I'm pretty easy going....dont voice my opinion unless asked. Don't bother anyone...etc. I dont mind when our church sends out an email that "Betty sue is in the hospital with infected corns...please pray" type of messege, or we have a red cross blood drive in town this weekend, etc.....I live in a fairly religious town and this type of commuinication is common. My wife goes to the church alot more then me and she feels it is more her church then I do....I was raised in a BIG presby. church and dont care to much for the smaller church. However, I like going, when I go and I enjoy the way the minister preaches. HOWEVER my posting is not about religion....my wife and I share a common email account.....If you were to send me a question about a rear sight, we both could read it. So I'm checking new posts at AR15.com as I do daily when we get a new email (not thru ar15.com)....I open it and:

Don't Let the Assault Weapons Ban Expire!

Dear friend,

Many of you know of my involvement in the Million Mom March Organization and our mission to promote sensible gun safety laws for our country.   Well, unless we ALL speak up the assault weapons ban that has been in place for 10 years will expire in a few days.  Well over 85% of Americans and the majority of our country's Police Chiefs support this ban and I am betting that you are one of them.    FOR THE SAKE OF OUR CHILDREN, WE MUST SPEAK UP TODAY TO LET OUR LEADERS KNOW WE EXPECT THEM TO RENEW THIS BAN.  PLEASE READ THE FOLLOWING INFO, GO TO THE LINK AND LET YOUR VOICE BE HEARD.  It is absurd that in our country the great majority of Americans could support the ban and it can very well expire due to the influence of the NRA on our elected officials.

Thanks in advance,

XXXXXXXXXXX  

The national ban on military-style assault weapons will expire on Monday, September 13th, unless President Bush and Congress act now. President Bush promised to renew the ban, but instead he's letting it expire -- he has refused to call on Congress to deliver it for his signature.

For 10 years the assault weapons ban has taken the deadliest weapons off our streets, cutting their use in crimes 66 percent. But beginning Tuesday the 14th, an 18-year-old will once again be able to buy an AK-47 assault rifle in most states.

We can stop this if we speak up now. President Bush and Congress must renew the assault weapons ban, not let it expire. Please join me in demanding it, at:

http://www.moveon.org/savetheban/

Thank you.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Buy the ways this was sent from the ministers wife to the common church email contacts...
OK.....how the hell should I respond to that.....I dont want me or my wife / kids to get black balled at the church....I dont care if I do but I sure as hell dont want my wife to....

Do I send her a link to buy a raffle ticket for the gunstock raffle....do I even respond at all....should I ask her to back up her statement with stats....I am truly torn about this subject.....these are my rights she is talking about taking away.....WTF..... this shit aint funny.....

You should tell her to quit speading lies and misinformation.

Respond by informing her.  

Tell her how the law has done absolutely NOTHING to prevent crime. Tell her, even though the AWB was in effect, these "military-style" weapons were still being sold.  Now, I dont know how many post-ban AR have been sold since '94, but i'm sure it's quite a large number.  I'm sure, she will be most shocked they are still being sold, lol.

Now ask her what was purpose of this law.  For the past 10 years, I havent heard of a reported drive-by bayonetting.  Then again, I didnt hear a single incident of it before than too.

The way I see it you could handle it in two ways: 1) Easy way- deleate the message and give her dirty looks at church next weekend. 2) Hard way- the way I normally take- Ask her if her husband approves the message she has forwarded to all of the church members and she doesn't stop useing the church's resources you are going to file a complaint with the IRS to remove the church's status as a non profit org. if they continue to use the church as political pulpit.

Quoted: The way I see it you could handle it in two ways: 1) Easy way- deleate the message and give her dirty looks at church next weekend. 2) Hard way- the way I normally take- Ask her if her husband approves the message she has forwarded to all of the church members and she doesn't stop useing the church's resources you are going to file a complaint with the IRS to remove the church's status as a non profit org. if they continue to use the church as political pulpit.

OK I may have dropped one nut tonight but that may take two.....I think you see where I am coming from......She did not send  a"blind"email....I could respond to everyone.....I'd have to move out of my friggin house (and take my assult weapons) with me.....

I could send everyone one of the "girls and guns' photos......

Quoted: file a complaint with the IRS to remove the church's status as a non profit org. if they continue to use the church as political pulpit.

Awesome response!  I wish I thought of that too.   You can also remind them that you won't be DONATING until things change.   Not to get too OT, but I don't go to my church anymore due to their views on a lot of things.  

Tell her that you like pie and to bring one over for the fun shoot that her husband has promised to attend...

Quoted: You should tell her to quit speading lies and misinformation.

exactly what 223 said, Find the statistics quote them in the email and then leave her the links for her to read herself and show here that the law has not reduced crim 66% and that the importation of AK's and such have been regulated since 89?(i think, don't kill me guys) Drown her in facts. Maybe she'll see that she was wrong and go buy an assualt rifle

Explain everything that is incorrect, politely, and then invite them to go shooting.

Normally, I wouldn't dream of inviting crazy leftists, but she IS a minister's wife.

- BG

I did a search for the words "sell" and "sword" via an online Bible resource.

http://bible.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?section=0&word=sell%20sword&version=csb

I was trying to find the phrase below.

Luke 22:36 -
Then He said to them, "But now, whoever has a money-bag should take it, and also a backpack. And whoever doesn't have a sword should sell his robe and buy one."

