• The Shot You’ll Never Forget Giveaway - Enter To Win A Barrel From Rifle Barrel Blanks!

    Tell us about the best or most memorable shot you’ve ever taken. Contest ends June 13th and remember: subscribe for a better chance of winning!

    Join contest Subscribe

"My God Given Right"

Maser

Destroy Israel
Full Member
Minuteman
  • May 17, 2006
    11,758
    20,317
    35
    /pol/
    www.youtube.com
    First off, lemme start by saying I am a proud Christian and not trying to push some anti-Christ bullshit on everyone here.

    Anyways, does anyone else get sick and tired of the term "my God given right" to own a gun? I own the same Bible I've had since I was a kid and use it pretty much as a talisman and I've not read it (not even the red words), but I'm pretty sure that Jesus never said anything about owning guns. One of the deadly sins is taking the Lord's name in vain and isn't that kind of what's happening when people say gun rights are God given? Just sayin.....
     
    "god" as in not human granted rights.......not specifically "god" as in the christian god (or any other god for that matter)

    they are using the word "God" more as a figure of speech rather than using it as a proper noun.

    used more in the context of "birth right" or "natural human rights"
     
    God given right, natural rights, inherent rights, they all mean the same thing.

    That which is elemental due to our consciousness and our ability to distinguish between right from wrong and the light from darkness. These things existed before government, continue to exist in spite of government, and will endure as long as there are live humans. They are not granted by anyone. They simply are.
     
    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’s enough!” he replied.
    — Gospel of Luke 22:36-38, NIV​

    So they didnt have guns back than but it appears it "was written" that you should have a sword.
     
    We have an innate, not necessarily a “God given” right to protect ourselves and our families from harm

    This is non-negotiable.

    I could give a crap what the present government thinks my rights are

    Thats how I see it. Its not about objects, per se, but about the right to protect yourself.
     
    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’s enough!” he replied.​
    — Gospel of Luke 22:36-38, NIV​

    So they didnt have guns back than but it appears it "was written" that you should have a sword.



    There is a prohibition against religious posts here. It opens too large a can of worms.
     
    Last edited:
    When making an argument for or against self defense using the bible, keep in mind that you can pick and choose passages to suit whatever you want it to say as just as in real life there are things for and against it.

    However taken as a whole from cover to cover, the theme tends to show that the "Righteous" should both have the latest and greatest weapons to defend themselves as well as be willing to liberally apply said weapons when needed to take care of threats unless circumstances say otherwise.

    This kind of the rule for just about anything you want to argue about using the bible as teaching, pretty much just about every hard fast rule has exceptions, and the exceptions have rules etc. As one would expect if you looked at around 3000 years of stories about notable humans / events.
    Generally however people pick the couple things that they want, which fit their own ideas and then create a new denomination around zealously guarding their interpretation of something as the only truth.

    (PS. In my own opinion, which many will disagree with, I kind of despise the NIV and other modern "corruptions", KJV only or if you want to argue it, we can go original Greek & original Hebrew, or first Publication Latin Vulgate.)
     
    There is a prohibition against religious posts here. It opens too large a can of worms.

    Than the post should be banned from the start.

    My posting was a half tongue in cheek utterance. Besides the meaning of the passage is in question.

    It corroborates to all common laws of nature that the individual has the right to defend oneself.

    As in Newtons Law's of Physics for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

    So unless man has the right to defend oneself than the law is only half complete because that would allow for only one side of the equation - a criminal has the inviolable right to assault you with no fear of being subjected to a return of force.

    In order to have balance counter to assault there must be defense.

    Defense is not defense unless the amount of counter force used is equal or greater to the amount of force applied.

    God given right or natural right - just semantics for a universal reality.

    The right of defense exists and the means of defense must be in relation to the available means of assault in order to truly be defense.
     
    .

    My posting was a half tongue in cheek utterance. Besides the meaning of the passage is in question.

    .

    With that statement I can agree. Taken in context, I would say I have to dis agree about the ultimate meaning of the bible, especially the NT.
     
    With that statement I can agree. Taken in context, I would say I have to dis agree about the ultimate meaning of the bible, especially the NT.

    Not commenting on the whole Bible, just that one passage, and was the intent of "That is enough!" in opposition to "sell your cloak and buy one."
     
    First off, lemme start by saying I am a proud Christian and not trying to push some anti-Christ bullshit on everyone here.

    Anyways, does anyone else get sick and tired of the term "my God given right" to own a gun? I own the same Bible I've had since I was a kid and use it pretty much as a talisman and I've not read it (not even the red words), but I'm pretty sure that Jesus never said anything about owning guns. One of the deadly sins is taking the Lord's name in vain and isn't that kind of what's happening when people say gun rights are God given? Just sayin.....
    The bottom line is that "God given" really represents inherent rights upon birth.
    That no man made authority can supersede.
    While it would seem to be the opposite lately the Founders had their shit together.

    R
     
    From the Declaration of Independence:

    "When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation."
     
    Interestingly enough all the answers are found in the most misunderstood and understudied documents, the Constitution, Bill of Rights, Declaration of Independence, and the personal writings of those who signed them. It amazes me that students of the law - read our elected officials - seem to be the least informed when it comes to these matters!
     
    • Like
    Reactions: jrassy
    It amazes me that students of the law - read our elected officials - seem to be the least informed when it comes to these matters!

    The elected officials, the lawyers and the judiciary are actively trying their best to do everything opposite to the constitution that they possibly can for their own power & gain. Twisting interpretations beyond belief or just plain making things up or ignoring the constitution are not being done because they don't know, they are done on purpose.

    Government, power & big money never like having any limits placed on them & will ignore "laws" and "constitutions" if you let them.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Redmanss
    I've never owned a cloak, but have some stuff that goes pew, pew, pew.
    In fact, I've got a few things that have sharp blades too.
    But if I had a cloak, I'd share it with you.

    I've got swords & cloaks and daggers, so pretty well set HA!

    In ancient times a cloak was considered a very valuable basic necessity for survival, various laws and such revolved around it.
     
    The elected officials, the lawyers and the judiciary are actively trying their best to do everything opposite to the constitution that they possibly can for their own power & gain. Twisting interpretations beyond belief or just plain making things up or ignoring the constitution are not being done because they don't know, they are done on purpose.

    Government, power & big money never like having any limits placed on them & will ignore "laws" and "constitutions" if you let them.

    I agree 100%. Lest we forget Obama calling the Constitution "a charter of negative liberties". He was correct in the fact that it denies the government powers beyond what is specifically allowed. We would all be better served if we just send all the POS politicians back home so they can't keep screwing things up worse.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: W54/XM-388
    I agree 100%. Lest we forget Obama calling the Constitution "a charter of negative liberties". He was correct in the fact that it denies the government powers beyond what is specifically allowed. We would all be better served if we just send all the POS politicians back home so they can't keep screwing things up worse.

    And the Constitutional scholar never got called out for it which was chilling.
     
    Deep thoughts.
    Maser, good on you for thinking outside the box as to what it means to take God's name in vain. Go to 2 Samuel Chapter 23 for a good account of old-timers delivering justice.

    Also, jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership (JPFO) has some great stuff on Bible and self defense.

    Gents,
    Hope you never miss and

    God bless America!
     
    I'm as non-religious as one gets... I probably leave smoking cloven hoofprints on hallowed ground.

    That said, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights (the first 10 Amendments) referred to what, at the time, philosophers and scholars (and Christians) believed to be the rights a man (today... person) was born with. Not bestowed by government or king... but born with. That implied... that those rights were God-given, because those philosophers whose ideas and ideals went into our founding principles... were of a western, classical, Judeo-Christian faith. So a natural right was, by extension, God-given. But the core philosophy was not about any one God or Religion. It was about what a MAN is born with.

    Me... I'm not a subscriber to the sky pilot theory. But I am a bigtime subscriber to the idea that what we call Christian principles... or living a Good, religious life... or following the 10 commandments.... or any religious doctrine... means that we are following the basic principles that allow people to organize, cooperate, live together, etc. etc. etc. In other words, the right thing to do... in a civilized and cooperative society.

    Raisers the question of Chicken or egg? Did humans recognize that following the Golden Rule (to use that as a blanket term)... allowed people to organize and improve themselves. Therefore... codify the Golden Rule... as a religious expression. And so it was just putting into practice what was already working? Or did we have the corollary, which is how you may see it if you are a Believer... That is that the organizing principles of society were handed down from a higher power... and by following them, we advanced as a species to the point that we have the Internet and snazzy new rangefinders that can count to 1000 in the rain... This is also a fine view yo have! Because in either case, the view serves to provide a foundation for civilization that has let us achieve some pretty cool things!

    God given rights or not... being an American... I believe 100 percent that my natural rights are mine. I was born with them. Nothing is written. I am not 'owed' anything for social %%$#king justice. I expect nothing but to be able to bootstrap myself to do anything I want... without infringing on someone ELSE's natural rights.

    And "Not be Infringed" means something... it means what some really smart guys in the 1700's said it means. That WE limit the power of government. That WE shall not be infringed by others. That nobody and nothing... has the power to touch our natural rights.

    Cheers,

    Sirhr
     
    • Like
    Reactions: mdmp5
    God given = Natural law = Self evident.

    At the inception of this country's founding, it was common sense and unquestionable that man had the right to defend himself with arms in common usage. Natural law also applies to many other things too, and it was taken for granted that people would understand it. However, these days the cool thing to do is smoke a bunch of weed or drop acid in ivy league schools and start questioning the validity of natural law, labeling it as "racist", "sexist" and whatever else the fuck these cunts can conjure up. I forgot who it was who said (paraphrasing) "this nation will never fall to outside forces; it is too strong. It will collapse from within".
     
    ^^ Lincoln said that. I quoted it somewhere on SH last week....

    And today 'Natural Laws' mean that everyone is entitled. That progressivism is the Natural Right.

    Because THAT crap was ginned up by Marx and Engels. And is a competing philosophy. And one that has been proven wrong in every nation-state where it has been tried.

    But it's a Utopian dream... so it keeps getting foisted on us.

    Utopia... derived from a Greek word literally-transiated... meaning "No Place."

    Utopia only exists in its non-existance. It can't exist.

    Cheers,

    Sirhr
     
    ^^ Lincoln said that. I quoted it somewhere on SH last week....
    Thought it was earlier than lincoln but he could have said it as well. Yes, this progressivism is out of control and has really unmasked how evil and self centered the human race is capable of being. It is applying the Keynesian principle of economics to life in general. "In the end, we are all dead anyway". Basically, if it feels good, do it. I gotta say that today's society is almost proof that the book of Genesis didn't quite happen as described. Unless God developed a tolerance for corruption, idolatry and unrepentant sin, I think we would have been engulfed in a great flood or destroyed with fire and brimstone by now.
     
    But it's a Utopian dream... so it keeps getting foisted on us.
    Utopia... derived from a Greek word literally-transiated... meaning "No Place."
    Utopia only exists in its non-existance. It can't exist.
    Sirhr

    I bet most younger people that mention "Utopia" have never read the book that that word in popular culture comes from.
    The "Utopian" society was way less "free" than people think, the way the book was written. I would hate to live in "Utopia" as written.
    It has been tried quite a few times, usually by Zealous Christian or Jewish cults, and is always the same oppressive mess.
    I'd much rather live in Boondock, on the planet Tertius if I had to pick something, that's a lifestyle I could get behind and open weapons carrying for everyone.

    The problem with the natural rights ideas of the founding of our country vs. people these days is one of simple logic.

    The original founders of this country envisioned that you were free to choose your own destiny and you owed nobody and nobody owed you & as long as you were not hurting somebody else / society, you should be reasonably free to do as you wanted, live or die, sink or swim, flourish or starve to death. (In actual practice people were a lot less free due to the "morals" of society).

    Today people seem to think that your "Natural Rights" Include free medicine, free food, guaranteed safety, never being offended, somebody taking care of your mistakes and children if you don't etc.

    The problem is a basic one of logic, you cannot have the "Right" to anything that is the product of the labor, wealth or ingenuity of another person. If you have the "Right" to free healthcare, well you are now saying that the government should enslave somebody against their will to provide this for you. If you have the "Right" to food and benefits, what you are saying is that the government should enslave and steal from somebody else to give you that.

    Basically everybody kind of understands it's wrong to go take somebody's stuff at gunpoint or make them serve you at gunpoint, but most seem perfectly happy with it, so long as they have a 3rd party middleman "The Government" do it for them.

    Hence the problem with Republics & Democracies, and why they all fail in the end, when every idiot has the same voting power as the intelligent wise producers, eventually the takers, looters & leaches get enough numbers to vote endless bread & circuses, backed up by taking from producers at gunpoint (try not paying your taxes and see how long it is before men with guns who call themselves "Public Servants" come to take you and your possessions away). Then eventually begins the slow decline as the producers produce less and less and the leaches consume more and more till it becomes unstoppable.

    People try the same ideas in the name of God, or Man, or Mankind or Atheism, Progress, Mother Earth or whatever, always ends up the same, it's just a matter of how long it takes to collapse.
     
    Last edited: