So. Bapt. leader: Chrstians should support homo-marriage rulings

So. Bapt. leader: Chrstians should support homo-marriage rulings

  • Yes, and I will post N.T. chapter and verse to prove it.

    Votes: 2 28.6%

  • No, I don't think believers were given that option, even in cases like this.

    Votes: 2 28.6%

  • Undecided.

    Votes: 3 42.9%
  • Total voters
    7
  • Poll closed .
musterion

musterion

Well-known member
http://christiannews.net/2015/02/15...es-must-uphold-gay-marriage-ruling-or-resign/

“In a Christian ethic, there is a time for civil disobedience in cases of unjust laws . . . [but] Given the high bar required for civil disobedience, the way to address same-sex marriage in this circumstance is not by defying the rule of law, but by making our case before the legitimate authorities,” Moore stated.
Click to expand...

The context is the Alabama situation but the broader context, based on his reasons, would include all believers. Hence the poll question...what IS this "high bar required for civil disobedience" Moore referred to...not according to human historical precedent, and not even according to "a Christian ethic" (whatever that is), but according to the New Testament?

Or is there one?
 
GFR7

GFR7

New member
I voted "undecided" as I would have to think about supportive scripture.

Moore does not say what we are to do if we bring our case to the "proper authorities" and they vote against us..... :think:
 
musterion

musterion

Well-known member
GFR7 said:
I voted "undecided" as I would have to think about supportive scripture.
Click to expand...

Understood and a very fair stance.

Moore does not say what we are to do if we bring our case to the "proper authorities" and they vote against us..... :think:
Click to expand...

Exactly, and there's a good reason he did not.
 
GFR7

GFR7

New member
musterion said:
Exactly, and there's a good reason he did not.
Click to expand...
Is it because we are supposed to follow it, knowing that this world passes away and it's judgments are not the important ones (and thus often wholly wrong, even within the Churches, as predicted in the Book of Rev)? :think:
 
GFR7

GFR7

New member
musterion said:
That's definitely part of it, I think.
Click to expand...
I think so as well. :think:

Romans 13 :
Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad.
Click to expand...

In the bolded, one must admit that in our own era rulers might be a terror to the good. Unless we are speaking only of having a clear conscience, and then those who are on the side of unrighteous laws are in bad faith (those who campaigned for them, say with same sex marriage)....Just reflecting out loud a bit......;)
 
Ardima

Ardima

New member
musterion said:
Why you no vote?
Click to expand...

There was no option that is 100% correct. There is scripture to support both options, but in the end it depends on the spirit in which you act either way. Each situation is different and requires wisdom from the Holy Spirit to discern which is correct in each situation. Remember, sin is only committed when one acts outside of the Love of God.
 
PureX

PureX

Well-known member
Ardima said:
I believe it depends on the spirit in which the defiance takes place.
Click to expand...
I agree. But for that to become a factor for today's Christians, they would have to be willing to examine their own motives and inclinations. And sadly, that is not the goal of a great many of today's Christians, nor of modern Christianity in general. Christianity today seems to be all about judging and condemning others, drunk on it's own self-righteousness; not moral/spiritual self-examination, confession, repentance, and service to others.
 
C

Christian Liberty

Well-known member
Acts 5:29

GFR7 said:
I think so as well. :think:



In the bolded, one must admit that in our own era rulers might be a terror to the good. Unless we are speaking only of having a clear conscience, and then those who are on the side of unrighteous laws are in bad faith (those who campaigned for them, say with same sex marriage)....Just reflecting out loud a bit......;)
Click to expand...

Romans 13 only really makes sense if you assume it is talking about a just government (in other words, defining "governing authority" in the context of Romans 13:3-4), otherwise the passage does not make sense. If you do what is good and the government punishes you anyway, it is acting outside its proper scope and need not be obeyed. Paul fled the government when it attempted to arrest him for doing good, even though he had no Biblical obligation to do anything but turn himself in. You cannot use Romans 13 to defend slavish obedience to tyrants who are not rulers at all.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/2007/08/chuck-baldwin/the-myth-of-romans-13/
 
GFR7

GFR7

New member
Christian Liberty said:
Acts 5:29



Romans 13 only really makes sense if you assume it is talking about a just government (in other words, defining "governing authority" in the context of Romans 13:3-4), otherwise the passage does not make sense. If you do what is good and the government punishes you anyway, it is acting outside its proper scope and need not be obeyed. Paul fled the government when it attempted to arrest him for doing good, even though he had no Biblical obligation to do anything but turn himself in. You cannot use Romans 13 to defend slavish obedience to tyrants who are not rulers at all.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/2007/08/chuck-baldwin/the-myth-of-romans-13/
Click to expand...
:thumb: Good post~!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top