Results 1 - 14 of 14
|
|
|||||
Results from: Notes Author: Montag Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Governmental Authority? | Rom 13:1 | Montag | 74629 | ||
you say they defended their right to establish a new government... i contend that they didn't have that right. Montag |
||||||
2 | Governmental Authority? | Rom 13:1 | Montag | 74627 | ||
gracefull, i think we are beginning to miss each other about the points of contention. -"So you believe America was a man made decision and God just took advantage of our ingenuity? How does this conclusion line up with scripture?" no absolutely not.... i think God found willing believers in the United States and He called them to reach the lost in other countries. -"By your statements on the Roman Empire are you saying persecutions are not taking place today? Surely not as odviously but they are taking place." my point of talking about the Roman persecutions was to say that the early Church had a much rougher persecution than those that started the american revolution. -"What exactly IS bothering you?: i'm just trying to figure out a Christian's place in relation to governmental authority. thanks again, Montag |
||||||
3 | Governmental Authority? | Rom 13:1 | Montag | 74625 | ||
Steve, thanks for taking time to add to this discussion. i'm not an expert on all the ideas of Locke but i am very familiar with his philosophical influence on our founding fathers. i agree that the war for independence was much more complicated than a group of men saying, "we will rebel and make our own government because we don't like this one." and i would much rather believe that their actions were Biblically justifiable in some way. i don't think there has been a more oppressive government than the Roman authority that the early Church had to deal with. you would think that if any group of Christians had a right to rebel against governmental authority then they would be granted that right. Paul didn't see it that way though, he was convinced that regardless of the actions of government, we should be subject to them (unless in direct violation of God's commands, thus Acts 4). i can see how the revolution occurred using the philosophical/religious influences of the day... i'm just not sure they were Biblical. God bless, Montag |
||||||
4 | Governmental Authority? | Rom 13:1 | Montag | 74506 | ||
Gracefull i take exception with this statement, "But as long as Satan is loose, every country will have both good and evil working from within. Our task is to determine personally, which we will serve...." our task is NOT to determine which we will serve since the determination has already been made for us in Rom. 13. we should "be in subjection to the governing authorities". i understand that you think that the US is responsible for sending the Gospel throughout the world. i would contend that it is the CHRISTIAN BELIEVERS in the US that are responsible for that rather than the US as a whole. the overwhelming majority of missionaries that have been sent out from the US have only been going for approximately the past 100 years. the pentecostal renewal that happened in azusa street at the turn of the century (approx. 1905) birthed a large percentage of the modern Christian missionary movements and organizations. (this is not to say that other missionary organizations are better or worse, i'm just making a point of the timetable of missionary activity) that is almost 150 years after the birth of this nation... you would think that if the missionary movement directly coincided with the birth of America then there wouldn't be such a large gap of time before meaningful missionary works started coming out of America. i said all of that to make a point that i don't necessarily believe that just because many missionaries are sent out from America that somehow God "ordained" the American Revolution. i find it much more likely that God allowed the missionary explosion to occur in the US simply because there were/are believers willing to be sent into the harvest. personally, i am not a pacifist by nature. my father is a Marine Corps veteran of the Vietnam War and i have always admired the men and women in uniform that protect our country. that being said, i'm beginning to try to take to heart Jesus's message of meekness, humbleness and blessing those that persecute me. (Matt 5) in the early days of the Church, Christians were persecuted unmercifully by the Roman Empire. it wasn't until Constantine became emporer (305 ad) that this persecution ceased. (Constantine converted to Christianity in 312 ad) Unfortunately he tried to force his new religion on the enitre Roman world and we all know how that eventually ended. well it seems like i'm starting to ramble now so i'll cut it off here. hopefully God will help me deal with this new-found desire for pacifism in me. any other comments are greatly appreciated. Montag |
||||||
5 | Governmental Authority? | Rom 13:1 | Montag | 74438 | ||
thank you EdB. i would definitly appreciate the insight of the knowledgeable people on this forum to help in exploring this issue. Blessings, Montag |
||||||
6 | Governmental Authority? | Rom 13:1 | Montag | 74437 | ||
Emmaus, no doubt that when the commands/laws of the government come in conflict with the commands of Christ then we really have no choice but to follow Christ. Act2 4:19-20 [19] But Peter and John answered and said to them, "Whether it is right in the sight of God to give heed to you rather than to God, you be the judge; [20] for we cannot stop speaking about what we have seen and heard." that is why i see no problem with missionaries in places like China, Sudan, Iran, etc preaching Christ even though it is deamed illegal by those governments. i think we can all agree about that point. incidently, in the passage you cited, Peter and John didn't try to replace the existing government with one more tolerant to their cause... they simply disobeyed an ungodly order. the thing that gives me pause is that the founding fathers were not merely disobeying, they actively sought to replace an existing governing authority. hmm... maybe all this talk about the American Revolution is just vain speculation but i am also curious as to how this passage relates to us in today's society. folks like Pat Roberson and Jerry Falwell would have us use politcal means to get our message across but it is clear from Jesus Christ's example that a political revolution is not what is needed, a spiritual revolution IS! i hope i'm not "muddying the waters", so to speak, by going in this direction. God help us, Montag |
||||||
7 | Governmental Authority? | Rom 13:1 | Montag | 74412 | ||
but what does that say about our founding fathers? they "resisted authority" (v.2) and therefore must have "opposed the ordinances of God" (v.2) the result of which is that they "will receive condemnation upon themselves." (v.2) i pray every day for this great country i live in... i just don't see how the birth of this country (USA) could have been God ordained if Rom 13 is to be believed. i know that God can use believers inside any country regardless of the actions of it's leaders and i believe THAT is the reason the United States has been an historical Christian witness to the world... not necessarily that we were/are a "Christian" nation. still searching, Montag |
||||||
8 | TATTOOS....yea or nay?? | Bible general Archive 1 | Montag | 74174 | ||
EdB in Lev 19 there are a couple other parts fo the Law i'm unclear whether we need to keep them or not. in verse 19 it is written; 19 'You are to keep My statutes. You shall not breed together two kinds of your cattle; you shall not sow your field with two kinds of seed, nor wear a garment upon you of two kinds of material mixed together.' should we follow these or are we allowed to break them? how am i supposed to tell which parts of the Law i'm supposed to keep and which parts i'm supposed to disregard? Montag |
||||||
9 | TATTOOS....yea or nay?? | Bible general Archive 1 | Montag | 74086 | ||
thank you for that... i was beginning to think i was the only Christian unapposed to tattoos. God Bless |
||||||
10 | TATTOOS....yea or nay?? | Bible general Archive 1 | Montag | 73958 | ||
jlpangilinan, i whole-heartedly agree that the commands of Christ are crucial for us to obey and if Christ had given me a command NOT to get a tattoo i wouldn't... we both know, though, that he made no such command. answering this statement... "I dont think for having tatoo you can glorified Christ, He had speak many thing in the new testament how we can Glorified God and I am very sure that tatoo is not including in it." how are you so sure tattoos cannot be included in glorifying God? in this "list" of ways we can glorify Christ did He include glorifying Him on an internet message board? did He include glorifying Him while working at your job? did he include glorifying Him while playing sports? did he include glorifying Him while enjoying time with your family? i think we can both agree that you are able to glorify God with any of the activities listed above but they are not specifically named as "approved" ways to glorify God. in the same way, tattoos can be used to glorify God. one final question, if getting a tattoo that says JESUS IS LORD! is not glorifying to God then who is it glorifying? Montag |
||||||
11 | TATTOOS....yea or nay?? | Bible general Archive 1 | Montag | 73956 | ||
EdB please tell me you don't keep the whole Law of God found in the OT. if you do, then you should still being slaying bulls and goats for the burnt offerings as a covering for your sin. you cannot say that this (offering sacrifices for sin) is NOT part of the Law of God because it clearly is. Jesus himself broke the Law of God as the Jews saw it in John 9 when he made clay on the sabbath and healed a man of blindness. bringing Romans 6:15 into the argument shows that you believe that getting a tattoo is a sin, plain and simple. i DON'T believe getting a tattoo is a sin AND i don't use God's amazing grace as a license to sin as you imply. i really don't appreciate that implication either. here is another passage for you to ponder since you don't really want to live apart from the Law yet. Galatians 3 [1] You foolish Galatians, who has bewitched you, before whose eyes Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified? [2] This is the only thing I want to find out from you: did you receive the Spirit by the works of the Law, or by hearing with faith? [3] Are you so foolish? Having begun by the Spirit, are you now being perfected by the flesh? [4] Did you suffer so many things in vain--if indeed it was in vain? [5] So then, does He who provides you with the Spirit and works miracles among you, do it by the works of the Law, or by hearing with faith? [6] Even so Abraham BELIEVED GOD, AND IT WAS RECKONED TO HIM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS. [7] Therefore, be sure that it is those who are of faith who are sons of Abraham. [8] The Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, "ALL THE NATIONS WILL BE BLESSED IN YOU." [9] So then those who are of faith are blessed with Abraham, the believer. [10] For as many as are of the works of the Law are under a curse; for it is written, "CURSED IS EVERYONE WHO DOES NOT ABIDE BY ALL THINGS WRITTEN IN THE BOOK OF THE LAW, TO PERFORM THEM." [11] Now that no one is justified by the Law before God is evident; for, "THE RIGHTEOUS MAN SHALL LIVE BY FAITH." [12] However, the Law is not of faith; on the contrary, "HE WHO PRACTICES THEM SHALL LIVE BY THEM." [13] Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law, having become a curse for us--for it is written, "CURSED IS EVERYONE WHO HANGS ON A TREE"-- [14] in order that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles, so that we would receive the promise of the Spirit through faith. for the sake of getting my point across i would emphasize verses 2, 3, 10, and 13. this passage seems pretty clear to me... please read it prayerfully so that the Holy Spirit can illuminate your mind to the Truth it holds. i understand your hesitation in this matter since even Peter the Apostle had to be rebuked by Paul about this very issue. Read Acts 15 and Gal 2:11-21 for the whole story. if you can show me in the New Testament where a believer has to live under the Law after they are saved then i will concede that getting a tattoo is a sin. otherwise i will continue to stand with Paul and proclaim: "For through the Law I died to the Law, so that I might live to God. I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself up for me." - Gal 2:19-20 Montag |
||||||
12 | TATTOOS....yea or nay?? | Bible general Archive 1 | Montag | 73846 | ||
EdB i'm fully prepared to be responsible before God for any opinion i have expressed on this subject. i'm not worried since my position is not contrary to the Nature of Almighty God. since you brought the Leviticus passage back up let me just ask you... do you believe the Law of God will save you from your sins? according to Paul the Apostle it has NO power to justify anyone, (Rom 3:19-20) 19. Now we know that whatever the Law says, it speaks to those who are under the Law, so that every mouth may be closed and all the world may become accountable to God; 20. because by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight; for through the Law comes the knowledge of sin. would you say that someone who is not circumsized cannot be a Christian? of course not because the mere act of circumsism does nothing to justify an individual. Paul addressed this in the Epistle to the Galatians when the Judeaizers were trying to apply the Law to gentiles that wanted to become Christians.... (he was rather passionate in his defense of his position.) in the same way, if you try to attach ANY part of the Law to salvation then you have already nulified the work Christ accomplished on the Cross of Calvary. that is something that i, personally, would like to stay FAR away from. as far as the permanent disfiguration of what God originally created, how many people with surgical scars are permanently "disfigured" in a similar way. whether it was self-inflicted or not has no bearing since you are concerned with what God "intended" us to look like. finally, i feel that by living in the liberties that Christ has given us i am honoring God in a very real and personal way. there is no "either/or" with liberty and honor, they mesh beautifully together. (Gal 5:1) It was for freedom that Christ set us free; therefore keep standing firm and do not be subject again to a yoke of slavery. Freed by Christ, Montag |
||||||
13 | TATTOOS....yea or nay?? | Bible general Archive 1 | Montag | 73752 | ||
i didn't realize that question was asked specifically to you EdB. i was just trying to give the question asker another viewpoint to consider. i am not advocating getting frivolous or meaningless tattoos, in fact, i'm not advocating getting tattoos at all. i'm just trying to say that the act of getting a tattoo is not, in and of itself, a sinful act. i know several Christians that have tattoos with deep spiritual significance attached to them. some are reminders to themselves, others are proclaimations of faith. in our society today (america), tattoos are also conversation starters. if someone sees you have a tattoo and notices that it is something unusual or unique many times they will ask you what your motivation was in getting the tattoo. it is a perfect opening to share your faith in Christ with them. i love paul's example of how he conducts himself so that more might be saved. 1 Cor. 9:19-22 (19. For though I am free from all men, I have made myself a slave to all, so that I may win more. 20. To the Jews I became as a Jew, so that I might win Jews; to those who are under the Law, as under the Law though not being myself under the Law, so that I might win those who are under the Law; 21. to those who are without law, as without law, though not being without the law of God but under the law of Christ, so that I might win those who are without law. 22. To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak; I have become all things to all men, so that I may by all means save some. 23. I do all things for the sake of the gospel, so that I may become a fellow partaker of it.) now i'm not saying that a person has to have tattoos in order to minister the grace of God to people that do have tattoos. i'm just saying God is not limited by our asthetic tastes. Grace be on you, Montag |
||||||
14 | TATTOOS....yea or nay?? | Bible general Archive 1 | Montag | 73613 | ||
I'm sorry but the graffiti argument doesn't hold much water. Many tattoos are not visible when a person has clothes on and some would argue that the OPINION that graffiti detracts from a building's apperance is really just a subjective thought. Pride issues, possibly. You must not agree with women who have earrings or people that color their hair when they start to get a bit grey around the edges either. Those are all examples of unnatural modifications to improve appearance as well. God also doesn't mince words in the verse right above in Lev. 19:27 "You shall not round off the side-growth of your heads nor harm the edges of your beard." I hope you don't shave or trim your beard EdB. Tattoos are not inherently evil. Of course, there ARE very inappropriate symbols and images that shouldn't be tattooed on a believer's body. But that's why Paul admonished Christians in Phil 2:12-13, "12. So then, my beloved, just as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, WORK OUT your salvation with fear and trembling; 13. for it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure." Continue striving towards Christ and you won't be led astray. God Bless, Montag |
||||||