Guns And Fake Jesus Lovers
BY Herschel Smith
4 years, 11 months ago
I’ve heard a few arguments from people over the years that Jesus was in favor of violence, but, given a little context and in light of the bulk of Jesus teaching and action, they all seem to fall short.
“Jesus made a whip and flipped over tables in the Temple.” Yes, but that whip comment is right by the driving oxen and sheep out of the temple comment, maybe the two were related? Besides, the reasoning Jesus gives for His actions is not in any way condoning violence, rather seeking justice for the outsider: “My house shall be called a house of prayer for all nations, but you have made it a den of robbers.”
What about when Jesus said, “I have not come to bring peace, but a sword”? Yes, He did say that. Matthew 10 starts with Jesus calling Talmudin (commonly translated Disciples) to imitate Him, live with him, learn through observation, and then sends them out to do the same work He has been doing all over the region. But before sending them off, he launches into a long speech about how they will be persecuted or mistreated. “They call me Beelzebub, what do you think they will call you?”
So yes, He did say that, but He wasn’t calling His disciples to use swords. He was giving them a lengthy pep-talk about the type of reception their message was going to get from people. At that moment, He was specifically talking about families being turned against each other. Do you suppose “Daughter-in-law against Mother-in-Law” was a call to bloody violence? Is that what he meant by bringing a sword?
“But Jesus told the Disciples to sell their cloak and buy a sword during the last supper.” Yes, indeed. And again, let’s remember the context. First, let’s pick up in Luke 22, following right after that buy a sword comment:
“’For I tell you that this Scripture must be fulfilled in me: “And he was numbered with the transgressors.” For what is written about me has its fulfillment.’ And they said, ‘Look, Lord, here are two swords.’ And he said to them, ‘It is enough.’”
Between Jesus’ comment about being numbered with transgressors and His replying that two swords are just fine for the 12+ party they had, I’d say condoning violence wasn’t the point. But in case you have any doubt, remember that later this night when Peter tries to defend Jesus with this sword they are all talking about, Jesus stops him, says basically “that’s not the way we do things,” and heals the soldier Peter attacked. This is the very same night in question. If He literally wanted them to buy swords (it seems pretty clear He didn’t) He definitely didn’t want those swords used on other people.
And that’s kind of the point, isn’t it? I know it is possible to own a gun that will never be used to harm a person. I know many people who own guns and do everything they can to ensure that no person would ever be harmed by those guns. But I have also met many, many people who have guns as a measure of protection against other human beings, and many of them also claim to be followers of Jesus.
Notice the Scripture twisting? Jesus didn’t drive out the oxen and sheep from the temple. He drove out the money changers. The “pastor” does everything in his power to claim that the Holy writ doesn’t really say what it says.
We’ve dealt with this before many times. By telling His disciples to buy swords, he is not only telling them to ensure their self defense, but also to directly disobey the magistrate. Owning and bear arms of any kind, including knives and swords, was strictly forbidden. Jesus was telling His disciples to ignore unbiblical laws.
As for his notion that one who has weapons needs to ensure that they are never used to harm another man, he of course rolls in criminals intent on rape, kidnapping and murder of women and children. This isn’t by accident. He intends to do that under the rubric of “turning the other cheek.”
So it would be redundant to rehearse this ground again, but we’ll do it for the sake of completeness.
God has laid the expectations at the feet of heads of families that they protect, provide for and defend their families and protect and defend their countries. Little ones cannot do so, and rely solely on those who bore them. God no more loves the willing neglect of their safety than He loves child abuse. He no more appreciates the willingness to ignore the sanctity of our own lives than He approves of the abuse of our own bodies and souls. God hasn’t called us to save the society by sacrificing our children or ourselves to robbers, home invaders, rapists or murderers. Self defense – and defense of the little ones – goes well beyond a right. It is a duty based on the idea that man is made in God’s image. It is His expectation that we do the utmost to preserve and defend ourselves when in danger, for it is He who is sovereign and who gives life, and He doesn’t expect us to be dismissive or cavalier about its loss.
…
If you believe that it is your Christian duty to allow your children to be harmed by evil-doers (and you actually allow it to happen) because you think Christ was a pacifist, you are no better than a child abuser or pedophile.
…
God demands violence as a response to threats on our person because of the fact that man is created in God’s image and life is to be preserved. It is our solemn duty.
…
I am afraid there have been too many centuries of bad teaching endured by the church, but it makes sense to keep trying. As I’ve explained before, the simplest and most compelling case for self defense lies in the decalogue. Thou shall not murder means thou shall protect life.
…
If you’re willing to sacrifice the safety and health of your wife or children to the evils of abuse, kidnapping, sexual predation or death, God isn’t impressed with your fake morality. Capable of stopping it and choosing not to, you’re no better than a child molester, and I wouldn’t allow you even to be around my grandchildren.
Indeed, all gun control is wicked. The Bible does contain a few direct references to weapons control. There were many times throughout Israel’s history that it rebelled against God (in fact, it happened all the time). To mock His people back into submission to His Law, the Lord would often use wicked neighbors to punish Israel’s rebellion. Most notable were the Philistines and the Babylonians. 1 Samuel 13:19-22 relates the story: “Not a blacksmith could be found in the whole land of Israel, because the Philistines had said, “Otherwise the Hebrews will make swords or spears!” So all Israel went down to the Philistines to have their plowshares, mattocks, axes, and sickles sharpened…So on the day of battle not a soldier with Saul and Jonathan had a sword or spear in this hand; only Saul and his son Jonathan had them.” Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon also removed all of the craftsmen from Israel during the Babylonian captivity (2 Kings 24:14). Both of these administrations were considered exceedingly wicked including their acts of weapons control.
John Calvin’s comments on this subject. We do not need to prove that when a good thing is commanded, the evil thing that conflicts with it is forbidden. There is no one who doesn’t concede this. That the opposite duties are enjoined when evil things are forbidden will also be willingly admitted in common judgment. Indeed, it is commonplace that when virtues are commended, their opposing vices are condemned. But we demand something more than what these phrases commonly signify. For by the virtue of contrary to the vice, men usually mean abstinence from that vice. We say that the virtue goes beyond this to contrary duties and deeds. Therefore in this commandment, “You shall not kill,” men’s common sense will see only that we must abstain from wronging anyone or desiring to do so. Besides this, it contains, I say, the requirement that we give our neighbor’s life all the help we can … the purpose of the commandment always discloses to us whatever it there enjoins or forbids us to do” (Institutes of the Christian Religion, Vol. 1, Book 2, Chapter viii, Part 9).
As for the pretend pastor, he’s probably unreachable with logic or the Scriptures. But I do have a suggestion for his wife or any future wife for the sake of his marriage. He needs to have a serious conversation with her and explain that he will in no wise ever defend her or protect her, or her children, from predators, kidnappers, murderers, rapists or other people intent on doing them harm. She just needs to understand that’s how he interprets the Bible. As for the her and the kids? Eh, they just need to turn the other cheek so he can claim to be holier than thou.
Pastor, please let me know how that conversation goes.
If in fact he is persuaded by any of this commentary and wants to become a man, there are ways to do just that (courtesy of WiscoDave).
On January 5, 2020 at 10:35 pm, JuneJ said:
Gharring is a perfect United Methodist Church pastor.
On January 5, 2020 at 10:38 pm, Jim Wiseman said:
So many who call themselves Christians wring their hands when other Christians keep and bear arms, yet show undying devotion to and support of LEOs no matter what.
On January 6, 2020 at 4:30 am, Duke Norfolk said:
The modern notion of the Christian pastor (and Christians in general) as soft, effeminate and cowardly is despicable, and pathetic.
These people aren’t Christians, but indeed worship the worldly values, more concerned with what society will think of them than anything else. They invoke nothing but disgust in me.
On January 6, 2020 at 8:53 am, Ned said:
Thank you Herschel. This should be required reading.
On January 6, 2020 at 12:57 pm, MTHead said:
I would ask why Jesus came here in the first place if not to fight evil? And why we wouldn’t be expected to do the same?
To me, life would be as pointless as growing up, and living in Sodom and Gomorrah. No. Were here to learn to fight evil. Pastors with no discernment are just part of the learning process.
On January 6, 2020 at 1:02 pm, Paul Scales said:
penses: You, and so many others quote verse 21 but ignore 20 and 22.
“20 But if I with the finger of God cast out devils, no doubt the kingdom of God is come upon you.
21 When a strong man armed keepeth his palace, his good are in peace:
22 But when a stronger than he shall upon him, and overcome him, he taketh from him all his armour wherein he trusted, and divideth his spoils.” – Luke 11:20-22
Jesus was referring to overcoming Satan, which is the “stronger than he” overcoming the “strong man”.
If the powers that be are coming to your house to take your firearms (armour in which you trusted) and auction off your stuff (divide up your spoils) it would follow that the best place to be is not there, and for your guns and your stuff not to be there either.
Remember the ongoing abortion of entire generations for which we deserve to be destroyed by the government, because when the government wins no one actually wins. 5G: cancer and sterilization; toxic food, air, water, and vaccines: 99% autism; replacement populations: invasion and racial extinction. Even if we keep our guns this is our present and future, because we depend on the enemy for our own needs while looking away from the man among us who passes his sons and daughters through the fire.
I think God was serious when he said “be ye separate”.
On January 6, 2020 at 1:13 pm, Thomas said:
This verse pretty much nails it and makes two aspects interdependent.
Jeremiah 48:10
Cursed be he that doeth the work of the Lord deceitfully, and cursed be he that keepeth back his sword from blood.
Remember what happened to the five foolish virgins.
On January 6, 2020 at 1:40 pm, ExpatNJ said:
“Scripture twisting”.
Yet another Super-Deceiver, as warned about in the Bible.
Isn’t that what China is about to try? And, what did Herschel say recently about that kind of treachery and Revelation?
On January 6, 2020 at 2:58 pm, Fred said:
“I’ve heard a few arguments from people over the years that Jesus was in favor of violence,”
The setup isn’t even clever. I wonder if anybody else caught it. Nobody is “in favor” of violence, it is necessary in a fallen world. The devil, boys and girls, is a liar from the foundation of the world and beforetimes. That’s his one trick. Know that, and you know how to ID him when you see him.
The notion that Holy God, given the pre-fall condition in the Garden is in favor of violence is a hoot. This devil has the reader, the emotionally shallow unlearned never read the Scripture twit, hooked from the outset. It plays right into the emotion. The very first underlying thought of the reader, correctly, is that; ‘nobody is in favor of violence’ and/but what is carefully avoided is the sin nature then necessitating the need, sadly, for the use of force to effect safety. And whose fault is that sin nature? Well of course it was Adam, but what beast made the offer of being made like unto gods? Man, I hate that guy.
The devil here attempts to perpetuate his own false kingdom of the fallen world by indoctrinating you into your need to sacrifice yourselves and your families, but since God doesn’t need your sacrifice only your Faith in His Son, and obedience to the gentle leading of the Holy Spirit sent to edify you in all things, who speaks not of himself but testifies of Christ in you, the devil would trick you into dying for his disgusting and wasted false kingship and the hands of one of his lesser devils to boot. I hate those who hate God Almighty!
I also suspect that this piece is at the hand of a “dispensation of grace” devil follower. They generally don’t consider the OT to be valid under this covenant. What changed in the New Covenant, A BLOOD COVENANT, is no more need for sacrifices. “By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.” So, we no more need a sacrifice of any kind, especially our children which aren’t ours at all but Holy God’s, to come into/be in the presence of Holy God, Jesus is that final one, and True Sacrifice.
But to this devil, to sacrifice your family to killers, rapists, Waring barbarians, Negro tribesmen, central american socialists, or communist Zionist overlords is sufficient to atone for sin?
Be careful of devils, they would have you do a works of atonement unto salvation by the sacrifice of yourself or your wife or your children. The devil has no new tricks. I can assure you, by the blood of the Lamb and the word of my testimony that your life at the hands of a criminal or in war is NOT sufficient sacrifice to cover your sins from the wrath, death, and hell to come, and that such a notion is blaspheme against the Christ and His final work on the cross.
Enjoy the sentencing phase, you’re gonna love the coming hard times of being chastised back into the arms Father God while serving it, and I can’t see, outside of miracles, any commutation at all.
On January 6, 2020 at 5:23 pm, Fred said:
I wanted to tie that off but went to exercise. So, the devil will offer you to be made like unto a god in exchange for just a little bit of death. Well, there is no such thing as a little bit of death. Only God offers life eternal by the blood of His Son. And the devil will offer for you to be made into the similitude of a god? Well only God Almighty offers to men to be made the Sons of God, joint heirs, begotten again unto a lively hope, born again into the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead. There, the counterfeit offer is exposed. Your choice, pick only one.
They author is a fake offering death for a type of temporary earthly godishness.
On January 6, 2020 at 5:40 pm, BRVTVS said:
@ Thomas
Thanks for sharing that quotation.
On January 8, 2020 at 3:05 pm, Sanders said:
I have a friend who is an ordained Methodist Pastor – he carries under his robes at the pulpit.
My mom’s pastor at the Cowboy Church she attends, carries openly on his hip.
I’ll take my chances on being wrong by making sure I’m armed in order to protect my family, my neighbor, and myself.