Faith and Firearms

I’m not a religious person, and most people who know me know this. I have a pretty good sense of who I am as a Jew who escaped the Soviet Union in 1979. I have written on the topic of being Jewish, being abused by one’s government, and being able to stand up to it. Being a Jew is what formed my views on gun rights to begin with before I ever knew what the Second Amendment was.

But I’m not religious at all. If I had to describe myself, I’d say I’m more of the agnostic/atheist variety. So when I tackled the subject of faith and firearms for Concealed Carry magazine more than a decade ago, I had to approach my father – a faithful Jew since we stepped foot onto American soil in 1980 – and some of his contacts.

I wanted to know whether many Jewish organizations in the United States had any basis for supporting disarmament, and whether they were misinterpreting Jewish law.

This week’s poll promfaith-and-firearms-coverpted me to see if the article I wrote all those years ago is available online, since it is still as appropriate today as it was more than 10 years ago when I wrote it.

The full article is here, along with a view from the Lutheran perspective. Here’s a bit.

The fact is that gun control subverts and violates Judaic law. According to Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership (JPFO), the sanctity of life is a core Jewish value. Rabbi Isaac Leizerowski, after having conferred with several of his colleagues, agrees that the right to self-defense is MANDATED by Jewish law. From the sanctity of Life comes an imperative to safeguard Life. The directive to defend your life is written in the Talmud, the 70-volume Code of Jewish Law, in at least three places. “And the Torah says, ‘If someone comes to kill you, arise quickly and kill him.’”

Have a good weekend!

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

21 thoughts on “Faith and Firearms”

  1. I find myself often in turmoil in my own mind. In my desire to allow everyone to be free to think as they wish about things, be it religion, gun rights, abortion, etc., am I being untrue to the causes to which I believe in?
    For example, on the topic of religion here, where you speak of your own lack of belief in a higher power, I myself have a strong faith in a deity, which I need not discuss here. But I have no desire to change you, ridicule you, or shout down your position. Is this being unfaithful to my own religion? That is not a question for anyone but me to answer, I think.
    Now, when it comes to the question of the 2nd amendment, I could substitute the same thing for a belief in a deity. I am a strong supporter of my right to keep and bear arms. I don’t think that I can change someone’s position. I am not trying to ridicule them or shout them down. Am I being unfaithful to our cause? I don’t think that is for anyone to answer but me.
    I am sure people have reasons to tell me I am wrong, but please let them be based on something other than emotion. Thanks.

    1. just one more thought. if we want freedom for ourselves, it seems like we have to have it for everyone. that means 1st amendment freedom for those who would lie to take our guns from us.

      1. They have the First Amendment freedom to lie in public, and you have the First Amendment freedom to challenge their lies.

        Keep in mind that a lie serves no good purpose. They lie in order to strip you of your other rights; their cause is so morally bankrupt that lying is the only way they can succeed.

        Challenging their lies is not the same as revoking their right to speak. The latter is a violation of their First Amendment rights; the former is merely exercising your own.

        (Some would say that you have a moral duty to call out others’ lies, but I believe that is a personal decision. Either way, it’s a debate for another time.)

      2. Nope, it’s not your mission to convince others. That’s not being unfaithful to the cause – there is no cause. There’s just life, and how we get through it. Most people aren’t amenable to logic anyway.

        What I do say though, is that I hope they get what they want for themselves, but that I am not participating in it. (Panarchy, in other words.)

