Firearms Refresher Course

[stmatthew]

Originally Posted by Brother Strange

Matthew, I have not spoken of defending myself. I have no problem with dying as a martyr or suffering any other violence for whatever cause, especially for the cause of Christ.

So you only espouse to defending others, and not yourself?

Yes you can. You defenitely can. No veagence is NOT our hands. That belongs to God alone. However justice and righteousness is in our hands. For instance, capital punishment for certain crimes is justice and it is godly. It is a demonstration of charity to society as a whole to carry out that execution. There are wars that you can engage in and love your neighbor as yourself at the same time. In times like that, you love your neighbor MORE than yourself especially when you are called upon to give YOUR OWN LIFE for the cause of the greater good...which is charity in its highest representation.

Bro, that is a big stretch. Please tell me how I can shoot down my enemy, and love him at the same time? That IS what we are commanded to do, isn't it? Love your enemies.

Yes, Lost said that he would not. He said that he would only trust God and do nothing himself. I hope that he has told his wife not to depend on him to protect her from a rapist.

I think this comment is quite underneath you. BUt none the less, I cannot speak for him, only to say that I did not see where he stated he would hold his wifes hand only while the rapist had his way with her.

It is not a shadow at all. Men have been in spiritual warfare since Adam. It was no shadow, it was very tangible and real. You are arguing a position from NO scripture in this regard.

The Old Testament call to "go in and conquer" was a shadow of the Spiritual war we now fight, otherwise Jesus would not have told Peter to put away his sword. The land we go in and possess is not this carnal land, but a spiritual land. Unless of coarse you believe in the "Dominion Now" false doctrine that is being espoused.

Bro, I am sorry, but there is not one place in the new testament that calls us to take up arms to defend ourselves or our families, but I have provided scripture that implies just the opposite. So the burden of proof is now on you.

But using your logic, we would not wrestle against flesh and blood even to protect our families, though you are now saying that you would...if that is your interpretation of wrestling. But that is not what that scripture is talking about.

So, would you wrestle to protect your family even since the scripture says NOT to wrestle?

I have been very plain to say I do not know what I would do in such a case, while showing what I believe scripture says. But my actions, or non-actions has no bearing on scripture. Thus far, all I have seen from the opposite side is supposition, and not sound doctrine. If I am wrong, I have no problem changing my view, as to me this is not a salvational type issue, but just a view. But until someone can present scriptural support when the New Testament gives quite a few verses like "Love you enemies", then I will continue believing what I believe, and hope I never have to be tested in this area.

[QUOTE]

Originally Posted by stmatthew

So you only espouse to defending others, and not yourself?

I have had my lights knocked out for my testimony. I did not defend myself.

Bro, that is a big stretch. Please tell me how I can shoot down my enemy, and love him at the same time? That IS what we are commanded to do, isn't it? Love your enemies.

In the case of war or capital punishment, it is the love of God in your heart for the "greater good." It is not that you hate your enemy. It is not that you want to render evil for evil against your enemy. It is not that you want to take revenge on your enemy. It is a case of loving God, loving your neighbor, and loving the cherished, blood bought freedoms given to you, your family, your neighbors and for all your descendants greater than the loss of the life of your enemy.

He is not willing to serve the greater good is too narowly focused upon SELF than to be willing to sacrifice self, life, fortune and property for that greater good. As a young man, I knelt and prayed with tears before I entered into the Armed Forces to SERVE you, your family, your neighbors and the future of your nation. I prayed that God would make me the very best that I can be, fully realizing that I might be called on to do the most despised part of military obligations. God did that for me. Today many years later, I have the Department of the USAF certificate hanging on my hallway wall, acknowledging my exceptional service, given to a very few. I proudly display that metal on my clothes even today and admire my own Certificate hanging on my wall, knowing that God helped me to do the best SERVICE that I could render.

I was committed THEN as I am NOW to serve the greater good. It is a principle that is outward focused rather than inward focused.

I think this comment is quite underneath you. BUt none the less, I cannot speak for him, only to say that I did not see where he stated he would hold his wifes hand only while the rapist had his way with her.

Underneath me? Whatelse are you left to believe when the scriptures say to do good to them that does evil? It is HIS own words. I can only imagine what he would do in the way of doing good for this rapist. Maybe prepare dinner for him when he is through? Certainly, he would not knock the man's head off his shoulders because that would be "rendering evil for evil?" So why would you say it is underneath me?

The Old Testament call to "go in and conquer" was a shadow of the Spiritual war we now fight, otherwise Jesus would not have told Peter to put away his sword. The land we go in and possess is not this carnal land, but a spiritual land. Unless of coarse you believe in the "Dominion Now" false doctrine that is being espoused.

Shadow? Yes! But it is MORE than a mere shadow. There was a national interest involved. Had there not been such a national interest, there would not have been an ISRAEL that finally made it into the promised land. The same is true today. Nothing has changed in that regard. God has set up nations for the sake of the people dwelling in that nation. If there were not such thing as national defense...................it is hard to understand your thinking here. Do you suppose you would have what you have today? Have you ever studied the Revolutionary War against Britain? Have you not read how GOD helped the little rag tag Continental Army whip the greatest military force in the world at that time? Can you not see how God has helped the American Armies in wars of her past? You should hear how God helped my Uncle who was right in the middle of the Battle of the Bulge in Belgium during the WWII. God has been revealed so powerfully in working with the American Armies that it is impossible for me to see the Pacificist point of view...since there is a godly interest of the "greater good" involved.

Bro, I am sorry, but there is not one place in the new testament that calls us to take up arms to defend ourselves or our families, but I have provided scripture that implies just the opposite. So the burden of proof is now on you.

I suppose if I were to turn the scriptures around as you all have, I would be a rank pacificist too. But, I am glad that I have a different concept of each of them that seems to me to be a much broader meaning than you all have applied to them.

I have been very plain to say I do not know what I would do in such a case, while showing what I believe scripture says. But my actions, or non-actions has no bearing on scripture. Thus far, all I have seen from the opposite side is supposition, and not sound doctrine. If I am wrong, I have no problem changing my view, as to me this is not a salvational type issue, but just a view. But until someone can present scriptural support when the New Testament gives quite a few verses like "Love you enemies", then I will continue believing what I believe, and hope I never have to be tested in this area.

Cetainly, I understand your confusion or vacilating thoughts. But for me, I clearly understand both the spirit and the letter of the Word in all of the suppose pacificist scriptures. There is no doubt, no conflict, no vacilation on my part. Hence, there is the integrity of thought, scripture and subsequent action without the least hesitation.

[TK Burk]

Originally Posted by Brother Strange

You don't have to bump it.

DID I SAY THAT IT WAS SYNONYMOUS? You don't have to put words in my mouth.

Yes you did.

Originally Posted by Brother Strange

So, she knows that you would obey scriptures as you see it. You would prepare the man's bath water for him in an effort to doing good for your enemy. Afterwards, you would prepare dinner for him.

Then later you said it to STMATTHEW.

Originally Posted by Brother Strange

Underneath me? Whatelse are you left to believe when the scriptures say to do good to them that does evil? It is HIS own words. I can only imagine what he would do in the way of doing good for this rapist. Maybe prepare dinner for him when he is through? Certainly, he would not knock the man's head off his shoulders because that would be "rendering evil for evil?" So why would you say it is underneath me?

And then in this very post you spoke of it again.

Originally Posted by Brother Strange

So, she knows that you would obey scriptures as you see it. You would prepare the man's bath water for him in an effort to doing good for your enemy. Afterwards, you would prepare dinner for him.

Originally Posted by Brother Strange

But now, if you are going to do as Jesus said, you would do good for the EVIL...just like Jesus said, following the scriptures. You might even fix the man a great meal after he is done his evil.

Brother Strange, with all due respect, is it your practice to always misrepresent those who oppose your views? I have NEVER said I would do nothing. The examples I gave show this. I put my body in the way of the other’s harm. Is this too hard to understand? Kill a person? No! Stop them? Of course.

Brother Strange, you are being cruel and vulgar concerning my godly wife. In our more than 20 years of marriage she can tell you of times I have protected her in the face of dangers. She will tell you that I did exactly what she expected. And she will also tell you that JESUS never failed us in these instances one time. Never needed to pull a gun, yet, here we are, still alive, safe, and well.

Originally Posted by Brother Strange

Of course you can involve yourself while an evil man is in the process of raping your wife. You can threaten him by telling him that you are going to call the police. That would be INTERVENTION. You might EVEN call the police and wait on the police to arrive. That would be INTERVENTION.

Why is calling the police wrong? Who said it was? Only you. The Bible says that this is EXACTLY what they are for. I already posted this before, but I will do it again:

Romans 13:3-4
(3) For RULERS are not a terror to good works, but TO THE EVIL. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:
(4) For HE IS THE MINISTER OF GOD TO THEE FOR GOOD. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for HE BEARETH NOT THE SWORD IN VAIN: FOR HE IS THE MINISTER OF GOD, A REVENGER TO EXECUTE WRATH UPON HIM THAT DOETH EVIL.

Paul is NOT referring to the 'rulers' in churches; he is talking about secular, unsaved leaders. They are the ones who are to carry the sword. Paul said they are for OUR GOOD. God uses such leaders to bring justice. God never intended His Church to do this. We are to preach salvation to the guilty, not judge and kill them.

Originally Posted by Brother Strange

Certainly, you would not take the kids' baseball bat and put an end to the attack...no way! THAT would be rendering EVIL FOR EVIL.

You are correct. Restrain him. Yes. But, I am not the giver of life, Jesus is. I am also not the taker of life; Jesus is supposed to be the only one to determine that as well.

Originally Posted by Brother Strange

In fact, you could not even call the police because the police might have to pull his gun and use it in some cases. THEN, you would be complicit in rendering evil for evil.

During the many times that the apostles escaped danger, were they rendering evil for evil? What about when Paul used his Roman citizenship? Was that using evil for evil? Those opposed to using their own Smith and Wesson are not the ones saying what you are here.

Originally Posted by Brother Strange

But then, since you have all that great faith...nothing like this could ever happen to you and your family, right?

Hey, why does believing Jesus for personal safety require more faith than believing Him for one’s salvation, or for healing, or for their needs? Why does protection of one’s body take greater faith than salvation of one’s soul? I think men always have great faith in areas where they trust God greatly. Doesn’t the Bible say that we cannot please God without faith? Where are the limits in having faith in God? Something to think about….

Originally Posted by Brother Strange

Ho boy! Good grief! There is no one so blind as he who is willing BLIND. I suppose you can believe anything when you twist scriptues, being inward focused.

Brother, you have not even offered any scriptures. Show us with your Bible where we are twisting what we have included in this discussion. This would be the good thing to do.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by stmatthew

The Old Testament call to "go in and conquer" was a shadow of the Spiritual war we now fight, otherwise Jesus would not have told Peter to put away his sword. The land we go in and possess is not this carnal land, but a spiritual land. Unless of coarse you believe in the "Dominion Now" false doctrine that is being espoused.

Bro, I am sorry, but there is not one place in the new testament that calls us to take up arms to defend ourselves or our families, but I have provided scripture that implies just the opposite. So the burden of proof is now on you.

I thought I would post Brother Matthew's excellent post to answer your question.

Timmy, may I ask how old are you?

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

[Timmy]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

I thought I would post Brother Matthew's excellent post to answer your question.

Timmy, may I ask how old are you?

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

I am an adult. But I will never grow up!

OK, the conquering thing, fine. What about God's mercy shown to folks such as Moses (barred from the promised land because of one mistake) and Uzzah (killed on the spot, for touching the ark to keep it from falling)?

Even in the NT, wasn't it God that killed Ananias and Sapphira? New believers, slipped up once. Dead. Did God decide he had to nip this kind of thing in the bud? Funny, it didn't seem to work very well, or not for long, anyway. And it's been a while since God's policy of "you lie - you die" has been in effect. (Never mind the eternal death thing. I mean dropping dead, here and now.)

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Timmy

I am an adult. But I will never grow up!

OK, the conquering thing, fine. What about God's mercy shown to folks such as Moses (barred from the promised land because of one mistake) and Uzzah (killed on the spot, for touching the ark to keep it from falling)?

Even in the NT, wasn't it was God that killed Ananias and Sapphira? New believers, slipped up once. Dead. Did God decide he had to nip this kind of thing in the bud? Funny, it didn't seem to work very well, or not for long, anyway. And it's been a while since God's policy of "you lie - you die" has been in effect. (Never mind the eternal death thing. I mean dropping dead, here and now.)

Big difference between a destroying Israeli army going out to slay the Amalikites, and GOD Himself pulling your plug.

Rom 12:17-21

"Recompense to no man evil for evil. Provide things honest in the sight of all men. If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men. Dearly beloved, AVENGE NOT YOURSELF, BUT RATHER GIVE PLACE UNTO WRATH: for it is written, VEGEANCE IS MINE; I WILL REPAY, saith the Lord. Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head. Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good."


Timmy if you never grow up then Peter Pan will take you to Never Never Land, where all Lost Boys go.

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

[Timmy]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Big difference between a destroying Israeli army going out to slay the Amalikites, and GOD Himself pulling your plug.

True! My question, though, had to do with using Jesus as our example, specifically in L&F's post.

I guess we need to pick carefully which of his actions use as examples. E.g., not the killing in response to an offense. In God's case, touching the ark or lying about what we gave warranted some killings. But in my case, I shouldn't kill my son if he doesn't do the dishes when I told him to, should I?

[TK Burk]

Originally Posted by Timmy

True! My question, though, had to do with using Jesus as our example, specifically in L&F's post.

I guess we need to pick carefully which of his actions use as examples. E.g., not the killing in response to an offense. In God's case, touching the ark or lying about what we gave warranted some killings. But in my case, I shouldn't kill my son if he doesn't do the dishes when I told him to, should I?

Timmy,

Thanks for your question.

Your question is not new here. It has already been dealt with in earlier posts. But to answer it again, let me ask you to put into context the following things:

1. While being espoused to a man, if a woman is found impregnated by another man, she was to be stoned according to the Law of God.

Deuteronomy 22:23-24 If a damsel that is a virgin be BETROTHED UNTO A HUSBAND, and A MAN FIND HER IN THE CITY, AND LIE WITH HER; (24) Then ye shall BRING THEM BOTH out unto the gate of that city, and ye shall STONE THEM WITH STONES THAT THEY DIE; the damsel, because she cried not, being in the city; and the man, because he hath humbled his neighbor's wife: so thou shalt put away evil from among you.

2. Mary was espoused to Joseph but was found impregnated by (supposedly) another man.

Matthew 1:19 Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a public example, WAS MINDED TO PUT HER AWAY PRIVILY.

His thinking about putting her away indicates that she had been with another man. Joseph had God’s Word that he was to stone Mary for her infidelity, yet he chose to divorce Mary.

3. The Bible says that Joseph was a “just man.” This means he was one that kept the Law of God. It also says because Joseph kept the Law he chose to divorce Mary secretly and to not make her sin public knowledge.

Matthew 1:19 Then Joseph her husband, BEING A JUST MAN, AND NOT WILLING TO MAKE HER A PUBLIC EXAMPLE, was minded to put her away privily.

But is THAT what the Law said to do? Did it? What I am going to ask you next, I ask not in jest, or to bait you, but with sincerity. Here is your question: since Joseph did not stone Mary as God’s Word provided, why did the same Word of God call him “JUST” for his choice?

[Timmy]

Originally Posted by Lost and Found

Timmy,

Thanks for your question.

Your question is not new here. It has already been dealt with in earlier posts. But to answer it again, let me ask you to put into context the following things:

1. While being espoused to a man, if a woman is found impregnated by another man, she was to be stoned according to the Law of God.



2. Mary was espoused to Joseph but was found impregnated by (supposedly) another man.



His thinking about putting her away indicates that she had been with another man. Joseph had God’s Word that he was to stone Mary for her infidelity, yet he chose to divorce Mary.

3. The Bible says that Joseph was a “just man.” This means he was one that kept the Law of God. It also says because Joseph kept the Law he chose to divorce Mary secretly and to not make her sin public knowledge.



But is THAT what the Law said to do? Did it? What I am going to ask you next, I ask not in jest, or to bait you, but with sincerity. Here is your question: since Joseph did not stone Mary as God’s Word provided, why did the same Word of God call him “JUST” for his choice?

Good question. My answer: Joseph was better than blindly following a law that he saw as too harsh. That Joseph actually disobeyed this law, apparently with God's blessing, is interesting. Joseph was still under the old covenant, so he literally disobeyed that law. Or was the new covenant already beginning to take effect, years before the cross?

But, that's not what I was asking. I wasn't asking about the law -- which OT laws we should obey, which ones we can ignore, etc. I asked about your post saying that Jesus is our example in all things. Is Jesus, even in the OT, our example in all things? I don't see an OT example for Joseph to follow in deciding to disobey that law. How did he know it was better to show mercy on Mary than have her killed?