Joining the NRA

[gwine]

This summer my wife got a .22 caliber Henry rifle for her birthday. She has yet to try it out, mainly because we have no easy access to a place to go.

My son had a membership in a local shooting club but he no longer does. I have thought about joining the club so we could all go, as long as I was there. However, I would have to join the NRA to do so.

What are your thoughts about doing so? I'm not too keen on joining any club (it took quite a while to become a member of a local church) but I am curious what possible ramifications you could point out.

Looking forward to your comments.

 

[LadyFlynt]

What would be your issues with joining?

 

[gwine]

Probably two things.

1: Privacy. Not like the world doesn't know I exist, but I don't know how much I really care to add to the pile.

2: The NRA itself. I am not all that knowledgable about what they stand for, but I do read a bit of their magazine and have read some of their letters they sent to my son regarding pending legistation. I have a feeling that I disagree more with their shrill tactics than I do their stance on gun issues, and that is a turn-off to me.

 

[VirginiaHuguenot]

I don't know if this would help your specific situation, but I would recommend Gun Owners of America over the NRA for its greater commitment to the Second Amendment and Biblical principles. The NRA, I think, is greatly compromised. I too share an aversion to joining with organizations and groups with aims or tactics that I cannot fully support. GOA, I think, is one of the best groups around in this particular area.

However, if that does not meet your needs, it may be that you know someone who has property where you can practice outdoors. Nothing beats hunting for improving one's proficiency.

 

[VictorBravo]

Gerry, I share your concern. I'm a bit of a separatist in the sense of officially joining groups. I was an NRA member before I was converted, and I am still an NRA certified instructor, but I let my membership lapse after my conversion.

The reason was one of unequal yoking, which I take pretty seriously. I don't want to contribute by way of membership dues to any organization that does not seek first to advance the Kingdom of God. I am uncomfortable being a subscribing member any kind of "ecumencial" group that does not demand a statement of protestant faith. Even so, I am forced to be a member of at least one organization that does not fit the definition: our state's mandatory bar association.

I'm not suggesting that this is the only way to live or that others do not have liberty to join such groups. It is my personal conclusion after much reading, prayer, and meditation. I have dear and faithful brothers and sisters who think otherwise.

Vic

 

[SRoper]

I am a member. My chief problem with them is that they advocate changing the law to allow hunting on the Lord's Day.

 

[Richard King]

I am a lifetime member of the NRA and the only real benefit I feel I get from it is the amusement I get from being judged and disliked by certain liberals solely because I am a member. These are people who otherwise preach that no one should judge or dislike anyone because of their beliefs. I love irony.

Gun Owners of America is the real non compromising second amendment defender.

[Edited on 12-31-2005 by Richard King]

 

[gwine]

Thanks for your thoughts, everyone. A few comments:

Andrew: I'm not sure if the local gun club would allow membership in another organization, but it is a thought. The GOoA site looks good. I believe the NRA includes liability insurance in their membership fees, and that would be an issue. As far as finding a friend to go shooting on their property, I have considered that but I don't know anyone who fits the bill. And I don't know about hunting, either. I am not an outdoorsy type, but I know what the sun is. I've seen it before.

Vic: I myself don't see the problem as one of being unequally yoked because we are not talking about the spread of the gospel - the NRA is a secular organization, after all. A soup kitchen for the homeless would be different. Like you I am a member of an organization (UAW) and I would rather not be, because they go beyond the collective bargaining line and into the political arena. Perhaps you could provide references to literature expanding on the unequally yoked issue.

Scott: What can I say? They are secular.

Richard: I am too non-confrontational to cherish the idea of getting under someone's skin about issues. Some of that needs to change, but I need more maturity before I am ready for that.

I wish you all a blessed new year.

 

[VictorBravo]

Gerry, my take is that it is unequal yoking in the sense of being formally joined with unbelievers and therefore subscribing to their standards. I think the chapter titled "New Testament Puritanism" in B.B. Warfield's "Faith and Life" (Banner of Truth) presents a good and balanced explanation about the unequal yoking passage. In summary:

"Associate with the world, yes! There is no man in it so vile that he has not claims upon us for our association and for our aid. But adopt the standards of the world? No! Not in the least particular. Here our motto must be and that unfailingly: No compromise.!"

Pg. 249.

