1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Second Amendment rights exercised in Orlando

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Dick Whitman, Jun 11, 2016.

  1. Batman

    Batman Well-Known Member

    I bet watching it would be a blast.
     
  2. Mr. Sunshine

    Mr. Sunshine Well-Known Member

    #nobodycares
     
  3. Riptide

    Riptide Well-Known Member

    I was told the second coming of Jesus would be on a bigger scale.
     
  4. Alma

    Alma Well-Known Member

    There's really not that much to say. Either you think the works are written in the inspiration and guidance of the Holy Spirit or you don't. And if you don't, I mean, OK, that's fine, but your average Christian is probably going to say "huh?" when you start going down that line of thinking.

    Paul's "POV" is fully within the spectrum of what the Holy Spirit would desire to convey in a given letter, for example. It would be inconsistent with God to desire a rote, straitjacketed voice in the Bible; if He'd wanted that, He could have created 1 person, downloaded the whole thing into that person, who then wrote an infinitely long book that He placed of His shelf as a testament to Himself.

    What's more, the Bible is but a tiny, tiny part of what's actually true of the world and God. Creation is its own testament, as are human beings themselves, as is our conscience (moral wisdom). Paul's POV creates a framework, divinely inspired, sufficient for living in a world that has knowledge of Christ, that is then supplemented by the Spirit and the other testimonies.

    So, to that end, there are obviously contextual aspects to his letters, both in Paul's time and how we'd view it today.
     
    Inky_Wretch likes this.
  5. JohnHammond

    JohnHammond Well-Known Member

    It's a great response to a question that wasn't asked.
     
    doctorquant likes this.
  6. Alma

    Alma Well-Known Member

    He asked For my take
     
  7. YankeeFan

    YankeeFan Well-Known Member

    Should be a fair read:

     
  8. YankeeFan

    YankeeFan Well-Known Member

    The other side:

     
  9. Earthman

    Earthman Well-Known Member

  10. BitterYoungMatador2

    BitterYoungMatador2 Well-Known Member

  11. Dick Whitman

    Dick Whitman Well-Known Member

    I saw a headline somewhere last night that the NRA said that the patrons at Pulse should not have been armed. because they were consuming alcohol, and the NRA does not think guns and alcohol mix well.
     
  12. Inky_Wretch

    Inky_Wretch Well-Known Member

    That was after Trump said he thought the club goers should have been armed. He then walked it back the next day by saying "obviously" he meant armed guards, not folks there drinking. Of course, his original statement wasn't obviously saying that and it disregards the fact there was an armed guard who exchanged gunfire with the shooter.

    Odd that somebody who claims to have a concealed carry permit would say such a thing. That's one of the major points of emphasis in the classroom portion of the permitting phase - if you're drinking alcohol, you are no longer legally allowed to carry a firearm.
     
    Smallpotatoes likes this.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page