Firearms, Faith, Fear Mongering and Freedom
Let’s start with Faith and Firearms
A serious, yet common mistake, is consulting God’s Word for His opinion on an issue when we already have our minds made-up. This results in cherry picking verses that support what we already decided.
The Bible needs to be studied as a whole book. Not just a verse here and there.
When I looked at God’s “take” on self-defense, I looked at verses used by other Bible believers with a different opinion than I had.
When it comes to defending the life of ourselves and others when carrying a firearm for that purpose as a Biblical Christian, we need to examine any verse in the context of the whole Bible. As Pastor Stuart Briscoe has oft said: “If you take the text out of the context, you are left with the con.”
I can only tell you that as a fallible human, I did my best to make sure that I was considering God’s Character, His Laws, and His Word about self-defense in the context of the entire Bible.
“Thou Shall Not Kill”
Often context means checking to see what the original language was used. The original Hebrew word that was used means “murder”.
The Hebrew word for “murder” means “the intentional, premeditated killing of another person with malice.” That is evil!
The Hebrew word for “kill” does not have the connation of intentional, premediated and with malice.
Professor Berel Lang writes from Trinity College in Hartford, Conn.:
“Perhaps you would give a couple of paragraphs to the misconception (and the mistranslation) of the Sixth Commandment [in Exodus 20:13], ‘You shall not murder,’ as ‘You shall not kill.’ The original Hebrew, lo tirtsah., is very clear, since the verb ratsah. means ‘murder,’ not ‘kill.’ If the commandment proscribed killing as such, it would position Judaism against capital punishment and make it pacifist even in wartime. These may be defensible or admirable views, but they’re certainly not biblical.”
God protected His people against evil. He sent His people to destroy evil – with weapons.
I don’t believe that God’s character includes any form of malice.
After 30+ years of study with Bible based preachers and teachers, I believe that God’s intent is to destroy evil before it can spread. His intent is to stop evil from doing harm to others.
God didn’t attempt to talk with evil. He didn’t try to compromise with evil. God didn’t have his warriors walk into the camp of the enemy with signs that read: ““Give peace a chance” “No Weapons Allowed” or “Make Love not War” (actually it was the former that got David into a lot more trouble than the later).
There is also evidence in the Old Testament that God allowed His people to defend themselves as well as others against murderers – evil.
Exodus 22: 2 If a thief is caught breaking in and is struck so that he dies, the defender is not guilty of bloodshed (Looks like God invented the Castle Law.)
Genesis 14:14-16 When Abram heard that his relative had been taken captive, he called out the 318 trained men born in his household and went in pursuit as far as Dan. During the night Abram divided his men to attack them and he routed them, pursuing them as far as Hobah, north of Damascus. He recovered all the goods and brought back his relative Lot and his possessions, together with the women and the other people. (God did not judge Abram as a murderer because he was protecting the life of Lot)
Esther 8:11 11” The king’s edict granted the Jews in every city the right to assemble and protect themselves; to destroy, kill and annihilate the armed men of any nationality or province who might attack them and their women and children…”
Did God expect His people to defend themselves; defend the life He gave them against evil? Did He also expect His people to protect others?
What about Jesus? Isn’t it different in the New Testament?
There is Luke 22:36, 38 36 He said to them, “But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. It is written: ‘And he was numbered with the transgressors’ ; and I tell you that this must be fulfilled in me. Yes, what is written about me is reaching its fulfillment.”
The disciples said, “See, Lord, here are two swords.”
“That’s enough!” he replied.
It was enough for the disciples to defend themselves. Perhaps the environment in which the disciples were to go into had changed. The first time Jesus sent out His disciples, He did not ask them to carry weapons for self-defense. This time, there was a need. Why? The disciples had a job to do for God. They needed to be alive to do it. The answer as to why is in the verse “…Yes, what is written about me is reaching its fulfillment.”
Using force to defend oneself or others depends on the situation.
For example, in Matthew 51-52 “Then the men stepped forward, seized Jesus and arrested him. With that, one of Jesus’ companions reached for his sword, drew it out and struck the servant of the high priest, cutting off his ear.
“Put your sword back in its place,” Jesus said to him, “for all who draw the sword will die by the sword.” (This also sometimes quoted as Those who live by the sword will die by the sword.)
First, the disciples were badly outnumbered; they would all die by the sword if they fought.
Second, what was written about Jesus was to be fulfilled so said Holy God and Jesus obeyed.
Third, was Jesus referring to Peter in terms of those who live by the sword will die by the sword or to the Roman Soldiers?
