UPDATE!! Montana constitutional carry bill & the I'm pro 2A but" crowd.

[Texasbuckeye]

chaps my arse is how so many clamor for more gun training before anyone should he able to possess or carry guns but the same group want to open voting rights to illegals and anyone without an ID….one could argue as much a personal defense for voting rights as gun rights, and yet silence from the majority of the same clamoring for more gun “training”. How ‘bout we institute a common civics test for voters and anyone that doesn’t pass with a high score their vote gets dropped from the rolls?
There are many arguments about 2A’s “shall not be infringed” and one of the most common i hear is we should not have military grade weapons in common folks hands, but when the founders wrote that into the BoR the prevalent weapons in the hands of the common citizen was better than the prevalent weapon found in the hands of the military (ky rifle vs musket). Common knowledge the founders would have known that has been lost to our excellent education system.

However, telling us the “right of self defense” is God given is sort of misleading. We see through Jesus’ life how He asks us to turn the other cheek and be meek and humble….His desire isnt for us to live a long and defended life here on earth, its to live a ling and fulfilled life with Him after our time here.
we consoder the right to self defense an inalienable right, meaning it is a right all people possess and isnt given by some govt, but i dont know that God’s will is for us to defend ourselves at the expense of someone else dying. That is a different discussion.

 

[Wvroach]

Is there a concealed carry section in the Bible that I overlooked?

The right to self protection is inalienable and bearing arms includes whatever method a person chooses. It is not the government's job to dictate how one can protect themselves.

Certainly property rights, self defense, defense of country, family and land is biblical though. Here are a few verses for you.

Luke 22:36 “If you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.”
Exodus 22 :2 If a thief is caught breaking in at night and is struck a fatal blow, the defender is not guilty of bloodshed; but if it happens after sunrise, the defender is guilty of bloodshed”
Psalm 144:1 Blessed be the LORD, my rock, who trains my hands for war, and my fingers for battle.

Plenty more available if you'd like.

 

[Wvroach]

chaps my arse is how so many clamor for more gun training before anyone should he able to possess or carry guns but the same group want to open voting rights to illegals and anyone without an ID….one could argue as much a personal defense for voting rights as gun rights, and yet silence from the majority of the same clamoring for more gun “training”. How ‘bout we institute a common civics test for voters and anyone that doesn’t pass with a high score their vote gets dropped from the rolls?
There are many arguments about 2A’s “shall not be infringed” and one of the most common i hear is we should not have military grade weapons in common folks hands, but when the founders wrote that into the BoR the prevalent weapons in the hands of the common citizen was better than the prevalent weapon found in the hands of the military (ky rifle vs musket). Common knowledge the founders would have known that has been lost to our excellent education system.

However, telling us the “right of self defense” is God given is sort of misleading. We see through Jesus’ life how He asks us to turn the other cheek and be meek and humble….His desire isnt for us to live a long and defended life here on earth, its to live a ling and fulfilled life with Him after our time here.
we consoder the right to self defense an inalienable right, meaning it is a right all people possess and isnt given by some govt, but i dont know that God’s will is for us to defend ourselves at the expense of someone else dying. That is a different discussion.

Context is key, turning the other cheek was in regards to insults of disrespect. A common phrase we still use to this day is "it was like a slap in the face" not actually talking about a physical slap.

Jesus did not come to abolish the law but to fulfill it. Whenever possible we should obviously try to avoid having to take a life or commit violence but it is the Man's role to be the protector of his family, which does not mean leaving them fatherless at the hands of a criminal when it is able to be prevented..

 

[Texasbuckeye]

The right to self protection is inalienable and bearing arms includes whatever method a person chooses. It is not the government's job to dictate how one can protect themselves.

Certainly property rights, self defense, defense of country, family and land is biblical though. Here are a few verses for you.

Luke 22:36 “If you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.”
Exodus 22 :2 If a thief is caught breaking in at night and is struck a fatal blow, the defender is not guilty of bloodshed; but if it happens after sunrise, the defender is guilty of bloodshed”
Psalm 144:1 Blessed be the LORD, my rock, who trains my hands for war, and my fingers for battle.

Plenty more available if you'd like.

Parsing individual quotes from the Bible is a deadly way to go about life. Jesus was not calling people to arms, He was giving a statement that He was was going to be sent as a rebel and There would be a fight, albeit a spiritual fight. The verses before and after are about how the disciples will betray Him and His eventual triumph over the world. We all know there was no actual weapons based battle.
The other verses you quotes are OT and there is plenty of example of the Isrealites fighting to get to or maintain their promised land. Using those quotes as examples of God ordaining weapons and violence are as good as propserity gospel preachers twisting the Word to serve their goals.

 

[Texasbuckeye]

Context is key, turning the other cheek was in regards to insults of disrespect. A common phrase we still use to this day is "it was like a slap in the face" not actually talking about a physical slap.

Jesus did not come to abolish the law but to fulfill it. Whenever possible we should obviously try to avoid having to take a life or commit violence but it is the Man's role to be the protector of his family, which does not mean leaving them fatherless at the hands of a criminal when it is able to be prevented..

And yet, when confronted with violence what did Jesus do? What did His disciples do once they were enlightened? Turning the other cheek was not about being insulted. Beleive what you may, but if you think Jesus would take anothers life to save His own, or call on His followers to do the same, you are gravely mistaken.

 

[Wvroach]

And yet, when confronted with violence what did Jesus do? What did His disciples do once they were enlightened? Turning the other cheek was not about being insulted. Beleive what you may, but if you think Jesus would take anothers life to save His own, or call on His followers to do the same, you are gravely mistaken.

I'd have to say the same in regards to you if you would believe that he would want you to be a coward and allow your family to be tortured or killed, or yourself over taking the life of the one commiting the atrocities. That is not being a good shepherd and is not my opinion but biblical, Jesus did not abolish the old testament, he fulfilled it.

The mosaic covenant of Ceremonial laws we are no longer bound to, but the binding of moral law is just as intact today as it was 2021 years ago.

 

[Texasbuckeye]

^^i am not sure where you took me arguing that self defense isnt Biblical into me not willing to defend myself or my family….i was simply making the point that inalienable and God given are not the same. And the points your are arguing are not very compelling arguments that God sanctions self defense.
try not to assume too much beyond what is written.

Yes, Jesus fulfilled the law, and the law was that sin must be forgiven by blood sacrifice. Jesus was that blood sacrifice for all our sin. He also said we are still under the old law but we are not bound by that law because He fulfilled it. The law was written as a way for man to become closer and know more about God. With Jesus, and more specifically now the Holy Spirit, we don’t need the law to know more about or be closer to God, the Holy Spirit acts as that bridge now. Jesus was a contemporary of man, fully man and fully God, who allows us to see and understand more Gods heart and Gods will for His people. As such, we should look toward Jesus and see what He did in very human instances to try and emulate our lives off His actions. We will never be perfect like He, but we can at least try.

 

[CamoPirate]

Ezekiel 25:17. "The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men. Blessed is he who, in the name of charity and good will, shepherds the weak through the valley of the darkness, for he is truly his brother's keeper and the finder of lost children.

Oh sorry, thought we were talking Pulp Fiction.

 

[Wvroach]

^^i am not sure where you took me arguing that self defense isnt Biblical into me not willing to defend myself or my family….i was simply making the point that inalienable and God given are not the same. And the points your are arguing are not very compelling arguments that God sanctions self defense.
try not to assume too much beyond what is written.

Beleive what you may, but if you think Jesus would take anothers life to save His own, or call on His followers to do the same, you are gravely mistaken.

That's where I got it. No need to interpret or add to i can read the text plainly. The points I have made are very easy to see. We should follow Christ, all scripture is theopneustos old and new testament. The dictates of defense still apply today as they did then.

 

[CoStick]

Is there a concealed carry section in the Bible that I overlooked?

All for the constitution but I can’t really see how it is connected to God. Mortal men wrote it and not all of them were God fearing.

