Guess.
Ph.D in Pot & the G.H.W. Bush Legacy
- Thread starter Jefferson
- Start date
Guess.
drbrumley
Well-known member
Not addressed to anyone, just my thoughts;
This thread has been an interesting read.
It still amazes me to this day why christians, good people, want to use the devil's playground to get what they think are biblical mandates passed. What should be happening is christians need to see the governments for what they are, Satan's playground and pass on it and if you want to change men's hearts, ask God to do it, cause that's the only way that will happen.
This thread has been an interesting read.
It still amazes me to this day why christians, good people, want to use the devil's playground to get what they think are biblical mandates passed. What should be happening is christians need to see the governments for what they are, Satan's playground and pass on it and if you want to change men's hearts, ask God to do it, cause that's the only way that will happen.
The law is how we teach people. It's the government's job to get the law right and in the Christian's best interest that it does.
drbrumley
Well-known member
Sorry, satan's kingdoms can't care one wit about God's law....that's your job to your children and those you call friends....
drbrumley
Well-known member
Im sure you don't. But your in it....like it or not. Again, your job is to be witness for Christ....
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
was Paul?
Governments are Satan's playground?
Bzzzzt!
Incorrect.
According to the Apostle Paul (re: governments, law):
Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God.Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves.For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same.For he is God’s minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid; for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God’s minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil.Therefore you must be subject, not only because of wrath but also for conscience’ sake.For because of this you also pay taxes, for they are God’s ministers attending continually to this very thing.Render therefore to all their due: taxes to whom taxes are due, customs to whom customs, fear to whom fear, honor to whom honor. - Romans 13:1-7 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans13:1-7&version=NKJV
Therefore the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. - Galatians 3:24 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians3:24&version=NKJV
You: governments are Satan's playground
Paul: governments are God's ministers for good, who bring terror to evil workers, but not good, are appointed by God, does not bear the sword in vain, and an avenger to execute wrath on one who practices evil.
Also Paul: the law is a tutor to bring people to Christ
Sorry, Doc, gonna go with Paul on this one, and not you.
drbrumley
Well-known member
Absolutely he was. And He knew it. And he handled it the way He was instructed, perhaps becoming the greatest Christian to ever walk the earth.
What better way than urging politicians to honor God?
drbrumley
Well-known member
Yes!
In your esteemed opinion...
So out comes a tyrants favorite passage....an a feeble attempt to shut me down and say "see, see!"
Agreed.....
Yes!
Another feeble attempt to shut me down and say "see, see!"
You do realize that's twice you quoted the same verse my friend.
That's fine and nothing to be sorry about....even tho you really are not siding with Paul, but Bob. And Bob is a great teacher, he is just wrong on this.
drbrumley
Well-known member
I don't disagree with that, as politicians are human beings as well. We should do as you said here.
In the loosest sense, maybe.
Could you provide scripture that says this?
No, according to the Apostle Paul.
Calling me a tyrant for quoting Paul?
:think:
Or maybe you're calling Paul a tyrant? :liberals:
Again, could you provide scripture that says that governments are Satan's playground?
If your position contradicts scripture, then you should be humble enough to acknowledge that you're wrong.
My position is that governments are God's ministers, something stated explicitly (and multiple times) by Paul.
Your position, is that governments are "Satan's playground," which is contradictory to what Paul said.
I did no such thing.
I quoted verses, then I compared excerpts from those passages with what you said.
Please read more carefully.
Who? :idunno:
I'm quoting the Bible here, not some guy named Bob...
:noid:
WizardofOz
New member
One last bump for [MENTION=16942]JudgeRightly[/MENTION] :juggle:
Harming someone, even permanently, should be illegal, and the one causing harm should be punished by paying medical fees and wages lost (if applicable), and flogging. If permanent harm is caused, eye for eye, hand for hand, foot for foot, and if necessary, life for life.
WizardofOz
New member
So yes, you believe that it should be illegal for someone to smoke inside their own home if another person is present. Correct?
No. I said that if a person causes harm to another, they should be punished by restitution, and/or corporal punishment, or death.
Last edited:
WizardofOz
New member
Do you think that second hand smoke does not cause damage?
So, if you concede that second hand smoke does cause damage to others, why do you feel that it shouldn't be illegal to cause this harm in this regard?
I'm just trying to understand your position. Given the above, it seems a tad inconsistent. :idunno:
You A) feel that second hand smoke causes damage. You also feel that B) if a person causes harm to another, they should be punished by restitution, corporal punishment, or death. Given this, why would you give a person causing harm in this way a pass?
I have answered this before. My answer has not changed.
Why does there have to be a specific law to make it illegal for a person to smoke inside his house when another person is present?
You're (unintentionally, perhaps) attempting to multiply laws. Too many laws means no one can know all the laws, which makes it more likely that someone will break the law, and increases the need for people who study the law.
If harming someone (by any means) is punishable by the above punishments, why would there need to be a law prohibiting a specific action that causes harm?
Your law:
would be redundant and unnecessary under my law:
| harming someone (by any means) is punishable by [restitution and/or corporal punishment, or death penalty] |