Posted on 12/4/2006, 5:59:57 PM by Jo Nuvark
In "Shooting Back: The Right and Duty of Self-Defense," van Wyk makes a biblical, Christian case for individuals arming themselves with guns, and does so more persuasively than perhaps any other author because he found himself in a church attacked by terrorists.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
Woe to us. War against the wicked is emphatically justified no matter the time or the season.
-Jo-
"How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property - either as a child, a wife, or a concubine - must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men. "Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities. Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the Queen: all know how to die. But the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytising faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science - the science against which it had vainly struggled - the civilisation of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilisation of ancient Rome."
--Winston S. Churchill-
Exodus 20 and following In His holy Law, which God decreed at Sinai, nowhere do you see God outlawing weapons in regards to the various crimes which He prohibited in His legislation. He always punishes the perpetrator. He never disarms the citizenry.
Exodus 22:2 In this verse, God declares that if someone breaks into your house at night and you kill him, you are not guilty of murder. This verse makes clear that you have a God-given right to defend yourself and to defend your family.
Deuteronomy 22:23-27 This passage deals with rape. Notice that verse 27 ends with the words "but there was no one to save her." What is the implication of such a statement? The implication is that had someone been around to hear her cry out, they had a moral duty to intervene and protect her from being raped. To stand by would be immoral. We have a God-given right to defend not only ourselves, but also others.
Numbers 1 In His economy, God instituted an armed citizenry, not a standing army, in order to deal with the affairs of war regarding Israel. This is what the Founding Fathers of America envisioned for our nation. Even in Switzerland today, every home is furnished with a machine gun (one of the reasons Hitler chose not to invade Switzerland).
MORE HERE: http://www.mercyseat.net/DEFEND/gunapologetic.htm
Self Defense Ping!
Your home page is extremely educational. Good job.
Are you sure you're not my son? He's a Ninja as does
not get along with pirates.
They did, but Jesus stopped them and healed the servants ear.
Matthew 26:51 Then the men stepped forward, seized Jesus and arrested him. With that, one of Jesus' companions reached for his sword, drew it out and struck the servant of the high priest, cutting off his ear.
"They did, but Jesus stopped them and healed the servants ear."
Exactly my point.
Jesus told him to put the sword away (after he healed the man's ear) because without His arrest, he would not be able to be the propitiary death for mankind's sins.
Many big guns bump
[...I find no indication in Scripture of any disciple fighting back when being attacked or persecuted as a Christian...]
Well, Peter cut off Malchus' ear trying to defend Jesus
(John 18:10). But for the most part I agree with you. We
ARE to turn the other cheek when insulted for the sake of
our Lord, Jesus. But I'm afraid many Christian believe
this gives license to pacifism. I have read the Bible over
25 times and studied each book seriously, and find the
Bible clearly on the side of arms, armies and self defense.
Why do you think He directed them to arm themselves when He sent them out?
"And he said unto them, When I sent you without purse, and scrip, and shoes, lacked ye any thing? And they said, Nothing. Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. "
"I have read the Bible over 25 times and studied each book seriously, and find the Bible clearly on the side of arms, armies and self defense. "
But not in the name of Christ - or for his sake.
In defense of innocents - yes.
In conscripted defense of country - perhaps.
But in defense of Christianity - never. Paul states explicitly...
"For though we walk in the flesh, we are not waging war according to the flesh. For the weapons of our warfare are not of the flesh but have divine power to destroy strongholds."
[...and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one...] Luke 22:36.
Right on Par ... PAR35.
[...But not in the name of Christ - or for his sake...]
Absolutely correct.
"Why do you think He directed them to arm themselves when He sent them out?"
If my Kingdom were of this world, then my servants would fight, that I wouldn't be delivered to the Jews. But now my Kingdom is not from here."
What Does The Bible Say About Gun Control?
http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3a4a2046600f.htm
(they're a bit odd in other things, though)
Would you say they're ... Cuckoo?
Thank you for the link.
RE: The Swiss Defense, my friend Bosco wrote...
Prior to the 2nd World War, a Swiss official was asked
what would happen to Switzerland if Germany, with it's
5 to 1 (I think that was the ratio) armed forces advantage,
decided to invade.
The answer: Then each Swiss soldier would only need to
fire 5 shots each.
The answer: Then each Swiss soldier would only need to fire 5 shots each.
The version I heard was when a German general asked the Swiss general how many soldiers he had under arms. The Swiss replied "500 thousand." The German said, "What will you do if the Kaiser orders me to invade Switzerland with 1 million soldiers?" The Swiss replied, "Order my troops to shoot twice and go home."
The point was to show the legendary marksmanship of the Swiss. BTW, the K31 rifle that the Swiss issued in 1933 and fielded until 1958 was superbly accurate. The Swiss issued their soldiers match-quality ammunition (called G11, which you can get at gun shows and via mailorder), and the soldiers and reservists were required to shoot the equivalent of 1.5 MOA to qualify (this is shooting a target 1.5 inches in diameter at 100 yards, or 3 inches in diameter at 200 yards).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.