Having A Right To Carry Does Not Make You A LEO - Page 13
Page 13 of 17 FirstFirst ... 31112131415 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 130 of 169

Thread: Having A Right To Carry Does Not Make You A LEO

  1. #121
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Republic of Dead Cell Holler, Occupied Territories of AL, former USA
    Posts
    7,419
    Quote Originally Posted by Treo View Post
    Teachings | Rocky Mountain Calvary (2009 Jul 19 (Sun) - Romans 13:1 - 13:14 - Eric Cartier)

    If you are interested here is a link to a teaching on Romans 13 from Rocky Mountain Calvary (my home church)
    Thanks, but my questions don't derive from a lack of available analysis on your (or your pastor's) understanding of Romans 13. That said, even your pastor acknowledges that the passage has its limitations. I think you alluded to it earlier, but in short, if authorities directives go against God, we are to obey God and not the authorities. If this government can't legitimately be tagged as one that has abandoned God, then I have to question the ability to understand what the Bible says of anyone who would assert such. We're approaching 60 million murdered babies since Roe was decided in '73. Every day we see another example of government trying to subvert our freedom to worship to its scrutiny and authority. Our pre-teen girls can get abortions without parental consent, or in some cases without even notification. This government runs on lies, treachery and debauchery. Satan is the prince of this world, and secular government serves him! How can Satan's work be *of* God? It is our duty to resist it as a manifestation of obeying God, not as a violation of Romans 13!

    As near as I can tell, your pastor is reading from the New International Version of the Bible. Where it refers to rebelling against the authorities, it says that those who do so, "...will bring judgment on themselves." Well, duh, everything we do will bring judgement upon each and every one of us, whether the action be judged righteous or sinful and unrepentant.

    The King James Version says it differently though. First, it uses the words "higher powers" and "power" where the NIV uses "governing authorities" and "authorities," and 13:2 says, "2 Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation."

    Damnation seems a bit more severe to me than judgment. Damnation means that anyone who resists the power referred to there is going to Hell, period. "Power" seems much more "of" God than does "governing authority" to me. "Governing" appears to be talking about civil governance, while "resisteth the ordinance of God" seems to be the power that we are not to resist lest we be damned to Hell.

    I am not saying I "like" the KJV more than I "like" the NIV. They may both be mangled by human interpretation to one degree or another. My point is that I am not convinced that Romans 13 is referencing civil authority at all. There is no "loophole" to escape the damnation of resisting the authority that your pastor cited out of the NIV. That would mean that smuggling Bibles into India or China or North Korea would damn a Bible-believing Christian to Hell for violating the civil law that forbids proselytizing or any type of religious writings in those countries. That means that protesting at abortion clinics is a sin against God. You "resisteth" and you go to Hell, period.

    I'm not positive what the root of the problem is here. It could be something lost in the translations between the original, God-guided manuscripts and subsequent, man-interpreted versions of the Bible, or it could be that pastors around the world have simply been deceived and preach some ancient ruler-dictated interpretation of that (and other similar passages) as a mandate to fealty towards civil authority, when what it seems to me it is clearly speaking of is God's and His surrogates' power and/or authorities. I do not believe that any Christian is damned to Hell for resisting and protesting against abortion, or for donating to ministries that are going to other countries to witness in direct violation of the civil law in those countries, and if I accept you (or your pastor's) take on it, I have to believe that. Quite to the contrary, Christians may bring the very judgment upon themselves that the NIV promises if they don't oppose Satan's work in the guise of civil authority.

    And you know what? Even if we accept your (or your pastor's) take, we are ignoring a very important bit of reality here: We are the government in this country. That is the authority that God put in place here. Government is under our authority, not the other way around. That is the system that He put over this country. So who violates God's law when the government that He created to be subservient to The People, violates the laws which we authorized them to administrate and enforce?

