View Poll Results: In your opinion, is Jesus Pro-2nd Amendmant or Anti-2nd Amendment?

Voters
14. You may not vote on this poll
  • Pro

    13 92.86%
  • Anti

    1 7.14%
Results 1 to 23 of 23

Thread: Jesus Pro-2nd Amendment?

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Northern Arizona, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    131

    Post imported post

    Ok, so I saw a picture on the internet of Jesus holding an AR15... It was this crappy version



    So I decided to photo edit a better version and this is the finished producted



    ....I showed some of my friends (who are both Pro-2A and Christian) and some were offended and called me a sinner.... So I wrote them a little letter explaining as to why I feel this picture NOT to be sack-religious (for those of you who are religious), and it went like this (just thought it would be interesting to share with all of you):

    Who isn't a sinner on this earth? Besides, how does Jesus holding an AR15 insinuate that I'm a sinner? They didn't have guns back in those days... But the sword was the AR-15 of that era in time. The best in technology back then.

    Jesus said to his apostles in Matt 10:34 "Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword." Jesus obviously knew that arming the righteous would bring forth the righteous (law abiding citizens).

    He told us in Luke 22:36 that if we cant afford to arm ourselves, we should sell our belongings in order to arm our selves. Both in the Old Testament and the New Testament the scriptures state that we should not just sit around around watch our homes being broken into by thieves, but should defend our property and our own family.

    In 1 Tim 5:8 it says "But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel. " It would be absurd to buy a house, furnish it with food and facilities for one's family, and then refuse to install locks and provide the means to protect the family and the property.

    In Exodus 22:2 and Matt 24:43 states that if a thief was caught breaking in and was killed, there should be no punishment to he who defended their home and their family. Because the "goodman" of the house shall not "suffer his house to be broken up" or else you have denied the faith and are worse than an infidel.

    To better demonstrate the biblical heritage of individuals bearing and keeping arms, during David's time in the wilderness avoiding capture by Saul, "David said to his men, 'Every man gird on his sword.' So every man girded on his sword, and David also girded on his sword" (1 Samuel 25:13). This also shows the Lord's approval for those in defense of evil to bear and keep arms.

    Finally, consider Nehemiah and those who rebuilt the gates and walls of Jerusalem. They were both builders and defenders. Each man and each servant were armed with his own weapon.
    "They which builded on the wall, and they that bare burdens, with those that laded, every one with one of his hands wrought in the work, and with the other hand held a weapon. For the builders, every one had his sword girded by his side, and so builded. And he that sounded the trumpet was by me." (Nehemiah 4:17-18).

    So by calling me a sinner just because I created a photo of Jesus holding a firearm, doesn't really constitute any sense on your behalf. Sure, Jesus did not need to ever use a firearm. Even when Peter tried defending Jesus with a sword when the high priest and his servants came for Jesus, Peter cut off the ear of the servant Malchus. When that happen, Jesus told Peter to put his sword away (not to get rid of it for good). Why did Jesus prevent Peter from defending him? Obviously because "for this purpose" He has come... If Jesus were defended, then He wouldn't have been able to fulfill his purpose on earth.

    Though considering biblical background and His historic views on the right to bear and keep arms, I'm sure if Jesus was didn't have the purpose of dieing for our sins, He would have let Peter defend him with deadly force.... If not even do it him self. We already know that the Lord has already 2,301,417 confirmed kills (not including the unspecified number people he had killed in floods, Sodom and Gomorrah, slaughters, etc.) and the estimate of His grand total kill count would be around 34,000,000 people.

    Having said that, I'm pretty sure He wouldn't hesitate to use deadly force to protect Himself, His family, or even the righteous. But considering His purpose here on earth, it would have been obtrusively fatuous to defend Himself.

    As you can see, His history shows that He is Pro-2nd Amendment and would justify the means of deadly force if necessary to protect the lives of the innocent.

    "I will make mine arrows drunk with blood, and my sword shall devour flesh; and that with the blood of the slain and of the captives, from the beginning of revenges upon the enemy." ---- Deuteronomy 32:42

  2. #2
    Regular Member hp-hobo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Manchester State Forest, SC
    Posts
    399

    Post imported post

    In twenty words or less, tell us how this relates to open carry in any way. It isn't even really 2A related. It's you telling us about your religious beliefs. I think I can speak for many of the members here when I say, we don't care. Some things are better kept to yourself.

    This forum is beginning to go down the crapper.
    "The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun, is a good guy with a gun."

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    303

    Post imported post

    So do you think Gandalf was Pro-2A, or perhaps would have become more so after his encounter with the balrog?

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Falls Church, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    392

    Post imported post

    Il_Duce wrote:
    So do you think Gandalf was Pro-2A, or perhaps would have become more so after his encounter with the balrog?
    More important -- would Saruman have dared invade the Shire if the hobbits had all been packin'?

    Edit: spelling

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Nampa, Idaho, USA
    Posts
    1,096

    Post imported post

    WWJD? Defend himself! I have heard the argument about Him telling Peter not to resist after cutting off the Roman soldiers ear also. But, I believe that was for fulfillment not for the general populace.

    Not related to open carry or 2nd amendment? IMHO, I think it relates to both and especially me. You don't have to follow the thread if you are offended.

    What does Gandolf have to do with anything? Many think that would not apply to the forum also, but, I think it would be a great discussion! How about leaving this thread for us to discuss Jesus and the 2nd amendment starting a new thread with that topic. I have seen all the movies so far and think they would be a great discussion!
    Chuck Norris/Ted Nugent That's the ticket for 2016!

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Rockingham, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    861

    Post imported post

    carracer wrote:
    WWJD? Defend himself! I have heard the argument about Him telling Peter not to resist after cutting off the Roman soldiers ear also. But, I believe that was for fulfillment not for the general populace.

    Not related to open carry or 2nd amendment? IMHO, I think it relates to both and especially me. You don't have to follow the thread if you are offended.



    This historical record including the original testament does discuss Open Carrying and self defense throughout .

    Atheism is a belief system with zero reason for being . Atheist believe in no thing . The natural process of faithleading tohopeand then to knowledge is hendered in all aspects of learning . Emotionallyand socially such atheist individuals have no thing .







  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Northern Arizona, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    131

    Post imported post

    hp-hobo wrote:
    In twenty words or less, tell us how this relates to open carry in any way. It isn't even really 2A related. It's you telling us about your religious beliefs. I think I can speak for many of the members here when I say, we don't care. Some things are better kept to yourself.

    This forum is beginning to go down the crapper.
    That's why this is in the "General Discussion" area. You read the thread title, if you are offended then you shouldn't have clicked on it. For some of us, this is a legit thing to discuss and will help us further spread out cause for 2A rights not just to one, but to many kindred and tongues throughout the world. You should be joyous that someone would actually be willing to do more work than you to help our 2A rights. If we can shed some light from all angles (not just from political and lawful angles) and maybe show them from a religious angle, they might be more intrigued to hear our message about 2A rights.

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Rockingham, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    861

    Post imported post

    carracer wrote:
    WWJD? Defend himself !
    Open Carry and crossdraw was the order of the day for the Apostles .



  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    ParkHills, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    970

    Post imported post

    Preach on brother !!:celebrate

  10. #10
    Regular Member hp-hobo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Manchester State Forest, SC
    Posts
    399

    Post imported post

    rolexbenz190e wrote:
    That's why this is in the "General Discussion" area. You read the thread title, if you are offended then you shouldn't have clicked on it. For some of us, this is a legit thing to discuss and will help us further spread out cause for 2A rights not just to one, but to many kindred and tongues throughout the world. You should be joyous that someone would actually be willing to do more work than you to help our 2A rights. If we can shed some light from all angles (not just from political and lawful angles) and maybe show them from a religious angle, they might be more intrigued to hear our message about 2A rights.
    Here, let me help you out with some facts...

    1. Nowhere in my post does it say that I'm offended, unless you can read something that I can't. I know you think itstrengthens your argument by stating that I'm offended by your belief that you're exercising your First Amendment right, but you'd be wrong on two counts. First, you have no rights on a privately owned forum and second, I'm not offended. The only thing that offends me so far is you trying to put words into my mouth.

    2. It's wonderful that you put this in the general discussion area, but that really doesn't matter. Why? Try reading the "basic rules" as written by the forum owner(s);

    "NOTE: This is not a general discussion web site - even the thread for "general discussions" must be fairly related to open carry,firearms and gun rights. Please police your own posts before posting them and help keep OCDO strong and focussed. If you think the post is questionable, please don't post it. Thanks!"


    and more specifically stated;

    "2) Since we are a site dedicated to open carry,firearms and gun rights, all posts should relate substantially to one of these topics, even if your comments pertain mainly to freedom andliberty. OCDO is not a general discussion forum on polticis, religion, the current President, etc. Take that somewhere else!"

    The bolded words aren't mine. Now I could be wrong, my wife tells me I am all the time, but I'm pretty sure his wishes trump yours every time. Your original post is essentially about your religious beliefs and secondarily about guns and 2A. And it has nothing to do with OC. Don't for a second think this is just about you or religion.It's not. Your post was just the one that got me to the point that I had to say something. This forum has in the recent past begun to have more and more BS content and less OC/CC/2A content. Like it or don't, John is right. We need to keep OCDO strong and focused and lose the clutter. Your thread misses the mark by a mile, and the fact that I've added to it trying to correct the problem just makes it worse.

    Have agreat day.

    ETA: Because of that final fact, this will be my last post in this thread.
    "The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun, is a good guy with a gun."

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Northern Arizona, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    131

    Post imported post

    R a Z o R wrote:
    carracer wrote:
    WWJD? Defend himself !
    Open Carry and crossdraw was the order of the day for the Apostles .

    I never even thought about that, its true though! Cross draw was an overall preference for drawing their weapon since pulling a 3ft-4ft sword from your strong side would be quite difficult. It was also more tactical to cross draw with a sword considering the draw from the sword's sheath could be used to cut scross someones belly or torso. So is anyone in favor that Jesus and God are pro 2A?

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Northern Arizona, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    131

    Post imported post

    hp-hobo wrote:
    rolexbenz190e wrote:
    That's why this is in the "General Discussion" area. You read the thread title, if you are offended then you shouldn't have clicked on it. For some of us, this is a legit thing to discuss and will help us further spread out cause for 2A rights not just to one, but to many kindred and tongues throughout the world. You should be joyous that someone would actually be willing to do more work than you to help our 2A rights. If we can shed some light from all angles (not just from political and lawful angles) and maybe show them from a religious angle, they might be more intrigued to hear our message about 2A rights.
    Here, let me help you out with some facts...

    1. Nowhere in my post does it say that I'm offended, unless you can read something that I can't. I know you think itstrengthens your argument by stating that I'm offended by your belief that you're exercising your First Amendment right, but you'd be wrong on two counts. First, you have no rights on a privately owned forum and second, I'm not offended. The only thing that offends me so far is you trying to put words into my mouth.

    2. It's wonderful that you put this in the general discussion area, but that really doesn't matter. Why? Try reading the "basic rules" as written by the forum owner(s);

    "NOTE: This is not a general discussion web site - even the thread for "general discussions" must be fairly related to open carry,firearms and gun rights. Please police your own posts before posting them and help keep OCDO strong and focussed. If you think the post is questionable, please don't post it. Thanks!"


    and more specifically stated;

    "2) Since we are a site dedicated to open carry,firearms and gun rights, all posts should relate substantially to one of these topics, even if your comments pertain mainly to freedom andliberty. OCDO is not a general discussion forum on polticis, religion, the current President, etc. Take that somewhere else!"

    The bolded words aren't mine. Now I could be wrong, my wife tells me I am all the time, but I'm pretty sure his wishes trump yours every time. Your original post is essentially about your religious beliefs and secondarily about guns and 2A. And it has nothing to do with OC. Don't for a second think this is just about you or religion.It's not. Your post was just the one that got me to the point that I had to say something. This forum has in the recent past begun to have more and more BS content and less OC/CC/2A content. Like it or don't, John is right. We need to keep OCDO strong and focused and lose the clutter. Your thread misses the mark by a mile, and the fact that I've added to it trying to correct the problem just makes it worse.

    Have agreat day.

    ETA: Because of that final fact, this will be my last post in this thread.
    Now you are putting words in my mouth saying "my beliefs" have no room in this forum. Nowhere did I say that I'm Christian or any kind of religious fanatic. All I said was "Is Jesus and God pro 2A"? I could be athiest, I could be muslim, I could be agnostic, etc. Who knows? I'm just bringing up strong points for those who ARE christian or wonder about the stance of those who are Holy on 2A rights.

    The discussion is NOT about religious beliefs, it is about 2A rights and the belief to carry. We are referring to God and Jesus as people who also have rights and beliefs. Just because someone might talk about Muhammad Ali doesn't mean they are talking about boxing. Just because someone talks about Bill Gates doesn't mean we are talking about the Microsoft Corporation. Get my drift? We are talking about 2A rights as stated in the title of this thread and stated also in the first post of the thread.

    We are merely talking about the thoughts of Jesus and God on the subject of the 2nd Amandment. I'm not seing any religious chatter going on here about being saved or anything... Purely 2A. So lets please get back on subject

    SOOOOOOOOOOOOO Having said that... more opinions on Jesus and God being 2A activists like us? :P

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Centennial, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    1,412

    Post imported post

    Making some tenuous connection between a random topic and OC/2A does NOT make it an appropriate topic for this board. If you try hard enough you can make some sort of vague connection to any topic, but John and Mike have made it quite clear that they do not want just any topic on their board.

    This forum could really do with some more moderation. I'm not going to blame John and Mike for the lack of it as they have other things to do. The only criticism of them I am wiling to make is that it was/is a bit naive of them to think that trusting the members to moderate themselves would actually work for a large forum.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    , Texas, USA
    Posts
    277

    Post imported post

    I don't think the J man's AR would have been so tacti-cool.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Greenwater, Washington, USA
    Posts
    89

    Post imported post

    Would you two take your bitchin somewhere else?

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    San Angelo, Texas, USA
    Posts
    301

    Post imported post

    Of couse, you are assuming a few things in your post:

    1. there was a jesus and he was the "son of God"

    2. the bible is 100% accurate

    Once these are proven to me, then we can debate if he was pro or anti 2A

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Nampa, Idaho, USA
    Posts
    1,096

    Post imported post

    I don't think proof would be necessary for the sake of discussion. The people that it would matter to can discuss the 2a issue amongst themselves. The rest can debate whether Batman and Superman are pro 2a or not.
    Chuck Norris/Ted Nugent That's the ticket for 2016!

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Northern Arizona, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    131

    Post imported post

    carracer wrote:
    I don't think proof would be necessary for the sake of discussion. The people that it would matter to can discuss the 2a issue amongst themselves. The rest can debate whether Batman and Superman are pro 2a or not.
    Well put carracer! Thats exactly what I was thinking. Doesn't matter if they exist or not. The discussion is about if they are pro-2A or not... We all know The Punisher is pro-2A but he doesn't really exist.

    So can we stay on topic and and talk about whether they are 2A or not? No more mambo jumbo off topic stuff. Strictly 2A in the times of the bible, which Jesus and God happen to be named there. PLEEEEEAASE stay on topic. There, I asked nicely

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    San Angelo, Texas, USA
    Posts
    301

    Post imported post

    I wonder if the flying spaghetti monster and the invisible pink unicorn are pro or anti 2A

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    San Angelo, Texas, USA
    Posts
    301

    Post imported post

    rolexbenz190e wrote:
    carracer wrote:
    I don't think proof would be necessary for the sake of discussion. The people that it would matter to can discuss the 2a issue amongst themselves. The rest can debate whether Batman and Superman are pro 2a or not.
    Well put carracer! Thats exactly what I was thinking. Doesn't matter if they exist or not. The discussion is about if they are pro-2A or not... We all know The Punisher is pro-2A but he doesn't really exist.

    So can we stay on topic and and talk about whether they are 2A or not? No more mambo jumbo off topic stuff. Strictly 2A in the times of the bible, which Jesus and God happen to be named there. PLEEEEEAASE stay on topic. There, I asked nicely
    How can one not exist yet have a pro 2A stance??

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Northern Arizona, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    131

    Post imported post

    cbackous wrote:
    rolexbenz190e wrote:
    carracer wrote:
    I don't think proof would be necessary for the sake of discussion. The people that it would matter to can discuss the 2a issue amongst themselves. The rest can debate whether Batman and Superman are pro 2a or not.
    Well put carracer! Thats exactly what I was thinking. Doesn't matter if they exist or not. The discussion is about if they are pro-2A or not... We all know The Punisher is pro-2A but he doesn't really exist.

    So can we stay on topic and and talk about whether they are 2A or not? No more mambo jumbo off topic stuff. Strictly 2A in the times of the bible, which Jesus and God happen to be named there. PLEEEEEAASE stay on topic. There, I asked nicely
    How can one not exist yet have a pro 2A stance??
    Ok.... this is only for sake of discussion.... So THEORETICALLY speaking, is Jesus and God pro 2A?

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Arlington, VA
    Posts
    377

    Post imported post

    Amen, brother. Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition!

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Centennial, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    1,412

    Post imported post

    How on earth is the theoretical stance of a theoretical person an appropriate topic? Just because you took the old Superman vs. Batman argument and put a twist on it doesn't make it appropriate.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •