H the K wrote:
Tim wrote:
On Aug 3, 7:19 am, H the K wrote:
Tim wrote:
HK wrote:
So, what weapon systems did Jesus recommend? :)
Harry, He never condoned, nor condemned having weapons.
You mean, there's no "reportage" of such a position. It's really
unfortunate Jesus didn't leave behind any writings. All we have is what
other people wrote, and some of those "other people" had their own
agendas.

Well, you have free agent, what do you think?


About Jesus? *If* there was such a being, and *if* he were 51% as
described, a very cool dude. Christianity, not so much.

Both "bibles" are full of contradictions, sometimes, I think
deliberately. So, to conclude from the Sermon on the Mount that Jesus
was in favor of nonviolent resistance only would not be the only
possible answer, since in Luke it is also claimed that Jesus urged those
who were swordless to get on. But I believe that reference was to
self-defense only.

One certainly does not need a full-auto assault rifle for self-defense.

If you read he old testament you find that it is a violence filled tome.

BAR wrote:
H the K wrote:
Tim wrote:
On Aug 3, 7:19 am, H the K wrote:
Tim wrote:
HK wrote:
So, what weapon systems did Jesus recommend? :)
Harry, He never condoned, nor condemned having weapons.
You mean, there's no "reportage" of such a position. It's really
unfortunate Jesus didn't leave behind any writings. All we have is what
other people wrote, and some of those "other people" had their own
agendas.

Well, you have free agent, what do you think?


About Jesus? *If* there was such a being, and *if* he were 51% as
described, a very cool dude. Christianity, not so much.

Both "bibles" are full of contradictions, sometimes, I think
deliberately. So, to conclude from the Sermon on the Mount that Jesus
was in favor of nonviolent resistance only would not be the only
possible answer, since in Luke it is also claimed that Jesus urged
those who were swordless to get on. But I believe that reference was
to self-defense only.

One certainly does not need a full-auto assault rifle for self-defense.

If you read he old testament you find that it is a violence filled tome.


D'oh.

Really?

Gosh.

Tim and I were discussing what Jesus might have thought of "weaponing
up," *not* the Old Testament. He wasn't a player in that set of books.

H the K wrote:
BAR wrote:
H the K wrote:
Tim wrote:
On Aug 3, 7:19 am, H the K wrote:
Tim wrote:
HK wrote:
So, what weapon systems did Jesus recommend? :)
Harry, He never condoned, nor condemned having weapons.
You mean, there's no "reportage" of such a position. It's really
unfortunate Jesus didn't leave behind any writings. All we have is
what
other people wrote, and some of those "other people" had their own
agendas.

Well, you have free agent, what do you think?


About Jesus? *If* there was such a being, and *if* he were 51% as
described, a very cool dude. Christianity, not so much.

Both "bibles" are full of contradictions, sometimes, I think
deliberately. So, to conclude from the Sermon on the Mount that Jesus
was in favor of nonviolent resistance only would not be the only
possible answer, since in Luke it is also claimed that Jesus urged
those who were swordless to get on. But I believe that reference was
to self-defense only.

One certainly does not need a full-auto assault rifle for self-defense.

If you read he old testament you find that it is a violence filled tome.


D'oh.

Really?

Gosh.

Tim and I were discussing what Jesus might have thought of "weaponing
up," *not* the Old Testament. He wasn't a player in that set of books.


No **** Sherlock. But, he was familiar with them wasn't he? Could it be
that he had read them? Jesus did live in violent times. What a dumb ass
you are Krause.

H the K wrote:
Tim wrote:
HK wrote:

So, what weapon systems did Jesus recommend? :)




Harry, He never condoned, nor condemned having weapons.

You mean, there's no "reportage" of such a position. It's really
unfortunate Jesus didn't leave behind any writings. All we have is what
other people wrote, and some of those "other people" had their own agendas.



Tim, can you see Harry dangling that bait?

--
Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq.

