Supreme Court ruling in...

Demiurge

unc2701 wrote: »

The swords had to do with fulfilling the prophesy of Isaiah and not defense. When his disciple attempts to defend Jesus against the soldiers in Gethsemane (a few passages later) and cuts off the soldier's ear, Jesus has him put up the sword and heals the ear.

Says who, you?

What a ridiculous argument.

unc2701 wrote: »

You're claiming that Christ said something about the right to defend oneself. I'd never heard of that. Please point me in the right direction.

I've never run away from the forums- I've been right here all along.

I didn't claim anything. I responded to the assertion that defending yourself is somehow wrong in the eyes of God. If you believe that, you don't know what you're talking about is what I said.

Luke 22:36-38 (KJV)

[Jesus] asked them [the eleven apostles], "When I sent you out without a purse, bag or sandals, did you lack anything?"

They said, "No, not a thing."

He said to them, "But now the one who has a purse must take it, and likewise a bag. And the one who has no sword must sell his cloak and buy one. For I tell you, this scripture must be fulfilled in me: ‘And he was numbered among the lawless’; and indeed what is written about me is being fulfilled."

They [the disciples] said, "See, Lord, here are two swords."
"It is enough," he replied.

Jstas

Wanted to get a post in on this one before it goes to the HOS or the graveyard.

Politics, guns AND religion all in one post! That's awesomesauce right there!

unc2701

I'm in no way claiming that defending oneself is somehow a sin before god, or claiming that christianity somehow teaches this. If you were competent you'd point out the absolution given to soldiers by churches all the time. However, christ was very clearly pacifist in all respects. If you went two verses beyond that in Luke, Christ rebukes his disciples for drawing those same swords in defense.

The consensus on that passage by nearly every theologian is what I gave. Obviously there's some debate, but the catechism of the Catholic church is in line with that, too.

steveinaz

Jstas wrote: »

Wanted to get a post in on this one before it goes to the HOS or the graveyard.

Politics, guns AND religion all in one post! That's awesomesauce right there!

...and I'm behaving myself.

Face

The problem here is, not everyone believes in the same god, or believe in god at all.

200 years later and there still isn't a real separation of church and state.

unc2701

Face wrote: »

The problem here is, not everyone believes in the same god, or believe in god at all.

200 years later and there still isn't a real separation of church and state.

Dammit, man! Now we're going to get the "founders never intended separation of church and state" crowd in on this.

Anyhow, I've laid what I learned through way too much time spent in church, take it or leave it. Luke 22 gets thrown around a lot by people who have trouble with the pure pacifism of christ- which I think gets to the original point of pmckeealaska when he brought it up. I'm done with Christianity, so gun ownership is A-OK with me.

obieone

Enjoy the 2nd amendment WHILE you can! 5-4 vote doesn't make me all warm and fuzzy for the future.

steveinaz

Yeah, I hear ya--its a scary testament of what Americans will buy off on (false sense of security). Apparently many in this country are perfectly content with being "taken care of"...no thanks, I'll take care of myself. You know the old saying "fear a government that fears your guns." True stuff.

Jstas

steveinaz wrote: »

Apparently many in this country are perfectly content with being "taken care of"...

Somebody should shoot those people.

obieone

I'd volunteer, but they STILL haven't issued permits for hunting liberals! Not even in S.C.!!!

steveinaz

Having said all this, I can't believe I'm not banned yet. I'm proud of you CP.

I just cannot imagine, or visualize, someone in my home and I have no way to protect my family. I guess many are satisfied with "ah, it won't happen to me". Good luck with that.

amulford

I'm sorry, but that vote just scares the **** out of me. All it means is the next time it could go the other way.

To think that the Bill of rights, which BTW IS the literal AND actual foundation of our Constitution, would even come under consideration is abhorrent IMHO.

I'm glad it eeked by, don't get me wrong. But if there ever comes a time that it doesn't, you need to seriously consider picking them up... What do you think would come next...

steveinaz

Honestly Anthony, it took 171 years to get a reading on this, I don't think they will revisit it for a very, very long time. But I do understand the concern....

Demiurge

unc2701 wrote: »

I'm in no way claiming that defending oneself is somehow a sin before god, or claiming that christianity somehow teaches this. If you were competent you'd point out the absolution given to soldiers by churches all the time. However, christ was very clearly pacifist in all respects. If you went two verses beyond that in Luke, Christ rebukes his disciples for drawing those same swords in defense.

The consensus on that passage by nearly every theologian is what I gave. Obviously there's some debate, but the catechism of the Catholic church is in line with that, too.

If your insertion into discussion on this forum is merely to muddy the waters and deviate from the topic at hand you do a brilliant job of it. The response of mine you quoted was to pmckeealaska, not you. He stated there's a quarrel between Christians and their ability to own and legally use firearms, insinuating Jesus, peaceful and pacifist as He was, would rather you take a bullet than defend yourself.

It's a **** idiotic assertion and you know it.

You don't need to be a church goer to see it and I have been through the whole works for many years. Not once has any pastor at any church I have been a part of over the years ever stated that defending yourself, let alone OWNING A GUN, was in conflict with the churches teachings. The fact all you can come up with is to tell others to research your points for you proves you don't have one. Stop trying to further dilute the discussion at hand, which is the SCOTUS ruling on gun ownership in America.

Demiurge

steveinaz wrote: »

Honestly Anthony, it took 171 years to get a reading on this, I don't think they will revisit it for a very, very long time. But I do understand the concern....

That depends on the court....If you get more who want to legislate from the bench it's game over and revolution time.

tonyb

I like a good old fashioned revolution every now and then,don't you guys? Seems to me we are long over due for a few anyway.

pmckeealaska

Hey Demiurge, how about if you stop being insulting to me by saying the point I was trying to make was an idiotic assertion. I wasnt trying to be insulting to anyone, just raising a point regarding an observation I have made many times about the correlation between those who are NRA members and also seem to be devout christians. I think it is a valid observation. Is it exactly gemain to the SCOTUS thread? Perhaps not, but it seemed like a good place to put it given todays decision. If you want to tell me to put it in a seperate thread fine, but there's no need to personally attack me for mentioning a very real observation I have made on more than one occassion.

bobman1235

tonyb wrote: »

I like a good old fashioned revolution every now and then,don't you guys? Seems to me we are long over due for a few anyway.

I'd say we're LONG overdue. Gas prices keep goin' up, I see a Mad-Max type atmosphere in the next 5 years.

Demiurge

pmckeealaska wrote: »

Hey Demiurge, how about if you stop being insulting to me by saying the point I was trying to make was an idiotic assertion. I wasnt trying to be insulting to anyone, just raising a point regarding an observation I have made many times about the correlation between those who are NRA members and also seem to be devout christians. I think it is a valid observation. Is it exactly gemain to the SCOTUS thread? Perhaps not, but it seemed like a good place to put it given todays decision. If you want to tell me to put it in a seperate thread fine, but there's no need to personally attack me for mentioning a very real observation I have made on more than one occassion.

You don't want to be personally attacked for what you say, but it's okay for you to mock and attack Christians who own guns by calling them hypocrites?

Nice double standard.

You don't have to like them or agree with them, but don't get bent when you get it shoved back in your face.

madmax

bobman1235 wrote: »

Gas prices keep goin' up, I see a Mad-Max type atmosphere in the next 5 years.

Woo hoo!

madmax

I am heading the new "atmosphere" around here!!!

fatchowmein

steveinaz wrote: »

What a bunch or morons. You still have to be legally "qualified" to own a gun--this isn't a free pass. Friggin sheeple.

If you search on Youtube, there's a funny interview with Gunny from Mail Call where he's complaining that even though he's filled out the registration form on his last 30+ purchases, he still has to fill out another form when he purchases another piece.

Anyway, great news for 2nd Amendment Rights.

madmax

pmckeealaska wrote: »

Is it exactly gemain to the SCOTUS thread?

What the hell do the germains got to do with this anyway... Buford T Justice.

unc2701

I was taught that Christ would have us avoid violence at all costs, regardless of who was wronging who. A devout Christian would struggle with every act of violence, defensive or not. So a Christian should at the very least question the morality of gun ownership- A christian should say to himself, "Life is precious, do I really need to possess an instrument of death? If I am put in that situation, what will I do to avoid having to kill someone?"

If a thief breaks into your house and you are unarmed, most the time you'll lose your possessions, but not your life. If a thief breaks into your house and you have a gun, someone will likely die. Given that calculus, I think Christ come down against guns, but I think each person should make that judgment for themselves. A christian gun owner is not a hypocrite by definition, but I start to wonder about the one that says "shoot first".

Christ gave his life, "took a bullet in the head" instead of defending himself. Turned the other cheek. And there are a whole lot of martyrs that did the same.

So the idea is far from **** idiotic, but Demi, you've shown time and again how small minded and ignorant you are, so I really don't expect you to get this.

schwarcw

Cut the crap!

Just show us your ****!

schwarcw

Come on Steve, bring out the Glock!:D

obieone

No ****!:p

amulford

Now who in the hell needs a friggin recoiless rifle, for cryin out loud:cool:

obieone

Let's go places and SHOOT things!