Thanks Bob

[elected4ever]

Dominion Theology Do You agree with this?http://www.religioustolerance.org/reconstr.htm

 

[PKevman]

Exactly. So... back where we started. If you do not have the right to kill a homosexual, how can you delegate that right to your elected representative?

I can't. God did. :think:

Agreed. But homosexuals committed no act against anyone but themselves. Yet you want to kill them.

Homosexuality is a destructive deathstyle not a lifestyle. It is also in Romans 1 shown to be a clear indication that a society has utterly turned its back on God. God knows better than people do what ARE and AREN'T destructive behaviors. Homosexuality is a destructive behavior (just see the average life expectancy of homosexuals for an example). How many people have died from the AIDS virus who WEREN'T homosexuals? So homosexuality has not been this innocent lifestyle that it is portrayed as.

This is not even taking into account the number of little boys (like myself) who were molested in childhood by homosexuals. And statistics show this to be a very high rate of the molestations in our country when compared to other molestations.

If homosexuality were punishable by death there would be FAR fewer homosexuals (as our country's history is an evidence of), thus there would be far fewer people dying of AIDS, far fewer innocents who never did anything wrong and contracted AIDS by a blood transfusion or something of the like, FAR fewer young boys molested and having their childhood taken away from them, and FAR less confused and torn people walking around in our society who are "gender challenged".

This perversion is a cancer to our society and the more we tolerate it, the worse it is going to get! Apathy doesn't reach anyone. Saying "Oh shoot they aren't hurting anyone", doesn't change anything. They are hurting themselves and as I have explained in this post they are hurting our society and plenty of innocent people.

I don't personally want to kill homosexuals, I want to reach them with the gospel. I want to see our government do its job and enforce what should be capital offenses. I believe homosexuality is a capital offense. Until our government agrees it is almost a moot point to bicker over it.

So the government acts like the vigilante?

NOOOO..... It does what it is supposed to do my friend. A vigilante by definition is lawless. Enforcing law is not lawlessness.....

Hope he doesn't change his mind about salvation.

Thank God our eternal security doesn't rest in the false doctrine of utter immutability, but rather in the fact that God is loving, relational, and good, and that He seals us with His holy Spirit according to the book of Ephesians.

You didn't address as to whether or not the instances I gave you indicate that God can and has changed in some ways. He doesn't change in His holy and righteous character. God is, always has been, and always will be:

1. Living
2. Personal
3. Relational
4. Good
5. Loving

Those are things that will NEVER change about God along with His holiness and righteousness. That being said, Scripture is REPLETE with examples of God changing. Pagan Greek philosophy has so infiltrated Christian teaching (going all the way back to Augustine who got his ideas from Aristotle and pagan Greeks), that people have denied this basic and fundamental teaching of Scripture.

Who did he say that to?

He said it to Israel. He said a lot of things to Israel. Some of them are truths that carry over to all dispensations, and some (such as dietary restrictions) were specific to that dispensation of Law and to His people Israel.

Murder, Adultery, Homosexuality, and the like are still wrong morally and should be punishable by death, and that has not changed one bit..... :think:

 

[Bob Enyart]

DrBrumley, it's humbling to read your OP...

DrBrumley, it's humbling to read your OP...

DrBrumley, it's humbling to read your OP.

Thanks, and may God bless you.

-Bob

p.s. And for those Ron Paul supporters who deny that he is pro-choice state-by-state, there is nothing one can do for them if they won't read his bills and interviews and see that is his open and blatant position, except point out their hypocrisy.

And for those Ron Paul supporters who admit he is pro-choice state-by-state, and say that the Constitution allows the states to kill the unborn, there is nothing one can do for such "constitutionalists" who ignore the federal constitution's 5th and 14th amendments' guarantee of the right to life, except point out their hypocrisy.

And for those Ron Paul supporters who admit he is pro-choice state by state, and accept apathy in our federal government regarding the systematic slaughter of the innocent, there is nothing one can do for them except expose their frustration and immaturity.

-Bob Enyart
Denver Bible Church & KGOV.com

 

[Granite]

Careful, the constitution is irrelevant to some here.

No kidding. Sometimes I wonder what some of these people actually like about their country, because it seems often that they really, really hate it.

 

[S†ephen]

A little something we're all overlooking.

When Leviticus 20:13 was written (the passage giving the death penalty for homosexuality) Israel was under a theocracy.

understand this well friends:
There was no man made government. A theocracy is a government led by a Deity. Those laws came specifically from God Himself to a nation He Himself led.

