Does Open Carry Cause Problems?
- By Hentenza
- American Politics
- 85 Replies
Exactly.Yet we don’t have any passages ever indicating that they did actually carry a sword after that night.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Exactly.Yet we don’t have any passages ever indicating that they did actually carry a sword after that night.
The sword in general is a metaphor of strength. In Luke 25 Jesus gave the their disciples their second commission to go and spread the gospel of good news while in Rev. 1 Jesus is returning, Jesus is the Word. In both cases the metaphor is the strength of the word of God. He metaphorically tells that disciples to trust the word of God and defend it.I don’t see how that has anything to do with what He said in Luke 25. Just because He used the word sword?
The problem isn't government. The problem is the people in governments. Corrupt people lead to corrupt governments.So, I want to explore political philosophy and how it relates to Christianity.
Ideally, our faith should inform our politics, but not the other way around. Yet, this unfortunately not the case in reality. I don't intend to turn this into a finger pointing game between the left and the right, I just want to explore options here.
Should the government enact policies that reflect Christian policies?
One could argue yes, since a Christian government could provide a moral foundation for an otherwise secular society and arguably improves everyone's lives. On the other hand, one can say that the government would just bastardize Christianity and use it as a weapon for social control.
What about libertarianism? The Bible says to help the poor and needy. Yet, does that mean we should petition the government to do it, or is charity a personal responsibility for us as Christians, and thus we should not outsource it to the state?
Should there be a government? There are verses that seem to advocate for submitting to earthly authorities. Then again, many of these earthly authorities have, and sometimes still do, put innocent people to death. It can also be argued that the government has a monopoly on force and violence.
What are your thoughts?
I'm personally undecided, but that's why I made this thread. I want to see what others think to help me find out where I stand.
Actually that is not the case. The chapter begins with “therefore” so you have to read chapter 3 to understand what the conclusion that prompted the therefore is.The whole argument of Hebrews 4 is STILL keeping the sabbath and not doing it is linked to disobedience where you will "perish".
Not really. You have to read the chapter in context. Remember that when the Bible was written there were no chapters or verse numbers so you have to read the reason for the conclusion in what is now chapter 4 by following the thread from chapter 3.It comes down to this, you have to ignore this chapter in order to say keeping the sabbath doesn't matter.
Yep. Context does indeed matter.That is picking and choosing what you want to follow and accept. Using God's grace, or sacrifice on the cross to argue against Hebrews 4 is misunderstanding what God did and what he still expects from us. The scriptural truth has to incorporate all teachings and verses while not ignoring a single point or verse. This is why understanding context matters. The context of Hebrews 4 is obedience vs disobedience. When you introduce concepts like grace, resting in Jesus, and justification, the context of those concepts are different.
The problem with this interpretation is that the actual purpose of the sabbath commandment was not really to just don’t work that day but to reserve a day to worship. The cultural and historical context shows that life during and before biblical times was hard as a result of Adam’s sin (Gen 3:17). Most people would work seven days a week and not have time to worship God. Jesus rest now wants us to worship Him TODAY not just on Saturday. His yoke is easy because we are no longer under the toils of the law.Resting in Jesus :
Matthew 11:28-29: "Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls."
The context: Is talking about a general practice of seeking rest in Him for everyday trials and tribulations because the Lord can handle it. That's not the same context of the sabbath where you are required to not work. One is dealing with literal work/labor (ie: a job), the other is dealing with the souls need for peace.
No works are necessary for salvation. Good works flow naturally from saving faith. The law no longer is our guardian because faith has arrived and Jesus nailed the law to the cross.Grace:
Ephesians 2:8-9: For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, 9 not of works, lest anyone should boast.
The concept is, that even if we were the most obedient people on the planet, we need God's grace to forgive us from the disobedience that we've done. And since not following the sabbath is "disobedience" according to Hebrews 4, we need God's grace to forgive us of that. But then Paul argues that we don't continue in disobedience so that Grace may increase:
“Therefore there is now no condemnation at all for those who are in Christ Jesus. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death. For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh, so that the requirement of the Law might be fulfilled in us who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.”Romans 6:1-2: What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? Certainly not! How shall we who died to sin live any longer in it?
So since we aren't supposed to continually live in sin (sin = disobedience 1 John 3:4), and since Jesus calls us to continue in obedience (John 14:15), we are still called to follow the Sabbath. Not doing so equals disobedience which equals death because that's not abiding in the vine (John 15:4) and are not apart of him (1 John 2:4).
Yes, Biden beat Trump, but his mental decline was so bad over the next 4 years his own party deemed him unfit to run for office. Then Trump beat Harris, the best the Democrats had to offerThe election. Biden beat Trump convincingly. Yes, Trump whined and threw tantrums, even incited an insurrection to stop the certification of the election. But Biden beat him.
And imagine the howls of MAGA if Joe Biden had kept falling asleep in meetings as Trump has. Dozy Don is clearly not as sharp as Biden was during his presidency.
2 Cor 6:2
For He says:
“In an acceptable time I have heard you,
And in the day of salvation I have helped you.”
Behold, now is the accepted time; behold, now is the day of salvation.
Today is the day of salvation, today if we hear His voice do not harden our heart in rebellion, sin and disobedience. Heb3:7-19 We have no idea what tomorrow brings.
This has nothing to do with the day being the Sabbath, its the day of Salvation which we should accept God as our Lord and Savior TODAY and turn from our sin and rebellion from Him TODAY= rebellion is not subjecting ourselves to the law of God Rom8:7-8 depending on what we feel is right and wrong instead of what God says.

It doesn’t matter if it’s a police officer or not. Police are just people who are susceptible to corruption just like everyone else. Somebody trying to harm my family is someone trying to harm my family whether he’s a police officer or the president of the United States. I’m not about to stand aside and allow them to do it just because they hold a certain title or occupation.Are you advocating pulling a gun out on police to “protect” your family?
We can be thankful to God in all times.A relative born in 1918 once derided the previous generation saying that their best friends were their siblings and cousins. He had been to college in the late 30s and thought he was a sort of "citizen of the world". He traveled in financial circles and did not understand that his "friendship" was sought for financial advantage.
We now live at a time when families have been decimated and "society" is the stream in which we swim. This in itself is not very conducive to real friendships. With shrunken families, geographical distances, and limited free time one would have difficulty making friends even without a general repudiation of Christianity not to mention a disinclination of delving deeper into doctrine.
Login to view embedded mediaI'm failing to see evidence of Biden falling asleep in meetings. Biden has had his share of gaffes though. Nothing on the level of "windmills cause cancer" or "magnets don't work in water":, but gaffes nonetheless.
Trump wanders off during walk with Japanese Prime Minister
Donald Trump appeared to wander off while being given a tour by new Japanese prime minister Sanae Takaichi.
During a welcome ceremony, the new leader of Japan guided the president around a room filled with troops and dignitaries.
At one point, Trump saluted the US and Japanese flags and then kept walking, leaving Takaichi behind to bow to the flags alone. On two other occasions, she had to direct him where to walk.
During the trip to Asia, Trump confirmed that he’d had an MRI during a visit to Walter Reed Medical Center but would not disclose the reason.
WASHINGTON, DC: President Donald Trump faced online mockery as he wandered away before signing executive orders and was guided back on Wednesday, April 2.
![]()
Trump guided back to sign orders after wandering off in viral clip, Internet calls it 'Biden moment'
President Donald Trump faced mockery after a viral video showed him wandering away before signing executive orders during a Rose Garden ceremonynews.meaww.com
Trump forgets what his limo looks like and wanders off from his airplane
Login to view embedded media
And now we're told his "executive time" wherein he does social media and watches television, has been expanded to much of the day:
Leaked schedule shows how many hours Donald Trump spends at the office
Donald Trump has been savaged for his work hours and spends most of his day in “executive time”, a stunning report suggests.
