Gun Control

[hxcCatholic413]

In case you missed it earlier in this thread, Christ commanded His followers to purchase swords for themselves if they did not have one. Even if they had to sell their cloaks to obtain one. To say that Christ instructed His followers to purchase something that He did not intend for them to use is ridiculous. That would have been extremely wasteful and the money could have been better spent by providing for the poor, whom; Jesus was a firm supporter of. The fact that Jesus said that the proceeds from the selling of the cloak were to be used for the purchase of a weapon instead of giving to the poor, shows that taking care of one’s personal safety come before our duty to the poor.

And when Peter cut off the ear, Jesus told Peter to put the sword away – not to throw it away. The reason was that the purpose of the sword was for His followers to be able to defend themselves after Jesus was gone. It was not for defending Jesus, who could have called down twelve legions of angels to defend Him.

Your missing the point. Jesus was against them taking up swords…did you notice the message was clear once his resurrection? The early apostles were martyred…did they fight back their captors with swords? No

When he said that they will need a sword he meant for the rough times ahead of them. I don’t think it was meant literally. They were meant to fight spiritually rather than physically. Hope this helps. God Bless!

 

[Sir_Knight]

Your missing the point. Jesus was against them taking up swords…did you notice the message was clear once his resurrection? The early apostles were martyred…did they fight back their captors with swords? No

Jesus was against them taking up swords that that is why He commanded them to get swords? Sorry, your reasoning is lacking.

When he said that they will need a sword he meant for the rough times ahead of them. I don’t think it was meant literally. They were meant to fight spiritually rather than physically. Hope this helps. God Bless!

The Apostles, who spent three years with Jesus, understood Jesus to mean actual swords. The Gospel writers, who wrote this passage AFTER the truth of the had been revealed to them, wrote that while Jesus did not always speak literally and the Apostles often misunderstood Him, He ALWAYS explained what He meant to them and we always see that explanation.

This would be the ONLY place in all of scripture where Jesus failed to explain something. Either scripture is wrong and Jesus didn’t explain everything to them or Jesus didn’t explain further because they understood correctly and Jesus meant actually swords.

I’ll take the latter. If you take the former, then you have to admit that there is at east one error in the bible and if it is possible for there to be one error, there MIGHT be other errors and since we don’t know how many or where they are, that places every statement in the bible under question that it might be wrong.

 

[TEPO]

Gun control is nothing more than popular fantasy. It’s un-enforceable…!

Most gun sales involve the redistribution or exchange of existing firearms, because guns are capable of lasting hundreds of years or longer when well kept. They’re handed down from generation to generation.

Besides guns, criminals can always just use a baseball bat to knock us our or kill us… All it takes is one good swing.

If we really want to cure our fear of violence and guns, people need to start teaching their children what is morally right from what is morally wrong… We need to focus on our own families and friends, and protect ourselves from evil.

kpeople: The moral of this message is this: Why should we involve ourselves or the Church in the impossible solution of gun control for the masses…? Lets focus on what matters… Lets get back to basics and start growing responsible families again, before we attempt to artificially fix our whole society…

 

[hxcCatholic413]

Jesus was against them taking up swords that that is why He commanded them to get swords? Sorry, your reasoning is lacking.

The Apostles, who spent three years with Jesus, understood Jesus to mean actual swords. The Gospel writers, who wrote this passage AFTER the truth of the had been revealed to them, wrote that while Jesus did not always speak literally and the Apostles often misunderstood Him, He ALWAYS explained what He meant to them and we always see that explanation.

This would be the ONLY place in all of scripture where Jesus failed to explain something. Either scripture is wrong and Jesus didn’t explain everything to them or Jesus didn’t explain further because they understood correctly and Jesus meant actually swords.

I’ll take the latter. If you take the former, then you have to admit that there is at east one error in the bible and if it is possible for there to be one error, there MIGHT be other errors and since we don’t know how many or where they are, that places every statement in the bible under question that it might be wrong.

