Exposition
What is a weapon? An instrument or device used for either attack or self-defense when contending against another. Note that an instrument or device becomes a weapon when it is used for a specific purpose. A kitchen knife is not a weapon when being used to make steak. It is a weapon when used to combat a thief. And what is a firearm? It is a type of weapon, like a pistol or a rifle, from which a bullet is fired by means of gunpowder. Is it biblical for a Christian to own or use firearms? In this post I will answer that question. But first—as we always do—we must start with Scripture.
As I think is readily obvious, the Bible does not mention firearms or guns. And that’s okay, because we know that while the Bible does not specifically mention everything, it does provide us with principles that are totally sufficient for all of life (II Peter 1:3). The Bible is therefore a comprehensive guide for all of reality. With that in mind, does the Bible talk about personal use of weapons and how a disciple of Christ is to use them? The answer is yes.
Jesus instructs His disciples on the use of weapons, namely a sword. I think it fair to correlate the use of a sword in antiquity with the modern use of a firearm. In Luke 22:35-36, Jesus says:
“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 cloak and buy one.
There are some who will stop here and conclude, “Look, God Himself told us right there to go out and buy a weapon. So, what I’m going to do is go out and get a gun. After all, it’s the Christian and biblical thing to do.”
Not so fast. As with anything else in the Bible, in order to properly understand what God is telling us, we have to understand the context. And what is the context of Luke 22? Well, we are at the end of Jesus’s public ministry. Thus, in the next chapter, He will stand trial and then be crucified. Consequently, Jesus’s tone in Luke 22 is that His ministry is about to enter into a new phase and this means things will be different for His disciples. Notably, the text makes it clear that perilous times will come and that this will be particularly evident in the rise of spiritual enemies that animate natural conflicts. For example, Luke 22 (verse 2) opens by saying:
And the chief priests and the scribes were trying to find a way to put [Jesus] to death, since they were afraid of the people.
The very next verses speak of Satan’s increasing activity:
And Satan entered Judas, the one called Iscariot, who belonged to the number of the twelve. And he left and discussed with the chief priests and officers how he was to betray Him to them. And they were delighted, and agreed to give him money. And so he consented, and began looking for a good opportunity to betray Him to them away from the crowd. (Luke 22:3-6)
In Luke 22:14-23, Jesus inaugurates the Lord’s Supper in which He tells His disciples, “Do this in remembrance of Me” (19). Then, in verse 31, Jesus makes clear that even His closest followers are not immune from the present spiritual conflict. Christ tells Peter:
Simon, Simon, behold, Satan has demanded to sift you men like wheat; but I have prayed for you, that your faith will not fail; and you, when you have turned back, strengthen your brothers.
Next, Jesus compares this new chapter in Church history with what existed before. In verse 35, He says:
“When I sent you out without money belt and bag and sandals, you did not lack anything, did you?” They said, “No, nothing.”
When Jesus says that He sent them out without provisions, He was referring to His prior instructions in Luke 9:3:
Take nothing for your journey, neither a staff, nor a bag, nor bread, nor money; and do not even have two tunics. (See also Luke 10:4)
In contrast, what does Jesus say in Luke 22:36? He says:
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 cloak and buy one.
What is the Lord’s emphasis here in distinction to what He said before? That until now, the disciples had been dependent on generous hospitality, but future opposition would require them to pave their own way. Consequently, when Jesus says to go and buy a sword, He means go and buy a sword: He’s warning them that from now on, they must use wisdom cognizant that they are sheep going out in the midst of wolves. Accordingly, in the dangerous times ahead, they will need defense and protection. After all, the disciples were never called to be so spiritual that they were detached from earthly reality. Certainly, the command to go out and buy a sword can be interpreted in a literal sense, and it would not be foolish to properly prepare themselves if they are aware they are walking into a troublesome scenario. But let us all be mindful that the war the disciples are called to defend themselves in—as the context of Luke 22 makes clear—is not primarily a physical one; it is a spiritual war against forces not of this world.
For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the powers, against the world forces of this darkness, against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places. (Ephesians 6:12; cf. 6:10-17; Matthew 28:16-20)
I will expand upon the spiritual war later on in this post.
