So You Believe Jesus Would Support Semi-Automatic Assault Rifles? Congrats, You’re a Fool

gop-jesusConservative “Christians” never cease to amaze me.  Many of these people claim to be “followers of Jesus Christ” while being some of the most hateful, willfully ignorant, bigoted, racist, paranoid individuals I’ve ever encountered.  Which doesn’t make a whole lot of sense considering the fact that if you’re gong to call yourself a “follower of Christ,” you’re not supposed to act like a prick.

But I think some of my favorite right-wing “Christian” conservatives are the gun nuts.  I don’t “troll” many people, but I love getting these people worked up about Jesus and guns.

Because it blows my mind that many of these so-called “Christians” honestly believe that if Jesus were alive today, he’d fully support the ownership and carrying of loaded semi-automatic assault rifles.  Heck, to even believe that Jesus Christ would support guns at all to me is pretty laughable.

Jesus Christ (whether you believe he existed or not) symbolized love, hope, compassion, giving, generosity, peace and acceptance.  I’m really not quite sure how you rationalize those beliefs with the need to own (and carry with you in public) semi-automatic rifles meant for killing humans.  

Don’t give me this nonsense about “I use my AK-47/AR-15 to hunt.”  While you might use it to hunt, that’s not what it’s meant for.  Hell, I can use dynamite to fish.  That doesn’t suddenly make it fishing gear.

And yes, I know there’s some scripture about Jesus using a whip, or encouraging his people to buy a sword, but that doesn’t suddenly mean that he would support guns.

Society is just slightly different than it was over 2,000 years ago, and a sword isn’t exactly the same thing as a gun that can discharge 20 rounds in a matter of seconds.  I can guarantee you if guns didn’t exist, and swords were the main “weapon of choice,” we wouldn’t have 8-10k people dying each year in this country from sword violence.

And if you believe Jesus would support guns, then why not say he would support RPG’s or tanks?  Those would be pretty effective tools for “self-defense” as well.

I just can’t fathom how there are millions of people who honestly believe that Jesus Christ would support these gun fanatics and groups like the NRA.  People who preach fear, paranoia and hate.

It’s just asinine.

Then again, these are often many of the same people who claim they follow the teachings of Jesus Christ while hating, judging and actively seeking to oppress pretty much anyone who doesn’t look and act like they do.  So to say that they don’t seem to have the slightest damn clue as to what Jesus Christ actually stood for would be an understatement.  Which is probably why they think that if Jesus were alive today, he’d be pro-gun.

You’d have to be a fool to say you follow the teachings of Jesus Christ, while professing your belief that if he were alive today he’d be standing there alongside you with a loaded semi-automatic gun strapped to his back.

Image via

Allen Clifton

Allen Clifton is a native Texan who now lives in the Austin area. He has a degree in Political Science from Sam Houston State University. Allen is a co-founder of Forward Progressives and creator of the popular Right Off A Cliff column and Facebook page. Be sure to follow Allen on Twitter and Facebook, and subscribe to his channel on YouTube as well.


Facebook comments

  • u_go_guys

    There are Christians. The “ammosexuals” are hypoChrists…demons…”evil its”…”evilists”…CINO.

  • DerpDestroyer

    Where can I get in on this “dynamite fishing”? Sounds real easy!

  • Joe Serblin

    This is a little off topic. You said “Jesus Christ (whether you believe he existed or not) symbolized love”. I don’t think the fact that he existed is a question. There is historical evidence that proves Jesus, in fact, did exist. The question is whether or not he was, in fact, the Son of God. The religious aspects are what are questionable.

    • Brian

      A. There’s actually no concrete historical evidence that he existed. Literally nothing about him from the time he was alive, just third or second person narratives that may or may not be written by people who claim to have known Yeshua in life. No Roman census record, no Israeli birth record, and both were meticulous record keepers, and it’s funny that Joseph took Mary to Bethlehem specifically for the census.

