Knowing that the good folks of SBC Voices tend to sometimes skip the main course (the article) and go right to dessert (the comment section), let me make some clarifications at the start of this post, which hopefully will be read by all!
1. I love Liberty University. My second son attended there, and I tried to get his younger brother and sister to follow in his footsteps. His little brother got involved in a band and didn’t want to leave town. His little sister rebelled against her father’s wishes and last May graduated with honors from that bastion of liberalism, Cedarville University. But my #2 son walked on campus for a visit over 10 years ago and fell in love immediately – he was home. That school helped to shape him into the man he is today. He found a wife there and gave me the two finest grandsons any man could ever have (any attempts to debate that will met with the harshest moderation). I will forever be grateful to Liberty University for the impact it had on my son’s life.
On the other hand, I’ve been disturbed at times since young Jerry took over. On June 25, 2010, he told Mormon Glenn Beck,
“I mean, that’s what my father believed when he formed Moral Majority, was an organization of Mormons, Catholics, Protestants, Jews, people of no faith. And there are bigger issues now, we can argue about theology later after we save the country.”
If Beck were Presbyterian or Assembly or such, I would give a hearty amen to that, but to say that “saving the country” supersedes fundamental, gospel doctrine? That is disturbing. We must never make the gospel secondary to political gain. I wonder if the son has the same moorings as the father.
On the other hand, I’m a big fan of the policy he has continued from his dad of inviting people from the other side of the aisle to speak at convocation at LU. Remember when old Jerry invited Teddy Kennedy to speak? What a scandal. Recently, Bernie Sanders spoke and was received cordially at Liberty. That is healthy engagement.
All of that is to say that these words do not come from one who disdains Liberty. They take a lot of ridicule, some of it ignorant, based on misunderstanding and misrepresentation. That is not this!
2. I am a supporter of the Second Amendment, theoretically. My dad never owned guns and I’ve never owned a gun. I have never spent the night in “my” home with a loaded (or unloaded) gun, unless you count a bb gun. But I believe that the constitution gives us the right to own guns and I believe that right should not be abrogated. I am not viscerally opposed to things like background checks or some limits (keeping guns out of the hands of the mentally ill, criminals, etc), but in general, I’m a supporter of Second Amendment rights.
3. I have never gone hunting. I watch those shows sometimes on ESPN where a guy sits in his perch in a tree and watches a deer wander by, shoots him and then acts like he just won World War II. I’ve never done it. I’ve competed in just about ever form of sport. I’ve run marathons. Maybe if I hunted I’d get it. Bow hunting? Now that seems like a real challenge! All of that is to say that I am anything but a gun enthusiast. I don’t own them. I don’t shoot them. I don’t carry them. I hear some folks talking about their guns with the kind of passion I reserve for my grandkids. It baffles me. Seems a little odd. But people probably think my passion for the Yankees is a little odd, right?
What Jerry, Jr Said
At last Friday’s convocation, Jerry Falwell, Jr, the president of Liberty University made some shockingly strong statements about guns and violence. Here is the clip of what was said. It comes from CNN (you may have to watch an ad). He proudly claims to have a gun in his back pocket and encourages all students to get their gun permits for concealed carry.
Here is the money quote.
“If more good people had concealed-carry permits, then we could end those Muslims before they walked in and killed them.”
That is certainly not a politically correct statement. There is a core of truth there; much that I agree with. This Thursday night we are have a local police officer come to our church to give us “active shooter” training – what we should do if someone shows up at our little fellowship. We have people in our church who have concealed carry permits and if someone ever were to walk into our building as a terrorist or in some other way to create havoc, it is comforting to me that we are not helpless.
What I Agree With
1. Disarming America is NOT the answer
It is true that most of these acts take place in states with the strictest gun control laws and in places that are designated as gun-free zones. The knee-jerk reaction in liberal circles is “let’s get rid of guns.” But France has some restrictive gun laws – it didn’t stop terrorism there. Connecticut has gun laws and so does California. Schools are gun-free zones. This cartoon has been making the rounds and I think it makes a pretty good point.