Now, fast forward to the time of Jesus long after Israel rejected their theocracy (for that look in 1 Samuel chapter 7) and let's look at the third temptation Satan gives to Christ in Matthew 4:8-10

~Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor. "All this I will give you," he said, "if you will bow down and worship me."~

JESUS DOES NOT DENY SATAN'S OWNERSHIP

Jesus said to him, "Away from me, Satan! For it is written: 'Worship the Lord your God, and serve him only.


So...

Will someone please show the passage of scripture that allows us to use man made government as a hammer to kill homosexuals.

Till I see that it seems pretty apparent that the more we support man made government the more we help Satan.


Stephen

 

[PKevman]

A little something we're all overlooking.

When Leviticus 20:13 was written (the passage giving the death penalty for homosexuality) Israel was under a theocracy.

understand this well friends:
There was no man made government. A theocracy is a government led by a Deity. Those laws came specifically from God Himself to a nation He Himself led.

Now, fast forward to the time of Jesus long after Israel rejected their theocracy (for that look in 1 Samuel chapter 7) and let's look at the third temptation Satan gives to Christ in Matthew 4:8-10

~Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor. "All this I will give you," he said, "if you will bow down and worship me."~

JESUS DOES NOT DENY SATAN'S OWNERSHIP

Jesus said to him, "Away from me, Satan! For it is written: 'Worship the Lord your God, and serve him only.


So...

Will someone please show the passage of scripture that allows us to use man made government as a hammer to kill homosexuals.

Till I see that it seems pretty apparent that the more we support man made government the more we help Satan.


Stephen

Hey Stephen Dale. I am afraid we may be in danger of hijacking Dr. Brumley's thread about Ron Paul. I would however like to discuss this issue further with you and your dad when I have time. I would also really like for your dad to substantively address the points I have made (especially in post #242). I am thinking this may be a good time to split our discussion and start a new thread to further discuss some of these points.

I will say in answer to your question, that I think the question you asked has been addressed already if you read back through the posts I have made in this thread.

Here is a question for you: Has the Mosaic Law passed away completely for unbelievers? Please think carefully before answering the question, and we are not talking about believers but unbelievers. If you are not sure, don't be afraid to say so. I will tell you that this question can be answered completely and totally from the Scriptures. I am off to church, but will probably start a new thread for us to talk about this when I come back online later tonight.

God bless you buddy, and we enjoyed the fellowship Friday night!

 

[S†ephen]

Hey Stephen Dale. I am afraid we may be in danger of hijacking Dr. Brumley's thread about Ron Paul.

My apologies. But the question is still perfectly applicable if we apply it to the subject of Ron Paul and abortion. Ron Paul wants smaller government all around where Alan Keys simply wants to use the system (controlled by Satan) for different things.

According to my last post Ron Paul is clearly in the right, even more so than Alan Keys.

Here is a question for you: Has the Mosaic Law passed away completely for unbelievers? Please think carefully before answering the question, and we are not talking about believers but unbelievers. If you are not sure, don't be afraid to say so.

I'm honestly not sure.

God bless you buddy, and we enjoyed the fellowship Friday night!

Me too!

(that's why I slept all day today:chuckle: )


Stephen

 

[sopwith21]

I am not the one who delegates authority to anyone! No civilian is! The authority of governing officials should not come from their constituents! God is the one who has deemed that there should be governments, and He has delegated authority to them!

That's tragically wrong, but even if it were right God would be apologizing for his mistake by now.

But if what you say it right, why bother with elected representatives? If their authority doesn't come from the people, then they can do anything they want.... its between them and God, right?

Makes you wonder why we killed Saddam Hussein... after all, it was God who put him in charge. Who are we to remove what God put in place?

If I, as a civilian, go find the person who murdered my friend [hypothetical] and kill them, that is murder. However, if the government finds them, tries them, convicts them, sentences them to death and executed them, that is not murder. It is good, and it is right.

So the morality or immorality of an act is not determined by the act itself, but rather by the identity of the person who commits it?

If government kills, its okay. If you kill, its wrong. When the IRS take someone's money, its okay. If you take someone's money, its wrong.

What happened to God's unchanging consistency?

Why does this have to be about me? And why does it have to be about a specific homosexual individual?

Better question... why do you want to make your killing so impersonal? Why do you want to be removed and separated from the dirty work?

Please give me the name of a homosexual that you would like to kill and the name of the person you would like to have kill them. And tell me how you would like them killed.

If you truly support these killings, you surely would want to witness them in person to see God's glory manifested... would you not? I mean... this is justice and righteousness in action. How could you miss it?

 

[sopwith21]

I can't. God did.

If God delegated authority to Hitler, who were we to challenge it?

I don't personally want to kill homosexuals, I want to reach them with the gospel.

Of course you don't want to kill them yourself... you want someone else to do it for you.

And I'm sure you want to reach them with the gospel, however, that's far more difficult when they're dead. So your goals appear to be mutually exclusive.

NOOOO..... It does what it is supposed to do my friend. A vigilante by definition is lawless. Enforcing law is not lawlessness.....

It is the same act regardless of who commits it.

Thank God our eternal security doesn't rest in the false doctrine of utter immutability, but rather in the fact that God is loving, relational, and good,

He may be right now... but if he is not unchanging, you have no guarantee that he will remain so in the future.

He said it to Israel.

Since you are not Israel and since I am not Israel, we now have a starting point from which to read this material. This is a good thing.

He said a lot of things to Israel. Some of them are truths that carry over to all dispensations, and some (such as dietary restrictions) were specific to that dispensation of Law and to His people Israel.

Cool! Who gets to decide which is which?

 

[sopwith21]

for those Ron Paul supporters who deny that he is pro-choice state-by-state, there is nothing one can do for them if they won't read his bills and interviews and see that is his open and blatant position, except point out their hypocrisy.

Bob Enyart, you have told a blatant lie. You are a pastor and should be ashamed of yourself.

Ron Paul does not support abortion. He would support a constitutional amendment to stop it, but he believes that a reversal of Roe v Wade and a state by state rollback of abortion is a more lawful and effective way to accomplish the same thing.

Both you and Ron Paul believe that government should outlaw abortion... the only difference is that you chose a different government. Your choice of the federal government as the prohibiter of abortion is no more righteous or unrighteous than Paul's choice of the state government to do the same thing. So don't accuse anyone on this forum of hypocrisy... you're a shining monument to it.

Bob, I publicly call upon you to withdraw your statement, confess your sin privately to God, apologize on this forum and in your church for misleading believers, and to Ron Paul for lying about his position on the issue.

Disagreeing with the method by which Paul would ban abortion is one thing - to blatantly and deliberately lie about his position is another.

 

[PKevman]

Bob Enyart, you have told a blatant lie. You are a pastor and should be ashamed of yourself.

Ron Paul does not support abortion. He would support a constitutional amendment to stop it, but he believes that a reversal of Roe v Wade and a state by state rollback of abortion is a more lawful and effective way to accomplish the same thing.

Both you and Ron Paul believe that government should outlaw abortion... the only difference is that you chose a different government. Your choice of the federal government as the prohibiter of abortion is no more righteous or unrighteous than Paul's choice of the state government to do the same thing. So don't accuse anyone on this forum of hypocrisy... you're a shining monument to it.

Bob, I publicly call upon you to withdraw your statement, confess your sin privately to God, apologize on this forum and in your church for misleading believers, and to Ron Paul for lying about his position on the issue.

Disagreeing with the method by which Paul would ban abortion is one thing - to blatantly and deliberately lie about his position is another.

Whoa Stephen. You go too far here. Bob hasn't lied at all. I see exactly what he is saying. Also, would you say Dr. Brumley lied in his OP in this thread? He was on this board defending Ron Paul as passionately as you, and if you read the OP you will see he is thanking Bob because after his own personal investigation into the matter, he realized that Bob was right about it.

It is sad to say that someone who disagrees with you is lying. I encouraged you to call in and talk with Bob during one of his shows and to at least hear him out before jumping to rash conclusions based on your preconceived notions. IF you are wrong about Ron Paul and the Libertarian party, and it is as anti-God as anything else, would you repent and stop supporting Paul and the Libertarians?

 

[drbrumley]

Just for clarification.

I agree with Bob that Ron Paul's Sanctity of Life bill (according to the wording of the bill) allows states to keep it legal. It would be my hope Mr Paul would rewrite that bill saying this would not be lawful. It would be a disastrous bill if every state indeed kept it legal.

But let me add, I am a libertarian but don't belong to the LP. And never will.

God granted people the LIBERTY to do as they see fit. As long as you don't break the 10 commandments. The 10 commandments are not 10 suggestions. With that said, I yield the floor.

 

[sopwith21]

It is sad to say that someone who disagrees with you is lying.

Whether he agrees with me or not is irrelevant.

Ron Paul is not pro-choice. Bob Enyart deliberately made a false statement. That is evil and immoral and as a pastor, you should not support it.

If Bob wishes to disagree with the methods by which Paul would attempt to outlaw abortion, fine. But claiming that Ron Paul is pro-abortion is an open, deliberate lie and a sin before God.

I call again upon Bob Enyart to publicly apologize and withdraw his false statements.

 

[sopwith21]

I agree with Bob that Ron Paul's Sanctity of Life bill (according to the wording of the bill) allows states to keep it legal.

Ron Paul's proposal would allow the states to make the decision on the legality of abortion.

Bob Enyart's proposal would allow the federal government to make the decision on the legality of abortion.

This does not make either Bob Enyart or Ron Paul pro-abortion. It merely means that they are appealing to different authorities to outlaw it.

The statement that Ron Paul is pro-choice is an outright lie. As a pastor, Bob Enyart has an obligation to apologize for his false statements publicly, apologize to Ron Paul and confess his sin.

 

[drbrumley]

Ron Paul's proposal would allow the states to make the decision on the legality of abortion.

True, exactly what I said. You used different words to convey the same thought.

Bob Enyart's proposal would allow the federal government to make the decision on the legality of abortion.

Murder is a crime, whether federal or state.

This does not make either Bob Enyart or Ron Paul pro-abortion. It merely means that they are appealing to different authorities to outlaw it.

EXACTLY!

The statement that Ron Paul is pro-choice is an outright lie. As a pastor, Bob Enyart has an obligation to apologize for his false statements publicly, apologize to Ron Paul and confess his sin.

No, Ron Paul is not a pro abort. But his bill is a pro abortion bill. I am not confident in the states outlawing it. Are some states prepared to outlaw it, sure. Some is better than nothing I guess. But it is the principle of the matter that needs to be discussed.

 

[PKevman]

If God delegated authority to Hitler, who were we to challenge it?

God delegated power to human government. God is not responsible if wicked men abuse that power and do things they weren't supposed to do. God doesn't micro-manage the affairs of men, and gives men free choice to obey Him or reject Him. Still, did it end up well for Hitler in the end or not? Sure he enjoyed SOME corrupt power for a period of time, but how's that working out for him now? He's in hell right now paying the penalty he will pay for all time. Not exactly a great reward for his wickedness now is it?

Of course you don't want to kill them yourself... you want someone else to do it for you.

If I didn't know you so well and know you were a great guy this would honestly make me mad. You just don't get it. I don't think you have read through the replies that I have typed out to you on this issue, and we may need to save it for a face to face discussion. It doesn't seem you are understanding at all what we are saying.

If I kill someone it's murder. If the government kills someone guilty of a capital crime, it is NOT murder. It's that simple. You said you weren't opposed to the death penalty in some cases. What cases would you say that it is ok for the DP to be enacted, who would enforce it, and why?

And I'm sure you want to reach them with the gospel, however, that's far more difficult when they're dead. So your goals appear to be mutually exclusive.

Actually as the evidence of our nation shows, when there is a death penalty for homosexuality, there are far less homosexuals. I guess you don't see the death penalty as a deterrent to criminal behavior, so until you are willing to accept all of the data that shows this to be true, you will not accept the premise of our argument.

It is the same act regardless of who commits it.

But God said those who commit capital crimes should be put to death. So in God's eyes they are ok because they are being obedient to Him and following His wishes. God knows better than you or I how a society and a people should live and how a society should be governed.

He may be right now... but if he is not unchanging, you have no guarantee that he will remain so in the future.

Our guarantee is in His goodness, not in the fact that He cannot change. You never answered the question....When Christ came to this world and became a baby in a manger was that a change for God the Son? When Christ was crucified on the cross, was that a change for God the Son? Were these changes in the Godhead both to God the Father and God the Holy Spirit, when Christ was on earth? Was it a change when God the Father poured out His wrath on God the Son on the Cross? Is God the Father pouring out His wrath on God the Son now? Had God the Father been pouring out His wrath on God the Son for all eternity past?

Since you are not Israel and since I am not Israel, we now have a starting point from which to read this material. This is a good thing.

That is right. Understanding passages of Scriptures requires us to understand WHOM they were being directed to and why.

Cool! Who gets to decide which is which?

God. And He has made it clear in His Word what things have changed in this dispensation and what things have not.

For example, speaking of the dietary restrictions, the Bible says in 1 Timothy 4:4

4 For every creature of God is good, and nothing is to be refused if it is received with thanksgiving; 5 for it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.

Yet Paul also said:

8 But we know that the law is good if one uses it lawfully, 9 knowing this: that the law is not made for a righteous person, but for the lawless and insubordinate, for the ungodly and for sinners, for the unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, 10 for fornicators, for sodomites, for kidnappers, for liars, for perjurers.......
(1 Timothy 1:8-10a)

FURTHER, Paul revealed that the death penalty should still be enforced against those who deserve it, when he said in Romans 1 that those who practice such wickedness as homosexuality are deserving of death. (Romans 1:32)

You are advocating the wrong position when you advocate the Libertarian Party's views of striking down laws. Because God gave the Law to reach people! The Law is for unbelievers! When you remove the Law, you remove the single greatest tool to reach men!

Romans 3:19
19 Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.

Galatians 3:24
24 Therefore the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith.

 

[S†ephen]

God delegated power to human government.

I don't believe he did as noted in my previous posts. And even if he did Satan still looked Him straight in the eye, said "They are mine" and God incarnate did not deny his control. :jawdrop:

God is not responsible if wicked men abuse that power and do things they weren't supposed to do.

How so? He put them in charge? :king:

God doesn't micro-manage the affairs of men, and gives men free choice to obey Him or reject Him. Still, did it end up well for Hitler in the end or not? Sure he enjoyed SOME corrupt power for a period of time, but how's that working out for him now? He's in hell right now paying the penalty he will pay for all time. Not exactly a great reward for his wickedness now is it?

I agree.

Still, I think there's a few million dead Jews who might have a slight problem with that.

 

[PKevman]

Here is a question for you: Has the Mosaic Law passed away completely for unbelievers? Please think carefully before answering the question, and we are not talking about believers but unbelievers. If you are not sure, don't be afraid to say so.

I'm honestly not sure

Great, thanks for your honesty! Let me turn you to some Scriptures:

Jesus comanded His disciples to go to all the nations and to "teach them all things that I have commanded you" (matt 28:20):

Further, Jesus said that until Heaven and earth pass away, the Law will not completely pass away (see Matthew 5:18-19):

For believers, Christ is the end of the Law:

4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes.

Until a person receives Christ, they are still under law! What law? Law to God and law to others. God wrote THESE laws on the hearts of mankind. (See Romans chapters 1&2)


The Law has two main purposes:

Purpose#1. It is a deterrent and restrains evil men from committing evil acts.

God promised through Moses and Solomon that IF His criminal law is enacted swiftly, it would act as a deterrent to crime:

12 Now the man who acts presumptuously and will not heed the priest who stands to minister there before the LORD your God, or the judge, that man shall die. So you shall put away the evil from Israel. 13 And all the people shall hear and fear, and no longer act presumptuously. (Deut 17:12-13)

I encourage you to think about Death Row and how long people sit on death row in our country. Now read this verse:

11 Because the sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil.


Purpose #2: It points sinners to their need for forgivenness from a holy and righteous God. See Galatians 3:24-25; Romans 3:19;1 Timothy 1:8-10;

Psalm 19:7a

7 The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul;

1 Timothy 1:8-9a says:

8 But we know that the law is good if one uses it lawfully, 9 knowing this: that the law is not made for a righteous person, but for the lawless and insubordinate

 

[PKevman]

I don't believe he did as noted in my previous posts. And even if he did Satan still looked Him straight in the eye, said "They are mine" and God incarnate did not deny his control. :jawdrop:

Right. Because God has delegated SOME control to Satan and his fallen angels. I fail to see how this proves your point......

How so? He put them in charge? :king:

He also put Adam and Eve in the Garden and told them not to eat of the Tree. Was He responsible for THEIR disobedience as well?

If your dad gives you the keys to his car and says "Here you go, son. Go take a spin, be careful and NO DRINKING." IF you go out, get drunk, wreck the car, and nearly lose your life, is your dad responsible for what you did? Or are you?

I agree.

Still, I think there's a few million dead Jews who might have a slight problem with that.

No, because I think most Jews realize that Hitler was NOT acting under direction from God. He was a godless and immoral pervert of a man and his actions were NOT glorifying to God in any way.

 

[PKevman]

Ron Paul's proposal would allow the states to make the decision on the legality of abortion.

Bob Enyart's proposal would allow the federal government to make the decision on the legality of abortion.

This does not make either Bob Enyart or Ron Paul pro-abortion. It merely means that they are appealing to different authorities to outlaw it.

The statement that Ron Paul is pro-choice is an outright lie. As a pastor, Bob Enyart has an obligation to apologize for his false statements publicly, apologize to Ron Paul and confess his sin.

I know Bob Enyart and he is a good and Godly man who would no more lie to prove a point than you would. I call on you to retract this statement, as it is counter-productive. You are capable of arguing a point far better than that!