This Newsgroup post is a natural product. The slight variations in
spelling and grammar enhance its individual character and beauty and in
no way are to be considered flaws or defects

BAR wrote:
H the K wrote:
BAR wrote:
H the K wrote:
Tim wrote:
On Aug 3, 7:19 am, H the K wrote:
Tim wrote:
HK wrote:
So, what weapon systems did Jesus recommend? :)
Harry, He never condoned, nor condemned having weapons.
You mean, there's no "reportage" of such a position. It's really
unfortunate Jesus didn't leave behind any writings. All we have is
what
other people wrote, and some of those "other people" had their own
agendas.

Well, you have free agent, what do you think?


About Jesus? *If* there was such a being, and *if* he were 51% as
described, a very cool dude. Christianity, not so much.

Both "bibles" are full of contradictions, sometimes, I think
deliberately. So, to conclude from the Sermon on the Mount that
Jesus was in favor of nonviolent resistance only would not be the
only possible answer, since in Luke it is also claimed that Jesus
urged those who were swordless to get on. But I believe that
reference was to self-defense only.

One certainly does not need a full-auto assault rifle for self-defense.

If you read he old testament you find that it is a violence filled tome.


D'oh.

Really?

Gosh.

Tim and I were discussing what Jesus might have thought of "weaponing
up," *not* the Old Testament. He wasn't a player in that set of books.


No **** Sherlock. But, he was familiar with them wasn't he? Could it be
that he had read them? Jesus did live in violent times. What a dumb ass
you are Krause.



There's never been anything but "violent times," Sherlock.

H K wrote:
Tim wrote:
On Aug 2, 6:02 pm, jps wrote:
On Sun, 2 Aug 2009 15:46:33 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:



On Aug 2, 5:37 pm, jps wrote:
On Sun, 2 Aug 2009 11:30:22 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:
On Aug 2, 12:03 pm, jps wrote:
On Sun, 2 Aug 2009 05:23:59 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:
On Aug 1, 11:06 pm, jps wrote:
On Sat, 1 Aug 2009 19:32:05 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:
On Aug 1, 7:19 pm, jps wrote:
On Sat, 01 Aug 2009 19:15:06 -0400, H the K

wrote:
jps wrote:
On Sat, 1 Aug 2009 13:55:24 -0700 (PDT), Tim

wrote:
On Aug 1, 3:32 pm, jps wrote:
On Sat, 1 Aug 2009 11:52:20 -0700 (PDT), Tim

wrote:
On Jul 31, 2:51 pm, H the K
wrote:
Buy A Boat, Get An Assault Rifle Free
Dealer Offers Free AK-47 With Purchase
ANDERSON, S.C. -- An Upstate boat and tractor dealer is
offering a
voucher for a free assault rifle with major purchases.
The marquee outside Carolina Tractor and Marine reads
“Free AK-47 With
Purchase.” A partner in the dealership, Henry Jordan,
said he got the
idea after seeing a story on FOX News Channel about a
Missouri car
dealership about a week ago.
Jordan said he is trying to clear out his end-of-year
inventory so he
can begin ordering for next year. He said he was just
looking for
something that would catch people’s attention.
“We thought, ‘You know what? Every man ought to have a
fishing boat, a
pickup truck and a tractor and they certainly need a
good gun to protect
themselves and their family,” Jordan said. “We believe
in the 2nd
Amendment. We believe, in fact, it’s a man’s
responsibility to protect
his family.”
Jordan said that since he started the promotion he has
sold a boat and a
riding lawnmower. He said the free-gun deal will run
until Labor Day.
Anderson County Sheriff John Skipper said he does not
have a problem
with the promotion.
“The AK-47 is a gun that anybody can purchase as long
as they qualify,”
Skipper said. “I think any gun in the hands of a
responsible person is
worth having.”
---
snerk
That's a pretty good offer, but I have cars and a bunch
of so-called
Assault Rifles"
So I'm not going for it.
Good for you Tim. I'm sure Jesus would commend you.
Oh yeah, and for the record, I live right across the
street. (about 75
feet) from a grade school play ground.
Hopefully you're not a postal worker.
Tim's okay. It's trash like Herring, FloridaJim, et al, that
might go
postal.
Sorry, don't understand the need to own an AK47, especially
by someone
who's relationship with Jesus seems so important.
I think Tim's okay too, I just don't understand his conflicting
allegiances.
I have no conflicting allegiance. I like my firearms and the
right to
own them.
I don't worship them.
You worship a man, lord, father who'd have absolutely nothing
to do
with guns and would certainly preach against them.
That you don't recognize that is pretty astounding.
Of course that is your opinion.
Of course it's your opinion that being a follower of Jesus and
owning
AK 47s and supporting the NRA fit nicely.
Bloody delusional. The very definition of cognitive dissonance.
And someday you'll explain yourself, likely not to me.
And let me save you the response; yes, it's my opinion.
Of course my views are "delusional"
Richard Dawkins says so.
You'll never answer straight, just obfuscate. It's a known practice
of those who simply cannot or refuse to face the truth.
Oh I face the truth. And it has nothing to do with the way i answer.
A "known" practice to who? You?
Anyone paying attention to debate tactics.

Really? I didn't know this was a debate.


The only answer I can come up with is that you're not as close to
Jesus as you'd like and have forgiven yourself for being another weak
human being given to temptation.

Guns designed to kill people are inherently evil in their design and
purpose and yet you find comfort in owning.

Jesus might say "Yikes, to which flock does he belong?"

Again, you're opinion.



So, what weapon systems did Jesus recommend? :)


I believe he wore a hammer holstered.

"H the K" wrote in message
...
Richard Casady wrote:
On Sat, 01 Aug 2009 20:35:23 -0400, H the K
wrote:

I've always thought that really humorous...I just do not understand how
someone can proclaim himself to be a follower of Jesus and also be armed
to the teeth *and* usually in favor of the death penalty.

When they set out to preach the gosple, some, three if I recall, of
the twelve wore swords.

Casady

08/03/2009, 07:46:09

Armed to the teeth and in favor of the death penalty is not the same as
carrying a sword.

Death penalty ~ abortion, it there *really* a difference?

D.Duck wrote:

"H the K" wrote in message
...
Richard Casady wrote:
On Sat, 01 Aug 2009 20:35:23 -0400, H the K
wrote:

I've always thought that really humorous...I just do not understand
how someone can proclaim himself to be a follower of Jesus and also
be armed to the teeth *and* usually in favor of the death penalty.

When they set out to preach the gosple, some, three if I recall, of
the twelve wore swords.

Casady

08/03/2009, 07:46:09

Armed to the teeth and in favor of the death penalty is not the same
as carrying a sword.

Death penalty ~ abortion, it there *really* a difference?

Yup.

On Mon, 3 Aug 2009 10:19:21 -0400, "D.Duck" wrote:


"H the K" wrote in message
...
Richard Casady wrote:
On Sat, 01 Aug 2009 20:35:23 -0400, H the K
wrote:

I've always thought that really humorous...I just do not understand how
someone can proclaim himself to be a follower of Jesus and also be armed
to the teeth *and* usually in favor of the death penalty.

When they set out to preach the gosple, some, three if I recall, of
the twelve wore swords.

Casady

08/03/2009, 07:46:09

Armed to the teeth and in favor of the death penalty is not the same as
carrying a sword.

Death penalty ~ abortion, it there *really* a difference?

Yes.

Babies have done nothing to warrant their execution.
--

John H

On Mon, 03 Aug 2009 13:31:44 -0400, "Just wait a frekin' minute!"
wrote:

D.Duck wrote:

"H the K" wrote in message
...
Richard Casady wrote:
On Sat, 01 Aug 2009 20:35:23 -0400, H the K
wrote:

I've always thought that really humorous...I just do not understand
how someone can proclaim himself to be a follower of Jesus and also
be armed to the teeth *and* usually in favor of the death penalty.

When they set out to preach the gosple, some, three if I recall, of
the twelve wore swords.

Casady

08/03/2009, 07:46:09

Armed to the teeth and in favor of the death penalty is not the same
as carrying a sword.

Death penalty ~ abortion, it there *really* a difference?

Sure there is.. The death penalty is usually used in cases where some
human did premeditated harm to others, it is a penalty for illegal
activity against society, abortion is just a killing of convenience
(mostly) for those who do not believe in self accountability...

Death peanalty, holding someone responsible for their own actions,
abortion, holding someone else accountable for your actions...

Well said.
--

John H