So I try not to join any organization that would have a claim upon my allegiance or would imply that I subscribe to unbiblical standards. I don't have a problem with paying for a service, buying goods, trading with unbelievers, contributing to a community building fund, etc., but I tread a bit lightly when an organization asks me to join in membership if that organization is not focused on Christ.

By the way, Happy and Blessed New Year!

Vic

 

[gwine]

Originally posted by victorbravo
Gerry, my take is that it is unequal yoking in the sense of being formally joined with unbelievers and therefore subscribing to their standards. I think the chapter titled "New Testament Puritanism" in B.B. Warfield's "Faith and Life" (Banner of Truth) presents a good and balanced explanation about the unequal yoking passage. In summary:

"Associate with the world, yes! There is no man in it so vile that he has not claims upon us for our association and for our aid. But adopt the standards of the world? No! Not in the least particular. Here our motto must be and that unfailingly: No compromise.!"

Pg. 249.

So I try not to join any organization that would have a claim upon my allegiance or would imply that I subscribe to unbiblical standards. I don't have a problem with paying for a service, buying goods, trading with unbelievers, contributing to a community building fund, etc., but I tread a bit lightly when an organization asks me to join in membership if that organization is not focused on Christ.

By the way, Happy and Blessed New Year!

Vic

Thanks for the article suggestion. I'll see if my pastor has the book that I can borrow it.

And while I understand the first sentence in your last paragraph and would in principle agree with it, I struggle with the first part of the second sentence because my thinking is that even patronizing a business could give the impression that one accepts their standards. I remember when Levi Strauss was one of the first companies to offer domestic partner benefits. While it might have been easy at that time to not buy their products as a form of protest, it becomes much more difficult now, since more and more companies are doing so, including the company I work for.

Of course, most of the time joining a club or organization is an option, so it is easier to just say no. I will continue to study the issue further.

 

[VictorBravo]

Originally posted by gwine


And while I understand the first sentence in your last paragraph and would in principle agree with it, I struggle with the first part of the second sentence because my thinking is that even patronizing a business could give the impression that one accepts their standards. I remember when Levi Strauss was one of the first companies to offer domestic partner benefits. While it might have been easy at that time to not buy their products as a form of protest, it becomes much more difficult now, since more and more companies are doing so, including the company I work for.

Of course, most of the time joining a club or organization is an option, so it is easier to just say no. I will continue to study the issue further.

I agree that there might be hard decisions. I don't have a black and white rule. I'd be disinclined from doing business with an organization that actively denies the Gospel, but I don't have a problem buying from your average nonbelieving yet otherwise inoffensive merchant. Paul probably sold tents to non-Christians and Lydia most certainly had to deal with nonbelievers in her business. So we can be in the world but not of it. I continue to study as well.

Vic

(Edited "offensive" to read "inoffensive"

[Edited on 1-2-2006 by victorbravo]

 

[satz]

Originally posted by victorbravo

Originally posted by gwine


And while I understand the first sentence in your last paragraph and would in principle agree with it, I struggle with the first part of the second sentence because my thinking is that even patronizing a business could give the impression that one accepts their standards. I remember when Levi Strauss was one of the first companies to offer domestic partner benefits. While it might have been easy at that time to not buy their products as a form of protest, it becomes much more difficult now, since more and more companies are doing so, including the company I work for.

Of course, most of the time joining a club or organization is an option, so it is easier to just say no. I will continue to study the issue further.

I agree that there might be hard decisions. I don't have a black and white rule. I'd be disinclined from doing business with an organization that actively denies the Gospel, but I don't have a problem buying from your average nonbelieving yet otherwise offensive merchant. Paul probably sold tents to non-Christians and Lydia most certainly had to deal with nonbelievers in her business. So we can be in the world but not of it. I continue to study as well.

Vic

Vic,

just so i can understand your position better, you mentioned in an earlier post that you were a member of the Bar association. What makes this an exception to the rule?

Just trying to work things out myself...

 

[VictorBravo]

Originally posted by satz

just so i can understand your position better, you mentioned in an earlier post that you were a member of the Bar association. What makes this an exception to the rule?

Just trying to work things out myself...

Mark, in Washington State and Montana, where I practice, bar membership is mandatory by statute. If you don't join, you can either not practice your profession or you can go to jail.

So I comply. Some people are in jobs that make union membership mandatory. The same thing, I think, applies, at least if the mandatory union rule is backed by state or federal law.

Vic

 

[satz]

Thanks Vic!