I think it was the Roman Soldiers.
“The words which St. Matthew gives are obviously not a general rule declaring the unlawfulness of all warfare, offensive or defensive, but are limited in their range by the occasion. Resistance at that time would have involved certain destruction. More than that, it would have been fighting not for God, but against Him, because against the fulfilment of His purpose.” (Elliot’s Commentary)
“These men, Jews and Romans, who have taken the sword against the innocent, shall perish by the sword. God will take vengeance on them” (Matthews Commentary)
“The Lord is speaking of those who arbitrarily and presumptuously resort to violence; and he says, "Let them feel the sword." The word was of wide application, and contained a universal truth; it was, in fact, a re-enactment of the primaeval law touching the sacredness of human life, and the penalty that ensues on its infringement (Genesis 9:5, 6). It enforced also the general lesson that violence and revenge effect no good end and bring their own punishment.” (Pulpit Commentary)
Did God sanction the killing of murderers/evil in the Old Testament, but not in the New Testament? What I know is that God doesn’t change. He hates evil and He always will. The entire Bible is consistent with God’s view on evil and evil people.
People who only use a "weapon" to defend themselves and others do not live by the sword.
Posting - No Guns Allowed
Didn’t God already post: “Thou shall not murder”? How is that working out? Evil people exist, and they aren’t about to obey God’s law. They aren’t about to obey man’s law about murder. Why do people continue to believe that posting their building will keep out evil?
I know intelligent and logical people who must believe that a "No Guns Allowed" post will stop a person intent on mass murder. They must think that a person with evil intent is going to see the sign and obey it?
NO - the person who could have saved lives with their CC carry firearm will obey it. Why would any little human post be obeyed by evil when God’s law isn’t obeyed by evil?
In fact, posting makes your building a target - 96% of the recent mass murders occurred in places that were posted No Guns Allowed.
The man in Colorado who burst into a movie theater and started murdering innocent people purposely went 20 miles out of his way to find a theater that was posted. Twelve people were murdered including a child. Seventy others were injured.
Sociopaths, murderers are not stupid. They choose places that are posted because there is virtually no chance that a concealed carry person will be there with a firearm. That murderer knows that most likely there won’t be anyone there who can fight back and protect the innocent.
” Jim Kouri, the public-information officer of the National Association of Chiefs of Police, told me earlier this year at the time of the Aurora, Colo., Batman-movie shooting. He noted that the Aurora shooter, who killed twelve people earlier this year, had a choice of seven movie theaters that were showing the Batman movie he was obsessed with. All were within a 20-minute drive of his home. The Cinemark Theater the killer ultimately chose wasn’t the closest, but it was the only one that posted signs saying it banned concealed handguns carried by law-abiding individuals.”
“Disarming law-abiding citizens leaves them as sitting ducks,” Lott told me. “A couple hundred people were in the Cinemark Theater when the killer arrived. There is an extremely high probability that one or more of them would have had a legal concealed handgun with him if they had not been banned.”
A word to parents in view of the Fear Fanning Fanatics
Leftwing politicians, Hollywood, and the mainstream media have done an excellent job of brainwashing all of us into extreme firearm phobia.
Interestingly the politicians have armed bodyguards. So do the Hollywood elites. Not to mention that Hollywood makes big money with their extremely violent, and getting even more violent, movies.
These hypocrites have been so effective at vilifying anyone who would have anything to do with a firearm that logical, protective parents won't even teach their children what to do if they ever came across an untended firearm.
It wasn’t that long ago when target shooting was one of the sports offered in High Schools. As a friend posted on Facebook: “About 15 years before I went to high school, they had a shooting sports program. The school handed rifles to students, all of them (even the ones that were picked on). They did not shoot up the school.”
Parents, you teach your children about stranger danger, about not playing with a sharp knife or running with scissors. You teach your child to look both ways before they cross the street.
So, why do you allow your protective logic to be overridden by a pack of elitists with hidden motives who lead you into panic rather than logical and calm protection?
Our grandchildren and young nieces and nephews who were and are being raised by parents who are familiar with firearms have taught their children exactly what to do if a fallible human being forgets his or her firearm in a public place.
These kids had their curiosity satisfied as well. They know how firearms work, how to safely carry one, and how dangerous a gun can be if misused (just like a knife, pair of scissors, a car, an electric drill etc.}.
Now, we can argue about gun control but instead, let’s keep our kids as safe as we can right now.
The NRA - yes, the NRA has a safety program for kids called the Eddie Eagle GunSafe program. Here are the basics to teach your children:
STOP – by stopping first, if the child sees an unattended firearm, it clues that child to remember the rest of the safety steps.
