Texas talking about leaving the USA

[JonC]

You were doing OK until that last part. If a Christian is involved with the GOP or DNC and standing for Christ, then they are doing precisely what those OT heroes were doing. If a Christian is involved with the GOP or DNC but abandoning Christ, then they are not in line with those heroes.

I do not trust government as far as I can throw the White House, but government is nonetheless responsible for doing what is right, and there is nothing in the Bible indicating Christians shouldn't tell them what that is, and vote accordingly.

If I said "involved with" the GOP or DNC then I misspoke (mistyped). I am speaking of identifying with a worldly power or Christ (it is one or another).

I am grateful Christians are involved with the GOP and DNC alike (imagine how they would be otherwise). But there is a difference between being in the world and being of the world.

 

[JonC]

Do you haver a passage that says to surrender your defensive weapons to a corrupt government authority bent on tyranny?

Yes. We are to submit to the authorities over us insofar as it is not against God's command.

I guess we should be thankful for past Christians of faith (and even now outside of the US) because in the US "christians" are now more attached to their rights and the Constitution than they are to Christ. An American may willingly die for his country but, as you eloquently demonstrate, he is less willing to suffer for his God.

 

[Benjamin]

Yes. We are to submit to the authorities over us insofar as it is not against God's command.

That circular argument didn't take long to return.

I see, ...so you are begging this question. No, you are quite wrong. That would be a poor interpretation of Romans 13 and one disagreed with by many Christians throughout time.

There is the question in a nut shell. Whoever resisteth the power, refers to ...they who obstinately, and for no right reason, oppose the ruler, and strive to unsettle the constitution.

Benjamin Franklin said, "Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God." and he and Thomas Jefferson wanted this phrase as our Great Seal of the United States, however they settled on, "In God we Trust."

The ONLY higher authority in the passages of Rom 13 is God. These verses have nothing to do with obeying tyranny, which in effect is what some are claiming we must do, and has everything to do with obeying God’s law. Take abortion for instance, it is impossible for rules of man to be THE LAW when they defy the law of God. To call evil LAW would be to call God EVIL! ...So much for the Rom 13 interpretation by many in Christianity today.

I actually was not talking about Romans 13.

Yes. We are to submit to the authorities over us insofar as it is not against God's command.

Already addressed that question begging premise...

 

[Benjamin]

I find that generally those who argue for passivist ideologies the loudest are usually also the loudest when complaining that we didn't do enough when things go really wrong.

 

[JonC]

I find that generally those who argue for passivist ideologies the loudest are usually also the loudest when complaining that we didn't do enough when things go really wrong.

That circular argument didn't take long to return.









Already addressed that question begging premise...

Call it what you want, that does not change the fact it is literally Scripture.

I do find it ironic that so many "christians" only observe commands they like.

 

[JonC]

I find that generally those who argue for passivist ideologies the loudest are usually also the loudest when complaining that we didn't do enough when things go really wrong.

I do not think ideologies have anything to do with it. What is applicable is whether we are to obey God or our own desires.

But I have also noticed Christians are often the ones whining about their rights and unfair treatment as they go to the courts to sue for having their feelings hurt for taking a Christian stance.

I just get tired of pansies who think they have a God given entitlement to exercise their "rights".

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

If I said "involved with" the GOP or DNC then I misspoke (mistyped). I am speaking of identifying with a worldly power or Christ (it is one or another).

I am grateful Christians are involved with the GOP and DNC alike (imagine how they would be otherwise). But there is a difference between being in the world and being of the world.

Neither "involved with" nor "participating in" must indicate an identification with politics or government that automatically supersedes being a servant of Christ, or else the heroes of old violated the principle of serving two masters, as they were literally serving the government while serving God.

Even the pledge of allegiance explicitly acknowledges the supremacy of God, though some wish to remove that explicit understanding. Removing it wouldn't change the understanding. Having to deny that higher allegiance to God would.

 

[JonC]

Neither "involved with" nor "participating in" must indicate an identification with politics or government that automatically supersedes being a servant of Christ, or else the heroes of old violated the principle of serving two masters, as they were literally serving the government while serving God.

Even the pledge of allegiance explicitly acknowledges the supremacy of God, though some wish to remove that explicit understanding. Removing it wouldn't change the understanding. Having to deny that higher allegiance to God would.

I do understand we can push the discussions to extremes (and, again, a lot is up to the individual).

But I do believe that we are not to allow ourselves to be entangled or bound by worldly powers.

A Christian could identify with the DNC as they do express compassion for those suffering. Or they could identify with the GOP as they are concerned with moral issues. I would argue neither solves those issues (in fact, they probably do the opposite). But that is up to the individual.

