 "Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path." Psalm 119:105 Contact Editor | Bible studies | Newer students | Bible Q & A's | Study tools | Search our site | Audios/Videos Library/Bookstore | Statement of faith | New material on site | Join our mailing list | Home Page | Donate QUESTION LIST; Page Number 62
| To list of all questions on Website |
| Back To Top | King James Bible the correct version with I Cor 15:47 (and ALL others)
A reader (a pastor) writes:
Hi [Xxxxx]. I only have a moment here, sorry; but I did do a screen capture of the Interlinear for your verse. It is from BibleSoft (PC Study Bible Version 4 Reference Library + [upgraded to the new version 5]). What happened to you is that you looked in the manuscripts of the NIV [the Nestles text], not the manuscripts from the KJV (Textus Receptus.) In other words, you were checking the King James version against the Mss (manuscripts) of the NIV version (New International Version). In the below, the Strong's numbers on the upper row are from the KJV manuscripts (Textus Receptus), and the Strong's numbers on the lower row are for the NIV manuscripts (Nestles text). Below is a legend to help understand the Interlinear used further below:
Below is a picture showing both the KJV's and the NIV's manuscript readings for I Cor 15:47. In it you can see that the KJV did not add the words, but rather the NIV omitted them. (The 9999#s are not words; but rather the "9999" indicates that the word did not appear in that text): 
In closing, not only does the KJV texts have the word "Lord" but they also have the Definite Article (Grk. #3588)! Once again the King James Bible is vindicated. Now, pastor, I have a question for you who enjoys the NIV: How do you feel about them (Adamantius Origen in his second century recension[1] which became the base manuscript for the corrupt codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus, copied later by Nestles, etc. et al, and then finding it's way into ALL newer Bible versions other than the KJV) omitting "the Lord" from the verse? And can really use that Bible version with confidence ever again?
Stick to the time-tested, faithful, and trusted King James Bible version, and you won't go wrong. What good thing can come from newer corrupt Bible versions that the very making of has consigned their editors and translators to hell?
Peace to you in Christ Jesus.
Back to list of questions at top of page
| Back To Top | The Millennium and the change of bodies
A reader writes:
Hello. I see two problems which may be causing difficulty. One, regarding the change of bodies at the Second Advent; and two, what happens to whom at the beginning and on into the body of the Millennial time (the 1000 years of Revelation chapter 20). The change of bodies Let's first take on the change of bodies. In 1st Thessalonians chapter four we see the Second Advent and what becomes of those faithful Christians who remained true to the Lord Jesus Christ during and through the Great Tribulation. In that Scripture (supplied below), Paul is speaking to Christians of Christians. He speaks not of any others (antichrists, infidels, atheists, etc.)—he is not speaking of what becomes of all men on that Second Advent, but only of all the faithful Christians; for, he addresses those that he is speaking to as "brethren", and he includes himself ( a Christian) with those whom he is speaking to when he says, "we believe that Jesus died and rose again". Then, speaking of the Second Advent, Paul says "the dead in Christ shall rise first". He speaks there of the deceased who died as faithful Christians; then he goes on to speak of those fellow servants, those others who were faithful to Jesus Christ until the very end, but who had not died, who had not been martyred: "Then we which are alive and remain...". The "we" are faithful Christians. He then gives them the glad news that those Christians who remain faithful to Jesus Christ during the Great Tribulation, and who have not died (naturally or by martyrdom), but rather "are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord" shall not die a flesh death at all—they shall be changed into their spiritual bodies without tasting of death, and shall forever be with the Lord. This is the first resurrection, and finds its compliment in Revelation chapter twenty. Observe the above Scripture we spoke of:
Those Christians who change without tasting of death
In other words, at the Second Advent there shall still be living Christians on the Earth who neither died nor betrayed Christ by taking the mark of the beast, and these shall not die—they shall never die—they shall not ever experience a flesh death. They shall simply "step out of their flesh bodies," their spiritual body (which is within us all, both good and evil, loosely referred to as "our soul") thus standing before Christ "and so shall we ever be with the Lord". The second death different than the first (flesh) death These (both the dead and living in Christ) shall not taste of the second death (the death of a soul, loosely and incorrectly referred to as "going to hell", but more accurately would be called "going into the lake of fire"). This is "the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years." (Rev 20:6b). And after that thousand years shall come the Judgment Day, where these faithful shall be judged worthy of eternal life, and shall be partakers of the New Heaven and New Earth of Revelation 21 on through the eternity; for, "on such the second death hath no power" (Rev 20:6). And thus, in fulfillment of prophecy and