Declaring places “gun-free” is about as useless and stupid as you get. Really? I’m sure that ISIS is going to see that and have a change of heart. We are rightly concerned that the movement to take away guns is a movement toward greater authoritarianism and even totalitarianism. Every despot wants to have his side armed and the other side not. The founders of our nation had been on the wrong side of that and wanted the people to have the right to keep and bear arms.
But there are a lot of guns in America and removing them from law-abiding citizens is a prescription for failure. I’ve visited Israel twice and it is quite jarring. You walk the streets knowing that threats are everywhere, and yet it is generally safe, as long as you stay away from certain areas – probably safer than most big cities in America. And it is not unusual to see young men and women walking around with semi-automatic weapons draped over their shoulders. Military service (and some of the best training in the world) is mandatory. There is a widely circulated picture of a teacher on a playground with her small children, carrying a rifle over her shoulder.
If there had been one person with a concealed weapon in the theater in Colorado, James Holmes might be dead, but 12 people might not be (as 70 people might not have been injured). What if the professor or one of those 8 students at Umpqua Community College had been able to shoot back? Maybe the death toll would have been much different.
I do not believe that the liberal knee-jerk solution “take the guns” is the answer – either practically or biblically.
2. Ignoring Radical Islam is not the answer.
I do not understand the president’s attitude on this. He seems more intent on defending Muslims than on defending America from Islamic terrorism. Marco Rubio did a masterful job in an interview responding to Obama’s speech concerning the California terrorist attack. ISIS is a form of Islam with an apocalyptic doctrine. They believe they are hastening a form of Armageddon that will usher in a worldwide Caliphate. You cannot say that “ISIS is not Islamic.” It is a form of Islam. Extreme? Yes. Does it represent all of Islam? No! A majority? I don’t know. Statistics vary. But ISIS is very much an Islamic “denomination” with a vision of worldwide domination by Islam. to pretend that anything else is true is simple ignorance – likely willful.
3. Preparing ourselves is wise.
Of course it is. We are under threat. When there is a threat, you prepare. If Obama really believes that disarming is the key to safety, then he should demonstrate that by disarming the Secret Service detail that protects him. We know he won’t (and shouldn’t) do that. But isn’t it hypocritical for him to want himself and his children to be made safe by people with guns, but demand that same protection be removed from the rest of us? I want a few people with concealed weapons in my congregation on Sunday morning.
If Liberty is not prepared for a terrorist attack, they are negligent beyond defense.
4. The untold story.
If you watch the whole video, the part that isn’t told is that just before the gun part, he offers scholarships to the children of the victims of the California tragedy.
Where Dr. Falwell’s Statement Erred
1. Our goal is to reach Muslims, not to kill them.
On top of Falwell’s previous statement to Glenn Beck, I am troubled by the tone of this statement. I would guess that if you pinned him down, Falwell would agree that our ultimate goal is to reach Muslims, but he seems, at times, to prioritize political over gospel action. This is symptomatic of American Christianity today. We tend to lump all Muslims together as the enemy. There’s a sense of glee that comes through at the thought of killing Muslims that ought to trouble us. Is ISIS an enemy of Christianity? Of course. No doubt about it. They kill Christians and are determined to destroy us. They may hate us as badly as many Muslims have hated the Jews through the years. But just because they are our enemies does not mean that we as Christians can regard them as enemies. Yes, our government should engage them militarily and we should take reasonable steps to protect our schools, churches, and homes, but we cannot see Muslims as enemies to kill, but as people to win to Christ.
I have been told by more than one person that there is a harvest happening among Muslims right now – many are beginning to come to faith in Christ. I cannot verify that, but I have been told this by people who work with Muslims. That is our primary concern.
Yes, we want to KILL Muslims – in the same way each of us should die. “I have been crucified with Christ, nevertheless I live.” “Buried with Christ by baptism into death and raised to walk a new life…” We don’t just want these adherents of a false faith to die, we want them to die to self and rise with Christ. This has to be our heart, our priority. We must make this our goal, our prayer, our focus in all that we do.