I am a retired soldier (combat engineer, without regrets). I am thankful so many Christians are in the military. You could argue that this is the same as identifying with the DNC (or GOP). Perhaps you are right, but I see a difference.

But we cannot merely dismiss that we are not to be of this world, or that these political parties are ultimately opposed to God.

You are incorrect about the Pledge of Allegiance. Just like "In God We Trust" and opening prayers in Congress this is, per our government (and a majority of GOP appointed Justices) simply meaningless words (they said "ceremonial deism").

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

I do understand we can push the discussions to extremes (and, again, a lot is up to the individual).

But I do believe that we are not to allow ourselves to be entangled or bound by worldly powers.

A Christian could identify with the DNC as they do express compassion for those suffering. Or they could identify with the GOP as they are concerned with moral issues. I would argue neither solves those issues (in fact, they probably do the opposite). But that is up to the individual.

I am a retired soldier (combat engineer, without regrets). I am thankful so many Christians are in the military. You could argue that this is the same as identifying with the DNC (or GOP). Perhaps you are right, but I see a difference.

But we cannot merely dismiss that we are not to be of this world, or that these political parties are ultimately opposed to God.

You are incorrect about the Pledge of Allegiance. Just like "In God We Trust" and opening prayers in Congress this is, per our government (and a majority of GOP appointed Justices) simply meaningless words (they said "ceremonial deism").

Perhaps we seem to be on two entirely different tracks because of this DNC vs GOP thing. In other words, we could agree in theory, but the practical is the kicker. I find it a bit humorous, as the governments the OT heroes served were steeped in idolatry, explicitly devoted to other gods. The US government is almost exclusively DNC-GOP, making anyone serving in its military subservient to both.

But leaving it at the individual level is what I've been arguing the entire time. It is a matter of conscience. We also agree that no one should surrender their allegiance to Christ or God.

As for that clever lawyerly dodge with the pledge and motto, I'm not the least bit surprised at its necessity. But one day, if certain ones ever have their way, will you argue the same when they demand a denial? Will it be merely a matter of denying "ceremonial deism" when God must be explicitly denied?

 

[JonC]

Perhaps we seem to be on two entirely different tracks because of this DNC vs GOP thing. In other words, we could agree in theory, but the practical is the kicker. I find it a bit humorous, as the governments the OT heroes served were steeped in idolatry, explicitly devoted to other gods. The US government is almost exclusively DNC-GOP, making anyone serving in its military subservient to both.

But leaving it at the individual level is what I've been arguing the entire time. It is a matter of conscience. We also agree that no one should surrender their allegiance to Christ or God.

As for that clever lawyerly dodge with the pledge and motto, I'm not the least bit surprised at its necessity. But one day, if certain ones ever have their way, will you argue the same when they demand a denial? Will it be merely a matter of denying "ceremonial deism" when God must be explicitly denied?

We could talk past one another a bit....I feel horrible (COVID negative, but horrible nontheless).

Yes, I agree that it is a matter of conscious.

I disagree about the military (serving a political party). The service is to the nation which is controlled at various times by different parties (all worldly powers). But the service is superficially to the Constitution and really to the American people. Still, many would object as it is an oath and it is military service.


I do not know which is the worse, acknowledging God superficially or simply denying Him. At least the latter is clear.

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

We could talk past one another a bit....I feel horrible (COVID negative, but horrible nontheless).

Yes, I agree that it is a matter of conscious.

I disagree about the military (serving a political party). The service is to the nation which is controlled at various times by different parties (all worldly powers). But the service is superficially to the Constitution and really to the American people. Still, many would object as it is an oath and it is military service.

I do not know which is the worse, acknowledging God superficially or simply denying Him. At least the latter is clear.

Sorry you feel horrible, but glad it's not COVID. We've pretty much talked this out. Appreciate the exchange. Get well soon, brother.

 

[Benjamin]

Call it what you want, that does not change the fact it is literally Scripture.

I do find it ironic that so many "christians" only observe commands they like.

As I said, I don't believe you've supported your charge (ideology) with scripture but merely tried to with a poor interpretation and have resorted to question begging on a circular argument. One might easily make the case that you as a "Christian" have only "chosen" to observe those commands you like.

I find it ironic that so many seem to miss the premise that We the People ARE the authority in this country as per our God given rights of Liberty that this country was founded on, and to suggest that we should submit to some coup trying to abolish that authority and that somehow it is not Christian if We the People wouldn't willing surrender our last line of defense against such corruption is beyond the pale in my eyes.

 

[JonC]

As I said, I don't believe you've supported your charge (ideology) with scripture but merely tried to with a poor interpretation and have resorted to question begging on a circular argument. One might easily make the case that you as a "Christian" have only "chosen" to observe those commands you like.

I find it ironic that so many seem to miss the premise that We the People ARE the authority in this country as per our God given rights of Liberty that this country was founded on, and to suggest that we should submit to some coup trying to abolish that authority and that somehow it is not Christian if We the People wouldn't willing surrender our last line of defense against such corruption is beyond the pale in my eyes.

I (of course) disagree. I believe the principle that we are to obey the laws of the land (provided they are not in conflict with God's command) is not only evident in Scripture but also discernable in the actions of the Church.

Where do you find that our liberties under the US Constitution are in fact "God given"?

Your posts, IMHO, illustrate one problem with our churches today. Many Christians readily go to the Constitution but are hesitant to turn to the Sermon on the Mount.

 

[Reformed1689]

I actually was not talking about Romans 13.

Do you have a passage that says to disobey the government if it denies us our constitutional rights?

If taking those rights away mean taking away religious freedoms that allow us to do our duty to obey God and spread His word? Absolutely.

 

[JonC]

If taking those rights away mean taking away religious freedoms that allow us to do our duty to obey God and spread His word? Absolutely.

I disagree. Where do you find the idea (in Scripture) that we have rights regarding religious freedoms that allow us to obey God and spread His Word?

I ask because it seems to me that Christianity has not only spread more but is also often stronger when opposed by the secular government. I do not see these Constitutional rights as "God given" but rather as given by our government.

 

[Reformed1689]

I disagree. Where do you find the idea (in Scripture) that we have rights regarding religious freedoms that allow us to obey God and spread His Word?

I ask because it seems to me that Christianity has not only spread more but is also often stronger when opposed by the secular government. I do not see these Constitutional rights as "God given" but rather as given by our government.

You asked when the Bible says we have a right to disobey the Government. Are you saying (and I know you are not saying this) that if they tell us we cannot speak about Christianity that we must be silent?

 

[JonC]

You asked when the Bible says we have a right to disobey the Government. Are you saying (and I know you are not saying this) that if they tell us we cannot speak about Christianity that we must be silent?

You are correct, that is not what I 'm saying. I believe that we are to take a stand but I have become concerned lately that our stand is too often one for a political party rather than as the Church.

I have voted Republican, and this last election I voted for President Trump. But afterwards I've determined that that may not have been the best thing for me to do. I do not want the GOP to be my voice.

So while I would say that the Church should in no way be silent, it may be inappropriate for its voice to be the GOP.

The challenge to my view would be that we are in a two party system (like it or not) and not to support the GOP would give the DNC more power. But I am not sure that this is a concern for the Church. I am leaning towards the idea that we are to stand for truth and let God take care of the rest.

 

[Benjamin]

Your posts, IMHO, illustrate one problem with our churches today. Many Christians readily go to the Constitution but are hesitant to turn to the Sermon on the Mount.

To be honest, of late I have very little tolerance for the displays of "christian" passivism on such an important issue as faces our nation today and frankly doubt you'd be as passive if I were to step on your "christian" pacifist do-nothing opinions and were to call it out as I see it, but you have your priorities of where you pick your battles and I have mine! No, you'd be greatly offended at my opinion of that type of "christian" character being sinfully neglectful of Christian righteousness just as I might become quite offended at you questioning my standing based off your pacifist views, so I think it best we don't go down this road. Concerning the gravity of the situation that I believe this nation faces today and the seriousness of where it is likely to lead if good men do not stand up against it this leads to my view that you'd best get into the fight against tyranny or get out of the way! Would merely be a shame to see you get all riled up over something you claim to not be a part of, if you know what I mean.

 

[Baptist Believer]

BREAKING: Texas GOP Responds to Supreme Court Ruling in Shocking Statement, Hints Towards Secession (trendingpolitics.com)

Let's be clear. The stupid comments were from Allen West, the chair of the Republican Party of Texas. He doesn't speak for all Republicans in Texas, nor is he a member of state government. He's a native of Georgia who has previously represented Florida, and moved to Texas only a few years ago. He retired from the Army after he was disciplined for the torture of an Iraqi police officer.

As a native-born Texan, I am appalled and embarrassed by his seditious comments. Of course, he is backpedalling now that his words are having consequences.

 

[Baptist Believer]

US is no longer united except in language.

The uniting force of our nation has always been our commitment to the Constitution and accepting diverse people from all over the world to make our nation strong.

Unfortunately, there are too many native-born Americans who think that "whiteness," fundamentalist Christianity, the English language, or civil religion is the glue that holds us together. A big clue to the depth of ignorance regarding the Constitution is that we currently have a President who has frequently claimed that Article II of the Constitution let's him do anything he wants. The fact that the current President's supporters haven't significantly challenged that blatant lie tells me that they either are completely ignorant of the Constitution, or they value one man over truth-telling AND the Constitution.