DON’T TOUCH – Takes away any chance of the firearm endangering the child or anyone else.
RUN AWAY – This removes the danger of touching the firearm.
TELL A GROWN UP – Find a trustworthy adult
As an adult, a parent, please learn what to do, how to pick up a gun safely and what to do next.
Should you be thinking that gun control would remove this danger – sorry, criminals, murderers by their very definition don’t follow laws.
It’s a fallen world, evil exists. Do we not have the right and the responsibility to save a life from evil – a murderer – ending a life before God intended that life to end?
Is there a moral difference, a Biblical difference, between murdering and merely allowing murder?
God gave us logical minds. Do we always use them? Well, when it comes to people who post “No Guns Allowed” they sure aren’t using logic. Who will obey that sign and not bring in their firearms? Law abiding, rule following, concealed carry people, that’s who.
Who will bring in their firearms with intent to murder? Murderers – evil people, that’s who will not care one with about a piece of paper on a door. In fact, even if you post the message directly from God: “You shall not murder.” It won’t matter to evil.
When a church (or a restaurant or any building) post, they are inviting evil.
Perhaps the chance is slim however, it does happen. Most mass murderers choose places that are posted. Now, that is logical on evil’s part. After all, the chances of being stopped are 99% zero.
Yet, that post is far from logical. What people in charge of a church who decide to post are, is dangerously naive. What they are doing is increasing the chances of having the people who are in their buildings and in their care of being chosen by a mass murderer.
Once again is the question: Is there a moral difference, a Biblical difference, between murdering and merely allowing murder?
So, even though a mass shooting may be very unlikely, go ahead and post your church and make sure no one has a chance to protect themselves, other adults, or the kids.
Yes, I know it’s a church – peace, love, pray, eat, everyone gets along. But, what did God do? Did He fight evil people intent on murdering his beloved people or did he tell them to love, pray, eat, be peaceful and just get along with evil.
There is a time for war and a time for peace. Ecclesiastes 3:8
Several churches in our area (Oconomowoc, WI) allow concealed carry. One of them actually has their concealed carry people organized and they have a plan in the rare instance that a mass murder should choose that church.
But, if there is another church in the area that is posted, well, that one will be the better target for evil to carry out its plan, won’t it?
“The Percentage Of Mass Murders IN Gun Free Zones?”
By the FBI’s definition from January 1, 1990 to date, just over 93 percent of mass occurred in placarded or posted gun free zones.
If you drop the threshold of deaths to two, that rises to 94.8 percent, and the emphasis shifts from schools and factories to malls and private residences
If the criteria are intent, it appears likely that more than 96 percent of intended mass murderers seek out posted or placarded gun free zones to do their killing. ( Posted on 15/10/2015 by Stranger)
Gun-free zones have been the most popular response to previous mass killings. But many law-enforcement officials say they are actually counterproductive. Gun-free zones have been the most popular response to previous mass killings. But many law-enforcement officials say they are actually counterproductive.
“Guns are already banned in schools. That is why the shootings happen in schools. A school is a ‘helpless-victim zone,’” says Richard Mack, a former Arizona sheriff. “Preventing any adult at a school from having access to a firearm eliminates any chance the killer can be stopped in time to prevent a rampage,” (IBID)
As stated above, the act of posting “No Guns Allowed” is not only far from logical but, I personally believe that it is not in line with the Character of God.
I have read many articles and posts by Christians, Christian pastors, authors of Christian books:
Now, you may find the following a real stretch. But, is it?
Biblical Christians know that “For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do”. Ephesians 2:10
The Parable of the Talents in Matthew seems to say that we will be held accountable for wasting our gifts and “talents” given to us by God to do the work He prepared for us.
But what happens if we stop someone else from using these gifts and talents for the work God prepared for each uniquely created person in advance?
What happens if we could save a life, but we don’t?
Some time ago in my discussion with a family member, who was against guns for, I believe, Christian reasons, she asked me if it was only me, would I shoot someone to save my own life. I said I would not.
That was categorically stupid of me. My life is just as precious to God (even at my current age of 70 something) as anyone else’s. If I can save my life and I choose not to, is that not akin to suicide? Am I not protecting one of God’s unique creations? And, if this is someone who may be intent on murdering others, why would I not protect them by killing this evil person?
Would I step in front of a child or another person to save their life? I sure hope so if that time ever came? But to stand there and let someone murder me when I was carrying a means to stop that person – stupid!
The other thing that occurred to me, which I am sure she didn’t mean, is that my death would be far better than the death of an evil person who may very well go on to kill others.