2. Our rhetoric matters.
“But he meant terrorists…”
Some have pointed out that Dr. Falwell did not mean to lump all Muslims into one group and condemn them all. He probably didn’t. When he said, “those Muslims” he simply meant terrorists who carry out attacks. I will concede that point. But he didn’t say that. He was speaking in convo at Liberty. These were prepared remarks. Even if he was speaking extemporaneously, a man like Falwell who knows that the press reports every word he says should be careful, but this was a public forum. He intended for these remarks to be heard publicly. If he wanted to say, “Islamic jihadists” then he should have said that.
We can argue about what percentage of Islam is radicalized or sympathetic to the radicals. But as Christians, we must be careful, every time we speak on the topic, to distinguish Islam and Islamic terror, radical Islam, or Islamic jihadists (choose your term). I’m traveling to a nation in a month that is Islamic, and is probably much safer than the USA. It is filled with moderate Islam. I’m not saying that Islam is a “religion of peace” because it’s sacred writings most definitely open the door for radical teachings. But we need to be careful when we speak.
What harm does it do to be respectful? How does it hurt us to distinguish the radicals from the moderates? How are we hurt by indicating our willingness to live in peace with those who are willing to live in peace? Every time we speak we need to make this clear.
Intemperate rhetoric like Dr. Falwell’s hurts our gospel cause.
3. Our tone matters.
Tone matters as well. It really does. There was a note of glee in his voice as he talked about killing Muslims. That sends the wrong note in every way. Are we justified in defending ourselves against criminals or terrorists who try to kill our people? Absolutely. Should we be happy about it? Should we rejoice because someone has been sent to hell? We should not.
Reading a tone of voice is dangerous, of course – it is an assignation of motive, deciding what is in someone else’s heart. But when there is even a hint of joy or enthusiasm for the death of sinners we do not have the heart of Christ.
The issues here are not as simple as they are presented by many. Some have leaped to condemnation of Dr. Falwell and others have defended him completely. As usual, the truth is nuanced. He is right about the need to defend ourselves and to defend our young people. The liberal solution is so empty of merit as to lead to the suspicion of other motives. But Christians ought to remember our higher calling, our gospel purpose. We are not here to kill Muslims but to bring people to Christ. Our rhetoric and our tone must be guarded when we address issues such as this.
Christians, we are citizens of the kingdom first and must never forget that.
Thanks Dave. One thing that frustrates me about many evangelicals is that when we are asked, “what is the answer to all of this mess?” and our first inclination is “guns!”, not the Gospel. I’m not against guns, but guns won’t be the solution. We need to be quick to be Gospel centered first. I was disappointed with Dr. Falwell here. I will say this, I’m glad this wasn’t said from a church pulpit. I was disappointed by some well known pastors who irresponsibly abused the pulpit by bringing politics into the pulpit during the Refugee conversation. We need to… Read more »
In fairness, Convocation at Liberty is not exactly chapel. It is most of the time, but they also have politicians, businessmen, civic leaders, etc – I think that’s why they call it Convo and not chapel.
Gotcha. Thanks!
First I would like to point out that President Obama “is not,” trying to take anyone’s guns. He said we need some common sense laws concerning guns. The criminals, mentally ill, or children shouldn’t have guns. In my opinion all hunters should have a gun safety course before being allowed to purchase guns. Just the other day a baby was shot and killed because the father was cleaning his gun loaded. This is pure ignorance. I have five guns, and one remains loaded in the nightstand in reach from my bed. I have no desire to carry a gun, I… Read more »
I’d just like to say that California has some of the toughest (common sense, some not so common sense, and some nonsense) gun laws. There is absolutely NO GUN LAW that could have prevented the incidence in San Bernardino. That’s a fact. What could have prevented the tragedy would have been a “common sense” approach to terrorism by the Obama Administration. The blame for San Bernadino lay at Obama’s feet–not the NRA. To even mention “gun control” in regard to San Bernadino is nothing more than Democratic propaganda-pure and simple . . . well, maybe not so pure. If people… Read more »
Jack,
Next time it rains, I’ll blame your president. Obama is your president.
Jess, I don’t really understand your blind loyalty to Obama simply because he won an election. Who was in charge when this radical Muslim intent on harming Americans was not only give a visa, but a green card? Does not Obama bear responsibility for that failure? Doesn’t it concern you at all that Obama’s response to this terrorist act is to push his agenda on “gun control?” Even if I were a gun control advocate, which I am not, I would despise the politicizing of a terrorist act. I know I might as well be talking to a wall, but… Read more »
Thanks Dave for opening up comments on this matter. To date, enough words have been printed to fix the whole mess, were verbiage a real solution. I am reminded of Mr. Einsten’ comment, “We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them.” Bottom line: Mr. Falwell was totally wrong, totally un-Christian and totally destructive. While I appreciate your excellent instruction and well-balanced understanding, I do not sense that you are ready to proclaim how very evil this man has behaved. It came from his heart and I don’t care what school or church pulpit… Read more »
Glenn Harrell,
No truer words have ever been spoken. Thank you so much.
I also would point out that when the disciple Peter pulled out his fishing knife and used it on a man. Jesus put Peter in his place.
First, Peter used an actual sword, not some silly “fishers knife”. Second, one should point out that Jesus knew that this was the point in which He would fulfill His purpose, that is being taken to be crucified so He could be our sacrifice. Anyone using this instance as a case against self defense is butchering the text worse than what Peter did the the soldiers ear.
SVN,
Nope not a sword!
In martial contexts, Marchaira in Greek is used to signify a sword with a non-forward curving blade (that would be a Kopis). Yes, in other contexts marchaira can mean any bladed instrument. But context determines meaning. Unless you suggest that in Romans 13:4 Paul meant that the government “does not bear the ‘fisherman’s knife’ in vain”? Same Greek word, same martial meaning, both signifying a weapon of war. A sword.
SV is correct Jess
SV, First of all Rome would have not allowed Israel to be armed, a knife would not be considered a weapon by the Romans. Second, anything longer than a fisherman’s knife would not have been convenient for a fisherman to wear. Remember all the nets fisherman had to clean. Anything longer than a knife or dagger would become entangled in the nets. Thirdly, Machaira in the Greek means dagger or short sword and is totally different from Rhomphaia which means long sword or spear. It had to be something a working man would carry, short and convenient. It is a… Read more »
Jess… 1. Wrong on Roman Law. Private weapons were commonplace. Google “The Roman Legal Treatment of Self Defense and the Private Possession of Weapons in the Codex Justinianus” 2. Weren’t fisherman back then were basically naked while working on the boat? If so a sword would have been put aside with the cloak and such. 3. Short swords and long swords are both swords. Either way it is presented as a weapon rather than a vocation-specific cutting tool. 4. In the movie it was a short sword…. and while this means little it does a pretty good job of showing… Read more »
SV,
You cannot clean fish with a sword. You have to gut them, and scale them, maybe.
Notice how Jess has completely ignored the identical word being used in Romans 13:4. Clearly pointing out that fact disrupts his narrative and extra-biblical hermeneutical gymnastics.
What Jess is missing is that Peter left his nets to follow Jesus, and the only time he returned to them was when he was out of fellowship with Christ. He also caught one fish to pay his and Jesus’ temple tax. He would not have needed a fishing knife everyday.
I’m not sure what has aroused your anger so much, Glen. I chose my words carefully. I think he was intemperate in his words, but I think the idea of self-defense against Islamic terrorism is reasonable. The idea that a reasonable number of people at Liberty would be armed and ready to defend others is not unreasonable. Have you ever been on campus? It is not isolated. It is not exactly Ft Knox and it would be hard to make it so. A major highway splits the campus. His idea is reasonable. The way he expressed it was unreasonable. He… Read more »
I am certainly not angry or upset with you Dave. You are one of the most sensitive, truthful and balanced men I read. Thank you for your integrity and honor to God and His Word. We all know the story of the watermelon farmer who put up a sign that read, “guess which melon is poisoned”. The next day the teens he had hoped to frighten away had left another sign that read, “no–you guess”. Mark my word. These extremest’s have seen this You tube disaster speech of cocky absurdness and Falwell is a marked man. And this school had… Read more »
Glenn, I agree with you from the beginning part about Dave to the end part of the sad commentary. The purpose of terrorists is to install fear. Religious terrorists seek to install fear to show how weak all other gods are but their own. And when Western leaders react with fear, it is understandable for they serve people and are in power to protect the physical lives of their people. But when religious leaders show fear, they betray their own god or in our case The God and present Him as weak before the world. Our Shepherds are to not… Read more »
And this battle has cost many the life of a brother and sister, and will continually do so. Onward Christian Soldier, but not with a gun.
