Gun Control

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bob_Sevigny
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
True, but “Homosexuals shall not enter the Kingdom of Heaven.”
Who on earth said that? Of course homosexuals can enter the kingdom of heaven if they remain chaste.

Btw, Max, did you read up on Confirmation Bias?

God Bless 🙂
 
The passage is correctly translated YES! But your interpretation is ERRONEOUS.

Thats as far as I can talk to you Sir Knight. I know not logic as you do. So we won’t get anywhere.

Oh and might help if you checked out the info on Confirmation Bias I provided.

God Bless 🙂
What other interpretation could there be? If the passage is correct and Jesus explained everything to His Apostles which they misunderstood, then He should have explained about the swords. Since no explaination was found, they understood correctly and Jesus referred to real swords. That is the logical flow of things and since you fail to understand that, clearly logic is not YOUR strong point.
 
I am sorry, but what exactly is the logical error again?

Also, there is nothing hypocritical here. I am simply pointing out why good Catholics would not need guns. It is not hypocritical to say that just as much as its not hypocritical to say that we must love everyone as our brothers and sisters in Christ.
By saying I am suspicious of others by carrying a gun you are in the same respect suspicious of my reasons for carrying a gun. I look at it ad nothing more than a tool to enjoy, but also a tool for self defense. If I’m not mistaken black belts in martial arts are considered lethal weapons, but just because they could kill a person in self defense does not mean they are suspicious of everyone.

I honestly don’t understand who you are tying to fool. You tell me that you are not suspicious of your brother and sister going at you. BUT, you also state that you want a knife or a gun because you don’t know when you will need it. So YOU ARE postulating that you WILL NEED IT.

Like it appears that you are contradicting yourself here.

But let me say why I think one can carry around a pocket knife. It might well be for other helpful things. My grandfather carried around a knife which he used to sharpen the pencil, shave etc.

BUT, it is also possible that you will carry around a knife with the wrong intention. As in for self defense mind set or as a criminal for using it as leverage. Those are WRONG.

In the case of a gun, as many have stated (including yourself), they CLEARLY want it for nothing other than fear of needing it in the streets. That is to suspect your brothers and sisters in Christ.

God Bless 🙂

No it’s not.

Again, if you had your way. And could remove all lethal weapons from civilian use, you are show the same suspicion of our actions that you say we have of others. I am suspicious of nobody, I carry my knife and sometimes my gun for my own personal reasons. If the need arises to defend myself against someone with a weapon I would not hesitate to defend myself.

I can’t help it if you fail to see your own hypocrisy. That’s usually the probl with hypocrite, they don’t even realize it.
 
What other interpretation could there be? If the passage is correct and Jesus explained everything to His Apostles which they misunderstood, then He should have explained about the swords. Since no explaination was found, they understood correctly and Jesus referred to real swords. That is the logical flow of things and since you fail to understand that, clearly logic is not YOUR strong point.
I know Sir Knight. Logic is my most weakest subject. I bow to your logical superiority.

God Bless 🙂
 
The Holy Spirit in 1 Corinthians.
As far as I know, no one is condemned to hell for having homosexual tendencies. One only sins when they act on those impulses and inclinations.

Might be a mistake on your part?

God Bless 🙂
 
No it’s not.

Again, if you had your way. And could remove all lethal weapons from civilian use, you are show the same suspicion of our actions that you say we have of others. I am suspicious of nobody, I carry my knife and sometimes my gun for my own personal reasons. If the need arises to defend myself against someone with a weapon I would not hesitate to defend myself.

I can’t help it if you fail to see your own hypocrisy. That’s usually the probl with hypocrite, they don’t even realize it.
Ok first, there is no hypocrisy. The government decides that you should not have weapons, they remove you from your weapons. There is nothing judgmental being made about YOU as a person, only your action of carrying a gun.

Same thing with a nuclear bomb. Lets say I have a nuclear bomb. The government would be concerned and want it from me. Is that hypocritical?

God Bless 🙂
 
Ok first, there is no hypocrisy. The government decides that you should not have weapons, they remove you from your weapons. There is nothing judgmental being made about YOU as a person, only your action of carrying a gun.

Same thing with a nuclear bomb. Lets say I have a nuclear bomb. The government would be concerned and want it from me. Is that hypocritical?

God Bless 🙂
This about your support of taking my guns based on your suspicions of my actions by carrying the gun.
 
Just answer the simple question. Is Mark 4:33-34 correct or isn’t it? Did Jesus explain everything to His Apostles or didn’t He? It the same answer. Which one is it?
Did you notice that I answered your question?
 
This about your support of taking my guns based on your suspicions of my actions by carrying the gun.
Um no, its the conclusion. I mean you said it your self “I carry a gun because I don’t know when I will need it”.

So I do not have to suspect. I KNOW. The government KNOWS.

Btw, this is why carrying a gun during time of WAR is justified. You KNOW you need it. No suspicion is involved.

God Bless 🙂
 
Boy has this thread drifted.

The right to defend ones self is a no brainier. To love your neighbor is not to blindly let them harm you while you have the duty to protect yourself and others.

In Roman times to “turn the other cheek” was an insult and caused the person slapping you to use both of his hands. A slap consisted of being backhanded. This was considered a no no for Romans. To carry another’s burden was law for one mile, when you walked the second mile carrying another’s burden the Roman Soldier could be executed. A Roman soldier could take your outer clothing but if he took everything he could be executed. The laws were exact as to what was legal and what was not.
 
Here is something some might find interesting:

This is the article on War. Scroll to the section “Right to War”

newadvent.org/cathen/15546c.htm

I would specifically like to draw attention to the following:-
Furthermore, the exercise of coercion is restricted in civil communities to the public authority, for the reason that such restriction is a necessity of the common weal. In like manner the use of force beyond the region of defence and reparation, namely for the imposition of punishment to restore the balance of retributive justice by compensation for the mere violation of law and justice, as well as to assure the future security of the same, is reserved to public authority, for the reason that the State is the natural guardian of law and order, and to permit the individual, even in a matter of personal offence, to be witness, judge, and executioner all at once — human nature being what it is — would be a source of injustice rather than of equitable readjustment.
Note that this is in perfect harmony with how our early church fathers and apostles acted with respect to the Roman Empire’s persecution. Since they were not authorities, they did not wage war against God given authority of the Roman Empire.

God Bless 🙂
 
Boy has this thread drifted.

The right to defend ones self is a no brainier. To love your neighbor is not to blindly let them harm you while you have the duty to protect yourself and others.

In Roman times to “turn the other cheek” was an insult and caused the person slapping you to use both of his hands. A slap consisted of being backhanded. This was considered a no no for Romans. To carry another’s burden was law for one mile, when you walked the second mile carrying another’s burden the Roman Soldier could be executed. A Roman soldier could take your outer clothing but if he took everything he could be executed. The laws were exact as to what was legal and what was not.
Kathleen, read my post above.

God Bless 🙂
 
Um no, its the conclusion. I mean you said it your self “I carry a gun because I don’t know when I will need it”.

So I do not have to suspect. I KNOW. The government KNOWS.

Btw, this is why carrying a gun during time of WAR is justified. You KNOW you need it. No suspicion is involved.

God Bless 🙂
Right I’ll never know when I’ll need a flat head screw driver either. That does not mean Im worried their might be a screw loose somewhere. But like a screwdriver a gun can serve for good purposes as well.

That does not mean I am suspicious of those around me.

You have lost this logical part of the debate, might want to go back to the biblical part.
 
Here is something some might find interesting:

This is the article on War. Scroll to the section “Right to War”

newadvent.org/cathen/15546c.htm

I would specifically like to draw attention to the following:-

Note that this is in perfect harmony with how our early church fathers and apostles acted with respect to the Roman Empire’s persecution. Since they were not authorities, they did not wage war against God given authority of the Roman Empire.

God Bless 🙂
Hmm, wonder what that region of defense part means up there…🤷
 
Here is something some might find interesting:

This is the article on War. Scroll to the section “Right to War”

newadvent.org/cathen/15546c.htm

I would specifically like to draw attention to the following:-

Note that this is in perfect harmony with how our early church fathers and apostles acted with respect to the Roman Empire’s persecution. Since they were not authorities, they did not wage war against God given authority of the Roman Empire.

God Bless 🙂
Because we carry guns or own guns does not mean we wage war against the governmental authorities. Many of our Church Fathers had illegal Masses in homes and in the catacombs. But there are many written accounts of the Roman times were the Christians did not just lay down their lives except in cases where they were asked to deny Jesus.

Self defense and denial of Jesus are two very different things today.
 
Boy has this thread drifted.

The right to defend ones self is a no brainier. To love your neighbor is not to blindly let them harm you while you have the duty to protect yourself and others.

In Roman times to “turn the other cheek” was an insult and caused the person slapping you to use both of his hands. A slap consisted of being backhanded. This was considered a no no for Romans. To carry another’s burden was law for one mile, when you walked the second mile carrying another’s burden the Roman Soldier could be executed. A Roman soldier could take your outer clothing but if he took everything he could be executed. The laws were exact as to what was legal and what was not.
Can you clarify what you think Jesus was telling his followers when he told them to do those things?
 
Because we carry guns or own guns does not mean we wage war against the governmental authorities. Many of our Church Fathers had illegal Masses in homes and in the catacombs. But there are many written accounts of the Roman times were the Christians did not just lay down their lives except in cases where they were asked to deny Jesus.

Self defense and denial of Jesus are two very different things today.
Kathleen, maybe you missed the sentence in the clutter of it all.
… State is the natural guardian of law and order, and to permit the individual, even in a matter of personal offence, to be witness, judge, and executioner all at once — human nature being what it is — would be a source of injustice rather than of equitable readjustment.
That does not speak about taking arms against government authority. So that is not the concern that is been addressed there.

Also, about holding illegal mass. That has nothing to do with using violence, right? My point is that early church fathers NEVER violently opposed the Roman Empire or Jewish persecutors that wrongfully put them to death.

In any case, I am actually in support of someone carrying a gun where the threat is CERTAIN like in a war zone. I believe that is consistent with Catholic doctrine. But I don’t see how to reconcile the need to carry guns as people here are putting it.

God Bless 🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top