- Jan 10, 2010
- 37,279
- 8,500
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
Supporting scripture?One can be subject yet dissenting regarding law.
Upvote
0
Supporting scripture?One can be subject yet dissenting regarding law.
True He didn't think too highly of the Jewish leadership but they were the governing authority of the people God called 'His own'. They received Divine Revelation and their religious expression and teaching was authentic. Their authority was endorsed by Jesus. The seat of Moses was the highest authority on earth wouldn't you say?There is no evidence that Jesus considered the Jewish leadership to be a higher standard.
Matthew 23:4Supporting scripture?
That's not regarding local law. That's regarding religious leaders to disdain their words and actions. The same with Peters comments.One can be subject yet dissenting regarding law.
8 But you are not to be called rabbi, for you have one teacher, and you are all students. 9 And call no one your father on earth, for you have one Father—the one in heaven. 10 Nor are you to be called instructors, for you have one instructor, the Messiah. 11 The greatest among you will be your servant. 12 All who exalt themselves will be humbled, and all who humble themselves will be exalted.
13 “But woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you lock people out of the kingdom of heaven. For you do not go in yourselves, and when others are going in, you stop them. 15 Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you cross sea and land to make a single convert, and you make the new convert twice as much a child of hell as yourselves.
It was regarding the Father above. He mentions that earlier in the day as well.Here Jesus was referencing the Jewish leadership as the authority from above given to Pilate
Not unless the Father committed a greater sin than Pilate.It was regarding the Father above. He mentions that earlier in the day as well.
The 'won't lift a finger" part that makes it about laws that need changed.That's not regarding local law. That's regarding religious leaders to disdain their words and actions. The same with Peters comments.
I've never argued that laws don't need to be changed.The 'won't lift a finger" part that makes it about laws that need changed.
Matthew 23:4
They tie up heavy burdens, hard to bear, and lay them on the shoulders of others; but they themselves are unwilling to lift a finger to move them.
Judas turned against Jesus. Pilate was following the law as God intended.Not unless the Father committed a greater sin than Pilate.
?” 11 Jesus answered him, “You would have no power over me unless it had been given you from above; therefore the one who handed me over to you is guilty of a greater sin.”
Your argument was about there being a biblical example of righteous dissent. Jesus is dissenting yet remains subject to the Jewish leaders.I've never argued that laws don't need to be changed.
"When Jesus called the Pharisees “vipers” and threw the money-changers out of the Temple for their evil actions, was He repaying evil for evil? No, He was taking a stand for righteousness. He resisted evil rulers who were oppressing the people. His actions show that verbal accusations and physical force are sometimes necessary to stand for righteousness and to protect others."They responded that the church leaders had no authority over their legal actions.
Matthew 15:1-3Your argument was about there being a biblical example of righteous dissent. Jesus is dissenting yet remains subject to the Jewish leaders.