the honorable completion of God's promise in 1st Thes 4:17, they shall "ever be with the Lord" in Heaven; the Tribulation and trials of this world being completed, "And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away." (Rev 21:4). How appropriate that Paul would close the 1st Thessalonians chapter four prophecy with "Wherefore comfort one another with these words." (1st Thes 4:18). And how tragic that misguided but perhaps well meaning preachers of the Gospel would diminish such glory and great comforting words of God by calling it a "Rapture." A Rapture, I might add, that shall never happen—never was to happen—and never was in the Holy Bible, but was rather the traditions of man forced into Scripture unnaturally. Clearing up a confusion Before we move on it is necessary to clear up an important issue with the above interpretation. It will be noted by some that in Rev 20:1-6, which speaks of the first resurrection, that those faithful (saved) Christians who died in years-gone-by are not mentioned specifically as being among those who constitute the people (souls) who partake in "This is the first resurrection" (Rev 20:5b). In those named in Rev 20 as partaking of the first resurrection we see two groups of Christians mentioned in Rev 20:4; those that, (1) "the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God" (the Tribulation martyrs) and those that, (2) "and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands" (those who had remained alive at the Second Advent). And we do not see written here specifically of those faithful Christians who had died all down throughout the centuries. Now, in fairness I will state that some would disagree that the above two groups are even two separate groups, but rather that both Scripture segments above (1 & 2) are one long description of the same group of people (the Tribulation martyrs). I disagree; however, that is immaterial to our present point, and would be a diversion and a source of confusion to work out here and now. For, as I hope to show, it doesn't matter, because other Scriptures overlap and fill in the blanks. We shall cover those Scriptures presently. Our dilemma is this: are the dead in Christ (those faithful Christians who had died all down throughout the centuries) resurrected in the first resurrection, or at some latter resurrection? This is important because knowing this allows us to know whether or not the dead Christians from yesteryear are active during the thousand years of Revelation chapter twenty (the "Millennium"). To this question we find our answer in our Second-Advent Thessalonians Scripture, where the "fate" (destination, condition) of those dearly departed of old in Christ is tied together with those who never died and who "are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord" (1 Thes 4:15). Now, if we can agree that those Christians who "are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord," of which is said shall "ever be with the Lord" (1 Thes 4:15) in fact are always thereafter with the Lord and thus necessarily partake of the Millennium, for that is where Christ is; then we must also conclude that those dearly departed of old who died "in Christ" (i.e., as faithful saved Christians) are also in that Millennium, for that is where the deathless ones are, and once again that is where the Lord Jesus Christ is. That the deathless ones are in the same place that the faithful dead of old are is evident: "and the dead in Christ shall rise first: Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever [forever and always] be with the Lord." (1 Thes 4:16b-17). Therefore, if these two groups of Christians are forever with the Lord from the Second Advent on into the eternity, then they are in the Millennium which comes between the Second Advent and the eternal New Heaven and New Earth of Revelation chapter 21 forward (commonly known in Christians teachings as "going to Heaven"). Read the below Scripture below again, bearing all of the above in mind:
In conclusion on this "difficulty": It is no more a cause of concern that Paul, in the Thessalonians Scripture, makes no specific mention of the Tribulation martyrs being "ever with the Lord", than it is any cause of concern that John in the Revelation makes no specific mention of the "dead in Christ (from antiquity)" being part of the first resurrection. Both authors spoke of the same subject—the first resurrection—and as often is the case in parallel Scriptures, one speaking more perfectly on one group of partakers, and the other speaking more perfectly on another of the groups. In other words, the first resurrection happens at the Second Advent, and those who partake in it are "ever with the Lord" including during the immediately-following Millennium. Else, what do we do with those "which are alive and remain" at the Second Advent? They never died, shall we kill them so that they can resurrect after the Millennium. Of course not. They never die, and are forever with Jesus Christ—ergo, they are with Jesus Christ during the millennium—as are their fellow servants who resurrected when they (the deathless ones) were changed at the Second Advent. Can anything be more clear? If they are from that point (the Second Advent) forever with the Lord (which Scripture says they are), and if the Lord is in the Millennium, which He clearly is, then they are with Him in the Millennium and not waiting for some future resurrection. Man is only resurrected once, but he can die twice. Die once in the flesh and then a second death of the soul in the Lake of of Fire (fore