“… the city of San Antonio, on November 5, 2017. The gunman, 26-year-old Devin Patrick Kelley of nearby New Braunfels, killed 26 and injured 20 others. He was shot twice by a male civilian as he exited the church.
The attack was the deadliest mass shooting in Texas and the fifth-deadliest mass shooting in the United States.] It was the deadliest shooting in an American place of worship in modern history, surpassing the Charleston church shooting of 2015 and the Waddell Buddhist temple shooting of 1991.”. Today)
Do I believe that God doesn't want us to defend our lives and the lives of others.?
When I decided to carry a firearm one of the most compelling reasons was picturing myself in a public place with my grandchildren and a man burst through the doors and started shooting. I saw myself totally helpless to even attempt to save their lives.
Perhaps it is the denial that a shooter would ever come into our midst and begin shooting
Please picture this with me:
You are the pastor, or the leader of a Bible study group and your church is posted No Guns Allowed. A person intent on mass murder breaks in and starts mercilessly shooting members of your congregation, your friends, members of your own family. If you could stop the action. What would you do? Would you start the action again but have concealed carry people present? Or, would you start the action again and allow the action to continue?
Police response time after a 911 call averages 10 minutes.
Concealed carry people are already there.
Please also remember, that CC people are putting their own lives in danger. Not only that, but even though they did nothing wrong but save lives, their firearm will be confiscated, and they will need to hire and pay for an attorney to get it back.
They may even be sued by the killer’s family if the killer is injured or killed.
After my experience with the criminal court system and knowing what I now know, I have asked myself a question which I never dreamed I would ask myself: Would I escape if I could or would I stay and defend others
What about our Freedom?
After reading countless articles and several books on the importance of an armed citizenry to remain free from a tyrannical government, I decided to choose several that will provide examples illustrating the connection of gun control and the rise of a tyrannical government. I am quoting these directly. May these examples warn us that America is on the brink of adding our Country to the history of the results of gun control. It will not happen by force but rather by hoodwinking a vulnerable populace into believing they will be safe when there are no more guns.
The following is from Freedom Outpost:
“The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing.” Adolph Hitler April 11, 1942
Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.
“The Weimar Republic’s well-intentioned gun registry became a tool for evil.
The perennial gun-control debate in America did not begin here. The same arguments for and against were made in the 1920s in the chaos of Germany’s Weimar Republic, which opted for gun registration. Law-abiding persons complied with the law, but the Communists and Nazis committing acts of political violence did not.
In 1933, the ultimate extremist group, led by Adolf Hitler, seized power and used the records to identify, disarm, and attack political opponents and Jews. Constitutional rights were suspended, and mass searches for and seizures of guns and dissident publications ensued.” (National Review)
(Have you ever wondered how history would have been different if the Jews had not surrendered their guns. When the Nazis came for them, they could have protected themselves. There were more Jews than Nazis at the start.)
Josef Stalin, the sole leader of the Soviet Union from 1924 to 1953, said:
“If the opposition disarms, well and good. If it refuses to disarm, we shall disarm it ourselves.”
In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
“All political power comes from the barrel of a gun. The communist party must command all the guns, that way, no guns can ever be used to command the party.”
Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
Pol Pot, who created in Cambodia one of the 20th century's most brutal and radical regimes, was responsible for killing one million of his own ‘educated,’ yet unarmed citizens.
The second amendment is only to vouchsafe our right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and to ensure all of the other rights given unto us by our Creator…the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable . . . the very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil” George Washington
These Quotes from Tyranny Always Involves Gun Control by Cheryl Pass
"Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed." Thomas Hobbes
"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms…disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. … Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man." Thomas Jefferson
Some of you may have already observed that the people who are attempting to take away our 2nd amendment rights are also working on eliminating our 1st amendment rights. The framers knew that free speech and the ability to defend ourselves against a tyrannical government were the two most essential freedoms in keeping us free from a controlling government.
If we don’t learn from history, we are destined to repeat it. (Sir Winston Churchill)
Fanning the Flames of Fear
We will not lose our 2nd amendment rights by force as was done in the past. We will lose that freedom intermittently by the slow drumbeat of misinformation, bias, lies, and pitting Americans against each other*. Have you noticed that there is a subtle message that portrays anti-gun Americans as being better, nobler, and far more "evolved" than their pro-gun counterparts?
I don’t think that massive scale gun confiscation will happen in the USA. The elitists know that too many people would wake up if something that visible started to happen. That is why it will be that slow and steady stream of fact-challenged hyperbole until enough of us have been lulled by the customary magician’s trick of distraction, misdirection, and illusion until only the government has guns.
