Should the Kingdom of Adventistan allow guns...

[Stan]

Comments here, so many people are asking, which I do not fully understand why.

http://adventistan.com/?p=70

[Gerr]

Are there meat eaters in Adventistan?

If so, gotta have a gun to shoot those critters for food!

[Dr. Rich]

As a retired police officer and now a lawyer, and also being a SDA all my life, here is my learned opinion: Guns do not do the killing just as cars do not do the killing and pens don’t do the writing. It is the people behind these tools that are responsible. I was wearing my ‘gun’ while off duty in church in Boulder Colorado one Sabbath when my father who was the head deacon rushed to me and said that they were being robbed while they were counting the money after taking up the offering. Quickly, while being very sly and pretending to be a ‘nobody’ I safely arrested the robbers without further harm to anyone and found that they had guns on them and would have used them IF I had not been trained in what to do in this same type of situation. In fact, no one else in the church had any hint of what was going on at the time.

Therefore, while even though I do not carry a gun anymore, (I’m 64) I would hope that we would allow those that have been trained to act in a quick and safe manner by going to one of the many classes that provide this type of training, to be able to be present anywhere and anytime because no one ever knows when someone evil will attempt to do things that we are now seeing in our churches and schools. I would rather prevent an incident where lives could be lost than to wipe up the blood and stich up the wounded later. After all, we ALL should uphold our great Constitution and ALL of the Bill of Rights, including the Second one.

God didn't kill Goliath, He used David (a human)to protect Israel. Therefore just having blind 'faith' in the hope that God will protect you might just be the foolish thing to rely on. Reminds me of the story about the person trapped on the roof during a flood praying for God to save him and when someone in a boat came by and offered to save him, the foolish man told him "No thanks, God will take care of me".

Dr. Rich

[Outta Here]

God will supply whatever weaponry we may need in time. If it takes only one smooth stone, that's what He'll give us. If it takes only our marching feet, then He'll let us know. If He needs to part the waters so that we can make a clean escape, He'll hold back the rushing waves.

[Gail]

I don't think guns are a good idea.

I think hornets are better:

Quote:

Exodus 23:28:

"I will send hornets ahead of you so that they will drive out the Hivites, the Canaanites, and the Hittites before you.

[carolaa]

I would hope we wouldn't need guns amongst ourselves.....

[oldsailor29]

I would hope we wouldn't need guns amongst ourselves.....

We don't need guns. We can stone the heretics.

[fccool]

I really don't find Christians with "guns" in the NT. No matter how hard I look, I usually end up finding people of incredible courage and strength, while the rest of the world thought they were stupid. Even when Peter "shot" the ear off...

Quote:

Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword.

And then he took the ear of and put it back in place. The guns are made for hurting and killing, sure there's the sport element, but historically this has not been the case. The guns are for killing.

We can argue and justify all day long how in the Bible God used other people to kill, but we are not God... and we don't have his right and perspective to do the same.

I have a hard time imagining Christians shooting at the enemy. Sure, some situations may be calling for it, but some situations could be calling for fornication, lying and denying God. Was Peter right to deny God to save his life? In his mind, his life was "the greater good" at that time.

Jesus really set the example of the way we are to behave on this earth... and He will have his vengeance on the murderers. Yet, I think it's the greatest testimony for others that God has all the power and guns in the world to smite the enemy, yet He pleads with them... even to the point of His own death.

I'm sure that some may have a different take on that, and I respect it... yet we were not called to live comfortably in this world... and having a gun does give a sense of comfort and security to some, doesn't it?

[fccool]

If anyone interested, here's a pretty good series of articles on this subject.

http://www.answering-islam.org/Authors/Arlandson/pacifism1.htm

[oldsailor29]

Luke 22:36

Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.

[fccool]

People love to quote this one and apply it universally without looking into the context.

Quote:

35 [Jesus] asked them [the eleven apostles], "When I sent you out without a purse, bag or sandals, did you lack anything?"

They said, "No, not a thing."

36 He said to them, "But now the one who has a purse must take it, and likewise a bag. And the one who has no sword must sell his cloak and buy one. 37 For I tell you, this scripture must be fulfilled in me: ‘And he was numbered among the lawless’; and indeed what is written about me is being fulfilled."

38 They [the disciples] said, "See, Lord, here are two swords."

"It is enough," he replied

And then AFTER they use the sword, He tells them:

Quote:

Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword.

What do you think is going on there? Is HE contradicting Himself? I think what's going on is twofold.

1) Scripture must be fulfilled: ‘And he was numbered among the lawless’. The criminals of the day carried swords, and he was to be numbered with them to fulfill the prophecy... the swords were not used by disciples since then, except for Peter... and even Peter was stopped by Christ.

2) I understand this passage as conveying the urgency of the time. The purse, the sandals, and the bag... they represent something more than objects. These represent the future that the disciples will face. They have to provide for themselves, they have to travel and etc. Likewise, the sword represents war and animosity that they will encounter. Yet, Jesus himself gives a principle... you are DIFFERENT. Don't behave like people on earth do. They use the sword, and they will be killed by it eventually.

Jesus uses the sword a couple times to represent such tension.

Matt. 10:34 "Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.

