Firearms Refresher Course

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

If it was just me, maybe I'd not fight back, but If I had a wife....kids....I'd use a gun to defend them rather than see them harmed in anyway

I have my answer. How old are you?

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

No, it means he was willing to die to SAVE OTHERS. The key here is saving others. I'd repeat my rhetorical question again but after doing it twice now it's clear you guys don't want to address it

This has been your mantra from the beginning; we had to wade through this for pages. Brother Matthew then posted and you replied to him in what Brother Matthew thought was an uncivilized manner. Which I do believe that if you weren't so much involved in your feeding frenzy with L&f and myself you may not have responded to Brother Matthew in such a way.

The below is your response to Brother Matthew. You see Brother Praxeas; you're not saying anything. You are just swinging wildly and hitting whatever doesn't agree with your philosophy. Not scripture mind you, but your philosophy. You then spiral off into the wild blue and want us to prove microwaves and cell phones, so on and so forth, but that in itself is a misrepresentation of what we are discussing here and therefore a strawman argument. Brother Praxeas, you are no longer defending your case you are becoming a bore. So, my advice to you is this get on with the discussion or just lay down your sword (no pun intended)

Jesus loves you Brother Praxeas; you just need to stick to defending scriptural arguments and not your own humanistic mindsets.

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Yes but that is your opinion. Is it a fact though? Did God command Israel to do evil when he commanded them to take a life? Does God change? Why would something be not evil and then become evil? That makes no sense for God to change His mind on what is evil and what is not.


There are no instances of a loved one being attacked so we have no evidence that any believer would come to their aid or just watch them be raped and murdered and do nothing. Also in the case of Acts these were instances of persecutions, not protecting a family. They were glad to be persecuted and counted it an honor. We are not talking about that here though. What you are doing is comparing apples and oranges.

I wonder, why didn't Peter tell Cornelius he had to leave the Roman army? See? We can go back and forth all day long and speculate.


Once again I have to repeat this and Im not sure why. StMatt....nobody here said we SHOULD render evil for evil. That's talking about revenge, payback. That is NOT talking about protecting someone from harm. I just pointed that out and you act like you didn't read it?

Second, Im not claiming taking up arms to defend your family is a doctrine we teach people, no more than taking adump in a white toilet is...you got scripture for that? The bible does NOT forbid or address protecting your family. The bible makes a distinction between taking a life in righteousness and murder. We are to do no murder.


Is it a "view"? I don't have bible for my view that microwave ovens cook faster either. See what Im saying?

I have to ask a question that nobody else seems to answer...how do you feel about the death penalty? How do you feel about imprisonment for any period of time. Does the bible tell Christians we should support that?

Originally Posted by stmatthew

When you want to discuss this in a civil manner with scriptural support from a new testament point of view, maybe I will respond to your posts further.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by stmatthew

When you want to discuss this in a civil manner with scriptural support from a new testament point of view, maybe I will respond to your posts further.

How was I not being civil to you personally? I don't see anyone else here being civil to me, however you made some points that I am pointing out are irrelevant. Nobody here is advocating rendering evil for evil or retribution. You are or were comparing apples to oranges.

Also I fail to see why this discussion has to be on YOUR terms...you and EB and L&F by saying "from a new testament point of view".

What's with the "new Testament point of view" all of a sudden? Why is it on some issues we can use the OT but on others we are limited to the NT? That's awefully convenient don't you think?

It would be interesting to see if StMatt, EB and L&F would promise right here and now to NEVER EVER use the OT again. To prove and sustain and substantiate everything from the NT only.

The entire bible makes a clear distinction between murdering someone and taking a life for other reasons, even accidentally. We all agree murder and retribution is wrong. Posting scriptures over and over, repeating them that prove retribution is wrong is firing off in the wrong direction. Self defense and protecting someones life is NOT retribution, vengeance or pay back.

You guys can post those verses over and over but they don't address the topic of self defense or defending a loved one from harm

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by RandyWayne

After a week and a half (with a somewhat-uncomfortable surgery betwixt then and now) I have a comment.

THIS is what anyone breaking into my home would see.



And yes, if it was in the middle of the night I would quietly put on my tux while thinking of some witty, and dry, comment to make to said intruder.

"You know they say the second kill is....."

<pop>

"indeed"

James Bond?