So, Jesus tells His disciples to go and buy a sword. In the next verse (Luke 22:37), Jesus quotes Isaiah 53:12 and says:
“For I tell you that this which is written must be fulfilled in Me: ‘And He was counted with wrongdoers’; for that which refers to Me has its fulfillment.”
Jesus was in essence saying, “I’m about to be arrested like a criminal because the world hates Me. As my followers, then, you will also be in danger.”
Perhaps the disciples took Christ’s words for sword-purchasing too literally, because in the next verse (38), they say:
“Lord, look, here are two swords.” And [Jesus] said to them, “It is enough.”
In other words, Jesus closes the discussion with an abrupt “That’s plenty.” John Calvin comments on Christ’s instructions and the disciples’ response:
“In metaphorical language [Christ] threatens that they will soon meet with great troubles and fierce attacks; just as when a general, intending to lead the soldiers into the field of battle, calls them to arms, and orders them to lay aside every other care, and think of nothing else than fighting, not even to take any thought about procuring food. For he shows them—as is usually done in cases of extreme danger—that every thing must be sold, even to the scrip and the purse, in order to supply them with arms. And yet he does not call them to an outward conflict, but only, under the comparison of fighting, he warns them of the severe struggles of temptations which they must undergo, and of the fierce attacks which they must sustain in spiritual contests. That they might more willingly throw themselves on the providence of God, he first reminded them, as I have said, that God took care to supply them with what was necessary, even when they carried with them no supplies of food and raiment. Having experienced so large and seasonable supplies from God, they ought not, for the future, to entertain any doubt that he would provide for every one of their necessities.
It was truly shameful and stupid ignorance, that the disciples, after having been so often informed about bearing the cross, imagine that they must fight with swords of iron. When they say that they have two swords, it is uncertain whether they mean that they are well prepared against their enemies, or complain that they are ill provided with arms. It is evident, at least, that they were so stupid as not to think of a spiritual enemy.”
The Argument
You may be now thinking to yourself that in my analysis, it is unbiblical for a Christian to own firearms. If so, then you have come to the wrong conclusion. In fact, I believe it is perfectly biblical and legitimate for a Christian to own and be proficient in the use of firearms. Why is that? Because although the Christian is primarily called to fight in a spiritual war, that war can often animate physical realities. In other words, it is because we take the Lord’s words seriously about the overruling spiritual war that we also take seriously a battleground in which that war is fought: the natural realm. Let us not forget that if God took the time to warn us about the danger of what lies ahead, we ought to take His advice earnestly and mitigate said dangers by putting off what won’t protect us (a cloak) and putting on what will (a sword). So, go out and get a sword, just remember to focus on the spiritual one before the physical one. A physical sword is of no value against the far more powerful spiritual enemies, though it may serve a purpose against natural ones.
The reality of spiritual war materializing in earthly reality explains why (for example) God wrought physical judgments on Egypt to liberate His people; why Joshua fought many battles and led the Hebrews into Canaan; why Jesus physically walked around Judea to teach; and why ministers of the Word use their mouths to preach the gospel to all those who will hear. And in our physical reality, do the forces of darkness “play nice,” or do they use violence for evil? The answer is, they want to murder you—and God’s people—any way they can: just remember what they did to Jesus. And so, what is the Christian to do? I am firmly persuaded that it is perfectly biblical for a Christian to use violent and lethal physical force—and this includes firearms—to act in self-defense for the protection of life. This is perfectly in line with what Jesus says in Luke 22:36 and has a strong precedent in the Old Testament.
The Sixth Commandment (Exodus 20:13) says, “You shall not murder.” It must first be said that not all killing is murder. The Hebrew language has several words that mean “kill,” and the one that appears in Exodus 20:13 appears most often in the context of the deliberate taking of innocent life. Consequently, not every kind of killing is murder, and thus not all acts of killing are against God’s law. Murder, however, is always sinful. Thus, in a negative sense, we ought not to sinfully take the life of another. As the Westminster Larger Catechism (Question 136) says:
“The sins forbidden in the sixth commandment are, all taking away the life of ourselves, or of others, except in case of public justice, lawful war, or necessary [defense]; the neglecting or withdrawing the lawful and necessary means of preservation of life; sinful anger, hatred, envy, desire of revenge; all excessive passions, distracting cares; immoderate use of meat, drink, labor, and recreations; provoking words; oppression, quarreling, striking, wounding, and whatsoever else tends to the destruction of the life of any.”
