Gospel Coalition on Gun Control (Here We Go Again) - Part 1

Alright, well, we are back, and we're gonna do the gun control debate.

I went back and forth on this one because, you know, it is painful to watch these things,

I'm not gonna lie, it's painful. But I also kinda like it. I don't know, maybe

I'm just a glutton for punishment, I'm not entirely sure what the deal is, but a lot of you have requested this gun control debate,

I'm definitely gonna do the racial justice one with Justin Giboney, but I figured

I'd start with this one. You know, we're gonna be talking a little bit more about the Guideposts report and the rape allegations and, you know, the

David and Bathsheba type stuff. That stuff's a little heavy, to be perfectly honest with you. So I figured

I'd just, this is more like a dessert, this is like a snack, this is like going to the store and buying a candy bar, you know what

I mean? That's what this kind of content is, the gun control debate. Speaking of which, have you seen the prices of candy bars lately?

I went to the store the other day and they were like advertising a deal like two king size for,

I forget how much it was, I think it was close to like six dollars. Two king size candy bars for six dollars?

Are you out of your mind? So you know, I bought a few, no I'm just kidding, I didn't buy any. I was actually there buying some of the low carb

Blue Moon, I think it's called Night Sky or Light Sky or something like that.

Some good stuff. In any case, also before we jump into it,

I just wanted to let everybody know that I went fishing this morning. I know you guys love to hear about this. Before the sun came up, it was just a very serene and calm, kind of foggy day.

The sun started coming up and you know how the sun and the fog just kind of looks very fuzzy and everything looks so great and I caught six trout and it was just a great day.

Just the Lord is just so good. So good. Alright, let's do it. Enough delays.

Debate. Gun control and the right to bear arms. Ooh, winsome music.

Yes, you can trust us. We are the Gospel Coalition. Trusted resources in winsome evangelicalism.

Two men today, no women in this one. I don't know, this one seems like it's a little sexist.

How should Christians think about gun control and the right to bear arms?

Well, the way we should think about it is according to the law of God. And it's just like everything, right?

The law of God is our standard. The law of God tells us what the government is for.

The law of God tells us what the church is for, what the individual families are for and things like that.

And so if you look at what the government is for in the law of God, it is to punish evildoers.

That's what the law of God is for. And so if you're talking about people who commit crimes with guns and things like that, they should be punished according to the law.

But if you're talking about, you know, individuals who haven't committed any crimes and they're just regular people and they want to own a gun for protection because there are some evil people out there.

Well, the federal government, or any government for that matter, just simply does not have a biblical moral right to ban you from doing that.

There's no reason that the government should limit how you can protect yourself. None whatsoever.

And that's just the bottom line. And so that's how Christians should think about gun control and the right to bear arms.

There's just nothing in the scripture that you could point to that says the civil governing authority has the right to tell you you can't defend yourself with a gun if you so choose.

And there's lots of things in the scripture that tells us that it's probably a good idea to have a weapon in these evil days.

In any case, that's the answer. Very easy. But we're going to have 50 minutes of bloviating and emotional, you know, appeals and nonsense, most likely.

So let's jump into it. On February 24th, 2022,

Russian troops launched a massive military invasion of Ukraine. In response, Ukrainian President Zelensky posted this on Twitter.

We will give weapons to anyone who wants to defend the country. The right to bear arms is no abstract right, and the debate over it is no ethereal debate.

If ever we needed a picture of how important the right to bear arms is, Russia's invasion of Ukraine has given us yet another one.

What should Christians think about gun control? Very shrewd to bring up Ukraine, because if you're not flying the

Ukrainian flag, are you even a Christian? And the right to bear arms. That's the question before us in this good faith debate.

And the answer is simple. Because Jesus Christ commands us to love our neighbors as ourselves,

Christians have a moral duty to protect every person's right of existence and of self -defense, which includes the right to bear arms.

I will. I gotta be honest, I don't know who this guy is, but I am very impressed with how he started here.

And I should have just let him keep going, but I have to say, like, very, very shrewd.

He brings up Ukraine, which is, of course, very, very, you know, present to our minds, and everyone's flying the

Ukrainian flag and all this kind of stuff. And if you're not supporting Zelensky, you're some kind of a monster. Now, I don't support

Zelensky. I support the right of Ukrainians to defend themselves, of course, including Zelensky, but Zelensky certainly seems like a very shysty character, if you know what

I mean. In any case, and then he says he uses the love your neighbor as yourself, and he uses it accurately.

This is actually an accurate use of love your neighbor as yourself. Because if you love your neighbor as yourself, you're accomplishing the law of God.

And one of the things that you ought to do if you're going to love your neighbor as yourself is protect people who can't protect themselves, who defend the innocent, take up the cause of the needy, things like that.

And one way we do that is through tools like guns, because guns equalize power.

So, you know, if there's an enemy trying to, you know, kidnap your wife or something like that,

John Piper might be, oh, so pious. I would just let him take my wife, and I would plead with him and say, please, please don't hurt my wife.

And that's an idiotic position, by the way. So I don't mean that to just be like an off -the -cuff insult.

If you wouldn't protect your wife from an intruder and you have a gun available to you, then you're an idiot and a coward and a fool.

And there's a special place in hell for cowards. That's not my opinion. That's from Revelation.

Now, here's the thing, though. So you could do that and not love your neighbor as yourself, not love your wife, or you could defend them.

And so you don't have to have a gun, but a gun is a very useful tool to defend innocent life.

And so that was very shrewd because that's one of the favorite scams of Big Eva and liberals to pretend love your neighbor as yourself is stuff that feels ishy -squishy when you watch

MSNBC, but it has nothing to do with the law of God and the scripture and the actual duties of men that God gives them.

And so very good job. I don't know who you are. I like it. I like your style. You even have a mustache, which

I'm thinking about just going with the stache soon. I don't know. In any case, let's continue. Demonstrate this assertion in three phases.

First, I will show biblically that human beings have a basic right of self -defense or to say it another way, a right to preserve their own existence.

Second, I will show that Christians have a moral duty to love our neighbors by protecting this right. And third, I will show that the right to self -defense in the modern world includes the right to bear arms.

And thus, to defeat my argument, an opponent would have to show either that human beings do not have a basic right to preserve their existence, that Christians do not have a moral duty to love our neighbors by protecting that right, or that that right does not include the right to bear arms.

Who is this guy? This is really good. This is very shrewd because he's framed this debate in a very effective way.

He said, here's what it is, and he uses love your neighbor as yourself and things like that. And then he says, if you're going to defeat me, which he's setting up the terms, if you're going to defeat me, you're going to have to show one of these three things.

Now, I think probably the person opposed to this is going to try to defeat the third one that doesn't include the right to bear arms.

But that's insane because what the gun opponents try to do is try to make it seem selfish.

You're selfish if you want to protect your right to bear arms. But the thing is, the right to bear arms is all about not being selfish.

It's the opposite of being selfish because I want to help defend your life and my life and the life of my family and the other people that can't defend themselves.

It's all outward focused. It's not selfish at all because people envision themselves being the good guy with the gun so that when somebody comes into the store and starts randomly shooting, you can be the guy that defends them.

It's all thinking other... And it's about putting yourself in harm's way if it's necessary.

Liberals try to pretend it's a very selfish thing to protect the right to bear arms but it's not, number one, because of you thinking of other people but also you want other people to have the same right to defend themselves.

You want other people to be able to protect themselves. It's all about other people. It's putting others more important than yourself.

That's what defending the right to bear arms is. Putting others more important than yourself. Does the right to bear arms mean that potentially criminals could have a gun which potentially puts you in danger?

Yeah, it sure does, but that's gonna happen anyway. Anyway, let's continue. To state my case another way, you might say this.

The right to bear arms derives from the right of self -defense which exists by virtue of creation.

Organisms that exist have the right to preserve their own existence. And because loving our neighbors includes protecting their right to existence, we have a moral obligation to protect the right of self -defense in society and that includes the right to bear arms.

So let's start with a very simple fact. Organisms that exist have a right to preserve their existence.

The preservation of life is a basic commitment of biblical ethics. And as organisms have a right to exist, so too they have a fundamental right to self -defense.

