Jesus would have told him to holster it and that anyone who lives by the gun dies by the gun.

Would Mohammad ?

Ok Im listening. Lay out your case.

Bingo!

what would he do to stop ISIS FROM killing CHRISTIANS?????????

Didn't Jesus craft his own weapon, a whip, to drive the merchants out of the temple?


He DROVE them from the temple, he did not politely ask them to leave. He used a whip to DRIVE them out.


Sounds like Jesus could be a badass when the situation required it.

JOHN 2:15

Jesus Cleanses the Temple

…14And He found in the temple those who were selling oxen and sheep and doves, and the money changers seated at their tables.

15And He made a scourge of cords, and drove them all out of the temple, with the sheep and the oxen; and He poured out the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables;

16and to those who were selling the doves He said, "Take these things away; stop making My Father's house a place of business."…


Seems like a good passage to justify carrying a sidearm in church.

When HE returns HE will be leading an army as a conqueror

Jesus didn't write the constitution, and place a restriction on the government to stay the fuck away from my pistol...so not a fuck is given what he'd do or what Christians think he'd do.


BTW, if you read the Bible and come away with the idea that Jesus was an advocate of self-defense, especially for himself, you're fucking high. Luke 22:36 (especially in context) does not cancel out, or even begin to cancel out, the many instances in which Jesus is clearly a pacifist and opposed to even meaningful violence.




Turning the other cheek wasn't about a Glock, for he or his flock. (hey, that rhymes)


 

We all put as much stock in that lesson, right? Right?

NO, he consume the unbelievers with balls of fire from his eyes and bolts of lightning from his ass.

The real question is what sidearm would Muhammad carry.

He wouldn't in Maryland because he'd never get a carry permit.  He'd need police reports and documented threats.

You usually only hear it when they are taking your money (Jesus would want you to pay more taxes so we democrats can buy more votes)

As usual, first post!

Asking the New York Times to opine on Jesus is like asking Hitler to opine on the Torah.

yes, probably a Glock 19

Or like asking four year olds which color crayon tastes the best.  

Well, to be fair, If I learned that I was the immortal son and earthly incarnation of God, I probably wouldn't bother to carry a gun around anymore either....

Of course. A 1911.

Well, the Jewish cults that took on the Romans ended up like that one at Masada. Christians survived by being pacifist, i.e., no threat to Rome.

Yes, and he built my hotrod.

Well, he did minister to the lowest scum of society (prostitutes, and such)...

The multitude of sins of lies & hipocracy that the NYT has regarding the truth is a very large cross to bear....

BIGGER_HAMMER

Jesus said to love your enemies. Honestly though Id rather just kill people like ISIS and ask for forgiveness afterwards.

Pretty sure the whole point of the story is that Jesus allowed himself to be crucified.

In other word Jesus could have stopped those who wished to kill him but instead choose not to for a specific reason.

The reason was not to let a gang banger steal his wallet and cap him for the LULZ.

So we can surmise he was packing sufficient firepower to stop the Roman Legions but in a specific circumstance and for a specific reason he choose not to draw.

If you can shoot Ol' Yeller because he's rabid, I'm pretty sure you can love your enemy and give him a dose of 5.56.

It's not clear at all. In the specific context of the events, Jesus knew He was going to be crucified, and
willingly went to His fate. There's several bits of foreshadowing as He makes clear that he knows what
will happen, even if His disciples do not. What's more, He knew that fighting His fate (on His own behalf,
or others fighting for Him) was contrary to His purposes at that point in time, and what's more, He
could call upon the Almighty if He so wished, which would overmatch any Roman force and made
battling the Romans with swords kind of silly.

"And He said to them, "When I sent you out without money belt and bag and sandals, you did not lack anything,
did you?" They said, "No, nothing." And He said to them, "But now, whoever has a money belt is to take
it along, likewise also a bag, and whoever has no sword is to sell his coat and buy one."

While the Big J was on the scene He looked out for His disciples, and they didn't lack for food or
enough money to meet their needs. But Jesus is  going to His death and resurrection, and won't be on the
scene (physically, anyway) to turn water into wine or Jesus up some loaves and fishes. So they
need to carry a money belt. Likewise, He's not going to be around to call on the hosts of the Almighty
for protection. So the disciples need to provide some protection for themselves.

Pacifism is very much a minority view in Christian sects. The Catholics:



The Baptists are of course even more enthusiastic about self defense.

He would if he needed to!  But The Force is strong with him, he needs nothing!

Your Grandmother was a wise woman indeed.

Lol.  im an atheist.  what jesus would hypothetically do has no bearing on what i choose to do

And i say its dumb to be unarmed.

Romans 12:19

He will ALREADY have won. His resurrection is proof of that.

1. Jesus used a whip, which might be classified as a sidearm.

2. He allowed the Disciples to bear arms - in Luke 22:38 they produce two swords and He responds with certainly sounds like approval.

3. Peter carried a sword while with the Lord, as demonstrated when he cut off the slave's ear in the garden. Jesus told Peter to put it away, not to throw it away. John 18:11.

4. Luke 22:36 in context is most assuredly a divine endorsement of going armed for self-defense.

Luke 22:35 - 38 35 And he said unto them, When I sent you without purse, and scrip, and shoes, lacked ye any thing? And they said, Nothing.  36 Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.  37 For I say unto you, that this that is written must yet be accomplished in me, And he was reckoned among the transgressors: for the things concerning me have an end.  38 And they said, Lord, behold, here are two swords. And he said unto them, It is enough.

(A) 22:35 refers to the earlier evangelical mission of the Apostles, as to which they were instructed "9Provide neither gold, nor silver, nor brass in your purses, 10Nor scrip for [your] journey, neither two coats, neither shoes, nor yet staves: for the workman is worthy of his meat." Matthew 10:9-10 Note especially the mention of staves, which are personal weapons.

(B) 22:36 tells the Apostles how to equip themselves for their coming mission: with money and weapons. Whatever Jesus is saying about sidearms, he is also saying about money ("purse" and "scrip."). He is also clearly contrasting the equipment for the coming mission (money and weapons) with the lack of equipment allowed for the former journey (no money, extra coat, shoes or weapons); what they did not take before, they are to take in the days ahead.

(C) 22:38 tells us Jesus' response when they show him 2 swords. Guess what? He doesn't say "Get rid of them" or "I meant don't carry swords, you knuckleheads." He says "It is enough."

5. Luke 22:49 49When they which were about him saw what would follow, they said unto him, Lord,  shall we smite with the sword? 50And one of them smote the servant of the high priest, and cut off his right ear.  51And Jesus answered and said, Suffer ye thus far. And he touched his ear, and healed him. 52Then Jesus said unto the chief priests, and captains of the temple, and the elders, which were come to him, Be ye come out, as against a thief, with swords and staves?

(A) In 22:49 the Apostles ask if they should defend Jesus with their swords. He tells them not to ("Suffer ye thus far"), but does not condemn them for being armed.

(B) In 22:52 it is confirmed that the staves referenced in Matthew 10:9 are weapons.

That's a very fundementalist approach to Jesus.  Remember the guy flipped the tables on the pharisees and called for swords.  I don't think a modern day Jesus would shy from guns.  I also don't think most Christians understand Jesus.....they are too caught in the church and it's legalisms.

Rome certainly thought they were a threat.

Do they teach nothing in schools these days?

Everyone knows Jesus carries a 1911 hand made by John Moses Browning.

Browning didn't die. He got promoted to be God's gunsmith.

Where's 22:37?

. . . would certainly seem to forbid going armed for the purpose of vengeance.

Between 36 & 38.

Would Jesus be for abortions?

Oh I see, I just went down your ABC list

Two points here:

1.  Who would Jesus abort.  
2.  Liberals also bring up Jesus when it suits them about handouts to the FSA.  And I quote "For even when we were with you, we gave you this rule: “The one who is unwilling to work shall not eat.”"

Only for Democrats.

The same thing he did to stop Romans from killing Cristians?

Would Jesus drive a car?

Jesus would carry a 1911 made by St. John Moses Browning.

Yeah, he doesn't directly answer the question.

My pastor thanked me for carrying and told me it makes him feel more comfortable knowing I do.

Do I give a shit?

He told them to sell their cloaks and buy swords because he knew they were targets now.

 

NY times.....who owns them....certainly not anyone who has an ounce of respect for the Jesus of the bible....or His followers..

Exactly....that is what those who hate Christ refuses to understand....Jesus is God the Son....The Creator.....The Word of God....with the Father from the beginning.
Jesus is the God of Abraham,Isaac and Jacob....they won't be able to wrap their minds around that until the two witnesses appear.