[RandyWayne]

"You know my name!"

Yes. Bond. James Bond.

[OP_Carl]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

How was I not being civil to you personally? I don't see anyone else here being civil to me, however you made some points that I am pointing out are irrelevant. Nobody here is advocating rendering evil for evil or retribution. You are or were comparing apples to oranges.

Also I fail to see why this discussion has to be on YOUR terms...you and EB and L&F by saying "from a new testament point of view".

What's with the "new Testament point of view" all of a sudden? Why is it on some issues we can use the OT but on others we are limited to the NT? That's awefully convenient don't you think?

It would be interesting to see if StMatt, EB and L&F would promise right here and now to NEVER EVER use the OT again. To prove and sustain and substantiate everything from the NT only.

The entire bible makes a clear distinction between murdering someone and taking a life for other reasons, even accidentally. We all agree murder and retribution is wrong. Posting scriptures over and over, repeating them that prove retribution is wrong is firing off in the wrong direction. Self defense and protecting someones life is NOT retribution, vengeance or pay back.

You guys can post those verses over and over but they don't address the topic of self defense or defending a loved one from harm

Prax,

That is what I see in their arguments too. There is a serious deficit in communication, or a bait-and-switch, or something.

You've decided to hold out until you talk them in to giving up. Have fun with that. Or not.

I've decided to do other things.

[TK Burk]

Timmy,

Thanks for your question.

Originally Posted by Timmy

What am I not answering? I answered your question about Joseph. But I don't see the relevance to my question about example.

You are Oneness, aren't you? You do believe that Jesus = God, throughout the NT and OT, don't you? You said Jesus is our example in all things. Well, is he always our example, or is he not? If not, how can we tell when he is and when he is not?

Timmy,

I was hoping you could perceive the significance of Joseph and Mary's example. Let me try to make it simpler: Joseph was commanded to stone Mary for her 'sin.' But, being a "just man" (one who obeyed the Law), he saw that the letter of the Law said death, but the spirit of the Law desired life. That is why he did not consider having her killed. Choice. That is what it is all about. And LOVE is always at the end of the command!

This is so basic to Christianity. Let me try it with the following illustration:

Remember John and James’ request?

Luke 9:54-55 And when his disciples James and John saw this, they said, Lord, wilt thou that we command fire to come down from heaven, and consume them, even as Elijah did? (55) But he turned, and rebuked them, and said, Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of.

Why was such vengeance acceptable during Elijah’s time, but not during the New Testament? Why did Jesus say that Zebedee’s, “Sons of Thunder, were asking for something that was of a “different spirit” than Jesus’? I am not asking because I need this answer; this question is for you….

God used to wink at a lot of things in the Old Testament that the New Testament says He now calls all men to repent for. Jesus said Moses allowed divorce because of the hardness of their Old-Testament-hearts, but then He raised the standard for all men in the New Testament and showed that a new heart should bring deeper commitment. Jesus had a woman caught in adultery cast before His feet to see if He would agree with stoning her as commanded through Moses. What did Jesus do? He showed that judgment was not the highest standard of His kingdom. Instead He showed mercy. Timmy, Jesus’ kingdom is built on His blood, not on His enemy’s. Jesus’ kingdom is to be known for love and mercy, not for hate and judgment. How can we demonstrate these godly traits when fighting a war or when killing another man?

Look at the changes from the Old to the New Testament:

OT: Mostly types and shadows of what was to come
NT: Jesus completes and explains that all is written of Him

OT: Physical Tabernacle and Temple were built
NT: Man becomes the Temple of God

OT: Man has a hardened heart
NT: Man is given a new heart

OT: God’s commands are written on tables of stone
NT: God’s commands are written on a believer’s heart

OT: One man, the High Priest, approaches God once a year
NT: All believers are priests having equal access to God at all times

OT: God calls a nation of people to Himself
NT: God calls men of all nations to Himself

OT: Mostly about the Law of God
NT: Mostly about the grace of God

OT: A God, whose glory no man could behold
NT: A God, whose glory men beheld and handled

OT: Animal blood was shed for man’s sins
NT: God’s own blood was shed for man’s sins

OT: Men strived for salvation through the letter
NT: Men received salvation through the Spirit

Timmy, have things changed from the OT to the NT?