Your query was found in 20 of 23 Translations
The Holman Christian Standard Bible - 1 Verse:  Display Verse
The New American Standard Bible - 1 Verse:  Display Verse
The American Standard Version - 1 Verse:  Display Verse
The Complete Jewish Bible - 1 Verse:  Display Verse
The New King James Version - 1 Verse:  Display Verse
The King James Version (Authorized) - 1 Verse:  Display Verse
The New Living Translation - 1 Verse:  Display Verse
The New Revised Standard Version - 1 Verse:  Display Verse
The Revised Standard Version - 1 Verse:  Display Verse
The Good News Translation - 1 Verse:  Display Verse
The Douay-Rheims Bible - 1 Verse:  Display Verse
GOD'S WORD - 1 Verse:  Display Verse
World English Bible - 1 Verse:  Display Verse
The Darby Translation - 1 Verse:  Display Verse
Hebrew Names Version of World English Bible - 1 Verse:  Display Verse
Webster's Bible Translation - 1 Verse:  Display Verse
Young's Literal Translation - 1 Verse:  Display Verse
Weymouth New Testament - 1 Verse:  Display Verse
Third Millennium Bible - 1 Verse:  Display Verse
New Century Version - 1 Verse:  Display Verse

Perhaps the words of Jesus Christ may sway their opinion.  Just a thought.  Your mileage may vary.
Sincerely,
Craig

Explain nicely that the AWB was largely based on appearance alone . And was an ill conceived piece of legislation written by people who watched too many action movies .

Then use her e-mail to sign up to every Lesbian and Bestiality mailing list you can find

Her info is a lie, and any working street cop knows it.  Its simply sad thats what she thinks after being spoon fed this filth.  You can tell her that there are plenty of officers who feel safer on the streets with a well armed society.  I know that I do.

Gidds, address it directly and clearly. Send her this link or cut and past parts of it:

http://www.gunowners.org/fs0404.htm

address the issue with FACTS not hype.

Also see:

http://www.claytoncramer.com/gundefenseblog/blogger.html
(though that one might be more "emotional")


KAC

DEFINITELY needs to be corrected. Such lies lead to the perpetuation of the bullshit we have to deal with...let's nip it at the bud....

She's an extremist that needs to be corrected.  Her views are out on the extreme left wing fringes.  Do you want her to influence people, if not, don't let her get away with her sheepish propaganda.  I would let her know, in no uncertain terms, that I believe owning an AR 15 provides for self-defense and guards against tyranny.  I would also let her know that her sheepish attitude hurts this country during this time of terrorism.

She invaded your privacy with a request that you do something repulsive to you.  Fight back, don't be a sheep!

Quoted:
... 2) Hard way- the way I normally take- Ask her if her husband approves the message she has forwarded to all of the church members and she doesn't stop useing the church's resources you are going to file a complaint with the IRS to remove the church's status as a non profit org. if they continue to use the church as political pulpit.
[Ace Ventura/]...and his name was...BINGO! [/Ace Ventura]

Yea, I can see where you wouldnt want to stir things up at church for your family. I've spoken with A LOT of people about the sunsetting of the AWB. Some will listen and cross to the right side of the fence, other refuse to hear the truth and continue to think they are right, but at least the true facts have been presented to them and they made up their minds to stay stupid themselves. Here
Gather up a large amount of data from 'our' sources. The facts behind the 'reduction in crime' the actual percentage that AWB 'type' weapons are used in crimes and stuff like that. Stuff that can be tested and proved to be true. Get a copy of 922r.

Print all of this stuff out and bring it up with her using a 'Hey, I saw your email and I have a few questions and it.'

Make her feel that SHE is the one that is going to be helping you to understand what the AWB is all about. When she goes into the standard 'little kids will be able to buy AK-47s from the trunks of cars!' speech, whip out a couple pages from your stack. Show her that NFA stuff is already legal in parts of the country and the AWB has nothing to do with that. Show her that laws are already in place to cover about 99.99995% of the stuff. Simply keep having her present her 'data' and you shoot holes in it with the truth. When she makes a statement with a percentage or something like that in it rebuke it, ask her where she got her data and how she knows that data is valid. I've found that after just a few questions and you presenting the ACTUAL facts and not straight out lies, people who really do have an open mind and will listen to facts and not just go off of feelings and what the media and anti-gunners tell them will usually at least take a step back and start asking you questions about it. Then the rest of the paper comes out and you can a lot of times really turn someone from a person who thinks they are doing something for all of the right reasons(kind of like how Christ ended up on the cross huh!)  to someone who really does know the facts and can take a bigger view on things then they had before.

Now that being said, if she is one of the types that has her mind made up and even the Lord almighty couldnt change her views because she is '100% right' and she 'knows her facts'. I would totally agree with taking up a fight on a financial direction. Yea, church should be a safe place, but it should be the last place that lies, mistruths and other garbage is sent out from.

Mudruck
----------
The Utah Varminters Association
http://utahvarminters.org

Quoted: I would keep it simple, because 99% of these folks don't understand laws or their impact. The media has whipped her up into a frenzy, with visions of armagedon in the streets Send her a short note asking her not to be worried.  The AWB is a cosmetic law, that in reality does not really affect the functioning of the rifle. It is a media misconception that kids or adults can simply purchase an AK47.  They have been regulated and licenced a long time ago (and that law does not sunset). Despite what political groups tell you, statistics prove that semi auto rifles are not the weapon of choice by criminals.  And if the AWB law stays or goes it will have no effect on the total number on firearms in the wrong hands. That might sound non-confrontational enough to preserve peace at your house, and get your message across?

Make sure when you respond, it responds back to all recipients
I'm guessing if it is a small church, they don't know to use blind copies.

FIND A NEW CHURCH! DUH! h
The girls with guns picture is a good idea too!

Whatever you do, be sure to "reply all".  She has already stated her association with the MMM which indicates she is to the far left on this issue.  Sending stats to show how the AWB did nothing to decrease crime may help others on the mail list, but she won't get it.  Not only report her to the IRS, but also to the church council.  Demand an immediate apology and retraction email be sent to all and that unless she is an appionted officer of the church she must be band from using the church email accoount.  This must be done today!!

Since she sent this out as an open request, I encourage you to post the email address so that this can be addressed approporiately by the masses (pun intended).

1.  Demand an apology.

2.  Take her to a "Bible Study" at the range.  I'd bet good money she's never even held a firearm, let alone had explained to her how on works.

This is the kind of political crap that lead me to stop going to church years ago. I see little has changed.

There is nothing worse in this country than uninformed do-gooders. I think you should explain the truth to her, and see how she responds.

OK - now you have been given a great responsibility.  Gather the appropriate information + rebuttal statistics, and send.  You could even do it in an anonymous email to the addresses she sent the email to.  We cannot continue to allow these people prone to ignorance with their knee-jerk reactions ruin our rights!!

Please IM me if I can help!

Quoted: This is the kind of political crap that lead me to stop going to church years ago. I see little has changed. There is nothing worse in this country than uninformed do-gooders. I think you should explain the truth to her, and see how she responds.

Please don't prejudge all of the faithful into a category that you assume do not believe in your same conservative views (on gun rights & such).  I can assure you that the majority of the faithful in my church, my town, my state, feel the same way everyone on this site does about the ridiculousness of the AWB.  My gosh, if you're basing your 'I'm going to take my ball and go home' on just one, two, or even three different churches, then I PROMISE you that you're being prejudice.

Prejudice = judging/coming to a decision about a person or body of people before the facts/the truth

It would be nice if we could calculate the cost to taxpayers this law has brought. Cost, wasted time Distraction from more important issue's, etc.

Respond by telling them the truth the whole truth.

I would do one of two things, one would definitely not win me any friends in the church and the other plan would just cause a knee jerk reaction with the person who sent the email.


The thing that I personally would do is look at the properties of the email message to see if it has ALL of the contacts for the email that she spammed out to all the members of the church.    If the email addresses were there, I would copy them and paste them into a message of my own while pointing them to awbansunset.com/ while telling them the lies of the AW ban.    Full auto AK47s will not suddenly be released onto the streets, the AW ban was a poor attempt at banning semiauto clones of military firearms, and that nothing was actually banned in the first place as everything made/owned before the ban went into effect was grandfathered and perfectly legal to own or transfer.

That would DEFINITELY get the kind of response I personally would be looking for.


As for the woman, take a family group picture of yourself and family holding both preban and post ban AR15s and say, "can you even pick out the "assault weapons" in the picture and tell me precisely what was banned by the 94 AW ban?"     Fill her in that the rifles, or which rifles, were all bought after 94 and how the ban does next to nothing when it comes to actually "banning" anything.

Quoted: Her info is a lie, and any working street cop knows it.  Its simply sad thats what she thinks after being spoon fed this filth.  You can tell her that there are plenty of officers who feel safer on the streets with a well armed society.  I know that I do.

Ya know stickman normaly I'd agree with you about that, but more and more I'm starting to think LEOs like you and a few others around this place are the exception rather than the norm as to the street cops views about these things. Maybe I;ve been watching to much COPs or something


As to the topic. If you do respond, remember don't get all technical as you will lose people real fast. Concentrate on the fact that the ban is all about cosmetics, the fact that they have never stopped making them, they just stopped making them with enough cosmetic parts to make them  fall into the AW catagory. Just give them a does of the truth and reality. SOme may be able to handle the truth, some won't there ain't much you can do about them.

send her this link:
http://www.ont.com/users/kolya
A fellow Arfcommer made it to explain the AWB.

It should aid your arguement.

call the nra.  they'll be happy to send you an ASSLOAD of pro gun propaganda, including the informative "Explaining the AWB to Bible Thumping Twats" brochure.

then call the irs.

I'm a "Bible-thumper" and I still almost spewed Dr. Pepper all over the keyboard!  

Quoted: OK - now you have been given a great responsibility.  Gather the appropriate information + rebuttal statistics, and send.  You could even do it in an anonymous email to the addresses she sent the email to.  We cannot continue to allow these people prone to ignorance with their knee-jerk reactions ruin our rights!! Please IM me if I can help!

Absolutely.

Educate her.  Don't get nasty, don't call her stupid, just explain the facts.   There are planty of them out there, and when you sort all the lies and half-truths, our side is firmy supported.

If she doesn't change her mind because guns are scary and it's "for the children," then I'm not sure what to do after that.  I suppose you could find another church.

You are all welcome to come back to the One, True Church...

Mudruck wrote wisdom: "Some will listen and cross to the right side of the fence, others refuse to hear the truth." I agree that if someone is innocently misguided, you should try to persuade them gently and respectfully. If someone should know better but is hard-hearted, feel free to nail them to the full extent of the law. As many have brought out, it depends on where she, herself, is at.

What's amusing to me is the different responses offered here. I'm willing to bet the younger and more impetuous guys are the ones that get all hot and say, "Don't be a wimp, shoot first and ask questions later!" And I'm willing to bet the older guys who have been mellowed by experience (in other words, they found out that being hot-headed and impetuous caused more problems than it solved) are the ones that counsel, "Try first to peacefully bring fencesitters over to our side." Test yourself: What was your advice and what was your age?

How do you tell where someone is at? It depends on whether they're willing to listen to your side, after you've listened to theirs, and whether they ask sincere questions in order to understand the truth.

John (age 40 )

------------------------
6.5 Grendel: AR10 Soul in an AR15 Body
www.65grendel.com

First talk to your wife and tell her as a patriot you must respond and get her feedback on tone in the rebuttal to all recipients.  The tell the pastor's wife you respect that she's concerned about the safety of her community and nation, but then tell her that her loyalty has been misplaced.  Her loyalty, especially as a pastor's wife, should be the defense of our nation and its Judeo-Christian roots.  Then explain that gun ownership was thought by our VERY Christian founding fathers to be a right necessary to the defense of family, community and our republic (refer her to David Barton's book Original Intent -pastor in TX. In Original Intent he explains that the pastors of this nation were the original drill sargeants in the colonial army that DEFENDED the right to bear arms uninfringed by the gov).


Then explain that gun control always leads to an increase in crime as criminals by definition don't obey the law, while God fearing law abiding citizens do, the result being that criminals have an unarmed populous to prey on (see UK, and DC).  Then explain that the second ammendment is the defender of the rest of the ammendments.  Then also explain that she is referring her flock to a totally godless socialistic web site.

Gidds, I agree with most everything people have said here, but I will make a few quick additional observations:
1.]  Do not worry about being black-balled at a small church.  If, as I think that you imply, it is a small Presbyterian Church USA congregation, they need all the members that they can get!!  They can’t afford to lose a single one!!  Most all of the congregations of the Old Line Liberal Mainline [i.e., PCUSA, Episcopal, United Methodist, United Church of Christ, American Baptist Church, Lutheran Church of America, Reformed Church of America, and so forth] are HEMORRHAGING MEMBERS  out of their churches.  Part of it has to do with this POLITICALLY CORRECT trash being preached, instead of the Gospel!  I am not saying that every congregation in these denominations has commie-Lib pinko pseudo-preachers in the pulpits, but I wouldn’t be surprised that most [3/4ths] do.
Don’t you wonder if the preacher’s wife is this screwed up, what other subtle or not so subtle forms of toxic theological poison is being spoon-fed to your wife and kids?!  Are you putting money in the offering plate to support this kind of trash?  

2.]  Speak your mind as others have suggested!  It’s your right.  It’s your obligation.  Take your time.  Write a well-crafted letter as others have suggested.  Be level-headed and calm.  Address it to the preacher's wife, but send it to everyone on the list.

3.]  Find another church, a church where the minister loves America and loves Liberty, and where that love for Liberty stirs his soul and passion so much that there is fire in his sermons for these things!!   If he doesn’t have at least 1000 rounds of ammo, and at least one AR 15 in his gun safe, he’s a wimpy Lib-dog as far as I am concerned. Well, maybe not, but close.  

Quoted: ... 3.]  Find another church, a church where the minister loves America and loves Liberty, and where that love for Liberty stirs his soul and passion so much that there is fire in his sermons for these things!!   If he doesn’t have at least 1000 rounds of ammo, and at least one AR 15 in his gun safe, he’s a wimpy Lib-dog as far as I am concerned. Well, maybe not, but close.

Amen!  

Quoted: OK I may have dropped one nut tonight but that may take two.....I think you see where I am coming from......She did not send  a"blind"email....I could respond to everyone.....I'd have to move out of my friggin house (and take my assult weapons) with me..... I could send everyone one of the "girls and guns' photos......

Since you have all the email addresses, you can grab a free account at yahoo, hotmail, etc, so that you can do your educating anonymously.

Shit dude, I'm not in that church, why don't you post her email on here so WE can respond.  I promise not to tell the idiot where I got the address!

I would also reply to all, to inform the sheeple that had been misinformed by the previous email

So did you get the chance to talk to her/them yet?

Quoted: I would keep it simple, because 99% of these folks don't understand laws or their impact. The media has whipped her up into a frenzy, with visions of armagedon in the streets herIt is a media misconception that kids or adults can simply purchase an AK47.  They have been regulated and licenced a long time ago (and that law does not sunset). Despite what political groups tell you, statistics prove that semi auto rifles are not the weapon of choice by criminals.  And if the AWB law stays or goes it will have no effect on the total number on firearms in the wrong hands. That might sound non-confrontational enough to preserve peace at your house, and get your message across?

+1

One thing I did in our church was to be very open about it. Answer questions, find facts and data for people who might now be as computer/Inet savy as some of us. If your church has a fellowship time after or before service, bring up the subject of guns and how much fun they can be and how they really arent the evil, bad, demonic things that the media makes them out to be. Sometimes you will have someone who wants to debate that and say that the only thing they are made for is to kill people. Ask them for the source of their facts, a lot fo times you find out it was the 'news' that said ir or they got their information secondhand or thirdhand from sources such as the MMM or HCI that blatantly lie and tell half-truths to make their point sound valid. Show them the REAL facts. Ive literally had people who thought when the AWB expired that machine guns would be totally and completely legal to buy from anyone and after sitting down and after carefully explaining the AWB to people they A LOT of times go... 'Ummm what good does a law like that do? What does a flash suppressor have to do with how a gun functions?' or something similar.

We even had a 'mens group' meeting at church that went out and hit the range. It was great fun and a super chance to take fence-sitters and hand them a nice little .22lr pistol and let them blast away until they were comfortable and then hand them the AR and show them what real fun is. I didnt do that much shooting while we were there due to the fact I was helping out people who hadnt shot before or hadnt shot in a long, long time. As our pastor, who really had only shot pistols and such earlier in life, said after mowing down a few water-filler 2 liter bottles... "MAN! This is addicting!".. Now he is asking me what features he should get on the EBR he is wanting to purchase. her
One thing that I really try to stress to all of them is that it is GUNS FIRST and once they get those to where they want them, gone, they will move onto other things such as not saying anything 'hateful' or 'you having too many things that other people deserve to have, and dont, even if they havent worked for them because its fair'. It comes down to a whittling down of OUR rights by people who have either their own adjenda or people who think they are doing it 'for the good of the children/people/community/world' and they do not or straight refuse to see what's in store down the road.

such mis-guided propaganda has to be met with factual counter-point

whether you are pro-gun or anti-gun, the AWB did absolutely nothing to stop ownership of military style weapons. Nothing.

To the contrary I believe all the publicity actually created a whole new class of owners.

back to the facts:

A)  Gun crime hasn't changed since its (AWB)  inception
B)  the importation of AK's (the most feared/hated of all so called assault weapons) remains
     restricted
C)  AK47's weren't part of that bill anyway
D)  SBR (short barreled rifles) will still be restricted- ( Ingraham, UZI etc.) Not an AWB matter
E)   Military style weapons represent less than 2% of all firearms
F)   Assault rifles do not kill people- people kill people and whether they have a legal AW or an    
      illegal .22 pistol, a criminal will do what criminals always do, AWB or no AWB.
g)   Firearm ownership is a constitutional right.

No one- to my knowledge- has been arrested soley for possession of an illegal AW.

Our churches should be Fighting abortion, not gun ownership, as that kills more people than any guns do/can

You could always asked her to go shooting with you!!

Is the use of Violence in Self Defense Scriptural?

We live in a society which seems to be increasingly violent and materialistic.  This problem stems from a lack of Godliness which has developed due to the lack of religious training in the modern family.  Breakdown of the family structure caused by lack of religious training leads to even less religious training, which in turn leads to even less Godliness, resulting in more violence.  Where violence used to be primarily limited to acquaintances, it is now predominately involving total strangers.  The civil government has admitted that it cannot protect innocent law abiding citizens from criminal attack, and cannot be held liable for failing to do so.  It is the responsibility of the individual citizen to protect themselves and their family and property.  While many Christians hold the opinion that self defense is approved by God, very few have actually given much thought to, or study of, the scriptures on the subject.

Luke 22:36 is a verse of scripture which is commonly misused to justify possession and carrying of firearms or other weapons for self defense by anyone.  This verse is taken out of context when used for this purpose.  The context in which this verse is set shows that the real reason a weapon was needed was to fulfill prophecy (Is 53:12); that Jesus would be considered an outlaw, because of the use of a weapon by one of his disciples.  The surrounding verses in the book of Luke, plus the parallel passages, help us understand the context.  The possession and use of a weapon against the Jewish rulers was not the total fulfillment of the prophecy, but it was a necessary part of the fulfillment.  The rest of the prophecy was fulfilled when Jesus was hung on the cross between two thieves.  Crucifixion was reserved for the worst of criminals, and was not the prescribed form of capital punishment given in the Law.

Luke 22:36-38 He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.  It is written: `And he was numbered with the transgressors'; and I tell you that this must be fulfilled in me. Yes, what is written about me is reaching its fulfillment." The disciples said, "See, Lord, here are two swords." "That is enough," he replied.


Matt 26:45-47 Then he returned to the disciples and said to them, "Are you still sleeping and resting? Look, the hour is near, and the Son of Man is betrayed into the hands of sinners.  Rise, let us go! Here comes my betrayer!"  While he was still speaking, Judas, one of the Twelve, arrived. With him was a large crowd armed with swords and clubs, sent from the chief priests and the elders of the people.

Matt 26:50-56 Jesus replied, "Friend, do what you came for." Then the men stepped forward, seized Jesus and arrested him. With that, one of Jesus' companions reached for his sword, drew it out and struck the servant of the high priest, cutting off his ear. "Put your sword back in its place," Jesus said to him, "for all who draw the sword will die by the sword. Do you think I cannot call on my Father, and he will at once put at my disposal more than twelve legions of angels? But how then would the Scriptures be fulfilled that say it must happen in this way?" At that time Jesus said to the crowd, "Am I leading a rebellion, that you have come out with swords and clubs to capture me? Every day I sat in the temple courts teaching, and you did not arrest me. But this has all taken place that the writings of the prophets might be fulfilled." Then all the disciples deserted him and fled.

Luke 22:48-53 but Jesus asked him, "Judas, are you betraying the Son of Man with a kiss?" When Jesus' followers saw what was going to happen, they said, "Lord, should we strike with our swords?" And one of them struck the servant of the high priest, cutting off his right ear. But Jesus answered, "No more of this!" And he touched the man's ear and healed him. Then Jesus said to the chief priests, the officers of the temple guard, and the elders, who had come for him, "Am I leading a rebellion, that you have come with swords and clubs? Every day I was with you in the temple courts, and you did not lay a hand on me. But this is your hour-- when darkness reigns."

Jesus knew that his disciples would try to defend him with the weapons they carried.  Jesus allowed this to happen, so that prophecy would be fulfilled.  Jesus did not rebuke his disciple for defending him, but stopped the violence from going any farther than necessary to fulfill prophecy.  The prophecy was partly fulfilled because the Jewish leaders considered any resistance to their will to be transgression of the Law.  The disciples believed they were defending Jesus and themselves from a mob of armed aggressors who were acting outside the bounds of the law.  

The account of the betrayal and arrest of Jesus cannot be used solely as a direct authorization for Christians to take up weapons in self defense, but it also cannot be used to disallow it.  Apparently Simon Peter and one other apostle were carrying weapons before Jesus required it of them.  It can be inferred that self defense is acceptable, since Peter was not rebuked for using his sword to defend Jesus.  The statement Jesus made concerning 12,000 angels being placed at his disposal also implies that he had the right to defend himself from the unlawful acts of the Jewish leadership, but refused to do so in order to fulfill God’s plan of salvation for all mankind.

John 18:36 Jesus said, "My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jews. But now my kingdom is from another place."



There is at least one account of violence being used for self defense in the old testament, where that violence had the approval of the civil authorities.

Esth 8:11 The king's edict granted the Jews in every city the right to assemble and protect themselves; to destroy, kill and annihilate any armed force of any nationality or province that might attack them and their women and children; and to plunder the property of their enemies.



The LAW of Moses provided for the homeowner to defend his property with physical force, allowing the taking of life, with the restriction that it could not be done during daylight.  Presumably, this is because the homeowner would be able to recognize the thief in daylight, see whether a weapon was being carried by the thief, and escape.  Civil authority could then apprehend the thief and recover the stolen goods.  During darkness the thief was hidden from recognition, and it would not be possible to determine if the thief was armed with a weapon.  The homeowner was not explicitly given the right to use a weapon against the thief.  The homeowner also stood to gain more by not killing the thief, since the thief was required to pay multiple restitution if he escaped and was caught later.

Exod 22:2-3 "If a thief is caught breaking in and is struck so that he dies, the defender is not guilty of bloodshed; but if it happens after sunrise, he is guilty of bloodshed. "  A thief must certainly make restitution, but if he has nothing, he must be sold to pay for his theft.

Prov 6:30-31 Men do not despise a thief if he steals to satisfy his hunger when he is starving.  Yet if he is caught, he must pay sevenfold, though it costs him all the wealth of his house.



The principle of self defense is recognized in the new testament as found in Matt 24:43.

Matt 24:43 But understand this: If the owner of the house had known at what time of night the thief was coming, he would have kept watch and would not have let his house be broken into.



The concept of responsibility for the welfare of family members is expressed in 1 Tim 5:8 and in Acts 7:23-25.  The word translated provide means to pre-plan, and the context establishes the physical welfare of the family as the purpose of the pre-planning.  

1 Tim 5:8 If anyone does not provide for his relatives, and especially for his immediate family, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.

Acts 7:23-25 "When Moses was forty years old, he decided to visit his fellow Israelites.  He saw one of them being mistreated by an Egyptian, so he went to his defense and avenged him by killing the Egyptian.  Moses thought that his own people would realize that God was using him to rescue them, but they did not.

Moses is referred to in the new testament as a man of faith, who kept God’s command, not as a murderer or unjustified killer of men.  This is another example from which we may infer that self defense and defense of the helpless and innocent is allowed.  It may be argued that it is preferable to prevent the innocent life from being killed, by killing the attacker, than to let the murder occur and then execute the murderer, thus losing two lives.  To prevent the murder without any loss of life is preferable.



The old testament contains many passages which describe evil acts that God hates, and for which the proper punishment is death.  Anyone committing these acts was NOT INNOCENT!  The LAW prohibited the shedding of INNOCENT blood!  The avenger of blood was required to take the life of murderers.  Many sins were to be punished by congregational stoning, where all the people took part in the execution of the guilty.  

Prov 6:16-19 There are six things the LORD hates, seven that are detestable to him:  haughty eyes, a lying tongue, hands that shed innocent blood, a heart that devises wicked schemes, feet that are quick to rush into evil, a false witness who pours out lies and a man who stirs up dissension among brothers.

Job 24:13-17 "There are those who rebel against the light, who do not know its ways or stay in its paths. When daylight is gone, the murderer rises up and kills the poor and needy; in the night he steals forth like a thief. The eye of the adulterer watches for dusk; he thinks, `No eye will see me,' and he keeps his face concealed. In the dark, men break into houses, but by day they shut themselves in; they want nothing to do with the light. For all of them, deep darkness is their morning; they make friends with the terrors of darkness.

John 10:10 The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; ...

Luke 10:30 In reply Jesus said: "A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, when he fell into the hands of robbers. They stripped him of his clothes, beat him and went away, leaving him half dead.

Ezek 18:10-13 "Suppose he has a violent son, who sheds blood or does any of these other things (though the father has done none of them): "He eats at the mountain shrines. He defiles his neighbor's wife. He oppresses the poor and needy. He commits robbery. He does not return what he took in pledge. He looks to the idols. He does detestable things. He lends at usury and takes excessive interest. Will such a man live? He will not! Because he has done all these detestable things, he will surely be put to death and his blood will be on his own head.

Exod 21:16 "Anyone who kidnaps another and either sells him or still has him when he is caught must be put to death.

Num 35:16-21 "`If a man strikes someone with an iron object so that he dies, he is a murderer; the murderer shall be put to death. Or if anyone has a stone in his hand that could kill, and he strikes someone so that he dies, he is a murderer; the murderer shall be put to death. Or if anyone has a wooden object in his hand that could kill, and he hits someone so that he dies, he is a murderer; the murderer shall be put to death. The avenger of blood shall put the murderer to death; when he meets him, he shall put him to death. If anyone with malice aforethought shoves another or throws something at him intentionally so that he dies or if in hostility he hits him with his fist so that he dies, that person shall be put to death; he is a murderer. The avenger of blood shall put the murderer to death when he meets him.

Deut 17:5-7 take the man or woman who has done this evil deed to your city gate and stone that person to death.  On the testimony of two or three witnesses a man shall be put to death, but no one shall be put to death on the testimony of only one witness.  The hands of the witnesses must be the first in putting him to death, and then the hands of all the people. You must purge the evil from among you.

Deut 19:15
One witness is not enough to convict a man accused of any crime or offense he may have committed. A matter must be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.

Num 35:29-31 "'These are to be legal requirements for you throughout the generations to come, wherever you live.  "'Anyone who kills a person is to be put to death as a murderer only on the testimony of witnesses. But no one is to be put to death on the testimony of only one witness.  "'Do not accept a ransom for the life of a murderer, who deserves to die. He must surely be put to death.

Exod 23:7 Have nothing to do with a false charge and do not put an innocent or honest person to death, for I will not acquit the guilty.

Rom 13:3 For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he will commend you.

Since two or more witnesses were required to convict someone of crime, the victim who was attacked while no one else was nearby and defended himself, killing the attacker, could not be punished by law due to lack of witnesses.  If the victim of an attack used a weapon to defend against an unarmed attacker, and the attacker died, the intended victim could be convicted of murder if there were witnesses. The LAW made a distinction between guilt and innocence based on the intent of the person, and on the use of a weapon to strike the fatal blow.  A thief, robber, kidnapper, or rapist, using a weapon to attack  the victim, could be assumed to have intent to kill, and if the attacker was killed in self defense, there was no shedding of innocent blood.



Under the law, an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, a life for a life, was the required punishment for deliberate acts of violence in violation of the LAW.  Those judged guilty were to be punished, and the victims were to receive restitution from the attacker.  The victims were not responsible for performing the punishment, the civil authorities were.  The LAW was designed to encourage good behavior and to discourage evil behavior, by severe punishment for wrongdoing, and multiplied restitution for victims.  The Law emphasized the physical aspects in men’s relationships with other men and with God.

In the new testament, Christ’s teaching emphasized the Spiritual aspect by saying not to resist violence against us, to give up material possessions to our enemies, and then to pray for our enemies.  This is opposed to human nature, by which most people fight their attackers, try to keep as much wealth as they can, or give it to friends only, and curse their enemies.  The contrast between the physical nature of the old LAW and the spiritual nature of the new covenant is shown to maximum effect in the way Jesus taught.  Jesus often taught in parables, wherein physical terms were used to portray the spiritual nature of the message.  These parables were almost never understood by the hearers, unless Jesus explained the meaning, as he did to the apostles.  The physical nature was not the intended message, it was the spiritual aspect.

Matt 5:38-45 "You have heard that it was said, `Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.'  But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.  And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you. "You have heard that it was said, `Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous.

Luke 6:27-31 "But I tell you who hear me: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you.  If someone strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other also. If someone takes your cloak, do not stop him from taking your tunic.  Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back.  Do to others as you would have them do to you.

Matt 5:10-12 Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.  "Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me.  Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you.

Luke 6:22-23 Blessed are you when men hate you, when they exclude you and insult you and reject your name as evil, because of the Son of Man.  "Rejoice in that day and leap for joy, because great is your reward in heaven. For that is how their fathers treated the prophets.

Is this a literal command, that we do not resist our enemies physically?  If we take these passages to be literal commands, which have precedence over examples, implication or inference, then no Christian may physically resist any evil act, even our own murder, or being stripped naked and left penniless.  The only new testament passages dealing with self defense are the passages cited in this study, and they are examples and implications.  The apparent contradiction between this command and the examples and implications, which ensues by a literal interpretation of this parable, can be resolved with the realization that the parables teach a spiritual lesson.  The parable is not intended to be a command in the literal, physical sense; rather it is in the spiritual sense.  

What is our enemy in this context?  Since the Spiritual aspect is being emphasized, it is logical to say that the enemy is a spiritual enemy, who is using physical and material persecution to try to weaken our faith. We are apparently told not to resist, in the physical and material realm, those who are our spiritual enemies.  Those who do evil to us for material gain without intending to do spiritual harm, and who don’t care what our faith may be, are not our spiritual enemies by this definition.  Can we then resist the physical harm they would do to us?

Jesus used physical violence to clear the temple of the money changers and those who were selling sacrificial animals there.  These people were doing evil, not from hate toward Jesus and his teaching, but for the sake of financial gain.  They did not meet the definition of a spiritual enemy, yet Jesus defended his Father’s house from the actions of evil men.

John 2:13-16 When it was almost time for the Jewish Passover, Jesus went up to Jerusalem.  In the temple courts he found men selling cattle, sheep and doves, and others sitting at tables exchanging money.  So he made a whip out of cords, and drove all from the temple area, both sheep and cattle; he scattered the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables.  To those who sold doves he said, "Get these out of here! How dare you turn my Father's house into a market!"



The figurative nature of Christ teaching is also brought out in these passages, where we are called the salt of the earth, and also told to deliberately mutilate and disfigure our bodies, in order to secure our salvation.

Matt 5:29-30 If your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell.  And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to go into hell.

Matt 5:13 "You are the salt of the earth. But if the salt loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled by men.

Do we take as literal that we are salt?  How many Christians do you know who have removed and discarded some part of their body because of sin?  Do we take as literal some part of the passages, and as figurative some other parts?  When do we take a passage literally?  What rules of interpretation should we use?  

Generally we take the meaning of a passage literally unless it is necessary for the sake of reasonableness or compatibility with other scripture to take it figuratively.  Generally we take a new testament passage (especially parables) in the spiritual sense unless it is necessary for the sake of reasonableness or compatibility with other scripture to take it in the physical sense.  The spiritual application in a literal parable overrides the physical interpretation.

The spiritual nature of our battle against spiritual enemies is described in physical terms, because we are physical by nature, and that is what is most readily understood.  Our weapons against spiritual evil are spiritual in nature, but described by analogy with physical weapons.  Our spiritual battle is contrasted with physical battle, but we can expect to have physical persecution.

Eph 6:10-18 Finally, be strong in the Lord and in his mighty power. Put on the full armor of God so that you can take your stand against the devil's schemes. For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms. Therefore put on the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you may be able to stand your ground, and after you have done everything, to stand. Stand firm then, with the belt of truth buckled around your waist, with the breastplate of righteousness in place, and with your feet fitted with the readiness that comes from the gospel of peace. In addition to all this, take up the shield of faith, with which you can extinguish all the flaming arrows of the evil one. Take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God. And pray in the Spirit on all occasions with all kinds of prayers and requests. With this in mind, be alert and always keep on praying for all the saints.




What is the answer to the question of Christians using physical violence in self defense?  We have seen that the principal of self defense of life and property is acknowledged in both old and new testaments.  Moses was not condemned for killing the Egyptian.  Peter was not condemned for striking off the ear of the servant of the High Priest with the sword, even though the attackers were spiritual enemies of Christ.  Yet Christ seems to be commanding us not to resist physical attacks against our selves and property if they come from spiritual enemies, even though he told the apostles to carry swords, knowing they would fight for his defense against spiritual enemies.  We know that the scripture cannot contradict itself, so we must endeavor to reach an understanding which agrees with all scripture on the subject.  


If we understand that Christ taught spiritual messages in parables using physical analogies and contrasts to enhance the spiritual aspect, and that these messages might seem to say one thing in the physical sense when they mean the opposite in the spiritual sense, then the apparent contradiction between command and example disappears.  An example regarding love and hate shows this principle, because Jesus taught everyone to love his neighbor as himself, yet in one verse says to hate those dearest to us.  Obviously the command to hate means to love Christ more, not to really hate everyone else.

Luke 14:26 "If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters-- yes, even his own life-- he cannot be my disciple.

Matt 19:19 honor your father and mother,' and `love your neighbor as yourself.'"



We are to fight a spiritual battle against the spiritual forces of evil, with the spiritual weapons God has given us, in order to keep our salvation.  Our primary obstacle is spiritual, but physical and material concerns may be used to weaken us.  Persecutions in the physical realm are to be expected, and we are to overcome them spiritually and increase in faith because of them.  We are to love our enemies and try to convert them to Christ, but this does not require us to let them rob and murder us.  Dead Christians cannot teach sinners the Gospel.  If we allow ourselves to be robbed and maimed, so that we do not have the means to support life, then our attention is diverted from teaching Christ, to filling our belly and covering our exposure.  

Where civil authority allows and circumstances require, we may use whatever minimal violent force is necessary to defend ourselves, our families, our necessary possessions, and innocent people from violent criminal attack and physical religious persecution.  Self defense is not vigilantism, and it is not revenge.  Self defense is an immediate response to an attack to prevent the attack from being successful.  Violence by the victim after the attack is completed is not defense, rather it is revenge.  God says to leave revenge to him, and the government is to carry out the punishment of criminals.

Rom 12:17-19 Do not repay anyone evil for evil. Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everybody.  If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone.  Do not take revenge, my friends, but leave room for God's wrath, for it is written: "It is mine to avenge; I will repay," says the Lord.





Any Christian who doubts that they have the right to self defense should submit to their attackers and enemies, in order that their conscience not condemn them as sinners.  Those who understand that self defense is allowable may do so without sinning.

Rom 14:22-23 So whatever you believe about these things keep between yourself and God. Blessed is the man who does not condemn himself by what he approves.  But the man who has doubts is condemned if he eats, because his eating is not from faith; and everything that does not come from faith is sin.

Christ came to save all sinners who would accept the plan of salvation.  The invitation is given by God, the time to accept it is now.



Copyright  January, 1995 by Michael D. Rhew.
This document may be freely distributed provided the following conditions are met:
1. This document must be reproduced and distributed in it’s entirety.
2. There may NOT be any modifications to the text of this document.
3. The information contained in this document is free of any charge.
4. Only actual costs of copying and distribution may be charged to recipients.

All scripture quotations taken from the New International Version (NIV) Bible.

Do a respond all, then send her this.

Dear Mrs. xxxx:

Thank you for your email of concern about the expiration of the "Assault Weapon Ban."  I share your concerns about crime and use of firearms in crimes.  However, you have been misled about the features of this law, its effects, and the results of its expiration.

Let me explain.  The general public was misled from the very beginning of this law into believing that the law banned machine guns.  Footage of full automatic weapons (aka "machine guns") was shown, when this bill was proposed, and now that it is about to expire.  This bill does not ban full automatic weapons ("machine guns"), which have been heavily regulated since 1934, and are nearly impossible for the average citizen to obtain.

The gun control groups, Handgun Control, National Coalition to Ban Handguns, etc, so active in the 1970's and 1980's, failed in obtaining handgun bans.  Josh Sugarmann, then communications director for the Coalition Against Gun Violence, stated, "The NRA is right...handgun controls do little to stop criminals from obtaining handguns."

So, they had to look around for a new whipping boy in their cause of gun control.  Semi-auto firearms caught their attention.  In Josh Sugarmann's own words, he admits their strategy in deceiving the general public.  Sugarmann, who is now Violence Policy Center Director, stated, "Assault weapons... are a new topic. The weapons' menacing looks, coupled with the public's confusion over fully-automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons — anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun — can only increase the chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons." (Josh Sugarmann, "Assault Weapons: Analysis, New Research and Legislation", March 1989)

The terms AK47 and Uzi are often tossed around.  Full automatic (machine gun) were never legally imported.  The similar models that were imported for civilian sales were merely "semi-automatic", that is, they fire only one round per pull of the trigger, just like common hunting rifles, or a policeman's pistol.  And the AK47 and Uzi were already banned from import by a 1989 Executive Order.

Machine guns were not available to the average citizen before the ban, nor during the ban, and after September 13, will still not be available.  No machine guns manufactured after 1986 can, by another law, ever be sold to civilians, only police and military.

The law banned cosmetic feature of SEMI-AUTO firearms (not machine guns), such as flash suppressors, pistol grips, folding stocks, etc, that did not affect the performance of these firearms in any way, and did not make them more powerful or fire more rapidly.  The features that were banned were cosmetic only.  Firearms that were the same as those banned by the law could continue to be manufactured and sold as long as they did not have these cosmetic features.  This is akin to a law that purports to stop street racing by banning mag wheels and fancy paint jobs.

The "neutered" guns (aka "post ban") could still be sold, and were no different in "firepower" than the "pre ban" guns.  In fact, most of the banned guns fire less powerful cartridges than most hunters her in our state use every fall to harvest deer.

What this law really accomplished was to put all gun owners at risk of going to prison for a meaningless, ineffective bit of metal here or there on their firearms, with no criminal intent.

The statistic you quoted, "66% reduction in crime", is often bandied about.  This is not true.  What the 66% reduction statistic really is, it was a 66% reduction in TRACES of the banned guns.  Traces do not equal crimes.

Also, the use of "semiautomatic military style assault weapons" was always a very small percentage of the murder rate, used in less than 1%.  In fact, ALL long guns used in gun crimes has been less then 3% for many years.  

Even the Department of Justice admitted that the use of these types of firearms, the ones banned by the Assault Weapon Ban, was statistically insignificant, and they could see no effects of the ban.

The groups such as Violence Policy Center, Million Mom March, and the Bradys have misled this country with hysteria and phoney statistics.  The news media have aided them.  Their polls ask loaded questions such as, "Do you think 12 yr old children should be able to buy machine guns and shoot up schools?"  Well, of course not!  But that does not mean that one should support the ill-conceived Assault Weapon Ban.

Even this week, CNN had news features about the expiration of the AWB, but showed footage of Al Queda terrorists training with AK47 machine guns.  Those guns, machine guns in Iraq or Afghanistan, would not be affected.  Those guns could never be legally imported, never, and already banned by exististing laws:  National Firearms Act of 1934 (controlled machine guns), Gun Control Act of 1968 (banned import of non-sporting firearms), and amentment to the 1986 McClure-Volkmer Gun Owners Protection Act (banned new manufacture of machine guns for civilian sale), and a 1989 Executive Order that redefined which guns could be imported under the 1968 GCA.  

With all of that, why do we need one more that will not affect machine guns, but only puts the average citizen at risk of going to Federal prison?  Why support a law that does not reduce crime?  Why should good citizens be punished for what terrorists MIGHT do?

I am very sorry to inform you, but you have been deliberately misled, no, let me clarify, you were lied to about the effects of the "Assault Weapon Ban" and its expiration.

Please, before supporting any legislation, I urge you to study the actual law.

Sincerely,

xxxxxxxx