• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Presbyterian 101 - A General Guide to the Facts About the PCUSA - Gun Control

Doug Huffman

Banned
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
9,180
Location
Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin,
imported post

http://www.pcusa.org/101/101-gun.htm

Gun Control
The Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) has a thirty year history of support for gun control legislation. Beginning in the late 1960's, in response to the assassinations of public leaders, the General Assembly called for ". . . control [of] the sale and possession of fire arms of all kinds."[sup]1[/sup] In 1976, this statement was re-affirmed, but also specifically worded to ". . .not cover shotguns and rifles used legitimately by sportsmen. . .".[sup]2[/sup] In 1988, these and other statements supporting gun control were again reaffirmed.
rule_gold.gif


A fuller statement was approved in 1990. In it, the General Assembly went on record as:
Support[ing] gun control at federal, state, and local levels as the most effective response to the present crisis of gun violence. . .
Call[ing] upon the United States government to establish meaningful and effective federal legislation to regulate the importation, manufacture, sale, and possession of guns and ammunition by the general public. Such legislation should include provisions for the registration and licensing of gun purchasers and owners, appropriate background investigations and waiting periods prior to gun purchase, and regulation of subsequent sale.
Urg[ing] the enactment of similar state and local laws, should such federal legislation be delayed.
Call[ing] upon government agencies at all levels to provide significant assistance to victims of gun violence and their families.[sup]3[/sup]
rule_gold.gif

In 1998, the General Assembly added to its policy by calling on all Presbyterians to:​
intentionally work toward removing handguns and assault weapons from our homes and our communities; and
seek ways to develop community strategies and create sanctuaries of safety for our children, so that all of our children may come to identify and value themselves and others as the precious children of the family of God that they are, and that they may come to learn peace for their lives and peace for this generation.[sup]4[/sup]
rule_gold.gif


Endnotes:
1. Minutes of the 116th General Assembly (1976), Presbyterian Church in the United States, p. 103.
2. Minutes of the 128th General Assembly (1988), Presbyterian Church in the United States, p. 209.
[align=left]3. Minutes of the 202nd General Assembly (1990), Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), pp. 605-606. [/align] [align=left]4. Commissioners’ Resolution 98-19, 210[sup]th[/sup] General Assembly (1998), Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.).[/align]
 

deepdiver

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
5,820
Location
Southeast, Missouri, USA
imported post

I was once a very active member of the Presbyterian church. I was a delegate to the 126th General Assembly at which the gun issue finally passed in 1988 was debated. It was hotly debated by a handful of us and the the general membership essentially called us war mongering baby killers. Within 4 months of coming home I withdrew my membership from the church for that and other policitical, non-faith based positions into which the church was insinuating itself.

Within a year my brother withdrew his membership and my parents finally did the same several years later as the leftist positions on non-faith related issues continued to pile up in the church. Sad. Lots of fond memories and good friends in that church. If church's could stick to God and faith and STFU about things that do not involve the Church (individual members can do whatever the hell they want as individual citizens) I don't think we would have seen the great decline in church membership over the years.

Cliff's Notes: Bunch of leftists in charge. I didn't leave the church it left me.
 

GLENGLOCKER

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2007
Messages
558
Location
VA Beach, Virginia, USA
imported post

I have researched the Catholic, Methodist, Lutherian, Episcopalian and many other of the denominational churches and there all anti-gun, pro UN and on the left side of many other social issues. Last year the Methodists agreed on a policy to encourage the US to do away with our military and give the money to poor people. The real estate agent I had last year was a devout Presbyterian. I tried several times to draw him out into political disscussions to no avail. He was a great agent, got me good deal on my house but I think we were polar opposites on a lot of issues.
 

sjalterego

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 16, 2008
Messages
84
Location
, ,
imported post

GLENGLOCKER wrote:
The real estate agent I had last year was a devout Presbyterian. I tried several times to draw him out into political disscussions to no avail. He was a great agent, got me good deal on my house but I think we were polar opposites on a lot of issues.
IF you had managed to draw him out would you then have been mad at him for having opposite views?
 

imperialism2024

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2007
Messages
3,047
Location
Catasauqua, Pennsylvania, USA
imported post

GLENGLOCKER wrote:
I have researched the Catholic, Methodist, Lutherian, Episcopalian and many other of the denominational churches and there all anti-gun, pro UN and on the left side of many other social issues. Last year the Methodists agreed on a policy to encourage the US to do away with our military and give the money to poor people. The real estate agent I had last year was a devout Presbyterian. I tried several times to draw him out into political disscussions to no avail. He was a great agent, got me good deal on my house but I think we were polar opposites on a lot of issues.
I'll try to say this as gently as I can...

But doesn't organized religion have the same goals as government? That is, exert the most power over the people, and get them to unquestioningly follow the leadership. So, a push for gun control seems only logical. Remove power (or the illusion of power) from the little man, and you reinforce the authority of the leadership. Thus... it doesn't surprise me that most organized religions are anti-gun.
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
imported post

imperialism2024 wrote:
GLENGLOCKER wrote:
SNIP I have researched the Catholic, Methodist...
I'll try to say this as gently as I can...

