Firearms Refresher Course

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Uh..Praxeas Peter didn't pray or have faith.


Mat 26:40-46

"And he cometh unto the disciples, and findeth them asleep, and saith unto Peter, What, could ye not watch with me one hour? Watch and pray, that ye enter not into temptation: the spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak. He went away again the second time, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if this cup may not pass away from me, except I drink it, thy will be done. And he came and found them asleep again: for their eyes were heavy. And he left them, and went away again, and prayed the third time, saying the same words. Then cometh he to his disciples, and saith unto them, Sleep on now, and take your rest: behold, the hour is at hand, and the Son of man is betrayed into the hands of sinners. Rise, let us be going: behold, he is at hand that doth betray me."

Just for EB...notice that quoting the whole thing does not change the first line? Weird how that works eh? As you can see it still has EB saying "Peter didn't pray or have faith"

[TK Burk]

EB, with all this talk about the OT here, I thought I'd ask you about the following: I am sure from your extensive study that you already know that personal retribution is explicitly forbidden in the Torah. Look here:

Leviticus 19:18
(18) Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself: I am the LORD.

Lev 19:18 - thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself — The word “neighbour” is used as synonymous with “fellow creature.” The Israelites in a later age restricted its meaning as applicable only to their own countrymen. This narrow interpretation was refuted by our Lord in a beautiful parable (Luke 10:30-37). --A Commentary on the Old and New Testaments by Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset and David Brown

Luke 10 is of course the parable of the Good Samaritan. This is really a great way to see how God views our treatment of all men. Those who did not value this man's life were looked very poorly on by Jesus. He said that we should do as did the Samarian. He was the one who showed value to life. What are your views here?

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Lost and Found

EB, with all this talk about the OT here, I thought I'd ask you about the following: I am sure from your extensive study that you already know that personal retribution is explicitly forbidden in the Torah. Look here:

Leviticus 19:18
(18) Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself: I am the LORD.



Luke 10 is of course the parable of the Good Samaritan. This is really a great way to see how God views our treatment of all men. Those who did not value this man's life were looked very poorly on by Jesus. He said that we should do as did the Samarian. He was the one who showed value to life. What are your views here?

I have yet to see anyone here, not the author of this thread, nor any other person, seek to justify retribution. Retribution means an a It does not mean self defense. It certainly never prevented Israel under God's direction from destroying her enemies.

Nor did the author nor anyone else suggest going up to a poor hurt neighbor who is on the side of the road in need of help and blowing their heads off with a gun. The context of what it was discussed here was not retribution nor helping someone in need. It was self defense, particularly in the instance of protecting family members.

1. Something justly deserved; recompense.
2. Something given or demanded in repayment, especially punishment.
3. Theology Punishment or reward distributed in a future life based on performance in this one.

The Death penalty is retribution. Jail time is retribution. Suing someone for wronging you is retribution. Going to your neighbor and shooting him because he had an affair with your wife is retribution.

[TK Burk]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Do you know what the word implied means?

You IMPLIED that God does change. Otherwise why word this the way you did? Do you agree with me that God does not change? You keep acting as thouth the verse in Malachi is a challange to something you said...if it's NOT that God can change, what is it?

Do YOU know what "CLAIMED" means? You did not say I "implied," you said I "CLAIMED." Uhhh, there is a BIG difference between these...at least there is if you know their definitions!

Jesus is the same yesterday, today, and forever. I already posted that way before you asked me here. Again, I do not think you are keeping up.

So are you ever going to answer my question about Deuteronomy 21 and Malachi? You are giving the appearance of backpedaling on this. :sshhh I am sure you do not want to do that!

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Lost and Found asserted implicitly that God does indeed change.
To which I quoted scripture

To which Lost and Found replied


So what's your take on that verse? You claimed God DOES change and Malachi says otherwise, Is Malachi wrong? You need to do more than try to switch the burden of proof or introduce red herrings and explain this verse.

Yes I know what claimed means. Here is where I said you implied. That does not change that this was your CLAIM. It can be implied or explicit, but either way you made a claim that you seem to be backing out of now.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Lost and Found

Do YOU know what "CLAIMED" means? You did not say I "implied," you said I "CLAIMED." Uhhh, there is a BIG difference between these...at least there is if you know their definitions!

Jesus is the same yesterday, today, and forever. I already posted that way before you asked me here. Again, I do not think you are keeping up.

So are you ever going to answer my question about Deuteronomy 21 and Malachi? You are giving the appearance of backpedaling on this. :sshhh I am sure you do not want to do that!

God does not change, when you agree with me then we can move on.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

EB once again ignoring someones point. His point, in case EB did not understand it, is that EB keeps resorting to an argument from silence, where by if the bible does not specifically say you can use a gun for self defense then it's wrong. Yet when others point out other things the bible does not specifically permit and when asked if they are wrong too EB avoids the point altogether. Perhaps that is a good sign though that EB realizes his argument from silence is fallacious. Though it still baffles the mind why he holds onto it like a hungry dog holding on to a bone.

Praxeas again you are wrong. Praxeas the New Testament does not teach retaliation with deadly force. The lex talionis "law of retaliation" or let the punishment fit the crime. Matthew 5:38 starts out with Jesus quoting the "law of retaliation" Lev 24:18-24:20, Jesus then speaks of the turning the other cheek. As when Jesus speaks of excomunication in Matthew 18:17-19, a three fold witness is used to remove the offender from the congregation (Matthew 18:18-20), but Jesus goes on to say that they needed to consider themselves before passing such a judgement on an offending Brother (Matthew 18:23-35) the one who is offended is to always focus on forgiveness because he was forgiven a huge debt. Peter asks Jesus how many times he was to forgive, and Jesus answers Peter with 70 x 7= 490 (Matthew 18:21-22). Jesus in Matthew 5:38-39 shows that the hashness of the punishment fitting the crime lex talionis, but shows His followers to turn the other cheek, and therefore not to withstand evil.

Rom 12:17

"Recompense to NO MAN EVIL FOR EVIL. Provide things honest in the sight of all men."

It's real simple Praxeas you're not to return blot for blot or an eye for an eye. No retaliation in the New Covenant Church, the Body of Christ.


Pro 20:22

"Say NOT thou, I will recompense evil; but WAIT on the LORD, and he shall SAVE thee."

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

I have yet to see anyone here, not the author of this thread, nor any other person, seek to justify retribution. Retribution means an a It does not mean self defense. It certainly never prevented Israel under God's direction from destroying her enemies.

Does Jesus teach his followers to destroy their enemies? Explain?

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Nor did the author nor anyone else suggest going up to a poor hurt neighbor who is on the side of the road in need of help and blowing their heads off with a gun.

Sorry Praxeas you are having one of your moments and this time you are making no point. We are talking about non-retaliation, period, and care to join the discussion? Yes or no answer will do.

Originally Posted by Praxeas

The context of what it was discussed here was not retribution nor helping someone in need. It was self defense, particularly in the instance of protecting family members.

1. Something justly deserved; recompense.
2. Something given or demanded in repayment, especially punishment.
3. Theology Punishment or reward distributed in a future life based on performance in this one.

The Death penalty is retribution. Jail time is retribution. Suing someone for wronging you is retribution. Going to your neighbor and shooting him because he had an affair with your wife is retribution.

Praxeas and you're saying?

[TK Burk]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

I have yet to see anyone here, not the author of this thread, nor any other person, seek to justify retribution. Retribution means an a It does not mean self defense. It certainly never prevented Israel under God's direction from destroying her enemies.

Nor did the author nor anyone else suggest going up to a poor hurt neighbor who is on the side of the road in need of help and blowing their heads off with a gun. The context of what it was discussed here was not retribution nor helping someone in need. It was self defense, particularly in the instance of protecting family members.

1. Something justly deserved; recompense.
2. Something given or demanded in repayment, especially punishment.
3. Theology Punishment or reward distributed in a future life based on performance in this one.

The Death penalty is retribution. Jail time is retribution. Suing someone for wronging you is retribution. Going to your neighbor and shooting him because he had an affair with your wife is retribution.

Retribution? Where did I post that? I AM talking about self defense. I AM talking about taking the life of someone else to protect your own. I AM talking about a Christian going to war to fight or protect their country. You are rabbit trailing.

Where is any of this found in the NT?

[TK Burk]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Yes I know what claimed means. Here is where I said you implied. That does not change that this was your CLAIM. It can be implied or explicit, but either way you made a claim that you seem to be backing out of now.

But nowhere did I claim or imply this.