He's not talking about the literal sword here, but warns about the tension.

Contrast it with the following verse.

Quote:

36Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.

There's a clear indication that Jesus' kingdom deals with conflict differently.

[fccool]

While I would not say that it's wrong for Christians to carry a gun (or serve in military) after all there are more ways than a gun to kill people. Yet, the point is that we are to behave differently. All of the disciples but one were martyred, and there's no record of them fighting off their enemies. quite the opposite, they were beaten half death and they would come back.

[lazarus]

As a retired police officer and now a lawyer, and also being a SDA all my life, here is my learned opinion: Guns do not do the killing just as cars do not do the killing and pens don’t do the writing.

I guess North Korea could argue Nuclear devices don't do the exploding!!!!

[Stan]

snappy comeback :)

[fccool]

Originally Posted By: Dr. Rich

As a retired police officer and now a lawyer, and also being a SDA all my life, here is my learned opinion: Guns do not do the killing just as cars do not do the killing and pens don’t do the writing.

I guess North Korea could argue Nuclear devices don't do the exploding!!!!

You could also say that North Korea is a criminal :)

[Dr. Rich]

You could also say that North Korea is a criminal

Fccool, no, you could not. North Korea is a Corporate Nation and it is a fictional person only. There are humans that do things that we might call criminal, but the Nation itself is not and can not be called criminal.

Today we have the new Kingdom of Heaven as found in Matthew 25's Ten Virgins (aka the SDA church) and this corporate entity is only a fictional 'person'. The humans at the GC have been authorized to control this fictional entity. We know that there will be a split among this fictional entity in the near future with some receiving salvation and the others receiving eternal damnation and destruction. At this point I am sure that those who were IN the KOH and now have been judged for damnation will be the worst enemies to the 'wise virgins'. This should give you something to think about.

Dr. Rich

[fccool]

Dr. Rich,

I understand what you are saying, and I would first of all disagree that 10 Virgins is a reference solely to SDA church. There's no indication of that at all. It's a reference to all Christendom.

Yet, I would agree that corporate 501c3 entities today are far from meaning of the "true church". There's no need for a "split". There are people who trust and obey God, and there are people who do not. There's a split enough for that.

While north Korea is a fictitious entity with fictitious borders, it is run and made possible by real people behind it... who execute actions on behalf of that fictitious entity. Therefore, the entity in itself could be considered criminal, even though many people belonging to the entity would not...

It's like saying that "dysfunctional family" is not a correct attribute, because "family" is a abstract conceptual entity. You can ascribe tributes to groups of individuals without any prejudice, although I'm sure it would not be fair to everyone belonging to that group.

You could say that KKK is racist... just like you could say that North Korea is criminal based on its past actions.

[Outta Here]

Since Adventistan is a virtual reality, and virtual realities are programmed, can't we just program it to be a non-violent virtual community that does not need to be controlled by virtual guns?

[carolaa]

What!? You mean it's not real?!!

[carolaa]

While I would not say that it's wrong for Christians to carry a gun (or serve in military) after all there are more ways than a gun to kill people. Yet, the point is that we are to behave differently. All of the disciples but one were martyred, and there's no record of them fighting off their enemies. quite the opposite, they were beaten half death and they would come back.

I think there's a difference between suffering for Christ and defending yourself (and/or others).

[GreatLakesGramma]

I think there's a difference between suffering for Christ and defending yourself (and/or others).

I agree.

[Dr. Shane]

I think water guns should be allowed but banned for all above the ave of 15.

[fccool]

Quote:

I think there's a difference between suffering for Christ and defending yourself (and/or others).

I think that people are confused when it comes to Christian Pacifism ideals. In fact, you could say that early church fathers were closer to pacifism ideals of Christ, rather than the "Just war" position held by the time Constantine "converted" to "christianity".

There are many misconceptions about pacifism. One of the greatest one is that pacifism is passive . Quite the opposite, pacifism is not passive. It simply rejects the idea of fighting evil with evil. The idea that you have to choose the lesser evil in order to achieve greater good. The road to hell is paved with such intentions.

People always ask me... well, if you see someone raping your wife... would you just stand there and watch? Of course not! This is not what Christ was promoting. Yet, there are better ways to resolving these situations than putting a bullet in someone's head, or knife under one's ribs... and all in the name of "life" . It surely make sense, pro-life war ?

There's a difference between defending others from evil, and taking judgment into your hands... and death is the ultimate judgment one may have (outside of second death). I don't believe that it's our call to make such judgment. If we believe in sanctity of life, does that only apply to the life of the "good people"? Then what different are we from heathens, as Paul asked?

[oldsailor29]

fccool

I quoted that because you said you didn't know of any Christians who carried guns in the NT. They did carry weapons which are analogous to guns. I was just supplying you with knowledge which you claimed not to have, but it turns out that you were very familiar with the text after all. I do not understand why anyone would deny knowing something which they knew. The problem with doing something like that is there may be people reading your post who do not know of the text, and because you denied knowing of it, they might assume it wasn't there.

When I showed my sister-in-law that text, she said, "I don't care what Jesus said, I don't like weapons." I was astounded by her statement, but at least she was honest about it.

[Bravus]

Should the Kingdom of Heaven allow guns?