    There is tons of scholarship every bit as qualified as your pastor to speak on the subject, that rejects the "civil authority" interpretation of Romans 13. Here's a couple that I've referred to often over the last couple of years as I've struggled with how to understand God's intentions for our relationship to each other and to our governments:

    Pastor Chuck Baldwin - Romans 13

    Fellowship of the Martyrs - What Does Romans 13 REALLY Say?
    Part 1
    Part 2
    Part 3

    Blues

  2.   
  3. #122
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Colorado Rocky Mountain High
    Posts
    3,899
    Quote Originally Posted by BluesStringer View Post
    As near as I can tell, your pastor is reading from the New International Version of the Bible. Where it refers to rebelling against the authorities, it says that those who do so, "...will bring judgment on themselves." Well, duh, everything we do will bring judgement upon each and every one of us, whether the action be judged righteous or sinful and unrepentant.
    Actually it's NKJV................
    See, it's mumbo jumbo like that and skinny little lizards like you thinking they the last dragon that gives Kung Fu a bad name.
    http://www.gunrightsmedia.com/ Internet forum dedicated to second amendment

  4. #123
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Colorado Rocky Mountain High
    Posts
    3,899
    Quote Originally Posted by BluesStringer View Post
    <space holder so it's clear what I'm reponding to >

    Blues
    I should never read this forum before I got to bed because when I do I end up tossing and turning about something I want to say and I don’t get any sleep until I drag my butt out of bed and say it.

    I do not profess any great understanding of Scripture. My general study method is to read it and take the plain text at face value and not to worry too much about the parts I don’t understand because I trust that God will reveal what He means when I need to know it.

    I have 4 translations that I really like KJV, NKJV, New English and Good news. I find that there are passages that make no sense to me in one or more translations but jump off the page in another. I also keep a Strong’s close at hand if there’s a word that I really don’t get or that Stands out that I want to know exactly what the writer had in mind when he used that word. I also have a couple of really good study Bibles that I like: Full Life (KJV), Spirit Filled Life (NKJV) and Inspirational Study Bible (NKJV). And I’m hoping to get through the McArthur Study Bible (NKJV) before Jesus comes back. I also atend a church that believes in studying through the Bible a line at a time and I listen to the pastor's radio broadcast at work everyday so I'm getting someone else's interpretation of the same Scripture I'm reading as a backstop so I don't get into some weird personal interpretation of Scripture

    The point that I’m trying to make here is that even with all of those resources I’m still living in flesh and because of that I’m never ( in this life) going to have a perfect understanding of Scripture. I’m just not and I’m not sure that I’m meant to.

    I believe Christians are called to study the Word and I believe that it’s supposed to be our standard (Don’t tell me that God is leading you to get a divorce when His Word very clearly says He hates it) but I don’t believe any of us are ever going to have perfect understanding (or application) of it in this life.

    I read the Word daily, I shoot for 3 chapters of a given book and one chapter of Provebs every day and I go from Genesis to the Revelation again and again and again (15 years worth) and it seems to me that the key is if I get it in there The Holy Spirit will use it to read my mail and change me from the inside out and I think that’s the whole point of Scripture.

    So, I take all this and apply it to Romans 13 and what I get is I don’t understand exactly what that chapter is about but I’m pretty sure what it isn’t about. It isn’t about me bombing abortion clinics because God told me to. It isn’t about me not paying my taxes because this government isn’t of God (The Roman Empire wasn’t of God either but Jesus was pretty specific about paying taxes to them). It certainly isn’t about me taking on the government because they impeded my personal comfort.

    What I think it is about is as far as it’s in my power I am to live at peace with and obedience to the government. That doesn’t mean I compromise God’s word and it doesn’t mean I condone the actions of the government.

    The Bible make it clear that our conduct as Christians is to be above reproach so that when we do have to cross the government we don’t present the image of a bunch of malcontented troublemakers.

    Go back and read the book of Daniel, Shaddrach, Meshach and Abed-nego were courteous and polite (while refusing to violate the Command of God) right up to the time they threw them in the fire. They also made it clear delivered or not they were going to serve God. (IOW they were perfectly willing to suffer the consequences of their civil disobedience)

    It’s hard for me to make a concrete concluding point to this because I don’t have perfect understanding but I have to get up for work at 0200 so I’m going to end this here for now and reserve the right to add more tomorrow
    See, it's mumbo jumbo like that and skinny little lizards like you thinking they the last dragon that gives Kung Fu a bad name.
    http://www.gunrightsmedia.com/ Internet forum dedicated to second amendment

  5. #124
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Republic of Dead Cell Holler, Occupied Territories of AL, former USA
    Posts
    7,419
    Quote Originally Posted by BluesStringer
    <space holder so it's clear what I'm reponding to >

    Blues
    That would be a welcome sight if it were only true. But....

