Mark wrote about firearms and freedom. His questions are representative of many on the subject of military (or mlitita) service.

You said, "The freedom of this country was NOT established nor gained by the use of guns. Nor will freedom be kept with the use of a firearm."

John Sterling responded: Actually, Mark, you are mistaken, at least in a literal sense. Philosophically, of course, you are right, it was (and will continue to be) the SPIRIT of LIBERTY that is strong in the hearts of all American Patriots that will do whatever it takes to remain free. But literally, it was guns in the hands of the Colonials which bought and paid (in blood) for the freedom which you and I enjoy. The Founding fathers (having fought, and lived through the war for independence) knew all too well the importance of preserving the individual (personal) right of every resident (not just citizens) with the absolute "inalienable" (not able to be severed) right to keep and bear arms. The second amendment is not about duck hunting! It is only tangentially related to crime. It is primarily about keeping tyranny at bay!

Mark said, "Christ got His point across without the use of any kind of force."

John Responds: What was Jesus’ point that He was getting across? Wasn’t His ministry at that point in time to illustrate the redemptive nature of God in partial fulfillment prophecy? When He returns, his presence will illustrate the judgment of God in partial fulfillment of prophecy. The character and nature of God, demonstrated in the life of Christ, the prophets, and the history of the Nation of Israel (through whom God has elected to reveal Himself to the rest of mankind) is full of examples of warfare, death, and judgment. It would be, I think, a huge doctrinal error to categorically place the ministry of Christ in such a limited context as to preclude the rest of the nature and character of God which has been revealed in the Word and history.

Mark said: "I am NOT a gun person, but the proliferation of the use of guns in the commission of crime has sunk to such a great depth that we must--if I dare use the phrase--fight fire with fire"

John Responds: The issue is what has happened to society that mankind is no longer able to control its collective behavior? The Founding fathers clearly understood (and wrote) that without the restraining influence of Christianity, the American system of government and jurisprudence cannot be sustained. The foundation principle of American self-government is based upon self-control. Since the religious climate in America at the time of the founding was such that people accepted the fallen, sinful nature of man, they properly understood that behavior must be controlled by the INTERNAL influence of God rather than the EXTERNAL control of government. Thus, when you read the Declaration and the Constitution (as well as the Federalist Papers and early Supreme Court Decisions) you can see plainly that proper role of government was to be EXTREMELY LIMITED in its ability to CONTROL. That is the purpose of the Bill of Rights- to CONSTRAIN government from taking away individual, personal, freedom. Of course, in those days, there were much more serious consequences for bad behavior. Nowadays society has tried very hard to eliminate the serious consequences of bad behavior. (Abortion, AIDS, Single parent families, Welfare, etc.) What society has tried to do is replace God with government. If government can take care of us, who needs God? (re-read the account of 1 Samuel ch 8. See what happened to the judges who failed to raise their children up properly and why the people for a civil government [like their ungodly neighbors] to take the place of righteous judgment).

Once you accept the (faulty) premise that government may legitimately "control" people instead of its proper (constitutional and biblical ) role of protecting people’s rights to worship God (re-read 2 Sam 23:3; Ps 2:10-11; Pr 16:12; Pr 20:28; Ro 13:1-7; etc.) then you are on the slippery slope to tyranny. The bible teaches us that power corrupts and that is why our form of government was built on the principle of three separate but equal branches. That power flows FROM God THROUGH the PEOPLE, to APPOINTED leaders. If that order of authority is ever reversed- it is UN-BIBLICAL and UN-CONSTITUTIONAL. Most of the political writings and Supreme Court decisions of the first 120 years of our republic will prove what I am saying. Only if you read (and believe) what has been written in the last sixty years will you get a different (more "modern") perspective.

Mark said, "Can you put up an argument which will substantiate the use of a gun? Why are they needed? "

John responds: Some of the foremost modern researchers and writers on this subject are John R. Lott, Stephen P. Halbrook, Don B. Kates, and Gary Kleck. If you do a word search with any of these names on Yahoo or Alta Vista, you will find dozens of scientific articles, complete with facts and figures which will completely answer your questions in this regard. If You find any flaws in their methodology, logic or conclusions, I would be VERY interested in hearing what it might be. I would be willing to bet fifty dollars that their scholarship is superior to any anti-gun advocate you can find.

Basically (although don’t take my word for it- do your own research) there are four or five lives saved from criminal violence by firearms for everyone that is injured. In other words, without the private possession and use of firearms, the death rate due to criminal violence would be four hundred percent greater! There are several hundred more deaths due to auto accidents than attributable to firearms, so if the argument is to reduce accidental deaths, we should look first to eliminating those causes.

Fundamentally, though, the argument is one of preserving the right of self-defense (from tyrants as well as criminals) which is GUARANTEED by the Constitution, versus the denial of PRIVILEGES which are granted by the state. Self defense is a RIGHT, NOT a PRIVILEGE! If you allow the government to restrict ANY RIGHT, then what is to prevent them from restricting ANY or ALL of your rights. Once you are dis-empowered, how will you regain that which was lost to a more powerful enemy?

I encourage you to read a LOT more of the historical documents because I fear, Mark, that you do not appreciate the seriousness of situation. Please avail yourself to the web (while it is still available) and read those precious founding documents. Read the Federalist papers. It is not always an easy read but critical to understanding the thinking of the founders. Please do not advocate giving away authority to the government (regardless of how well-intentioned it may be) unless the Constitution permits it. Americans who do that are holding in disdain the blood shed by the heroic veterans of past wars fought to win and preserve that freedom!

John

********************

Mark Writes: Do you think the average person in the military would 'fight' for the country like those in the past have already done? When the gulf war broke out, many people in church stood up and asked to pray so that their loved one would not have to go to the gulf. This was done by many people. I thought this was why people joined the military? There hasn't been a draft for 25+ years. If you apply for a military job, be prepared to go fight and shoot fellow humans. That is what war is all about.

Mark

*******************

John Answers:

I think you already know the answer to your question.
1. God is a covenant-maker.
2. God Hates covenant breakers.
3. People who join the military are under contract (covenant) to fight.
4. Covenants are voluntary, not coerced.
5. People who violate their contracts (covenants)are covenant-breakers.
6. People who pray that God will intervene so that their (or their loved one's) covenant will not be enforced are asking God to deny His own nature for their selfish wishes.
7. Selfishness is a lack of faith.
8. Without faith, it is impossible to please God.
9. If the people are under a system of government ordained by God (all are not) and the government is exercising its just powers derived from the consent of the governed (it doesn't always) and the decision of war is made with proper deliberation (they aren't always) and the people have accepted the duties of citizenship; then they must honor their commitment. If the rest of the citizens (parents, spouses, friends, etc.) do not stand behind the military members, and support them in this most difficult of times, then those non-military citizens are derelict in their duty of citizenship as well as disobedient to God.

Recognizing that this subject evokes deep feelings, I reiterate that this is a matter of faith, not feelings. Strong as they are, and difficult as it may be to control them, feelings are never the most reliable mechanism to make decisions. The more important the decisions, the more we must have men in leadership who will control their own emotions. Self government cannot happen without self-discipline.

I know the Republic has changed and for the most part, I'm unhappy with any change that moves us away from the Ideals and Principles of our founders. They were not gods but they were highly intelligent, principled, men who gambled (and nearly lost) everything on the "new Republic".

Those principles are the cornerstone of our existence. If we abandon the principles, we lose the republic- its that simple. The only "change" I want to see is for the return of a government which is run in strict accordance with the principles of a democratic federal republic; one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty, and justice for all.

Tina and I, and a large (and growing) number of other folks have decided to commit the rest of natural lives to trying to restore America to its former glory. The answer lies in rebuilding the foundations. As a practical matter, we must push up, from the grassroots, leadership that is committed to fundamental principles and force out those in positions of power who subvert those principles. Rebuilding means that we need to form coalitions, campaign, contribute, vote, take others to vote, contribute some more, and continue to expose the wrongdoing of our present leadership. The deterioration is so far advanced that the recovery cost will be much greater. Like a fine old mansion, the greater the neglect and abuse, the more effort and money will be required to put it back into shape.

I hope that you and your wife (and all your neighbors plus everybody in your community) will join us in this huge, daunting, endeavor. Within you precincts and caucuses, raise up a leader that the community will support and carry that person to the legislature or the governor's mansion. Let it be said that if we do not prevail, it was not for lack of effort!

John