  2. Acceptable behavior in modern society is inversely proportional to the adherence that person has to their religion. Even those who profess a belief in the inerrancy of any particular written word do not conduct themselves accordingly. If they did, as a society we would take them off the streets, and often do.
    Notwithstanding that, we also tolerate and even endorse behavior that under any other conditions would be considered repugnant. In NYC in 2014 5 infants died as a result of genital mutilation. The perverse practice of adhering to strict orthodoxy infected them with the HERPES virus as the Rabbi sucked the blood from their penis with his mouth, unknowingly infecting them. The barbaric practice is protected by law. What parent knowingly hands their infant child to a man that is going to hack off the end of their penis and suck the blood of your injured child? A person who has suspended their critical thinking in favor of Bronze Age mythology is the only answer I have.
    You speak of the right to own and use firearms within the framework that justifies morally bizarre behavior. Is it an unjustified stereotype to state that most practicing Jews are Democrats? Of course not. Is it prejudicial to state that most conservative Christians are Republican? Some stereotypes exist because they are based in fact.
    A previous post asked revealing and thoughtful question. Is a person being untrue to a religion they believe in by tolerating behavior that is not acceptable to its foundational teachings? Yes, of course they are. And, thankfully so. The further away from a belief that a bush burst into flames and wrote the moral code on a rock, believe that a warlord climbed on a winged horse with a human head and flew into the heavens or think that eating the flesh and drinking the blood of a 2,000 year old Jew is a good thing, the more sanity and reason they display in our culture.
    There is one principle by which if we live will never fail to keep us in everlasting ignorance. That principle is; Contempt prior to investigation. Religion fosters that contemptuous behavior. It is a bar against doubt, against the obligation to question our beliefs, against the principles of reason.
    One need look no further than the political positions endorsed by their particular faith to understand why they take their position on guns. It also makes me a bit contemptuous. Getting any of them to admit the less they practice what is in their written word the more acceptable their behavior is almost impossible. Lets just hope their hypocrisy, albeit denied, continues to flourish.

    1. Dave,
      thank you for your thoughtful response. I do have a few points to make.
      In your very first sentence, you make a statement about people that adhere to any particular religions written word. I must disagree with you in this area simply because there are so many different ways that people interpret the Bible, according to how they were brought up, their agenda, their education, their point of view, etc.
      It is kind of like saying all Baptists ….. By saying something like that, you really have not said anything. In the U.S. today, there are as many different flavors of Baptists as there are bathing suits at Bloomingdales.
      I am certainly not trying to do a debate with you, as you do have many valid points. However, what I think you miss is summed up in your ending, dealing with hypocrisy.
      I will not deny that there is a huge problem with hypocrisy in religion today, just as I am sure that there was 2000 years ago. However, I think that you do miss the point. There are many, many people of faith whose lives have been changed by their belief in a deity. Perhaps you chose to ridicule them. But the fact is that peoples hearts have been renewed, they have become better husbands, fathers, wives and mothers. They have stopped drug abuse, they have started ministries to the poor and downtrodden, etc. All because they have found faith.
      Now, you can say that it is hogwash and is all in their heads. It doesn’t matter. What matters is to the many people whose lives now have meaning and purpose, it is real. And that is something that Atheists can’t take away from people of faith, and why, even though I don’t push my faith on people, I am never shy about sharing what it means to me.
      You can’t prove you are right any more than I can. That is why I am so much for letting people have the freedom to express themselves however they wish, even if I totally disagree with them. Some can’t have a civil discourse. I hope we can.

      1. I encourage people to share their views with me. I can disagree with most people and still have a profound respect for them as individuals.

        Yes, I am Atheist. That tells you nothing about what I am, only what I am not. I respect the Right for people to worship as they choose. I have and will continue to defend that right.

        I know that some people have a profound religious or spiritual experience that changes their lives, I have witnessed it.

        Some, not all of course, of those who become driven by their experience that it takes priority over the rights of those around them. If people no longer question their beliefs and are only exposed to one particular belief system they tend to exist in an echo chamber.

        Can I prove there is no God? Of course not. I can prove to any reasonable person that the foundations of the three faiths of Abraham are false. I debate it, write about it, and encourage people to learn more about it.

        I most probably could not have proven to those who flew airplanes into buildings that their religion was false. What disturbs me most is the lack of people from any particular faith standing up and denouncing is the strongest possible terms the actions of those that go too far with their faith.

