The New Testament Bible supports the ownership of Arms by means of context

As Con I will show that the new testament Bible does NOT support the ownership of arms by means of context. So before I begin Let me offer a breif roadmap. I will go first offer some framework regarding the round, I will then deconstruct my opponent's claims, and finally I will offer voters. =Framework= I accept my opponent's definitions. Obs1: As the framer of this debate, my opponent has the burden of proof to show beyond the shadow of a doubt that the Pro position is indeed true. If he is unable to do so, or does so in such a way that is obviously of semantic interpretation of the bible; then he will lose this round. Obs2: the resolution uses the phrase "by means of context". And as my opponent himself stated, whatever is said in this round must be linear with the Bible's text. Meaning that unless my opponent proves his stance in context with the bible; His arguments are invalid. Obs3: This debate is not one of reciprocal burdens. As the Con, it is only my job to disprove my opponent's arguments. Outside of that I do not in turn have anything to prove. =Clash= I'm just going to go through and argue what my opponent has said piece by piece. -My opponent claims that it is without a doubt that the teachings of Jesus heavily influenced the ownership of arms. However he offers us no warrant to prove this rather hefty claim; So at that point we cannot accept it. This claim is also entirely abusive, as if it assumed to be true it takes all clash out of the round. If there is no doubt then I cannot oppose this idea. Also if there where no doubt, I would not have accepted this debate/ - Luke 11:21*- Now out of context this verse would appear to have me sunk. However when backing up to verse 14 of the same chapter, we see that this verse is actually in rebuke of the pharisees saying Jesus's power comes from Beelzebub. Now let's read verse 22-23 "But when some-one stronger attacks and overpowers him, he takes away the armor in which the man trusted and divides up the spoils. He who is not with me is against me, and he who does not gather with me scatters. " Luke 22:36-38*- Cross-referenceing this with Isiah 53:12 " Therefore I will give him a portion among the great, and he will divide the spoils with the strong, because he poured out his life unto death, and was numbered with the transgressors. For he bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors. He told the disciples to take their swords in order to fulfill prophesy, in all reality this verse does not support the ownership of arms, as Christ wants us to trust in his power not ours. You see the theme of turning the other cheek all throughout the new testament Jesus, Steven, and Paul are to name just a few. And in fact in Luke chapter 22: 50-51, Jesus rebukes one of the disciples for cutting off one of the guards ear; he then promptly heals the guard. "And one of them struck the servant of the high preist, cutting off his right ear. But jesus answered, "No more of this! " and he touched the man's ear and healed him. " - My opponent agrees that the New Testament does not support violence. Of course, we cannot look at the new testament alone, we must reference it with the old testament for deeper understanding. And ecclesiastes 3:8 Tells us there is a time for war. The does not however justify the private ownership of weapons, it justifies the ownership of weapons during times of war. -John 18:11, Yes.