Each according to his ability, to each according to his need

[sangha]

So with all the scripture that can be found in the Bible, this is the best response you can come up with to support your argument? You're kidding, right?

When you can find scripture that actually refutes my claim (instead of irrelevant quotes that you dishonestly claim are relevant), let me know.

In the meantime, only a wingnut like you would argue that "it is necessary to submit to the authorities" means "it is NOT necessary to submit to the authorities" because I only have one biblical quote.

I have proven my point, but I'll break it down for you so you can understand more clearly:

WHO HAS THE GREATER AUTHORITY: GOD, ... OR THE NATION'S (Roman's 13) AUTHORITY:

2 PETER 2: 9-10
... the Lord knows how to deliver the GODLY out of temptation and to reserve the UNJUST under punishment for the day of judgement, and especially those who walk according to the flesh in the lust of uncleanness and despise Authority. They are presumptuous, SELF-willed.

Authority refers to God's authority. This is explained under ANOTHER scripture: MATTHEW 28: 18 (see below)

PSALMS 24: 1
The earth is the Lord's and all it's fullness.

PSALMS 47: 2-3
For the Lord Most High is awesome; He is a great King OVER all the earth. He will subdue the peoples under us, and the NATIONS under our feet.

1 TIMOTHY 2:5
For there is one God and one Mediator between God and Man Christ Jesus.

MATTHEW 28:18
"And Jesus came and spoke to them saying, 'All authority has been given to Me in heaven and earth.'

MATTHEW 6:33
But seek FIRST the Kingdom of God and His Righteousness (notice who is first here, there is no mention of any nation)

ACTS 17: 24-26
'God who made the world and everything in it, since He is Lord of heaven and earth, does not dwell in temples made of hands. Nor is He worshipped with man's hands as though He needed anything, since He gives to all life, breath, and all things. And He has made from one blood EVERY NATION of men to dwell on all the face of the earth, and has determined their preappointed times and the boundaries of their dwellings'


The scriptures above point to God's authority being GREATER than ANY nation's authority.


1) Can YOU Sangha, show me in Biblical scripture where a "Nation's" authority is GREATER than obeying God's authority, and what God requires? (This will require more than just ROMANS 13)




What does God require (Obedience):

ROMANS 2: 8-12
"But for those who are self-seeking and do not obey the TRUTH, but obey unrighteousness --- indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish, on every soul of man who does evil, of the Jew first and also of the Greek; but glory, honor, and peace to everyone who works what is good, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. For there is no partiality with God. For as many as have sinned without law will also perish without law, and as many as have sinned in the law will be judged by the law."

LEVITICUS 11: 44
'For I am the Lord your God. You shall therefore consecrate yourselves, and you shall be holy for I am Holy.'

ROMANS 12: 2
And do not be conformed to THIS WORLD but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God

JAMES 4: 4
Whoever therefore wants to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God


These above scriptures points to obedience of God's "Authority", and what He REQUIRES, as being GREATER than obeying the nations of the world. Christians are not required by God to submit to worldly authority, where it CONFLICTS with what God requires.


__________________
1 CORINTHIANS 1: 20
Where is the wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the disputer of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?

Idiot christians don't understand that Romans 13 clearly states that the authorities are appointed by God and that God Himself said that the authorities are Gods' agents.

All you've done is prove that Gods' authority is greater than the govts' authority. Nothing you posted contradicts Romans 13 requirement that "it is necessary to submit to the authorities"

Let me know when you have a biblical quote that says "it is NOT necessary to submit to the authorities"

 

[Newby]

Idiot christians don't understand that Romans 13 clearly states that the authorities are appointed by God and that God Himself said that the authorities are Gods' agents.

All you've done is prove that Gods' authority is greater than the govts' authority. Nothing you posted contradicts Romans 13 requirement that "it is necessary to submit to the authorities"

Let me know when you have a biblical quote that says "it is NOT necessary to submit to the authorities"

I think it's you who does not understand it.

Romans Chapter 13 by Chuck Baldwin

 

[sangha]

Idiot christians don't understand that Romans 13 clearly states that the authorities are appointed by God and that God Himself said that the authorities are Gods' agents.

All you've done is prove that Gods' authority is greater than the govts' authority. Nothing you posted contradicts Romans 13 requirement that "it is necessary to submit to the authorities"

Let me know when you have a biblical quote that says "it is NOT necessary to submit to the authorities"

I think it's you who does not understand it.

Romans Chapter 13 by Chuck Baldwin

That was a perfect example of how christians lie about their own faith because they are too sinful to follow Gods Will.

Notice that civil government must not be a "terror to good works." It has no power or authority to terrorize good works or good people. God never gave it that authority. And any government that oversteps that divine boundary has no divine authority or protection.

Notice how the author lies and dishonestly claims that Romans13 says that "civil government must not be a 'terror to good works'"

Romans 13 does not say that. That's why the Baldwin, like you, can't actually quote Scripture that supports his claim. All Baldwin can do is dishonestly claim that Romans13 forbids civil authorities from being a terror to good works, even though Romans13 does not say that.

Here's what Roman 13 says about "terror to good works"

For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil

As anyone (who is honest) can see, there is nothing about prohiting the civil govt from being a terror to good works. Instead, we have a quote from God Himself saying that the authorities are not "terrors to good works". Like a typical christian hypocrit, you disagree with God

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

Idiot christians don't understand that Romans 13 clearly states that the authorities are appointed by God and that God Himself said that the authorities are Gods' agents.

All you've done is prove that Gods' authority is greater than the govts' authority. Nothing you posted contradicts Romans 13 requirement that "it is necessary to submit to the authorities"

Let me know when you have a biblical quote that says "it is NOT necessary to submit to the authorities"

I know you seemed confused, let's see if I can clarify things a little more for you, to help you understand.

A)First of all, do these "Nations of Authority" support laws that:
1) stand against the killing of unborn children?
2) allow prayer in schools?
3) allow the teaching of the Bible in schools?
4) Do these nations stand against sexual immorality, to include saying homosexuality is a sin (according to God's Word)?

I'll try and make this very simple for you, Sangha. If these nations of authority were truly "God's agents", there would no problems [no issues whatsoever] with them following after "God's laws", correct? Until they start OBEYING God's Word, they are not followers of God, but of the world. They are "WORKERS OF REBELLION" against God.

B)If Romans 13 was the most important thing Christians OUGHT to do, can you Sangha, explain to me WHY would Paul (in the same book) ALSO wrote the following verse:

ROMANS 12: 2
And do not be conformed to THIS WORLD but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God

Are not laws and culture a part of "THIS WORLD" that Paul writes?
Let's look us at the word "conform" itself to find the answer:
conform [v] : to comply with rules, standards or laws.
What Paul is stating here is that it's more important Christians obey God's laws, and what God requires, than the laws of men.



SANGHA, Until you can provide proof that it's more important to obey a Nation whos laws are REBELLIOUS against God's laws, OVER what God requires of Christians (holiness and separation from the things of the world), you're just "bloviating" and recycling scripture already proven to be misinterpreted. Judging by your past responses you really don't have a lot of knowledge of what the Bible actually says. You got to dig further into the Bible, there's no way around that (no more recycled shortcuts Sangha). ...... Oh and please use RESOURCE TOOLS like "scriptures", a dictionary, or Bible Concordance to back up your arguments, not just your "opinion".






C)REMEMBER what the Bible says with regard to following "MAN'S laws" OVER God:

First God requires holiness, and separation FROM the world. I may be taking it for granted that you know what these "terms" means. If you need clarification, I will be more than happy to explain it to you.

LEVITICUS 11: 44
'For I am the Lord your God. You shall therefore consecrate [separate] yourselves, and you shall be holy for I am Holy.'


What God says about following "the world", referring to it's laws and culture:

ROMANS 12: 1-2
I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that you present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, and acceptable to God which is your reasonable service. And do not be conformed to THIS WORLD but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God

JAMES 4: 4
Whoever therefore wants to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God



SANGHA From the scriptures above: the requirements of God (living holy and SEPARATE from the world) supersedes man's laws. You YOURSELF admitted God's Authority is greater!! ....UNLESS of course, you can provide OTHER "SCRIPTURES" that say it's more important to obey a nation's authority OVER what God requires. I seriously DOUBT it's possible.
I believe that's check-MATE there Sangha.

 

[sangha]

Idiot christians don't understand that Romans 13 clearly states that the authorities are appointed by God and that God Himself said that the authorities are Gods' agents.

All you've done is prove that Gods' authority is greater than the govts' authority. Nothing you posted contradicts Romans 13 requirement that "it is necessary to submit to the authorities"

Let me know when you have a biblical quote that says "it is NOT necessary to submit to the authorities"

I know you seemed confused, let's see if I can clarify things a little more for you, to help you understand.

A)First of all, do these "Nations of Authority" support laws that:
1) stand against the killing of unborn children?
2) allow prayer in schools?
3) allow the teaching of the Bible in schools?
4) Do these nations stand against sexual immorality, to include saying homosexuality is a sin (according to God's Word)?

Once again, you have to make up stuff. There are no "Nations of Authority". You just made that up.

I'll try and make this very simple for you, Sangha. If these nations of authority were truly "God's agents", there would no problems [no issues whatsoever] with them following after "God's laws", correct? Until they start OBEYING God's Word, they are not followers of God, but of the world. They are "WORKERS OF REBELLION" against God.

Once again, you have to make up stuff. That's why you have no biblical quotations to support your dishonest claim.

Let me know when you can find a biblical quotation where God says that He was Wrong to say "For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and you will be commended."

You are obviously terrified of the authorities, and God makes it clear why....You are one of "those do wrong". God is clear about this. It is the ONLY reason to fear the authorities ACCORDING TO GOD.

But I suppose you know better than God. Most christians seem to think they know better than God.

B)If Romans 13 was the most important thing Christians OUGHT to do, can you Sangha, explain to me WHY would Paul (in the same book) ALSO wrote the following verse:

ROMANS 12: 2
And do not be conformed to THIS WORLD but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God

Are not laws and culture a part of "THIS WORLD" that Paul writes?
Let's look us at the word "conform" itself to find the answer:
conform [v] : to comply with rules, standards or laws.
What Paul is stating here is that it's more important Christians obey God's laws, and what God requires, than the laws of men.

Yes, it is more important to obey God, but that does not refute Gods' Will as expressed in Romans. You keep implying that the authorities, appointed by God Himself, will not follow Gods' Will even though God Himself has said you have nothing to fear unless you are one of those who do wrong.

SANGHA, Until you can provide proof that it's more important to obey a Nation whos laws are REBELLIOUS against God's laws, OVER what God requires of Christians (holiness and separation from the things of the world), you're just "bloviating" and recycling scripture already proven to be misinterpreted.

There is no need to show this because the authorities are APPOINTED BY GOD. God Himself says that they are acting as His Agents.

And like most christians, you think you know better than God.

Judging by your past responses you really don't have a lot of knowledge of what the Bible actually says. You got to dig further into the Bible, there's no way around that (no more recycled shortcuts Sangha). ...... Oh and please use RESOURCE TOOLS like "scriptures", a dictionary, or Bible Concordance to back up your arguments, not just your "opinion".

Judging by your past responses, you think you have something to fear from the authorities even though God Himself said you do not. Obviously, you are just another christian who ignores Gods Will whenever it is convenient to do so.

Just like the christians who rape little children ignore Gods Will.

C)REMEMBER what the Bible says with regard to following "MAN'S laws" OVER God:

First God requires holiness, and separation FROM the world. I may be taking it for granted that you know what these "terms" means. If you need clarification, I will be more than happy to explain it to you.

LEVITICUS 11: 44
'For I am the Lord your God. You shall therefore consecrate [separate] yourselves, and you shall be holy for I am Holy.'


What God says about following "the world", referring to it's laws and culture:

ROMANS 12: 1-2
I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that you present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, and acceptable to God which is your reasonable service. And do not be conformed to THIS WORLD but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God

JAMES 4: 4
Whoever therefore wants to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God



SANGHA From the scriptures above: the requirements of God (living holy and SEPARATE from the world) supersedes man's laws. You YOURSELF admitted God's Authority is greater!! ....UNLESS of course, you can provide OTHER "SCRIPTURES" that say it's more important to obey a nation's authority OVER what God requires. I seriously DOUBT it's possible.
I believe that's check-MATE there Sangha.

[/quote]

Remember, none of that says that it is NOT required to submit to the authorities, who God Himself appointed to their positions, and who act according to Gods Will (maybe you'll give this a try someday, like a christian should)

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

Idiot christians don't understand that Romans 13 clearly states that the authorities are appointed by God and that God Himself said that the authorities are Gods' agents.

All you've done is prove that Gods' authority is greater than the govts' authority. Nothing you posted contradicts Romans 13 requirement that "it is necessary to submit to the authorities"

Let me know when you have a biblical quote that says "it is NOT necessary to submit to the authorities"

I know you seemed confused, let's see if I can clarify things a little more for you, to help you understand.

A)First of all, do these "Nations of Authority" support laws that:
1) stand against the killing of unborn children?
2) allow prayer in schools?
3) allow the teaching of the Bible in schools?
4) Do these nations stand against sexual immorality, to include saying homosexuality is a sin (according to God's Word)?

Once again, you have to make up stuff. There are no "Nations of Authority". You just made that up.



Once again, you have to make up stuff. That's why you have no biblical quotations to support your dishonest claim.

Let me know when you can find a biblical <snip> ... ( just more "unsupported" opinions. )

Sangha, Unfortunately, throughout your entire argument, you have been unable to provide me with any references ( or SOURCES ) for your statements. All that you have done was simply to ramble on about your unsupported "claims". Are you really having that much of a difficult time trying to find Biblical passages to support your argument? Is that why you are choosing to lash out at people on this thread, like a little "child" holding a temper tantrum? I can only lead you, Sangha, to the resources that you need, to search out what the scripture is ACTUALLY trying to say. I can suggest excellent tools for you to use ( bible "scriptures", a Concordance, or even the simple use of a dictionary ) to help you correctly interpret certain passages, but I can't do the work for you. At least make an effort to provide some resources behind your statements.

Let me demonstrate for you, Sangha, how you can properly use certain types of references to help you interpret and discover the true meaning behind any Biblical scripture:


What did Paul say about government Authority? :

ROMANS 12: 2
"And do not be conformed to THIS WORLD but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God."
Are not laws and culture a part of "THIS WORLD" that Paul writes?
Let's look us at the word "conform" itself to find the answer:
SOURCE: The New Oxford American Dictionary: conform [v] : to comply with rules, standards or laws.
What Paul is stating here is that Christians ought to be living holy lives according to God, and submit to those government "laws" which do. For it's more important for Christians to follow after what God requires, than what man's law ( the world ) demands. Why? Because man's laws and customs, like sexual immorality and murdering the unborn are REBELLIOUS against God. ( SOURCE: ROMANS 1: 22-32, and TIMOTHY 3: 2-5 )

TIMOTHY 3: 2-5
"For men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, unloving, unforgiving, slanderers, without self control, brutal, despisers of good, traitors, headstrong, haughty, lovers of pleasure, rather than lovers of God, having a form of godliness but denying it's power. And from such people turn away."

LEVITICUS 11: 44
"For I am the Lord your God. You shall therefore consecrate [separate] yourselves, and you shall be holy for I am Holy."

JAMES 4: 4
"Whoever therefore wants to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God"


As a result for a concern of government ( man's ) laws going against what God requires ( holiness, Godly living ), Paul writes in:

Romans 12: 2 ( with definition of the word "comfort" emphasized ):
"And do not be conformed to [do not - comply with rules, standards or the laws of] THIS WORLD but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God."



ROMANS 13: 1-7
[verse 1]"Let every soul be subject to governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and all the authorities that exist are appointed by God." He later adds

[verse 7]"Render therefore to all their due: taxes to whom taxes are due, customs to whom customs, fear to whom fear, honor to whom honor"

SOURCE: the Strong's Concordance of the Bible: Customs: is from the Greek word "telos". It means a tax, toll, tribute, particularly what is paid for public purposes for the maintenance of the state.

So when you look at ROMANS 13: 1-7, what Paul is making reference to is simply ( and only ) towards the "position" or seat of authority. Paul is calling christians to respect the person who sits from a "position" of authority. NO WHERE in Romans 13: 1-7 in that particular scripture passage does Paul make mention, or make any reference to, Christians MUST having complete submission to ALL of the nation's "laws" ( That subject of "laws" can be found in ROMANS 12 ). This particular passage SOLELY speaks about the "SEAT" of authority, and to respect the "position" from which that person represents.


[verse 2]"Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God"

Paul here is instructing Christians not to fight in "rebellion" against a person who sits from a power of authority. Paul says, we need to respect ( have reverence ) towards a person who attains that position, just as we would revere and respect God.


[verse 3] "For rulers are not terrors of good works, but to evil. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same."

Paul writes here that if we don't want retribution or intrusion into our lives; Christians must do what is good and Godly, and a good government will praise us ( rulers are not terrors towards those doing good works ). However, when we do what is good and a government persecutes us for it, then we must do our part to try and change that government from within the system .... ( signed petitions, demonstrations, voting, letting our voice be heard ). In short, Paul writes that christians must work WITHIN the government system by being godly and respectful, to our government leaders. Demonstrating as Christians, those "Christ-like" qualities towards those that are above us, and working towards a more Godly form of government..... not fight in rebellion ( doing evil ) against it.
SOURCE: The Book of Romans "Righteousness In Christ", Woodrow Kroll

Again, ROMANS 13 speaks of how Christians must respect the POSITION and the "SEAT" of someone that is in authority.

ROMANS 13: 1 - "Let every soul be subject to THE governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exists ( addressing only positions ) are appointed by God. Therefore whoever resists the authority ( person in position ) resists the ordinance of God." There is NO SCRIPTURE reference found in the passage of ROMANS 13 that addresses Christians ought to be in complete submission of all of a nation's governing "laws". Rather this chapter on government authority, is specifically used to refer to how Christians ought to treat those people who HOLD a certain "position" of authority.


Now Sangha, do you think that perhaps you can show me that YOU can provide "scripture" references, or other RESOURCES to support your position? I'm not interested in hearing another one of your "made-up" opinions, if you can only demonstrate to everyone here that you are incapable of backing up what you say.

 

[frazzledgear]

You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.' But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.
(Jesus, Matthew 5:38-39)

Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you.
(Jesus, Luke 6:27-28)

Put your sword back in its place...for all who draw the sword will die by the sword.
(Jesus, Matthew 26:52)

Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.
(Jesus, Matthew 5:9)

A soldier of the civil authority must be taught not to kill men and to refuse to do so if he is commanded, and to refuse to take an oath. If he is unwilling to comply, he must be rejected for baptism. A military commander or civic magistrate must resign or be rejected. If a believer seeks to become a soldier, he must be rejected, for he has despised God.
(Hippolytus of Rome)

..... have learned from His teaching and His laws that evil ought not to be requited with evil, that it is better to suffer wrong than to inflict it, that we should rather shed our own blood than stain our hands and our conscience with that of another .....
(Arnobius, Adversus Gentes I:VI)

The whole world is wet with mutual blood; and murder, which in the case of an individual is admitted to be a crime, is called a virtue when it is committed wholesale.
(Cyprian of Carthage)

Christian pacifism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

By accepting the words and life of Christ, most Christians refrained from engaging in military service and holding government office for any secular state that would place inevitably place them in a direct moral conflict of interest.

Despite centuries of religious persecution and martyrdom, there is no history of Christians actually taking up arms against Rome in their own defense.

Conventional modern wisdom would be that without armed resistance, Christianity would have allowed itself to be systematically destroyed over time - the reality is that by placing their faith in Christ and His teachings (The Beatitudes) and not the sword, Christianity actually prospered and flourished.

Where did Jesus ever proclaim Himself anti-war and a "pacifist"? Was it when he stood in front of the temple whipping and beating merchants for defiling His Father's house by selling sacrificial animals at the temple door instead of in the marketplace? You mean THAT kind of pacifism? Jesus was here to fulfill His mission -which wasn't to bring an end to war. He certainly wasn't a liberal who was stupid enough to believe that the absence of war was "peace" and He never once denounced the past wars -including the past wars carried out by those who were beloved by God either, did He? Nope, missed that one. Jesus never once said that followers had to help those intent on killing them by lying down so their killers are better able to cut their throats. Life is a precious gift from God and to treat it in a cavalier fashion either by abusing it or by refusing to protect and defend it from those who would take it from you -is a sin. An equally useless waste of your life -neither of which would EVER be valued by God whatsoever! Unlike another religion, followers do NOT believe the purpose of life is to hurry up and get it over with or that God values wasted lives or would value allowing anyone to take your life without fighting to protect and keep it! If you gave an extremely valuable gift to your child, would you really think "how wonderful" if you watched him passively stand aside to watch his friend destroy it? Are you insane? Wouldn't you expect him to appreciate its value and take care of it and protect it from his buddy who wants to smash it up? Gee, do you REALLY think Jesus was saying that is how little value God puts on the precious gift of YOUR life He gave you that you shouldn't defend and protect your own God-given gift of life?

Jesus didn't resist His own crucifixion because His SACRIFICE was a GIFT to the rest of us, opening the doors of salvation. The gift He willingly gave had THAT kind of value to Him! It was NOT a useless waste of His life thrown away to the first person who wanted to take His life! And He was NOT trying to show by example what He expected His followers to do! What a truly EVIL perversion! It was a unique ONE TIME ONLY event! He sacrificed His life for a VERY SPECIFIC REASON without which He would not have done so at all! His sacrifice made for a very specific reason and purpose, did NOT mean He expected followers to likewise sacrifice their own lives and refuse to protect or defend their life from then on and were now obligated to be meek cows led to the slaughter no matter who that butcher may be! What a bastardized, perverted view of His sacrifice to even suggest such a thing! And of course, there are those cherry picked verses that ARE cherry picked because they suit your own agenda.

By the way your very first verse about turning the cheek if someone strikes you on the cheek already proves my point. Do you really want to insist Jesus was talking about a a PHYSICAL threat or a LETHAL blow when it is clearly an INSULT He was discussing? If someone INSULTS you, Jesus said to turn the other cheek. In other words, ignore him and not respond in kind! It was NOT a commandment to bare your throat to someone intent on putting a KNIFE in it! Jesus clearly made a distinction between an INSULT and a blow to your ego - and a homicidal act that threatened your very existence! If He really meant it to apply to an act that threatened your life or limb instead of your ego -don't you think He would have chosen to use that homicidal act as the example in His words instead of an act that only bruised the ego? He didn't use an act that threatened life or limb because He was NOT saying you should not defend yourself from a physical attack! If He really was a pacifist - He would never have used an act that caused no real physical harm and only bruised the EGO, would He? Being slapped in the face is NOT an act of war or a threat to life or limb or nation. The worst injury is only to the ego and THAT is the kind of thing Jesus said to ignore -NOT an act that threatened your God-given gift of LIFE! Amazing how those intent on re-writing Jesus' real message do so because they hope to distort, pervert, bastardize all for their own agenda. NEVER for that of God's. Like billions of other Christians in the world -I reject your perverted interpretation as the perversion it truly is. Likewise the quote about the "peacemakers" is regarding when war is no longer necessary in defense of one's life and nation. Peacemakers can only exist on the side that wants to wage war for non-defensive reasons! Those who would urge those being attacked to submit and accept defeat are NOT peacemakers but allies of the enemy - because they would be urging them to submit, accept defeat and be conquered -which is NOT what this verse means! Most wars are WAGED for reasons of greed, to enslave another population or to lay claim to more territory -the peacemakers are NOT those trying to persuade people not to defend themselves from a war being waged against them for these reasons -but those who persuade others not to wage war on others for reasons of aggression. And if you realize that peace is NOT the mere absence of war and means MUCH, MUCH more than that pathetic definition -you'd be able to grasp the difference between true peace and the false definition so often held out by liberals. But I expect that is over your head.

As for your quote from Hippolytus and these other people -are you for real? I'm supposed to pretend his words and opinion on this which is NO part of the Bible whatsoever, somehow obligates me to share those OPINIONS? I have news for you -there are a whole slew of theologians who disagree on Biblical doctrine -and a whole slew whose OPINIONS on it also were NEVER incorporated into the Bible either. For a reason. His OPINIONS were never believed to have EVER been divinely inspired! Just like the work of nearly every single theologian to have ever existed was never believed to have been divinely inspired either and were also not incorporated into the Bible! The fact theologians exist doesn't place any additional obligations on anyone to accept ANY part of their work or even accept the underlying premises they operate from. Get real. If I drag out the work of MANY, MANY more theologians who vigorously disagree with these few verses you picked from these guys, does that really prove anything to you either? Joan of Arc sure didn't buy into that interpretation, did she? Gee, wouldn't Jesus DAMN her for failing to be a COW and wouldn't other Christians have likewise held her up as despised by Jesus for choosing to defend herself? The last person I would seek advice on interpreting the Bible and the very tenets of my religion -is never going to be an atheist so I don't understand why the atheists on this this threat are SO intent on insisting and pretending THEY are the superior interpreter at all. ROFL

 

[sangha]

Sangha, Unfortunately, throughout your entire argument, you have been unable to provide me with any references ( or SOURCES ) for your statements. All that you have done was simply to ramble on about your unsupported "claims"

Why do you lie and pretend that Romans 13 does not say "it is necessary to submit to the authorities"?

 

[sangha]

Where did Jesus ever proclaim Himself anti-war and a "pacifist"? Was it when he stood in front of the temple whipping and beating merchants for defiling His Father's house by selling sacrificial animals at the temple door instead of in the marketplace? You mean THAT kind of pacifism?

Christians will go to any length, and tell any lie, to justify their bloodthirst. This moron thinks that Jesus whipped and beat the money changers in the temple.

All Jesus did was turn their tables over.

 

[Big Fitz]

Where did Jesus ever proclaim Himself anti-war and a "pacifist"? Was it when he stood in front of the temple whipping and beating merchants for defiling His Father's house by selling sacrificial animals at the temple door instead of in the marketplace? You mean THAT kind of pacifism?

Christians will go to any length, and tell any lie, to justify their bloodthirst. This moron thinks that Jesus whipped and beat the money changers in the temple.

All Jesus did was turn their tables over.

Oh joy, o rapture! The gospel according to Sane?Nah! Bow low and worship him.

 

[sangha]

Where did Jesus ever proclaim Himself anti-war and a "pacifist"? Was it when he stood in front of the temple whipping and beating merchants for defiling His Father's house by selling sacrificial animals at the temple door instead of in the marketplace? You mean THAT kind of pacifism?

Christians will go to any length, and tell any lie, to justify their bloodthirst. This moron thinks that Jesus whipped and beat the money changers in the temple.

All Jesus did was turn their tables over.

Oh joy, o rapture! The gospel according to Sane?Nah! Bow low and worship him.

Actually, it's The Gospel according to Mathew

Matthew 21:12 (New International Version, ©2010)

Jesus at the Temple
12 Jesus entered the temple courts and drove out all who were buying and selling there. He overturned the tables of the money changers and the benches of those selling doves.

 

[Samson]

Actually, it's The Gospel according to Mathew

Matthew 21:12 (New International Version, ©2010)

Jesus at the Temple
12 Jesus entered the temple courts and drove out all who were buying and selling there. He overturned the tables of the money changers and the benches of those selling doves.

You misspelled "Matthew"

 

[sangha]

Wow! A typo!! Congratulation!!

Major pwnage for Samson!!

 

[Samson]

Wow! A typo!! Congratulation!!

Major pwnage for Samson!!

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

Sangha, Unfortunately, throughout your entire argument, you have been unable to provide me with any references ( or SOURCES ) for your statements. All that you have done was simply to ramble on about your unsupported "claims"

Why do you lie and pretend that Romans 13 does not say "it is necessary to submit to the authorities"?

SHOW ME where I am lying, by pointing to the specific verse you are referring to. As I have already PROVEN, ROMANS 13 is talking about "respecting" the person who holds a POSITION of authority. Point to the scripture VERSE (they are identified by little numbers following the chapter, which proceeds each Bible verse) under ROMANS 13, that says it's NOT about "respecting" the one who sits in the POSITION of authority, but Christians are specifically instructed they must submit to its "laws". If you can't provide the specific scripture verse you are referring to, then all you've been doing ( up to this moment ) was simply inserting your OWN "made up opinion" and you have no argument. So far you haven't "proven" to me anything by your argument. Please save yourself the humiliation of claiming you "know" what the Bible says, if you are unable to include specific scriptures to support your statements.


Let's see if you can do something more than simply look to your usual "cop-out" saying of:

Why do you lie and pretend that Romans 13 does not say "it is necessary to submit to the authorities"?

By the way, the word "submit" is not the proper translation of the Greek word "hupotasso", SUBMIT just does not exist in this scripture. When you look at the translation, it means to respectfully subject oneself to the "POSITION" of one who sits in authority.
SOURCE: The Complete Word Study of the New Testament, by Spiros Zodhiates Th.D

 

[Big Fitz]

Christians will go to any length, and tell any lie, to justify their bloodthirst. This moron thinks that Jesus whipped and beat the money changers in the temple.

All Jesus did was turn their tables over.

Oh joy, o rapture! The gospel according to Sane?Nah! Bow low and worship him.

Actually, it's The Gospel according to Mathew

Matthew 21:12 (New International Version, ©2010)

Jesus at the Temple
12 Jesus entered the temple courts and drove out all who were buying and selling there. He overturned the tables of the money changers and the benches of those selling doves.

You're not Matthew. You're a loon.

 

[sangha]

Sangha, Unfortunately, throughout your entire argument, you have been unable to provide me with any references ( or SOURCES ) for your statements. All that you have done was simply to ramble on about your unsupported "claims"

Why do you lie and pretend that Romans 13 does not say "it is necessary to submit to the authorities"?

SHOW ME where I am lying, by pointing to the specific verse you are referring to. As I have already PROVEN, ROMANS 13 is talking about "respecting" the person who holds a POSITION of authority. Point to the scripture VERSE (they are identified by little numbers following the chapter, which proceeds each Bible verse) under ROMANS 13, that says it's NOT about "respecting" the one who sits in the POSITION of authority, but Christians are specifically instructed they must submit to its "laws". If you can't provide the specific scripture verse you are referring to, then all you've been doing ( up to this moment ) was simply inserting your OWN "made up opinion" and you have no argument. So far you haven't "proven" to me anything by your argument. Please save yourself the humiliation of claiming you "know" what the Bible says, if you are unable to include specific scriptures to support your statements.


Let's see if you can do something more than simply look to your usual "cop-out" saying of:

Why do you lie and pretend that Romans 13 does not say "it is necessary to submit to the authorities"?

By the way, the word "submit" is not the proper translation of the Greek word "hupotasso", SUBMIT just does not exist in this scripture. When you look at the translation, it means to respectfully subject oneself to the "POSITION" of one who sits in authority.
SOURCE: The Complete Word Study of the New Testament, by Spiros Zodhiates Th.D

I have already posted the excerpt from Romans 13 that you are requesting, and every version of the Bible but one uses the word "submit". You are cherry picking.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

Why do you lie and pretend that Romans 13 does not say "it is necessary to submit to the authorities"?

SHOW ME where I am lying, by pointing to the specific verse you are referring to. As I have already PROVEN, ROMANS 13 is talking about "respecting" the person who holds a POSITION of authority. Point to the scripture VERSE (they are identified by little numbers following the chapter, which proceeds each Bible verse) under ROMANS 13, that says it's NOT about "respecting" the one who sits in the POSITION of authority, but Christians are specifically instructed they must submit to its "laws". If you can't provide the specific scripture verse you are referring to, then all you've been doing ( up to this moment ) was simply inserting your OWN "made up opinion" and you have no argument. So far you haven't "proven" to me anything by your argument. Please save yourself the humiliation of claiming you "know" what the Bible says, if you are unable to include specific scriptures to support your statements.


Let's see if you can do something more than simply look to your usual "cop-out" saying of:

Why do you lie and pretend that Romans 13 does not say "it is necessary to submit to the authorities"?

By the way, the word "submit" is not the proper translation of the Greek word "hupotasso", SUBMIT just does not exist in this scripture. When you look at the translation, it means to respectfully subject oneself to the "POSITION" of one who sits in authority.
SOURCE: The Complete Word Study of the New Testament, by Spiros Zodhiates Th.D

I have already posted the excerpt from Romans 13 that you are requesting, and every version of the Bible but one uses the word "submit". You are cherry picking.

So you STILL can't SHOW ME where I am lying.
I have already reviewed my posts, and No you didn't back up your point with other Biblical scripture references
( as I requested. ) If you had, your response would have looked like this:

Let me know when you can find a biblical quotation where God says that He was Wrong to say "For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and you will be commended."

ROMANS 13 [verse 3] "For rulers are not terrors of good works, but to evil. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same."

Paul writes here that if we don't want retribution or intrusion into our lives; Christians must do what is good and Godly, and a good government will praise us ( rulers are not terrors towards those doing good works ). However, when we do what is good and a government persecutes us for it, then we must do our part to try and change that government from within the system .... ( signed petitions, demonstrations, voting, letting our voice be heard ). In short, Paul writes that christians must work WITHIN the government system by being godly and respectful, to our government leaders. Demonstrating as Christians, those "Christ-like" qualities towards those that are above us, and working towards a more Godly form of government..... not fight in rebellion ( doing evil ) against it.
SOURCE: The Book of Romans "Righteousness In Christ", Woodrow Kroll

Again, ROMANS 13 speaks of how Christians must respect the POSITION and the "SEAT" of someone that is in authority.

So as anyone who looks back on this thread can see, and to use your own words: ... YOU LIED !!!




Also, take some time to look at this [LINK] about Romans 13 ( to which I am still waiting for YOUR "scripture supported response" that I'm requesting -- as you say. However, I'll try not to hold my breath on THAT one )
But seriously, I HAD actually expected this kind of reply from you. You simply have chosen to stop responding to my statements with a reply that was supported ( backed up ) with other scriptures, or ANY Biblical study references for that matter. I have already explained, using "REFERENCES", what Chapter 13 actually says. You on the other hand, are struggling very hard to do the same. Perhaps you need to look to another subject to which you are actually MORE FAMILIAR with, as you look like you're very "out of your element" here. I've tried to show you how to research scripture properly, you've simply chosen thus far to ignore it.




Cherry Picking? Again, you've just shown me your lack of knowledge in studying the Bible.

With regards to YOUR word "submit", which actually doesn't exist ... but it's the word subject, that's taking a Word and looking to the ORIGINAL intent of the Bible. There is a BIG difference between the original Greek or Hebrew meaning .... and the later "re-written" paraphrased interpretation of the Bible ( see Romans 13 through the "paraphrased" NIV or NLT versions ... VERSES ... Romans 13 in the "original English" KJ version sometime, for an example ) . ANYONE who studies the Bible KNOWS the New Testament was written in Greek. These are VERY BASIC study skills you need to know before you can CONVINCE ANYONE you actually know what the Bible says. This is why a Concordance to understand the original Greek "root" word, is absolutely NECESSARY, because the New Testament was written in Greek not English. Did you know that Sangha? Look at my "link" above, I gave an example on how you can PROPERLY study the Bible. I hope this helps you, the next time you feel the need to try and quote scripture.

 

[sangha]

There is a BIG difference between the original Greek or Hebrew meaning .... and the later "re-written" paraphrased interpretation of the Bible ( see Romans 13 through the "paraphrased" NIV or NLT versions ... VERSES ... Romans 13 in the "original English" KJ version sometime, for an example ) .

Christian wingnuts are so dumb, they think the Bible was originally written in English

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

There is a BIG difference between the original Greek or Hebrew meaning .... and the later "re-written" paraphrased interpretation of the Bible ( see Romans 13 through the "paraphrased" NIV or NLT versions ... VERSES ... Romans 13 in the "original English" KJ version sometime, for an example ) .

Christian wingnuts are so dumb, they think the Bible was originally written in English

Sangha, No one ever told you the KJ was the First English translated version of the Bible? You really DO need Bible Basics don't you?


Is this the best you can do, because of your failure to respond to my requests in my previous post?


Now, let's see if you can follow this biblical instruction, if you need me to go slower .... let me know. The King James was the first translation of the Bible to be written in "english". Then other "rewritten and paraphrased" versions that were created includes the NIV (which means; "New International Version"), NLT (which means; "New Living Translation"), and the NASB (which breaks down to mean: "New American Standard Bible"). You CAN follow this, can't you sangha?

Also, just in case you can't read I said:

There is a BIG difference between the original Greek or Hebrew meaning .... and the later "re-written" paraphrased interpretation of the Bible ( see Romans 13 through the "paraphrased" NIV or NLT versions ... VERSES ... Romans 13 in the "original English" KJ version sometime, for an example ) . ANYONE who studies the Bible KNOWS the New Testament was written in Greek. These are VERY BASIC study skills you need to know before you can CONVINCE ANYONE you actually know what the Bible says.

Now Sangha, let's see if you can go PAST your simple mindedness, and answer my requests under my previous post.