        Believe as you choose, I will defend your right to do so………to a point.

        1. I as you am always willing to look at any evidence that might prove my beliefs as wrong. The problems arise when those who might bring that proof are not also willing to look at proof that they might be wrong.
          Let’s not look at religion, let’s look at global warming. It is also a contentious issue. Those who support it claim that those who disbelieve it are heretics. Yet they are never willing to allow competent scientists to have a real dialog with them in a public forum. They do have some lunatic fringe nutjob debate on tv talk shows, but that is just for politics, not for real scientific discussion.
          I am not a climate change denier, nor am I an Al Gore disciple. I am simply someone who is both old enough to have witnessed the claims when I was in school of the next ice age and the idea of spreading soot over the north and south poles to speed the melting of them to help stop the dying of mankind. And someone who thinks that something is being manipulated in some data as far as temperatures is concerned.
          Climate change is almost like a religion for some people. The pope is even involved. For crying out loud, the president has gone so far as to say that it is the thing that most threatens the country today. Not the economy, or China’s hacking, or a nuclear middle east, or terrorism, or Donald Trump as president. Climate change. And we are not supposed to question that or ask for any evidence. Now, NOAA doesn’t even want to release it’s numbers as to how it got it’s data? What is the secret, that their fake?
          If Christians found out that Jesus wasn’t a carpenter from Bethlehem, but a rich landowner from Rome, don’t you think that would be significant, and people would deserve to know? At least to let them discuss it? If climate change is real and manmade, why do scientists feel the need to hide?

          1. I am sure I have not had a religious and global warming analogy to discuss before. I welcome diversity. There is no debate, at least credible debate over climate change. Of course the climate is changing, it always has. A drive down any highway with a cut through sedimentary rock clearly shows there has always been climate change.

            The debate is centered on the impact humans have on it. Of course our presence has an effect on the global climate. Billions of people simply breathing must have some effect. The confusion comes because of the words used to describe the process.

            What should be used is Global Energy Retention. That is; the increase or decrease in the amount of energy retained by the Earth from the Sun. I often read things from people that cite a growing ice sheet in the Antarctic as some sign the climate is not warming. Of course it has to grow if it warms slightly. It must. The colder air is the less moisture it can retain. If it warms even a small amount it will hold more moisture and as it cools will precipitate that moisture.

            The Polar cape is shrinking for a simple reason; there is no land mass to support it and is surrounded my warming waters. Does that mean humankind is the primary cause. I doubt it, but claiming that we have no impact at all is outright denial.

            We have allowed ourselves to become polarized in our opinions about these things. Friending people who only share our world view. Watching news outlets that tend to support our opinions. If we allow this to happen, our exposure to contrasting views is nearly completely thwarted by the echo chamber we have created. I am guilty of that very thing from time to time.

            Being willing to accept that as a reality and stepping out of my chamber from time to time is enlightening and often disturbing.

            From my perspective, I live in a world where most people believe they have telepathic superpowers to communicate to an invisible being that will suspend the laws of physics and probability in their favor if they chant a secret phrase or conduct a dogmatic ritual in that beings behalf. The notion of that is scary to me. The notion that they believe with so much evidence to the contrary that it is true, terrifies me.

            Being in denial of climate change with an overwhelming amount of evidence to the contrary seems to be congruent. Our impact on that process being over stated equally absurd.

            People tend to believe things because it makes them feel good. All evidence indicates that when we die, we die. Feeling one way or the other about it has no impact on the evidence.

            I could go on for hours probably but I risk being overly verbose. I guess my main point is we can never know everything about any topic. But, there is a difference between not knowing a thing and won’t know a thing. Substituting faith in a belief for critical thinking and evidence is a celebration of willful ignorance.

        2. Sorry for butting in here.

          Some, not all of course, of those who become driven by their experience that it takes priority over the rights of those around them. If people no longer question their beliefs and are only exposed to one particular belief system they tend to exist in an echo chamber.