But doesn't organized religion have the same goals as government? That is, exert the most power over the people, and get them to unquestioningly follow the leadership. So, a push for gun control seems only logical. Remove power (or the illusion of power) from the little man, and you reinforce the authority of the leadership. Thus... it doesn't surprise me that most organized religions are anti-gun.

Bingo!

Pretty close I'd say. The only distinction I would make is that religious philosophy and doctrine wouldn't have control as a goal, so much as the memberswho can't receive the philosophy and doctrine into their heart.

What's needed isa religious philosophy thatpromotes freedom and has doctrine supporting it, both internally and externally.

In the meantime, just point out that they'd better support allthe Bill of Rights becausetheir religious freedom is already under steady assault. If #2 goes under the secular wheels, religion won't have a chance. Unless they want to do the whole emigration thing again---to Antartica.
 

falcon1

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2007
Messages
124
Location
, Tennessee, USA
imported post

From the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod website (LCMS is generally thought to be one of the more conservative Lutheran denominations):

Defending Ourselves
Q. I am dealing with a non-Christian at work, he says he can't be a Christian because we aren't allowed to defend ourselves. Do you have anything I can use?
A. Tell your friend that the Christian church (including the Lutheran church) has never held that the Bible teaches that Christians are not allowed to defend themselves. This view is based on a misunderstanding of passages such as Luke 6:29 and Matt. 5:39, which are speaking of the Christian's overall attitude toward enemies and persecutors, not giving practical advice for dealing with any and every specific situation in life.

http://www.lcms.org/pages/internal.asp?NavID=2164


I did a rudimentary search for "gun control" and "guns" on the site, and while I found articles which decried violence, I did not personally see any which blamed the firearm itself (although I might have missed one). I believe some Lutheran groups are indeed "anti-," but I have never felt LCMS was (although that may be a function of locality as well). OMO, YMMV. :)
 

jcman

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2007
Messages
23
Location
, Colorado, USA
imported post

I've asked my pastor about it before (I'm LCMS), and he's said the same thing. You're absolutely allowed to defend yourself, and if you feel comforatable using a firearm to do so, go for it. When this was first posted, I went for a search of the passage of selling your cloak to buy a sword. I came across this essay describing the passage, as well as the turn the other cheek, quite well:

http://home.earthlink.net/~ronrhodes/qselfdefense.html


Read the last passage as well. It can be considered a sin to actually NOT stop someone committing murder, rape, etc...
 

GLENGLOCKER

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2007
Messages
558
Location
VA Beach, Virginia, USA
imported post

jcman wrote:
I've asked my pastor about it before (I'm LCMS), and he's said the same thing. You're absolutely allowed to defend yourself, and if you feel comforatable using a firearm to do so, go for it. When this was first posted, I went for a search of the passage of selling your cloak to buy a sword. I came across this essay describing the passage, as well as the turn the other cheek, quite well:

http://home.earthlink.net/~ronrhodes/qselfdefense.html


Read the last passage as well. It can be considered a sin to actually NOT stop someone committing murder, rape, etc...
Google, more truthfull then some pastors

http://blogs.rep-am.com/matters_of_faith/?p=149
 

falcon1

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2007
Messages
124
Location
, Tennessee, USA
imported post

GLENGLOCKER wrote:
jcman wrote:
I've asked my pastor about it before (I'm LCMS), and he's said the same thing. You're absolutely allowed to defend yourself, and if you feel comforatable using a firearm to do so, go for it. When this was first posted, I went for a search of the passage of selling your cloak to buy a sword. I came across this essay describing the passage, as well as the turn the other cheek, quite well:

http://home.earthlink.net/~ronrhodes/qselfdefense.html


Read the last passage as well. It can be considered a sin to actually NOT stop someone committing murder, rape, etc...
Google, more truthfull then some pastors

http://blogs.rep-am.com/matters_of_faith/?p=149
The ELCA and the LC-MS are not the same groups. The ELCA was formed by the merger of ELIM, ALC, and LCA in the seventies or so. LC-MS is a distinct entity.
 

Tomahawk

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2006
Messages
5,117
Location
4 hours south of HankT, ,
imported post

From the late Pope John Paul II's Evangelium Vitae:
....Yet from the beginning, faced with the many and often tragic cases which occur in the life of individuals and society, Christian reflection has sought a fuller and deeper understanding of what God's commandment prohibits and prescribes. [suP]43[/suP] There are in fact situations in which values proposed by God's Law seem to involve a genuine paradox. This happens for example in the case of legitimate defence, in which the right to protect one's own life and the duty not to harm someone else's life are difficult to reconcile in practice. Certainly, the intrinsic value of life and the duty to love oneself no less than others are the basis of a true right to self-defence. The demanding commandment of love of neighbour, set forth in the Old Testament and confirmed by Jesus, itself presupposes love of oneself as the basis of comparison: "You shall love your neighbour as yourself" (Mk 12:31). Consequently, no one can renounce the right to self-defence out of lack of love for life or for self....

....

Moreover, "legitimate defence can be not only a right but a grave duty for someone responsible for another's life, the common good of the family or of the State". [suP]44[/suP] Unfortunately it happens that the need to render the aggressor incapable of causing harm sometimes involves taking his life. In this case, the fatal outcome is attributable to the aggressor whose action brought it about, even though he may not be morally responsible because of a lack of the use of reason [suP]45[/suP]...
When dealing with various bishops, of course, you may get a different story.
 

MetalChris

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2007
Messages
1,215
Location
SW Ohio
imported post

springerdave wrote:
The words written in red in Luke told me to sell my robe an buy swords.I bought an XD, a KEL TEC, and two Smith & Wesson "Swords".
I like it!
 

Dustin

Regular Member
Joined
May 28, 2008
Messages
1,723
Location
Lake Charles Area, Louisiana, USA
imported post

imperialism2024 wrote:
I'll try to say this as gently as I can...

But doesn't organized religion have the same goals as government? That is, exert the most power over the people, and get them to unquestioningly follow the leadership. So, a push for gun control seems only logical. Remove power (or the illusion of power) from the little man, and you reinforce the authority of the leadership. Thus... it doesn't surprise me that most organized religions are anti-gun.



You are GROSSLY misinformed.

Some religions are, but Christians are not like this at all.

If you would like to learn more you can go here - p-o-o-p.org

Otherwise this can get off topic quick.
 

JosephMingle

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2008
Messages
110
Location
Yorktown VA
imported post

imperialism2024 wrote:
GLENGLOCKER wrote:
I have researched the Catholic, [...]
I'll try to say this as gently as I can...

But doesn't organized religion have the same goals as government? That is, exert the most power over the people, and get them to unquestioningly follow the leadership. So, a push for gun control seems only logical. Remove power (or the illusion of power) from the little man, and you reinforce the authority of the leadership. Thus... it doesn't surprise me that most organized religions are anti-gun.

Imperialism2024, I appreciate your caveat. However, “organized religion” and government do not have the same goals. The problem with regard to “gun control” and churches has to do with the power of corruption and the innate nature of man which is outwardly demonstrated in the manner in which he attempts to influence or control an object, individual or organization.

As regards Christianity, true Christianity is not concerned with man’s opinion but truth. If one claims to be a Christian they must be able to demonstrate the soundness of their doctrine from an immutable truth – Scripture. Man has a moral right to defend himself as well as a wider obligation to defend those unable to defend themselves. In Paul’s first letter to Timothy (1 Timothy 5:8) the eminent Apostle said, “But if anyone does not provide for his own, and especially for those of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.” In context Paul was instructing Timothy on provision (food and shelter) for parents, and widows in particular. But it is not unreasonable to apply the obligation for provision of the family to that of defense. Some might argue with me, but if one believes providing food and shelter for widows is of greater value over against providing for the defense of your loved one’s against evil, I’ll simply pass on responding to such senselessness.

Though having said this, I recognize that many who identify themselves as Christian know little to nothing of Christ’s teachings… or Scripture in general for that matter. But that’s a different topic and well outside the purpose and intent of OpenCarry.org
 

JosephMingle

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2008
Messages
110
Location
Yorktown VA
imported post

Citizen wrote:
imperialism2024 wrote:
GLENGLOCKER wrote:
SNIP I have researched the Catholic, Methodist [...]
I'll try to say this as gently as I can...

But doesn't organized religion have the same goals as government? [...]

Bingo!

Pretty close I'd say. The only distinction I would make is that religious philosophy and doctrine wouldn't have control as a goal, so much as the memberswho can't receive the philosophy and doctrine into their heart.

What's needed isa religious philosophy thatpromotes freedom and has doctrine supporting it, both internally and externally.

In the meantime, just point out that they'd better support allthe Bill of Rights becausetheir religious freedom is already under steady assault. If #2 goes under the secular wheels, religion won't have a chance. Unless they want to do the whole emigration thing again---to Antartica.

Citizen,

I certainly agree with you (if I’m reading your reply to Imperialism2024 correctly, see my other post). The history behind and purpose of our Nation’s founding has been abused and undermined by revisionist historians for decades. There are a number of sound published works based on primary source documents that demonstrate that, though in violation of Paul’s Epistle to the Romans and some of his other letters which addressed submission to state authorities, our Nation was built upon an architecture of freedoms gleaned from the Bible and our founder’s understanding of God ordained rights.

Two works I’d recommend that present this plainly and precisely are “Original Intent: The Courts, the Constitution, & Religion” by David Barton and “The Christian Life and Character of the Civil Institutions of The United States” by Benjamin F. Morris. Mr. Morris’ work is a huge volume of 1060 pages originally published in 1864. Much of Mr. Morris’ work is comprised of transcribed letters, executive orders, and debates and such – some of which are no longer available but were when originally published – so it’s not simply a lengthy treatise of his opinion. Of Mr. Barton’s work, 184 pages of the 534 page book are committed to appendix (Declaration of Independence and Constitution), biographical sketches and end notes.

I commend both works to anyone who wants a better understanding of how this great Nation came about without a revisionist’s hand at work. Both these authors rely on primary sources not some new interpretation of what happened 200+ years ago.
 
Top