The most important biblical text on this matter is Exodus 22, verse 2 which reads,

Not according to John Piper, I would not defend my wife. I would because I think

I'm pro -life. I'm pro -life. I would plead with him and say there's another way. There's another way to do it.

You don't have to do it. Take her if you must, but there's another way. God's law is superior to any nonsense

John Piper has to say. And we're going to cover John Piper's little article about David and Bathsheba because people keep pointing out

John Piper believes it, so it must be acceptable. It's not acceptable. If you believe that David raped

Bathsheba, you show one of two things. Number one, you don't know how to read the Bible. So obviously you shouldn't be teaching.

Because the Bible on its own terms clearly tells us that David did not rape Bathsheba. Number two, you just don't care.

You're an unbeliever. You're a pagan, and you're just saying whatever you want to say to accomplish your evil deeds. It's a litmus test at this point.

If you can't admit that you're just making that stuff up, or you're implying, or you're thinking, or you're whatever, if you can't admit that, then quite frankly, nobody should pay attention to what you have to say about this.

There are some people out there that are like, well, I don't care what the Bible says, but it's clear that he raped Bathsheba. And those people, of course, we're going to discredit them.

They're at least being honest. They don't care what the Bible says. But if you pretend to care what the Bible says, and you still think that David raped

Bathsheba, I'm sorry. At this point, you either are disqualified from teaching, in my opinion, or you're just, quite frankly, a pagan.

A lot of people are both, of course. Be guilty before the Lord for killing a man during a robbery.

Quite simply, because it's a clear case of self -defense. In the

Talmud, the rabbis offer this commentary on the text. It's as though the thief was considered dead from the start.

Here the Torah teaches, if someone comes to kill you, kill him first. The Bible and the

Jewish common law tradition assume the basic right of human beings to self -defense. Greek and Roman law also recognize this basic right.

The Roman orator, Cicero, in a speech before the court during a self -defense trial asked, what is the meaning of our swords?

It's a little strange that he's going to Greek and Roman law and the Talmud. Like, you don't have to do that.

The Bible on its own terms is completely sufficient to make this point. It's a little weird. We would never be permitted to have them if we might never use them.

This, therefore, is a law, O judges, not written but born with us. If our life be in danger, every means of securing our safety is honorable.

For laws are silent when arms are raised. The law very wisely and silently gives a man a right to defend himself.

The great Thomas Aquinas also understood the right of self -defense to be a given. In the Summa, he writes, inasmuch as every substance seeks the preservation of its own being, whatever is a means of preserving human life and of warding off its obstacles belongs to the natural law.

In the Reformation tradition, Francis Turretin states the matter quite plainly. To repel by force and to defend oneself belongs to natural and perpetual right even unto the slaying of the aggressor.

So, biblically, logically, and theologically, human beings have a basic right to exist and therefore a basic right to self -defense.

Furthermore, Christians have a moral duty to love our neighbors by protecting and preserving this right for them.

This is most clearly seen in the way the Protestant catechisms understand the Sixth Commandment, You shall not murder.

The Westminster Larger Catechism asks You know, I wonder if he's going to because because it's

Gospel Coalition, like this is no knock against this man. I don't even know who it is and he's done a great job so far.

I wonder, I'm trying to see into the future of what the scam is here because I don't trust Gospel Coalition at all.

I wonder if he's going to grant red flag laws and common sense gun control laws that are really just a liberal's dream

I almost said something bad. Our liberal's dream. I wonder if that's the thing. He's going to pretend to defend the right to bear arms, but he's really going to do it the way a lot of liberal

Republicans do it. We don't want to have big capacity magazines and this and that we don't want to have assault weapons that kind of stuff.

I wonder if that's what's going to happen here. If I was a betting man, I would say because of what

Gospel Coalition is that's probably what would happen. But this guy's done a good job.

So this is not a knock against him except for the fact that he's participated in the Gospel Coalition debate because that is a knock on you.

Sorry buddy. Required in the sixth commandment and it answers this way. The duties required in the sixth commandment are all careful studies and lawful endeavors to preserve the life of ourselves and others, including just defense against violence.

The catechism goes on to state 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.

According to the catechism, the law of God enjoins upon Christians a moral duty to defend our neighbors against unjust violence and to preserve their lives by all means possible.

This was Calvin's understanding of the commandments as well. He writes Not John Piper though.

concern himself with the safety of all I will not do it. I will not offend my wife. saving our neighbors lives faithfully to employ it.

I will not defend my wife. I care about life.

I will ask you to repent, but I will not defend her. You know, if you don't take care of your wife or your family, the

Bible says that you're worse than an unbeliever. If you don't provide for your family, the

Bible says you're worse than an unbeliever. And I'm pretty sure it doesn't limit that to, you know, giving them food and clothes.

Like, if a robber comes into your house and wants to kill or rape your wife and you're just like, no,

I will not touch a gun, I'm pretty sure the Bible is saying that's worse than an unbeliever.

So you think you're holding your integrity Piper and all of you Piper followers, but you have no integrity if you won't defend your wife.

You're a coward. You're trying to look good, but you're actually not interested in being good.

That's such an endemic thing. So many evangelicals are trying to look good to people, but they're really not interested in what good actually is.

It's really a sad situation. So thus far, I've established that biblically, logically, and theologically, human beings have a basic right to existence and to self -defense, and that Christians have a moral duty to love our neighbors by protecting that right.

It remains then to show that the right of self -defense includes the right to bear arms.

If it is granted that human beings have a right to defend themselves, and they do to defend others, the only matter to be settled is, what are we to defend against?

And the answer is, against violence to their person. On the playground, it may be the violence of a bully's fists.

In Cicero's day, it may have been the violence of a Roman sword. And in our day, it includes the violence of modern weapons.

We live in a world where guns exist. We may wish that wasn't the case, but it is. And in a world where guns exist, the threat of gun violence will also exist.

If a bully attacks me with his fists, I can fight back and call for help. If a stranger picks my pocket,

I can cancel my credit cards and replace my lost goods. But if an attacker threatens me with a firearm, my life itself is in immediate and grave danger.

And therefore, the right and responsibility to defend life in the modern world includes the right to bear arms for the simple fact that one of the gravest threats to life in the modern world is the threat of gun violence.

And this threat exists not only for individuals, but for churches and schools, as we've seen repeatedly in recent decades.

Advocates of strict gun control laws would deny to human beings a defense proportional to the threat against them.

They work to craft a world in which we face the threat of gun violence, but lack a proportional means of defense for ourselves and for others.

And that violates both the right to self -defense that is ours by creation and the duty of neighbor love that is ours by redemption.

Because Jesus Christ commands us to love our neighbors as ourselves, Christians have a moral duty to protect every person's right of existence and of self -defense, which includes the right to bear arms.

In closing, let me speak briefly to what I think is the strongest argument for gun control in the modern world, and that is this, that we are better off to entrust the defense of ourselves and others to the government and to its agents.

Oh man, that was low -key savage, whoever you are. If that's the best they got, they're toast.

They're toast. You know how many people governments have killed?

This guy's like a low -key savage. Yeah, we ought to trust

Oh yeah, you know that government that all these liberals are saying is hopelessly racist and sexist and pro -abuse and evil and greedy and all this stuff?

Yeah, let's leave it to them. Let's leave it to them to control the guns so they can keep us safe. Yeah, you know, they'll definitely do it.

Because, yeah, you know, I know yesterday I said that they're racist, and I'll probably say so tomorrow, but definitely you can trust.

These people are brain -dead. A lot of these people are brain -dead. And when I say brain -dead, I mean, obviously they have brain activity, but they're completely compromised.

Like, they don't think the way a human being ought to think. And this is actually something God does to you. When you love your sin so much, he just makes you stupid.

But anyone who makes that case, those kinds of cases simultaneously, which is basically every liberal, oh, they're racist, sexist, evil, greedy, you know, all that stuff.

But they should have all the guns. Those people aren't thinking straight. You don't have to point out the hypocrisy because they don't even understand hypocrisy.

They don't understand what they said doesn't compute with what they said yesterday or what they're saying tomorrow or what they're saying even in the next minute.

They don't understand it, right? They need the Gospel. They need the Bible, is what they need.

They need the Scripture. That's why I'm like laser -focused on the Scripture. All this has been really good. I really appreciate what he has to say.

But the bottom line is, it should just be Scripture. The Scripture tells us what the government's for. The Scripture tells you what you're required to do.

And he's done that a lot. I mean, he's obviously brought up other things, but the Scripture is what's important here. And it's also the only thing that will ever change anybody because the

Scripture can change a heart, right? When you preach the words of God to someone, you preach that Gospel to someone, that can actually change someone's heart.

And that's the only hope for a lot of these people who literally cannot think straight. They cannot think straight because they're hopelessly depraved, but for the grace of God.

Their depravity has affected their mind to such a degree that they don't understand anything.

Guys, they don't know that a male cannot give birth. They're pretending.

Either they're pretending not to know, or they really don't know. I think we often think that they're pretending.

I think a lot of them don't know that a male can't give birth. Let's not take that away from them.

I think they're being honest. They're just that clueless. They're that deluded. It's the judgment of God that has been poured out on our nation.

We need to understand that, and that's why we ought to be focused on the Scripture. You can't convince someone who is unreasonable using reason.

You can't convince someone who is illogical using logic. They can't see it.

They don't understand. They have no ability to understand. It's the Gospel that changes hearts.

It's the words of God that hit their mark. That's why you need to be focused on the Scripture. Sorry for preaching.

Actually, I'm not sorry for preaching. Let's let him continue. And that works well until the government and its agents become the threat.

And history has no shortage of such cases. It actually doesn't work very well. It's the reason the right to bear arms was enshrined in the

English Bill of Rights of 1689 and in the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

During the debates around the ratification of the Constitution... You should have just quoted the Constitution! End of story! ...that a powerful federal government could simply disarm the people and impose military rule.

And so Joseph Story, an early Supreme Court justice, argued that the security of a free state included security against the tyranny of an overreaching government.

Because governments and not merely individuals are prone to violence and injustice.

Much more on a higher scale, too. ...is to enshrine the right to bear arms broadly across a society.

Yes, that does mean that guns will be accessible to criminals. But it's also the only way to ensure that every individual maintains the right to defend themselves and others against violence, whether that violence comes from an individual or from a government.

The scriptures promise us that one day, the lion will lie down with... Amen. ...that one day, swords will be beaten into plowshares...

Amen. ...and spears into prunings. I can't wait for that. ...that one day, nation shall not lift up sword against nation...

It's coming sooner than we think, baby. ...neither shall they learn war anymore. But until that day, the scriptures assure us that wicked men will continue to eat the bread of wickedness and to drink the wine of violence.

Therefore, Christians should worship our Savior for laying down His life and becoming a sacrifice for us.

But we may not sacrifice the lives of those around us by our refusal to defend and protect them.

In this fallen world, Christians have a moral duty to protect every person's right of existence and of self -defense.

And that necessitates the right to bear arms. Well, I have to say, very, very impressed with this opening salvo here.

We'll see what happens, because I still do not trust Gospel Coalition. I'm just waiting for the other shoe to drop, that kind of thing.

But taken in isolation, that opening statement was really good. I mean, it wasn't perfect.

Like, the last time that I uploaded the video, the one yesterday, that was a perfect video!

That was even more perfect than Trump's call to Ukraine! But anyway, very, very good.

Honestly, very impressed. I was actually impressed with Karen Swallow Pryor's opening statement last time, too, even though I knew that was going to go south.

I don't know for a fact that this one will go south, but I do highly suspect it. So, we'll see you in the next video.

I'm sure this presentation, the next one's going to be horrendous. We shall see. But yeah,

God bless you. I hope you found this video helpful. God bless. He's right, though.

You know, that was a lot less dense than the video yesterday. A lot more fun. So, I'm going to continue to do this.

You know, sometimes you just got to do passion projects. You know what I mean? I guess that's what I'll do. Oh, this morning, just a side note.

This morning, I was feeling pretty apostolic. So, I had fish for breakfast. It was pretty good, man.

Those apostles were onto something. Jesus, when he came back, didn't he have fish for breakfast as well?