 

[2ski]

chaps my arse is how so many clamor for more gun training before anyone should he able to possess or carry guns but the same group want to open voting rights to illegals and anyone without an ID….one could argue as much a personal defense for voting rights as gun rights, and yet silence from the majority of the same clamoring for more gun “training”. How ‘bout we institute a common civics test for voters and anyone that doesn’t pass with a high score their vote gets dropped from the rolls?
There are many arguments about 2A’s “shall not be infringed” and one of the most common i hear is we should not have military grade weapons in common folks hands, but when the founders wrote that into the BoR the prevalent weapons in the hands of the common citizen was better than the prevalent weapon found in the hands of the military (ky rifle vs musket). Common knowledge the founders would have known that has been lost to our excellent education system.

However, telling us the “right of self defense” is God given is sort of misleading. We see through Jesus’ life how He asks us to turn the other cheek and be meek and humble….His desire isnt for us to live a long and defended life here on earth, its to live a ling and fulfilled life with Him after our time here.
we consoder the right to self defense an inalienable right, meaning it is a right all people possess and isnt given by some govt, but i dont know that God’s will is for us to defend ourselves at the expense of someone else dying. That is a different discussion.

You listen to too many fear mongers. The left doesn't want illegal aliens to vote hate the state of the country. Everyone manipulating their constituents by making them fear the other side. Do you fear your neighbor. I mean your real neighbor. Fred or Joe or whatever next door. He's a nice guy. He's just not politically aligned the same.

 

[2ski]

Many dont recognize your right because they dont recognize your Creator. If they throw out God, the rest is fairly easy to get rid of with a little patience.

Oh so now you want to toss freedom of religion? That's not a right that you care about?

 

[Btaylor]

Oh so now you want to toss freedom of religion? That's not a right that you care about?

If that's what you got from my post, well, bless your heart.

 

[2ski]

If that's what you got from my post, well, bless your heart.

Why bless YOURS. Lol

 

[GSPHUNTER]

Charlton Heston, 4/8/08. FROM MY COLD DEAD HANDS.

 

[SquirrelyDan]

I need more ……..

 

[GSPHUNTER]

I need more ……..

And not that microwave crap.

 

[Wrench]

And not that microwave crap.

Popcorn is like guns, some are open and some hide it in the microwave.

 

[Alaskanopolis]

I agree that CCW should be easily obtained w/o bureaucratic hurdles (I'm thinking of you CA, MD, and DC). However, I strongly believe that training should be a prerequisite. I believe training and "licenses" should be a prerequisite for virtually any dangerous endeavor. I wish my state would require training and licensing for boaters/PWC users. I agree that drivers should be required to have training and licensing (I don't think current driver training/testing goes far enough; I'd include tire replacement, car part identification/nomenclature, and more). I agree that motorcycle riders should be required to have different training and licensing than auto drivers; same with CDLs. I agree that hunters need training prior to setting off on their first hunt (I personally don't think that modern hunter safety is enough; I'd include marksmanship training/qualification, meat care, and more). However, in all of those instances, I think the applicant should be able to "test out" of the training via a pre-test; this would be similar to most state's CCW training requirement that is waived if the applicant can prove military pistol marksmanship training.

I strongly believe that everyone except violent criminals should be able to own a firearm in virtually any configuration. However, to carry the firearm in public or while hunting, we should be able to trust that the person knows what they're doing with it. The only way I see to guarantee that is through training and licensing.

I think if we all accepted robust training and qualification as a prerequisite to public carry (open or concealed), that might go a long way to fending off the opponents who say "it'll be like the wild west," "shootings on every corner," "think about the children," and any other concerns about innocent bystanders being hurt.

Do you think people should be required to receive training before they’re “allowed” to exercise their other God-given/natural/constitutional rights? There is no such thing as “pro-2A but.” You’re either fully pro-2A or you’re anti-2A. A lot of anti-2A people back in the 30s already shit all over the 2A with the firearms act. I should be allowed to order a full auto machine gun from Amazon.

 

[Alaskanopolis]

That's my thought too. Hard lefts are all about education, well let's educate everyone on firearm safety, just like vehicle safety.

Should we start educating and license the right to freely speak in public, or practice religion, or do any other number of our rights as enumerated in the constitution and supposedly protected and guaranteed by the federal government? I’ll tell you what we need: civics education.