          I had a (Lutheran) pastor tell the congregation that doubt — even doubt in one’s faith — is healthy. It’s the sign of a questioning, thinking, analytical mind. Questioning one’s beliefs is a good thing; a person strong in their faith (and with powerful personal testimony) will continue to believe even as they continue to question.

          What happens, though, when someone is so strong in their faith that they stop questioning? This is commonly called “blind faith”, and such believers tend toward extremism. ISIS, for example, believes whole-heartedly and without question (because questioning would make one an infidel) that dying in service of their (false) god is an instant ticket to heaven. They’re being rail-roaded by faith in their deity and culture of death, and the track can only end in war and destruction. It’s an extreme case, but that’s where blind faith can lead.

          I believe in the Christian God; His only Son, Jesus Christ, and the embodiment of His power, the Holy Spirit. I question this belief daily, but I’m also reminded daily of the good works He does in this fallen world. I’ve witnessed His power manifest in situations where no other earthly explanation exists for the outcome. And so I continue to believe due to indisputable (to me) evidence, not blind faith.

          Please don’t take any offense, but as a Christian, I will pray for you and I hope you find God. But as an American, it’s not my business to interfere directly in your life. As both, it’s not my place to force my faith upon you any more than it’s my place to force you to vote (or not), to write a book (or not), or to own a firearm (or not).

          Trying to force or coerce you to do any of these things is where trouble starts (see: ISIS again).

          1. Archer.
            I don’t want to give too much of my background here, but I did attend Bible college, many years ago. I found that if one was not careful, it was an easy place to become carnal. Mom and Dad forced their kids to go there if they wanted it paid for by them. Kids went, but rebelled.
            I went as a young adult of 24, married, so it was different for me.
            I remember a song from a long time ago with the line thanking God for the faith to doubt and yet believe. I married that young lady when I was 19, and we divorced when I was 30. I went through some dark days. I had many seasons of doubt, in God, and in myself. Yet through it all, in the back of my mind, I still believed.
            Sometimes, life can be hard. I mean down right wish you could get hit by a bus hard. For me, I simply can’t fathom going through it without a belief in a loving God, whom I believe weeps with me in the bad times, and rejoices with me in the good times.
            I know, atheists will say it is all a mental game I play with myself, to convince myself to feel better. To that I reply, what makes you feel better? The thought that everything just happened to start from some point in time, which somehow didn’t even exist, until a huge bang, which they are even now beginning to question. And that when we die we simply cease to exist? Since energy can’t be destroyed, but simply changes form, what happens to our life energy?
            I am not by any means an apologist for any religious group. I have a faith which many might find strange, based on my own study of the Bible. However, there are many facts that people who ridicule those who believe the narrative of the Bible are every day gaining archeological support.
            The Bible is not a historical text. It must be studied and understood in it’s own context and within it’s own framework. It is still a text which men and women disagree on, which was written over the course of about 1500 years by about 40 some odd men. And completed almost 2000 years ago in its original languages. To think that we will agree on faith based upon this book, here in the 21st century is certainly naïve. However, I am glad that we can have this discussion, without resorting to verbal abuse like I have seen in other forums.
            It does seem odd to be discussing this here. but perhaps this is really the perfect place for this. Faith is often used as an excuse against self defense, when nothing could be further from the truth. Thank you, all who have posted, and thank you , Zelman partisans, for your support of Israel. I stand with you.

          2. “It does seem odd to be discussing this here. but perhaps this is really the perfect place for this.”

            I’m very glad you’re having this discussion. Thank you.

          3. “What happens, though, when someone is so strong in their faith that they stop questioning? This is commonly called “blind faith”, and such believers tend toward extremism.”

            Not necessarily:
            “Roger Williams was not a man out of time. He belonged to the 17th century and to Puritans in that century. Yet he was also one of the most remarkable men of his or any century. With absolute faith in the literal truth of the Bible and in his interpretation of that truth, with absolute confidence in his ability to convince others of the truth of his convictions, he nonetheless believed it “monstrous” to compel comformity to his or anyone else’s beliefs.”

            http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/god-government-and-roger-williams-big-idea-6291280/?c=y%3Fno-ist

          4. Please don’t apologize for your comment, particularly one as thoughtful as that one. I am not offended if you pray for me. I have stood guard over other Marines so they could pray.

            I was thinking of a way to express my response to your post. Thank you for giving me an opportunity to ponder on my position.

            If I was walking down a path and a bush burst into flames and I heard a voice clearly talking to me, several things would happen. First, I would question my mental stability. Second, I would be amazed by what I was experiencing. Third, if it was genuine I would believe I was in the presence of something with abilities greater than mine. Fourth, I would not call whatever that was a God. Fifth, I would not worship it. Lastly, if it were actually number 4 it would not need number 5 from little ole me.

            Not having an explanation for something is evidence of nothing. Well, maybe evidence of my ignorance. At one time we did not know what caused volcanoes to erupt. Someone came up with the idea that a God of some kind was upset and if we threw a few children into it that would make it happy.

            Seems bizarre by our standards today. Even if you could come up with an event that had no rational explanation to me, that is no evidence whatsoever that a God of any kind was responsible for it. You still have all of your work cut out for you. It is a leap of dogmatic belief that the only other reason that could possibly exist for that event was a God.

            I could pay a debt you owe if I choose. I could confess to a crime you committed and take your punishment. If I did such a thing and expected anything in return I should make those conditions clear before I do anything.

            If you wrong me in some way. Commit some crime against me. It is unacceptable for me to hold your children responsible for what you did. I would never, and do not believe most others would, punish your grandchildren for your transgressions. The idea of doing such a thing is repugnant.

            From my vantage point, that is exactly what believing in a Christ figure is. My ancestors committed a wrong against some God that I am being punished for. I was born being punished for it. I am commanded to get well on punishment of eternal torment.

            Jesus a Christ died so I would be forgiven for my ancestors transgressions. I am expected to accept this sacrifice without my prior consent to any of it to avoid punishment from the very being that created all the rules in the first place.

            It just seems to me that if a God wanted to forgive me he need not kill or torture anyone in the process. Why not just forgive me and not torture my children and their children over it all.

            Furthermore, if there really is a God of some sort he, she or it would know exactly what it would take to make be believe. Evidence would be nice, but I will not rule out some other device. If I was created by a God then it seems to be that Gods will that I am Atheist.

            You apparently not so much. Thanks for the opportunity to discuss the issue.

  3. Being brought up in Conservative Judaism – kosher home but lights on Shabbos – my disgust of too many synagogues/Rabbis/Congrgregants anti-gun attitude has left me with the feeling I would be more comfortable armed on the roof surveilling than inside.

    I may have to try that.

    We, as a culture, seemingly forgot the culmination national socialism and our place in muslem culture – and both are rapidly growing.

    1. DML,
      Therefore, what do you think that we are to do? I am beginning to doubt the usefulness of a political effort.. So what is to become of the country?
      Will it continue to devolve into Socialism no matter the party in charge, as it looks likely? Or do you think that the freedom movement is strong enough that it will gain power and return our nation to it’s historical constitutional principals?

      1. I am the wrong person to ask about solutions, having failed in my attempts to convince my extended family that my “obsession” with firearms not pathological. They grew weary of my ‘you something like national socialism, but different from the National Socialists?”. I grew weary of it too, and gave up.

        I failed in my attempts to show that the religion of peace isn’t, and that ‘diversity’ cannot include a monocultural, violent group.

        I do not know if a reversal of current politics, trends and (lack of) education. is possible through political means. I hope so. I point out to my son that tax money is needed for all the shiny things given out. I frequently show him my pay stub and the money taken by taxes as well as the axes taken from my moonlighting. He gets it, and he points out that none of his high school classmates do.