I’m just pointing out there is some ideological overlap between the various Abrahamic religions. They all read out of ancient books saying gays should be killed for their sins. There’s just degrees of separation between them and how far they take that part of the scriptures to heart.Is that the norm in Christian-majority countries?
![]()
Map of Jurisdictions that Criminalise LGBT People | Human Dignity Trust
LGBT people are criminalised in 65 jurisdictions worldwide. Find out where with our map.www.humandignitytrust.org
And in other report by the National Secular Society, it also draws some noteworthy contrasts:
35 of the 53 Muslim-majority countries have laws that criminalise homosexuality
31 of the ~120 Christian-majority countries have laws that criminalise homosexuality
The remaining five countries include Nigeria, which has a roughly 50-50 split of Muslims and Christians. The other four are either Hindu or Buddhist majority. No country with a nonreligious majority bans homosexuality.
Ten countries prescribe the death penalty for homosexuality. Apart from Nigeria, every one of these countries is Muslim-majority. The penalty is based on sharia law.
Noting: Uganda's law isn't a blanket capital punishment for all homosexuality
Their law prescribes the death penalty for certain acts of "aggravated homosexuality". These are defined as: those who have homosexual sex with minors, with persons aged over 75 years, persons with disabilities, without or unable to consent, or with a person who is mentally ill. Anyone having infected others with a serious infectious disease such as HIV/AIDS, are also liable to be convicted as perpetrators of "aggravated homosexuality".
(obviously that still presents an issue with equality under the law if gay people are getting harsher punishments for the same crimes than their straight counterparts who also commit those types of crimes)
So if we run the numbers just to do a little "odds analysis" of certain likelihoods.
If a territory is Majority-Muslim
67% chance they'll end up with laws criminalizing gay people
17% chance they'll impose the death penalty for it
If a territory is Majority-Christian
25% chance they'll end up with laws criminalizing gay people
0.8% chance they'll impose the death penalty for it
...and if you only consider Westernized Majority-Christian countries, those numbers drop to practically 0.
So I don't think we do any sort of public service by conveying some sort of equivalency.
Nor is it particularly productive to, in the name of "inclusion", prop up some sort of standard of "Well, you're not perfect, and until you are perfect, you have no moral standing to criticize this other imperfect culture, attempt to limit its influence, or try to establish guardrails for them" (when that other culture, by all objective metrics, is blatantly a far worse offender, and it's not even close)
Considering that Trump is immortal and will remain president for the rest of the existence of planet earth, I don't see the sensibility of continuing this practice.From the article:
Trump hosted Kagame and Congolese officials at the recently renamed Trump Institute of Pace in Washington, D.C., on Thursday for the signing of the peace agreement.
I think they meant "Peace" not "Pace". Whatever happened to the tradition of naming things after a president only after he has died or at least left office?
Well as commercial flights very rarely, if ever, happen, there's no reason why there should be. That's not the same as saying that it cannot happen - i.e it's impossible.Well my claim was simply, there is no recorded flight that passes the pole and onto the other side.
Yet we don’t have any passages ever indicating that they did actually carry a sword after that night.It was not a call to violence and no where did I argued that. They were indeed entering an uncertain and dangerous time which parallels the reason why we carry a firearm for protection these days.
I was just looking at that. That part is a letter from the Spartans to the Jews. Basically they are sucking up to the Jews to make a political alliance. Jews write back in the same chapter calling the Spartans their brothers. Or maybe they were not sucking up maybe they were physically descended from Abraham based on this here saying the Spartans believed they came from Heracles / Hercules
![]()
The Jews of Sparta: Diplomatic Origins of Religious Synchronization.
By Pat Lowinger Were the Spartans actually ancient Jews? Of course not, but within the turbulent political period of the 2nd century BCE there appears to have been a desire by the Kingdom of Israe…discoveringancienthistory.wordpress.com
and Josephus saying Hercules was a descendent of Abraham
The Antiquities of the Jews, 1.240–1.241
Flavius Josephus translated by William Whiston
240And indeed Alexander Polyhistor gives his attestation to what I here say; who speaks thus: “Cleodemus the prophet, who was also called Malchus, who wrote a History of the Jews, in agreement with the History of Moses, their legislator, relates, that there were many sons born to Abraham by Keturah: 241nay, he names three of them, Apher, and Surim, and Japhran. That from Surim was the land of Assyria denominated; and that from the other two, Apher and Japbran, the country of Africa took its name, because these men were auxiliaries to Hercules, when he fought against Libya and Antaeus; and that Hercules married Aphra’s daughter, and of her he begat a son, Diodorus; and that Sophon was his son, from whom that barbarous people called Sophacians were denominated.”
But the Spartans did not circumcize which was the sign of the Abrahamic covenant in Genesis so if they were descended from Abraham it is strange they did not follow that custom.
Then here come two non-loaded questions, that I have asked multiple times in this thread but nobody did answer yet. So let me repeat:Loaded questions also carry a premise. Yours was obvious. It was basically an accusation in the form of a question that was asked in bad faith.
Yeah I 100% agree because in the majority of statistics that’s exactly what’s happening. In fact that’s usually the reason for conducting the study in the first place.I’m not saying that it is not possible but I’m having a problem with by which extent if any. Statistics can be manipulated to support a political agenda.
I would say that you’d have to separate gun attacks from gun defense, you can’t lump defense situations in with attack situations. Obviously if people have a gun to defend themselves you’re going to have guns involved in violent incidents.No one is saying it is one cause. What I am saying as gun restrictions become less a thing, then expect more gun violence.
Are you talking about culture or morality? I can't keep track.Is that the norm in Christian-majority countries?
![]()
Map of Jurisdictions that Criminalise LGBT People | Human Dignity Trust
LGBT people are criminalised in 65 jurisdictions worldwide. Find out where with our map.www.humandignitytrust.org
And in other report by the National Secular Society, it also draws some noteworthy contrasts:
35 of the 53 Muslim-majority countries have laws that criminalise homosexuality
31 of the ~120 Christian-majority countries have laws that criminalise homosexuality
The remaining five countries include Nigeria, which has a roughly 50-50 split of Muslims and Christians. The other four are either Hindu or Buddhist majority. No country with a nonreligious majority bans homosexuality.
Ten countries prescribe the death penalty for homosexuality. Apart from Nigeria, every one of these countries is Muslim-majority. The penalty is based on sharia law.
Noting: Uganda's law isn't a blanket capital punishment for all homosexuality
Their law prescribes the death penalty for certain acts of "aggravated homosexuality". These are defined as: those who have homosexual sex with minors, with persons aged over 75 years, persons with disabilities, without or unable to consent, or with a person who is mentally ill. Anyone having infected others with a serious infectious disease such as HIV/AIDS, are also liable to be convicted as perpetrators of "aggravated homosexuality".
(obviously that still presents an issue with equality under the law if gay people are getting harsher punishments for the same crimes than their straight counterparts who also commit those types of crimes)
So if we run the numbers just to do a little "odds analysis" of certain likelihoods.
If a territory is Majority-Muslim
67% chance they'll end up with laws criminalizing gay people
17% chance they'll impose the death penalty for it
If a territory is Majority-Christian
25% chance they'll end up with laws criminalizing gay people
0.8% chance they'll impose the death penalty for it
...and if you only consider Westernized Majority-Christian countries, those numbers drop to practically 0.
So I don't think we do any sort of public service by conveying some sort of equivalency.
Nor is it particularly productive to, in the name of "inclusion", prop up some sort of standard of "Well, you're not perfect, and until you are perfect, you have no moral standing to criticize this other imperfect culture, attempt to limit its influence, or try to establish guardrails for them" (when that other culture, by all objective metrics, is blatantly a far worse offender, and it's not even close)