Would God approve of Guns

[Domina Nostra Nova Terra]

There is no contradiction

O RLY?

Yes really, all supposed contradictions in the bible are either just poor translations or things without context/theological understanding.

[Eastkilty]

I remember this conversation was started by me in the What if America banned guns forum but stopped, mainly because it was off topic. So I decided to make a forum for it.
In the bible it says "Thou shalt not kill" -Exodus 20:13, and guns were made to do just that. However as most us know, the bible is full of contradictions.

“Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.” -Matthew 10:34

This clearly contradicts the quote from the bible "Thou shalt not kill".

So what do you guys think, do you think God would approve of guns, not approve of guns, or not know what god would think because of all those contradictions in the bible?
Edit: Thou shalt not murder sounds better than Thou shalt not kill.

It's not a contradiction.
First of all, you are interpretating the Bible to a literal matter. That passage did not literally mean Jesus would bring a sword to the world. To understand the true meaning of that verse, we go to Luke.

In Luke, the word division is used instead of sword. This implies that Jesus' coming would create division between people of different faiths or views. This is also what sword meant in Matthew.

When Jesus came down, God didn't knew the whole world wouldn't come to peace, and it never would. They would be people who hated, despised Jesus, or saw him as a fraud. The sword, or divide, is meaning the divide on different views on Jesus. As well as on Christianity, and its teachings.

So, that verse wasn't literal. It didn't literally mean violence and a sword.

[Myfanwyski]

prefers lollies- and who loves ya baby

[The New California Republic]

Would God approve of guns? God knows...¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[Jeoloba]

O RLY?

Yes really, all supposed contradictions in the bible are either just poor translations or things without context/theological understanding.

I don't get how you can not see the contradictions. If it were true that they these contradictions should be dismissed as just "poor translations" then how could God allow poor translations in his own book? Surely God would have control over his own creatures and tell them what to write? Because it has poor translations then how could you even know what is true or not in the Bible?

[Eastkilty]

Yes really, all supposed contradictions in the bible are either just poor translations or things without context/theological understanding.

I don't get how you can not see the contradictions. If it were true that they these contradictions should be dismissed as just "poor translations" then how could God allow poor translations in his own book? Surely God would have control over his own creatures and tell them what to write? Because it has poor translations then how could you even know what is true or not in the Bible?

1. Name me a contradiction, besides the sword one I already proved false.

2. The one true Bible is the King James Bible, which, if you study, has no contradictions. Some verses are just not literal, or you need to dig deeper/understand context. Poor translations belong to other, incorrect versions, like the NIV.

[Aclion]

As for guns, or more broadly weapons, consider Luke 22:36 in which Jesus explicitly tells his followers to arm themselves. and Matthew 26:52 when one of his companions cuts the ear off one of the men arresting him and, instead of remonstrating him tells him to put his sword away. Clearly not opposed to the carrying of weapons, or their use in defense.

My view there is that Jesus knew what needed to happen and that's why he told the apostles to just let him be taken.

Yes they could have fought for him but doing so would delay his sacrifice which was necessary for the salvation of the world.

You might not believe that but that's what's clear in the gospels.

I think there are three things going on there;
First Jesus wants a prophesy to be fulfilled (specifically Isaiah 53:12)
Second he wanted to warn his followers of coming trials and persecution, hence why he say that they will need cloths and equipment for traveling, as well as a sword while before they wanted for nothing.
Third he wanted to warn them against trying to rebel against Roman rule, since this was something a lot of people expected him to do, and what he was accused of. This is why two swords would be "enough" and why he warns that all who take up the sword would die by it.

[Jeoloba]

I remember this conversation was started by me in the What if America banned guns forum but stopped, mainly because it was off topic. So I decided to make a forum for it.
In the bible it says "Thou shalt not kill" -Exodus 20:13, and guns were made to do just that. However as most us know, the bible is full of contradictions.

This clearly contradicts the quote from the bible "Thou shalt not kill".

So what do you guys think, do you think God would approve of guns, not approve of guns, or not know what god would think because of all those contradictions in the bible?
Edit: Thou shalt not murder sounds better than Thou shalt not kill.

It's not a contradiction.
First of all, you are interpretating the Bible to a literal matter. That passage did not literally mean Jesus would bring a sword to the world. To understand the true meaning of that verse, we go to Luke.

In Luke, the word division is used instead of sword. This implies that Jesus' coming would create division between people of different faiths or views. This is also what sword meant in Matthew.

When Jesus came down, God didn't knew the whole world wouldn't come to peace, and it never would. They would be people who hated, despised Jesus, or saw him as a fraud. The sword, or divide, is meaning the divide on different views on Jesus. As well as on Christianity, and its teachings.

So, that verse wasn't literal. It didn't literally mean violence and a sword.

And we saw with the crusades what division between people of different faiths did now did we? It sure does look like he brought a sword to the world.

[Kowani]

I don't get how you can not see the contradictions. If it were true that they these contradictions should be dismissed as just "poor translations" then how could God allow poor translations in his own book? Surely God would have control over his own creatures and tell them what to write? Because it has poor translations then how could you even know what is true or not in the Bible?

1. Name me a contradiction, besides the sword one I already proved false.

2. The one true Bible is the King James Bible, which, if you study, has no contradictions. Some verses are just not literal, or you need to dig deeper/understand context. Poor translations belong to other, incorrect versions, like the NIV.

The KJV is the only true one? What happened to those 8 missing books, then?

[Eastkilty]

It's not a contradiction.
First of all, you are interpretating the Bible to a literal matter. That passage did not literally mean Jesus would bring a sword to the world. To understand the true meaning of that verse, we go to Luke.

In Luke, the word division is used instead of sword. This implies that Jesus' coming would create division between people of different faiths or views. This is also what sword meant in Matthew.

When Jesus came down, God didn't knew the whole world wouldn't come to peace, and it never would. They would be people who hated, despised Jesus, or saw him as a fraud. The sword, or divide, is meaning the divide on different views on Jesus. As well as on Christianity, and its teachings.

So, that verse wasn't literal. It didn't literally mean violence and a sword.

And we saw with the crusades what division between people of different faiths did now did we? It sure does look like he brought a sword to the world.

Sigh.

The Crusades were carried out, and I cannot stress this enough, CATHOLICS, not Christians. Please research about Christianity more before criticising it.

[Hladgos]

I mean, assuming god, god made man, man made guns, good to go. Man made bows and arrows and clubs and maces and swords and shite so we're all good.

[Kowani]

And we saw with the crusades what division between people of different faiths did now did we? It sure does look like he brought a sword to the world.

Sigh.

The Crusades were carried out, and I cannot stress this enough, CATHOLICS, not Christians. Please research about Christianity more before criticising it.

But…Catholicsare Christians.

[Eastkilty]

1. Name me a contradiction, besides the sword one I already proved false.

2. The one true Bible is the King James Bible, which, if you study, has no contradictions. Some verses are just not literal, or you need to dig deeper/understand context. Poor translations belong to other, incorrect versions, like the NIV.

The KJV is the only true one? What happened to those 8 missing books, then?

Which 8 missing books? The KJV was ordered by King James himself, king of what would be the most powerful nation on earth, and was composed by 50 of the world's absolute BEST translators.

[Kowani]

The KJV is the only true one? What happened to those 8 missing books, then?

Which 8 missing books? The KJV was ordered by King James himself, king of what would be the most powerful nation on earth, and was composed by 50 of the world's absolute BEST translators.

Tobit
Judith
1 Maccabees
2 Maccabees
Wisdom of Solomon
Wisdom of Sirach (also called Ecclesiasticus)
Baruch including the Letter of Jeremiah
Additions to Esther
Additions to Daniel:
Prayer of Azariah and Song of the Three Holy Children (Septuagint Daniel 3:24–90)
Susanna (Septuagint prologue, Vulgate Daniel 13)
Bel and the Dragon (Septuagint epilogue, Vulgate Daniel 14)

Also. Best translators? I do hope you’re joking.

[Eastkilty]

Sigh.

The Crusades were carried out, and I cannot stress this enough, CATHOLICS, not Christians. Please research about Christianity more before criticising it.

But…Catholicsare Christians.

Sigh.

The Crusades were carried out, and I cannot stress this enough, CATHOLICS, not Christians. Please research about Christianity more before criticising it.

But…Catholicsare Christians.

Sigh.

Catholics aren't Christians. There teachings have steered from the Bible so much, twisting its beliefs and doctrine. The Bible is supposed to be something we never dare twist and defy, and base our beliefs on. The Pope constantly comes up with new 'revelations' that steer Catholicism away from Christianity.

The Catholics teach salvation through good works and faith, whilst the Bible doesn't. They also worship the Pope a lot, and by doing so often put man over God.

[Andsed]

Don''t know don't care. If god has a problem god can say so and depending on how well of an argument god makes I might consider it.

[Kowani]

But…Catholicsare Christians.

But…Catholicsare Christians.

Sigh.

Catholics aren't Christians. There teachings have steered from the Bible so much, twisting its beliefs and doctrine. The Bible is supposed to be something we never dare twist and defy, and base our beliefs on. The Pope constantly comes up with new 'revelations' that steer Catholicism away from Christianity.

The Catholics teach salvation through good works and faith, whilst the Bible doesn't. They also worship the Pope a lot, and by doing so often put man over God.

So, yeah, I’m going to assume you know nothing about Catholic doctrine. And through that, nothing about the Bible.

[Eastkilty]

Which 8 missing books? The KJV was ordered by King James himself, king of what would be the most powerful nation on earth, and was composed by 50 of the world's absolute BEST translators.

Tobit
Judith
1 Maccabees
2 Maccabees
Wisdom of Solomon
Wisdom of Sirach (also called Ecclesiasticus)
Baruch including the Letter of Jeremiah
Additions to Esther
Additions to Daniel:
Prayer of Azariah and Song of the Three Holy Children (Septuagint Daniel 3:24–90)
Susanna (Septuagint prologue, Vulgate Daniel 13)
Bel and the Dragon (Septuagint epilogue, Vulgate Daniel 14)

Also. Best translators? I do hope you’re joking.

Yes, best translators. Look it up if you are actually bothered.

Also, you've got your Bibles mixed up.
These books are missing from the NAB, and the Roman Catholic Bible, not the KJV. The KJV has more than these books, furthermore. Modern KJV (like NKJV) may have missing books, but the KJV, the original 1611 version, has more books.

[Jeoloba]

I don't get how you can not see the contradictions. If it were true that they these contradictions should be dismissed as just "poor translations" then how could God allow poor translations in his own book? Surely God would have control over his own creatures and tell them what to write? Because it has poor translations then how could you even know what is true or not in the Bible?

1. Name me a contradiction, besides the sword one I already proved false.

2. The one true Bible is the King James Bible, which, if you study, has no contradictions. Some verses are just not literal, or you need to dig deeper/understand context. Poor translations belong to other, incorrect versions, like the NIV.

1. https://thoughtcatalog.com/jim-goad/2014/05/30-pairs-of-bible-verses-that-contradict-one-another/ and https://ffrf.org/legacy/books/lfif/?t=contra and I know a good book "Testament" by Jean Meslier, it has a whole chapter on Bible contradictions. If you want one real quick "Thou shalt not kill" and look what the Israelites got their so called "Holly Land" through violence.
2. The saying that is the one and true bible is like me saying the Quran is the one and true holly book. Not a valid point. You say it has no contradictions? https://baptistdeception.com/12-contradictions-found-in-the-kjv/#.XTS8ILxzznE

[Cekoviu]

Sigh.

Catholics aren't Christians. There teachings have steered from the Bible so much, twisting its beliefs and doctrine. The Bible is supposed to be something we never dare twist and defy, and base our beliefs on. The Pope constantly comes up with new 'revelations' that steer Catholicism away from Christianity.

The Catholics teach salvation through good works and faith, whilst the Bible doesn't. They also worship the Pope a lot, and by doing so often put man over God.

Biblical literalism, been a while since I saw that.
And you're... uh, decrying being a good person and having faith?

[Eastkilty]

Sigh.

Catholics aren't Christians. There teachings have steered from the Bible so much, twisting its beliefs and doctrine. The Bible is supposed to be something we never dare twist and defy, and base our beliefs on. The Pope constantly comes up with new 'revelations' that steer Catholicism away from Christianity.

The Catholics teach salvation through good works and faith, whilst the Bible doesn't. They also worship the Pope a lot, and by doing so often put man over God.

So, yeah, I’m going to assume you know nothing about Catholic doctrine. And through that, nothing about the Bible.

Look it up. The KJV teaches salvation through faith alone. Catholics believe in salvation through good works, like doing charity and attending mass. Look it up, for Pete's sake.

My mother was also an ex-Catholic, and so was my grandfather.

[Novus America]

So, yeah, I’m going to assume you know nothing about Catholic doctrine. And through that, nothing about the Bible.

Look it up. The KJV teaches salvation through faith alone. Catholics believe in salvation through good works, like doing charity and attending mass. Look it up, for Pete's sake.

My mother was also an ex-Catholic, and so was my grandfather.

The KJV is a poor, inaccurate, obsolete translation.
First get a real bible.

The KJV was written to be poetic more than accurate, and that was a long time ago. Since then we have found the Dead Sea Scrolls and other historical documents and greatly improved our understanding of historical languages.

[Cekoviu]

So, yeah, I’m going to assume you know nothing about Catholic doctrine. And through that, nothing about the Bible.

Look it up. The KJV teaches salvation through faith alone. Catholics believe in salvation through good works, like doing charity and attending mass. Look it up, for Pete's sake.

My mother was also an ex-Catholic, and so was my grandfather.

Here's the issue with that, though: Hitler, Stalin, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, Osama bin Laden, Hirohito... they could all get into heaven just by converting to Christianity, despite their horrific actions, without even repenting.

[Cekoviu]

Look it up. The KJV teaches salvation through faith alone. Catholics believe in salvation through good works, like doing charity and attending mass. Look it up, for Pete's sake.

My mother was also an ex-Catholic, and so was my grandfather.

The KJV is a poor, inaccurate, obsolete translation.
First get a real bible.

Also this.
If you're going to do Biblical literalism, you've gotta read it in the original Hebrew and Greek.

[Jeoloba]

And we saw with the crusades what division between people of different faiths did now did we? It sure does look like he brought a sword to the world.

Sigh.

The Crusades were carried out, and I cannot stress this enough, CATHOLICS, not Christians. Please research about Christianity more before criticising it.

If you did research you would the Catholic Church is one of the oldest Christian churchs. I have never meet a Catholic that has never meet a Catholic that said they were not a Christian.