Zone1 Are Christians Expected to Follow The Government?
- Thread starter Road Runner
- Start date
- Thread starter
- #22
buttercup
Diamond Member
- Apr 9, 2010
- 12,107
- 9,238
- 2,220
Yes, unless their commands clearly contradict God's commands. In that case, Christians should obey GOD, not man. Acts 5:29 is just one scripture that backs that up, but there are others. God is the true and highest authority.
I think a lot of people (nonbelievers and some Christians) misunderstand that Romans 13 verse that is usually brought up when this topic comes up.
But Peter and the apostles answered, “We must obey God rather than men.” - Acts 5:29
I think a lot of people (nonbelievers and some Christians) misunderstand that Romans 13 verse that is usually brought up when this topic comes up.
- Thread starter
- #24
buttercup
Diamond Member
- Apr 9, 2010
- 12,107
- 9,238
- 2,220
Well that shouldn't be too surprising because the bible also says that this world is temporarily being run by the enemy of God, i.e the "god of this world".... notice the lowercase l. (2 Cor 4:4, Eph 2:2, John 12:31, etc.) That's why there are so many upside-down ideas and bad laws. Not to mention corruption, deception, evil, wars based on lies, etc.
I do think you need to be careful to not think in a naive or simplistic way. The people who run this world are very deceptive, so they WANT you to believe that there's an evil party and a "good" party. I don't want to get off topic, but I believe the corrupt powers of this world control both "sides" .... it's really just two wings of the same bird. But you know, I've been saying that so much recently, to the point of getting tired of hearing myself say that, lol. And it's off topic anyway, but I wanted to reply to what you just said.
- Thread starter
- #26
With all due respect, there's a party who's against murder, rape, and a party that isn't.
buttercup
Diamond Member
- Apr 9, 2010
- 12,107
- 9,238
- 2,220
I don't know even know where to begin with this. You have to be either sincerely ignorant or extremely naive to not know that it wasn't only Ds, but also Rs who started wars overseas based on lies, that resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent people. The war in Iraq, for example, but that's just one example. The corruption exists on both sides of the aisle, going waaaay back. Also, I just mentioned the other day on a thread that the pedo problem is not just a D thing, it's a people in high places thing, which includes Rs. If you don't believe me, watch the documentary "Conspiracy of Silence" from 1994, about the Franklin Scandal. You can find it on YouTube. As for abortion, the Rs might pay lip service to that issue, but if you really believe they are all truly pro-life, you're more naive than I thought. They usually don't do much to end abortion, they just say the right things.
Don't get me wrong. I agree with you that the Dems are horrible and promote evil, twisted things like transgenderism, LGBTQ, etc. But my point (which I don't think you got) was that the temporary ruler of this world is the enemy of God, and the enemy is very deceptive. The enemy wants you to believe in false dichotomies, and you're doing just that by having that simplistic "white hat vs black hat" mentality, and continuing to cheerlead for frauds and puppets.
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #28
How is 911 based on a lie though? As Americans might have started the war but it was provoked by Iraq.
Okay, I will and give you the benefit of the doubt when I get a chance to.
What more can we do that hasn't been done already when it comes to abortion?
kjw47
Gold Member
The bible teaches--pay Caesers things to Caeser=taxes it was talking about.
Show respect to those in authority. Do not break their laws( if not in contradiction to Gods laws and statutes) then they will have no reason to jail one( but they still do in certain countries)--That is all.
God allows Govts because they do some good and their wont be anarchy--But the bible is clear they all stand in opposition to Gods king.
whutTHEYsay
Gold Member
- Jul 9, 2014
- 28,256
- 6,106
- 245
000 30 acetftgz …~… Are Christians Expected to Follow The Government? That is the question. Christians like everybody else are expected to follow the law and verdict of the courts nothing more nothing less. The Christians that follow Donald Trump have convinced themselves that they do not have to follow them all or the courts
InstantOn said:,,We don't have a state religion.
whut I say acetftzg00030 …~… We have state religions in every state that currently bans abortion and voted for Project 2025 to be installed by a Republican Congress and an oligarch controlled Republican President. We will have it permanently if the Republican Party succeeds.in doing what it failed to do on January 6, 2021.
surada timdtrtp02302 …~… George Washington predicted Donald Trump: Why doesn't everyone know this? (msn.com)
Excerpt: George Washington, warned us about the rise of Donald Trump. No, he didn't know the man's name, of course — he wasn't a time traveler or a clairvoyant — but he described Trump's personality and actions..
George Washington, warned us about the rise of Donald Trump.
No, he didn't know the man's name, of course — he wasn't a time traveler or a clairvoyant — but he described Trump's personality and actions in detail. Washington was president as the United States prepared to hold its first contested presidential election — he was elected twice without opposition — and wanted to make sure it would run smoothly. More than that, he wanted to make sure all future elections ran smoothly. So in his famous Farewell Address, he outlined what an enemy of this democratic process might look like. The speech was published during the 1796 election between John Adams and Thomas Jefferson, the two great rivals of early American politics.
The most relevant section of the document (most of which reads as fairly antiquated today) is pretty much a giant spoiler alert for everything Trump did to undermine the results of the 2020 election, an effort that began long before a single ballot had been cast. When you get right down to it, one of the likeliest ways for American democracy to reach its breaking point would be if a presidential candidate refused to accept the will of the people. More than two centuries before that happened, Washington foresaw exactly how it would go down.
Although the ideas were entirely Washington's the address was largely written by Alexander Hamilton. At one point, the man on the one dollar bill warns that partisanship could lead to the rise of a dictator. Decrying the "baneful effects of the spirit of party generally," he argued that if partisanship reaches a fever pitch, it could "gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual."
Washington also warned that hyper-partisanship "opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which finds a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions." He was worried that these factors could facilitate the rise of "cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men" who would manipulate partisan anger to "subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion."
Does any of that sound familiar? Trump has close and somewhat mysterious ties to Vladimir Putin's government, and former special counsel Robert Mueller's report demonstrated that his campaign worked with individuals connected to Russia during the 2016 presidential election. When Trump abused his power in an effort to pressure Ukraine into opening an investigation into Joe Biden, Senate Republicans — intimidated by a voter base that, intoxicated by "the baneful effects of the spirit of party," had come to value defeating Democrats over everything else — rigged his impeachment trial so that partisanship would prevail over justice.
Then Republicans did it again when, after years of conditioning his supporters to believe that any election he loses has been stolen, he became the first defeated president to refuse to accept his loss — and led an insurrection attempt as a result. (After John Tyler, who sided with the Confederacy during the Civil War, Trump became the second president to indisputably betray the Constitution.) Now Republicans have allowed Trump to transform the party in his image, not caring that he put many of their own lives in danger. They are using a Big Lie to erode democracy.
And what did Washington think the climax of all of this hyper-partisanship — as manifested in the above "hypothetical" examples — would be?
The disorders and miseries which result gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of public liberty.
Trump is, to a T, what the Father of His Country predicted. Opponents of Trump, Trumpers and Trumpism need to bring this up waaaaaaay more often.
For what it's worth, I was tempted to bring up two other relevant sections of Washington's Farewell Address. One, which pertains to foreign policy, prophesied the rise of American imperialism and is interesting for that reason, but isn't directly relevant here. The other, which denounces "all obstructions to the execution of the laws, all combinations and associations, under whatever plausible character with the real design to direct, control, counteract, or awe the regular deliberation and action of the constituted authorities," I simply don't support. True, that suggests Washington would clearly have disapproved of the Jan. 6 rioters and their defenders, but not necessarily for the right reason. The problem with the Capitol attack, at its core, is that it was a battle for a baseless and unjust cause. If the rioters had been fighting for human rights rather than fascism — like the civil rights protests of the 1960s, or at least a cause better than shared omnipotence with a malignant narcissist — their actions might have been theoretically defensible.
In any case, those who fight for democracy today should embrace Washington's Farewell Address. We don't need to pretend that Washington was an impeccable and virtuous hero, or look past his numerous flaws. But he wasn't wrong about democracy. His greatest achievement was not defeating the British in the Revolutionary War. It was leaving office in 1797 and handing the reins to Adams, his elected successor — establishing a precedent that Adams knew he had to follow four years later, when he lost his rematch with Jefferson in the bitterly contested election of 1800. It was the precedent that every president followed until Trump lost to Biden in 2020. Washington showed that democratic government could function, for the first time in modern history, because the nation's leaders would respect the will of the people.
I once attended a reenactment of Adams' inauguration as part of my journey covering Barack Obama's second inauguration for Mic (then PolicyMic) in 2013. When the tour guide read from a contemporary account describing the tension in the room as people wondered whether Washington's troops would arrest Adams so the first president could stay in power, it felt like a bizarre account from ancient history. Only eight years later, the very people who would claim to venerate Washington's footsteps have made that 1797 report seem like this week's headlines.
