- Jan 10, 2010
- 37,279
- 8,500
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
I offer no defence of what I didn't say.Deflecting the question?
Last edited:
Upvote
0
I offer no defence of what I didn't say.Deflecting the question?
Even Daniel had a similar position. Until that authority tried to force him to commit idolatry.Obey local laws! This is advice that will allow you to live in other countries. Other advice in this thread will have you dead or in jail, if your lucky.
Romans 13:1-7
Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. .....Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God's wrath but also for the sake of conscience.
Even Daniel had a similar position. Until that authority tried to force him to commit idolatry.
Acts 5:41-42
41 The apostles left the Sanhedrin, rejoicing because they had been counted worthy of suffering disgrace for the Name. 42 Day after day, in the temple courts and from house to house, they never stopped teaching and proclaiming the good news that Jesus is the Messiah."
Does "taking up your cross" mean anything to you? Peter promised Jesus he would (Luke 22:33). Unfortunately, he followed your advice for self preservation:
Luke 22:60-61
"60 Peter replied, “Man, I don’t know what you’re talking about!” Just as he was speaking, the rooster crowed. 61 The Lord turned and looked straight at Peter. Then Peter remembered the word the Lord had spoken to him: “Before the rooster crows today, you will disown me three times.”
And what did Peter do?
Luke 22:62
"62 And he went outside and wept bitterly."
Jesus told us to deny ourselves, but you are suggesting that we should deny Jesus if local authorities try to force us. So why are you suggesting that we deny Jesus like Peter did for the sake of self preservation? Why are you telling us that we shouldn't "take up our cross" and "deny ourselves?" Why are you asking us to "lose our lives" by trying to save them?
Luke 9:23-26
23 Then he said to them all: “Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross daily and follow me. 24 For whoever wants to save their life will lose it, but whoever loses their life for me will save it. 25 What good is it for someone to gain the whole world, and yet lose or forfeit their very self? 26 Whoever is ashamed of me and my words, the Son of Man will be ashamed of them when he comes in his glory and in the glory of the Father and of the holy angels."
It would be by the authority of the one world government led by the Anti-Christ. Surely you know this. But according to your argument, it really doesn't matter the level of authority as long as it isn't a Church authority. In regards to the mark of the beast, the authority is from the beast described in Revelation 13.I checked your claims. But no mention of government or local authority.
What are you talking about? Just out of curiosity, what is the "suggested model"? How should have Peter responded?Peter lied. It's not the suggested model. But I greatly appreciate the supporting scripture. It's a breakthrough for me I've always hoped people would lean toward.
Jesus stated His opinion that local law was His Fathers will on earth. This surprised me as well. Here Jesus refuses to speak out against local law.
They made her stand before them 4and said, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. 5In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such a woman. So what do You say?”
Thanks for reading it thoroughly. I should have concluded that "Here, Jesus demonstrates that He knows the laws of Moses are obsolete. "You are making a mistake here by conflating "local law" (in general) with the Torah. What you quoted in scripture just proved it.
Peter should have answered honestly. Of what use is the testimony of a liar?What are you talking about? Just out of curiosity, what is the "suggested model"? How should have Peter responded?
It would be by the authority of the one world government led by the Anti-Christ. Surely you know this. But according to your argument, it really doesn't matter the level of authority as long as it isn't a Church authority. In regards to the mark of the beast, the authority is from the beast described in Revelation 13.
Do you have any scriptural that demonstrates that the word of God should be obeyed over local laws?
But that could have gotten him killed. Isnt self preservation one of your reasons for obeying local laws over the word of God?Peter should have answered honestly. Of what use is the testimony of a liar?
But that could have gotten him killed. Isnt self preservation one of your reasons for obeying local laws over the word of God?
That is not a valid reason, since I cite the opposite example:.
so if self preservation is not a valid reason for denying Christ, would you care to explain your previous post?Obey local laws! This is advice that will allow you to live in other countries. Other advice in this thread will have you dead or in jail, if your lucky.
God says to obey local laws. Living is a benefit, but if Godso if self preservation is not a valid reason for denying Christ, would you care to explain your previous post?
Can you explain, where exactly does biblical rules apply? Second, is "Jesus is Lord" a statement worth dying for?I also made the point that Biblical rules do not apply
in foreign countries. Follow the local rules.
Can you explain, where exactly does biblical rules apply? Second, is "Jesus is Lord" a statement worth dying for?
But you did say...I offer no defence of what I didn't say.
For reasons I can't say I fully understand, that was directed at me.Learn about the quote function, lower right corner.
The martyrs of the first century died for what they claimed to be eyewitnesses to.God's laws are written in each person's heart.
I do not support martyrs. I don't know why anyone does.
I'm familiar with the rumors. Obey local government and accept your fate, becasue local government actions are God's will.The martyrs of the first century died for what they claimed to be eyewitnesses to.
For some reason, they found death-by-torture imminently preferable to recanting their stories about having seen Our Lord returned from the dead.
Right. If you ask me to defend something "I said" then use theBut you did say...
For reasons I can't say I fully understand, that was directed at me.
Btw, I clicked "Reply" to the above comment and I am about to click "Post Reply", if you're interested.