Showing posts with label home defense. Show all posts
Showing posts with label home defense. Show all posts

Friday, August 7, 2020

Devotional for Fall 2020 Semester

 

The Parable of the Ten Virgins

August 10 Devotional for Fall 2020 classes

Dr. John Sterling

“Then the kingdom of heaven will be comparable to ten virgins, who took their lamps, and went out to meet the bridegroom. And five of them were foolish, and five were prudent. For when the foolish took their lamps, they took no oil with them, but the prudent took oil in flasks along with their lamps. Now while the bridegroom was delaying, they all got drowsy and began to sleep. But at midnight there was a shout, ‘Behold, the bridegroom! Come out to meet him.’ Then all those virgins rose, and trimmed their lamps. And the foolish said to the prudent, ‘Give us some of your oil, for our lamps are going out.’ But the prudent answered, saying, ‘No, there will not be enough for us and you too; go instead to the dealers and buy some for yourselves.’ And while they were going away to make the purchase, the bridegroom came, and those who were ready went in with him to the wedding feast; and the door was shut. And later the other virgins also came, saying, ‘Lord, lord, open up for us.’ But he answered and said, ‘Truly I say to you, I do not know you.’ Be on the alert then, for you do not know the day nor the hour.” —Matthew 25:1-13

We know from scripture that the bridegroom is Jesus.    Jesus is coming again. He gave us explicit instructions to be ready for His return. The readiness of the people of God depends upon their knowledge of truth, their obedience to truth, and their patience and faithfulness. In Matthew 24 and 25 we find some of the verses in the Bible that give clues to those days prior to His coming.  Elsewhere in scripture we find many instructions to help us always have an attitude of readiness, not just for His coming, but our service to Him.  We are told to make ourselves ready, spiritually, mentally, and physically to be “fit” for the work that God has called us to.  In Leviticus, this verse lays a foundation for the parable of the ten virgins:

“Command the children of Israel that they bring to you pure oil of pressed olives for the light, to make the lamps burn continually.” Leviticus 24:2.  If the mission requires light, you must have enough oil for the lamps to be ready at a moment’s notice.

Those who were (have been) schooled in God’s Word, we understand the imperative: we have to DO some things to “get ready”. Salvation is free (nothing we CAN do to earn that) but our sanctification (the process of growing closer to God) involves discipline on our part-preparation and practice to be ready for the next “mission”.  In the Army, leaders report that their elements (squads, platoons, companies, battalions, etc.) are “mission-ready, sir!”   We have trained, and equipped ourselves to accomplish whatever we have been called to do.

Half of those virgins (young women who make up part of the wedding entourage) were called to provide light.   Light is produced by the lamps which require olive oil as the energy source. Part of the responsibility of the lamp-bearer is know how much oil will be required to accomplish the mission. Also implied is that the preparation for the mission must take place while we are engaged in another mission: the mission of daily living.   There is no special time set aside for training and material acquisition prior to receiving your “marching orders”.  Once activated, the preparation must be fully accomplished.

No doubt all of the ten virgins were engaged in something when they received the call. The Bible does not provide details so they are not important but we may surmise that whatever they were doing, they had short notice to drop that and report to the wedding feast prepared to accomplish the mission- to provide light for the wedding party inside the wedding chamber.

The ten virgins are divided by the narrative into two groups: the wise virgins and the foolish virgins (There is no middle ground here. You are one, or the other.)  The five foolish virgins must have had  some oil in their lamps, because they said, “Our lamps are going out.” They were “semi-prepared”.   Semi-prepared is not enough. You have to come to the wedding fully “mission-ready”.  Perhaps they thought they might avert disaster by some “late-stage” action. Maybe they didn’t take the assignment seriously in the first place.  Maybe they hoped for some kind of undeserved leniency.  So, the “foolish” virgins  were advised to try to go buy some more.    But it was late, the opportunities to acquire more oil were gone. By the time the bridegroom arrived, it was too late to buy oil.  They missed their “window of opportunity”.

“And while they were going away to make the purchase, the bridegroom came, and those who were ready went in with him to the wedding feast; and the door was shut. Afterwards the other virgins came also, saying, ‘Lord, Lord, open to us!’ But he answered and said, ‘Assuredly, I say to you, I do not know you.’” Matthew 25:10-12.

Do you see the finality here? When the deadline is passed, there are no more opportunities.   The score is “pass-fail”.    No sliding scale or grading on the curve. Whether you are “in” or “out” depends upon whether you took the warnings and instructions seriously.

I want to apply this principle to two different current events.    First, this is the beginning of a new semester at college, and we have a lot of new Freshmen who are poised to launch a whole new chapter of their lives.   Some have been preparing for this for a few years. Others, have managed to get this far mostly by dumb luck and/or the grace of God.  For those new college students, this is the message: Read the syllabus, read carefully and complete all assignments on time, and ask the instructor if you need assistance. Manage your time wisely, anticipate setbacks, and plan for contingencies. You will be like the wise virgins.

The other application for this parable is the social breakdown we are experiencing in American culture.  I address here a different audience, with different issues and challenges, but the principles are the same.  When we abandon first principles and reject God and His instructions, are become blind to the “signs of the times”. If we do not prepare for what must certainly be inevitable social collapse and systemic failure, then we will experience catastrophic destruction at the personal and national levels.  Like the foolish virgins, we have been warned, and we have been given opportunities (and second chances) to “get it all together” for these times.  Failure to heed the warnings will result in total systemic failure and we have no one to blame but ourselves.  Our preparation must include spiritual study and practice, mental discipline, and our physical and economic health. You may wish it were not so…you may not believe it will be so… but if it is true, it will be true no matter what you believe about it.  

No matter what you are going through, or where you are in life right now, the time is right for you to take action.  The warnings are clear to all who are paying attention. If you are not seeing it, you are not paying attention. The “fix” is also clear: seek God while He may be found. Do today what you can do to prepare.  Never gamble what you cannot afford to lose. Don’t procrastinate. Once the doors are closed, there will be no one to help you.  Quite literally, there will be Hell to pay.

John Sterling

Aug 7, 2020

Thursday, June 18, 2015

Flawed Firearms Research is Agenda-Driven




Response to NCVP  research on gun violence- John Sterling
Conclusion:  Poor “analysis” of facts establish clear policy agenda.
POLICY POSITION of National Center for Violence Policy
Their report is available at https://www.vpc.org/studies/justifiable15.pdf
(My responses in Parenthesis)
Fact: The VPC asserts that “When analyzing the most reliable data available, what is most striking is that in a nation of more than 300 million guns (Their source estimates 310 million), how rarely firearms are used in self-defense.”
(In 2012, 8,342 criminal gun homicides were recorded by the FBI.  8,342 divided by 310 million = 0.0000269097.  What “strikes” me is that this is a number so low as to be statistically irrelevant).

The NCVP researchers ask this: “While it is clear that guns are rarely used to justifiably kill criminals, an obvious question remains: How often are guns used in self-defense whether or not a criminal is killed”
“…for the five-year period 2007 through 2011, the NCVS (National Crime Victimization Survey, conducted by the Bureau of Justice Statistics) estimates that there were 29,618,300 victims of attempted or completed violent crime. During this same five-year period, only 235,700 of the self-protective behaviors involved a firearm.
(29,618 divided by 235,700 = 7.957% over five years. Eight % is approximately 103,000 people who DID NOT become victims during the reporting period because of having a firearm available. Apparently this 8% of intended victims of violence do not matter to the Violence Policy Center. Instead they are agitated over the claim by pro-gun advocates that the number is higher.)

In “… the five-year period 2007 through 2011, the NCVS estimates that there were 84,495,500 victims of attempted or completed property crime.
During this same five-year period, only 103,000 of the self-protective behaviors involved a firearm. Of this number, it is not known what type of firearm was used, whether it was fired or not, or whether the use of a gun would even be a legal response to the property crime. And as before, the number may also include off-duty law enforcement officers. In comparison, data from the Department of Justice shows that an average of 232,400 guns were stolen each year from U.S. households from 2005 to 2010.
(84.5 million property crimes were either attempted or completed in this five year period – an average of 169,000/year.  Note that this “analysis” contains a fair bit of speculation on the part of the NCVP. They do not know how many crimes were “completed” so they cannot know how many “attempted” crimes were thwarted by armed property owners. Since property crimes can happen inside of, or outside of, the home, the legality of using deadly force or the threat of deadly force is unknown. Therefore this piece of information is useless to any “analysis”.)
(It is completely valid to be concerned with 232,400 guns being stolen each year [0.00075% of all estimated firearms], but that is different problem, requiring a different solution. Furthermore, there does not appear any research was done as to how many of those 232,400 guns are subsequently used in violent crimes, which WOULD be an important piece of information, particularly for an organization whose interest is in violence prevention. )

CONCLUSION of the NCVP:  “The reality of self-defense gun use bears no resemblance to the exaggerated claims of the gun lobby and gun industry.”   (OK. And this important, why?)    Further, “…in 35.5 percent of the justifiable homicides that occurred in 2012 the persons shot were known to the shooter.”   (Not sure why this is relevant to the discussion. A threat is a threat regardless of whether the victim knows the perpetrator, or in what context.)
“  The devastation guns inflict on our nation each and every year is clear: more than 33,000 dead, more than 81,000 wounded, and an untold number of lives traumatized…”  (It is interesting to me that these figures are NOT footnoted.  There is no citation provided to check these numbers.  But assuming they are accurate, they do not constitute evidence to prove their assertion.    They are just “out there” and the reader is left to form his/her own conclusions. Logically, the number of all people killed by firearms in the United Stated per year would be people who were (1) unarmed victims of crime, (1) armed perpetrators of crime, or (3) suicides.  Intuitively, the vast majority of those killed by firearms are people who were using firearms illegally. (i.e. criminals killing other criminals as in gangland shootings, shootouts with police, etc.. Hardly useful information if the purpose to hinder lawful gun ownership. Further, the VPC clearly is more compassionate towards criminals than towards the citizens who use firearms to protect themselves.)
“When analyzing the most reliable data available, what is most striking is that in a nation of more than 300 million guns, how rarely firearms are used in self-defense.” (Besides being irrelevant if offered in support of gun control, this fact, actually tends to support the conclusion that private ownership of firearms is more safe than a whole range of other lawful, but more deadly, liberties. It is possible-even logical- to conclude therefore that if MORE people had firearms in their possession at the time of the attempted crime, more lives would be saved and crime would be REDUCED!  Instead, this organization is focused on the claims that MORE incidents of crime were prevented by firearms than may actually be the case. Again, I’m not quite sure why THAT is their focus when their organizations stated purpose is the prevention of unnecessary violence and death.
For example, in 2012, the same year from which NCVP draws their statistics, there were 254 million automobiles registered in the U.S. In that same year there were 33,561  automobile fatalities.  I’ll not even discuss the “…untold number of lives traumatized…” by being injured in an auto accident, nor shall I speculate on the numbers of unregistered cars on the road which may, or may not, have been involved in accidents.   Statistically speaking, the number of fatalities compared to the number of vehicles registered is about 0.00013213 %, or roughly TEN TIMES the numbers of fatalities compared to guns and gun-related violence in the U.S.. Further, there are apparently no statistics available for how many automobiles were used for self-defense so there is no way to compare the number of lives saved to the number of lives lost for that particular “dangerous” activity. Since that number is likely very low, the “self-defense value” of a firearm exceeds that of the much more dangerous automobile a hundred-fold or more.)

MY conclusion:  The NCVP seems unjustifiably antagonistic towards the private ownership of firearms and the use thereof to protect lives and property, and the overall reduction of crime. Their research is incomplete, and their analysis is flawed.   It seems clear that they are agenda-driven rather than research driven. Methinks they should change their name to one that more accurately expresses their agenda.
John Sterling, MA, JD
Copyright 2015