Parson,
Curious as to why you equate being armed against random violence is somehow based in fear? I would say it is wisdom.
Dave, I was uncomfortable with Dr Falwell’s words. Everything about it seemed wrong coming from a man of God. We are working on our policies, constitution and bylaws at VBC. We will include an emergency response plan in our policies. Part of this plan will or will not call for certain law enforcement officers to have concealed firearms. If we choose for these gentlemen to be packing will it be as bad as Dr Falwell’s comments?
As I said in my piece, I think it is reasonable for churches, schools and other institutions to have security, even armed security in place. I would think that except in the most extreme of circumstances it should be as “behind the scenes” as possible – “concealed” carry is the operative word.
My biggest problem with Falwell was with his tone and attitude.
Thanks Dave, this is a real issue for me. I remember the first big conflict in the first church I pastored was if it was appropriate to ever lock the church doors. Now we are putting together a plan that includes armed men in the church.
I pastored a church whose doors had never been locked. The current pastor is a friend we share. I do not know if they lock the doors now.
Still unlocked. A few look at me funny and jokingly mock me when they see me unlocking the door to the parsonage.
If you get a ticket anytime soon, it might be my fault. I was selling some stuff on eBay and one address was the Court House. I mentioned that I used to live in Drakes Branch and he said he is a cop there! I told him to give you a ticket and sign my name.
Funny. Small world.
This kind of thing frustrates me. The NRA and the like-minded have this vision of a wild-west utopia where we are all safe because everyone is packing. I’m all for letting people who want to carry guns legally, carry them (within reason). I’m NOT for encouraging your whole student body (or even a significant portion of them) to carry guns. As a professor, I can tell you I would definitely NOT feel safer if I knew thousands of gun-toting college students were wandering around with the conflict, stress, pressure and strife that accompanies being a student. I’m NOT for gun… Read more »
Two things ought to bother you.
1. How often we think alike.
2. Those few things on which we disagree.
I just got chills.
“How crazy have we become when we think people on the no-fly terror watch list should still be able to buy guns?”
Yep, some folks are so open-minded on that one that their brains have fallen out. “I’m on a watch list, watch me buy a gun!” Only in America.
Bill, It is true that the art of pistolcraft is on the decline due largely to urbanization and the decline of shooting sports. We have a group of folks who have been trained who are armed everytime the church meets (current and former peace officers and military). I am confident that we also have a lot of other folks who are armed. If I am ever in a room full of people and someone comes to kill us all, I will be happy for every single person who is armed. I will happily take a stray bullet to save 20… Read more »
Donald, This is a tricky subject for me. As I said, I like the 2nd amendment, and I’m glad we have trained people around who carry weapons. But we also seem to have a generation of people who think they aren’t safe unless they have a loaded, chambered gun with the safety off (or no safety) on their person or in their house. And then you have toddlers shooting each other, or their parents, or people shooting themselves or their friends. I grew up in a hunting family, and hunting camp was a place of dubious morals, but one thing… Read more »
I get you Bill. I do have fundamental disagreements with your suggestions (due to my training) but I want to say I appreciate where you are coming from and I agree that there are always examples of freedom/liberty being abused. I don’t have all the answers. What I can say for sure is that anyone who is being attacked will wish they had some way of effectively defending themselves and their loved ones.
I currently own 2 handguns, (use to have another that was made by a different manufacturer), do not have a manually operated safety. And yet, they are without a doubt, the safest firearms I own. These firearms cannot, in any circumstance be fired with out pulling the triggers. You could drop it from 10,000 feet and the gun would break before it triggered a round. Another handgun I own is a 1911. The safety can only be engaged with the hammer locked back. If I carried it with the hammer down (which would be required for certain styles of holsters… Read more »
Good comment. I don’t own a gun. I recently shot my dad’s pistol and was very disturbed by my inability to hit the target under the calmest of circumstances. I hate to think what it would be like if I had to shoot the thing at a killer in a crowded area. I may still purchase a gun for defending my family at home, but I cannot imagine being comfortable carrying it in public.
“I cannot imagine being comfortable carrying it in public.”
Get training if you are going to get a handgun. For under $2K you can have the best training in the world @ Gunsite.
Since the “no fly” and terror lists got brought up…I’m not a fan of denying people their constitutional rights without due process. As such, until someone on said list has been convicted of a crime, their rights should not be abridged.
So…how crazy have we become that we’re talking about doing away with constitutional rights without due process?
Joseph,
Fair enough, then let’s let them fly as well.
Flying is not a constitutional right and certainly not a fundamental one -, Imo, Being a legit suspect of terrorism is enough to restrict flying – but not for denying a fundamental constitutional right. Having said that I’m concerned that the process by which a person is added to the no-fly list has very little oversight and can certainly be used as a tool of government depression if not monitored. Having said that I’m concerned that the process by which a person is added to the no-fly list has very little oversight and can Potentially be used as a tool… Read more »
*Government oppression
Civil rights during wartime is an issue that really needs to be dealt with. Especially now that we are going to be in perpetual undeclared war.
Shall we also restrict their freedom to worship as they see fit? To peaceably assemble? What other constitutional rights should we abolish due to someone’s name being on a list, whether appropriately or inappropriately?
It’s a dangerous path to walk, hoss. I’d rather we not go there, wouldn’t you?
I just wish the world was talking more about Radical Christians (of a good sort), than Radical Muslims.
David Platt worked that term radical to good effect, but perhaps in this day we need to make use of a different term. Not completely sure. Maybe passionate? Committed. Maybe go back to the term from my youth. Back then we were “on fire.”
Yea, unfortunately the word “Radical” is starting to have negative connotations. I wish that weren’t the case because I love everything David Platt has done.
Dave,
Was the term “on fire” in vogue during your youth because fire was invented during your teenage years?
Where is that doggone “ban” button.
I can see why a lot of people are afraid of Muslims or people who look like they are from the Middle East. Some of them might be terrorists. They are afraid of death. I can’t see why Christians are afraid of terrorists. They shouldn’t be afraid of death. In fact we are plainly told not to fear the one that can harm the body only. I’m not saying Christians shouldn’t carry a gun. I am saying he shouldn’t carry a gun because of fear. One of the things I see wrong with the health and wealth movement is that… Read more »
ParsonM said: “I’m not saying Christians shouldn’t carry a gun. I am saying he shouldn’t carry a gun because of fear.”
Why do you assume that fear is the motivation? In your theology of emotion, what place does fear hold?
Dr. James White just brought up something similar to this on his Facebook. I think its worth noting to post. I think it’s relevant to Dave’s last two points. Islam is not a monolithic religion. There is not a “single” “true Islam.” First, ISIS draws from a stream of Islamic thought and jurisprudence that goes back to the earliest periods of Islam. Though the final very closed, radical, unreformable (note this!) form that is plaguing us today took time to develop (for example, the concept of the Qur’an as uncreated and eternal took generations to evolve), it is plainly ISLAMIC… Read more »
A couple of questions for anyone who has the answer.
1. Doesn’t Liberty have Muslim students? 2. How does this statement by Falwell affect missionaries who are in Muslim countries? Does it endanger them further?
Tyler I agree 100% with Dr. White on this subject.
I assumed they did not. It was my belief that students had to sign a statement of faith to enroll. But when I tweeted my belief to that effect to Rod Dreher (he has written some WONDERFUL articles on this) Dr. Moore responded that there are 15 or 20 Muslims at Liberty. Evidently they are required to live according to basic code of conduct.
Thank you for checking Dave.
Dave, Thank you for having the courage to voice your views on Jerry Falwell Jr’s comments on guns on campus. I might frighten you to know I agree completely with your thoughts. I support the 2nd amendment but do not support the NRA. I have for long time wondered why the conservative position, either theologically or politically, has seemed to be so pro-gun and pro-NRA. It didn’t necessarily correspond with my early learning regarding Jesus’ teachings or my conservative law and order upbringing. You and I have both lived in a country with extremely strong gun control laws and I… Read more »
How can we not see this? The goal of ISIS and like groups is to make all non-muslims hate all muslims. It’s working. See Donald Trump for details. When non-radicalized muslims see the entire non-muslim world (or country) unite against them, then where will they go, but to ISIS, or Boko Haram or other such groups? How do you radicalize people but to convince them that those unlike them are enemies? Radicalization begins with polarization, and that’s happening right now, aided by unwitting non-muslims who have fallen into the very trap ISIS has set for them.
Boy is it working.
“But people probably think my passion for the Yankees is a little odd, right?”
“Sinful” is really the word that comes to mind.
I keep hoping your heart will be reached.
I am absolutely ashamed of what the church is becoming. The church supposed to be the body of Christ with Christ being it’s head. At what point do we stop being the body of Christ? Answer–When the body is no longer controlled by it’s head.
Friends,
I own two grenade launchers and about fifty grenade’s. I only would use them for protection. I have a right to bare arms. I would love to purchase a working tank. Can anyone of you fault me for owning such protection weapons? I carry my assault rifle in the restaurants where I go. I have a legal right.
Now, I have to say that I am lying, I own no such weapons and would not own such. If we live in a country where citizens think more of guns than people, we are already defeated. May God help us.
“””I have a right to bare arms.”””
Could I ask what wearing a short-sleeve shirt has to do with this discussion 🙂
Jack,
You know that was funny, you were the only one who caught it. Lol
Jess,
Ordnance vs arms. Your analogy falls apart immediately.
A university news story added a qualifier that Falwell had issued to the media and on social media — “that when he referred to ‘those Muslims,’ he was referring to Islamic terrorists, specifically those behind the attacks in Paris and in San Bernardino.” -Falwell’s concealed-permit comments enter gun debate http://bpnews.net/45968/falwells-concealedpermit-comments-enter-gun-debate I’m all for those with concealed carry permits, who are comfortable doing so, carrying a gun. You might even want to keep a larger gun in your car. As the saying goes, usually the only thing that stops a bad man with a gun, is a good man with a… Read more »
Dave , Thank you, excellent article. I wish Jerry jr. had challenged us all to go out to Muslims with the gospel. ( BTW I am a CC permit holder usually have mine in my car) but I chose to first go out with the other G, the gospel. Dr. Nik Ripken ( Author of The Insanity of Obedience) says that we are having to fight wars in places that the church has refused to go for the last 100 years. It would be sad if that now includes our own country and our refusal to take the gospel to… Read more »
Dave, you siad: “Some have pointed out that Dr. Falwell did not mean to lump all Muslims into one group and condemn them all. He probably didn’t. When he said, “those Muslims” he simply meant terrorists who carry out attacks. I will concede that point. But he didn’t say that. He was speaking in convo at Liberty. These were prepared remarks. Even if he was speaking extemporaneously, a man like Falwell who knows that the press reports every word he says should be careful, but this was a public forum. He intended for these remarks to be heard publicly. If… Read more »
His immediate context was the California attack, and it seemed obvious that “those Muslims” were his target.
Liberty U has always held positive views on the second amendment. I met NRA President Charlton Heston on the campus of Liberty University when they hosted an NRA 4th of July celebration in 2002. Mr. Heston was not feeling well and did not give his intended speech. He joked that he would sometimes mistakenly repeat the same story, but that his stories were pretty good so it is OK.
I saw an interesting question this am on Facebook, one that a lot of our rhetoric would validate. We ask, “Is Islam actually a religion of peace.” Wouldn’t our rhetoric and some of our actions lead the average Muslim to wonder whether Christianity is a “religion of peace?”