those who do not overcome). And while there is more than one resurrection, every soul only goes through one of them, they just do it at different times. "And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth [die] shall awake [resurrect], some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt." (Dan 12:2). Finally, regarding omissions in the lists of with-Christ/Millennium partakers: Nowhere in either the Thessalonians Scripture not the Revelation Scripture does the Holy Spirit announce that He is giving an exhaustive (complete) list. So that what we have here is another great witness (Thessalonians by Paul and Revelation by John) to the single Author of the Bible—our Heavenly Father. For He, writing through many human authors and paper epistles, spread His whole message between and across the several books of the Bible—no single book or author possessing the whole message, and none able to stand alone as complete; so that none of them can be defamed by the wicked one and their work cast aside by intelligent readers. One can't understand the book of Revelation apart from the rest of God's Bible, both the Old and the New Testaments. Moving on... Now that we have looked at the first resurrection from its beginning as it will happen, now let us look at it as it completes and moves further in time into the thousand years that we refer to as "the Millennium" (millennium means 1000 years).
The above events transpire at the Second Advent, which we just looked at in the Thessalonians Scripture; but these events above occur in a different location than the gathering to Christ of His faithful (which we saw in 1st Thessalonians). Also notice that while Christ Jesus comes directly for His own, it is angels of God who deal with antichrist (satan). Continuing the above Scripture we see the principle actors in the Millennium:
The second death is the death of a soul. It is the final destination of the damned. They are not tortured for an eternity as so many medieval paintings depict, for they are now at this time in their spiritual bodies which do not respond to pain (as witnessed in Nebuchadnezzar's furnace). The Lake of Fire is what most Christians think that "hell" is; that is to say, the destination of those who do not "go to Heaven." That the final end of the unsaved and unredeemed is not "hell" is easily witnessed by the fact that even hell itself is cast into the Lake of Fire before the eternity begins. Thus, there can be no eternal hell; for, even "hell" (which means the grave; i.e., death) is destroyed in the Lake of Fire. So we see that even death can die ("The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death." [1st Cor 15:26]), and that in the eternity "there shall be no more death" (Rev 21:4), for it is no more; i.e., it "dies" (ends, completion, is no more, etc.).
Please let me know if I missed something that you were asking about.
Peace
to you in Christ Jesus.
Back to list of questions at top of page
| Back To Top | Pastor Murray and the Shepherds Chapel. Also, the mark of the beast and the global apparatus to enforce it
A reader writes:
Hello [Xxxxx]. I could add to your list: his interpretation of "born again," his "our brother Judah" doctrine, his "5 month total Tribulation time," and an "Ezekiel 44 Millennium"; but I don't want to turn into a critic of pastor Murray, as he is the best out there on TV. But those would cover the main ones; and none of those are salvation doctrines, they are not spiritually imperative nor interfere with the saving of souls. I will only say this: I agree with pastor Murray on all important salvation doctrine, and I disagree with him on some points (as evidenced in my writings) related to prophecy matters. And while I did not say that the mark of the beast is necessarily a (computer) chip, I did say that it will be something identifiable. I base that on the fact that "they" shall know if you are one who is allowed to "buy and sell," and they shall know if you are one who hasn't yet taken the mark, whereby they can deliver you to the (soon to be, Judaic-run) councils for conversion (to antichrist/satan) or death. So, how will they know, if there is not a visible or detectable mark in/on you? Are they going to divine it? Nope, they shall see/detect it. Why do I identify these councils as Judaic? Well, for one, Christ more than hinted at who would be the ultimate persecutors of Christians in the Tribulation; and, the current world-wide "Hate Crime" / "AntiSemitism" / "Holocaust Denial" laws that are being instituted near and far (we even have in American government a global AntiSemitism office!) is the framework for the global apparatus that shall morph and eventually become the body that will be utilized to enforce totalitarian compliance with the receiving of the mark of the beast. You are free to disagree with that position. To that I would say to you: "Just watch." I need not prove it—they themselves are proving it for me, if one would only look. Pastor Murray is great Bible teacher, it is through his ministry that I began my own study of God's written Word, and he has taken Bible deeper study further than any of his peers, should he even have any peers nowadays. And he has done what few others have done, he has taught his students how to do their own studies. However, like all men—and like my favorite, E.W. Bullinger—he isn't perfect (nor does he claim to be, I might insert). Please allow me to close this E-mail with the words of that favorite of mine Bible teacher, Ethelbert Bullinger (deceased a century ago):
Peace to you in Christ Jesus.