    Quote Originally Posted by Treo View Post
    So, I take all this and apply it to Romans 13 and what I get is I donít understand exactly what that chapter is about but Iím pretty sure what it isnít about. It isnít about me bombing abortion clinics because God told me to. It isnít about me not paying my taxes because this government isnít of God (The Roman Empire wasnít of God either but Jesus was pretty specific about paying taxes to them). It certainly isnít about me taking on the government because they impeded my personal comfort.
    You're not responding to me with that, nor are you responding to anything anyone else said whom you might expect or perceive that I've been defending. Maybe if you had used Eric Rudolph as an example of a citizen on a real war-footing such as you have previously described, the bit about bombing abortion clinics would make sense in the context of our discussion. Instead you used Randy Weaver who went from one end of complying with government authority to the other with nothing more rebellious than cutting off an inch or two of a shotgun barrel at the behest of a government agent who knew he would be prosecuted if he gave into his many attempts to get him to do it.

    Neither I or anyone else that I've seen has said a word about not paying taxes for any reason, because of government's evil deeds or otherwise. You apparently read people's motivations into the things they write rather than just replying to what they actually say. It's impossible to have a calm, honest, thoughtful discussion with you because of that seemingly uncontrollable propensity.

    And what the heck does "...taking on the government because they impeded my personal comfort" even mean? Whatever you read that you now claim that line to be in reply to from me has been wildly misinterpreted, misunderstood, or perhaps wholly imagined out of thin air by you. I know more about personal discomfort than I would ever burden you with knowing about, some of it just plain ol' luck of the draw, and some self-imposed due to horrible decisions I have made in my life, but none of it do I blame on government, or worse, on God. I really have no idea what you were trying to say there, or how it could conceivably relate to anything I've said anywhere on this forum.

    I use the words "protest" or "oppose" and you read/hear the words "bomb abortion clinics." Is it just the slightest bit possible that your use of rhetorical hyperbole is no less inappropriate than you perceive Axe's use of the word "war" to be? Casting the first stone and all that stuff.....but I digress.

    You didn't reply to a word, thought or idea I actually expressed. C'est la vie. God Bless and goodnight.

    Blues
    No one has ever heard me say that I "hate" cops, because I don't. This is why I will never trust one again though: You just never know...

  6. #125
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Colorado Rocky Mountain High
    Posts
    3,899
    The above was just general observations about Romans 13.
    See, it's mumbo jumbo like that and skinny little lizards like you thinking they the last dragon that gives Kung Fu a bad name.
    http://www.gunrightsmedia.com/ Internet forum dedicated to second amendment

  7. #126
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Republic of Dead Cell Holler, Occupied Territories of AL, former USA
    Posts
    7,419
    Quote Originally Posted by Treo View Post
    The above was just general observations about Romans 13.
    That's not what you said when you wrote it.

    <space holder so it's clear what I'm reponding to >
    No one has ever heard me say that I "hate" cops, because I don't. This is why I will never trust one again though: You just never know...

  8. #127
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Colorado Rocky Mountain High
    Posts
    3,899
    Quote Originally Posted by BluesStringer View Post
    That's not what you said when you wrote it.
    My original post is unedited. there are no words in it now that weren't there when I posted, there are no words deleted from when I originally posted.

    Your response 124 above leaves me with the impression that you have been just waiting for me to give you an excuse to attack. I was not making a direct response point for point to your post and I'm sorry if you took it that way. I was not trying to imply that you bomb abortion clinics, neither was I attempting to imply that you don't pay your taxes. Although I have seen people who are not you attempt to justify both from that chapter.

    I was merely offering my take on the chapter itself and attempting to draw a framework of how I reached that conclusion.
    See, it's mumbo jumbo like that and skinny little lizards like you thinking they the last dragon that gives Kung Fu a bad name.
    http://www.gunrightsmedia.com/ Internet forum dedicated to second amendment

  9. #128
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Republic of Dead Cell Holler, Occupied Territories of AL, former USA
    Posts
    7,419
    Quote Originally Posted by Treo View Post
    My original post is unedited. there are no words in it now that weren't there when I posted, there are no words deleted from when I originally posted.
    Good grief Treo. Where did I accuse you of editing your post? I quoted the part that validates that you made no claim of a "general observation" about anything, you said you were making it clear what you were responding to, which was my post.

    Quote Originally Posted by Blues
    Quote Originally Posted by Treo View Post
    The above was just general observations about Romans 13.
    That's not what you said when you wrote it.

    <space holder so it's clear what I'm reponding to >
    Now you're raising another red herring about what's been said. Like I said, it is seemingly an uncontrollable propensity within you.

