FOX Lies!! Barack Obama Pastor Wright

[Rico]

Originally Posted by BrotherEastman

I have a question. If the atomic bombs were dropped in 1945 on both Hiroshima, and Nagasaki; then why would God punish this generation of Americans for what the previous generation had done? If it were so wrong, I believe that God would've judged that generation, not this one. What proof does JW have that the previous generation was or wasn't judged? Of course, this question applies to anyone who can answer it, but I'd really like to see Chris answer.

Brother, you are forgetting that God is a long suffering God, especially when it comes to nations.

[Ferd]

Originally Posted by DividedThigh

all good points bro, wasted on deaf ears but good, 1945 bro, just a hint from an ex history teacher, dt

see what happens when you ballpark dates?

[ChristopherHall]

Originally Posted by ReformedDave

As I haven't figured out this cut-n-paste thing let me try to respond in a cogent manner.

You yourself have stated as such many times. Notice that not one of the smallest part of the law will be done away with till heaven and earth are.

No one is saying that the Law was “done away”. The Law has been laid in store for the time of the Kingdom when Christ shall use said Law righteously to rule the nations.

It is in effect now.

Demonstrate this by showing BIBLICAL examples of the New Testament church stoning sinners, using violence, advocating war, and resisting tyranny through revolution. Give BIBLE. If this were so we would see it in the first century Church. There are plenty of examples of Christians not using violence, revolution, activism, or lethal force throughout the New Testament. We also read an entire epistle where Paul rebukes Judaizers and those who would bring the Law upon gentiles under the New Covenant.

If the Law in its entirety is in effect the Church is required to officiate a rebuilt temple! That was never the fact in the NT! In fact we see just the opposite. Also you would have circumcision be required of us to fulfill the Law, failing to see it spiritually fulfilled in Christ and applied via water baptism in Jesus name.

Jesus was instructing people in the fullness of the law that the Pharisees had perverted. Christ goes on to say "you've heard it said but I say..." He corrected the misconception that was advocated by the teachers of that day. He wasn't changing the ten commandments.

First, the eye for an eye passage isn’t in the ten commandments. Second, Christ called his followers to loving God with all their hearts and loving their neighbors as themselves. In these two things they fulfilled the purpose of God’s Law. Jesus never advocated Christian Nationalist nation worship. IT IS WRITTEN:

John 18:36
“Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world:
if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants
fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is
my kingdom not from hence.”

We who are of HIS kingdom do not fight. Nor are we of this world and this world’s nations. We are not this world’s pawns. We are not this world’s politicians. We are dead to this world. This world and all that is in it is passing away. Your Christian Nationalist Utopia is a farce that will not be realized until the Lord Jesus returns in power and glory and establishes his Kingdom.

My point is that just because the church did something a certain way it doesn't mean that it SHOULD have been done this way.

Like becoming Trinitarian, marrying Christianity with the Roman government, and forcing ancient dominionism upon an entire continent with war, execution, extortion, and inquisitions?

Your doctrine is an ancient lie that has seen ascendancy in dark days when the supposed “orthodoxy” was enforced by the power of the sword. History testifies against you.

These laws were shadows pointing to what Christ accomplished of the cross and were ceremonial in nature. Actually as a side note, God destroyed some gentile countries that did not conform to His law. They had nothing to do with the civil authority.

Nothing in the New Testament suggests that Christians enforce OT law by use of civil government. Instead Christianity is a universal and spiritual kingdom working like leaven among all nations of this earth until our Lord comes and puts them to rest, subjugating them under his power. All Christians are to live peaceably and in obedience to the authorities until Christ returns.

We are in the salvation business…not the nation building business. You reduce Christianity to a political philosophy, a theocratic fascism.

I have never advocated a state in the line of Israel. I do believe that it is possible for a state to make as it's authority the Word of God.... and one day the world will all acknowledge that Jesus is sitting at the right hand of the Father now!

