Once I saw what a gun is capable of doing to a human body with my own eyes, my view on guns and violence changed. I wish it would have changed sooner based off the teachings of Jesus.
Interesting. Scot, you are a genius and I love you, so I am going to disagree very carefully. The Second Amendment is not a "moral good" in the way that the First Amendment is not a "moral good." It is no more moral to carry a gun than it is to worship Satan or to scream obscenities at your neighbor or to drum up false news stories about a political candidate, all of which are protected by the Bill of Rights. These are freedoms that our founders saw fit to protect for very good reasons.
I find it interesting that you chose Australia--a country where its citizens are being tear gassed, rounded up, and placed into internment camps for violations of Covid policies--as the lever for this argument. That could never happen in the United States *because of* the Second Amendment. So, pro: They have fewer gun deaths. Con: Their government can basically do whatever they want to them. That's not an acceptable tradeoff. I think we can agree holding people against their will is not a moral good.
The purpose of government and policy is not to effect a moral good because government itself is not "good." This is precisely why these rights--to say what we wish, to worship as we wish, to be tried by a jury of our peers, to own and carry firearms--exist: to guard against what is both necessary and capable of great evil (as we see in parts of Australia).
There are obviously many, many other strong arguments in favor of the Second Amendment, but this only addresses the argument that it is not a moral good, which I do not believe is in working order.
These two sentences cannot be reconciled: "Chicago has the strongest gun laws in the nation and those laws seem to have little slowing-down impact. Murderous people, of course, use guns for murder but gun laws can help."
Mitch, Chicago's example is one I ponder often: lots of gun laws, lots of murders. Chicago shows gun laws are not the total solution, but I believe they can be helpful. I think it was in the 60s that the SCOTUS heard a case and ruled to expand permissible guns. Bad permission. But I do believe Christians have to ask about the moral good of guns, gun ownership, and gun laws on the basis of Christian ethics and not on the basis of the Second Amendment. This all from a theologian to a lawyer!!!
Scot, I grew up and was shaped in a place where a gun is a tool ... like a shovel or a lawn mower or a tractor. We use them to hunt. Yes, we can also use them to protect ourselves. I would be interested to hear your exegesis/thought process on why Jesus told his disciples to sell their cloak and buy a sword in Luke 22. Is owning a sword a moral good?
I grew up with a shotgun and hunted quite often. Loved it. I have no hesitations with hunting guns or fishing poles, which rules out handguns to be used to shoot people and assault weapons (modified or not).
In the Old Testament you have the moral good of self-defense. Matthew five and its spirit of turning the other cheek does not apply when you are mugged in an alley and a knife pierces your body. There, self defense is justified.
On Luke 22, it's one of those texts that seems to be suggestive, provocative, etc.. I read it like this: "if you don't have a sword ... buy one" is a metaphor for "it's gonna get tough and dangerous." So the disciples say "Hey, we've got two already!" And Jesus says "Enough" and means "You still don't get it." it's hard to square the personal use of a sword with Matt 5's command not to resist.
Mitch, you are seriously misinformed about the situation in Australia! The Government has not been tear gassing people and placing them in internment camps. It is true we have been under harsh lockdown rules during Covid but that is to protect its citizens with the result that we have over 90% vaccination rate and less than 2000 deaths from Covid. Compare that to US statistics! There is legitimate debate about Government overreach but please spare us the misinformation that feeds the conspiracy theories. I live in the most locked down city in the world and am very critical of the way our Government locks up refugees but I am thankful for the efforts our governments have made to suppress this pandemic.
You are correct that police have used tear-gas at times to quell violent protests that have been hijacked by extreme right wing groups but the internment camps are quarantine facilities which are far superior to hotel quarantine which has been plagued with problems. Mandatory quarantine is not unique to Australia. I am not sure of your point in your criticism. Are you saying the US authorities would not use tear gas to quell violent riots or are you suggesting it would be better if the population was armed so we could fight back?
I think Scot’s point is still valid - more guns are not the solution.
I’m sorry if you thought I was disparaging you - it was not my intention but the articles you posted show how the media shapes our perceptions. We have a problem here with Christians who are convinced that the Government is out to get them and so I am wary of posts that feed that fear.
We're really ready to start questioning someone's status as a Spirit-filled believer because they don't embrace your cultural values and fears? This might be the kind of hyper-sensitivity and reactivity that the article warns about.
As an American, I also find quite a bit of irony in claiming that guns keep our police from crossing unjust boundaries...
I wonder if the hyper-militarization of our police force in both gear and training is partly a response to the danger of our public gun culture. Or they might just be symptoms of the same American inclination to violence.
A militia these days, whether armed forces, reserve or volunteer forces, does not usually keep its guns at home, and does not carry them when not under orders in service.
Thank you for speaking to this with such clarity. I preached on this subject a number of years ago, specifically the connection to idolatry. You'd think the connection between swords/guns in ancient/modern times - to say nothing of Jesus dying on a cross instead of nailing his enemies to them - wouldn't be too difficult to draw, but the power of our national imagination to justify our love affair with guns is powerful indeed. This, of course, gets back (as so many things do) to the power of bad theology and dangerous hermeneutics ("Well, in the end Jesus is going to come back to open up a can on everyone anyway, so...") Anyway...I appreciate you lending your voice and platform to this discussion. Thank you.
Aside from being a pastor, I also am a hunter and a target sportsman. I well understand some of the positive uses for firearms and participate. I have fed my family countless healthy, organic, and delicious meals from harvesting wild game. At the same time, I have serious theological reservations with the idea of defensive weapons and the whole culture and system of thinking around how that *actually seems to play out* (in difference to overly tidy ideologies around the issue). I'm not sure how America can address such an issue that goes so deep.
Here in Canada, our system leaves no room for defensive guns (as a purpose of ownership) for civilians - hunting or target sports only. Likewise, we have a strong vetting system and safety course(s) to get a license(s). Among vetted, licensed (legal) owners, this keeps crime very low. Of course, those who are intentioned to do evil can get illegal weapons (mostly smuggled from the USA). But there is a positive way forward to retain the ability to hunt or participate in sports while shifting the culture of ownership away from thinking about using them on people. Speaking of which, I strongly resonate with the last sentiments of the post. I do believe that we need to hold the entertainment industry to account for glorifying such violence and nurturing interpersonal violent gun culture.
If you live in a place with wild hogs, you learn quick that an AR is pretty important hunting and protective tool. Yes, you can get an equivalent rifle that doesn’t look “scary” and still put a magazine in it with enough rounds to take down several hogs, but it’s heavier and more cumbersome.
I am a Christian Pacifist thanks to Lipscomb and Yoder and others… that being said I have no issue with self defense or the second amendment. What I see most in this argument is a class distinction. Wealthy, bourgeois lefties who don’t like guns mainly because they don’t like the people that like guns.
Once I saw what a gun is capable of doing to a human body with my own eyes, my view on guns and violence changed. I wish it would have changed sooner based off the teachings of Jesus.
Excellent post.
PTSD is one of the tell-tale implications of the horrors of war. I'm sorry for you.
Interesting. Scot, you are a genius and I love you, so I am going to disagree very carefully. The Second Amendment is not a "moral good" in the way that the First Amendment is not a "moral good." It is no more moral to carry a gun than it is to worship Satan or to scream obscenities at your neighbor or to drum up false news stories about a political candidate, all of which are protected by the Bill of Rights. These are freedoms that our founders saw fit to protect for very good reasons.
I find it interesting that you chose Australia--a country where its citizens are being tear gassed, rounded up, and placed into internment camps for violations of Covid policies--as the lever for this argument. That could never happen in the United States *because of* the Second Amendment. So, pro: They have fewer gun deaths. Con: Their government can basically do whatever they want to them. That's not an acceptable tradeoff. I think we can agree holding people against their will is not a moral good.
The purpose of government and policy is not to effect a moral good because government itself is not "good." This is precisely why these rights--to say what we wish, to worship as we wish, to be tried by a jury of our peers, to own and carry firearms--exist: to guard against what is both necessary and capable of great evil (as we see in parts of Australia).
There are obviously many, many other strong arguments in favor of the Second Amendment, but this only addresses the argument that it is not a moral good, which I do not believe is in working order.
These two sentences cannot be reconciled: "Chicago has the strongest gun laws in the nation and those laws seem to have little slowing-down impact. Murderous people, of course, use guns for murder but gun laws can help."
Mitch, Chicago's example is one I ponder often: lots of gun laws, lots of murders. Chicago shows gun laws are not the total solution, but I believe they can be helpful. I think it was in the 60s that the SCOTUS heard a case and ruled to expand permissible guns. Bad permission. But I do believe Christians have to ask about the moral good of guns, gun ownership, and gun laws on the basis of Christian ethics and not on the basis of the Second Amendment. This all from a theologian to a lawyer!!!
Scot, I grew up and was shaped in a place where a gun is a tool ... like a shovel or a lawn mower or a tractor. We use them to hunt. Yes, we can also use them to protect ourselves. I would be interested to hear your exegesis/thought process on why Jesus told his disciples to sell their cloak and buy a sword in Luke 22. Is owning a sword a moral good?
I grew up with a shotgun and hunted quite often. Loved it. I have no hesitations with hunting guns or fishing poles, which rules out handguns to be used to shoot people and assault weapons (modified or not).
In the Old Testament you have the moral good of self-defense. Matthew five and its spirit of turning the other cheek does not apply when you are mugged in an alley and a knife pierces your body. There, self defense is justified.
On Luke 22, it's one of those texts that seems to be suggestive, provocative, etc.. I read it like this: "if you don't have a sword ... buy one" is a metaphor for "it's gonna get tough and dangerous." So the disciples say "Hey, we've got two already!" And Jesus says "Enough" and means "You still don't get it." it's hard to square the personal use of a sword with Matt 5's command not to resist.
Mitch, you are seriously misinformed about the situation in Australia! The Government has not been tear gassing people and placing them in internment camps. It is true we have been under harsh lockdown rules during Covid but that is to protect its citizens with the result that we have over 90% vaccination rate and less than 2000 deaths from Covid. Compare that to US statistics! There is legitimate debate about Government overreach but please spare us the misinformation that feeds the conspiracy theories. I live in the most locked down city in the world and am very critical of the way our Government locks up refugees but I am thankful for the efforts our governments have made to suppress this pandemic.
This literally takes seconds to find, Peter. You're full of it, and "it" is not the Holy Spirit.
https://www.opindia.com/2021/08/australia-police-tear-gas-rubber-bullets-thousands-protest-against-lockdown/
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/sep/23/arrest-footage-and-teargas-raise-concerns-about-victoria-polices-use-of-force-to-quell-protests
https://twitter.com/daisymay4263/status/1457607388056285187?s=20
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-59486285
You are correct that police have used tear-gas at times to quell violent protests that have been hijacked by extreme right wing groups but the internment camps are quarantine facilities which are far superior to hotel quarantine which has been plagued with problems. Mandatory quarantine is not unique to Australia. I am not sure of your point in your criticism. Are you saying the US authorities would not use tear gas to quell violent riots or are you suggesting it would be better if the population was armed so we could fight back?
I think Scot’s point is still valid - more guns are not the solution.
I’m sorry if you thought I was disparaging you - it was not my intention but the articles you posted show how the media shapes our perceptions. We have a problem here with Christians who are convinced that the Government is out to get them and so I am wary of posts that feed that fear.
We're really ready to start questioning someone's status as a Spirit-filled believer because they don't embrace your cultural values and fears? This might be the kind of hyper-sensitivity and reactivity that the article warns about.
As an American, I also find quite a bit of irony in claiming that guns keep our police from crossing unjust boundaries...
I wonder if the hyper-militarization of our police force in both gear and training is partly a response to the danger of our public gun culture. Or they might just be symptoms of the same American inclination to violence.
A militia these days, whether armed forces, reserve or volunteer forces, does not usually keep its guns at home, and does not carry them when not under orders in service.
True enough, but the Supreme Court adjusted gun laws a couple times and has made too many guns available for too many.
Thank you for speaking to this with such clarity. I preached on this subject a number of years ago, specifically the connection to idolatry. You'd think the connection between swords/guns in ancient/modern times - to say nothing of Jesus dying on a cross instead of nailing his enemies to them - wouldn't be too difficult to draw, but the power of our national imagination to justify our love affair with guns is powerful indeed. This, of course, gets back (as so many things do) to the power of bad theology and dangerous hermeneutics ("Well, in the end Jesus is going to come back to open up a can on everyone anyway, so...") Anyway...I appreciate you lending your voice and platform to this discussion. Thank you.
Aside from being a pastor, I also am a hunter and a target sportsman. I well understand some of the positive uses for firearms and participate. I have fed my family countless healthy, organic, and delicious meals from harvesting wild game. At the same time, I have serious theological reservations with the idea of defensive weapons and the whole culture and system of thinking around how that *actually seems to play out* (in difference to overly tidy ideologies around the issue). I'm not sure how America can address such an issue that goes so deep.
Here in Canada, our system leaves no room for defensive guns (as a purpose of ownership) for civilians - hunting or target sports only. Likewise, we have a strong vetting system and safety course(s) to get a license(s). Among vetted, licensed (legal) owners, this keeps crime very low. Of course, those who are intentioned to do evil can get illegal weapons (mostly smuggled from the USA). But there is a positive way forward to retain the ability to hunt or participate in sports while shifting the culture of ownership away from thinking about using them on people. Speaking of which, I strongly resonate with the last sentiments of the post. I do believe that we need to hold the entertainment industry to account for glorifying such violence and nurturing interpersonal violent gun culture.
If you live in a place with wild hogs, you learn quick that an AR is pretty important hunting and protective tool. Yes, you can get an equivalent rifle that doesn’t look “scary” and still put a magazine in it with enough rounds to take down several hogs, but it’s heavier and more cumbersome.
I am a Christian Pacifist thanks to Lipscomb and Yoder and others… that being said I have no issue with self defense or the second amendment. What I see most in this argument is a class distinction. Wealthy, bourgeois lefties who don’t like guns mainly because they don’t like the people that like guns.