    Quote Originally Posted by Treo View Post
    Your response 124 above leaves me with the impression that you have been just waiting for me to give you an excuse to attack.
    "Attack?" What are you talking about? Frustrated with your non-responsive twisting of my words, yes, absolutely, but I have made no "attack" on you at all.

    Quote Originally Posted by Treo View Post
    I was not making a direct response point for point to your post and I'm sorry if you took it that way.
    Not only were you not making a point for point response to my post, you made absolutely no points in response to my post, yet stated how clearly you wanted to make it that that was your intention. Then you get all butt-hurt, feeling "attacked," because I point out that it was completely non-responsive to anything I said.

    You gave me a link that explained clearly what your view of Romans 13's meaning(s) are. I listened to it, even cited a bit of it as the basis of my reply to you, and analyzed a bit of it, pointing to what I believe is a conflict in language between two (or maybe more) versions of the Bible. I posted links for you so you could understand where my questions derive from. Did you listen to them? Any part of them? If you did, it was not apparent in your 100% non-responsive "reply" to "that" post.

    What you now perceive as being "attacked" is nothing more than me trying to understand as clearly as possible the Word of God. I engaged you in a discussion because one, you brought up a Chapter that I have been trying to get a clearer understanding of for a couple of years and, two, even though we have rarely agreed on anything on this forum, your ability to articulate your understanding of Scripture has been quite impressive. If only you understood your fellow forum members' words as well. Since you don't, I'm going to try again to make myself understood.

    The man who finally taught me how to open my heart to Christ so that I could accept Him as my Lord and Savior is right now in India witnessing for Christ. This is his fourth trip in as many years. He spends anywhere from four to eight months at a time away from his family, living in the most disgusting squalor you could ever imagine, defying the Indian government by witnessing for Christ to a mostly Hindu population in the areas his mission visits. Like I said in Post #121, if I accept that the "authorities" referred to in Romans 13 in the KJV (and likely other versions that I'm not up to speed on) are worldly governments, I have to accept that my closest brother in Christ has brought damnation upon himself for his missionary work. That interpretation means that I am damned as well because I have supported his work to the furthest extent possible for over three years now.

    The man to whom I am referring goes by "INVAR" on the web. He runs a blog called "Sword At The Ready," to which I have linked and quoted several times on this forum. While his faith is consistently reflected in his blog posts, the topics he writes about are most often politics-related. He is decidedly a part of the Patriot movement. You can see quite a lot of what he does in India by visiting his YouTube channel. Something you said yesterday I could not understand in light of my relationship with the most godly human being I know who is also one of the most dedicated Patriots I know:

    Quote Originally Posted by Treo View Post
    There was a time when my whole life was wrapped up in the patriot movement to the point that it was a false religion.
    Is this truly-stated, or is this hyperbole? If truly-stated, it's befuddling to me how or why you couldn't distinguish between your commitment to God and your commitment to country, or what the one True God revealed to you that would make you give up your patriotism as a way to better serve Him. Does Romans 13 have anything directly to do with this confusion? Is there any part of the Bible that you understand to promulgate the notion that deep-seated patriotism is tantamount to worshiping a false god? Honestly, I can't fathom the feelings that the above quote reveals must have been present in you.

    So now we understand that Romans 13 has no loopholes to being Saved if we defy the worldly authorities that your understanding of it says God put here not to be defied. We further understand that just the act of being a dedicated Patriot to that same governmental system has the potential to further damn Bible-believing Christians to Hell because it "was a false religion" to you. Further still, if we ask you how you came to these confusing conclusions, and deign to question the interpretation your pastor offered in your link, it is nothing more than laying in wait to "attack" you. Me and my brother in Christ are going to Hell for following Jesus' command to spread His Word, and if we try to understand if that interpretation is one we should adopt, and adjust our methods and places of testimony accordingly, we are "attacking" you. Have I missed anything? Nope, that about covers it as far as I can tell. Thanks for your input. I'll take it under consideration.

    Blues
    No one has ever heard me say that I "hate" cops, because I don't. This is why I will never trust one again though: You just never know...

  10. #129
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Colorado Rocky Mountain High
    Posts
    3,899
    You know what? I tried I really tried to be civil and try to explain myself. In fact I was amazed that you even wanted to listen to someone that you made such a public point of castigating for being a “Cowardly poltroon” (that’s a mighty Christ like attitude) because I didn’t share your world view the last time we interacted but I have come to the conclusion that you are the kind of person that gets off in displaying your language skills to make others look foolish on the internet and I’m through playing the game.

    I got nothing more to say

    Good day.
    See, it's mumbo jumbo like that and skinny little lizards like you thinking they the last dragon that gives Kung Fu a bad name.
    http://www.gunrightsmedia.com/ Internet forum dedicated to second amendment

  11. #130
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Republic of Dead Cell Holler, Occupied Territories of AL, former USA
    Posts
    7,419
    Quote Originally Posted by Treo View Post
    ...In fact I was amazed that you even wanted to listen to someone that you made such a public point of castigating for being a ďCowardly poltroonĒ....
    Treo, honestly, I think you need professional help. Holding onto grudges that are more than a year old over such a meaningless discourtesy is bordering on obsessive. I guess the age of that slight will have to be reason enough to forgive being misquoted, but back on Feb. 28, 2012, I said you were a "pusillanimous poltroon." It was a redundant use of language, but it rolled off the tongue with such poetic rhythm that I went ahead and used it because the depth of its redundancy was only exceeded by its truthfulness.

    Quote Originally Posted by Treo View Post
    ...(thatís a mighty Christ like attitude)....
    I certainly have never claimed to be Christ-like, but even if I had, the utterance was in response to you saying, "After reading some of your posts I really, really, believe that some of you strap up every day praying to God for a chance to be a hero."

    As in this thread, your wild imagination got away from you about what people were saying, and I answered that tripe by saying, "...I challenge you to cite one post where anyone said anything close to the equivalent of praying to God for "the chance" to get into a gunfight. One post you pusillanimous poltroon. Good luck with that."

    Of course, that reply didn't come in a vacuum. It was preceded by many posts of yours that could have inspired the same kind of utterance from me or anyone else, including the very person who was involved in the shooting we were discussing. Not surprisingly, you never supplied any example that would lead you to such a specious, insulting, unjustifiably judgmental, and dare I say, un-Christ-like, conclusion about people with whom you had disagreements in an internet forum discussion.

    But here, you're not satisfied with exaggerating as an "attack" the honest questions about a Bible Chapter that I've sought your opinion on after you invoked it to buttress an argument you were having with someone else, now you go into outright dishonesty to make me look bad in reader's eyes, when you say:

    Quote Originally Posted by Treo View Post
    ...because I didnít share your world view the last time we interacted....
    I called you a pusillanimous poltroon because of what you said that I quoted above. We weren't discussing a "world view" subject at all, we were discussing a very isolated and specific incident that you adopted an extremely jaded, but more importantly, incorrect and inaccurate view of right from the start. And in what may be the irony of all ironies that I have ever encountered on this forum, the thing you said that put us squarely at odds in that thread was that even if the law said that you were obligated to give a witness statement, you would still sneak out the back door before the cops got there to avoid compliance! In case you have forgotten, this all started in this thread because you invoked Romans 13 against Axeanda45's assertion that, "We are also NOT commanded by Him to follow evil men or govt," and your answer to that said that Romans 13 says, "....that we are [to] obey the laws of that government unless they directly contradict the word of God." And now you bring up a year+ old thread where the reason for my strong disagreement with you was partly due to your position that you would be "Gone like yesterday's news" even if the law obligated you to wait for cops and give a witness statement! So what word of God would have been *directly contradicted* by your legal obligation to stick around long enough to give a witness statement, hmmm? Un-freakin'-real, Treo.

    Quote Originally Posted by Treo View Post
    ....but I have come to the conclusion that you are the kind of person that gets off in displaying your language skills to make others look foolish on the internet and Iím through playing the game.
    First, if I "get off" on this "game" you speak of, you have to give me that a year+ between such orgasmic delight means I control my urges quite well.

    Second, my language skills in this instance are only eclipsed by your depth of hypocrisy, your dishonesty, and your cognitive dissonance. It wasn't any skill on my part that made you write all the inconsistent and irreconcilable memes you have exposed your propensity for, Treo. You brought up Romans 13. You claimed it demands obedience to our government lest we bring judgment (or damnation, depending on which version we're discussing) upon ourselves. You brought up a year+ old thread where you said in your own words that you would defy a law in complete disobedience of the interpretation of Romans 13 that you put forward in this thread. If you think you look like a fool, that's on you, and has nothing whatsoever to do with any language skills I may or may not possess.

    Quote Originally Posted by Treo View Post
    I got nothing more to say
    That'll be the day.

    Blues
    No one has ever heard me say that I "hate" cops, because I don't. This is why I will never trust one again though: You just never know...

Page 13 of 17 FirstFirst ... 31112131415 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast