| Submit your comments on this article | |
| -Land of the Free | |
| You can’t be pro-life and pro-gun. | |
| 2016-01-02 | |
| [WashingtonPost] In the United States, evangelicals are among the biggest supporters of gun rights. They are the major religious group least likely to support stricter laws. Evangelical Larry Pratt, who directs Gun Owners of America, even argues that all Christians should be armed. For most of my adult life, I agreed. I believed that we had a God-given right to defend ourselves. I also believed that the Second Amendment guarantees a right to bear arms, and that anyone should be able to obtain a gun. So far, so good... Then, I saw the after-effects of gun violence firsthand. In Pennsylvania, I visited the families of five murdered Amish schoolgirls, as well as the family of the shooter. And I watched as a mass shooting unfolded at the Washington Navy Yard, across from where I lived at the time. These experiences, followed by careful theological and moral reflection, left me convinced that my family of faith is wrong on guns. Those incidents did not involve defending one's own with a gun. Those were criminal acts committed by criminals against unarmed or unprepared individuals, not Christians defending themselves and their families with guns. This massively twists Biblical admonitions on dealing with evil through deadly force. This isn’t easy for me to say. Forty-one years ago, I accepted Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior under the preaching of an evangelical pastor. I attended an evangelical college and seminary, was ordained an evangelical minister, and now chair the Evangelical Church Alliance, one of America’s oldest associations of evangelical clergy. My Christian identity is solidly evangelical. Credentials. I read a news report from a woman who said she was pro 2nd Amendment listing all of her qualifications: instructor, etc, and most of them state sanctioned. The woman was, in my view a statist in love with state imposed fees and requirements to obtain those qualifications. Credentials impress me very little. But I disagree with my community’s wholesale embrace of the idea that anyone should be able to buy a gun. For one thing, our commitment to the sanctity of human life demands that we err on the side of reducing threats to human life. And our belief in the basic sinfulness of humankind should make us skeptical of the NRA’s slogan, “the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is with a good guy with a gun.” The Bible indicates that we are all bad guys sometimes. Not all of us seek to shoot people for no reason whatsoever. Additionally, anyone using a gun for defense must be ready to kill. Such a posture is antithetical to the term “evangelical,” which refers to the “evangel,” or gospel. The gospel begins with God’s love for every human, and calls on Christians to be more Christ-like. At no time did Jesus use deadly force. Although he once allowed his disciples to defend themselves with “a sword,” that permission came with a limitation on the number of weapons they could possess. Numerous Bible passages, such as Exodus 22:2-3, strictly limit the use of deadly force. The referenced passage makes an absurd restriction of the use of deadly force. The passage refers to killing a thief, when in fact the issue is breaking into a residence, which in some states is cause for use of deadly force. Unfortunately, too many evangelicals ignore this. Instead, they jump on a secular bandwagon of fear mongering, contempt and bravado to gin up support for gun rights. Evangelical Sen. Ted Cruz, who I’ve prayed with several times, has said, “You don’t get rid of the bad guys by getting rid of our guns. You get rid of the bad guys by using our guns.” Sarah Palin, who I know and once supported, told an annual meeting of NRA members, “Nowadays, ammo is expensive. Don’t waste a bullet on a warning shot.” And Jerry Falwell Jr., president of Liberty University (one of the largest evangelical institutions in the world), called on his students to arm themselves in the wake of terrorist shootings. He joked about carrying a gun in his back pocket and made light of killing Muslims. (He later said he meant only Muslim terrorists, but his comments received lots of whoops and applause.) As well they should have. In the DC enclave, you are extremely likely to ignore the existential threat Islam poses to Liberty in the US, especially if our own politicians, policy makers and journalists are, as I believe they have been, receiving monies from foreign sources to destroy religious and civil liberties, and aid in the imposition of a hostile foreign religion. To me, turning from Christian to secular sources on a paramount moral question indicates a failure in faith. The words of Cruz, Palin and Falwell seem to contradict those of Jesus Christ, who commands believers to “bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you.” Good Biblical sentiment, lousy public policy. The response to my public comments on this spiritual crisis has, at times, been fiercely negative. Some have accused me of “siding with the enemy” or even aiding those that are annihilating Christians in the Middle East. A former supporter suggested that I’d been “bought” by George Soros, who has never offered me money. I wouldn’t take it if he had. In fact, airing my concern has only cost my organization financial support. Good. Despite this criticism, I won’t be silent on this issue. The Christian gospel should quell our fears and remind us of our Christ-like obligation to love all people, even those who intend us harm. This generous view of the world calls us to demonstrate God’s love toward others, regardless of who they are, where they come from or what religion they practice. Assuming a permanently defensive posture against others, especially when it includes a willingness to kill, is inimical to a life of faith. If my pastor to told me to love and accept a religion or an individual that unabashedly advocates not just my own personal demise and the destruction of the social institutions that preserve and advance religious and civil liberties, but those of people I am sworn to protect, I would have to find another pastor. The impulse to protect oneself is natural, especially after terrorist attacks. But evangelicals must be careful that the noble language of self-defense is not used to cloak a more insidious lust for revenge. St. Paul wrote to persecuted Christians, “Do not take revenge, my dear friends, but leave room for God’s wrath, for it is written: ‘It is mine to avenge; I will repay.’” We must turn away from our fears, base human instincts and prejudices, and turn toward the example of Jesus in word and deed. Not revenge. Retribution.
