|
Post by ebrayley on Jul 24, 2006 11:28:45 GMT -5
It's a strange thing... I understand what you are saying, Josh, and I agree with you more than anyone else on this issue. For instance, if I were pastor of a church and the church came under siege for some reason, I would exhort my congregation NOT to "barricade the door and grab the shotguns from under the pews" so to speak. If I were being beaten, I would not strike back. If someone wanted to kill me, I would not resist. At the same time I would support forces fighting back an invasion of Islam, or defend a woman being assaulted and calling for help, or shooting a person who is about to murder another. It really depends on the situation. However, even when you are forced to act it does not nullify trusting in God or letting him take vengeance. Think of David and Goliath. David killed him, but it was God working from the very beginning. Of course, I will continue to think about this and will probably change my mind when I get gray hair (Lord willing)
|
|
|
Post by Josh Parsley on Jul 24, 2006 22:26:41 GMT -5
Amen.
Love your neighbors as yourself, no matter what the government tells you.
The only completely Christ honoring government is the one ran completely by Him. From what I understand that will happen in the Millennium.
Yes is it resistance. Did he use guns or clubs?
That sounds good, and personally I have no problem with it, but making "Christ honoring laws" will not change hearts. The Gospel changes the heart. Have you heard much about Dowie and what he did in Zion? You should check it out if you haven't. We are not called to make utopias, but rather preach the Gospel and see mens hearts changed. Regardless of what the law says, mens hearts will still be wicked unless they are born again.
If this is so true, can you show me one New Testament example of it?
I don't have a problem with the word "resisting evil," but do not agree in as you said will happen, "a gun in one hand and a bible in the other."
|
|
|
Post by oap001 on Jul 25, 2006 6:30:53 GMT -5
Amen. Love your neighbors as yourself, no matter what the government tells you. The only completely Christ honoring government is the one ran completely by Him. From what I understand that will happen in the Millennium. Yes is it resistance. Did he use guns or clubs? That sounds good, and personally I have no problem with it, but making "Christ honoring laws" will not change hearts. The Gospel changes the heart. Have you heard much about Dowie and what he did in Zion? You should check it out if you haven't. We are not called to make utopias, but rather preach the Gospel and see mens hearts changed. Regardless of what the law says, mens hearts will still be wicked unless they are born again. If this is so true, can you show me one New Testament example of it? I don't have a problem with the word "resisting evil," but do not agree in as you said will happen, "a gun in one hand and a bible in the other." I think the point is Josh, is that the tribulation period is a time of war. Why would Christ leave His Church and place them in a position where they will be required to fight? I am curious though what you think of this article? www.mercyseat.net/atimeforwar.htm
|
|
|
Post by Josh Parsley on Jul 25, 2006 10:25:08 GMT -5
Maybe I didn't read that article close enough, but I didn't notice where they said we should use guns, in the "war" they were talking about. It is a war. 2Co 10:4 (For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds;) Carnal warfare will never overtake spiriutal powers. 2Co 10:3 For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh:
Eph 6:12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. Brother, who are you at war with? Does Christian Doctrine change in time of persecution? I like this quote from Ravenhill: "Would we send our daughters off to have sex if it would benefit our country? Yet, we send our sons off to kill when we think it would benefit our country!"
|
|
|
Post by Josh Parsley on Jul 25, 2006 10:30:52 GMT -5
“I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men; For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty. For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.” (1Tim 2:1-4)
We are to pray for all who are in authority, not just our government. It's hard for me to concieve praying for a government and declaring war against them.
|
|
|
Post by oap001 on Jul 25, 2006 12:36:16 GMT -5
Maybe I didn't read that article close enough, but I didn't notice where they said we should use guns, in the "war" they were talking about. It is a war. 2Co 10:4 (For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds;) Carnal warfare will never overtake spiriutal powers. 2Co 10:3 For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh:
Eph 6:12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. Brother, who are you at war with? Does Christian Doctrine change in time of persecution? I like this quote from Ravenhill: "Would we send our daughters off to have sex if it would benefit our country? Yet, we send our sons off to kill when we think it would benefit our country!" I'm not saying we are to use guns in the culture war either. But Josh you said that we had to obey the government. Clearly this represents a very clear resistance movement. There are principals at debate here that you refuse to take into consideration.
|
|
|
Post by Josh Parsley on Jul 25, 2006 18:03:45 GMT -5
I did? If you can quote me on that, I will recant. I don't ever remember saying obey the government.
|
|
|
Post by oap001 on Jul 25, 2006 19:23:52 GMT -5
I did? If you can quote me on that, I will recant. I don't ever remember saying obey the government. Ok, thats fair enough, I'm not about to go back and look. But I believe you did say that. What those guys did, by blocking the way for sodomite marriages. That was right and it and it should be duplicated through out the country. We really need to be "active resisters" in the culture war.
|
|
|
Post by oap001 on Jul 25, 2006 21:38:42 GMT -5
A Biblical Response to
Those Who Say We Should Disarm; to
Those Who Teach Pacifism; to
Those Who Think the Bible Has Nothing to Say About Arms
by Pastor Matt Trewhella
Genesis 4:8-12 In this passage, Scripture records the first murder wherein Cain killed Abel. That Cain must have used some sort of weapon to kill Abel is evidenced by the fact that Abel was bleeding (he was not strangled). Notice how God responded to the killing. He did not institute some sort of weapon-control, rather, He punished the one who committed the crime.
Exodus 20 and following In His holy Law, which God decreed at Sinai, nowhere do you see God outlawing weapons in regards to the various crimes which He prohibited in His legislation. He always punishes the perpetrator. He never disarms the citizenry.
Exodus 22:2 In this verse, God declares that if someone breaks into your house at night and you kill him, you are not guilty of murder. This verse makes clear that you have a God-given right to defend yourself and to defend your family.
Deuteronomy 22:23-27 This passage deals with rape. Notice that verse 27 ends with the words "but there was no one to save her." What is the implication of such a statement? The implication is that had someone been around to hear her cry out, they had a moral duty to intervene and protect her from being raped. To stand by would be immoral. We have a God-given right to defend not only ourselves, but also others.
Numbers 1 In His economy, God instituted an armed citizenry, not a standing army, in order to deal with the affairs of war regarding Israel. This is what the Founding Fathers of America envisioned for our nation. Even in Switzerland today, every home is furnished with a machine gun (one of the reasons Hitler chose not to invade Switzerland).
I Samuel 13:19-22 The Philistines disarmed the Israelites. Weapon-control was instituted. No blacksmiths were allowed lest the Israelites arm themselves. A disarmed people is the sign of a conquered people. A disarmed people is the sign of an enslaved people.
Isaiah 2:1-5 Many, including the United Nations, take the latter part of verse 4 in this passage, which states "they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks," and try to say that God wants us to disarm. The context makes clear however, that "swords will be beaten into plowshares and spears into pruning hooks" when God Himself rules, not when the United Nations or any other government of man rules.
Matthew 5:38-39 In this passage, Jesus is not denigrating the Law of God in regards to one’s right to defend himself and others, rather He is repudiating the lex talionis - the law of retaliation, which said, "if someone messes you up today, you go back and mess him up five times worse tomorrow." The Pharisees were even using the Law of God to justify this mindset. Jesus is repudiating this personal vengeance which some sought to justify and participate in. He is not saying we cannot defend ourselves or others.
Vengeance belongs to God (Romans 12:19; Deuteronomy 32:35; Proverbs 20:22). We are not to avenge ourselves. If we see someone who needs our help during the commission of a crime, we have a God-given right and duty to intervene. If however, the crime has been committed (past tense), we have no God-given right or duty to go and execute judgment upon the perpetrator. God will avenge. God will judge.
God has given the sword (a symbol of judgment) to the civil magistrate (Romans 13:4). If a crime has been committed, it is to be reported to the civil authorities and they have a God-given right and duty before God to execute judgment.
Matthew 26:51-52 Some try to say that this passage proves that Jesus was a pacifist and against guns. Quite the contrary. Where does Jesus tell Peter to put his sword? "In its place." John makes it clearer, Jesus said to Peter "Put your sword into the sheath" (John 18:11). Jesus didn’t tell him to melt it down into a plowshare, rather he told him to put it "into the sheath." The sword has its proper place. It’s not evil. But Peter was wanting to use it in an improper situation. Jesus came to earth to die. Peter would be abrogating the purposes of God if he intervened with the sword. As Jesus goes on to say in verse 11 of John chapter 18, "Shall I not drink the cup which My Father has given Me?" Jesus was trying to teach His disciples that His Kingdom is not expanded in the earth through the use of force, rather it is expanded through the preaching of the Gospel and the discipling of the nations.
If someone wants to live by the sword, they will die by the sword, as Jesus says. In other words, he who uses the sword for improper purposes will die by it. It was improper for Peter to have used it in that situation. A criminal or a tyrant who uses the sword improperly will rightly die by it. But the use of the sword in a proper fashion, to defend one’s person or one’s family or one’s country, is not condemned by Scripture, rather Scripture upholds it.
God is not a pacifist. Jesus is not a pacifist. As Jesus said in the very next verse, verse 53, "Or do you not think that I cannot now pray to My Father, and He will provide Me with more than twelve legions of angels?" Jesus could have used force. The use of force; the use of swords were simply improper for the situation in which Christ was involved. He was suppose to die. He and the Father are not pacifists. He did not use force because He had to drink the cup of the Father.
Exodus 15:3 This verse of Scripture declares the Lord to be a "man of war." That God is not a pacifist is evidenced throughout Scripture. Even Jesus Himself, who is the brightness of God’s glory and the express image of His person, and who has declared all that God is (Hebrews 1:3; John 1:18), drove the moneychangers out of the temple with a whip and overturned their tables (John 2:15). The book of Revelation defines Him as a King who does what? "Judges and makes war" (Revelation 19:11). The Scripture declares that Jesus Christ is "the same yesterday, today, and forever" (Hebrews 13:8). God’s character does not change. God is not a pacifist.
In closing, there are some who say that "we should not have guns; we should just trust God." My response to those who say this is - "let me ask you, do you have a lock on your front door?" They always say "yes." I then ask "Do you lock it when you leave or go to bed at night?" Those who live in the city always say "yes." I then ask "Why do you have a lock on your door? Why don’t you just trust God?"
Just because we have a lock on our door or a gun in our closet does not mean we are trusting in them to protect us with the same trust with which we’re to trust the Lord.
Rather, we simply see the wisdom and prudence of having such things in order to be good stewards in protecting our belongings and our families.
The psalmist understood that there was no contradiction. The psalmist (David) who said in verse one of Psalm 144 "Blessed be the Lord my Rock, Who trains my hands for war, and my fingers for battle" said in verse two of Psalm 144 "My lovingkindness and my fortress, My high tower and my deliverer, My shield and the one in whom I take refuge."
|
|
|
Post by Josh Parsley on Jul 31, 2006 14:01:40 GMT -5
Can you show me one example of physical fighting in the NT. I don't believe you can do it. I've looked. I use to hold your position. What if I were so raddical that I told a soldier the same thing John the Baptist told one? Would you call me a heretic? (although i've never done this, and am not conviced you are not saved if you do fight...) Luk 3:14 And the soldiers likewise demanded of him, saying, And what shall we do? And he said unto them, Do violence to no man, neither accuse any falsely; and be content with your wages. Here is my example, which Peter said that ye should follow. 1Pe 2:19-23 For this is thankworthy, if a man for conscience toward God endure grief, suffering wrongfully. For what glory is it, if, when ye be buffeted for your faults, ye shall take it patiently? but if, when ye do well, and suffer for it, ye take it patiently, this is acceptable with God. For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps[/u]: Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth: Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not; but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously: Here is a small except from George Fox's journal. From what I understand the government tried to get him to lead the civil war (in his country). The time of my commitment to the house of correction being very nearly ended, and there being many new soldiers raised, the commissioners would have made me captain over them; and the soldiers cried out that they would have none but me. So the keeper of the house of correction was commanded to bring me before the commissioners and soldiers in the market-place, where they offered me that preferment, as they called it, asking me if I would not take up arms for the Commonwealth against Charles Stuart. I told them I knew whence all wars arose, even from the lusts, according to James’ doctrine; and that I lived in the virtue of that life and power that took away the occasion of all wars.
Yet they courted me to accept of their offer, and thought I did but compliment them. But I told them I was come into the covenant of peace, which was before wars and strifes were.
They said they offered it in love and kindness to me because of my virtue; and such-like flattering words they used. But I told them, if that was their love and kindness, I trampled it under my feet. Then their rage got up, and they said, “Take him away, jailer, and put him into the prison amongst the rogues and felons.” So I was put into a lousy, stinking place, without any bed, amongst thirty felons, where I was kept almost half a year; yet at times they would let me walk to the garden, believing I would not go away.
|
|
|
Post by oap001 on Aug 1, 2006 0:57:13 GMT -5
Can you show me one example of physical fighting in the NT. I don't believe you can do it. I've looked. I use to hold your position. What if I were so raddical that I told a soldier the same thing John the Baptist told one? Would you call me a heretic? (although i've never done this, and am not conviced you are not saved if you do fight...) Luk 3:14 And the soldiers likewise demanded of him, saying, And what shall we do? And he said unto them, Do violence to no man, neither accuse any falsely; and be content with your wages. Ok Josh...good verse. In fact as being a "police officer" this verse has special meaning to me. I've studied it and it speaks to those who have authority to take life. 1) They were not rebuked for being military men. Or for having the sword. 2) Basically I think this verse says..don't harm anyone unjustly..be honnest and content....a days work for a days pay. 3) Don't lie. 4) See in this industry there is a temptation to do things under you own power. Like take all the drug dealers off the street by any means possible. Attempting to get in front of God with your authority. 5) God never said...don't ever use force against somebody. He gave them instructions for conduct among their kind. Here is my example, which Peter said that ye should follow. 1Pe 2:19-23 For this is thankworthy, if a man for conscience toward God endure grief, suffering wrongfully. For what glory is it, if, when ye be buffeted for your faults, ye shall take it patiently? but if, when ye do well, and suffer for it, ye take it patiently, this is acceptable with God. For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps[/u]: Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth: Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not; but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously: Here is a small except from George Fox's journal. From what I understand the government tried to get him to lead the civil war (in his country). The time of my commitment to the house of correction being very nearly ended, and there being many new soldiers raised, the commissioners would have made me captain over them; and the soldiers cried out that they would have none but me. So the keeper of the house of correction was commanded to bring me before the commissioners and soldiers in the market-place, where they offered me that preferment, as they called it, asking me if I would not take up arms for the Commonwealth against Charles Stuart. I told them I knew whence all wars arose, even from the lusts, according to James’ doctrine; and that I lived in the virtue of that life and power that took away the occasion of all wars.
Yet they courted me to accept of their offer, and thought I did but compliment them. But I told them I was come into the covenant of peace, which was before wars and strifes were.
They said they offered it in love and kindness to me because of my virtue; and such-like flattering words they used. But I told them, if that was their love and kindness, I trampled it under my feet. Then their rage got up, and they said, “Take him away, jailer, and put him into the prison amongst the rogues and felons.” So I was put into a lousy, stinking place, without any bed, amongst thirty felons, where I was kept almost half a year; yet at times they would let me walk to the garden, believing I would not go away. [/quote] This example is a man who had a conviction against fighting in a war. I agree that there are unjust wars. I don't think there is anything sinful with someone who has an earnest belief in not fighting in a certian conflict. Personally I don't think everyone should jump on the Bush band wagon and wave flags and such. I'm just basing my arguement on the concept that there is a time for war. There is a time to resist tyrany and to also defend the helpless. We should be able to agree on that. I respect your conviction on the when and where part.
|
|
|
Post by Josh Parsley on Aug 1, 2006 12:35:13 GMT -5
The main area of my disagreement is if someone were to get punched or something while preaching the Gospel, and begin to beat up the other person.
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Aug 1, 2006 13:47:47 GMT -5
I am all for the self-defense of an individual, a family, a society, and a country.
But if someone is preaching the gospel, and they start getting beat up, I do not believe they should fight back at all.
I will defend myself, my family, and my country, but if I am attacked for preaching the gospel, I would rather die then to fight back.
I know of at least one open air preacher that I have heard about who will actually beat up hecklers if they hit him. In fact, a women slapped him and then he punched her in the face. The cops showed up and they were both arrested. I watched this on video. What a terrible witness!
And then comes the issue of abortion doctors etc etc. Should Christians kill abortion doctors. My answer is NO! Get them saved! It's the only way to stop abortion. If you kill one, another one will pop up in his place. God's way, and our way should be, not violence but preaching!
I do however believe that the government should outlaw abortion and then the government should prosecute abortion doctors and women who have abortions as murderers and sentence them to 25-life in prison or execution. This is not the job of Christians or the Church, but is the responsibility of the government.
|
|
|
Post by messengermicah on Aug 1, 2006 14:04:10 GMT -5
I agree with Jesse on this wholeheartedly.
|
|
|
Post by oap001 on Aug 1, 2006 14:33:39 GMT -5
I agree with Jesse on this wholeheartedly. I agree with Jessee as well. Although I think a person still has the right to defend himself while preaching. I guess it would depend on how bad he is being beaten. Certainly I don't think he should allow himself to be beaten to death. But I will think on it. Defense of the unborn...I agree most with Pastor Ovadal's position. Its had to put a finger on someone's actions like Paul Hill. It's hard to say point blank that he is wrong. However I don't think he was right. I think it was right to bring him to justice but at the same time he did not get a fair trial. I do not support the killing of abortion doctors. But I think that the Government should protect unborn children the way they protect born children. I think that civil disobedience as a mode of resistance is just for this situation. Its very had for me to think of being in a situation of having to defend someone employed by planned parenthood. I would never to any over time work for them. And as my conviction is I would do what I could to maintain order as everyone should be protected by the government. But I have also balanced that by taking a public stand for the Lord. This is a great topic!
|
|
|
Post by Josh Parsley on Aug 1, 2006 15:04:11 GMT -5
Brother, do you think the early church martyrs were crazy or something? (please don't take that the wrong way) Why do you think Stephen wasn't throwing stones back? Look through the early church martyrs. Why didn't they fight people when they were preaching and such? Jesus said not to. This is the area that I so strongly disagree with: fighting while preaching. I'm not as sure on the other areas.
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Aug 1, 2006 15:05:27 GMT -5
Honestly,
If someone tried to shot an abortion doctor, I would jump infront of the bullet if I could.
I would do that for anyone. No one deserves it. But I would more willingly jump in front of the bullet to save an unsaved sinner then to save a righteous saint, because unsaved sinners go to hell forever but saved saints go to Heaven.
|
|
|
Post by oap001 on Aug 1, 2006 15:15:28 GMT -5
Brother, do you think the early church martyrs were crazy or something? (please don't take that the wrong way) Why do you think Stephen wasn't throwing stones back? Look through the early church martyrs. Why didn't they fight people when they were preaching and such? Jesus said not to. This is the area that I so strongly disagree with: fighting while preaching. I'm not as sure on the other areas. I have a hard time to honestly say I would allow myself to be beaten to death. God has a call on my life and he has blessed me with a family that I intend to raise. So I will admit to you that I am not there yet. Possibly if I were old and my family was raised God would convict me that way. I also have to honestly say that there is no one that I would take a bullet for. No one but my family members....however I would run into a burning building and 'risk" my life to save anyone including abortion doctors and the unsaved.
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Aug 1, 2006 15:17:03 GMT -5
But isn't this what our Lord did? And aren't we called to follow in His foot steps?
|
|
|
Post by messengermicah on Aug 1, 2006 16:11:57 GMT -5
Let's not forget there were many times Jesus purposely avoided persecution.
I cannot see myself fighting back if attacked when preaching (and I have been attacked several times), but I can see a point at which you should get out of harm's way if possible.
There is a time to be beaten to death and there is a time to avoid further physical harm. It depends on the circumstance.
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Aug 1, 2006 16:22:34 GMT -5
If a mob is coming to your house to kill you, get dropped out of the window in a basket!
|
|
|
Post by oap001 on Aug 1, 2006 16:25:12 GMT -5
If a mob is coming to your house to kill you, get dropped out of the window in a basket! Yes I agree...that if we have the option to retreat we must do so.
|
|
|
Post by rebecca02 on Aug 1, 2006 16:27:32 GMT -5
Do you think women more vulnerable to attacks than men if they are preaching alone? I try to mainly preach salvation but even then people get really angry.Ive never been afraid of violence though.Im more concerned with keeping in the will of God and Im really confused as to whether women should preach especially alone.
|
|
|
Post by messengermicah on Aug 1, 2006 16:43:42 GMT -5
It is always better to preach with someone else if possible, whether you are male or female.
I don't know if women are necessarily more susceptible to attacks than men. My wife has never been attacked but I have. Another sister who preaches with us has never been attacked either.
Sometimes though I guess we have to preach alone, and let the chips fall where they may.
I have been preaching many times, and the situation was on the verge of a riot. Officers would ask us to stop or take a break for our own safety. I can understand this. It reaches a point of diminishing return to continue to preach to a mob.
I do not say this out of fear, as I had no fear at all during these times, and am ready to lay down my life if necessary.
I just don't think it is so black and white, that you must stay preaching until you are beaten to death in every situation.
I certainly never like to back down and never do, unless told by police to do so. I just think sometimes in the heat of battle we may not act wisely.
I am continually reminded of the scripture:
And in nothing terrified by your adversaries, which is to them an evident token of perdition, but to you of salvation and that of God. Phillipians 1:28
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Aug 1, 2006 16:43:46 GMT -5
I believe a women should preach, but as a general rule she should not preach alone. Though there is always room for exception. I know women who have preached alone and God has blessed them tremendously.
I think it is also good for men not to preach alone. Though I have preached alone and know others who do.
So as a general rule, go out at least two by two.
|
|
|
Post by rebecca02 on Aug 1, 2006 16:46:19 GMT -5
I guess what I am trying to say here is that when women preaching alone it's kind of like your asking for trouble in a way or do you think either way it doesn't matter.Im not afraid at all of violence but is it a WISE thing to do or not? I really don't have time to make a bunch of plans to go out with other people.It's hard enogh to find people to go out with and preach, there just aren't very many in this area unless I go to Tampa with GNN...
|
|
|
Post by oap001 on Aug 1, 2006 16:49:27 GMT -5
Do you guys think we should picket abortion mills and doctors homes PEACEFULY and attempt to have them closed down?
|
|
|
Post by messengermicah on Aug 1, 2006 16:52:27 GMT -5
pacp,
Yes.
rebecca,
Again, it is never best to preach alone whether you are male or female.
However, if you must preach alone, then preach alone. It is just not ideal. I preach alone sometimes.
|
|
|
Post by rebecca02 on Aug 1, 2006 16:54:09 GMT -5
You're right Jesse, Jesus did send them out two by two.That's not always an option though but it's a good idea.
|
|
|
Post by rebecca02 on Aug 1, 2006 16:55:41 GMT -5
Micah, It's definitely not ideal that's for sure but sometimes you have to...
|
|