Results 1 - 5 of 5
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | 'Conscientious Objection' Biblical? | Ex 20:13 | charis | 16235 | ||
Dear Sir, Blessings, friend, in Jesus' name! To start at the end, I am sorry that you disapprove of my phrase, 'whim and fancy,' implying that I do not understand the belief system of 'a very large number of committed Christians.' I very carefully chose this phrase, without malice or intent to disparage. The phrase accurately describes the 'unknown state' of those who claim a freewill road to salvation. This thinking panders to the 'capricious' nature of our emotions (soul), and negates the sovereignty of God to decide who are His. But, it is inconsistent. If man's fate is in his hands, i.e. to repent to salvation, as has been said regarding capital criminals, then they have stolen from God, potential Christians. Then you say we must provide them with an entire natural (though imprisoned) existence that they might accept (or not accept) Jesus as Lord. If we say, "Thou shalt not kill," but there is no consequence for breaking this law, then we mock God's just nature. I do not believe we can pray for the dead that were 'prematurely' killed by criminals. What if one victim was 'away from God' at the time of his murder? The criminal has taken away his opportunity to spend eternity with God. But we, (standing in God's stead?) offer a full opportunity for repentence? I am afraid I do not understand this logic. Sir, I do not rob you of hope or optimism when I say that Utopia is unavailable on earth. Indeed, I eagerly and earnestly seek for the return of the Lord Jesus, and His eternal kingdom. Yeah, even now, I believe that *within the church* we may enjoy many *previews* of this glorious future. But we cannot have this 'utopia' in an environment of a corrupt age, that is turned away from God. It is impossible to 'attain' this by our works, and will come about in due time by the sovereign act of God. My good fellow, I do not decry your faith. I simply believe that 'unilateral disarmament' will not 'bring the world about.' Only God can, (and will!) do that. Until then, we must seek peace, but the Bible is clear that the world will not 'cooperate' until God takes away their ability to disregard Him. This is why the Lord gave us human government and society. They are (temporarily) *sanctioned* by God until He returns and institutes His holy theocracy. Meanwhile we have a responsibility to protect ourselves and others from anti-social behavior. Peace and love. In Christ Jesus, charis |
||||||
2 | 'Conscientious Objection' Biblical? | Ex 20:13 | Sir Pent | 16633 | ||
Dear Charis, There were a few comments from your post, which I would like to respond to. The first was that "unilateral disarmament will not bring the world about". My question is how do we know? It's never been tried. On the other hand unilateral armament has been tried throughout history, and all the wars that have resulted definately have not brought the world about. Another comment was that criminals take away the chance of their victims to come to a relationship with God later in life, so why should we give the criminal that chance. Quite simply because we are Christians. As followers of Christ we are called to not only give mercy to those who deserve it (even the non-Christians do that), but also to those who do not deserve it. If we remove the criminal's chance for salvation then we are lowering ourselves to the level of the criminal. Another comment was that "Free Will negates the sovereignity of God." Simply put, that satement is not true. This is extensively dealt with in other threads. I'd prefer to limit that dicussion to the threads dedicated to it. A final comment was that "we have a responsibility to protect ourselves and others from anti-social behavior." If a person looked at the life of Jesus would they see someone who was willing to kill people in order to "protect Himself"? Is the definition of the "others" that we have a responsibility to protect limited to not include sinners who we kill? Does this "protection" require killing people, or is it conceivable that there could be other ways? |
||||||
3 | 'Conscientious Objection' Biblical? | Ex 20:13 | charis | 16668 | ||
Dear Sir, Friend, this lapses into tedium... I well understand your point, but your point strains Biblical interpretation toward an emotional bent. Also, with all due respect, your logic defies reality. How do we know that unilateral disarmament will not bring the world about? I suppose that same way we know that gravity will draw you to earth if you jump off a cliff. Sir, I am not being facetious! Unilateral disarmament HAS been tried historically numerous times. If we lived in a world that was ruled by common sense, common morality, and common faith it WOULD work. But until the Lord returns, we live in a perverse age. You mistakenly think that we will 'change the world' with love. Well, this works in the movies, but goes against the Bible. Jesus spoke so many of His words to a nation that knew the Lord, a society that had a fundamental faith in one God. He spoke to a community that was to despise the 'outside world' and it's ways. We now live in an amalgamated world, the faithful amongst the wolves. "Behold, I send you out as sheep in the midst of wolves; therefore be shrewd as serpents, and innocent as doves." Matthew 10:16 NASB In my humble opinion, your pendulum is swung to the left. Jesus preached balance, not bent. You are correct in that we are called to be merciful, but not at the expense of justice. You are mixing crimes, we are talking of murderers. As to grace to salvation, God is well able to take care of that. My actions will not negate His work. Indeed, free will HAS been discussed elsewhere. A search of these previous threads will reveal that I am no Calvinist :-) However, any way you argue it, if you think that man's choice affects his and other's salvation, then you clearly infringe on God's sovereignty. I do believe in the responsibility of believers to follow Jesus. But unless God instigates it, it will not happen! Finally to your finally: Jesus had a purpose on earth...the Cross awaited Him. As a lamb to slaughter, He went to glory. But the Lord clearly advised us to be strong in our faith, not sacrifices to foolishness and the wanton behavior of the world. It is one thing to submit to earthly authority for the sake of the name of Jesus, but quite another to submit to the whims of an immoral society. Sir, I am not preaching aggressive behavior, just the common wisdom that the Lord gave us. Yes, we must be careful, but not foolish! Yes, we are to be 'fools for Christ,' but not fools toward the world and it's unholy ways. In Jesus' name, charis |
||||||
4 | 'Conscientious Objection' Biblical? | Ex 20:13 | EdB | 16687 | ||
Charis I have to jump in here for just a moment, I can tell you for a fact unilateral disarmament will not turn the world around. How? The Bible tells me so. Jesus said in the last days there will be wars and rumors of wars. No matter what happens this world will never have peace until the Shiloh comes the second time. Be Blessed my brother Ed |
||||||
5 | 'Conscientious Objection' Biblical? | Ex 20:13 | charis | 16705 | ||
Dear Ed, Brother, you may jump in at any time! Amen! As has happened on more than one occasion, I failed to say what I started out to say. And bless you for saying it for me! It bears repeating... Because the Bible tells me so! Come quickly, Lord Jesus! In His name, charis |
||||||