| |
| Posted by:badanov |
| #14 I am pro-gun because I am pro-life...MINE I've kept myself alive with firearms for a long time and I do not intend to stop. All of the states can do and say what they want and the emptysuit can issue any executive order he wants but the truth is I will always have a gun and I will always carry a gun. Permit, I don't need no stinking permit. Self defense is a constitutional right and I believe permits are unconstitutional. |
| Posted by: Bill Clinton 2016-01-02 11:36 |
| #13 Age restrictions are discriminatory. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2016-01-02 09:17 |
| #12 Me, too. I used to be in favor of it to age 21, but I think thirty's about right now. |
| Posted by: Fred 2016-01-02 09:06 |
| #11 Well, I'm not "pro-life". In fact, I support "retroactive abortion" in some cases. |
| Posted by: g(r)omgoru 2016-01-02 08:02 |
| #10 rammer, what matters is the original Hebrew, which was subsequently translated into Latin, and thence to English. Here is a succinct but thorough exegesis. But I assert that either your or my translation yields the same spiritual guidance, which is that the death of a thief in the night is not proscribed. Agreed. And so, clearly, would the rabbi at the link, were that question asked him directly. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2016-01-02 07:27 |
| #9 I'm with TopRev, I blame Anabaptists. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2016-01-02 03:35 |
| #8 I Love how these anti-american atheists are such learned theologians. So learned in both Christianity and Islam! No wonder the moslems love them almost as much as we do. |
| Posted by: Nguard 2016-01-02 02:55 |
| #7 TW, I am schooled in Latin, but uncomfortable in the translation subtleties here. My KJV says: Exodus 20:13 Thou shalt not kill. According to Bible Gateway, the New KJV says: Exodus 20:13 “You shall not murder. So, I am not going to disagree with you. But I assert that either your or my translation yields the same spiritual guidance, which is that the death of a thief in the night is not proscribed. |
| Posted by: rammer 2016-01-02 02:38 |
| #6 As for the rest of rammer's argument, not to mention Top Rev's: well said, gentlemen. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2016-01-02 02:00 |
| #5 So, thieves in the night are unprotected by the commandment to not kill. Mistranslation. The commandment is not to murder. All sorts of killings are Biblically not only permitted, but required. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2016-01-02 01:56 |
| #4 Evangelical means "good news." The Gospel of Jesus the Christ is called, in Greek, the evangelium. The "good news" that is the Gospel is freedom from anything (e.g., rules, values) or anyone (e.g., prelates) that/who would come between God and any person. So, a person who wants to defend themself and/or their family or friends or even a stranger with a firearm or any other weapon is practicing the Gospel. And, Jesus the Christ did too use violence when He deemed appropriate, as against the money-changers and as His curse upon the whole of Jerusalem for rejecting His offer of freedom, a curse made palpable by Titus in 72 AD. I out-rank this moron, who is really a political activist, in pedigree and position and declare him an insane, lying, anti-Christian self-promoter. The tip-off is in the first sentence of his third paragraph: his words "gun violence." There is no such thing. Never has been, never will be. Someone paid him good money to write this charlatan's nonsense. Who today call themselves evangelicals descend from the Left Wing of the Reformation, from Anabaptists. Their forebears always have fought the rule of law and argued for the rule of whim, which they call Divine Inspiration. |
| Posted by: TopRev 2016-01-02 01:48 |
| #3 No. Pro-life is about protecting the innocent. Pro-gun is about protecting the innocent. We begin with the KJV on the sited passage Exodus 22:2-3... 22:2 If a thief be found breaking up, and be smitten that he die, there shall no blood be shed for him. So, thieves in the night are unprotected by the commandment to not kill. Next... 22:3 If the sun be risen upon him (the thief), there shall be blood shed for him (the thief); for he (the thief) should make full restitution; if he (the thief) have nothing, then he (the thief) shall be sold for his theft. So, if a thief is killed while breaking up during the day, the person having killed the thief is liable for preventing the thief from making restitution for his crimes or being sold into slavery for his crime, but is not liable for having killed the thief. Sounds like a civil matter of money and restitution, not a religious one. For discussions about just wars and civil responsibility of the Christian, pursue the writings of Saint Augustine, based on Romans 13-4, discussing the enforcement of the (civil) law through the authority of the government (Caesar), which in the USofA is in part enforced by the militia including all males 17-45, 10 U.S. Code § 311. 4 For the one in authority is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. So, doing wrong invites the representatives of the ruler to open up a righteous can of wrathful whoop-ass on you and the Secular penalties to those representatives are as described by Secular law, which is sometimes sad for Police in Baltimore, but is much less bad for homeowners in Detroit. But no matter what the Secular law is, in this area of punishing wrong-doers, scripture is clear that "rulers do not bear the sword for no reason." So, this entire article is hogwash. |
| Posted by: rammer 2016-01-02 01:09 |
| #2 What you will expect from WPost? So i guess i can't be pro-life and be pro-life. Since life always ends in death. |
| Posted by: Lionel Thoth9784 2016-01-02 01:09 |
| #1 Pacifism works less well when one is surrounded by danger. |
| Posted by: Super Hose 2016-01-02 00:45 |