Why a Pastor Carries

[ptmccain]

I’m so used to firearms and enjoying shooting them and using them legally, as per the Second Amendment, that I’m always genuinely puzzled when people are surprised, puzzled, offended, angered and in some cases, yes, outraged, to learn I do take full advantage of the rights I have as a US Citizen, including the right to…well, you know…keep and bear…arms. I also bare arms when the weather allows, but that is another post.

The point is that as a Christian, I know that God has given my reason and all my senses. Using that reason and those senses, there is nothing wrong with defending oneself from those who would kill or do bodily injury to me, my family and friends, and neighbors. “Turning the other cheek” is not about legitimate self-defense, but about accepting persecution precisely because of the fact that you are confessing your Faith. Some Christian pacifists do not, and refuse to, understand this point.

Furthermore, as a Lutheran I believe that the commandment “Thou shalt not kill” is about murdering, not killing in legitimate self-defense or defending others, for as we Lutherans explain that commandment we teach that we are to do nothing to hurt or harm our neighbor in his body, but rather help and befriend him in every bodily need or danger to his life and body. That’s pretty straightforward self and explains why I carry.

So, here's a video I made explaining why, and what, I carry:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0WfxkafoA80

[Buckaroo]

Well said!

As a fellow pastor I tell folks that I carry where it is legal.

[Irish]

Nice video. I'd suggest taking a look at some quality aftermarket sights rather than the plastic stock Glock sights.

[TomMcC]

The pacifistic impulse within some parts of Christiandom is quite old and pervasive. I once was talking to a group of Menonite/Anabaptists men (in front of their women and children) about self defense/justifiable killing and they were adamant that, yes they would stand by while their women and children were raped and murdered and not lift a hand to protect them.

[chadbag]

Yes, I agree, the "pacifist" camp amongst Christians I find really annoying. They forget that our body is a temple of God, and Christ gave the example when he cleansed the temple. He did not sit passively there and accept the blasphemous behaviors of the money changers and all that. He made a "whip" and went through and over turned the tables and kicked them all out.

Relate that to your own body as a temple of God and using "violence" to keep it from being defiled.

Also, the mere fact that Peter had a sword to cut of the ear of the servant of the people who came to arrest him shows that Jesus was not against the bearing of arms. AT THAT SPECIFIC MOMENT it was not appropriate to use it since Christ needed to fulfill the atonement, so he told Peter to put it away. But if it were so evil to have, Jesus would have long before told them to get rid of their swords.

--

[WillBrink]

Furthermore, as a Lutheran I believe that the commandment “Thou shalt not kill” is about murdering, not killing in legitimate self-defense or defending others,

I'm not a religious man, but I say good for you sir, and there's nothing (as you know) "un Christian" about defending yourself from those who would do you harm/evil. :cool:

[TomMcC]

Yes, I agree, the "pacifist" camp amongst Christians I find really annoying. They forget that our body is a temple of God, and Christ gave the example when he cleansed the temple. He did not sit passively there and accept the blasphemous behaviors of the money changers and all that. He made a "whip" and went through and over turned the tables and kicked them all out.

Relate that to your own body as a temple of God and using "violence" to keep it from being defiled.

Also, the mere fact that Peter had a sword to cut of the ear of the servant of the people who came to arrest him shows that Jesus was not against the bearing of arms. AT THAT SPECIFIC MOMENT it was not appropriate to use it since Christ needed to fulfill the atonement, so he told Peter to put it away. But if it were so evil to have, Jesus would have long before told them to get rid of their swords.

--

Oh yeah I mentioned those scenes, they said Jesus actually whipped the animals not the changers. I also pointed out that Jesus TOLD his disciples to get swords. One of the women said "that's right he did" then no one said anything more.

[loganp0916]

I'm not a religious man, but I say good for you sir, and there's nothing (as you know) "un Christian" about defending yourself from those who would do you harm/evil. :cool:

+1
I am not religious either but it is good to see a pastor that has some sense. Unlike the stereotypical Christian folks such as the ones that you mentioned that doubt your faith.

[chadbag]

Oh yeah I mentioned those scenes, they said Jesus actually whipped the animals not the changers.


Not that it actually changes the argument, since he still used violence even under their interpretation, but did you ask how they knew this? In John it says (again KJV) (John 2:15)

"And when he had made a scourge of small cords, he drove them all out of the temple, and the sheep, and the oxen; and poured out the changers' money, and overthrew the tables;"

In Matthew (again KJV) (Matt 21:12)

"And Jesus went into the temple of God, and cast out all them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers, and the seats of them that sold doves;"

So (and this is not directed at you TomMcC but for you to use as a counter argument), where exactly do they know this that he only exhibited violence to the animals and not the actual money changers and others defiling the temple? Not from the Bible (in fact, in John, it says " he drove them all out of the temple, and the sheep, and the oxen; " with a big AND in there, so he drove the ANIMALS and the miscreants defiling the temple with his scourge.)



I also pointed out that Jesus TOLD his disciples to get swords. One of the women said "that's right he did" then no one said anything more.

Good point as well.

My take is that I have a stewardship over my own self, as well as a father and husband over my family as well, being responsible for their protection and to keep them and their temples (bodies) from being defiled. I do not seek out trouble, but if it comes to me, I try and end it in my favor, protecting my family and other innocents that may be threatened at the same time.


--

[The_War_Wagon]

Never would've guessed you a member here also, Brother McCain. Glad to see we waste time together in a lot of the same places. :p