      B. No question about it, because whether Jesus exists or not, the Abrahamic god is no more a god than any other of the thousands that came before him.

      • Curtis Scarbrough

        I’m not Christian by any stretch of the imagination, and I’m not saying Jesus did exist, even as a regular man (More likely he’s a combination of other prophets), just because there aren’t any census records doesn’t mean nobody by that name existed. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

      • Brian

        The only people named “Jesus” speak Spanish or Portuguese. His name would have been “Yeshua” because “Jesus” is a horribly mangled anglicization and latinization of the Hebrew name.

        Anyway, absence of evidence in such an extreme case can pretty much be evidence of absence. I’m not overly fond of the “flying spaghetti monster” rebuttal, but it applies here.
        Let me elaborate. It cannot be argued that Jesus/Yeshua was an extremely important figure even in his time. According to the gospel, the Romans and the Hebrews, again both very meticulous record keepers, went to great lengths to humiliate and kill this person. They did not want him erased, they wanted him made into a joke and remembered as that forever. No record from either side of any of this, or anything remotely like this happening.
        What’s more, crucifixion also wasn’t really a thing. There was literally only one known crucifixion in the history of Roman Israel.
        Finally, the entire New Testament was invented and written by Constantine at the council of Nicaea. So potentially everything in it is unreliable and written by a man who saw nothing and wanted only power.

        Now, you could say that somewhere a man named Yeshua existed. It’s a common Hebrew name. Still is. It’d be completely irrelevant and argumentive to point it out, because it would not be the world famous Yeshua son of Yahweh. That Yeshua does not exist.

      • Curtis Scarbrough

        I was under the impression that crucifixion was just a normal every day thing in the Roman empire. Not a special punishment for alleged demigods, but a standard punishment for a number of crimes.

      • Brian

        You’d be wrong. Crucifixion wasn’t even the preferred method on execution in the Roman empire. Most crimes serious enough to warrant execution simply resulted in the perpetrator being forced into slavery or becoming a gladiator. Seditionists were often crucified as examples, but only if crucifixion was considered ok by the part of the Roman Empire the execution took place in. Remember, this was a very cosmopolitan empire that respected the beliefs and practices of its client nations and conquests. The preferred, holy method of execution in Israel was stoning, so Roman Israel preferred stoning as a method of execution.
        All executions, of course, were recorded. This is an actual fact that there was only one confirmed execution by crucifixion in Roman Israel. It made the news in a lot of archaeological journals because its discovery was a big deal.
        The bible misrepresents Rome and its ways pretty terribly by making it look like Romans were paranoid and crucifying people left and right. It plays into Constantine’s hands because it makes the Roman Empire look like it punishes alleged seditionists. The treatment of Yeshua by the Jews during the crucifixion also works out pretty well for Constantine because it makes other ethnicities look vicious and barbaric. The New Testament was a clever work of propaganda on so many levels. With Constaine controlling both the religion and the government of the Romans, it made it all too easy for him to ensure that he stayed in power no matter what.
        It’s all a scam, mate. All made up.

      • Janice la Pinta

        omg, you really dont know what you’re talking about. haha. romans hung criminals at that time, right they didnt crucify on a ‘cross’ but they did hang them on a stake, and it wasnt israel law or punishment that could be used, they were under Roman rule

      • Doug

        Josephus mentioned of multiple Jewish crucifixions,

      • Brian

        I repeat, there has been one, single, confirmed crucifixion in Roman Israel.

      • Doug

        Repeating without adding any new information doesn’t move the conversation forward. This is a text based conversation and I can read your previous posts. Are you saying that you disagree with Josephus or that those where crucifixions done outside Israel? Also, what is the source of your original and repeated statement?

      • Brian

        I’m saying that regardless of what Josephus said, archaeological and recorded evidence suggests one crucifixion. Look up Yehohanon. He’s it. Roman historians have a long history of lying through their teeth.

