The NYTs finds an evangelical reverend to carry its holy water.
Dumb question here —-> (with painful video of the reverend trying to be intellectual.)
The implication is that Christians are hypocrites if they want self-protection, or they want to protect their family, or if they want to be civil servants, or go into the military.
I take that back.
The right reverend dumbbell is only calling out citizens that want to conceal carry. He’s not bright enough to dig deep and see that this would mean Christians couldn’t have a firearm under any circumstances. That would also include allowing people around you, like Obama’s secret service, to possess firearms in your service.
The guy is an idiot, hoping that his genteel (gentile?) persona masks it.
It doesn’t.
ht/ sam shultis
Christ told us to sell our cloak and buy a sword. I preferred to buy an H&K .45 USP.
Peter did….must have been Kosher with JC
Maybe not but his bodyguards would. The Bible clearly states that on several occasions the apostles traveling with Jesus were armed.
No, Jesus would not wear a sidearm. He would have no need to, just as he had no need for a sword. (He used an item similar to a bullwhip when clearing out the temple, he was NOT a pacifist)
As was pointed out above, he instructed his followers to be always armed from the date of his departure onward.
He commanded that we have a sword, if we don’t have one, to sell our cloak to buy one. That meant that being able to protect oneself from other humans was more important than protecting oneself from nature.
The fact is that people calling themselves Christian that are not armed are, at best ‘cafeteria Christians’ that pick and choose which of Christ’s instructions to follow and which to ignore, or at worse, liars.
If one is uncomfortable with the teachings of Christ, there is always Islam.
That fraud of a ‘Reverend’ is paving a path of pacifism and retreat in front of those that would destroy Christianity.
I guess appendix carry is OK.
“So he made a whip out of cords, and drove all from the temple courts, both sheep and cattle; he scattered the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables.”
Relevant. All God’s people need, is His Word. 92 year old woman attacked in her care defenseless. Well, kinda.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1ixd0J5GqC4
Evangelicals are religious left wingers.
IMHO
Not to be confused with a person intruding with intent to kill!
How do you come to that conclusion?
I noticed there was hardly anyone in his congregation.
Hell yeah!…
Jesus would wave a flaming sword around and chop your ugly satanic progtard head off with it and then use your decapitated head as a motherfuckin’ soccer ball…
Next question.
“But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.”
— Jesus, Matthew 5:39
Really? My compatriots at my church would dispute that rather vocally (at the very least) and would love to show you our firearms if asked to do so.
He said to them, “But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.”
— Luke 22:36, NIV
Which requires that the citizen strike your cheek with his “poop” hand; a grave dishonor to his family…stops them in their tracks.
Sell your cloak and buy a Troy M4 (with the tritium front site upgrade and Aimpoint Pro) – Jesus
Well, that’s what he’d say today…
“Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.”
— Matthew 10:34, NIV
All the above are in there, I’ve used those scriptures to make many a pacifist think.
Indeed he brought a sword – the Romans came for him with a cohort – a cohort was 600 men. They must’ve thought they had need – Judas Iscariot – Judas the Sicari. Peter the Earcutter.
Somebody on that mount was considered armed & dangerous by the cops.
That man is silly. Jesus wouldn’t need a side arm. He is the SON OF GOD!
If you understood the context it was that Christians were to ignore personal slights and insults. It was not a blanket condemnation of self-defense. Read a little deeper and understand that Jesus Christ is not denying us that inherent right.
Of course He can call a legion of angels in a moment and smite all. He is the Author of the Universe. His Power and Justice cannot be opposed, so no, he does not need a sidearm.
He would, of course, approve of Christians defending the weak and opposing evil, so we MUST be armed.
Anyone who says otherwise is a false prophet, a liar, and a wolf amongst the sheep. That includes the socialist gun-hating Pope.
Jesus could rip the heart out of a Commie in one second and then laugh and play with tiny cute kittens in the next second. Jesus is killer shit. Accept no substitutes.
Luke 11: 21 When a strong man armed keepeth his palace, his goods are in peace: 22 But when a stronger than he shall come upon him, and overcome him, he taketh from him all his armour wherein he trusted, and divideth his spoils.
Christ was not armed because being so would have impeded his purpose. Thus Peter was rebuked when he acted on his behalf.
But as is clear from the previous posted Biblical quotes I do not believe he taught that it was wrong to defend yourself or others from violent attacks. You turn the other cheek only when it would be suicide to defend yourself. When the stronger man of vs 22 is present. And I’m pretty sure he will be well armed when he returns with a different goal to fulfill.
Things like this would be much easier to figure out if the gospels recorded a story of the military draft board calling him up to serve as an infantryman in an unpopular war.
Hehe, You said it. My comment: Jesus doesn’t need a sidearm. He could wave his hand and you would have your skin on the inside and guts on the outside before you saw his hand move.
Don’t mess with Jesus.
The Lord Jesus does not need a mortal weapon because He is the Eternal Weapon who conquered Hell and the grave – Revelation 1:18 (KJV);
Revelation 19:21 (KJV) “And the remnant were slain with the sword of Him that sat upon the horse, which sword proceeded out of his mouth: and all the fowls were filled with their flesh.”
Take note, heretics and reprobates – Jesus will be back!
What part of “resist not evil” is unclear in His statement? Who are we to interpret what He meant by that? If it only applied to personal slights and insults, why would He not have fought against those who came to crucify Him? Surely that would be a case for self-defense by anyone’s definition, would it not?
My favorite essay on the subject: http://www.barnhardt.biz/the-one-about-jesus-and-guns/
No offense, but you make Jesus sound bipolar.
IMHO?
Well Mickey, I believe you have mistaken ignorance as humility. The hundreds of Evangelicals I know are Christ Centered preppers and very well armed, practiced and supplied.
They will protect their flock, families and what they have from thieves or other criminal elements. The large stockpiles of food, medicine, tents, clothing and other material are there to be given to those in need.
The alternative is wait for the federal government to come and rescue you. The Feds did a bang up job during Katrina and most all disasters…. If you find yourself in great need, call upon the Evangelical Community
How does this stupid bastard feel about the koran’s commandments to kill unarmed Christians and Jews?
He should go try to sell his propaganda to the devout moslems in isis. That would be the most effective way to learn why Christians must be armed with superior weaponry.
God the Father, Creator and King of the Universe has used flaming swords that could not be defeated by man. I believe it would be okay for His Son to do likewise, if he ever had reason to do so.
Genesis 3:24
So he drove out the man: and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubim, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.