_______________________________________________________________________ The reader replies:
Hello [Xxxx]. My, my, aren't we all wound up? I have no problem with women watching for the signs of the times. Neither did Paul in God's Word, they just aren't supposed to be over and leading men, especially in the churches. So you can be a watchmen to. I implied no gender in naming this Watchmen Bible Study Group. As you know, often times the male gender term is used to include women, such as in the designation "mankind." Let's not get all Feminist here, please. You might be surprised to know that the supporters of Watchmen Bible Study Group are about half male and half female, so I don't think that I am coming-off as being anti-women on the Website. I just supply the Scriptures and let women take their place as their conscience dictates. Regarding your above quote, I have some detailed work on the matter that I will direct you to. I couldn't do the subject justice in a short E-mail, and why re-write it anyway? But in answer to your question: of course I believe Ezekiel, as I do all the prophets of God. When a prophet speaks and writes, he speaks and writes the words of God. That, by the way, stripped of all else, is the purist definition of the word prophet—one who speaks God's words. But you are not rightly dividing, as you shall shortly discover if you choose to read my below articles. So here you go, fellow watchmen: [Xxxxxxx], I deduce that you are an ardent supporter of pastor Murray. So too am I. However, I will part opinion with any man at the exact place and time where his teaching contradicts clear Scripture. Now, that does not mean that I will throw away a man who makes a mistake; but it does mean that I will side with God where man and God disagree. Pastor Murray is a great old guy, and I respect him greatly. In fact, for whatever it may or may not be worth to you, it is deeply painful for me to have to disagree with the man publicly, as I have learned so much from him. But for me, it all and always comes back to loyalty and fidelity—loyalty to God and fidelity to the truth. Now, perhaps I may be the mistaken party, and pastor Murray the correct; but you will never find that out until you do Scriptural investigation for yourself. I stand on my studies as sound doctrine, I always post Scriptural documentation for my positions. And if and where I can be shown through Scripture where I am wrong on a matter, I would come forward and change my position Biblically on that matter. I am not so burdened, as is pastor Murray, to be perfect. You all truly do expect too much from the man. No man, save for Christ, was ever perfect. My favorite Bible teacher and most true servant of Christ Jesus, E.W. Bullinger, believed in the Rapture hoax, knew nothing of the two creation events, was oblivious to the identity of Cain's father, etc. Apostle Paul had to publicly correct and admonish Apostle Peter. Why hold pastor Murray to a higher standard than any other man on the planet?
Peace to you in Christ Jesus.
Back to list of questions at top of page
| Back To Top | Jewish defector and convert to Christianity, Benjamin Freedman, on Jesus NOT being a "Jew"
Hello; Jesus was definitely NOT a Jew as we reckon "Jews" today. Below is an article by a Jewish convert to Christianity: Below are some free E-books on our Website from the same above author. This should get you more than started. A Jewish Defector Warns America by Benjamin H. Freedman 
Facts Are
Facts by Benjamin H. Freedman
NOTE ON AUTHOR: Benjamin H. Freedman was one of the most intriguing and amazing individuals of the 20th century. Mr. Freedman, born in 1890, was a successful Jewish businessman of New York City who was at one time the principal owner of the Woodbury Soap Company. He broke with organized Jewry after the Judeo-Communist victory of 1945, and spent the remainder of his life and the great preponderance of his considerable fortune, at least 2.5 million dollars, exposing the Jewish tyranny which has enveloped the United States. Mr. Freedman knew what he was talking about because he had been an insider at the highest levels of Jewish organizations and Jewish machinations to gain power over our nation. Mr. Freedman was personally acquainted with Bernard Baruch, Samuel Untermyer, Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt, Joseph Kennedy, and John F. Kennedy, and many more movers and shakers of our times. This speech was given before a patriotic audience in 1961 at the Willard Hotel in Washington, D.C., on behalf of Conde McGinley's patriotic newspaper of that time, Common Sense. Though in some minor ways this wide-ranging and extemporaneous speech has become dated, Mr. Freedman's essential message to us -- his warning to the West -- is more urgent than ever before.
Peace to you in Christ Jesus. Back to list of questions at top of page
| Back To Top | More on the "King James Only" Bible position
A reader writes: [WBSG Note: The "..." marks are in the original reader's E-mail, and do not denote editorial omissions as are generally then case with such markings in quoted text]
Check out the following. Then ask the question...Just 'how many' Gods are there?...
I believe with all my soul that this is no mistake...for it is they " Who changed the
truth of God into a lie".
Hello, thank you for the kind words and the payers, they mean much to me. As you have ably illustrated, the main focus of the omissions and adulterations in the newer Bible versions (every version AFTER the true King James Version Bible) are geared towards attacking the Deity of Jesus Christ. Your Scripture (Dan 3:25) was a foreshadowing of Jesus Christ before His time. Jesus, THE Son of God, THE "the only begotten Son of God" (Jn 3:16) was the forth man in the furnace which saved the three Hebrews. How could Jesus have been here before His time, one might ask?:
This, the same Jesus whom God by His Holy Spirit in the Gospel of John confirmed in His Holy Bible as being the only begotten (through Mother Mary without man's seed) Son of God. We, you and I, male and female, are all sons of God; all the angels are called sons of God; but there is only one begotten Son of God, the man Jesus Christ.
As described in our study (Adulterations in the Newer Bible Versions (NIV, NASB...); Proof that the King James Bible (KJV) is the True Word of God), all the newer versions are based upon a corrupt manuscript stream that deviated from the manuscript stream that the King James Bible was translated from. But that is only for the Greek text, for the New Testament text. But you have shown that the damned new version Bible makers have also corrupted the Old Testament text in the newer "Bible" versions. This is substantial, it is very important to observe; for, they have no corrupt manuscript to blame for the tampering with the Hebrew Old Testament text. In other words, these self-damned men have purposely lied about what the text says and, sadly, so many well meaning Christians are using these "Bible" versions. Satan is very smart, as are his minions:
Below is the whole passage for context. In it you will observe that Nebuchadnezzar witnessed a miracle, and because of it he made the Hebrew's religion legal in his realm:
Peace to you in Christ Jesus. Back to list of questions at top of page
| Back To Top | Is there unrighteousness with God?
A reader writes:
Hello, I won't "Pleazzzzzzzzzzzze" say that "those were different times" because God's Word is never ending. And even Jesus stated:
The answer question #1, "...is this justice, really?", is this:
And also a warning from the Scriptures for those who endeavor to charge God with "unfairness":
And when you learn to respect God with a reverent fear, then He may choose to explain verses 22 and 23 above to your heart. But you are nowhere near ready to believe God; therefore, all shall remain a mystery to your heart, because from the first you did not trust the Lord, nor, apparently, do you now yet fear Him. The answer to question #2, "...10 concubines; how is this not fornication or adultry?", is this: Your not knowing what is and what is not adultery is causing you confusion. Then, once confused, you "solve" the problem by charging God with error. Please learn what Adultery is according to God's Bible, then go about assigning guilt and attributing contradiction: Adultery is SOLELY and SPECIFICALLY predicated on the marital status of the female participant So we see that the problem was not that God contradicted His own written Word (the Bible); but that rather, man failed to teach it accurately. Some preachers think it good to add and take away from what God said and meant in the commandments and laws of the Bible. But, for however well-meaning they may have been, in the end they cause God problems like the above reader's dilemma. False would-be do-gooder preachers cause God to look contradictory and even hypocritical! They shall answer for that one day. It is a mighty and fearful responsibility to teach God's written Word, the Bible. Many men take up the noble task quite haphazardly. Men don't choose the vocation, God calls men to it. Those who force their way in shall run right across and through the back door, right back out in the dark. For, God begins His judgment at the altar (clergy first). Now perhaps people can see why it is never right to lie about God's written Word, it is never right to add to the Scriptures because "one feels that the people will take excessive license with freedoms." The Catholic Church is an enormous offender in this regard: telling people that this or that is a sin when God didn't say it was. For instance, nowhere in the Bible is drinking alcohol or smoking cigarettes a sin; yet, so many non-Christians and quasi-Christians believe that it is a sin. The reason they errantly think that these are sins is because the churches, in their ignorance—or worse, in their adding to the Scriptures through false teaching—have told everybody that these are sins. So that in the Catholic Church you are a sinner for drinking beer, but you are a "good Catholic" for worshipping idols in the church. Go figure! Now, we know that idolatry is a sin because it in the Ten Commandments, which the Catholic Church is in extreme disobedience to; but, what will the popes and cardinals (and many non-Catholic Christian clergy) do with Jesus Christ? After all, His first miracle on Earth was to turn water into wine at a wedding party. And what about those neo-preachers who say that it "wasn't real wine" that Jesus made, but that it was grape juice? They will go to any length, any stretch, to make God say what they want Him to say, not what He is really saying. Further comment is superfluous. Let's just prove Scripture by Scripture; or, let's let God's written Word prove God's spoken intent:
So we see that the above wine spoken of, is a wine that made men drunk "have well drunk" (Jn 2:10b). Below we have another Scripture with both these same words, in the which there is no room for misinterpretation:
Peace to you in Christ Jesus. And I would tread a little lighter with the God-blaming and God-accusing if I were you. "Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap." (Gal 6:7). WBSG NOTE: For honesty's sake and for full disclosure: This author both smokes cigarettes and drinks alcoholic beverages; but, I assure you, that had no bearing on my above Scriptural interpretation. Drinking alcohol in moderation is no sin, and smoking cigarettes is no sin. And should "they" throw up the "your body is the temple of God" Scripture, ask them to read the verse in context with the rest of the passage, and they shall discover that it is speaking of sexual immorality (and figuratively, idolatry), not diet, alcohol, cigarettes, tattoos, piercings, biting your fingernails, failure to wash behind your ears, etc. The "your body is the temple of God" Scripture is a "catch all" for those who can't find their positions mirrored in the Scriptures, whereby they can make God look to be in agreement with their own particular (and un-Biblical) pet-peeves; and it is one of the more misapplied Scriptures in the Bible.
_______________________________________________________________________
Back to list of questions at top of page
| Back To Top |
Christians and self defense, should we sit back and expect God to do it all? A reader writes:
Hello, may I answer your last question first? You said/asked:
I can't help you with that because that is not the truth of the matter. We are supposed to count on God for things that we cannot do, but we are supposed to do what we can do. Could not I take your above argument and say "Why should I spread the Gospel, God is capable of spreading it Himself?" The laws of America provide for self-defense. So it is not against the law, neither God's law nor man's law. Now, I am not advocating young people running around with knives, but every adult ought to provide for his and his/her family's self defense. (You never told me your son's age, many people have adult sons.) You use the common "Christ is my defense," and that is rightly true, but then you err by taking that to mean that we can be lazy and "leave everything to Jesus to do." It is not God that seeks to render Christians helpless and disarmed, it is satan's minions who exploit the Scriptures to leave Christians vulnerable to criminals, rapists and robbers and murderers and thugs. If someone is trying to rape or kill you or your wife/daughter, then you have the right both under man's laws and God's laws to dispatch that wicked person to God (kill) where God shall then deal with them. The reality on the ground is that good Jesus Christ loving Christians do in fact get raped and murdered; however, another fact on the ground is that far fewer good Jesus Christ loving Christians get raped and murdered while they are armed. And yes, God helps some; but as we see, not all.
And the rest of your questions: You said/asked:
The answer should be self-evident: so that the Christian may protect his person and his family from evil doers. You said/asked:
If he is of an age where it is legal in your area to possess a knife, and if the length of the knife is legal—then your son is most correct. But do inform him that the law draws a very thin line between self defense and aggression. "Self defense" is not a valid excuse just because someone is insulting you. And a measured response is also looked at by the law. In other words, if a bully punches your son in the nose after insulting him in front of his girlfriend, and then your son pulls a knife and chases down the bully and stabs him to death—then you son shall be spending the next 15-20 years in State Prison for murder, and someone else shall be taking his girlfriend to the Prom, and he shall discover a side of "diversity" that he cannot now fathom. You said/asked:
Because that was enough weaponry for self defense in that particular place at that particular time. Today, a nine-millimeter is an "enough" weapon. But do it legally, following all the laws of your locality if at all possible. And understand that if you go against the laws of your city, even though you are in accord with God's laws, you will still end up in jail. Which most usually is better than ending up in a rape clinic or graveyard. But do understand that your actions have consequences, and that courts are not very accommodating to the Christian Bible defense because this world hates Jesus Christ and God's Bible and God's Christians. Don't give satan an opportunity to entangle you, Christian. You said/asked:
You notice that Jesus did not chastise Peter for doing something wrong, He simply healed the man's ear so that Peter would not be arrested. Jesus had work for Peter to do which Peter could not do if he was in jail or on a cross. Christians, think about that before you take irreversible "self-defense actions." You may be right, but you also may not get a fair trial, as Peter no doubt would not have had a fair day in court. Just because you can kill an assailant doesn't mean that you have to. The Judaic-controlled court systems of America are not very friendly to what they consider "vigilante action," most especially Christian self-defensers. In the book of Revelation, which speaks of the endtimes which we are racing into presently, it states:
You will notice that God didn't say that he was angry with them for fighting, but just that if they resist they can expect to be dealt with by satan's henchmen. However, those who accept captivity shall go into captivity of antichrist, which means they will swear allegiance to him and bring upon themselves the wrath of God. I'd rather die than worship satan (antichrist). Each Christian must make his/her own decision when that time comes, should our Lord choose to allow us to be subjected to difficulties during it. And I must stress that if your child is a minor: that most states have more restrictive laws regarding minors and weapons, because minor children are not always capable of making sound decisions and are less likely to give measured responses to aggression. You said/asked:
By studying each Scripture in context and then comparing them as a whole. Your problem, if I may say it, is that you have been poisoned by false pacifist preachers who would disarm God's Christians and leave them vulnerable to victimization. You even have preachers who don't know their Bible protesting Capital Punishment. That shall be most helpful to the International Judaics during the Great Tribulation when they are rounding up Christians for conversion (or execution) to their antichrist. You must understand that without the sword and the gun there would be no such religion as Christianity today—we would all be hell-bound Muslims. Remember the much maligned "Crusades," well, had the Christians not won there would not be a Christian religion on this planet today—that's why God gave the Christians the victory (yet you have deceived Christians today that are ashamed of the "Crusades"!). And today, Judaics are behind all gun confiscation legislation. Why is that? It is because they want Christians ripe for the plucking when the time comes. The greatest enemy to the antichrists are well armed Christians. Not the answer that you expected, huh? Not at all surprising nowadays, what with the endemic failure of the Christian clergy and churches. But it is Biblical. Now what will you do? Well, you could go to most any other Christian ministry with your question and have them tell you to lay down and go to sleep. But do insist that they satisfactorily answer regarding your above excellent Scriptural examples of armed Christians.
Peace to you in Christ Jesus. Back to list of questions at top of page
| Back To Top |
Pending
A reader writes:
Hello. I appreciate your trying to search the Scriptures out for your answer. That is exactly what we are supposed to do. However, what you have |
Two
Works By Benjamin H. Freedman, Jewish Defector (Jewish convert to
Christianity):