IronCelt

When handling someone else's firearm, I always ask for permission before dry firing the thing. I *hate* it when they reply: "Sure, it won't hurt it." Duh. Look... I know it won't hurt it. Quit insulting my intelligence. It won't hurt my Harley for you to sit on it or my wife for you to dance with her, but you sure better ask permission before attempting either. Celt out.

Hey, Dirtypool, you're not off-topic, by a long shot. You nailed one of my favorite rants. Here's another angle I'm curious about but can't get closure on because nobody seems to know the definitive answer: Did the Romans allow their Judean subjects to arm themselves for personal defense? If the answer is no, the ramifications are kinda awesome. I'm open to correction here... if I've missed the path, please point me in the right direction... (a) Jesus was sinless in life. ( Jesus told his followers to arm themselves for personal protection (Luk 22:36) © This may have been a violation of secular law. (d) Jesus made a distinction between secular and spiritual law (Matt 22:21 - Give to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's). If © is 'yes' then (a) would be false unless God is saying the state (Caesar) has no authority over matters of self protection. Since (a) cannot be false (as a matter of faith), then either the state has no legal authority over me arming myself for protection, or, it was legal for the average Jew to arm himself under Roman occupation. Is the logic faulty? Can anyone provide the answer? Our Westminster Catechism says it's a violation of the Sixth Commandment (You will not commit murder) to remain passive in the face of an attack on an innocent and also calls for Christians to engage in all 'lawful endeavors' to protect our own life. I hate being surrounded by sheep. It does my heart good to know there are other Christian warriors out there. And, I'm Protestant, btw, so Esteban's comments were particularly interesting and edifying. Thanks. Celt out.

Yeah, I struggled over Matthew 5:39 a long time when I first began training civilians in Lethal Force issues. A lot of prayer and a couple of trips to the concordance settled it pretty well for me, tho. That and a friend who pointed out that nothing in that passage comes close to lethal force. Duh. Anyway, the word for 'evil' used in this verse is best translated 'hurtful', as in someone who slanders you or sues you. 'Hurtful' doesn't begin to describe someone trying to beat your brains out or rape you. That Jesus expected the innocent to stand and endure a physical attack rather than defend himself is incorrect, in my understanding. Didn't Jesus do just that? Yes, when it was necessary. But, we don't have the same sacrificial / redemptive mission that Jesus did. We shouldn't forget that Jesus was operating from a position of strength and he expects us to do the same. There are several examples of Jesus escaping physical attack before the appointed time for his death had come. When you take the scriptures as a whole, the command to turn the other cheek, if taken literally and universally, would condemn God as the greatest of hypocrites. And why would Jesus say that and then tell his disciples to buy a sword...sell their cloak if necessary, but get a sword? In those days, the cloak was the most important garment people owned. They carried stuff in it, they used it for protection from the elements and they slept in it when necessary. It was so important that OT law forbade anyone keeping a cloak as collateral to keep it overnight. So, Jesus was stressing the necessity, now that he was going away, for the disciples to get the means to protect themselves. The first CWP law. And straight from the mouth of Jesus. And, as pointed out in the initial rant, allowing a criminal to persist in his ways when you have the means and ability to stop him violates the commandment to 'love your neighbor.' It's the opposite of the self-sacrificing love (agape) that Jesus preached. Think you're making a sacrifice to turn over your wallet to someone who's pointing a gun at you? Not hardly. That's the easiest thing in the world to do, I promise. The hard thing, the self-sacrificing thing, is to risk your health to stop him from harming himself. I hate it when people hear I carry at church and ask, 'Why do you carry at church?!' Because church is no different from any other place a bunch of unarmed sheep are gathered. Holy Ground? Well, wherever I go is holy ground. Church is just a building in this sense. God's temple is in my heart. And I'm going to protect that temple, bud. The short answer to the above question is, "Luke 22:36. Where's your sword?" I say I hate it, but I really love it because it gives me an opportunity to do battle. According to scripture, God doesn't change. I know a lot of people like to separate the OT God from the kindler, gentler NT God, but that's unscriptural. He's the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow. If we want a good model for our behavior, look at Joshua. As long as the Israelites obeyed God, they were unbeatable. Over and over God tells them (and us), 'Be strong and courageous!' For the life of me, I don't understand why the church insists on training believers to be weak and defeated. Is there a danger in being strong? Absolutely. The minute you start believing in your own strength, you're in sin and heading for a fall, because God can't stand an arrogant man. David says many times in the Psalms about God making him strong and training his hands for battle. That's not just prose, but should be taken quite literally. But, the important thing is his trust is not in his sword. It's in God. I also hate it when people say, "I just trust in the Lord." I say, great, do you brush your teeth or do you just trust in the Lord to keep them in your head? Do you use your seat belt, have a fire extinguisher, inoculate your kids? Quit being stupid... or deceived. Most people just haven't studied it, prayed over it, thought about it. They've accepted the party line and are blissful in their ignorance. And that's fine for them and I'd say Thank God for a natural selection process, but the problem is, they get in the way of those of us who understand that we live in a world at war and interfere with us doing our job. I hate that. Seriously. Let me ask this question: Do you think Roman law allowed the average Judean subject to arm himself for self-protection? Celt out.

Hello, Brother. Hey, I facilitate a Wild at Heart study group at my church. Eldredge's latest book, 'Waking the Dead' is even better, IMO. You're absolutely correct not to spoon feed the link! Every man, and every mother of a male child, should read 'Wild at Heart.' And we talked about Rev 21:8 last night, too. Evidently God has no room for cowards in heaven. That was a wake up call. Another thing I hate: People who don't believe that Luke 22:36 means exactly what it says. Celt out.

I hate the word love. I almost hate the whole concept... at least as it's preached from the pulpit and understood by the masses. We love love and peace, brothers. Headlines shout 'Cease-fire in Najaf!' or Fallujah or wherever, like that's our goal. I'd much rather see this headline: 'Last Islamic terrorist killed like a dog today!' I've seen friends go to ruin because I didn't understand that true love sometimes requires active intervention. I've almost gone to ruin myself because my friends didn't understand I needed to hear hard words. A slap in the face, literally or figuratively, can sometimes be the most loving thing to do to a friend headed down the wrong path. But, love today means tolerance of things that shouldn't be tolerated. American men are being feminized day by day in the name of love. And the church hasn't stood in the doorway to put a stop to it. In fact, the church is doing everything in its power to push strong men away. Who wants to worship a pale faced, hippy Mr. Rogers that so many mistakenly believe was forced to his death? And, church leaders don't want strong willed men challenging their authority or being 'divisive.' It's not love to allow some predator to take your wallet. That's not what Jesus meant when he said to turn the other cheek. This creep's going to use your credit cards to buy drugs and you're showing him 'love' by allowing him to have them? Not hardly. Love is knocking his dick in the dirt, getting control of him and then telling him the gospel. You can always take him some spending money while he's in jail if you feel the need to. Would we let our children run into the path of a car, or would we do whatever was necessary to rescue them? Obviously the latter. So, how is the concept any different in application to friends, predators, or even other countries? God is a Warrior and I have His spirit living inside me. I am not a nice guy. I'm a Christian. The two are not necessarily inclusive. In fact, I'd argue that being a Chritian calls for you to sometimes be a butthead to the world. I'm a Christian man which means I must be a warrior. I'm not a warrior in spite of my faith, nor as a footnote to my faith. I'm a warrior because of my faith. And somedays, that's the only thing that gives me the courage to get out of my foxhole and join the battle. For a true picture of Jesus when he returns, check out Rev. 19:11. <--- just another clue that the 1911 was inspired by God! There's much more to this rant, but I have things to do. Celt out.