Washington stepping down from power was the first thing that made America great. If Republicans really want to Make America Great Again, they need to heed Washington's message — and dump the "cunning, ambitious and unprincipled man" on whose behalf they seem willing to destroy democracy. Post Jun 14, 2021
xxx
InstantOn said:,,We don't have a state religion.
whut I say acetftzg00030 …~… We have state religions in every state that currently bans abortion and voted for Project 2025 to be installed by a Republican Congress and an oligarch controlled Republican President. We will have it permanently if the Republican Party succeeds.in doing what it failed to do on January 6, 2021.
surada timdtrtp02302 …~… George Washington predicted Donald Trump: Why doesn't everyone know this? (msn.com)
Excerpt: George Washington, warned us about the rise of Donald Trump. No, he didn't know the man's name, of course — he wasn't a time traveler or a clairvoyant — but he described Trump's personality and actions..
George Washington, warned us about the rise of Donald Trump.
No, he didn't know the man's name, of course — he wasn't a time traveler or a clairvoyant — but he described Trump's personality and actions in detail. Washington was president as the United States prepared to hold its first contested presidential election — he was elected twice without opposition — and wanted to make sure it would run smoothly. More than that, he wanted to make sure all future elections ran smoothly. So in his famous Farewell Address, he outlined what an enemy of this democratic process might look like. The speech was published during the 1796 election between John Adams and Thomas Jefferson, the two great rivals of early American politics.
The most relevant section of the document (most of which reads as fairly antiquated today) is pretty much a giant spoiler alert for everything Trump did to undermine the results of the 2020 election, an effort that began long before a single ballot had been cast. When you get right down to it, one of the likeliest ways for American democracy to reach its breaking point would be if a presidential candidate refused to accept the will of the people. More than two centuries before that happened, Washington foresaw exactly how it would go down.
Although the ideas were entirely Washington's the address was largely written by Alexander Hamilton. At one point, the man on the one dollar bill warns that partisanship could lead to the rise of a dictator. Decrying the "baneful effects of the spirit of party generally," he argued that if partisanship reaches a fever pitch, it could "gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual."
Washington also warned that hyper-partisanship "opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which finds a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions." He was worried that these factors could facilitate the rise of "cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men" who would manipulate partisan anger to "subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion."
Does any of that sound familiar? Trump has close and somewhat mysterious ties to Vladimir Putin's government, and former special counsel Robert Mueller's report demonstrated that his campaign worked with individuals connected to Russia during the 2016 presidential election. When Trump abused his power in an effort to pressure Ukraine into opening an investigation into Joe Biden, Senate Republicans — intimidated by a voter base that, intoxicated by "the baneful effects of the spirit of party," had come to value defeating Democrats over everything else — rigged his impeachment trial so that partisanship would prevail over justice.
Then Republicans did it again when, after years of conditioning his supporters to believe that any election he loses has been stolen, he became the first defeated president to refuse to accept his loss — and led an insurrection attempt as a result. (After John Tyler, who sided with the Confederacy during the Civil War, Trump became the second president to indisputably betray the Constitution.) Now Republicans have allowed Trump to transform the party in his image, not caring that he put many of their own lives in danger. They are using a Big Lie to erode democracy.
And what did Washington think the climax of all of this hyper-partisanship — as manifested in the above "hypothetical" examples — would be?
The disorders and miseries which result gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of public liberty.
Trump is, to a T, what the Father of His Country predicted. Opponents of Trump, Trumpers and Trumpism need to bring this up waaaaaaay more often.
For what it's worth, I was tempted to bring up two other relevant sections of Washington's Farewell Address. One, which pertains to foreign policy, prophesied the rise of American imperialism and is interesting for that reason, but isn't directly relevant here. The other, which denounces "all obstructions to the execution of the laws, all combinations and associations, under whatever plausible character with the real design to direct, control, counteract, or awe the regular deliberation and action of the constituted authorities," I simply don't support. True, that suggests Washington would clearly have disapproved of the Jan. 6 rioters and their defenders, but not necessarily for the right reason. The problem with the Capitol attack, at its core, is that it was a battle for a baseless and unjust cause. If the rioters had been fighting for human rights rather than fascism — like the civil rights protests of the 1960s, or at least a cause better than shared omnipotence with a malignant narcissist — their actions might have been theoretically defensible.