We can see throughout the NT that Christ had a way with words and their actual meanings. Why would he spare the adulterer, but yet approve the use of swords? He commanded them to get “Spiritual Swords” Swords are a weapon…he meant for them to use it spiritually OR in other terms to have strong faith.
It’s a metaphor that they obviously weren’t aware of UNTIL Christ’s resurrection when the message seemed to be clear. God Bless!

 

[hxcCatholic413]

Gun control is nothing more than popular fantasy. It’s un-enforceable…!

Most gun sales involve the redistribution or exchange of existing firearms, because guns are capable of lasting hundreds of years or longer when well kept. They’re handed down from generation to generation.

Besides guns, criminals can always just use a baseball bat to knock us our or kill us… All it takes is one good swing.

If we really want to cure our fear of violence and guns, people need to start teaching their children what is morally right from what is morally wrong… We need to focus on our own families and friends, and protect ourselves from evil.

kpeople: The moral of this message is this: Why should we involve ourselves or the Church in the impossible solution of gun control for the masses…? Lets focus on what matters… Lets get back to basics and start growing responsible families again, before we attempt to artificially fix our whole society…

Good message TEPO…strong families with strong morals build a better future, but in reality theres no way everyone will believe this; therefore it is somewhat helpful that all of us as Christians and the Church as a whole have a stand regarding this issue.

 

[tommcguire]

If one accepts the premise it is obligatory to protect human life with a lethal weapons, is it therefore sinful to give one’s life as a martyr?

“The Martyr Saints of China, or Augustine Zhao Rong and his 119 companions, are saints of the Roman Catholic Church. The 87 Chinese Catholics and 33 Western missionaries, from the mid-17th century to 1930, were martyred because of their ministry and, in some cases, for their refusal to apostatize. Many died in the Boxer Rebellion, in which xenophobic peasants slaughtered 30,000 Chinese converts to Christianity along with missionaries and other foreigners. In the ordinary form they are remembered with an optional memorial on July 9.”

These are saints of the Roman Catholic Church who did not choose to destroy life to save life. The Church gives them to the faithful as models to imitate. I know relatives of some of these martyrs. They tell of how the blood of their relatives gave birth to new life in Christ and growth in the Catholic Church even in the face of great oppression.

What if all Catholics were as willing to give their life as a witness to Jesus Christ as these martyrs? It seems such sacrifice invites sinners to accept salvation in Jesus Christ? Which we believe is why God sent His Son to redeem the world.

In reply to the challenge of what I did when held up at gun point. No I did not stop the young boy. Had I tried to stop him with a gun, someone would have been hurt or killed, probably myself. He may indeed have held up another, even killed another human being. “Forgive him for he knew not what he was doing.” In my life, I try to imitate Jesus. Jesus did not try in anyway to stop his executioners from carrying out His unjust execution on the cross.

May God forgive me for all the times I have failed to imitate Jesus Christ in my life.

 

[Tigg]

This is not in one specific document, this is the CORE of Christianity. It is in EVERY DOCUMENT of the church. Through Christ’s death, we are all brothers and sisters. Do you carry a weapon afraid of your brother or sister in your own house? Your wife or kids perhaps?

If your answer to the above is YES, then you of course need to rethink a lot of things. Assuming it is ‘NO’, then you should act the same way towards the rest of the planet. That is what Christianity is. If you do not try to accept everyone on this planet as your brother or sister and love them that way, you have failed as a Christian. And of course, carrying a gun afraid of your fellow brothers or sisters is certainly NOT a step in the right direction…

What I am pointing out is the type of relationship we must have with our fellow brothers and sisters. It must be with acceptance of the fact that everyone is our brother and sister in Christ. That is why we do not carry a gun around. Just as we do not fear our brother or sister harming us, we do not fear the spiritual brothers and sisters in Christ. In fact, this is the essence of Christianity. Our life is a strife to get ourselves to love everyone as brothers and sisters in Christ…

I think in short, you and I and all Catholics can agree that our duty is to LOVE everyone as our brother and sister. Our duty is to maintain good mental, physical, and spiritual health in all members of Christ. You are certainly correct that in our society, some might turn out to be bad people. Our duty is NOT to shoot the rapist BUT to make sure that the person NEVER becomes that ‘what if’ rapist. Our duty is to GET RID of the Guns on the streets that are used by drug dealers and all other kinds of people who engage in violent organized crime. We can’t do this by having a gun ourselves. The other person would just use a bigger gun. So we do that our duty by giving the young would be ‘gang bangers’ a good education and most of all, teachings of CHRIST.

I find your posts very judgmental! As with all liberal thinking, you are erroneously believing that somehow we can bring about Utopia on earth and change the hearts of those intent on following evil. No one is disputing that as Christians, we have a duty to promote the Kingdom values of love and peace, but it appears to me you would rather give a free pass to criminals and let them abdicate their personal responsibility for crimes committed by their own free choosing. It sounds to me as though you would rather place the blame squarely on the shoulders of the righteous!

Gun control is not about guns; it is about control. This is a purely progressive, political issue which addresses the agenda to erode self reliance and the independence of a free people. I do not want to live in a country where government has unrestrained power to tyrannize. There are many things more dangerous than a gun, which incidentally, can save lives as well as take them. I would never want to face judgment and have to explain to my Lord why I did not try to protect those I love from a danger which caused them grave harm.

 

[ddarko]

In case you missed it earlier in this thread, Christ commanded His followers to purchase swords for themselves if they did not have one. Even if they had to sell their cloaks to obtain one. To say that Christ instructed His followers to purchase something that He did not intend for them to use is ridiculous. That would have been extremely wasteful and the money could have been better spent by providing for the poor, whom; Jesus was a firm supporter of. The fact that Jesus said that the proceeds from the selling of the cloak were to be used for the purchase of a weapon instead of giving to the poor, shows that taking care of one’s personal safety come before our duty to the poor.

And when Peter cut off the ear, Jesus told Peter to put the sword away – not to throw it away. The reason was that the purpose of the sword was for His followers to be able to defend themselves after Jesus was gone. It was not for defending Jesus, who could have called down twelve legions of angels to defend Him.

In case you missed the memo Sir Knight, that interpretation of that passage is incompatible with Scripture.

The inevitable conclusion of interpreting that as Jesus asking them to actually BUY Swords makes Jesus look like a lunatic. That is why in Academia, your view is considered as IMPOSSIBLE.

I can’t help but summarize though, you don’t seem to realize that correlation does not imply causation. You want to build up a case for having guns based on incorrect Scriptural exegesis. Moreover, you want to discard Christ’s teaching to consider all peoples as our brothers and sisters in Christ. You are also having ample difficulty reconciling shooting and abortionist and your position of ‘fight against evil’. I think you are starting and entering this debate with a mindset that Guns ARE GOOD. But if thats the case, I am afraid not even the Pope will be able to convince you otherwise. You will always hear what you want to hear.

I am not sure at this point if there is any point going forward with you. So I am going to bow out of conversing with you

God Bless

 

[Sir_Knight]

We can see throughout the NT that Christ had a way with words and their actual meanings. Why would he spare the adulterer, but yet approve the use of swords? He commanded them to get “Spiritual Swords” Swords are a weapon…he meant for them to use it spiritually OR in other terms to have strong faith.
It’s a metaphor that they obviously weren’t aware of UNTIL Christ’s resurrection when the message seemed to be clear. God Bless!

In the passage, Jesus is talking about material objects … a walking stick, a money bag, their cloak, etc. Nowhere does He imply that the swords are to be spiritual. The Apostles understood it to be physical swords. The gospel writers understood it to be physical swords. Scripture tells us that Jesus ALWAYS explained everything to His apostles in private when they misunderstood because they were to carry His message to the ends of the earth. Why didn’t He clarify this? Would the great teacher allow them to misunderstand knowing that they were to pass this misunderstanding on to others that they taught? Why does the bible tell us that Jesus ALWAYS explained everything when we see in this example that He didn’t? Why do we never see Jesus informing a military convert that he needed to resign from his line of work (Matthew 8:5-13; Luke 3:14) – instead, Jesus praised them.

If one assumes that Jesus did not mean physical swords, too many questions are raised which can not be answered. No such questions exist if one correctly concludes that Jesus meant actual physical swords. I leave you with the words of our Lord as recorded in Luke 11:21 – " … When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own palace, his goods are safe … "

 

[ddarko]

I find your posts very judgmental! As with all liberal thinking, you are erroneously believing that somehow we can bring about Utopia on earth and change the hearts of those intent on following evil. No one is disputing that as Christians, we have a duty to promote the Kingdom values of love and peace, but it appears to me you would rather give a free pass to criminals and let them abdicate their personal responsibility for crimes committed by their own free choosing. It sounds to me as though you would rather place the blame squarely on the shoulders of the righteous!

My dear friend,

what part was I being judgmental again? It appears that you are in-fact incorrectly ‘judging’ me in this case.

I am simply pointing out Christian teaching. We are called to embrace everyone as our brother and sister in Christ. Do you carry a weapon at home afraid of your brother or sister? No right? So we are called to LOVE our spiritual brothers and sisters the same way. That is what being a Christian is about.

I am also not after some Utopian dream. This is why I stressed the importance for authority and governance. They can have guns (ideally even that won’t be necessary of course). I also stressed the need for guns if you are in a war-zone.

Your inability to agree with the fact that WE can all agree that our DUTY as Christians is to get that would-be rapist from ever getting to that point really baffles me.

Gun control is not about guns; it is about control. This is a purely progressive, political issue which addresses the agenda to erode self reliance and the independence of a free people. I do not want to live in a country where government has unrestrained power to tyrannize. There are many things more dangerous than a gun, which incidentally, can save lives as well as take them. I would never want to face judgment and have to explain to my Lord why I did not try to protect those I love from a danger which caused them grave harm.

I am afraid you will have to answer why you were so keen on putting a bullet through the rapists head while not properly trying to STOP such people from happening. You will also have to answer how you made the lines of division between ‘those are my loved ones’ and ‘those are not’.

What you have failed to realize it seems is that we are called to LOVE everyone as brothers and sisters in Christ. Do you understand that this is the essence of Christianity through which everything is built on?

God Bless

 

[ddarko]

If one assumes that Jesus did not mean physical swords, too many questions are raised which can not be answered. No such questions exist if one correctly concludes that Jesus meant actual physical swords. I leave you with the words of our Lord as recorded in Luke 11:21 – " … When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own palace, his goods are safe … "

Actually if we conclude as ‘physical swords’ as Sir Knight wants to put it, Jesus is a bumbling lunatic. Because moments later in Gethsemane he is telling Peter about what happened to those who take up the sword.

That looks like a classic scenario of multiple personality disorder

Sir Knight has been following incorrect theology and has been using this argument for quiet sometime. So at this point I think its just stubbornness to give it up more than anything else.

God Bless

 

[ddarko]

If one accepts the premise it is obligatory to protect human life with a lethal weapons, is it therefore sinful to give one’s life as a martyr?

“The Martyr Saints of China, or Augustine Zhao Rong and his 119 companions, are saints of the Roman Catholic Church. The 87 Chinese Catholics and 33 Western missionaries, from the mid-17th century to 1930, were martyred because of their ministry and, in some cases, for their refusal to apostatize. Many died in the Boxer Rebellion, in which xenophobic peasants slaughtered 30,000 Chinese converts to Christianity along with missionaries and other foreigners. In the ordinary form they are remembered with an optional memorial on July 9.”

These are saints of the Roman Catholic Church who did not choose to destroy life to save life. The Church gives them to the faithful as models to imitate. I know relatives of some of these martyrs. They tell of how the blood of their relatives gave birth to new life in Christ and growth in the Catholic Church even in the face of great oppression.

What if all Catholics were as willing to give their life as a witness to Jesus Christ as these martyrs? It seems such sacrifice invites sinners to accept salvation in Jesus Christ? Which we believe is why God sent His Son to redeem the world.

In reply to the challenge of what I did when held up at gun point. No I did not stop the young boy. Had I tried to stop him with a gun, someone would have been hurt or killed, probably myself. He may indeed have held up another, even killed another human being. “Forgive him for he knew not what he was doing.” In my life, I try to imitate Jesus. Jesus did not try in anyway to stop his executioners from carrying out His unjust execution on the cross.

May God forgive me for all the times I have failed to imitate Jesus Christ in my life.

Well said my friend. Catholicism never spread by the sword. That is IN FACT the main difference between Christianity and Islam.

Christianity was spread on the blood that was spilled, not of the persecuting Roman emperors and soldiers BUT that of the very Christians who happily gave up their lives and families for Christ.

It is rather ironic that in this day and age, we are still so keen on labeling one group as “those we love” and another group as “those we do not love and therefore OK to be killed in defense of our other labeled group”.

This is a major misuse of the Just war doctrine.

God Bless

 

[ddarko]

Why do we never see Jesus informing a military convert that he needed to resign from his line of work (Matthew 8:5-13; Luke 3:14) – instead, Jesus praised them.

Why does it seem that some don’t realize that being against guns among civilians IS NOT the same as being against military carrying guns. I believe that I myself and many others have stressed that their problem is not against authority carrying guns.

God Bless

 

[Sir_Knight]

If one accepts the premise it is obligatory to protect human life with a lethal weapons, is it therefore sinful to give one’s life as a martyr?

“The Martyr Saints of China, or Augustine Zhao Rong and his 119 companions, are saints of the Roman Catholic Church. The 87 Chinese Catholics and 33 Western missionaries, from the mid-17th century to 1930, were martyred because of their ministry and, in some cases, for their refusal to apostatize. Many died in the Boxer Rebellion, in which xenophobic peasants slaughtered 30,000 Chinese converts to Christianity along with missionaries and other foreigners. In the ordinary form they are remembered with an optional memorial on July 9.”

These are saints of the Roman Catholic Church who did not choose to destroy life to save life. The Church gives them to the faithful as models to imitate. I know relatives of some of these martyrs. They tell of how the blood of their relatives gave birth to new life in Christ and growth in the Catholic Church even in the face of great oppression.

What if all Catholics were as willing to give their life as a witness to Jesus Christ as these martyrs? It seems such sacrifice invites sinners to accept salvation in Jesus Christ? Which we believe is why God sent His Son to redeem the world.

In reply to the challenge of what I did when held up at gun point. No I did not stop the young boy. Had I tried to stop him with a gun, someone would have been hurt or killed, probably myself. He may indeed have held up another, even killed another human being. “Forgive him for he knew not what he was doing.” In my life, I try to imitate Jesus. Jesus did not try in anyway to stop his executioners from carrying out His unjust execution on the cross.

May God forgive me for all the times I have failed to imitate Jesus Christ in my life.

If you did not attempt to stop him because you might have placed your own life in danger, then you obviously did nothing wrong because the CCC is very clear that we are to take greater care of our own life than that of another but if you could have opposed evil and failed to do so, what does it say about your duty to do so?

And as far as “the premise it is obligatory to protect human life with a lethal weapons”, I ask this question again – does not the CCC say that we have a GRAVE duty to protect ourselves and others from death and serious injury (within the law – for the nitpickers out there)? Yes. If something is considered “grave”, doesn’t that mean that the best possible means should be used to accomplish it? Otherwise, how can it be considered “grave”? Is not a gun the best means of personal self defense in most case? Yes.

Draw your own conclusions.

 

[Sir_Knight]

Why does it seem that some don’t realize that being against guns among civilians IS NOT the same as being against military carrying guns. I believe that I myself and many others have stressed that their problem is not against authority carrying guns.

God Bless

Why does one in uniform have a right to defend his life with the best means possible but those out of uniform don’t? Doesn’t Christianity teach that we are all equal? Doesn’t the CCC state that we all have a grave duty to protect our lives? Why should some be allowed to have better means of defense than others?

 

[Sir_Knight]

My dear friend,

what part was I being judgmental again? It appears that you are in-fact incorrectly ‘judging’ me in this case.

I am simply pointing out Christian teaching. We are called to embrace everyone as our brother and sister in Christ. Do you carry a weapon at home afraid of your brother or sister? No right? So we are called to LOVE our spiritual brothers and sisters the same way. That is what being a Christian is about.

I am also not after some Utopian dream. This is why I stressed the importance for authority and governance. They can have guns (ideally even that won’t be necessary of course). I also stressed the need for guns if you are in a war-zone.

Your inability to agree with the fact that WE can all agree that our DUTY as Christians is to get that would-be rapist from ever getting to that point really baffles me.

I am afraid you will have to answer why you were so keen on putting a bullet through the rapists head while not properly trying to STOP such people from happening. You will also have to answer how you made the lines of division between ‘those are my loved ones’ and ‘those are not’.

What you have failed to realize it seems is that we are called to LOVE everyone as brothers and sisters in Christ. Do you understand that this is the essence of Christianity through which everything is built on?

God Bless

Self-defense is indeed one of the greatest examples of human love. Christ Himself said, “Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends” (John 15:14). When protecting one’s family or neighbor, a Christian is unselfishly risking his or her life for the sake of others.

 

[ddarko]

If you did not attempt to stop him because you might have placed your own life in danger, then you obviously did nothing wrong because the CCC is very clear that we are to take greater care of our own life than that of another but if you could have opposed evil and failed to do so, what does it say about your duty to do so?

And as far as “the premise it is obligatory to protect human life with a lethal weapons”, I ask this question again – does not the CCC say that we have a GRAVE duty to protect ourselves and others from death and serious injury (within the law – for the nitpickers out there)? Yes. If something is considered “grave”, doesn’t that mean that the best possible means should be used to accomplish it? Otherwise, how can it be considered “grave”? Is not a gun the best means of personal self defense in most case? Yes.

Draw your own conclusions.

After a while, I swear I feel like this is an AI answering. I’ve heard this exact same words multiple times among multiple threads haha.

Anyway, the obligation is for us is to fight EVIL the proper way. Carrying a gun is for authorities and IT IS THEIR duty to protect us. We are called to love our persecutors. NOT put a bullet between the eyes. **We can certainly defend with all our might if the need ever arises. But if we walk around pre-supposing such a need would arise, then it is to be suspicious of our brothers and sisters in Christ. That is sinful and judgmental. **

The Authority MUST defend the oppressed because THAT is a MORAL duty of the Authority. The JUST WAR doctrine does not therefore apply to every individual in that sense.

God Bless

 

[ddarko]

Self-defense is indeed one of the greatest examples of human love. Christ Himself said, “Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends” (John 15:14). When protecting one’s family or neighbor, a Christian is unselfishly risking his or her life for the sake of others.

Thats quiet the twisting of Christs words.

Who exactly are your friends? The ones you love right? So who are you called to love? EVERYONE.

This is where your theology falls. You are failing to realize the CORE of Christianity. It is that we are all brothers and sisters in Christ. I am your friend just as much as the gang-banger living down the street from you.

God Bless

 

[Sir_Knight]

Actually if we conclude as ‘physical swords’ as Sir Knight wants to put it, Jesus is a bumbling lunatic. Because moments later in Gethsemane he is telling Peter about what happened to those who take up the sword.

That looks like a classic scenario of multiple personality disorder

Sir Knight has been following incorrect theology and has been using this argument for quiet sometime. So at this point I think its just stubbornness to give it up more than anything else.

God Bless

I already explained this earlier, when Peter cut off the ear, Jesus told Peter to put the sword away – not to throw it away. The reason was that the purpose of the sword was for His followers to be able to defend themselves after Jesus was gone. It was not for defending Jesus, who could have called down twelve legions of angels to defend Him.

If we conclude that Jesus did not means physical swords as you suggest, then Jesus is a liar because throughout the Gospels Jesus said that He was in perfect agreement with His heavenly Father and through the Old Testament we see numerous times when God told people to use the sword to kill their attackers. God even turned His back on Saul when Saul refused to use the sword against an enemy.

 

[Sir_Knight]

Thats quiet the twisting of Christs words.

Who exactly are your friends? The ones you love right? So who are you called to love? EVERYONE.

This is where your theology falls. You are failing to realize the CORE of Christianity. It is that we are all brothers and sisters in Christ. I am your friend just as much as the gang-banger living down the street from you.

God Bless

And the gang-banger living down the street, when he does evil, is to be opposed so that the innocent are not harmed – that is our DUTY as Christians. To oppose evil is at the heart of Christianity.