Not to be a respecter of persons

[freeatlast]

Our Lord is no respecter of persons and we are to be as He. Scripture also says;
Luke 14:26 If any [man] come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.

So here is the question; If you suspected or saw some stranger breaking the law (robbery, murder, drugs, and so on) would you turn them into the police? If you had a child that you suspected or you knew was breaking the same laws would you turn them into the police?

 

[dwmoeller1]

No and no.

 

[matt wade]

I would turn the stranger in.

My own child? I am biased in that case. I openly admit that I would have a problem turning in my kid.

 

[Amy.G]

The Bible says (and I cannot find it right now) that if you know of a crime being committed and do not report it, you are as guilty as the perpetrator. I think it's in Deuteronomy. Maybe someone can help me out locating it.

 

[freeatlast]

Let me add to this. Based on the Luke passage in the OP if someone says that they would not turn in their child who breaks the law or they are not sure if they would turn their child doesn't that mean that they are not a disciple of the Lord's based on His words?

 

[dwmoeller1]

The Bible says (and I cannot find it right now) that if you know of a crime being committed and do not report it, you are as guilty as the perpetrator. I think it's in Deuteronomy. Maybe someone can help me out locating it.

Never heard of that. Maybe you are thinking of the penalty for a false witness (Deuteronomy 19:16-21) where the one who bears false witness is punished as if he had committed what he falsely accused someone else of.

 

[dwmoeller1]

Let me add to this. Based on the Luke passage in the OP if someone says that they would not turn in their child who breaks the law or they are not sure if they would turn their child doesn't that mean that they are not a disciple of the Lord's based on His words?

How so?

Now sure, if one believes it is their Christian duty to report a crime, then their failure to do so for their child is inconsistent. But if a person believes they are not to turn anyone in for a crime then their failure to do so for their child is entirely consistent - no respecter of persons in that case.

 

[freeatlast]

The Bible says (and I cannot find it right now) that if you know of a crime being committed and do not report it, you are as guilty as the perpetrator. I think it's in Deuteronomy. Maybe someone can help me out locating it.

Amy I am not familiar with the one in the OT but the Lord said this;
"Render unto Ceasar what is Ceasar's, and render unto God what is God's."

Jesus was telling us that we had to respect the authority of government officials, as well as render unto the government what belongs to the government. Every state that I know of has a law on the books that requires all individuals that suspects or knows of certain types of crime to report it or you can be considered as helping the person excape the law.


Read more: http://blogcritics.org/politics/art...l-immigration-is-not-christian/#ixzz11nsSaC9A

 

[freeatlast]

How so?

Now sure, if one believes it is their Christian duty to report a crime, then their failure to do so for their child is inconsistent. But if a person believes they are not to turn anyone in for a crime then their failure to do so for their child is entirely consistent - no respecter of persons in that case.

Let me ask this. Is truth based on what I believe or on what God's standards are? In other words am I free to live and do as I wish simply because I believe my way is the way even if I claim my way is of God?

 

[rbell]

Depends on the crime.

Would I turn my child in for a parking violation? Doubtful--but I would handle it. Then again--were there complete disregard for law and authority, I might.

I have, and would, turn folks in for actions which hurt another. I've reported multiple folks for dealing drugs. Would I turn in my child? I'm sure at some point I would--I might attempt to get him help through another avenue first...but if he becomes a danger to others, the best thing might be, as hard as it would be to watch, allowing the legal consequences to overtake their behavior.

 

[annsni]

My choice was not there. I would turn them both in but the "no exceptions" has me not checking it. The "exceptions" would be if my child would be willing to turn themselves in, I would not turn them in - and actually, the same with a stranger.

 

[dwmoeller1]

Let me ask this. Is truth based on what I believe or on what God's standards are? In other words am I free to live and do as I wish simply because I believe my way is the way even if I claim my way is of God?

What God's standards are.

No.

 

[dwmoeller1]

Amy I am not familiar with the one in the OT but the Lord said this;
"Render unto Ceasar what is Ceasar's, and render unto God what is God's."

Jesus was telling us that we had to respect the authority of government officials, as well as render unto the government what belongs to the government. Every state that I know of has a law on the books that requires all individuals that suspects or knows of certain types of crime to report it or you can be considered as helping the person excape the law.

Of course, none of us believe this command is w/o exception or qualification. We probably all believe in peaceful dissent from laws that violate our conscience. And we even probably all believe that this represents a higher Christian duty (must obey God rather than man).

BTW, I probably should mention for clarities sake that I am a Baptist who is essentially an Anabaptist in my views on the Christian's relationship to government (or at least I lean very strongly in that direction).

 

[Aaron]

So here is the question; If you suspected or saw some stranger breaking the law (robbery, murder, drugs, and so on) would you turn them into the police?

Of course. We live in the low rent district. So I have plenty of opportunity to be on a first-name basis with the officers.

If you had a child that you suspected or you knew was breaking the same laws would you turn them into the police?

Not for drugs unless other more serious crimes were involved, but I would intervene. Decisively. If my children get involved in drugs, it will be because they were pressured into it, and Heaven help those who pressured them, cause if I find out . . . they're goin' down.

We have a neighbor, a single mother, whose 14-year-old child was impregnated by a 18-year-old. They said the law wouldn't do anything about it because they're too close in age. My response was, "That's where fathers come in . . ."

The interesting thing is that all my daughter's girlfriends think I'm one of the greatest dads in the world, and all her guy-friends are terrified of me. Yeah, I'm bragging. :tongue3:

 

[canadyjd]

Let me add to this. Based on the Luke passage in the OP if someone says that they would not turn in their child who breaks the law or they are not sure if they would turn their child doesn't that mean that they are not a disciple of the Lord's based on His words?

No. You are misunderstanding the passage. It has nothing to do with obeying the government.

The passage from Luke is obvious hyperbole. Jesus is not telling us to hate anyone. He is saying that our love for Him should be so strong that, in comparison, our love for our families would look like "hate".

A similar passage from Matt. (10:37) can help us to understand the intention of Jesus. "He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me; and he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me."

To believe Jesus is literally telling us to hate our families would make Jesus contradict Himself when He commands that we "love" one another.

peace to youraying:

 

[matt wade]

If my children get involved in drugs, it will be because they were pressured into it, and Heaven help those who pressured them, cause if I find out . . . they're goin' down.

No...it couldn't be that your child just has a sinful nature (like every other person in the world). It would have to be because someone else pressured them to do it. What makes you think you have children that won't rebel just for the sake of rebellion?

 

[dwmoeller1]

Well it *might* be because he has an open and honest relationship with his kids and knows their character well enough to be confident in his assessment. Maybe, just possibly, he is a parent who can make a relatively honest and accurate assessment of his kids strengths, character and weaknesses.

Why assume otherwise?

 

[freeatlast]

No. You are misunderstanding the passage. It has nothing to do with obeying the government.

The passage from Luke is obvious hyperbole. Jesus is not telling us to hate anyone. He is saying that our love for Him should be so strong that, in comparison, our love for our families would look like "hate".

A similar passage from Matt. (10:37) can help us to understand the intention of Jesus. "He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me; and he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me."

To believe Jesus is literally telling us to hate our families would make Jesus contradict Himself when He commands that we "love" one another.

peace to youraying:

No I think it is you who does not understand the passage. The Lord is trying to show that if a person does not choose Him over everything and everyone, including their family, they are not His disciple. He will not take second chair. To choose Him over everything else means that we would deny anyone or anything to follow Him. That is called love seen in obedience, and is not out of legality or fear, but out of a desire, which is a natural heart attitude for the saved, to please our Lord. (That is called love) In doing so the object or person that is denied is seen as hate (rejection.) What we reject is seen as hate when compared against what or who we choose. It is not enough to say that I love this or that and choose something or someone else. That is the context of the text and does not necessarily have anything to do with emotion. We can still hold an emotional feeling towards another and still reject them for the Lord. The passage is to show how God feels about our choices in this life, what or who we love. So it does include obeying the laws of a government as long as that law does not contradict God's law. In the case of the OP to decide not to turn in any criminal even our own flesh and blood is to reject (hate) God because the scripture says we are to obey those in authority. It all boils down to whom do we love and whom do we hate. The Lord said that MANY will say Lord! Lord! only to hear "I never knew you." The original question is a good barometer to see where our heart really is and decide if we want to receive a new one. Who do we love, our family, our selves or the Lord?

 

[matt wade]

Well it *might* be because he has an open and honest relationship with his kids and knows their character well enough to be confident in his assessment. Maybe, just possibly, he is a parent who can make a relatively honest and accurate assessment of his kids strengths, character and weaknesses.

Why assume otherwise?

I'm not assuming anything. I'm open for the possibility that if his children try drugs that could try them for a variety of reasons. He's the one that is insistent that the only reason his children would try drugs is if someone pressured them into it.

The only reason I commented on it was that I find the mentality, that if his children do drugs it must be someone else's fault, strange. I'm more of a personal responsibility type of guy. You know, if his children do drugs it is because his children wanted to.

 

[dwmoeller1]

I'm not assuming anything. I'm open for the possibility that if his children try drugs that could try them for a variety of reasons. He's the one that is insistent that the only reason his children would try drugs is if someone pressured them into it.

The only reason I commented on it was that I find the mentality, that if his children do drugs it must be someone else's fault, strange. I'm more of a personal responsibility type of guy. You know, if his children do drugs it is because his children wanted to.

Actually, I didn't think you were assuming anything till this post. Now it seems you are assuming his mentality is that its someone else's fault if his kids do drugs. However, he doesn't say this, nor is it a necessary implication of what he does say. Recognizing that someone was pressured into something in no way implies that they aren't at fault as well. For instance, Scripture often criticizes those who make others stumble, but we don't assume that this means the one who stumbles is off the hook or somehow blameless. Matt 18:7 and Luke 17:1 are good examples of this. In short, recognizing the legitimate fault of one who causes someone to stumble doesn't imply that the one who stumbles is faultless as a result.

You just seem to be reading more into his statement than is there. Esp. since I doubt you know the man personally.