Moreover, in a positive sense, the Christian ought to act to protect life and to prevent the heinous sin of murder. This includes killing to stop murder. While murder involves premeditation and evil intent, justifiable homicide can include those instances in which the killing was unintentional (Numbers 35:11; Deuteronomy 19:5), without malice (Numbers 35:23; Deuteronomy 19:4), or caused by events that are beyond human control (Exodus 21:13). Again, the Westminster Larger Catechism (Question 135) says:
“The duties required in the sixth commandment are, all careful studies, and lawful endeavors, to preserve the life of ourselves and others by resisting all thoughts and purposes, subduing all passions, and avoiding all occasions, temptations, and practices, which tend to the unjust taking away the life of any; by just defence thereof against violence, patient bearing of the hand of God, quietness of mind, cheerfulness of spirit; a sober use of meat, drink, physic, sleep, labor, and recreation; by charitable thoughts, love, compassion, meekness, gentleness, kindness; peaceable, mild, and courteous speeches and behavior: forbearance, readiness to be reconciled, patient bearing and forgiving of injuries, and requiting good for evil; comforting and succoring the distressed, and protecting and defending the innocent.”
In short, then, murder is bad. Therefore, anything to prevent murder is good, which requires Christians to act to stop murder from happening: this includes the use of lethal force. This helps to explain why in the Mosaic Law, a man is not guilty of murder if he kills someone else in self-defense (Exodus 22:2-3). For a person who commits justifiable homicide, they value the life that God made, and therefore they act to preserve it. For a person who commits murder, they despise God and the life He made, and therefore they act to destroy it.
But what of the history of saints in the Old Testament? Were they men who refused the sword or who used it for righteous purposes when providence required? Let us not forget that more than half of the Psalms were written by a soldier (David) who composed many before and after battle. For example, Psalms 18 and 144 are battle Psalms, and David praises the Lord for giving him strength to fight with a sword. In Psalm 18:34, 37-39, David speaks of God and says:
[The Lord] trains my hands for battle, so that my arms can bend a bow of bronze … I pursued my enemies and overtook them, and I did not turn back until they were consumed. I shattered them, so that they were not able to rise; they fell under my feet. For You have encircled me with strength for battle;
You have forced those who rose up against me to bow down under me.
And in Psalm 144:1, David writes:
Blessed be the Lord, my rock, who trains my hands for war,
and my fingers for battle.
In Temporal Authority: To What Extent It Should Be Obeyed, Martin Luther wrote:
“From the beginning of the world all the saints have wielded the sword in this way: Adam and his descendants; Abraham when he rescued Lot, his brother’s son, and routed the four kings as related in Genesis 14:8-16, although he was a thoroughly evangelical man. Thus did Samuel, the holy prophet, slay King Agag, as we read in I Samuel 15:33; and Elijah slew the prophets of Baal (I Kings 18:40). So too did Moses, Joshua, the children of Israel, Samson, David, and all the kings and princes in the Old Testament wield the sword; also Daniel and his associates, Hananiah, Azariah, and Mishael, in Babylon; and Joseph in Egypt, and so on.”
What I will add is that the Bible’s first physical war is recorded in Genesis 14. In that war, Abram raises a sword to rescue Lot, his kidnapped nephew. The text says that as soon as Abram heard of his nephew’s abduction, he and 318 of his men went out to battle. Which means what? That these men both had swords and were already trained in how to use them.
There are some who may object and say that the life of Old Testament saints is of no relevance now. Yet while there is not complete continuity between the Old and New Covenants, there remain many abiding principles that extend through all Scripture. One of those principles is that God whom we serve does not change, nor does His moral code. Accordingly, Luther continues in Temporal Authority:
“Should anyone contend that the Old Testament is abrogated and no longer in effect, and that therefore such examples cannot be set before Christians, I answer: That is not so. St. Paul says in I Corinthians 10:3-4, “they ate the same spiritual food as we, and drank the same spiritual drink from the Rock, which is Christ.” That is, they had the same Spirit and faith in Christ as we have, and were just as much Christians as we are. Therefore, wherein they did right, all Christians do right, from the beginning of the world unto the end. For time and external circumstances make no difference among Christians. Neither is it true that the Old Testament was abrogated in such a way that it must not be kept, or that whoever kept it fully would be doing wrong, as St. Jerome and many others mistakenly held. Rather, it is abrogated in the sense that we are free to keep it or not to keep it, and it is no longer necessary to keep it on penalty of losing one’s soul, as was the case at that time.”
Beloved, let us remember that Jesus is the same yesterday, today, and forever (Hebrews 13:8). The God of the Old Testament is the God of the New Testament. What the Lord revealed to us in the Old is not to be ignored, but rather was revealed for our benefit (cf. Matthew 5:17; Romans 15:4; II Timothy 3:16) so that we may learn from and profit by it.
Furthermore, I write as both a husband and a father. There is a biblical mandate that exists for all men to be the primary defenders and protectors of their own families. As I Timothy 5:8 says:
But if anyone does not provide for his own, and especially for those of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.
Now I ask you this: of what good is my provision if I don’t protect those whom I provide for? It is easy for those who bear no responsibility to make the most critiques. Hence, to all the husbands and fathers reading this, I ask: how will you protect those whom you love? If you had access to a highly effective means of defense, wouldn’t you choose to use it to protect those whom you are responsible for? What will you do when seconds count but help is minutes away? Or worse, what will you do when seconds count and is there is no help? In Nehemiah 4:14, the prophet encourages the people to continue to rebuild Jerusalem’s wall in light of threats from outsiders:
And I looked and arose and said to the nobles and to the officials and to the rest of the people, “Do not be afraid of them. Remember the Lord, who is great and awesome, and fight for your brothers, your sons, your daughters, your wives, and your homes.”
In their work Gutachten, Luther and Melanchthon wrote:
“Every father is obliged, according to his ability, to protect his wife and children against outright murder.”
Luther would even extend this principle of fatherly protection when the State overreaches and begins to engage in open violence against those families who comprise the State. Thus, in Warning to the German People, Luther argued that as a preacher he would not call for war, but rather he spoke against war and for peace. However, Luther wrote:
“If war breaks out—which God forbid—I will not reprove those who defend themselves against the murderous and bloodthirsty papists, nor let anyone else rebuke them for being seditious, but I will accept their action and let it pass as self-defense.”
In Luther’s time, papal supporters were potential murderers and warmongers, and resisting them would therefore be legitimate self-defense. Luther’s position here agrees with the Scriptures: the support of active resistance against aggressors.
What I will also say is that while I firmly believe it is biblical for a Christian to own guns, it is not necessary. A Christian is free to use his or her liberty and may acquire firearms, but I do not think you can make the biblical argument that he or she must. Additionally, the defensive use of a sword can mean many different things, but as a father, when I ask myself what I can use that can be a most effective deterrent to those who wish my family violence, a modern firearm is a logical answer. There are others whose “sword” may be a literal sword, or their own fists; or they may rely on the power of another, as the apostle Paul did when he appealed to Caesar (Acts 25:11) as the one who bears the sword (Romans 13:4) to protect the righteous and punish evil-doers.
Objections
In Matthew 26:52, Jesus said to His disciple, “Put your sword back into its place; for all those who take up the sword will perish by the sword.” Consequently, there are some in Christian circles who say that Christians ought to be passive, never-violent people, and thus carrying and/or using a firearm is antithetical to the Christian faith. To this I would respond: biblical Christianity is not a religion of non-violence. It is a religion of non-aggression. The distinction is simple but important to be mindful of: the use of defensive violence is permissible, but we don’t take forceful, offensive action against another without cause. This coincides with what I said earlier: I am firmly persuaded that it is perfectly biblical for a Christian to use violent and lethal physical force—and this includes firearms—to act in self-defense for the protection of life.
To those who would assert that Christianity is non-violent, I would ask them to consider what happened in John 2. There, Jesus found people making a mockery of the Temple and turning it into a house of business: they were selling cattle, sheep, and doves, and there were others exchanging money (John 2:14). And what was Jesus’s response? He made a whip out of cords and drove all of them out of His Father’s house (John 2:15). I would also ask them to consider how the Bible describes the Second Coming of Christ (Revelation 19:11-19). I would finally ask them to consider that throughout the Scriptures, the text champions God as a warrior who triumphs over His enemies (see Exodus 15:3; Deuteronomy 20:1-20; Joshua 8:1-35; Psalm 24:8, 68:1-35; Isaiah 42:13; Jeremiah 20:11; Revelation 19:11-15).
Let us also not forget that violence need not be physical. Accordingly, our Lord perhaps was the sharpest in using the sword of truth to fight against lies all throughout the New Testament. For example, in John 8:44, in response to their unbelief and false accusations, Christ tells the unbelieving Jews:
You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies.
Similar language can be read in Christ’s response to enemies of the kingdom in Matthew 23:13-36. Jesus also used the Word to fight off the devil during the temptation in the wilderness (Matthew 4:1-11; Luke 4:1-13). Furthermore, use of divine truth to defend against violent heresy can be read all throughout the writings of the apostles. In particular, I will draw your attention to the apostle Paul’s words in Galatians 3:1-14, where he publicly rebukes the Galatians for their foolish idea of salvation by works. The important point to take note of here is that there is a biblical distinction between defensive violence and offensive aggression.
So, how are we to process these principles with what Christ says in Matthew 26:52, that “all those who take up the sword will perish by the sword”? Recall in this scene, Judas arrived in Gethsemane with a large crowd armed with swords and clubs. Judas betrayed Jesus with a kiss, and then the men stepped forward to arrest the Lord. Next, one of Christ’s companions (Peter) reached for his sword and struck the servant of the high priest, cutting off his ear. It is then that Jesus told him, “Put your sword back in its place … for all who draw the sword will die by the sword.” What was Jesus telling us? Was He contradicting Himself when comparing what He said here to what He said in Luke 22:36, to “go and buy [a sword]”? By no means. Here, Jesus was certainly not rebuking Peter for defending himself, because, after all, no one attacked Peter. Christ was rebuking His disciple for being the aggressor and inciting violence. In Matthew 26, Peter was the provoker by molesting a person who did him no wrong. Thus, Jesus was telling His disciple, “That’s not how we do things.” Quite simply, the Lord speaks wisdom here in that He is instructing His disciples that the way of the sword—or the way of aggression—is not to be their predominant manner of life; it is not to be an overriding principle that governs their day-to-day activities (excluded, of course, would be those whose vocation it is to use force to protect others).
Physical violence as a lifestyle is not the Christian way, but as mentioned before, the Bible repeatedly testifies to the fact that all Christians are—and were, and will be—engaged in a violent spiritual struggle. The Lord is a Man of war (Exodus 15:3), and so He calls His own to fight. We fight the war within against sin and the flesh (Romans 7:14-25). We fight the war without against the world. And as already mentioned, because this war is fought against forces and powers not of this world (Ephesians 6:12), we fight with spiritual weapons and are commanded to put on the armor of God (Ephesians 6:13-17). Satan’s primary weapon is the lie, which is why all Christians brandish the sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of God. We fight with the truth because the holy war that began in Genesis 3 was initiated by a lie that influenced our first parents by getting through their ear-gate. Every Sunday, a preacher of the Word goes to battle against unbelief in the minds of those listening. The point is that Christians are called to be warriors, but the primary weapon we brandish is not what fits in a holster.
Christians are always called to have God and His kingdom as primary importance, not things of this world. With that in mind, the Christian’s ultimate goal isn’t to conquer the world by force but to go out into it, preaching the gospel, teaching, and baptizing (Matthew 28:16-20). In the same way, the apostle Paul tells us in Romans 8:5:
For those who are in accord with the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who are in accord with the Spirit, the things of the Spirit.
And so, the Christian has their mind set on things of the Spirit, yet is wise enough to realize that they live in a world full of those who are fleshly minded. Hence, in some situations, they use wisdom and do what’s best to protect themselves and their loved ones: not to start a fight but to defend themselves in case someone else starts a life-threatening conflict first.
Furthermore, we are not to take vengeance on our own, because God says, “Vengeance is mine” (Deuteronomy 32:35). Still, the God whom we serve is a God of justice (Deuteronomy 32:4; Psalm 33:5; Isaiah 30:18; Micah 6:8; Romans 6:23; I John 1:9). The Lord never instructed us not to take our own vengeance so that the “bad guys” can freely walk around molesting others. That is why the Lord ordained the State to bear the power of the sword so that it could be an instrument of earthly vengeance. God will have final, full vengeance on all sin not atoned for through Christ. Yet for evil committed here and now, the State is supposed to be an instrument of vengeance and is ordained to yield the power of violent physical force to bring “wrath on the one who practices evil” (Romans 13:4; cf. 13:1-7). The thinking person may now ask themselves, “But what happens when the State becomes corrupt and refuses to yield the sword against evil-doers?” Then, the Christian will continue to raise his or her sword in self-defense.
Overall, the Christian’s goal and preference is to live peaceably with all men (Romans 12:17-19) without violence or threats of violence. If a man needlessly brandishes his sword and walks out looking for trouble, then truly, he who takes up his sword will perish by it. And let us not gloss over the fact that in Matthew 26, a disciple was defending God (!) and trying to avenge a non-lethal arrest. It is thus fitting that the next thing Jesus says is:
Or do you think that I cannot appeal to My Father, and He will at once put at My disposal more than twelve legions of angels? How then would the Scriptures be fulfilled, which say that it must happen this way? (Matthew 26:53-54)
Another famous teaching of Christ’s comes from the Sermon on the Mount. In Matthew 5:38-39, the text says:
You have heard that it was said, “Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.” But I say to you, do not show opposition against an evil person; but whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other toward him also.
Jesus says, “Don’t show opposition or resist an evil person.” So how could we resist an evil person? By retaliating. By giving them back what we received. By living by the rule, “An eye for an eye,” so if you insult me, I insult you. But as Paul will say in Romans 12:21, “Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.”
As John Calvin comments on Matthew 5:38-39:
“The present subject is retaliation. To restrain his disciples from that kind of indulgence, he forbids them to render evil for evil. He afterwards extends the law of patience so far, that we are not only to bear patiently the injuries we have received, but to prepare for bearing fresh injuries. The amount of the whole admonition is, that believers should learn to forget the wrongs that have been done them—that they should not, when injured, break out into hatred or ill-will, or wish to commit an injury on their part—but that, the more the obstinacy and rage of wicked men was excited and inflamed, they should be the more fully disposed to exercise patience.”
I would invite you to ask yourself a simple question: is a slap lethal? Does a slap with the back of the hand (which is what the original Greek verb refers to—more of an insult than an act of violence) pose a threat to anyone’s life? Could you—in theory—be hand-slapped all day long and then simply walk away from the encounter with (at worst) some bruising and swelling that will ultimately heal?
I agree fully with Calvin that in these verses, Christ was teaching His disciples heavenly ethics and cultivating fruit in the hearts of His followers that would benefit the kingdom of God. I believe the Lord’s intent here was to prepare us so that even in the midst of wounding situations, we are kingdom minded: thus, when life dishes out one challenge after another, we are prepared to sustain many figurative injuries. Indeed, God never calls His children to be doormats, and it would be foolish to exalt Christ’s lesson here over and above the rest of Scripture. After all, as Christ Himself said a few verses earlier, He did not come to abolish the Law (which includes the Sixth Commandment) or the Prophets, but to fulfill them (Matthew 5:17). How this relates to our current discussion is simple. Even for the Christian who is armed, they are prepared and will be ready to endure many “cheek-slaps,” cognizant that their firearm is a last resort to be used for defensive purposes only in the setting of a life-threatening situation.
Extremes
In what preceded, I hope I have provided a sober and balanced analysis of what the Scriptures say. I think for some circles in modernity, a sober and balanced analysis is needed because an earnest Christian can take two unbiblical extremes when it comes to interpreting and applying Christ’s words in Luke 22:36 and the New Testament as a whole.
One extreme is to become a “gun nut” and—at least in the United States—to elevate the Second Amendment (the right to bear arms) over and above the second (greatest) commandment to “love thy neighbor.” For these folks, it would seem that they take the physical idea of a sword and elevate it above the spiritual reality that is always more important. They seem to champion their right to bear arms over and above the rights of all those around them. I think this approach is unbiblical.
The other extreme is to reject the idea of a Christian owning a firearm outright and then enforce that preference on others as a biblical ideal. I believe this is also a step in the wrong direction, because it denies the biblical reality of Christian liberty in peripheral matters and tries to enforce the mere wishes of some on everyone else. This unbiblical approach of want-projection also denies the reality of reality: meaning, it minimizes the brutal fact that we live in a world dripping with sin, and sinners can often try to inflict violence on those who aren’t bothering anyone. If a God-loving Christian—who is a highly useful member of the kingdom—could defend life against the unlawful and sinful aggression of another, why would anyone ever deny them the freedom to use a firearm in order to do what is right: that is, preserve life?
Applications
The final question I will address relates to a social and political phenomenon: that is, when it comes to a person using a firearm for an evil purpose like holding up a bank, shooting up a school, or opening fire at a concert. There are those who would use the bad behavior of some to penalize the majority. The question I would have, then, for those who are in favor of limiting access to firearms for everyone based on the bad behavior of a few is this: ought we not to apply that same logic to all of reality if it is valid? If a drunk driver is texting while on the highway and then gets into a crash that kills many, ought we not to ban highways, cell phones, and alcohol? If a person uses social media to say something mean about someone else, ought we not to ban computers, keyboards, and internet service providers? If a preacher says something unbiblical from a pulpit, ought not we to ban speech and churches?
I don’t intend to be cheeky in asking these questions, but to think like the world means we will invariably develop worldly, unbiblical solutions. The Bible makes plain to us that bad things happen in this world because people are bad; in fact, they are totally depraved (cf. Jeremiah 17:9; Ephesians 2:1-3; I Corinthians 2:14; Psalm 51:5; Romans 3:23; Isaiah 64:6). Sin exists because people are sinners. Sin begins with us and then flows outward through a variety of channels. Seen this way, a firearm is a morally neutral thing. By itself, it is neither good nor bad. It can be used for either good or evil purposes depending on a moral agent with intent. Hence, to borrow a term from American politics, “Guns don’t kill people, people do.” In fact, people will continue to kill other people whether they have guns or not. Without a person, a firearm can do absolutely nothing.
The Bible never blames things for anything but holds us responsible as those beings who have a basic sense of morality. And so, in the same way a person can use the internet to write encouraging emails to a missionary or look at pornography, what is clear is that the internet is not to blame, we are. A pen can be used to take notes during a sermon, or it can be used to poke someone in the eye. We cannot blame a highway for a car accident, nor can we blame a bottle of whiskey for a drunkard. In God’s eyes, who is responsible for sin is always a person who commits said sin.
And so, if we were to blame firearms for the evil use of firearms, we would be making more than an error in logic. We would be making an error about who humans are and why we are broken. According to God’s logic, the core of the problem with people is their sin. Sin is what makes us not right with God, and thus, not right with others. Therefore, the solution to getting right with others is not to tweak externals but to get right with God. We will never “fix” people by blaming what’s not the problem: everything other than the person. We will never “make the world a better place” by regulating or tweaking things. God is the only One who fixes people by causing them to be born again, making them a new creature with a new heart and mind. He is the One who makes people right with Him through the life, death, and Resurrection of His Son, Jesus Christ. God’s purpose is to “[reconcile] the world to himself in Christ, not counting people’s sins against them. And he has committed to us the message of reconciliation” (I Corinthians 5:19). The message of reconciliation is simple: believe in Christ and you will be forgiven and saved.
Beloved, sin is aggression against God. Yet, by His splendid grace, a holy and kind God does not retaliate but instead condescends in order to extend forgiveness to a poor soul who is incapable of helping themselves. What wonderful love it is for the Lord to pardon the great and many sins of an undeserving sinner! This is what keeps the heart of a Christian in the love of God and away from sinful aggression: to embrace His unchanging love for us although we don’t deserve His favor. And so, the greater our sin, the greater the name of God becomes (Psalm 25:8, 11). Beloved, remember Jesus and remember what He did for you at Calvary.
I will end this post with Jesus because in the end, firearms don’t matter, only He does. So, to any Christian reading these words, I say love God and do as you please, whether that involves firearms or not. Christ is Lord.
Dr. C. H. E. Sadaphal