        We are busily preparing for the worse. We all hope it will be wasted time and effort. But we’re not stopping.

        1. DML,
          I guess we are in similar situations. I too find myself preparing for rough times ahead. For me, it has happened once before, and I was not ready for it.
          After 35 years on the same job since high school, making specialty steels, I found myself jobless, accused of being drunk at work. I don’t even drink. But my employer at the time apparently did not like me, as I was outspoken on issues of worker safety and rights, and being a non union shop, they decided that I was not needed. I even have a letter from my state unemployment board saying that my former employer had failed to show proof of my blood alcohol content, which I knew they could not. However, they have better lawyers than I can hire, so I just let it go. I had seen others try and fight them and lose.
          Since then, I have learned my lesson. I have begun storing food and water. I have found a website where I am learning about prepping. I am debt free. I use no credit. None. Ever.
          We own 2 mini vans with about 190,000 miles each on them. 2 months ago, we took an extended trip to the upper peninsula of our state. Guess which one. We anticipated putting about 600 miles on a vehicle, so we rented one. My wife got a deal on an SUV for 108$ total for the 3 days. We figure we saved about 35 $ in gas. And we drove a Jeep Compass with 3020 miles on it. So yeah, we will continue to drive our pieces of junk, rent something nice when we need something a little more reliable, and save a ton of money.
          Are we fully prepared as some we see on tv or the internet? No, I wish we had a retreat in the mountains off grid with our own food supply. However, I am satisfied that currently, with a small outlay each month, we are currently building both our food and water, and our firearms and ammo supply up to what is reasonable without tying up too much in any one area. I think diversity is prudent in times of economic trouble.

          1. Re preps – Fortunately we live in a state with numerous streams of all sizes and rivers – and have redundant water filters because there are things besides water I want to carry.

            What I’ve experienced, and perhaps you too, is that the more we prep, the more we prep. Initially, buying our early preps was like breaking the ice. Then, as our basic dedicated preps were achieved (think rucksacks, weapons, tools, etc) our normal buying patterns altered a bit towards dual use items. When my son needed a car to commute to HS, he got mine. I purchased a diesel 4×4 pickup truck from about the turn of the century – very much a multi- use rig as it serves as a daily drive for me, weekend hauling, and if needed can be run on heating oil and carry a few thousand pounds in its bed over trail. The 17-19 mpg is a small price to pay.

            I think we’re screwed, and I’ll be salvaging heating oil from abandoned homes sooner rather than later. Thelizardfarmer.wordpress.com recently posted:

            # of Americans: 318 million (est.)

            % of civilians in the labor force: 62.4%

            # of folks employed in the private sector: 116 Million

            Current US Debt: $18.2 Trillion

            Per citizen (employed or not) chunk of that sammich: $57 Thousand

            Per taxpayer bite of that sammich: $154 Thousand

            The unfunded debt liability per taxpayer: $828 Thousand

            What can’t continue, won’t.

            What will the freeshit army do when EBT cards don’t get loaded by .gov on ‘payday’ ? I don’t want to be around by day 3. I work for the .gov (I can live with it because that particular institution is found in the Constitution) and if my paycheck doesn’t clear by the COB on payday, it’s time to make a few calls and make ready.

            A retreat in the mountains… with how many families? How many folks guarding the household, the crops… how many out a bit further doing recon? At night, or during the day while others ‘work’? Survival will take more than 1 family, it will take kith and kin.

            And I venture to guess Jeeps are far more welcome in your neck of the woods than a Rav4 or a Sorrento.

          2. Sorry, DML,
            I just went back and reread my previous post. I misstated. I had said that I do not drink. I should have said I did not drink. Now days I will have an occasional beer, as well as a VERY small shot of bourbon. Usually not at the same time.
            I have a family history of alcoholism, and I have always been cautious. However, I have also been under control of myself at all times. I used to play music in bars and clubs years ago, and never drank at all there. Saw too much, and I was working, although sometimes I saw bands who made more in booze than in wages.
            I just wanted to post this because I am a lot of things, old and bald come to mind, but I have, as to the best as I can remember, never been one to lie, even if accidently, and I would hate to give that impression, even if on such a trivial matter to someone who probably could care less. But it matters to me and to my integrity.

  4. Dave,
    I know that I will never change your mind about God and whether or not such a being exists. It is not my job nor my intention. What I would like to point out to you is that the concept of sin has nothing to with something that humans have done in their past or their ancestors have done, and therefore need some sort of penance for. The Biblical idea, as far as I can determine from my point of view and study, is that our human nature is sinful, and so it has more to do with our makeup than with our actions, although they certainly are involved.
    The issue is muddied up for some who might say, well how could a month old child be born sinful, perhaps die, and thus never be, as your type might say “saved”, or forgiven, and so be sentenced to hell, or whatever. The only answer I have ever come up with that satisfies me, has to come from the Bible. I won’t bore you with chapter and verse, since, frankly I am too lazy too look it up, but you can quite easily look it up if you wish.
    When David and Bathsheba got together, he actually used his position as king and made it happen. He tried to get her husband to sleep with her to make sure he covered up in case she became pregnant, but he was a military man, in the field, who the king called back for a quickie with the wife as a reward. The husband, being a good officer, said that as long as his men were fighting, and could not have a roll in the hay, he wouldn’t either.
    David was horrified. What would the people think? They would certainly figure it out. So he sent the soldier back with sealed orders to his superiors. They were to put him up front where he would be killed. Which he was.
    God was not amused. As punishment, he caused the child that Bathsheba bore him to fall sick. While sick, David did the old fashioned thing of putting on ashes and sackcloth, basically begging God to save the child.
    Ultimately, the child died. Immediately, David took off the old clothes, washed up and dressed himself back as normal.
    When his closest friends and advisors asked him about it, since his child had just perished, David answered ” My child is now dead. He cannot return to me, but I will go to him”.
    Sorry for the long story, but sometimes, the best way to explain a Biblical principal is from the source.
    What King David was saying was that he could no longer beg for God to save the child’s life, but that he had assurance that he would see him again one day when he himself died.
    I know from other passages of the Bible that David had assurance of meeting God in heaven. God called David a man after His own heart. Of course, many other examples.
    There are many Christians who struggle with this one. Some say that babies are immune from judgment because they are too young, saying they have not achieved the age of accountability. The problem is they have no Biblical support for this, and it ignores the idea of being born with a sinful human nature.
    I do believe there is an age of accountability, based upon the Bible. However, many would strongly disagree with me. I think it is much older than many would think.
    As far as climate change, one of the biggest issues I have is the manipulation of data, and the unwillingness to release data. I of course agree that climate change happens, it has since the world began, lo these 10,000 years ago. ( sorry, couldn’t help a Christian jab.)
    What I also have a problem with is so called scientists calling for enforcement of RICO acts against those who might question human involvement with climate change. If such a thing would have actually happened, I wondered what would have been the end result of our 1st amendment freedoms? Would we even be able to have this sort of back and forth, which, while certainly fun and spirited, could be viewed by someone with an agenda as me using hate speech and I could be in serious trouble.
    If I recall, when one writes a scientific paper, one releases the data used to support the paper for peer review, in order to maintain absolute integrity. I believe that a lot of that has been missing and covered up by the very community who should be screening it.
    I do know that from my days of study many, many years ago, the amount of CO2 emitted from volcanoes dwarfed the amount from human activity , by a magnitude of like a thousand.
    I have come to trust scientists less and less, the more we discover. For instance, and on this I will close, they always said that coal was formed after thousands and thousands of years, through intense pressure. Seemed plausible, until some found a vein of coal with a leather boot and a skeleton key embedded in it. I don’t remember the magazine I read it in but I saw the picture, about 20 years ago. I never did find anything out further on this, but it makes you wonder.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *