So I just read that Sister Sarah hath proclaimed that Jesus would defend the Second Amendment.
“Don’t believe me?” she asked. "Look it up – Luke 22:36. Proof that Jesus is a proponent of carrying.”
Well, it is an interesting verse:
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.”
Of course, as Christians are want to do, she has taken the entire text out of context so that she can back up a position that she knows Jesus COULDN’T support.
Let’s look at this verse in context.
Then Jesus asked them, “When I sent you without purse, bag or sandals, did you lack anything?”
“Nothing,” they answered.
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.
Luke 22:35-38
What was going on when Jesus spoke those words?
Well, they had just wrapped up the Last Supper, Judas had disappeared at Jesus’ bidding:
That thou doest, do quickly…
Peter had just proclaimed that he would die for Jesus, and Jesus told him that he would do just opposite: he would deny Jesus “this very night.” And finally, Jesus was planning on spending his final night in the Garden of Gethsemane.
There is strong evidence that Jesus was up to something that night, and that Judas was part of it, and that he sent Judas’ to put the plan into motion. This is why he advised his disciples to arm themselves. But as you can see, when they told him that they had two swords, he decided “that’s enough.”
I’m going to post that thesis, but this article is to take Sarah to task for being willfully ignorant and trying to deceive the people “in Jesus name.”
First of all, only someone who has never read Jesus could actually even consider this. Anyone who has read the gospels would know that, despite his many idiosyncrasies, Jesus would never support guns, not even to defend his own life. In fact, if you read that last part about his life, he didn’t seem all that interested in self-defense.
I’ve posted this article before, but I’m going to post it again. It’s my hope that by reposting this thesis that we can start to shut down the idea that somehow guns are “godly.” If you want to defend guns, defend them, but leave Jesus out of it. We are bombarded by people who tell us “what Jesus wants,” but wouldn’t know what he wanted if he actually told them. In fact, if he ever did talk to them, they’d demand a new messiah. I’m hoping to infuse this debate with a little bit of “perspective.”
So here it is: Jesus would not only NOT defend the Second Amendment, he would eviscerate the NRA.
One of the greatest ironies of American Christianity is how anti-Jesus it is. Jesus was Jewish peasant with messianic aspirations. Christ was a Hellenized (white), anti-Semitic, Gentilic Messiah (my own made-up word)... a concoction of St. Paul the Megalomaniac. Christ would probably be just fine with guns and the carnage they create, but Jesus, the Rabbi would be appalled.
How can we be sure?
First, there’s the easy answer: “DUH! Have you READ the gospels?” The harder answer though, is a bit more complex.
One of Jesus’ most common teachings centered on faith. “If you have the faith of a mustard seed…”“Ye of little faith, why are you so afraid…”“He was amazed at their lack of faith…” His beliefs on faith could probably be distilled to this one statement:
“Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or drink; or about your body, what you will wear. Is not life more than food, and the body more than clothes? Look at the birds of the air; they do not sow or reap or store away in barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not much more valuable than they? Can any one of you by worrying add a single hour to your life?”
Matthew 6:25-27
There are pages and pages of ideas we could extrapolate from this statement, tens of thousands of words we could write, but it acts as a staunch rebuttal to the “self-protection” meme being quoted by Sister Sarah of Stupidia. One has to wonder, would Jesus be comfortable with HER lack of faith in God, and HER misplaced faith in a weapon?
How about the “good-man-with-a-gun” argument? “All it takes to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.” Is this compatible with the Jesus of Luke 6:27-36?
"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.”
The irony of “people of faith” is their complete “lack of faith.” Sister Sarah of Paranoia lives in terror that someone is “coming for her.” The Liberals are coming for her guns, and to steal her ammunition, or force her into a FEMA camps (first we’d like to get her into a hospital where she won’t hurt herself-or anyone else). She lives in fear that immigrants are taking her jobs, and that gay people are ruining her marriage. This is not faith, this is fear. If it’s true that “Perfect love casts out all fear,” Sister Sarah is a long way from love.
“And he said unto them, Why are ye fearful, O ye of little faith?”
To align yourself to Jesus is to embrace the faith of God, and I’ve yet to hear a defense of guns that comes from this faith. Instead, it comes from that one emotion Jesus criticized the most: doubt (which Jesus often equated with fear).
But we should have the option to protect ourselves, right?—Trust in God but tie up your camels!
Well… yes and no. I suppose it would have a lot to do with how seriously you take Jesus’“Love your enemies” injunction. Gandhi is one of only a handful of people who seems to have taken this admonition to heart.
To say that Jesus was all about peace and love is to over-simplify who he was and what he stood for, but peace, love, and practicality were a big part of his ideology. In some instances, it does sound like Jesus is telling us that we ‘will’ be “lambs to the slaughter.” Yet in other instances he gives advice on how to stand up to oppression. But his methods are extreme: trust in God and love your enemy.
Because no such thing as a gun existed in first-century Palestine, we can correctly say that Jesus never spoke about guns. Of course not. But we can look into Jesus worldview: who he thought he was, who he thought God was, who he thought we were, and who he thought our enemies were. Oh—and what guns are, and what purpose do they serve the Kingdom of Heaven.
Who Jesus thought God was:
Obviously, this is going to be complicated. Even asking who “I” think God is can’t be put into words. However, we can see that Jesus looked into the universe and saw something, something wonderful; that ruled earth and took a passionate interest in humanity (particularly the poor). Jesus of course viewed all this through the lens of Judaism and through the politics of the Temple, but his take on God was still unique. He identified this entity as “Father…” a “daddy,” intimate with his children. Jesus was so intimate with this “Father,” that when he prayed he simply assumed that Father was going to provide it. Hence his focus on faith. His connection was so deep that the he could say, “I and my Father are one.”
Who Jesus thought we were:
Well, that depended a lot on where you were on the socioeconomic scale. The higher up you were politically and financially, the less his Father thought of you, unless you used your resources to help the poor (See the parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus). The lower down the social scale you were, the more precious you were to the Father. His Father loved the poor. Jesus even told his disciples that they were the same in this Father’s eyes—“the works I have been doing, and they will do even greater things than these…” Jesus and God were one, we were all one with God.
Who Jesus thought our enemies were:
In short, they were our neighbors. The Gospel of Luke tells the story of an expert of the law asking Jesus what he must do to inherit eternal life.
“What is written in the Law?” he replied. “How do you read it?” He answered, “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind’; and, ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’”
“You have answered correctly,” Jesus replied. “Do this and you will live.” But he wanted to justify himself, so he asked Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?”
Luke 10:25-29
And here’s where Jesus tells the man—and the rest of us—the story of the Good Samaritan. We’ve heard this story so many times that we’ve lost the punchline. Samaritans were to Jews what atheists are to Christians, only more so. Samaritans would be the: LGBTQ/bake-me-a-gay-cake/atheist/gun-haten’/Second-Amendment-tramplin’/liburals of Palestine. They were detested, loathed, despised, abhorred…(I think you get the point). Yet in his story about “my neighbor,” Jesus casts the most avid “non-Christian” in the starring role.
He tells of a Jewish man on his way to Jericho who was robbed and beaten and left for dead. Then Jesus casts two very important men in the supporting roles: a priest and a Levite (prominent Christians, such as Sister Sarah). Both passed their fellow Jew but ignored him, even going so far as cross the street in order to avoid him. Though to be sure, Sister Sarah would have at least left a word-salad as to why this poor Jew deserved his beating and if he had a gun, he could have defended himself.
Those listening to this story for the first time had to have felt a twinge of anger and disgust when they heard it.
Along comes our hero, the Samaritan, who…
…“took pity on him. He went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he put the man on his own donkey, brought him to an inn and took care of him. 35 The next day he took out two denarii and gave them to the innkeeper. ‘Look after him,’ he said, ‘and when I return, I will reimburse you for any extra expense you may have.’
Luke 10:33-35
Jesus ends his story by asking:
“Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?”
The expert in the law replied, “The one who had mercy on him.”
Jesus told him, “Go and do likewise.”
Luke 10:36-27
Notice how Jesus doesn’t cast a Jew in the role of “neighbor”? Again, there are volumes that can be written about that, but it was bound to have angered the “Conservatives” in his audience. It’s as if Jesus was saying that they had to look outside Christianity to find a real Christian.
The last line of the story, “Go and do likewise,” is often taken as a throw-away line, but think about it—according to Jesus, if you want to enter The Kingdom of Heaven, you’ve got to take pity on your neighbor—which was really your enemy. Jesus was telling a Jew to act like a Samaritan—a Conservative to act like a Liberal, a Christian to act like an Atheist.
So now that we know our neighbor is actually our enemy, how does Jesus demand we treat our enemies?
“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 children 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. If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that?
Matthew 5:43-47
Finally, let’s look at what Jesus thought about life:
He used the term Kingdom of Heaven when talking about God, peace, love and life. In Matthew alone, he used it about thirty-six times. That Kingdom, though, was not static, or out in the ethereal. It was in and around us, taking up space. “The Kingdom of Heaven is within you.” In his parables, Jesus compares a sower to The Kingdom of Heaven, a mustard seed, yeast, treasure, a merchant, and a net— all to The Kingdom of Heaven. This kingdom was vibrant, active, and vital. It was part of us, part of God, and part of nature and everyday living. It was movement, going and coming, ebbing and flowing, giving and receiving, growing and catching—and we had the “keys.” We directed The Kingdom of Heaven.
In the context of how Jesus saw this life, Matthew quotes Isaiah:
A bruised reed he will not break, and a smoldering wick he will not snuff out,
Matthew 12:20
This was Jesus’ Kingdom of Heaven.
Now, let’s look at the gun. What is the purpose of the gun?
Guns are manufactured for one reason only—to kill: To make killing easier; To able to kill from further away; To kill more people at the same time; To be able to kill at night; To kill silently; To kill through walls; To kill while on the go; To kill through bullet-proof vests.
I think it’s a safe bet that Jesus would not be on board with such an instrument of destruction. Guns violate who God thinks we are, they represent the lack of faith of the alleged follower of Jesus, they hurt our neighbor (our enemies), they hurt children, they rob life—in short, they are a direct attack on The Kingdom of Heaven.
From the days of John the Baptist until now, the kingdom of heaven has been subjected to violence, and violent people have been raiding it.
John 11:12
Jesus used the term hypocrite when describing people (usually in power) who misused or misrepresented God and his instruction, and who said things about God that were not true—specifically when they brought harm to others. This was the worst offense Jesus ever called anyone, and he used it for those he truly detested—the worst of the worst. It’s a safe bet that Sister Sarah is now on that list.
If Sister Sarah wants to own a gun, or many, that’s her right. But she’s using the name of Jesus to justify those guns, and we have pretty strong evidence that she’s misrepresenting God… and Jesus had several choicer words for people like her.
Jesus, unlike Sister Sarah, was pro LIFE (pro-Kingdom of Heaven)—and he took that stance seriously.