Food For Thought

First off, what is the difference between God wiping them out, and having the Israelites themselves do it? And how do you know He wasnt speaking metaphorically there? and even so, who is putting them at the same level, first off, second off, why not. They were human. Were human. They make mistakes. we make mistakes. Thats why God included the history in the bible so that we learn from it. We do see regardless of whether it was plan A or plan B That God did order the Israelites to wipe out the people of Jericho and everyone in the land. So your initial argument that the Israelites disobeyed God in killing the cities inhabitants, was wrong.

So what if its plan B? the Israelites never disobayed God in the sense He told them not to kill the people there. In fact, if you take a look at scripture, it wasnt even the sending the spies that caused them trouble. It was the fact that they doubted Gods will in giving them the land. It was doubting God, not the spies, that did it. If all 12 of those spies had said lets go for it, and the Israelites went for it, I have no doubt in my mind they wouldnt have wandered in the wilderness. and everyone in jericho would still be dead. Regardless of what happened earlier, God still ordered the Israelites to kill everyone-and they did. To say they disobeyed God in doing so is incorrect.

And, I like how you try to cast those christians who choose to believe in self defense in a negative light, that we have to "justify it in our minds" well, Ive already justified it in scripture, and you have yet to comment on it. . .
 
I guess to hold the ancient Hebrews any higher than the rest of us seems odd to me. Other than God chose them to be his representatives-and failed. My Bible says we all come from the blood of Noah in some way.

My point was, I don't believe God meant us do be defenseless-physically. God is our spiritual defense AND can if He chooses to intervene in the physical. Whether it be a baseball bat, sword, handgun, tank, whatever...are we not to have the ability to protect our families?
 
Rusty said:
I'm not doing that at all. The ancient Jews were just as normal as you and I, BUT they had man many geberations under pagan influences while in Egypt. You and I don't. Moses was taken form Egypt and made a shepherd by the Lord for the murder of one Egyptian. Looks like God wasn't real thrilled in his rash idea of self-defense and needed some re-education time quite alone, IMO.
Click to expand...

I would disagree about the pagan influences as they are very much alive today especially in our 'American' culture and those of several other "civilized" nations. In my opinion, the USA is due for a tribulation.

As for Moses, I believe that was premeditated murder-not self defense. Exodus 2:12
 
Rusty said:
I see this as a contradiction. God has thousands of promises throughout the Bible for our physical protection too. I don't see Him being fickle with if He will or won't protect the obedient (or willing to be obedient) Christian.

Do mission societies pack a .45 with every missionary they send out? Nope.
Click to expand...

Not sure if and how missionary's protect themselves, I would imagine some do, some don't. I think that may be based on a level of faith-speculation of course. Maybe none do?

Your thoughts on Luke 22:36-38, And Peter carrying a sword? (Mathew 26:51, Mark14:47, John 18:10)
 
Rusty said:
Dirty: I only have a problem with justification of current gun oriented Christians in pointing to the ancient Hebrews and claiming that since they killed and conquered nations, they can pack heat. They can do what they want, but I find it untenable to drag the OT into it.

This sort of logic was used to justify slavery in pre-American Civil War times, because the Jews had slaves.
This sort of logic is used by polygamists today, because some Jews were polygamists.

I think the use of carnal force is a matter of a Christian's conscience and counsel with the Lord Himself, not by a gun club, or politcal lobby.
Click to expand...

I am not in agreement with our government killing at will using our troops as a tool for the devil.

I think there is a big understanding by most of the world about what our Second Amendment is all about. "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

The intent of the second amendment is to protect the PEOPLE from their own GOVERNMENT which wants ultimate power and control over the masses to make us slaves LIKE the Hebrews were in Egypt. It is about the internal freedom of the USA, not stomping about the planet taking from third world countries on a whim.
 
Rusty said:
Well...research it. It's quite fascinating.

I'm VERY active in the mission field, so have watched this for years. I know personally not one missionary that has even considered guns in their work for the Lord. None.
Click to expand...

I understand "live by the sword, die by the sword' And that is different than having the ability for defense at hand-and not using it. Living by the sword could be considered a soldier or a mercenary. The fact that Peter (and any of the other disciples) had a 'sword' (weapon of the day) in the Lord's presence is pretty significant I think. Is there a lesson there about abstaining from the use of available power? Absolutely. Was not Christ on the cross the same type of example? He had the power to defend Himself before during and after the crucifixion and chose not too-for our benefit. He was never a victim.

You take away the ability to protect yourself, and now you become a victim, not a sacrifice. Two different statuses.
 
I think if coming down to personal choice, you should be able to have a choice. I wouldn't say that God is for or against 'packing heat' if you will. I think it always comes back to intent. If you want to pack heat to mug, rob, rape-then you aren't going to through the permit process and be listed on every government agency list imaginable. But if you are concerned for your safety, then you should be able to follow a REASONABLE law to legally own weapons-which is what most people do.

I think the misunderstanding between using scripture comparisons were that there were a couple of tangent points that spiraled out of control. I would agree that God is the ultimate end to all means-whether He directly intervene or use the people(s) of His choosing.

My point using the scriptures was that God was the decision maker to use force through the people. Not the people using God as an excuse to use force. Am I following you now?
 
Rusty said:
Are we to follow Christ's example or the non-soldier's, one below?:



I see an ALL there, not a soldier.
Click to expand...

I understand and accept the consequences of using a weapon. But that does not say said person will be condemned. Just the form of death. I turned down a spot as an Army Sniper because I didn't want to kill people for a living-if that makes any difference. I am not looking for a fight- I really want a quiet and peaceable life.

Does it mean I have a lack of faith if I chose to own a weapon?
 
I'll be honest with you Rusty, I think we are pretty close to the end of things. If I didn't have daughter that depends on me to protect her, I would give it all up and head out preaching the Gospel. Maybe I am coward? Lack of Faith?

My opinion is once the USA is out of the picture, the fallen one won't be to far from being revealed as the false savior.
 
Rusty said:
Thanks. Major.

Several points you have made:

a) that Christ had an angelic form, Michael, before His human form many years later, when born as a babe in the manger

b) battle is a judgment of the Lord.

I completely agree with a) but cannot accept your conclusion b).

Many national Israel battles in the OT are supported by the Lord, but as a last choice, not a first choice. Take for example this saga of Jericho.

Did the Hebrews take the city by sword? No....God had them do something utterly absurd: march and blow trumpets. God's "sword" was used (which I believe were angelic hands) and tore the wall down. It was not an instruction from the Lord to do this:Joshua 6:21
In this they were overstepping the Lord. They were wrong and still thinking like slaves and pagans, in spite of the mighty miracles done in their favor.

The most important point of this saga of Jericho was the rescue of Rahab, the only believer in God in this city, a type of all of the redeemed. Was it not God that actually rescued her by pulling down the walls, and NOT the soldiers, killing everything?

Also...this in no way justifies today's desires for personal weapons: shooting muggers and rapists is a far cry from the concepts of Jericho. American Christians are not the Exodus Hebrews.
Click to expand...

Always good to hear from you Rusty. I guess in this case we will have to be in disagreement BUT.......I still love ya man!

1).
I would say about the "angelic form" that it is the Jewish teachers by tridition that say the "man" was Michael.
They would of course never admitt to it being the pre-incarnat Christ since that rejected Christ altogether.

Then when we read the Scripture.......there is no mention of "angelic form" at all.

Notice........""And it came to pass, when Joshua was by Jericho, that he lifted up his eyes and looked, and, behold, there stood a man over against him with his sword drawn in his hand: and Joshua went unto him, and said unto him, Art thou for us, or for our adversaries".

It was a MAN, not an "angelic form". It was a man and Joshua did not know this MAN was Christ untill the man told him.


2).
I understand your thinking, and in fact agree. You say angels tore down the walls of Jericho. Is that not a battle???
Destruction came from judgment of God.....correct. God used angels to tear down the walls (I do not neceessarly agree with that)....Boom!

Sword equals battle = judgment.

Sodom & Gommorrah. Again, angels destroyed the cities. Sword = destruction = judgment.

I agree that not EVERY war or battle is that way but the ones in which Gods judgment is proclaimed, I feel as if He can and did use anything He wanted to bring about His judgment and many times it was by the sword.

Judah was found wanting and in sin and God allowed the Babylonians to remove them by the SWORD of judgment.

As far as Jericho we must remember that it was in fact already under the judgment of God as found in..........

Gen. 15:16,
" In the fourth generation your descendants will return here, for the sin of the Amorites has not yet reached its limit".

When their iniquity was “full,” (The Canninites) divine judgment fell. Four hundred later God’s judgment was akin to surgery for cancer or amputation of a leg as the only way to save the rest of a sick body. Just as cancer or gangrene contaminates the physical body, those elements in a society—if their evil is left to fester—will completely contaminate the rest of society.

Finally, the battle confronting Israel was not simply a religious war; it was a theocratic war. Israel was directly ruled by God and the extermination was God’s direct command

Joshua 8:24-26
"When Israel had finished killing all the men of Ai who had chased them toward the desert (they all fell by the sword), all Israel returned to Ai and put the sword to it. 25 Twelve thousand men and women died that day, including all the men of Ai. 26 Joshua kept holding out his curved sword until Israel had annihilated all who lived in Ai."
 
Rusty said:
Yes....but that was NOT God's Plan A....This was....



This was God's preferred way....But the Hebrews failed to uphold their end of the bargain.
Click to expand...

Who is this angel????

Other Scriptures shed light on the answer.

1 Corth. 10:4........
"And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them, and that Rock was Christ".

1 Corth. 10:9-10......
"Neither let us tempt Christ as some of them also tempted and were destroyed of serpants". Neither murmer ye, as some of them also murmured and were destroyed of the destroyer".

It is the Lord Jesus that they were to obey and He is the one in view here.

God told Israel that He intended to put the enemy (Cannanittes, Amorites, Hitties etc) out of the land because of their enormouse sin. God without question told Israel in verse 27 of Ex. 23 that His intention was to remove them from the land and to make it their land.

God went on to tell them in verse 32-33 that they were not to make any covenants with the people in the Promised Land neither with their gods. Joshua made the mistake of making a treaty with the Gibeonites. He did not do enough proper investagating of the situation.

Of course the reason why Israel finally went into Babylonian captivity was because they went into idoltary and served other gods. They DID NOT DO WHAT GOD TOLD THEM TO DO and the sword of Gods judgment fell upon them.
 
rusty, while to a point, I agree with you, and dont. As far as taking the Israelites actions of war, and using that as justification for self defense, I dont think thats a good justification. There is a difference, between packing heat for self defense, and going to war. Now, dont get me wrong, I do believe in such a concept of just war, but as for packing guns for self defense, its a slightly different subject (though connected)

However, the fact you want to "ignore the OT" when it comes to self defense, that I disagree with. God gave us the ENTIRE Bible for a reason. So that we can learn from the Israelites. So that we know what sin is (the law, Romans 7:7) and even, self defense, which is found in the OT. You cannot ignore OT principles, they are fundamental. And that includes the right of self defense.
 
Im not. I even said, that comparing jewish wars, with the right for self defense, isnt a good comparison. I did, however list several verses that talk about self defense, and you have yet to comment about them, and keep harping about "comparing us to the ancient jews"
 
Rusty said:
I understand: I have a family, as well. But I do not live in the USA. If I did, I would still use my understanding of the Lord in the same manner as I have for years.

What makes you think that the theoretical down fall of America is pivotal to prophecy being fulfilled? Or should we make a new topic?
Click to expand...

Not so much pivotal-that would be giving the USA too much credit. However; the disintegration of free trade and capitalism is a stumbling block for a one world socialized government and religion. Therefore-it is more of a necessity-not because the USA is overly special.

Realistically, the USA has already been destroyed on paper, and the upcoming 'gun ban' is like the nail in the coffin for the USA because there is a multitude of outcomes possible. All which lead to the submission of the USA to 'International' Law and economics through the UN (see Agenda 21).

Does that mean once the USA is out of the picture as a sovereign nation Satan will take his place-I have no idea. It could be next month or a thousand years from now. (I personally don't think it will take that long-but who am I?)
 
rusty, no Im not talking about military matters. I said comparing Israels military conquests to our right for self defense isnt a good comparison. multiple times. Please stop accusing me of doing such.

Please read this all the way through before jumping to any more conclusions.
Though, thankyou for actually replying to the post about exodus verse. However, the thing your failing to grab, is the principle behind the laws. Should we kill sorcerors and people who sleep with animals? No, certainly not, but that doesn't mean that its ok to accept sorcery or those who sleep with animals. Witchcraft, sleeping with animals, sex outside of marriage, all these things are still sin and without Christ those people are doomed for death anyway. The law, was given so that we know what sin is.

Romans 7:7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.

So lets go through this step by step.

We are not saved by the law, but through grace. That is a given.

The punishments, dealt out in the law, are also a mute-because we are saved by grace, anyone who sins and isnt forgiven, will die and go to hell. Also a given.

Without the law, we don't know what sin is. How do we know sorcery is bad? the law. how do we know adultry is bad. the law. how do we know its wrong to sleep with your dog. The answer? is the law.

So, we can ascertain, that the law, tells us what sin is, and we can pull principles from it. The law, allows for self defense. That is a principle. That is a principle we can ascertain from the law. It is also, a principle, that is repeated throughout the OT and even hinted upon, in the NT. So your argument that the law is for different people is both true and false, the actual law, and the consequences, were intended for the jews, and for the old covenant, that much is true, but the principles Still hold true today.

2 Timothy 3:16
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness

Keyword here, is all scripture. Timothy doesnt differentiate between the old and new testament-he says all scripture. And while we are no longer bound by the law, the law was still given by inspiration of God, is profitable for doctrine, reproof, correction, and instruction in righteousness. Are we to stone sorcerors? no, thats legalism-were saved by grace, not legalism. But we are to learn from the principles laid out in the law.
 
no theyre not, the principles still apply. You throw forward these things, and accuse me of ignoring such. How are they ignored? The principle behind keeping the sabbat-setting a day aside to worship God-that principle is true, we still need to do this, and I still need to attempt to do this. I can go into slavery but thats an entirely different suject, other then to say that slavery, in the OT was a lot different, then slavery during americas early days.

Nothing is ignored. Even your attempts to dismerit me. If you want to bow out, on such a weak argument as matthew 26:52, then be my guest, but all you did was take a single verse, and miss one very important piece of it. There is a tremondous difference between owning a sword, and living by it. Huge. Which, is what I have been trying to explain to you all along. Just because someone chooses to own a gun and is willing to use it to defend their family does not mean they live by it. I mean, if Jesus was so against swords, why did Jesus tell everyone to buy a sword (like 22:35-37) and why did Jesus allow Peter to carry a sword in the garden. For that matter, Jesus never told peter to get rid of the sword, to just put it away.

I am ignoring nothing, you are ignoring the principles the law was based on. Your ignoring the fact that without the law, we wouldnt even know what sin is. You cannot ignore the principles laid out in the Bible, in either the old or the new testaments, they dont contradict each other.

And while I agree, God does protect us-but often, He uses things in this world to protect us. Have you ever thought, that perhaps God gave us the gun to protect us? If you don't want to pack heat, thats your choice. but theres nothing evil about it. I hold that its my God given responsibility, to protect my family. My gun(s) are just a tool that God provided to help me do that. I hope, never to have to use them, but Im read if I do. I dont live by the gun. I use them regularly, with hunting, and target shooting, but I dont live by it. And to suggest that those who choose to pack heat "arnt trusting in God" is arrogance, because you don't know their walk with God, your speaking from your own personal opinion, that, of course must be right, even if scripture doesnt speak against owning weapons and defending oneself, even if scripture, as a matter of fact, allows it.
 
Well, if that wasnt your intention, then I apologize, but the way several of your posts were worded, it seemed like you were insinuating them. I am not angry, nor do I wish to convey any anger, or attack in anyway, and if it came across as such, I do apologize. I admit, I tend to debate very straight forward and somewhat "aggressively" I normally, edit my posts 2-3 times before hitting the post button, to try to edit out the worst of the aggressiveness-but it still gets through. So, I apologize if I said something that offended you-it wasnt my intent, its just the way ive always debated-not justifying it, its a weak point of mine, just trying to explain the thought process.

I wasnt trying to call you arrogant-or anything like that-just that the thought process you were going through (or thought you were) anyway, seemed arrogant to me, and I apologize if it came across as an attack, it was not my intent. I am not an angry person, its just the style of debating im used to, and among my friends is actually nice (you should see some of the debates we get into, they get downright viscious, however, we always go away from them with equal respect) I do realize that I cant, or shouldnt debate with other people I barely know, the way I do with my close friends-which is why I do so much editing-but it does slip, I do apologize. And if I bold certain words, its not that im angry, its just I want to emphasize certain points.

As for my suggestions? to which do you find disturbing? because I meant what I said about not ignoring the principles behind the law. I know this is a seperate discussion, but I know, the early americans used the Israelite law as justification for slavery-and it wasnt right, but it wasnt because the law had no point, it was because the early americans, ignored the principle behind the law. Lets look at slavery in the Bible, according to the law, slavery in the hebrew nation, was actually more of a mistranslation, indentured servant, is probably a closer meaning. The slaves, were, by the law, well treated, had certain rights, and were freed after 7 years. A slave, at such point, could choose to be permanently indentured to the person-but it had to be the slaves choice. The slaves of the Bibe, of OT law, were treated with respect, and as human people. The slaves in early american times, even by the best slave owners, were treated as property, to be bought and sold at will, with no rights whatsoever, and were enslaved for life, regardless of their choice. Most slave owners did not mistreat their slaves, but neither were they respected as people, either.

Just because a certain group of people misused a passage of scripture for their own gain, does not mean that that scripture does not apply today in any way or form, it just means that group of people misused scripture. They were looking at the "law" and ignoring the "principles" behind the law.
 
Well...........I have a Remington shot gun in my office at home, a 357 S&W in my truck and my wife has a 38 Police Special with one of those new laser lights on it.

We go to the gun range about every month, church 3 times a week.

I believe and expect the Lord to protect us in every way, but just in case He is having lunch, we are prepared.


Now.............what was the purpose of this thread to begin with???????
 
I just feel that God gave us tools with which to protect ourselves with. No, he didnt "create the gun" but he did give man a brain smart enough to develop such tools, and know how to use them responsibly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top