smaller
Member
I suppose inquisition denial is an option.
Christian Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
-
Guest, Join Papa Zoom today for some uplifting biblical encouragement! --> Daily Verses
How Can The U.S.A. Reduse Mass Shootings?
- Thread starter iLOVE
- Start date
Jim Parker
Member
I have no idea what you mean by that.
smaller
Member
Think of all the various weapons that christians used to kill people. Would you like a few websites showing the tools of the inquisition?
Jim Parker
Member
Why in the world would anyone want to think of such things? (Unless one is seeking excuses not to believe or has a morbid interest in such devices)
Phl 4:8 ... whatever things are true, whatever things are noble, whatever things are just, whatever things are pure, whatever things are lovely, whatever things are of good report, if there is any virtue and if there is anything praiseworthy—meditate on these things. How about I just try to focus on those things?
Rather than focusing on those evil, wicked, mean and nasty Christians of 300 years ago, consider the number of people atheists have murdered in less than a single generation in the 20th century!
Stalin: 40 to 60 million
Mao: 60-80 million
Planned Parenthood et. al.: another 60 million in the USA alone
And an innumerable number of victims as a result of the export of the atheist, Communist revolution at the hands and under the instruction of murderous thugs like Ernesto "Che" Guevara.
And today we have the atrocities being committed on a daily basis by Muslim fundamentalists in the Middle East and Africa and all around the world.
Those people make the inquisitors look like rank amateurs.
And if you want to see horrific results of mass murder, just Google "Abortion photos."
Not really. I could find them myself if I had any interest in such evil. I do not.
The inquisition? How long ago was that? 300 years? Do you think, maybe, it's time to move on?
iakov the fool
Last edited:
smaller
Member
Point made. Weaponry in uses by "christians" have long been the NORM.
Maybe we can talk about the Swiss guard?
http://www.guns.com/2014/04/13/guns-swiss-guard/
Or perhaps the Russian Orthodox's support of Putin's military incursion into Syria?
http://www.christiantoday.com/artic...syria.to.protect.christians/66312.htm?email=1
http://www.christiantoday.com/artic...syria.to.protect.christians/66312.htm?email=1
Maybe we can talk about the Swiss guard?
http://www.guns.com/2014/04/13/guns-swiss-guard/
Or perhaps the Russian Orthodox's support of Putin's military incursion into Syria?
http://www.christiantoday.com/artic...syria.to.protect.christians/66312.htm?email=1
http://www.christiantoday.com/artic...syria.to.protect.christians/66312.htm?email=1
Jim Parker
Member
Sure! Now, THERE'S a threat to world peace! 110 guys whose job it is to protect the pope 24 hours a day because, every now and then, some Nimrod tries to kill him. (As a comparison, Barak Obama took 500 people in his entourage to the Paris "Climate Change" bull session where the world leaders worked out a plan to tax the air.)
But I give you the point that someone could get an eye poked out by one of those pikes!
Sure.
The regime of Bashar al Assad is oppressive by western standards (though about normal for a Muslim country) but he has protected the Christians in Syria (primarily Eastern and Oriental Orthodox) from radical Muslims who just love murdering Christians and burning their churches.
On the other hand, the so-called "moderate" Muslim insurrectionists (made up of peace-loving contingents from Al-Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, ISIS, and other "moderate" sweethearts) who are being supported with arms by our president Barak Hussein, have been raping, murdering, beheading, and otherwise mistreating Christians to their hearts delight. So, yes, the Patriarch of Moscow is in favor of Russia stepping in to support a regime that protects Christians rather then standing on the sidelines and saying nothing about the slaughter. (Like our dear Muslim Brotherhood loving leader, BO.)
I don't have a problem with that. Do you?
Or would you rather that Putin stand down and let Christian women be raped to death, their girl children sold as sex slaves and their men and boys beheaded? (Like our own dearly beloved, and disturbingly silent, BHO)
iakov the fool
Last edited:
That's false judgmentalism.
Yes. "Hyperbole" is the polite way of saying it.
jim
But I'm not allowed to say it the impolite way.
smaller
Member
Sure! Now, THERE'S a threat to world peace! 110 guys whose job it is to protect the pope 24 hours a day because, every now and then, some Nimrod tries to kill him. (As a comparison, Barak Obama took 500 people in his entourage to the Paris "Climate Change" bull session where the world leaders worked out a plan to tax the air.)
But I give you the point that someone could get an eye poked out by one of those pikes!
Sure.
The regime of Bashar al Assad is oppressive by western standards (though about normal for a Muslim country) but he has protected the Christians in Syria (primarily Eastern and Oriental Orthodox) from radical Muslims who just love murdering Christians and burning their churches.
On the other hand, the so-called "moderate" Muslim insurrectionists (made up of peace-loving contingents from Al-Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, ISIS, and other "moderate" sweethearts) who are being supported with arms by our president Barak Hussein, have been raping, murdering, beheading, and otherwise mistreating Christians to their hearts delight. So, yes, the Patriarch of Moscow is in favor of Russia stepping in to support a regime that protects Christians rather then standing on the sidelines and saying nothing about the slaughter. (Like our dear Muslim Brotherhood loving leader, BO.)
I don't have a problem with that. Do you?
Or would you rather that Putin stand down and let Christian women be raped to death, their girl children sold as sex slaves and their men and boys beheaded? (Like our own dearly beloved, and disturbingly silent, BHO)
iakov the fool
Understanding the unfortunately ill/sick/sin side of humanity is WHY people, inclusive of christians, should be "armed."
There is of course a number of downsides to "arming" the heads of state with the power to use these various forces of arms however. And that is probably where MOST of the worlds perpetual ills come from as it is invariably a local armed bad actor who eventually works his way to the top, and it is these who make war with each others, with the others as their pawns.
If everyone were equally armed, this might diminish that inevitable outcome.
So, I might propose less to no armed heads to lessen the issues of humanity.
One or two rogue shootings might happen now and then, but if everyone was armed the chances of a larger debacle are reduced. And it is NOT these rogues who kill the majority. It is the bigger rogues, with too much power.
th1b.taylor
Member
No sir, I've been observing people for almost seventy-one years now and what I said is a tested and proven observation I have, from time to time found myself guilty of. Just the facts sir, God judges and I do my best to advise.
Jim Parker
Member
Having ones head in the sand puts one in the proper position for the government to administer their blessings.
BOHICA!
iakov the fool
jasonc
Member
LolHaving ones head in the sand puts one in the proper position for the government to administer their blessings.
BOHICA!
iakov the fool
How does that harmonise with Paul's instructions to Christians? 'If possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all' (Rom 12:18 ESV).
I do not have my head in the sand. That is what my comment to you was related to. I have been a Christian for 54 years. I didn't come down in the last Christian shower so I understand it when you accuse me of something that is false. That was the reason for my statement that your comment about me was false judgmentalism.
Obadiah
Member
Keep in mind that this scripture says "so far as it depends on you". There are times that living peaceably no longer depends on you, and if those times include enough threat of violence to you, you will have to take action or die. We are never told that we are required to die needlessly. All our needless death does is give Satan the victory by depriving God of one more worker for harvesting his "ripe fields".
That is not my understanding of 'live peaceably with all'.
Perhaps another thread could be started to deal with 'Is there a theology of loving one's enemies with the use of a gun?'
Obadiah
Member
How do you explain the "so far as it depends on you" and the "If possible" part. You didn't address that, yet it is part of the scripture. And explain to me how being attacked by a person is living peaceably with them?
And no, your other thread wouldn't be a good idea due to the highly prejudicial wording of your title.
Obadiah,
Let's examine Rom 12:18 (ESV) in context: 'If possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all'.
In Rom 12 we are dealing with living life in presenting our bodies as a living sacrifice (Rom 12:1-2), how to demonstrate gifts of grace (Rom 12:3-7) and how to live out the Christian life (Rom 12:8-14). Rom 8:12 is in this latter section that includes 'bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse' (Rom 12:14) and 'repay no one evil for evil' (Rom 12:17).
The close connection of Rom 12:17, Rom 12:18 and Rom 12:19 should be self evident. These 3 verses exhort believers not to engage in behaviour that has a negative impact on them. From v. 17 we learn that 'no one' should be paid evil by us for evil done by them. In v. 18, we are to live peaceably 'with all'. What did Jesus urge upon us according to Matt 5:9, 'Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God'?
From the context of Rom 12:18, we don't know the specifics of whether there was a situation in the church of Rome that caused the kind of teaching of Rom 12:18, but 12:14 is clear enough that we should be blessing those who persecute us. Could these Roman believers been experiencing persecution and needed this instruction? Could be!
Jesus made it clear that 'I have said these things to you, that in me you may have peace. In the world you will have tribulation. But take heart; I have overcome the world' (John 16:33 ESV). Paul in Rom 12:18 is acknowledging that for the Christian, conflict is not possible to avoid, but he adds this double qualification, 'If possible, so far as it depends on you' - leave peaceably. I, as a believer, have a responsibility to live at peace with those who oppose me.
The application is that Paul is saying that persecution is inevitable but he doesn't want Christians to use this certainty of opposition to them and their faith to be an opportunity for them to engage in behaviour that needlessly inflames the conflict. He doesn't want us to see the unavoidable persecution and opposition as a reason for giving up on a positive witness to those who are opposing us.
It may be impossible for the Christian to live peacefully with all people. Christians may be attacked by evil people for their proclamation of the Gospel, truth and the good. In those circumstances, 'if possible' the Christian is to be a pacifist while he or she may be an activist for Christ and the truth. The Christian is to start no strife or hostility. It is the sinful flesh that initiates discord. Yes, the Christian will become involved when another initiates a brawl.
I cannot see Rom 12:18 being used as justification for opposing a gun wielding person with a gun. The context in Rom 12:14 indicates that the Christian is to 'bless those who persecute you'.
Surely the next verse is a stunning answer to the issues you raise with regard to v. 18, ' Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord”' (Rom 12:19 ESV).
Using a gun is avenging ourselves. God's instruction to us (my paraphrase) is: Don't do it with a gun. Leave vengeance to the Lord. The Lord will repay this retribution.
Oz
Last edited:
jasonc
Member
so I guess, training in martials arts is a sin.if the laws says you are able to act in your defense , then what is the difference if the law is called in to act? I say nothing.the laws says you must be in danger of life or limb.
some states have laws that will punish if you are able to save life via first aid but fail to act have you been stalked?
I have. my wife's ex husband placed nails in her driveway. the law was never able to catch him.
brother Paul
Member
Most people who oppose or try to discredit "Christianity" always use the same three or four instances from centuries ago. They always point to the Inquisition, the later crusades, and the actions of the Calvinists in Switzerland and the subsequent Puritan witch hunts etc.! Think about it. The whole history and population of Christians (many of whom also suffered under these movements) are lumped into and judges according to the actions of these groups and incidents. Why? For the first 400 years of Christendom we were without doubt (and demonstrable by history) the Number One most persecuted group in the world.
Then one faction of Christianity after gaining a certain political power in the very nations of the world that Jesus Himself rejected (Luke 4) passed theocratic rules that made them and their hierarchy the final word in all matter of faith and doctrine and began to punish, jail, persecute, and eliminate any persons or groups that did not agree with or obey them (meanwhile most Christians did not believe this but rather even themselves were subject to it). Eventually, these alleged leaders were men who gained positions of power by buying their Bishopric (even as late as Leo the 10th). It became obviously true that absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Reformers rose up who disagreed and we only hear of a few. Sadly one of them (John Calvin) had so convinced his group that THEY were "The Elect of God" that they then assumed the same position of Punisher of all who disagreed and began exiling, jailing, torturing, burning, etc., which influential Puritans following in suit assumed the right of when they came to new lands accusing, judging, killing...
However all of these together are still only a minority and none can rightly say Jesus or anything His apostles taught and lived demonstrated such evils (in other words these were not people of the Spirit of Christ - Romans 8:9)....these people may have worn the label (they had joined the club of Churchianity but were none of His - Romans 8:9)
Secondarily these people totally ignore the reality that Christianity has done more to educate, feed, house, clothe, and bring medical assistance to others less fortunate than any other group or any 10 governments combined, and they have done this for centuries without a single government's tax dollars. For example, over 150 hospitals and 450 schools have been built in India by the sweat tears and blood of Christian missionaries without a single tax dollar being demanded. Over 500 alphabets have been devised worldwide so people could be educated and many Christians gave their lives in the process. Slavery in many countries has been totally eradicated by Christians. Foot binding in China was end Wives are no longer burned alive on the funeral pyres of their husbands in India. Millions of alcoholics, thieves, murderers, drug addicts, and other wise deleterious people have been transformed into useful beneficial citizens of their respective countries...and the list goes on and on.
So know this there have been "Christians" so -called who have done such evil things, but "Christianity" is not at fault, people are....any grouping you can pick has its evil ones, extremists, and knuckleheads that give the rest a bad name...even the Ku Klux Klan called themselves "a Christian Organization" but were they at all like Christ or following the Way He taught?