TexasCHLforum.com

When the jihadists walk into your church with AK-47s, you'd better pray someone is armed. Some many ones. Trying to find a biblical imperative for the right to bear arms is silly. Common sense tells you it's foolish to be a victim. Without defensive weapons, that's exactly what you are. Ask the Easter celebrants in Pakistan how helpful it was to be unarmed.

The article is well written and quite clearly anti-gun with such remarks as

blessed peacemaking from the barrel of a sidearm fits perfectly with today’s “good guy with a gun” fantasies.

and

houses of worship are no less likely to serve as venues of conflicts that escalate uncontrollably because of the presence of a gun

. The Trace is certainly consistent on the topic of guns.

The mention of Texas churches in the article conveniently brings up some side-effects of the recently enacted licensed open carry law. Missing, of course, is that it has been legal to carry concealed in Texas churches for several years with negligible negative -- and presumably some positive -- effects.

Baldeagle & Russ,

My take on the article was that it was a subtle attempt to dismiss the justification of guns in churches.

”​ If more weapons begin to turn up in congregations in Mississippi and around the country, we may soon hear stories of church guns and their unholy uses told and retold, like so many verses from scripture."

This is the last sentence in the article, which is akin to the standard mantra of the left that if people are armed with self defense in mind it's axiomatic "blood will run in the streets", sigh...

No, no it won't.

Why not?

Because those arming themselves as a measure of self defense aren't criminals, or loons, or ready to shoot you for some wily-nily reason, that's why...

You, who are afraid of guns, depend on people who aren't.

I know what the pastor and leaders of my church feel towards carrying in church, and they are to a person all for it. There have been too many instances of people coming in and shooting congregants. There are no signs prohibiting carry of any kind, and I know that there are several LTC holders who carry every Sunday, myself included, as well as a few LEO's who are armed. We don't have an organized security team, but I do practice drawing while holding my bass, I face the doors to the church when we are playing so if anyone enters with evil on their mind, they may be surprised to see the bass player draw down on them. ( I don't know if my solid body bass will stop a bullet or not, but it will have to go through it to hit me.)

All of the stories listed in the article, (some going back to the 1880s) list disputes between church members with no mention of the legality of them even owning guns, much less the fact that these weren't a response to an attack. The left simply throws out incidences that have nothing to do with the church, but interpersonal issues between people.

just old Texas news here:
Fort Worth church knows ‘all too well’ the horror of a mass shooting
http://www.star-telegram.com/news/local ... 76049.html

On Sept. 15, 1999, horror struck Fort Worth’s Wedgwood Baptist Church when Larry Gene Ashbrook invaded a youth rally carrying 200 rounds of ammunition and a pipe bomb

http://www.nytimes.com/1999/09/16/us/gu ... worth.html

Baptist church in Fort Worth, a man with a semiautomatic handgun walked in and began firing, killing six people in the church before turning the gun on himself. An eighth person died later at a hospital, officials said. ...bomb exploded on a balcony inside the church sanctuary

A young man interviewed on CNN said the gunman paused at least once to reload his gun.

''I just saw him keep shooting and reloading,'' said the man, who was not identified. ''He'd empty it and then throw some more bullets in there, and he kept shooting

While I'm not a church goer, I have great respect for those who are.

You must defend yourselves.

And, you've no reason whatsoever to apologize for doing so.

I'm a lapsed Christian, but I still love the faithful.

Luke 22:36

"...whoever has no sword is to sell his coat and buy one."

And the Catholic Church can actually endorse going to war, as long as certain conditions are met:
http://www.catholic.com/documents/just-war-doctrine

Sounds pretty clear to me.

Exodus 22 offers the case of self-defense by a homeowner against an intruding burglar. The Torah makes a clear distinction between a nighttime and daytime robbery – as does Texas law!

This passage from Exodus introduces the classic principle of self-defense, "If someone comes to kill you, rise up and kill him (first)." If there is homicidal intent, self-defense is more than permitted; it is required. This is a common principle of all legal systems, America's included and Texas especially!

I would just like to point out something I haven't seen mentioned yet.

There is no reason to expect different behavior from actual Christians outside of a church building than one would expect inside of a church building. The church is the people, not the building. If it is okay for a Christian to defend himself out in the world, then it is okay for him to do so at church.

As far as scripture goes, I have spoken to my pastor (who carries) about this. He said that the Bible teaches us that we should count it joy if we are persecuted for our faith, even unto death. However, almost none of the attacks we see in this country are religiously motivated. They are personal or political in nature. We are commanded in scripture to protect our families. I will do so with a legally carried firearm, whether I'm in church or out. Just as I will try to shine the light of Christ's love and mercy wherever I go, whether in church or out.

I've never seen anything within the new testament which prohibits the moral use of force, it does say "thou shalt not murder" which is the wrongful taking of an innocent life. It does not actually say "thou shalt not kill" the hebrew writing says murder. As for being persecuted for being a christian to the point of myrterdom, I am no scholar on the subject but I've always thought the idea simply means refusing to reject one's faith in Christ regardless of the circumstances. And that includes using force if need be to defend oneself up to and including death if need be in the face of refusing to reject or disavow one's faith. The idea of the christians passively allowing themselves to be fed to the lions never seemed to make sense, grab a sword or a spear and defend one's faith and by extension one's self. You may still die but you are dying because of your refusal to reject your faith regardless of the fact you are still defending yourself.
Jesus himself was not above the use of force, in this case brute force. He did not ask the moneychangers in the temple to please leave. He got ahold of a whip and beat them until they left.

wil wrote:I've never seen anything within the new testament which prohibits the moral use of force, it does say "thou shalt not murder" which is the wrongful taking of an innocent life. It does not actually say "thou shalt not kill" the hebrew writing says murder.

Absolutely correct! Not everyone realizes that the King James translation, which was in turn translated from the Greek (Septuagint) incorrectly reads "kill", when the correct translation direct from the Hebrew is "murder". And the two words do indeed carry very different meanings. Nicely done!

LTC (Ret) Dave Grossman talks about church security:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yIPJ5S8 ... r_embedded

I attended a Sheepdog Seminar in Ft Worth in February. It was well worth the trip and expense. I've read LTC Grossman's "On Combat" and am reading "On Killing". Good books.