It's not that God is or isn't the same God in both the OT and NT, but that we have been called to change from our old ways to Jesus’ new and better ways. That is what the New Covenant is all about: new heart, new nature, new Spirit inside, better Covenant, new creature! Read the book of Hebrews. It confirms what I am saying.

[TK Burk]

Originally Posted by RandyWayne

After a week and a half (with a somewhat-uncomfortable surgery betwixt then and now) I have a comment.

THIS is what anyone breaking into my home would see.



And yes, if it was in the middle of the night I would quietly put on my tux while thinking of some witty, and dry, comment to make to said intruder.

"You know they say the second kill is....."

<pop>

"indeed"

Brother, you need SHAKEN and STIRRED by the Holy Ghost!

God help you and those who see you as their witness of Jesus!

[Hoovie]

I have hardly enough time to just read this thread... but for such a timely and profound post - THANK YOU!

Originally Posted by Lost and Found

Timmy,

Thanks for your question.



Timmy,

I was hoping you could perceive the significance of Joseph and Mary's example. Let me try to make it simpler: Joseph was commanded to stone Mary for her 'sin.' But, being a "just man" (one who obeyed the Law), he saw that the letter of the Law said death, but the spirit of the Law desired life. That is why he did not consider having her killed. Choice. That is what it is all about. And LOVE is always at the end of the command!

This is so basic to Christianity. Let me try it with the following illustration:

Remember John and James’ request?

Luke 9:54-55 And when his disciples James and John saw this, they said, Lord, wilt thou that we command fire to come down from heaven, and consume them, even as Elijah did? (55) But he turned, and rebuked them, and said, Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of.

Why was such vengeance acceptable during Elijah’s time, but not during the New Testament? Why did Jesus say that Zebedee’s, “Sons of Thunder, were asking for something that was of a “different spirit” than Jesus’? I am not asking because I need this answer; this question is for you….

God used to wink at a lot of things in the Old Testament that the New Testament says He now calls all men to repent for. Jesus said Moses allowed divorce because of the hardness of their Old-Testament-hearts, but then He raised the standard for all men in the New Testament and showed that a new heart should bring deeper commitment. Jesus had a woman caught in adultery cast before His feet to see if He would agree with stoning her as commanded through Moses. What did Jesus do? He showed that judgment was not the highest standard of His kingdom. Instead He showed mercy. Timmy, Jesus’ kingdom is built on His blood, not on His enemy’s. Jesus’ kingdom is to be known for love and mercy, not for hate and judgment. How can we demonstrate these godly traits when fighting a war or when killing another man?

Look at the changes from the Old to the New Testament:

OT: Mostly types and shadows of what was to come
NT: Jesus completes and explains that all is written of Him

OT: Physical Tabernacle and Temple were built
NT: Man becomes the Temple of God

OT: Man has a hardened heart
NT: Man is given a new heart

OT: God’s commands are written on tables of stone
NT: God’s commands are written on a believer’s heart

OT: One man, the High Priest, approaches God once a year
NT: All believers are priests having equal access to God at all times

OT: God calls a nation of people to Himself
NT: God calls men of all nations to Himself

OT: Mostly about the Law of God
NT: Mostly about the grace of God

OT: A God, whose glory no man could behold
NT: A God, whose glory men beheld and handled

OT: Animal blood was shed for man’s sins
NT: God’s own blood was shed for man’s sins

OT: Men strived for salvation through the letter
NT: Men received salvation through the Spirit

Timmy, have things changed from the OT to the NT?

It's not that God is or isn't the same God in both the OT and NT, but that we have been called to change from our old ways to Jesus’ new and better ways. That is what the New Covenant is all about: new heart, new nature, new Spirit inside, better Covenant, new creature! Read the book of Hebrews. It confirms what I am saying.

[TK Burk]

Originally Posted by OP_Carl

Prax,

That is what I see in their arguments too. There is a serious deficit in communication, or a bait-and-switch, or something.

You've decided to hold out until you talk them in to giving up. Have fun with that. Or not.

I've decided to do other things.

The only deficit is in you and those who are "amening" you posting scriptures to back what you are 'saying' is SO BIBLICAL. Now, who is going to be the first to offer some kind of scriptural response to show where the Bible says we are wrong? If we are so out of touch with the Bible, PLEASE show us with the Bible.