Sig Swanstrom in his book: God, Guns, and Guts of Firearm Defense says:
“No matter what the anti-gun crowd says, we need to keep in mind that gun control is not about public safety; it’s about power and people control.”
Mr. Swanstrom goes on to say that many anti-gun people have been duped. These are often intelligent people, yet they don't see the real motive of the gun control elitists.
It appears that these intelligent people also don't notice that guns protect the anti-gun elitists. Guns also protect their families. How convenient to keep your hands clean because someone else is using a firearm to kill a bad guy. Funny, how they never offer to fund bodyguards to protect you and your family. They never mention that while you and yours are sitting ducks, they and theirs are protected by armed guards. Their children are safe in their schools protected by guns.
Schools are soft targets. Until people realize that they are duped into not doing what will work by elite politicians and Hollywood celebrities who have their own bodyguards, these kids will be in danger.
As one man on TV said, there are a lot of retired police and military that would be delighted to furnish protection at schools to defend kids against an active shooter. And, believe it or not, there are teachers who have a cc license and are practiced and ready to defend these kids instead of standing by relatively helplessly with nothing other than to try to hide them - or as the coach in the Florida case, protect children with his own body and taking the bullets himself. So sad - so sad.
Remember when SUVs were the target of the global warming group? Suddenly any accident, any fatal car crash that involved an SUV, that fact was mentioned. If it wasn't an SUV, the type of car wasn't noted
That not so subtle message is sent to convince us that SUVs were more dangerous cars so we shouldn't buy them. Control!
Likewise, making mass murder, the gun’s fault is taking the blame off the evil person and putting it on an inanimate object.
Following that kind of logic, it would be the car’s fault that someone was killed in an accident and not the fault of the drunk driver. And, consequently, it is the alcohol’s fault that the person driving that car was drunk and lost control of the vehicle. Naturally, in line with that logic, it is the food's fault or the fork's fault that people overeat, get fat and die from diseases that affect the overweight.
But the fear mongers are not trying to create fear over cars, alcohol, and forks. That doesn’t help them control people. And, they are not yet creating fear and panic over knives – that will probably be next.
The Daily Signal:
Amid Push for Knife Control, UK Shows Gun Control Doesn’t Increase Safety
The United Kingdom has some of the most restrictive gun control laws in the world, so the increased murder rate in the British capital is mostly a result of a sharp rise in knife-related crime.
By the way, cars, knives, bombs can be and have been used in mass murder. I’ve been told that anyone can go online and find the instructions for making a bomb. What do we ban to eliminate everything that could murder innocent people? I know, let’s ban evil people (how does one roll their eyes in writing?)
The fact is that the more gun control laws, the higher the crime rate. Chicago and Washington DC have the strictest gun control laws and the highest crime rates. When people cannot protect themselves and their loved ones, criminals are more confident that they will not be stopped.
It is illogical to think that posting: No Guns Allowed will keep out a mass murderer. It is just as naive to believe that small magazines, i.e. fewer bullets will keep us safer. Do you think that a criminal cannot get larger magazines with more bullets illegally? See, that’s what criminals do. They get stuff that the law-abiding citizens can't.
In The Cornered Cat: A Woman’s Guide to Concealed Carry, author Kathy Jackson (who is a Christian) tells about being stranded on a dark two lane highway with car trouble.
She had picked up three of her five children from camp and dropped the other two off at the camp. The road was not often traveled. A man drove up and asked if she needed help. She writes that she was not worried about this man's intentions. If his intentions were evil, she had the means to protect herself and three of her kids.
Fortunately, intentions were good, and all turned out well. But what if it had been someone with bad intentions. Women are more vulnerable to certain crimes than men are. Kathy wasn't a vulnerable woman, and her children has a Mom who could protect them if necessary.
What if it were you? Could you protect yourself in a situation that could be worse than eventual death? Or, would you be vulnerable to evil intent.
Kathy’s book contained the following quote
… “to permit murder when one could have prevented it is morally wrong. In brief, not resisting evil is an evil of omission. Any man who refuses to protect his wife and children against a violent intruder fails them morally”. (Dr. Norman Giesler and JP Moreland, Christian theologians) May I add that it goes for women too.
*maybe it will not be slowly, maybe it will be by force – this 11/9/18
* In the Milwaukee, Wi area:
Police in the Democrat haven of Maryland shot and killed a man in his home on Monday while serving a "protective order" under a new law which allows them to seize people's guns without due process.