Surely you jest. Israel couldn’t even properly make their authority the Word of God…and that’s with all the mighty displays of his power in the OT. What in the world makes you think a gentile nation can accomplish what Israel couldn’t and was in fact destroyed for failing to do?

When Christ returns the mystery of iniquity will have run its course. Only a remnant church will remain. It will appear that he will not even find faith in the earth. Christ will establish his Kingdom and rule seated upon the throne of David and Israel shall be re-established in righteousness and we shall rule and reign with him. The World will acknowledge his power because he will personally subjugate all kingdoms to his rule. No need for Christian nationalism.

You read too much into the text. First Paul never says that the civil magistrate has to be a non Christian.

The point is that in context Paul is addressing a non-Christian emperor. In fact, Paul is advocating living peaceably under a tyrant, Nero. This would be fundamentally opposed to the Law of God and if you were correct Paul would have advocated rebellion and the institution of Biblical Law.

It is alright for a Christian to use the sword as long as he is part of the civil magistrate and uses it according to God's word.

The Christian wasn’t called to rule over the nation as the rulers of the gentiles do. We are a separate people who are part of a spiritual kingdom. You will remember that Satan tempted Christ with the kingdoms of this world. Dominionism is Satan’s tempting the church to grasp earthly kingdoms. Historically Christians refused public office or refused to use the sword when serving in public office thereby bringing public policy in harmony with the gospel. One may argue for the use of the sword to enforce justice. Again, that’s this world’s matter. If war is necessary one might argue for “just war” standards by which to wage war. However, with the deception abounding in our world a Christian does well not to involve themselves seeing that their government may be lying to them. David K. Bernard wrote something interesting,

The New Testament admonishes us to pay taxes, to
submit to governmental authority, and to pray for civil
leaders (Romans 13:1-7; I Timothy 2:1-3; Titus 3:1; I Peter
2:13-17), but it does not tell us to bear arms to support the
government. Although the Roman Empire was a pagan
government and a foreign dictatorship, Jesus did not
endorse Jewish rebellion against it, but taught submission
to civil government (Matthew 5:40-41; 17:24-27;
22:17-21). When slaves converted to Christianity, Paul
and Peter did not condone rebellion against their masters
but taught them to serve their masters, even harsh
masters, as they would the Lord (Ephesians 6:5; I Peter
2:18-21). – David K. Bernard, Practical Holiness

I served in the military and fought to have my MOS changed from 19K Tank Crewman (which I signed up for while unsaved) to 91B10 Combat Medical Specialist after becoming saved. Did I serve? Yes. Was I loyal? Yes. Was I a combatant? No. My duty was to preserve American lives and even the lives of wounded enemy….even if it meant risking my own life. I take this charge VERY seriously. We as Christians may serve no matter how dangerous…but not to the point of blood.

Show me where a sinner is the ONLY one who can rule. You keep pointing out history as it is automatically the correct practice of Christianity.

No. It is the outcome of a consistent Christian ethic.

[ChristopherHall]

Wasn't the centurion told to treat people fairly and to be satisfied with his pay? He was not told to change his job.

Yes. And history will show that centurions who became Christians were executed by Rome because they refused to shed blood for the empire. If a Christian centurion was ordered to slaughter a village of people resisting Roman authority, would they do it? What if a sizeable number of those in said village were his Christian brothers and sisters? If it is ok for the centurion to kill for government…can he lie, steal, and commit adultery for his government? And if he follows the orders of his government believing he is doing a noble deed and his government has lied did he not become a pawn of said worldly power and thereby responsible for placing himself in said position to commit grave sin against God by slaughtering unjustifiably? And if said centurion was marching proudly in Rome’s army and called to battle an enemy nation on the battle field…should he meet another convert of Christ’s serving in that country’s military would it glorify God that the slay one another by morning’s light? And if one is justified and the other is not, how do we determine which soldier shouldn’t have committed themselves to serve?

To treat people fairly would be to refrain from killing them in the interests of earthly nations…even if it called for the charge of treason…and Roman execution.

I don't believe in rebellion by the sword and that Christians must rise up and take over by force.

Ascendancy through peace and enforcement by sword. Islam teaches, “I will kiss thy hand today, that I might break it tomorrow.” How is this any different?

By the time John wrote his epistles gnosticism had come into the church and brought with it the spiritual/secular false dichotomy which is still with us.

Gnosticism wasn’t an issue of “civil law”. Gnosticism was a metaphysical structure of belief pitching spirit against flesh. Such called for extreme asceticism or antinomianism, binding one to purification rituals or releasing one to commit debauchery believing that the spirit was untainted by the flesh. You’re twisting both Christianity and Gnosticism to suit your purposes.

Many in the early church even denied that Christ had come bodily as the body is sinful.

Again, unrelated to Dominionism.

When Scripture uses the term "world" it is used in several different contexts. 1 John 2 states "15 Do not love the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. 16 For all that is in the world—the desires of the flesh and the desires of the eyes and pride in possessions—is not from the Father but is from the world. 17 And the world is passing away along with its desires, but whoever does the will of God abides forever." Here it is obvious that the 'world' is not a piece of earth but a philosophy of life that is ungodly and the fruits of it are "the desires of the flesh and the desires of the eyes and pride in possessions". If it were talking about the literal earth it would have to include much more than those things and would include things that we are to love.

It is written,

John 18:36
{18:36} Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world:
if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants
fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is
my kingdom not from hence. {18:37} Pilate therefore said
unto him, Art thou a king

Also consider,

John 6:15
{6:15} When Jesus therefore perceived that they would
come and take him by force, to make him a king, he
departed again into a mountain himself alone.

Christ isn’t after an earthly Kingdom…not until he returns in power and glory.

Now in Genesis we do have the creation mandate to take dominion over the earth and in Mathew 28 we are given guidance in how to do that. You say My response would be that we're to take dominion through evangelism. From the bottom-up! As more of the 'world' becomes believers it will become easier to form our laws with Biblical principles and to live accordingly.

Adam was granted dominion over the earth (i.e. the land, the garden as part of his charge to “keep” it). This doesn’t speak of Adam being given authority over other people, there were no other people.

Bestiality.

Wherever the term “fornication” is used we must realize it includes the entire gamut of sexual sin as defined by Scripture. Also since bestiality was a common practice in idolatrous worship one could include references to idolatry,
Acts 15:20
20 But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood. (KJV)
Gal 5:19
19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, (KJV)
Gal 5:21
21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God. (KJV)
Eph 5:5-6
5 For this ye know, that no whoremonger, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.
6 Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience. (KJV)

[Ferd]

Originally Posted by BrotherEastman

I have a question. If the atomic bombs were dropped in 1945 on both Hiroshima, and Nagasaki; then why would God punish this generation of Americans for what the previous generation had done? If it were so wrong, I believe that God would've judged that generation, not this one. What proof does JW have that the previous generation was or wasn't judged? Of course, this question applies to anyone who can answer it, but I'd really like to see Chris answer.

Easty, God punishes nations when "their cup of iniquity" is full. (see Amaleck)

I do believe that the Civil War was the judgement of God on America for the sin of slavery, remember that it was not the founding fathers generation(s) that suffered. the Civil war started 89 years after the Declaration of Independence.

So in part one must agree that the generation that sins isnt always the one that is punished. God allows time for the cup to be emptied in repentance or filled before he decides to forgo judgement or execute it on a nation.

But also understand that when God punishes a nation, it is total. Anyone who thinks 9/11 was Gods judgement has a small opinion of the Judgement of God.

Compair the loss of 3,000 on 9/11 to OT judement. Amaleck was distroyed in total. God said kill their men, women, children, sheep, goats, cows, and everything that lives. Israel and Judah were sent into slavery.

If one believes as I do that the Civil War was the judgement of God on America, consider that more Americans were killed/died from that war than in all the other wars we have fought combined!

Consider also that if Bombing Japan was a "sin" in Gods eyes, and sistimic/institutionalized racism that existed in America until the 1960's was a sin in Gods eyes, then it stands to reason that God in his grace gives a nation to repent.

Consider the shifting attitudes of Americans toward wholesale war, that in Iraq, we do not bomb civilian populations (turning a different direction from the past).

Consider the landmark legal decisions of the supreme court overturning institutionalized racism (sperate but equal), the vast amount of law that has been passed to counter racism. Consider that while we still have predjudice/racism today (read Rico's thread, it is brilliant), we are nowhere near as bad as we were in 1940 or even in 1980.

If God provides time for a nation to turn, then this nation has in many ways either done so or is doing so. And thus must be seen by God as worthy of more time.

Clearly then 9/11 cannot be the judement of God.

but that's just my 2 cents.

[ChristopherHall]

Originally Posted by Ferd

Chris, to begin with, I dont agree with anybody 100% of the time. David Bernard would be in that group of "Anybody"

The warning to Japan was to the government. It was direct and included a statement that Japan would face certain distruction. No mention of the Atom bomb was given.

However, no warning was given to the population to provide them opportunity to flee. No parents or children warned to flee the cities.

I still believe America was justified. the consequinces of not using the A-bomb would have been devistating.

Devastating according to whom? Us or God? Would it have been worth loosing another 500,000 or more in an effort to spare innocent lives? Those are deep philosophical questions I think anyone with a conscience would ask themselves. Remember soldiers sign up to fight…children playing on play grounds didn’t. The question becomes what is more precious, the unsuspecting civilian families of Japan or enlisted American soldiers? Who’s job was it to fight and die?

As a Christian…I wouldn’t have been able to drop the bomb. I would have declined participation in the action.

the invasion would have cost close to (if not) a million American lives, it would have cost hundreds of thousands of Japanese lives. It would have prolonged the war which would have led to extended famine in Japan.

Probable…but speculation. We’ll never know how it may have turned out.

It would have brought the Russians into the Japanese theator causeing extended conflict with the communists post WW2.

I can see that. However, that is the world’s problem. We do well to pray for God’s will and refrain from blood shed.

If I veiw the action from 1944 understanding of the intelegence, attitudes and experience, it was the right thing to do.

If I view it from 2008 understanding of the intelegence and with our vastly different moral perspective I still believe that the use of the Atom bomb reduced both the losses of American lives AND innocent Japanese lives.

The entire war is a symptom of man’s sin. Nothing involved was the “right thing to do”. The baseline is God’s righteousness standard of perfection….not our worldly number games no matter how it makes us feel better. Honestly, my carnal mind agrees with you. But God doesn’t see things the way we see them. The entire war from beginning to end was evil for evil. In a world submitted to God such would be impossibility.

Additionally I do not believe that America would have been justified in taking a moralist approach and remained unengaged in the war from the beginning.

The issue for me isn’t so much America’s involvement it’s “Christian” involvement and approval. I was taught that Christians should issue an indictment against the world and her wars…not choose sides.

Had we simply chosen not to respond to Japans attack at Pearl, they would eventually invaded the west coast.

At the time, American military experts felt like they would reach the rockies before we could stop them.

Had we not engaged in Europe, It is very likely that with only 1 front, the Germans would have dismantled the russians, and the "Final Solution" would have cost entire races their exestance. we are talking hundred(s) of millions of lives.

There is no scenario where I find it convenient for my faith in God to bring me to a moral perspective that allows untold distruction to occur while I maintain my "salvation".

Yes. Agreed. But that is an issue for the world’s governments to address. Perhaps they (the Allies) addressed it the best they could. My issue is the part of the “Christian”.

I hope you see my concern.

[ReformedDave]

Yes. And history will show that centurions who became Christians were executed by Rome because they refused to shed blood for the empire. If a Christian centurion was ordered to slaughter a village of people resisting Roman authority, would they do it? What if a sizeable number of those in said village were his Christian brothers and sisters? If it is ok for the centurion to kill for government…can he lie, steal, and commit adultery for his government? And if he follows the orders of his government believing he is doing a noble deed and his government has lied did he not become a pawn of said worldly power and thereby responsible for placing himself in said position to commit grave sin against God by slaughtering unjustifiably? And if said centurion was marching proudly in Rome’s army and called to battle an enemy nation on the battle field…should he meet another convert of Christ’s serving in that country’s military would it glorify God that the slay one another by morning’s light? And if one is justified and the other is not, how do we determine which soldier shouldn’t have committed themselves to serve?

To treat people fairly would be to refrain from killing them in the interests of earthly nations…even if it called for the charge of treason…and Roman execution.

I completely believe in a just punishment system and Scriptures tell what that is. I believe Scripture has set forth criteria and unjustifiable killing is a sin by an individual or state. Again, your anecdotal history is not authoritative. Why can't a Christian be a civil ruler? God can ONLY use SINNERS to administer the proper use of the sword?

Ascendancy through peace and enforcement by sword. Islam teaches, “I will kiss thy hand today, that I might break it tomorrow.” How is this any different?

I miss wrote. What I meant was is that Christians are not to be rebellious and that civil disobedience is allowable only after ALL other means are exhausted. The objectionable law would have to personally impact me and my Christian practice.

Gnosticism wasn’t an issue of “civil law”. Gnosticism was a metaphysical structure of belief pitching spirit against flesh. Such called for extreme asceticism or antinomianism, binding one to purification rituals or releasing one to commit debauchery believing that the spirit was untainted by the flesh. You’re twisting both Christianity and Gnosticism to suit your purposes.

Not really. This mindset has created a worldview where the Christian refuses to engage culture. You are a product of that thinking, not directly of coarse. You seem to espouse a belief where the Christian doesn't engage society in all levels. It is a form of antinomianism and God is not truly Lord of all. The body, and the world is seen as evil and we're to leave it alone or shun it, withdraw from politics, assume a 'neutral' position, etc.

Christ isn’t after an earthly Kingdom…not until he returns in power and glory.

Of coarse in my escatological position He is ruling now. "In earth as it is in heaven"

Wherever the term “fornication” is used we must realize it includes the entire gamut of sexual sin as defined by Scripture. Also since bestiality was a common practice in idolatrous worship one could include references to idolatry,
Acts 15:20
20 But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood. (KJV)
Gal 5:19
19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, (KJV)
Gal 5:21
21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God. (KJV)
Eph 5:5-6
5 For this ye know, that no whoremonger, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.
6 Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience. (KJV)

Really nothing to do with bestiality....Thank God for Leviticus.

[Praxeas]

Biblically speaking, don't judgments of this sort to nations happen only AFTER a prophetic warning to the nations? Those judgments were recorded. The only judgments I know of for a fact are God's ordained are those in the bible

[Ferd]

Originally Posted by ChristopherHall

I hope you see my concern.

Chris, I do see your concern. with respect, I disagree with your end conclusion. I do not believe that Christians can afford to simply step aside and do nothing.

We fundimentally disagree. I do understand your perspective.

let me ask you this. If you feel so strongly about it, how then do you participate in the political arena at all?

[Ferd]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Biblically speaking, don't judgments of this sort to nations happen only AFTER a prophetic warning to the nations? Those judgments were recorded. The only judgments I know of for a fact are God's ordained are those in the bible

Praxeas, I suspect that if you were to get into a time machine and travel back to 1842, you would find more than a few preachers warning that slavery was a national sin.

I suspect that God did warn. Understand that England effectively abolised slavery a hundred years before the American Civil war.

and I dont think there is a recoding of Amaleck being given a warning.