alternatively wrote:Aside from the current "legal" implications.Why do you want to keep a gun?To kill people with?Whats happened to thou shalt not kill?
Are you an Obama voter, by any chance? It would explain a lot.
alternatively wrote:a] Still does not answer the question, Why?b] I don't keep a weapon of any kind in my house. And in America not everybody needed to defend themselves everyday in their life.c] The question is really for the individual isn't it.d] But the Christian could ask; Does God protect me or do I need a weapon to keep me alive as long as God wants me to live?
b] I don't keep a weapon of any kind in my house. And in America not everybody needed to defend themselves everyday in their life.
c] The question is really for the individual isn't it.
d] But the Christian could ask; Does God protect me or do I need a weapon to keep me alive as long as God wants me to live?
b] That's your choice. And OF COURSE we don't have to defend ourselves everyday! But it only takes that ONE time ...
c] Agreed.
d] God certainly protects us. However, I would NOT presume upon God to ward off all malicious and violent threats against family. That seems to be the responsibility of the man in the house.
And here's a question for you: Should Christian police officers refuse to carry deadly force, i.e., guns? Or should they, too, depend upon God's protection in keeping them alive for as long as He wants them to live?_
Non-hunting guns in the home is a matter for prayerful consideration. But they ARE our Constitutional right!
DJC49 wrote:More properly understood, the 6th commandment of the decalogue reads:"You shall not MURDER." [Ex 20:13 NASB]This is a superior rendering of the Hebrew instead if the KJV which reads:"Thou shalt not kill."There's a HUGE difference between murder and kill. And law-abiding citizens keep guns in lieu of keeping baseball bats, longbows, broadswords, and morning stars.
I don't keep a weapon of any kind in my house. And in America not everybody needed to defend themselves everyday in their life.
The question is really for the individual isn't it.
But the Christian could ask; Does God protect me or do I need a weapon to keep me alive as long as God wants me to live?
alternatively wrote:Why do you want to keep a gun?To kill people with?Whats happened to thou shalt not kill?
Whats happened to thou shalt not kill?
There's a HUGE difference between murder and kill.
And law-abiding citizens keep guns in lieu of keeping baseball bats, longbows, broadswords, and morning stars. Remember too: the bad guys pack the artillery._______________________________
Mike wrote:A matter of interpretation, true. But only because many have the false notion that the Supreme Court has the legal right to interpret the Constitution. THEY ONLY HAVE AUTHORITY TO INTERPRET LAWS as to whether they abide Constitutionally.
DJC49 wrote:Agreed.In this country, it's "Lex Rex" and not "Rex Lex" ... at least in theory.Unfortunately, it's because men get to interpret and thereby determine what exactly the Law of the Land IS that we get into problems here in this country which is supposedly under the Constitution. And it's obvious that a LIBERAL Judiciary, i.e., a liberal Supreme Court, easily short-circuits the whole Constitutional concept of "Lex Rex."So, ... Just as with the Bible, it comes down to a matter of interpretation.
Mike wrote:It's the law of the land. Romans 13 says we are subject to the higher powers. Those who oppose the right of the people to keep and bear arms are against the law of the land, and stand in opposition to the higher powers.
Why do you want to keep a gun?
To kill people with?
In this country, it's "Lex Rex" and not "Rex Lex" ... at least in theory.
Unfortunately, it's because men get to interpret and thereby determine what exactly the Law of the Land IS that we get into problems here in this country which is supposedly under the Constitution. And it's obvious that a LIBERAL Judiciary, i.e., a liberal Supreme Court, easily short-circuits the whole Constitutional concept of "Lex Rex."
So, ... Just as with the Bible, it comes down to a matter of interpretation._
And here's a SermonAudio sermon to that effect:[URL=http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=21908153390]]]Rex Lex vs. Lex Rex: The Folly of Blindly Following After the Rule of Wicked Leaders[/URL]
The point is this: if today's contra-Christian mood carries a Con-Con, it will carry out several amendments with it, and be certain that the first and second will be the first two to go.
For those who are afraid of guns or believe that they are unbiblical, remember that keeping and bearing arms doesn't require you to be a warmonger or invader. The provision is designed for the people's protection against criminal individuals, groups, and governments. I don't PERSONALLY know a a gun owner who had to shoot anyone (I know OF a few), but I do know (at least here in Baltimore) that crooks don't break into houses where it's known that the inhabitants not only have weapons, but know how to use them.
The fact that FEMA and the US Military disarmed law-abiding citizens during Katrina was telling. They disarmed people who were not even in the flooded areas! A tyrannical gov't will always disarm the public and install a police state, and that's what's happening here folks. Pray about it, then do something about it ... while you still can...
[URL=http://www.constitution.org/lrev/rodell/woe_unto_you_lawyers.htm]]]Woe Unto You Lawyers![/URL]
Mike wrote:The question is kind of silly. Whether you agree or not is irrelevant. Amendment 2 is the guarantee, regardless of what Obama or any other "official" wants, that you may indeed keep and bear arms. There is no law that says only government types and criminals are allowed this. There is no authority to deny the 2nd Amendment right. Any law that seeks to do so is unconstitutional, and therefore illegal.
Alan H wrote:[URL=http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1108/15835.html]]]Would-be [Obama] appointees quizzed on guns (Pg. 1)[/URL] "Tucked in at the end of the questionnaire and listed under “Miscellaneous,” it reads: “Do you or any members of your immediate family own a gun? If so, provide complete ownership and registration information. Has the registration ever lapsed? Please also describe how and by whom it is used and whether it has been the cause of any personal injuries or property damage.” [URL=http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1108/15835_Page2.html]]]Would-be [Obama] appointees quizzed on guns (Pg. 2)[/URL] “Barack Obama and his administration are showing their true colors and true philosophy with regard to the Second Amendment,” said Chris Cox, the NRA’s top political official. “It shows what we’ve been saying all along — this guy doesn’t view the Second Amendment as a fundamental constitutional right.”
As for guns in particular I personally do not care for them. I prefer the traditional bow myself. I do hope to get into spears and knives in the future.
"Tucked in at the end of the questionnaire and listed under “Miscellaneous,” it reads: “Do you or any members of your immediate family own a gun? If so, provide complete ownership and registration information. Has the registration ever lapsed? Please also describe how and by whom it is used and whether it has been the cause of any personal injuries or property damage.”
[URL=http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1108/15835_Page2.html]]]Would-be [Obama] appointees quizzed on guns (Pg. 2)[/URL]
“Barack Obama and his administration are showing their true colors and true philosophy with regard to the Second Amendment,” said Chris Cox, the NRA’s top political official. “It shows what we’ve been saying all along — this guy doesn’t view the Second Amendment as a fundamental constitutional right.”
“I guarantee you, Barack Obama ain’t taking my shotguns, so don’t buy that malarkey,”
“I got two, if he tries to fool with my Beretta, he’s got a problem.”
So nobody needs a gun anymore.