In any case, those who fight for democracy today should embrace Washington's Farewell Address. We don't need to pretend that Washington was an impeccable and virtuous hero, or look past his numerous flaws. But he wasn't wrong about democracy. His greatest achievement was not defeating the British in the Revolutionary War. It was leaving office in 1797 and handing the reins to Adams, his elected successor — establishing a precedent that Adams knew he had to follow four years later, when he lost his rematch with Jefferson in the bitterly contested election of 1800. It was the precedent that every president followed until Trump lost to Biden in 2020. Washington showed that democratic government could function, for the first time in modern history, because the nation's leaders would respect the will of the people.
I once attended a reenactment of Adams' inauguration as part of my journey covering Barack Obama's second inauguration for Mic (then PolicyMic) in 2013. When the tour guide read from a contemporary account describing the tension in the room as people wondered whether Washington's troops would arrest Adams so the first president could stay in power, it felt like a bizarre account from ancient history. Only eight years later, the very people who would claim to venerate Washington's footsteps have made that 1797 report seem like this week's headlines.
Washington stepping down from power was the first thing that made America great. If Republicans really want to Make America Great Again, they need to heed Washington's message — and dump the "cunning, ambitious and unprincipled man" on whose behalf they seem willing to destroy democracy. Post Jun 14, 2021
xxx
Last edited:
- Apr 11, 2023
- 43,370
- 21,160
- 2,488
Jesus is said to have said give to the government belongs to it, so recorded within fifty to seventy years after his death.
So, yes, a Christian should follow the government and tell it when s/he thinks it is wrong.
So, yes, a Christian should follow the government and tell it when s/he thinks it is wrong.
whutTHEYsay
Gold Member
- Jul 9, 2014
- 28,256
- 6,106
- 245
White Republican Christians think the government is wrong to protect minorities that obey the secular laws that we all are expected to comply with. Women who become pregnant are a minority that is oppressed in red states by white Republican Christian politicians.
Last edited:
Z99
Platinum Member
- Aug 30, 2024
- 659
- 527
- 888
Verse?
Z99
Platinum Member
- Aug 30, 2024
- 659
- 527
- 888
Sure it did.
kjw47
Gold Member
Th
1Cor 6:9-11 mentions that men who lie with men will not inherit Gods kingdom amongst many other unacceptable sins. Galations 5:19-21 is another list it says will not inherit Gods kingdom. Paul mentioned spiritism there. The Greek word= pharmacia, thus drug addiction is apart of spiritism. So along with those 2 lists and all the false god worship on Earth=99% minimum will not inherit Gods kingdom. Yet the blind guides tell many of those-you are saved, give me a tithe.
ere is no literal place of eternal suffering, its symbolic. There is no life in death.
1Cor 6:9-11 mentions that men who lie with men will not inherit Gods kingdom amongst many other unacceptable sins. Galations 5:19-21 is another list it says will not inherit Gods kingdom. Paul mentioned spiritism there. The Greek word= pharmacia, thus drug addiction is apart of spiritism. So along with those 2 lists and all the false god worship on Earth=99% minimum will not inherit Gods kingdom. Yet the blind guides tell many of those-you are saved, give me a tithe.
Z99
Platinum Member
- Aug 30, 2024
- 659
- 527
- 888
What about...
Romans 11:32
English Standard Version
32 For God has consigned all to disobedience, that he may have mercy on all.
So will God have mercy on all?
kjw47
Gold Member
- Apr 11, 2023
- 43,370
- 21,160
- 2,488
None of you understand scripture or have Christ in you heart.
Repent.
Repent.
Last edited:
Z99
Platinum Member
- Aug 30, 2024
- 659
- 527
- 888
They are sent to the Lake of Fire, but they don't remain there forever. Otherwise, God would NOT be providing mercy to ALL.
- Apr 11, 2023
- 43,370
- 21,160
- 2,488
Similar threads
New Topics
-
No More Tariffs? Rand Paul allegedly has the votes to stop them.- Started by TemplarKormac
- Replies: 0
-
-
-
Democrat Dick Durbin goes all out to bring down Trump nominee
- Started by lennypartiv
- Replies: 2
-
Latest Discussions
-
-
-
-
So, it's nine days until the benchmark "1st hundred days" for trump- Latest: Cellblock2429
