Now after the Sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary came to look at the tomb. ² And behold, a severe earthquake had occurred, for an angel of the Lord descended from heaven and came and rolled away the stone, and sat upon it. ³ And his appearance was like lightning, and his clothing as white as snow. ⁴ The guards shook from fear of him and became like dead men. ⁵ And the angel said to the women, “^[a]Do not be afraid; for I know that you are looking for Jesus who has been crucified. ⁶ He is not here, for He has risen, just as He said. Come, see the place where He was lying. ⁷ And go quickly and tell His disciples that He has risen from the dead; and behold, He is going ahead of you to Galilee. There you will see Him; behold, I have told you.” – NASB

Part 1

“But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.” – 1 Corinthians 11:3

Unless you are her leader, your wife can’t be happy and will be useless to you. The man is to offer his family to God, without spot, sanctified by obedience to the Holy Writ, just as Christ will present His Church, cleansed from all sin by His blood, to the Father.

True contentedness in marriage only exists when each knows and subordinates themselves according to the law-word of God. The Fifth Commandment (Exodus 20:12), the Seventh Commandment (Exodus 20:14), the Eighth Commandment (Exodus 20:15), and the Tenth Commandment (Exodus 20:17) all apply directly to the man’s responsibility not only to his wife but to all women, both those that his own family, and those that are not. Therefore this responsibility to the Almighty extends to God’s ordained family for its purpose in creation, structure, and function.

The family is central to God’s plan for every person. The family is critical to a foundation upon which God will build a functioning civilization. The Left sees the family as a primitive construct, a fiction that can be reimagined to fit any abominable wickedness of sin ever considered by the heart of man. Without the family, as God supplied, society rapidly breaks down under the weight of sin. Please keep in mind that it’s not the lack of family; it’s the presence of sin that causes the absence of family to perpetuate total degeneracy; sin always comes first. No sins can stand alone; the corruption of man’s heart has far-reaching and horrific consequences once a bit of evil is allowed.

We don’t have space here to answer many aspects of these four commandments of Holy God. However, as we’ve stated over these pages, violating only one of the Ten Commandments is nearly impossible; there’s too much cross-application among them. It’s impossible to keep the whole law.

It was an act of God’s caring, which had Him provide a helpmeet. And by His mercy in creating the family for us, it’s an act of reciprocal love for the Almighty to constitute your family upon the foundations of the Holy Bible. If you are Christian, God’s word should be your sole worldview, within which you establish a functionally just society, the head of which is Christ, and must include the sound family structure revealed to us in God’s law and word. It’s a lie from the pit of hell that women can lead the family, the fruits of which lay glaringly evident at the fall and today; sin abounds, begetting even more corruption.

Women are to be a helpmeet for the man (Genesis 2:18). The man is to lead the woman (1 Corinthians 11:3). When the woman directs, sin enters in (Romans 5:12). That’s what happened in the garden with Adam and Eve. Adam stood right there when Eve sinned against God, and he did not stop her (Genesis 3:6). The whole Earth stands cursed because the man failed to lead as the head, harkening unto his wife instead of Holy God.

It’s the man’s job to lead the family in righteousness. Perhaps you esteem God’s word lightly, but no matter: what’s explained here isn’t Christian theory; it’s a fact evident in nature (His created order), to any man of sound reasoning, that God was kind enough to warn us about in His word.

God has given three central institutions of which Christ is to be the head; Church, Family, and State. Men are to lead in each instance as Christ’s representative to those under his charge. Woman’s leadership leads to sin, destroying family and Civilization with it.

“19 And what is the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who believe, according to the working of his mighty power, 20 Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places, 21 Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come: 22 And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church, 23 Which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all.” – Ephesians 1:19-23

Christ is the head over all things to the Church. If you are Christian, you are a member in particular of the body of Christ, so to you, Jesus Christ is above all things; He has the preeminence. We keep the commandments of God by faith in Christ our King. See Exodus 20:3 and John 1:1.

We might as well address this while we’re here. Marriage is a covenant one man and one woman makes with Holy God. It’s not a state-licensed activity between two people of any sex to be disannulled at a whim.

At marriage, the man and the woman are made one, no longer twain (Mark 10:8), but one flesh, a joining by covenant in a holy union with their Creator. Christ is the head of the Church, which is His body. The man is the head of the woman, now made by marriage one body. As Christ is the head of the Church, which is His body (at marriage, the man and woman are made one body), the man is the head of the woman and his children; this constitutes the body of the family; they are the man’s charge, under Christ our Lord.

In the section of Mark below, Jesus discusses divorce, but the direct application is thoroughly made with no reservations to the family as a whole.

“5 And Jesus answered and said unto them, For the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept. 6 But from the beginning of the creation, God made them male and female. 7 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife; 8 And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh. 9 What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder. – Mark 10:6-9, Jesus refers to Genesis 2:24.

Carefully consider that monogamy is disappearing, so too, prostitution has waned; what in one is pure before God and the other terrible wickedness are merging under the Leftist program. Sadly, women are so terribly misled that they consider themselves free from the constraints of patriarchy, while men view them as unpaid servants of pleasure. Men don’t like women who give themselves away but view them as a simple physical utility to an evil end. Being broadcast across all media, it’s a lie from the pit of hell that physical interaction equates to love. Women themselves have taken this up and are promoting it, only to end later in life with a devastated soul longing for the satisfaction that God, from the start, offered by obedience to His design purposes for the woman to belong to one man, raising a family. Sin never finds a comfortable middle ground; it invariably progresses to destructive ends.

The man and the woman have exclusive property rights to the other’s body. The exclusive right to be the only desire of the heart and mind takes much steadfastness in the faith with prayer, Bible devotions with reading both separately and as a couple, gathering together with other faithful and monogamous Christians in the worship of your Lord, and serving Christ together in building the Kingdom of God while seeking His return. Nobody said marriage was easy but fulfilled are the man and woman who look upon their marriage as consecrated by the Almighty that He alone has dominion over.

——–

Part 2

We thought to provide the meat up front in Part One. What follows is a common outline. It’s not enough; it’s not holding the family together, even in the churches, this lightly touched-upon explanation that’s taught everywhere. As though God were merely suggesting these things and not commanding in His might from the throne of wrath that His people obey or suffer civilizational collapse. The New Religion soft peddles everything ruining your future.

God made them male and female (Genesis 1:27).

God gave Eve to Adam to be his helpmeet. This is why, in Christendom (we suppose a type of symbolism), the woman is given by her father. Her father was, before marriage, her image (type) of God, leader, and priest. She is given by her father to her husband, who now becomes her sole leader and priest in the image of Christ.

Continuing to emphasize the likeness of the Church, Jesus Christ being her head, with the man as head of his wife and family, Ephesians 5:25-31 is often cited. But first verse 32 because it tells us the purpose of this section.

“This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church.” – Ephesians 5:32

What’s being spoken of is the Church of Jesus Christ. Remember that a mystery in the Bible is not something hidden but something that has been, or is being, revealed to us in Scripture.

In the section of Ephesians below, the writer uses the family as an illustration of the Church. These illustrations in the Holy Bible are instructive by design, so we must look for the lessons contained in them. One thing about them is that they often take something self-evident in God’s institutions to explain a more significant function relating to our understanding of God’s purposes for us in creation. In this case, God uses the husband’s relationship as the wife’s leader, which should be evident in the macrocosm as common knowledge, to explain a more profound truth of Christ and His Church, bringing the obscure into the light by using marriage as an example of His Church, Christ as the head.

Still, many have taught, in our day, the government of family structure and roles based upon Ephesians chapter 5, and this isn’t wrong. It is gravely disappointing that Western Civilization has fallen so far that one must teach this section from a reverse perspective. Still, in verse 25, instruction to the husband is what we find. The man is to present his family to God, without spot, sanctified by obedience to the Holy Writ, just as Christ will present His Church, cleansed from all sin by His blood, to the Father.

You’ve seen these verses before, so take them and hide them in your heart, that you might not sin against God (Psalm 119:11).

“25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; 26 That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, 27 That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish. 28 So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself. 29 For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church: 30 For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones. 31 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.” – Ephesians 5:25-31

These duties are immense and can only be undertaken with much prayer and steadfast insistence.

-The man is commanded to be a type of Christ

-Die to save her life

-Be the spiritual leader as the priest of the family

-Be both submitted to God yet the leader of the household simultaneously

-Love his wife as much as Christ loves him (that’s a command of Holy God)

-Ensure the family is without blemish before God

-Be sinless, spotless, and above reproach, and keep his help meet the same

-And he must sacrifice his own will, unto God, so that his family will thrive

A man has an innate drive by the design of God to fulfill these roles. And a woman would be much better off letting her husband lead the family, tribe, and nation. An intelligent woman will recognize Ephesians 5 as a grand and useful master list, from God Himself, on how to support her man to maximize the realization of their dreams together.

The Left is destroying men by insisting that these tasks belong to government and also indicating that they aren’t needed duties but that women can suffice to do them. It’s gibberish, and all lies.

The fall of man as it relates to sin today and the destruction of society must be considered.

“And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.” – Genesis 3:6

It’s not hyperbole to say Civilization hangs in the balance when we sin against the Almighty. The man was with her and, as the leader, failed to stop his wife from her sin, and in so doing, Adam disobeyed God. Sin brought the fall of man, and with it, the whole earth is now cursed.

Christ’s sovereignty came by submitting to the Father, even unto the cross of humiliation. For us, by submission to Christ as our head come the blessings of the authority to carry out the roles in God’s design for men and women.

“For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me.” – John 6:38 and many others.

Even Jesus subordinated Himself to the Father. We must subordinate ourselves to God’s word. The man must take charge, and the woman must submit to the glory of God the Father. Once this is accomplished by continuous active pursuit, a colossal burden is lifted from the family. Keeping God’s ordination brings blessings evident in nature and daily living to those faithful to keep His commandments.

The result of sin today is evident all around. Only the devil wants women to be like men and men to be like women. Why? Because the devil and his workers of iniquity hate you and want you destroyed and dead.

If the man and the woman are to be under Christ, the woman is subordinate to the man. The priests of the New Religion will never be allowed to say that women acting like men publicly in society and at home have caused major mental and emotional problems, but it’s why 40 percent of women are taking antidepressants. They’ve been told that they can, and even should have been, just like men in all aspects of the associations they inhabit.

God made men to work, protect, hunt, build, and make hard decisions to ensure the survival of the tribe. God made women to nurture, gather, encourage, and, yes, especially to inspire. These traits of women are not belittling to mention; this notion is absurd brainwashing. Women are necessary for the proper raising of children, maintaining a family, and critical to nurturing that familial relationship without which all of society falls apart.

The choices of blessings or curses are set before us each day; choose wisely.

I’m not qualified to have written this, but it’s by the dispensation of the grace of God that would allow teaching to men and women whose shadow I’m not worthy to gaze upon.

Good Lord.

First up in this most recent but awful recent procession of the ugly and parade of the vulgar is a report from New Mexico.

The New Mexico State Police released additional information Thursday on a deadly shooting that happened the day prior in Farmington after officers mistakenly responded to the wrong home and shot one of its occupants to death.

In a Thursday statement, the NMSP said an officer with the Farmington Police Department fatally shot the victim, identified as Robert Dotson, 52, after responding to a call for a domestic violence incident at around 11:30 p.m. Wednesday.

Farmington police officers responded to the area but visited the wrong address.

“Once on scene, officers mistakenly approached 5305 Valley View Avenue instead of 5308 Valley View Avenue,” the NMSP said. “Officers knocked on the front door of 5305 Valley View Avenue and announced themselves as Farmington police officers. When there was no answer at 5305, officers asked their dispatch to call the reporting party back and have them come to the front door.”

The addresses are located across the street from one another. Police said the occupants of 5305 Valley View Avenue opened the door armed and an exchange of gunfire ensued.

“Body camera footage shows as the officers backed away from 5305 Valley View Avenue, the homeowner, Robert Dotson, 52, opened the screen door armed with a handgun. At this point in the encounter, officer(s) fired at least one round from their duty weapon(s) striking Mr. Dotson,” police said.

The NMSP added: “After the initial shooting, Mr. Dotson’s wife, also armed with a handgun, fired from the doorway of the residence. Once again, officer(s) fired. Once she realized that the individuals outside the residence were officers, she put the gun down and complied with the officer’s commands.”

If one doesn’t know who is at the door making a commotion, it seems to make perfect sense to go armed.  But in fact it doesn’t.  If police can shoot you with immunity for simply being in possession of a firearm, then the RKBA doesn’t exist at all.

Second, the wisest counsel would say don’t open the door for police.  Just like you never talk to the police without a lawyer, you don’t open the door for the police.  Simply don’t do it, especially if you’re in possession of a weapon.  Don’t let your dog[s] out or they will also get shot by Barney Fife.  Ensconce inside your home and assess the situation, but don’t believe for even a single second that the police are there to protect your safety.  In fact, there is no situation so bad and so dire that it cannot be made worse by the presence of the police.

The second event up in this obscene spectacle comes from Florida.

Two police officers in Clearwater, Florida, were suspended following an incident wherein they both shot at each other in the darkness. They responded to a call about a man firing a gun in his backyard. They approached silently, in the darkness, positioned themselves, and when the man fired a round, they both essentially mag-dumped at each other. One of the officers was hit.

The violations of extremely important rules of safety are so stark it boggles the imagination.  Don’t shoot if you don’t know what you’re shooting at.  Know your target and what’s behind it.  The Supreme Court decision in Tennessee v. Garner, and so much more that it’s just not productive to lay out all of the failures here.

Third up in this display of foolishness comes straight to you from the FBI and SOCOM.

Members of the FBI and the US Army Special Operations Command who were conducting a training exercise in downtown Boston raided the wrong hotel room and detained the person inside before realizing their mistake, the FBI said in a statement to CNN.

The FBI said its Boston division was helping the military with a training exercise around 10 p.m. Tuesday “to simulate a situation their personnel might encounter in a deployed environment.”

“Based on inaccurate information, they were mistakenly sent to the wrong room and detained an individual, not the intended role player,” the FBI said.

[ … ]

An officer with the US Army Special Operations will lead the investigation into the incident, Burns told CNN Friday. The investigation will be an administrative fact-finding inquiry, but it can result in recommendations that could lead to judicial proceedings under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

It’s a wonder they didn’t kill anyone.

Good grief.  Have things gotten so bad in SOCOM that they have to take lessons in how to screw up from the FBI?  My son did this for real among real bad guys in Fallujah and could teach them how to do this right.  Better yet, there are tactical trainers out there who make a living doing this (here you must be careful since there are also some fakes, like the FBI, and also some trainers who don’t believe in the RKBA and would tyrannize the American people).

The point is that the FBI is the very last place SOCOM should go for training.  If they have fallen to that level, America’s armed forces are truly in trouble.

I knew a sergeant in a local PD who knew that I have a penchant for 1911s.  He told me once that he wouldn’t trust any officer in his department to carry or decock a hammer fired pistol, even if it’s a backup pistol to his service issued firearm.  Of course, you must know what you’re doing with a striker fired gun too, but he’s a wise man to restrict his officers to something he thinks they can handle.

You’re never in more danger than when the police are around.  Do everything humanly possible to get away from them as quickly as possible.

Civil Asset Forfiture

Source:

Found it. Make them famous.
Sergeant Glenn Rigdon is the NHP officer (badge no. 140)- Ordered the seizure
Trooper Chris Brown of the Nevada Highway Patrol (badge no. 250)-made the stop
DEA Agent Shane Murray

— BuckshotRedux (@BuckshotRedux) April 7, 2023

Never forget that you owe this precedent-setting debacle of an empowered ATF making up law out of whole cloth to Donald Trump.  Never forget that. This all gave the go-ahead for the pistol brace rule, and many other things yet to come.

Huge Breaking 2A News! Biden administration late last night at the last hour before the final deadline filed a 197-page Writ of Certiorari, aka request that the US Supreme Court hears the Garland v Cargill bump stock lawsuit at SCOTUS. #2A #GoodFriday2023 #2AShallNotBeInfringed pic.twitter.com/wY8XSzQ0Bz

— Michael Cargill (@michaeldcargill) April 7, 2023

This is interesting for most of us, although it wouldn’t and doesn’t dissuade me from carrying a revolver for personal defense.  Of course, if your name is Jerry Miculek, none of this applies to you.  It seems to me that one of the lessons is to carry a backup handgun if you think you might be in a protracted gunfight.  If you can’t predict the future like most of us, I guess get good with speed loaders.  I like the idea of carrying a secondary weapon better.

On a related note, I don’t ever buy Armscor ammunition.  One comment to Sam’s video is interesting: “Back as a cop, I carried a 22 mag pocket revolver as a backup to the 38 issued weapon. Our armourer specifically warned us not to use Squires Bingham (what Armscor used to be in those days) 22 wrmf rounds for this reason. And this was quite a while ago now. Seems their QA for their rimfire mag round has not improved much.”

It’s all a myth.  So says Serene Jones of Union Theological Seminary, writing at Salon.  She discusses politics extensively, and then finally gets to her main point.

But as a theologian with deep biblical expertise, I must say, I’m struggling to find the part in the Bible about unlimited access to guns. I hate to break it to these “devoted” religious followers: The Bible says absolutely nothing about allowing people to run amuck with guns. It’s a completely ludicrous reading of the text.

Generally, conservative politicians justify this vague connection by claiming the Bible gives people the right to self-defense. But that’s a preposterous jump from the text. The Bible barely touches on a right to self-defense. There are a few sentences that could allude to one – but in no way is there a concrete message on the subject. Plus, the deadliest weapon the Bible ever mentions is a sword – hardly an AR-15 that can kill dozens of people in seconds.

All in all, it seems to me that the Bible would perhaps support a hefty supply of pepper spray. But weapons of war? That’s absurd.

One might cite Exodus 21:12-15, Numbers 35:6-34, and Deuteronomy 19:1-13, Exodus 22, Nehemiah 4:8-23 and especially Esther 8:11-12.  But it’s apparent she doesn’t want to hear it.

Something simpler must be done.  Here we will get detailed and a bit deep for a usual post, so the reader must pay closer attention than the usual 2 or 3-minute read.

Recall that we’ve approached this many times from the perspective of the Decalogue, the most didactic and straight forward statement on the issue of man being man in God’s image.  We’ll do that shortly, but in order to couch this in the usual boundary conditions thrown around by statists, it’s necessary to mention that the American government doesn’t function like Paul intended in Romans 13.  Evil doing goes unpunished, and even more to the point, there is no legal requirement for the police to provide protection of its citizens.

That’s a myth usually told to those with childlike thinking in order to pacify them.  The American court system has ensured that the police can watch a woman being raped on the streets, eat doughnuts while it happens, and then arrest the perpetrator after the fact and be within the law (even if not their department policies depending on the specific PD).  The police are there to effect arrests for law-breaking, not make peace or supply protection.  For those who doubt this, see again the following cases.

Castle Rock v. Gonzalez

Warren v. District of Columbia

DeShaney v. Winnebago County

In fact, the surest and quickest way to get shot is to invite the police into any situation.  So if the police cannot and will not provide protection, who will?  Who will protect the women and children?  Who will provide the same function as the men did in Esther 8:11-12?  It isn’t enough to conflate protection of national borders with the self protection discussed in Esther.  The armed forces of the nation are no located on the street corners protecting women and children.

Ms. Jones teaches a course on John Calvin.  It’s to Calvin we turn right now.  The best case for the necessity of self defense comes straight from the Decalogue.  John Calvin, commenting on commandment and prohibition, observes:

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).

I then make these remarks.  “Matthew Henry observes the same concerning Proverbs 24:11-12 (“If we see the lives or livelihoods of any in danger of being taken away unjustly, we ought to bestir ourselves all we can do to save them …”).  Far from a weak or forced case for self defense, this is one of the strongest in the Scriptures.  Thou shalt not kill means that thou shalt not allow yourself or those around you to be killed, thus says the Lord.  It isn’t an option – it is His commandment.”

“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.  Finally, self-defense may actually result in 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).”

As the reader might suspect, it’s necessary to invoke Luke 22:36, if for no other reason than to dismiss the persistent false views of what Jesus is saying there.

Paul Carter writing at Gospel Coalition states the following.

This passage is often submitted as evidence that Jesus permitted violent self defence if the situation so warranted. However, the vast majority of commentators think Jesus was speaking metaphorically here and that the disciples misunderstood the point he was trying to make. John Calvin for example said:

It was truly shameful and stupid ignorance, that the disciples, after having been so often informed about bearing the cross, imagine that they must fight with swords of iron. [1]

Indeed, had the disciples’ understanding been accurate, it would be hard to understand why just a few hours later Jesus would rebuke Peter for drawing a sword in self defence.  “Jesus said to him, “Put your sword back into its place. For all who take the sword will perish by the sword” (Matthew 26:52 ESV).

Either Jesus had a very short memory, or the disciples were guilty of gross misinterpretation of his teaching.

I’m not aware of a single commentator who thinks Jesus was telling the disciples to stock up on actual swords.

He utterly misses the point, misapplies Calvin here, and falsely states that Jesus spoke in riddles.  Calvin nowhere denies the biblical right of self defense, but rather states clearly that the sword will not win the souls of men.

Also quite clearly, Jesus did tell His disciples to purchase swords (actually, what was common then was a more concealable cross between a knife and sword).  More to the point, however, is that this command directly ordered His disciples to violate Roman law in order to obtain weapons of self defense.

… for some evidence, see Digest 48.6.1: collecting weapons ‘beyond those customary for hunting or for a journey by land or sea’ is forbidden; 48.6.3.1 forbids a man ‘of full age’ appearing in public with a weapon (telum) (references and translation are from Mommsen 1985). See also Mommsen 1899: 564 n. 2; 657-58 n. 1; and Linderski 2007: 102-103 (though he cites only Mommsen). Other laws from the same context of the Digest sometimes cited in this regard are not as worthwhile for my purposes because they seem to be forbidding the possession of weapons with criminal intent. But for the outright forbidding of being armed while in public in Rome, see Cicero’s letter to his brother relating an incident in Rome in which a man, who is apparently falsely accused of plotting an assassination, is nonetheless arrested merely for having confessed to having been armed with a dagger while in the city: To Atticus, Letter 44 (II.24). See also Cicero, Philippics 5.6 (§17). Finally we may cite a letter that Synesius of Cyrene wrote to his brother, probably sometime around the year 400 ce. The brother had apparently questioned the legality of Synesius having his household produce weapons to defend themselves against marauding bands. Synesius points out that there are no Roman legions anywhere near for protection, but he seems reluctantly to admit that he is engaged in an illegal act (Letter 107; for English trans., see Fitzgerald 1926).

There is a wide gulf between negating OT law regarding self defense, and merely emphasizing that the kingdom of God will not be won without the winning of souls.  It’s all too easy for modern “scholars” to conflate these ideas.

It would have been useful if Ms. Jones had provided more of her allegedly biblical objections to self defense, but she does not.  Her focus here is mainly on politics.  But it’s easy enough to demonstrate that a rock is useful in self defense, a stick maybe more so, a sword even more so, and a firearms the premier self defense weapon in the world today.

I usually ask most who object to the notion of self defense if they would take a life to prevent a home invader from taking the life of their wife.  When the moralistic legalistic among us tell us no, it’s interesting to watch the reactions of their wives.  They are quite literally willing to sacrifice their wives to rape and even death for the sake of their false sense of morality.  The next follow-on question usually ends the discussion: What about your children – are you willing to sacrifice their lives too?  Is your duty to protect the little ones?  What would Jesus do?

In the end, Ms. Jones is advised to moderate her claims to having “deep biblical expertise.”  I’ve done a bit of reading and study myself, my professor having forced me to read Francis Turretin, “Institutes of Elenctic Theology.”  It would also be wise to rehearse her knowledge of Calvin before teaching on him again.

And she might want to question her husband or other protector on his intentions in a home invasion.  She might find the results bracing.

It doesn’t help to assert as some do that God will take care of us.  That’s ineffective even for a Calvinist like me.  God expects us to follow His laws, meet our responsibilities, and fulfil our duties.

If this comes down to what weapon we think best to effect the self defense that God commands, Ms. Jones is stepping in between God and man if she presumes to decide that for us, and is taking the seat of Christ.  That’s a dangerous perch.

She would be best to ask the question, “Why has society changed so that misuse of weapons is the problem we think it is today?”  Or better yet, “Where does sin come from, and how long has man been committing it?”

As for the later, read Genesis Chapter 3.  As for the former, she might ponder the effects of the Auburn Affirmation with its rejection of the deity of Christ, the infallibility of the Scriptures, and the general defenestration of Biblical theology, along with the awful effects on American culture of that decision to make friends with the source, form and redaction criticism of the Germans.  In other words, look in the mirror, Ms. Jones.

Source:

The president of Ecuador, Guillermo Lasso, announced an authorization this weekend that allows civilians to carry and use guns amid surging crime in the country.

Reuters noted that crime has reached a point where it is hard to curtail, and Lasso hopes to find some degree of respite in allowing citizens to be armed for self-defense.

Lasso—a political conservative—announced the new policy, saying, “We have a common enemy: petty crime, drug trafficking, and organized crime.”

“We’ve modified the decree that allows the possession and carrying of guns,” he continued. “In other words, in general terms … the possession and carrying of guns for civilian use in personal defense is authorized, in accordance with the requirements of law and regulations.”

We’re obviously not against this. And you might say that America needs or even has something similar to this. But that’s not the direction I wanted to take. I was thinking about this the other day, and others have mentioned it. What if the government news outlets in America, let’s not even say breathlessly but matter-of-factly, reported the thousands of self-defense gun uses in America every month?

Yes, thousands of times every month, somebody uses a firearm for self-defense in the United States. This includes everything from showing a firearm to a would-be assailant to brandishing or muzzling and, least often but sadly, actually having to shoot an assailant.

We applaud the move by Mr. Lasso in Ecuador, but the president there should also direct the daily and weekly stats to be aggressively released to the public and broadcast along with any footage of justified self-defense. Once criminals see the effective use of guns in self-defense, crime will plummet.

America’s problem isn’t so much of a crime problem in most states. The U.S. problem is the government narrative that denies guns’ utility and constantly promotes restrictions and confiscations despite the majority of states requiring nothing but the attainment of age to carry and use a handgun in self-defense. If the U.S. government wanted to actually lower crime, they would broadcast every self-defense use and encourage people to report self-defense uses to be included in official releases and broadcasts.

Cases.  Because there is more than one.

Here is a video from Silencer Shop.  This sounds like a nice idea, but at the expense of registering it with the ATF, not so much any more.  You’re free to disagree. I see that they have designed the suppressors with different choke sizes in mind. That answered the only question I had before watching he video: what does this do to the shot pattern? I do wonder what this does to the weight distribution and balance of the gun though.

I find that using shotguns in particular reduces the need for any sort of suppression of the sound because of the comfort of wearing sound enhancing ear muffs (or electronic ear muffs).  They work well with the lower comb of the shotgun and don’t interfere with getting a good cheek weld.

Rifles are a different story.  With rifles the stock doesn’t have the same profile, and this is especially true of modern sporting rifles where the stock is along the same axis as the recoil.  I find that electronic ear muffs do interfere with my cheek weld.  The only option at that point is foam hearing protection for the ear canal.

The upshot of electronic ear muffs for hunting or other shooting sports is that, especially for a person who is somewhat hard of hearing like me, the muffs actually enhance the sound (other than the shot itself).  I damaged my hearing by running power equipment for years before we thought about things like hearing protection. I always use hearing protection now. Thus, the last time I went quail hunting I had a regular conversation with someone with muffs on, and yet suffered no hearing damage from the shotgun.  The downside of foam hearing protection is that no such conversation can be had.

I am a fairly well rounded engineer, and in addition to studying both mechanical and nuclear engineering, I have studied the physics of sound, including all of the OSHA regulations and the dumbed-down ways they force you to compute reduction in decibels (for example, when double protection is used).  OSHA crafts its calculations for the simplest minded health and safety technician to use, not for the engineer.

But those regulations do provide worker protection.  And while it can be said that OSHA has no jurisdiction over hearing safety for those other than workers, if the FedGov cared in the least about the health and safety of its citizens, OSHA would be in front of Congress lobbying for removal of suppressors from the NFA.  Hearing loss is a human safety issue.  There are no two ways about it.

The only conclusion one can reach is that OSHA doesn’t really care about you, any more than the federal government does.  Because you engage in hunting and the other shooting sports, they hate you.  It’s that simple.  If they cared about you, they would have removed suppressors a very long time ago and allowed them to be sold at the local hardware store.