      • Doug

        The information about Yehohanon that I found didn’t say he was the only crucified person in Jerusalem, but that his body was preserved having been entombed. The Romans didn’t put a lot of effort in preserving the bodies of criminals it seems.

      • Maxxigram

        I like your logic regarding the lack of evidence (but I don’t agree that there is none) and I’m a liberal Christian who tries to live as an example in everything I do–although I fail, as we all do.

  • Diane Henry

    How about the whole “Thou shall not kill?”…………….. Amongst other things that are done in “Jesus’s” name that are not in accordance with his teachings…… It is pathetic how the right can twist it and convince themselves.

    • James Orcutt

      The literally in”concordance”, the original languages”Thou shal not Murder, as defined, to lie in wait, enact vengeance.
      if you understood,instead of just repeating what you know nothing of, you would know this.
      The”Heathen”Are all without a relationship with God ,through his Son, Jesus Christ.
      jesus on the sermon of the mount
      says”I claim you…..brothers , sisters and mothers.”
      We dont claim him.
      If you heard “him” you would know.
      Religion ,is the worst of mens Evil, used to control.
      So yes, truth in the ” Beware of the scribes,in their finery, those seeking the head of the table,or the highest places of the theater”
      With your Unique path in Gods will, you will never be unchallenged or unfullfilled.
      It isnt the easyway,but I chose it 29 years old,
      the toys drugs money women, empty,bleak life of tumult.
      Cant even compare to today.
      Our Father in Heaven, Simply wants to know you,
      His child.
      Your missing so much.

      Your “belief” comes from what?
      TV, Religion of the Evil missguiders.(Yes, they are the overwhelming majority)

      God needs no interpreter.
      in spirt
      in secret,
      use your spirit
      to hear the spirit.
      Evil can hear your spiken words.
      Not your spirits ….spirit.

      some say meditate,pray, or however one believes.

      belief is nothing. what one is taught.
      faith…the sun rises and sets.
      Relationship with my Father in heaven.
      like loiking at my hands and body.
      The rest of the nonsense is Evil Men.

  • James Orcutt

    clifton , Jesus Christ is the way to knowing Our father in heaven or for the awakened infinity.
    The conduit.
    Religion is a ruse of man used to control.
    If you seek,He will find you.
    The literal is the Evil.
    God in his way,mercy,power, charity and Love,
    will ( if you daily deed and in spirit… in spirit seek his will for you.
    The completeness of whole, has no equal.
    why let starving in africa starve or killers kill,
    It is US who can and must change this,

    What is seen and heard is love and clarity.
    All things known exist together, on a line, of different times.
    The catagorization and separation by Rank,
    Is The Evil of Men.
    Not God.
    One must ,grow to become welcome in the infinate energy.
    Your missing so much

  • Curtis Scarbrough

    Maybe these people haven’t made it to the new testament yet, and they’re still reading the part where god is committing a genocide every other page, and his followers are little more than a horde of barbaric, land stealing murderers.

  • Troubleshooter

    AS IF a Progressive Liberal has the slightest clue about who Jesus Christ is. For one thing, everyone who knows Jesus Christ knows that HE IS ALIVE. The most important thing that the Scriptures say about people like you is “My People Perish For Lack Of Knowledge”. You should stay out of water that’s way over your head, because you obviously can’t swim.

    • gwynne

      You cannot be a true Christian, you are judging! That’s against your God’s law! I know many Progressive Liberals that worship the Christian God, as well as I know many Regressive Conservatives that do not believe in the Christian Deity. There is also evidence that the Roman’s invented Jesus to keep the Jews in line. It’s an interesting theory and worth some research…if your not afraid of questioning your faith!

      • Janice la Pinta

        there is NO evidence to that at all. website claims arent evidence

    • Dorothy Dill

      Wow. I can not believe you just said that. How would you know what or who a progressive liberal knows or doesn’t know. Are you now setting your throne as high as God himself so that like God you know what is in a man’s heart. God said man looks on the outward appearance but God looks on the heart. Are you saying you are now like God and you know my heart. Perhaps it is you my friend who should be careful about trying to swim in those waters because I believe you have misjudged the direction of the current you are swimming in. Lastly, just for the record….I am a progressive liberal and I know my daddy very very well.

  • NakedJusticeLeague

    What a silly article. Jesus is concerned with saving souls. When He walked the Earth as a man, He did not care if you were centurion, fisherman, merchant, poor man, or rich man. He wanted to get your priorities in order. He even accepted prostitutes and tax collectors as long as you were committed to God. In fact, He would condemn this author for using this blog to twist his teachings to push a totalitarian agenda.

    • Peristroika

      You just know it’s a conservative, gun-totin, FOX loving twerp when you hear the “totalitarian agenda” being bandied about! As if you all are the poor misbegotten downtrodden of our society. You have clearly not even read your buybull. Jesus was a share the wealth communist! Even tho he accepted anyone, they were expected to join the movement, give up their worldly possessions and seek peace in the Lord! Remember rich getting to heaven thru the eye of the needle and all that? He stood for Peace, forgiveness and brotherhood, none of which have ANYTHING to do with GUNS! Get real.

      • NakedJusticeLeague

        Typical communist bullshit. You have not read The Bible. Christ did not want material goods to come before Him. Your atheist party bullshit did not sell back then, and it does not sell now.

      • Peristroika

        Atheist party??? Yeah, just confirming you have no clue because there isn’t one, and never was. Gestapo hat noted, it’s obvious anyone is wasting his breath talking to you.

      • NakedJusticeLeague

        The eyes are open, fingers type, but Mr. Brain has gone bye bye on you Peristroika. Are you seriously telling me that the communists were not atheists? You may think that your putrid breath is wasted on me, but a bullet would not be wasted on you. By the way, Col. Klink was in the Luftwaffe, not the Gestapo, idiots.

      • Janice la Pinta

        so, YOU are a GOOD Christian and threatening someone’s life? wow

      • NakedJusticeLeague

        How did I threaten?

  • Sharon Knox

    He has legions of angels at his beck and call or a snap of his fingers. Thus, no need for guns. “If you live by the sword, you will die by the sword.”

  • Sharon Knox

    Jesus is not passive. Check out Revelation, chapters 17-19

  • Stephen Curran

    Its crazy to argue the existence of Jesus Christ to a Christian. That is their religion after all. You will accomplish nothing.
    That being said…I doubt if Jesus were alive today, that he would be another Chuck Conners ( The Rifleman)
    If I remember my early teachings…Christ was suppose to be a peaceful man. Yes, He did get mad at the money changers in the market, but all in all, he taught about peace…..not Peacemaker ( old Revolver).I would have to agree that it would not fit his Character to condone the use of Assault Weapons. But this whole article is stupid… It like asking …If Beethoven was alive today, would he condone the use of a synthesizer?

    • Funkasaurasrex

      Yes. And he would be playing Jazz no doubt.

  • Dorothy Dill

    Actually I do not recall any scripture where Jesus used a whip and he never encouraged buying swords. In fact when Peter cut off the soldier’s ear, Jesus told Peter to put his sword away. Then he basically told Peter….those who live by the sword will die by the sword. (Matthew 26:52). Jesus NEVER advocated the use of ANY weapons. His weapon was love and the power of the Holy Spirit.

    • Janine Lea

      I believe that Christ promoted Love and the Power of God, but I don’t believe for a moment that he would have told you to stand by while someone was being killed. Or that he would have said “turn the other cheek” when you saw someone breaking into your home when you are alone at night with your children. If we lived in the Utopia that Jesus spoke of, then yes, I might agree that weapons might not be necessary, but that is not the world we live in. In a world of druggies and gang bangers, of rapists and murderers, then yes, I believe we need to protect ourselves and our families.

      • Dorothy Dill

        Janine I agree with some things you say and I disagree with some. Jesus never really talked about a utopia. He did talk about a new heaven and a new earth but that will be after he returns for his children. Until then we live in the same world he lived in. It is really no different now than it was then. They had criminals then just as we have them now. In fact he hung on the cross between two criminals, remember. And remember the story of the good Samaritan who had helped the guy who had been robbed and beaten by thieves. Yet Christ never promoted violence or the carrying of weapons. I do however agree that he wouldn’t want you to stand idly by and watch while someone is being hurt. Also, just for the record I do believe in personal, responsible gun ownership. Yet this article was not about me. It was about Christ and if he had wanted to set that example of carrying weapons for protection then he very well could have. But he didn’t and he even scolded Peter for using his sword to protect Jesus. As I said I do agree with personal gun ownership but I also very much agree with many of the points Mr Clifton made in this article and he is very accurate about the attitudes of many people who call themselves Christian. It saddens me and upsets me greatly when I see the things conservatives do in the name of religion and I can tell you, I pray about it often. I also believe it saddens my heavenly father to see the things that is taking place today in his name. He never mistreated people because they were different than him. He never forced people to live according to his principles. In fact it was just the opposite. He gave every person the right to choose and he told his disciples if people don’t want to listen to you then shake the dust off your feet and move on. Yet today conservatives who call themselves Christian try to force their faith on everyone and they have no respect at all for people who live contrary to how they “think” that person should live. Also, regarding this article and guns, Mr Clifton is right that it is those very conservatives who call themselves Christian who fight every possible law for sensible gun legislation and they seem to have this attitude that it is their God given right to own a gun And I disagree with both points. I agree with sensible legislation. There is no reason we shouldn’t have background checks on all sales because why do it at all if you are only going to do 40%. Furthermore, I agree no one needs an assault rifle to protect their family or home. Personally I am more concerned about the nut with the gun that we see on a regular basis more so than the tyrannical government that we hardly ever see. Furthermore, should there arise a tyrannical government, that rifle is not going to protect you anyway. So then should we all have cannons parked on our front lawn. Actually, I doubt even that would stop a government if they really wanted to invade your home. Also, while you talk about guns to protect you and your children and your home….I wish we could do a review or study to show just how many home invasions were interrupted, stopped, or prevented because the owner had a gun. I personally believe that number would be surprisingly low. However, the number of gun accidents and violence with guns is definitely a number that is faaaaarrrrr too high and too great. The last point I would like to make is we ultimately have to trust God everyday for our protection. There are many things that could take our life or invade our homes other than just the gangbangers, druggies, rapist, and murderers that you referred to. In fact there are many things that are a far greater threat. For example a hurricane or a tornado can rip into your home and destroy everything and take the life of you and your loved ones. In fact, many of us have faced this threat far more often than we have faced the threat of an intruder. In those instances we can’t look to a gun for protection. We have to pray that God will look over us and keep us safe. Well, if we trust him enough to protect us at those times then why can’t we trust him to protect us from bad people. Personally, I have more faith in him than I do that gun and I pray EVERY DAY that God will keep me and my family and friends safe….Safe from hurt, harm, and danger. That includes car accidents, storms, and bad people.

      • Peristroika

        Typical paranoia here. As long as you’re scared, it’s okay and smart to be armed and ready to kill. You are perpetuating the frightening world you’ve created in your mind and therefore, your streets.

    • Eg Kbbs

      While I agree with your general point, there was the time when Jesus cleared the Temple in Jerusalem of the money changers, marketers, etc.

      • Dorothy Dill

        Yes he did. He was angry because the people had made a mockery of his temple and had made it a place for profit instead of a place for healing and developing our relationship with God. There are plenty of scriptures that show God does indead get angry just as we do. His word even says in Ephesians 4:26 Be angry but don’t sin. We are made in his image so things will make us angry but we have a choice on how to deal with that anger. Jesus had every right to turn over those tables but that and scolding the money changers for their actions is all he did. He didn’t chase after them with sword or gun. If he had wanted to carry a sword he very well could have, but that is not who he is. He is a God of love and peace and he even said blessed are the peacemakers….not blessed are those who stand their ground 🙁

  • Andy Betts

    “Do not think that I have come to bring peace on earth. I have not come to bring peace, but the sword” Matthew 10:34. Jesus was a political and religious radical in Palestine (one and the same in the Jerusalem theocracy run by Romans) like many others before and after him. And the Romans crucified thousands there. The road to Jerusalem was often lined with their hanging, rotting carcases. Jesus talk about peace was about Jews, and between Jews. The Romans were an entirely different issue.

    • Janice la Pinta

      totally wrong, read more

  • stokes

    An interesting read if it is still in print “The Passover Plot”

  • Maxxigram

    I agree with the premise 100%. Unfortunately, the writer shows how judgmental he is, which makes the article unavailable to me to post on FB. Please refrain from calling names. Moron, etc. doesn’t help the argument.

  • Politician

    The picture shows him holding a lever action rifle, not a semi-automatic modern sporting arm

  • Jimmy D

    Sure is a lot of hate and bigotry of your own packed in that first paragraph for someone so disgusted by the hate and bigotry you accuse others of displaying. (Yep, I’m already fucking off…)

  • Funkasaurasrex

    I’m a fool, but to make your point about semi automatic assault rifles, you put a Lever Action in the Hands of Jesus. smh

  • EngineeringExcellence

    “But now,” he said, “take your money and a traveler’s bag. And if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one!” -Jesus(Luke 22:36)

    • Southern Logic

      tanks, drones, laser guided munitions

    • SOMEGUY7893 .

      Dude, an assault rifle is more the equivalent of a few ballista’s it’s not a valid comparison, a sword needs you to be right in the face of a single enemy, while with a rifle you can from a distance kill large groups of people at a time.

  • n0truscotsman

    I honestly couldn’t care less about what “jesus said”. Im not a believer and/or follower, so the input of ancient mythology has no basis on how I conduct daily business.

    “Don’t give me this nonsense about “I use my AK-47/AR-15 to hunt.” While you might use it to hunt, that’s not what it’s meant for.”

    This is why people make fun of the pro-gun control crowd; when they demonstrate that they know little about what theyre talking about when it comes to guns and their “purposes”.

    Kalashnikov and Stoner-type long guns are excellent for hunting for a variety of reasons. They are lighter in weight than other types of hunting rifles, they are reliable, safe, accurate, and capable of accomodating different types of bipods, triggers, and optical sights.

    I personally prefer to hunt coyotes and rockchucks with a AR15 with a 10 round magazine and bipod (30 rounders are a PITA to go in the prone with). I guess it depends on what Im hunting.

    Going back to the “thats not what it was designed for argument”, many of the most successful civilian hunting arms are derived from military designs.

    Does the term “mauser action” ring a bell with anybody? how about “lever action”? or “muzzle loading rifle”? Right. All military-derived designs used as a basis for some of the most successful and popular hunting firearms in existence.

    “Society is just slightly different than it was over 2,000 years ago, and a sword isn’t exactly the same thing as a gun that can discharge 20 rounds in a matter of seconds.”
    Technology evolves. It cannot be uninvented.
    “I can guarantee you if guns didn’t exist, and swords were the main “weapon of choice,” we wouldn’t have 8-10k people dying each year in this country from sword violence”
    Do you really want to compare the murder rates of indigenous pre-european north american populations? Or revert back to the “civilized good ol’ days” of the medieval era? or the classical age?
    That argument holds no water. people didn’t suddenly become “more inclined towards violence” because of guns. We were certainly no less inclined as a species to exploit, murder, and wage war before the invention of the firearm.