Firearms Refresher Course

[HeavenlyOne]

Originally Posted by Lost and Found

I never said what you said I did here. Never one time. It also is NOT my belief. You not only misrepresent me, but you also do it to Paul. As far as Paul saying what you claim, look again:



Too much use of "I" here to merit saying your points establish biblical Truth. The context bears out that the context of Paul's writing is only concerned with reminding a WIDOW’S children and grandchildren to supply her daily sustenance needs. Sorry, but your opinion just does not carry as much weight as Paul's CONTEXT. Remember, in biblical hermeneutics, context is KING.

The no-scripture-needed crowd always use "I think, "I believe," "I think," “could be” or “PERHAPS” when describing private interpretations of Scripture. Where does such a process agree with "rightly diving the WORD of GOD"?

Sola Scriptura, Sister!

Are you saying you never say 'I believe' when speaking about your beliefs in regard to scripture? Don't make me do a search of your posts!

Paul said a man who doesn't provide (this verb is left open with no supporting noun, ever wonder why?) for his family is worse than an infidel. You claim that Paul is speaking of the same support he admonishes those same men to give to the widows and fatherless, yet he doesn't tell them they are worse than infidels if they don't provide for those people. Why not?

You say Paul is referring to monetary support only. I'm telling you that fathers do that all the time, even though they don't even see nor speak to their own children but pay because the court said they had to. And you don't think those men are worse than infidels because they are at least sending money to the children? Give me a break!

If Paul is speaking only of monetary issues, does this mean the man is exempt (if he so chooses) from giving them food, clothing, and shelter because Paul didn't tell him to? I mean, by what you are saying, you give every deadbeat an excuse for his actions, IMO.

Paul wanted men to provide. Period.

[TK Burk]

Originally Posted by Brother Strange

Can't believe this dumb thread is still going on.

Got to be some of the most Holy Ghost filled, righteous, full of faith and power of God that I have ever heard of in my 67 years as an Apostolic that are posting on here.

I wonder if any of you that are so full of so much of God, if you would invite me to come spend some time with you just so I can hear you pray? I would greatly appreciate the opportunity. I would jump at the opportunity to come, rent a motel room in your city, and get together with you for a few days of earnest prayer. It would be a great experience. I've been around some spiritual giants in my life, but nothing to compare to some of you.

Originally Posted by Lost and Found

Brother Strange, are you a minister of the gospel?

Originally Posted by Brother Strange

Yes. Since 1965.

Wow! I just never saw a preacher of the gospel be so against people trying to live like Jesus. Sorry, I heard you were, but your above post threw me.

[TK Burk]

Originally Posted by HeavenlyOne

Are you saying you never say 'I believe' when speaking about your beliefs in regard to scripture? Don't make me do a search of your posts!

Paul said a man who doesn't provide (this verb is left open with no supporting noun, ever wonder why?) for his family is worse than an infidel. You claim that Paul is speaking of the same support he admonishes those same men to give to the widows and fatherless, yet he doesn't tell them they are worse than infidels if they don't provide for those people. Why not?

You say Paul is referring to monetary support only. I'm telling you that fathers do that all the time, even though they don't even see nor speak to their own children but pay because the court said they had to. And you don't think those men are worse than infidels because they are at least sending money to the children? Give me a break!

If Paul is speaking only of monetary issues, does this mean the man is exempt (if he so chooses) from giving them food, clothing, and shelter because Paul didn't tell him to? I mean, by what you are saying, you give every deadbeat an excuse for his actions, IMO.

Paul wanted men to provide. Period.

Your post did not start by saying you were against dead beat dad’s. You said that Paul said good men were those willing to take the life of an attacker. BIG Difference!

Again, you must learn that the Bible must be read in CONTEXT if it is to be understood!

Why are you struggling so to prove Paul is saying what he isn’t? When reading his words in context, Paul proves your stance is incorrect. Sister, it's okay to say when you are wrong. You’re beating a dead horse here. Paul’s words prove you wrong no matter how many “I thinks” you add to your posts. Your effort to make this passage say what you want it to is NOT helping your cause at all. In all sincerity, you would do better to leave this and move to passages that are truly in context with your statements. Then you can biblically substantiate your “I believe” statements. What you or I believe means NOTHING if we do not believe in harmony with Jesus’ Word.

God Bless you Sister!

[Hoovie]

Originally Posted by Brother Strange

Can't believe this dumb thread is still going on.

Got to be some of the most Holy Ghost filled, righteous, full of faith and power of God that I have ever heard of in my 67 years as an Apostolic that are posting on here.

I wonder if any of you that are so full of so much of God, if you would invite me to come spend some time with you just so I can hear you pray? I would greatly appreciate the opportunity. I would jump at the opportunity to come, rent a motel room in your city, and get together with you for a few days of earnest prayer. It would be a great experience. I've been around some spiritual giants in my life, but nothing to compare to some of you.

Sincerely Rev., if you judge spiritual depth on prayer lenth and style you have been mislead. This post could have been written by one named Simon.

[Praxeas]

One last point here. That the word Vengeance means to repay a deed and not defend someone from harm, let's look at the context

Rom 12:17 Recompense to no man evil for evil. Provide things honest in the sight of all men.
Rom 12:18 If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men.
Rom 12:19 Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.

AMP Rom 12:17 Repay no one evil for evil, but take thought for what is honest and proper and noble [aiming to be above reproach] in the sight of everyone.(2)

Note verse 18 If possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone.

IF possible. This is not an absolute command, but leaves room for situations where it is not possible.

Rom 12:19 Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave the way open for [God's] wrath; for it is written, Vengeance is Mine, I will repay (requite), says the Lord.(3)

Notice avenge and vengeance here is defined as repayment for deeds done. Not defend against a deed, or prevent a deed or stop someone from doing a deed to someone else. It's about repayment

Lastly, did anyone notice this is actually an Old Testament verse?
Deu 32:35 Vengeance is mine, and recompense, for the time when their foot shall slip; for the day of their calamity is at hand, and their doom comes swiftly.'
Deu 32:36 For the LORD will vindicate his people and have compassion on his servants, when he sees that their power is gone and there is none remaining, bond or free.

Yet within the context of the law NOT all killings were murder or wrong.

BTW know something funny? The greek word for coals in verse 20 is anthrax lol

[HeavenlyOne]

Originally Posted by Lost and Found

Your post did not start by saying you were against dead beat dad’s. You said that Paul said good men were those willing to take the life of an attacker. BIG Difference!

Care to quote me on that? Cause I never said it nor implied such.

Again, you must learn that the Bible must be read in CONTEXT if it is to be understood!

I totally agree, but where Paul didn't mention specifics, just the action verb alone, you are trying to limit Paul's intentions in what he was saying in that verse.

Why are you struggling so to prove Paul is saying what he isn’t?

Uh, HELLO! That's EXACTLY what YOU are doing. I quoted scripture. You added to it.

When reading his words in context, Paul proves your stance is incorrect. Sister, it's okay to say when you are wrong. You’re beating a dead horse here. Paul’s words prove you wrong no matter how many “I thinks” you add to your posts. Your effort to make this passage say what you want it to is NOT helping your cause at all.

And you aren't doing the same thing? I quoted Paul, and you add what you think he was talking about by bringing in people who aren't the man's family as if they were.

In all sincerity, you would do better to leave this and move to passages that are truly in context with your statements. Then you can biblically substantiate your “I believe” statements. What you or I believe means NOTHING if we do not believe in harmony with Jesus’ Word.

God Bless you Sister!

Again, show me where protecting one's family is wrong. In addition, as someone else mentioned, show me where simply holding back an attacker is allowed by Christians, but stopping them with deadly force isn't.

You all are making up the rules as you go along.

In all sincerety.

[HeavenlyOne]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

One last point here. That the word Vengeance means to repay a deed and not defend someone from harm, let's look at the context

Rom 12:17 Recompense to no man evil for evil. Provide things honest in the sight of all men.
Rom 12:18 If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men.
Rom 12:19 Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.

AMP Rom 12:17 Repay no one evil for evil, but take thought for what is honest and proper and noble [aiming to be above reproach] in the sight of everyone.(2)

Note verse 18 If possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone.

IF possible. This is not an absolute command, but leaves room for situations where it is not possible.

Rom 12:19 Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave the way open for [God's] wrath; for it is written, Vengeance is Mine, I will repay (requite), says the Lord.(3)

Notice avenge and vengeance here is defined as repayment for deeds done. Not defend against a deed, or prevent a deed or stop someone from doing a deed to someone else. It's about repayment

Lastly, did anyone notice this is actually an Old Testament verse?
Deu 32:35 Vengeance is mine, and recompense, for the time when their foot shall slip; for the day of their calamity is at hand, and their doom comes swiftly.'
Deu 32:36 For the LORD will vindicate his people and have compassion on his servants, when he sees that their power is gone and there is none remaining, bond or free.

Yet within the context of the law NOT all killings were murder or wrong.

BTW know something funny? The greek word for coals in verse 20 is anthrax lol

Great post, Prax.

Funny also that God mentions that he will vindicate His people, but those same people were sent by God to kill those (and their families, including women and children) to keep them from harming the children of God. This included commanding them to go when the enemy was sleeping, unarmed, and I think once the enemy was drunk!

God didn't even wait for the enemy to come to His people most of the time, but instead sent His people to take care of the enemy first.

Yes, God said He would have vengeance against those who harm His people, but in order to have vengeance, He sent those same people to do it for it many times.

Reminds me of the guy who believed that God only worked miraculously, so during a flood, he perched on his roof and prayed for God to save him.

A boat came by. No, he was waiting on God, but thanks anyway.

Another boat came by. He'd love to take the ride but he had faith in God that God Himself would save him.

A helicopter came by. He gave the same statements.

He died.

He got to heaven and God let him in according to his deeds. He turned and asked a simple question..."God, why didn't you save me?"

"I tried! I sent two boats and a helicopter, what more did you want?"

See, God uses man most of the time to do His works. How can God do works if we refuse to do them?

You think the enemy would have perished had Gideon told everyone to stay put, that it was God's fight, not theirs? Think the walls of Jericho would have fallen if God's people had just stayed at their camp and waited for God to announce that He'd done the deed Himself?

Faith without works is dead. You can have faith that God will protect your family, but you have to work to make sure that happens. This goes for any situation, be it on the street (you don't let your children play on the interstate while believing God will keep them safe, right?), in the park (you don't let your children ride their skateboards down a flight of steps while praying God keeps them safe, right?), while driving (you don't go to sleep at the wheel after praying that God keep your car on the road, right?) or while someone is harming or threatening your family (you don't stand there and call 911 and let them do God's work, right?).

Yet this is what I'm hearing from some of you.

Originally Posted by Lost and Found

Wow! I just never saw a preacher of the gospel be so against people trying to live like Jesus. Sorry, I heard you were, but your above post threw me.

Don't let it throw you. I am very impressed with so much spirituality.

I deny the accusation. That accusation is unkind and unfounded.

I always encourage people to seek for as much of God as they can get. I encourage you to do the same. Certainly, I do continually.

May I come to where you are? I would love to just hear you pray. Maybe we could enter into the portals of prayer together. I am always seeking for more of God.

Notice: See how carnal I am? I used the word "I" nine...whoops ten times in this one post.

Originally Posted by Stephen Hoover

Sincerely Rev., if you judge spiritual depth on prayer lenth and style you have been mislead. This post could have been written by one named Simon.

Sir, you are wrong.

I do not judge anyone's prayer on length or style. I have not been misled. I am well experienced.

The post could have been written by Simon, who? Simon the sorcerer?

Is that not over the line?

[TK Burk]

Originally Posted by Lost and Found

Your post did not start by saying you were against dead beat dad’s. You said that Paul said good men were those willing to take the life of an attacker. BIG Difference!

Originally Posted by HeavenlyOne

Care to quote me on that? Cause I never said it nor implied such.

You never said it or implied it? Really. Okay, here it is....

Originally Posted by HeavenlyOne

1Ti 5:8
But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel.

Provide.......provide what? Money, shelter, love, protection, food, clothing, advice, discipline.......the list goes on and on.

Originally Posted by HeavenlyOne

Paul wasn't specific, except to say that if a man doesn't provide (this is an action verb here), he is worse than an infidel. I don't believe Paul was just referring to monetary commitment by the man to his family. Men do that all the time but don't care for their families in any other way. I call them 'deadbeat dads', even if they do pay the child support.

According to you, as long as the support is made, the man is ok. Well, he's not. He's not providing for his own in all the other ways necessary, thus he is worse than an infidel, as Paul said.

When you consider these with your afore statements, it is apparent you were saying a man unwilling to kill another man for his family is less than an infidel. Sister, what else could you be ‘saying’ or ‘implying’ with your above statements? If I am wrong, please explain what you meant when posting these statements.

God Bless you Sister!