Thanks Bob

[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.

We are calling for abortion to be struck down unilaterally across ALL STATES! To leave it up to each state to decide is very much saying one is pro-choice state by state.

 

[Lighthouse]

I added this to the discussion way back when several people were proposing that the government must kill all homosexuals in America (and apparently the world as well) because of the Mosaic and Levitical law.

And?

The only way to be consistent is if America is supposed to follow the whole law, which none of them had really gone into, which includes this bit about a rebellious son being stoned and a few thousand other commands such as the feasts, the dietary restraints, etc. Why stop at the homosexuals? Does not the whole law apply and why would the government be responsible to carry out one death penalty and not the other.

OK. So we shouldn't execute murderers either? This is about the elements of the law that God wants all people to live by, not the ones He made only for Israel.

P.S.
That verse is not about a small child. It's about an adult son. Why else would it mention being a drunkard?

I don't ascribe to the government doing this at all by the way.
Old testament Israel could barely keep such laws enforced let alone enforced justly and very few modern Jews, even the most orthodox, would attempt such governmental enforcement and authority on the scale that has been portrayed here.

Have you prayed about this?

Nobody. Just we don't follow it. But even if the Constitution was perfect, it would still be changed here and there. Please tell me you don't deny that?

If we followed God, it would not need changed, and it would not be changed.

As it pertains to Liberty and who the government is or isn't, the founders were wrong as well as Enyart's Constitution of America.

Why is Bob's document wrong?

The next best thing is when Christ returns and we live in a Theocracy. Do you know of another that has worked any better? If you people are going to promote extreme Dominion Theology, why don't you take it to it's natural, logical conclusion and start your insurrection now. What are you waiting for? You do realize that the theology you are ascribing to also presupposes that Jesus cannot return until the earth is completely converted by force? (I state this to help those that are not aware of what these folks believe in.) Everyone not familiar may want to google Dominion Theology and Theonomy, of course there are many variations of it. The most extreme of them care nothing of American constitutionalism or any other law of man for that matter.

Are you really this stupid? No one here is saying that these things must happen, or that everyone must be converted. No one is suggesting that anyone is converted by force. We are not proposing laws that would say everyone had to be of a certain belief system.

FYI for all those reading this: the bold part is a complete lie.

 

[Granite]

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.

Does the pro-life movement represent the majority of Americans?

(This is a yes or no question.)

If so, would it be a "disaster" for this decision to be left to individual states?

 

[drbrumley]

Does the pro-life movement represent the majority of Americans?

(This is a yes or no question.)

If so, would it be a "disaster" for this decision to be left to individual states?

It would be a "disaster" for the innocent unborn child.

 

[Granite]

It would be a "disaster" for the innocent unborn child.

That doesn't answer my question and you know it.

 

[elected4ever]

I will say this one time and one time only. This statement is true regardless of your status or ministry. Those who would bring themselves under the the authority of the Mosaic law, whether ceremonial, dietary or civil are departing from grace and are adding to the gospel of Christ. This includes the 10 commandments delivered in stone. It demonstrates that you are carnal in your thinking and not according to Christ. It is not the mission to deliver the law to the world but to live righteously in it. Righteousness does not come by the keeping of the law but by faith in God. Keeping the law and requiring others to do so is to reject the gospel of Christ. If you keep the law you are not under grace. You are yet in your sin because you have not believed Christ and yes in that case you do in fact sin as you clam that you do.

 

[PKevman]

I will say this one time and one time only. This statement is true regardless of your status or ministry. Those who would bring themselves under the the authority of the Mosaic law, whether ceremonial, dietary or civil are departing from grace and are adding to the gospel of Christ. This includes the 10 commandments delivered in stone. It demonstrates that you are carnal in your thinking and not according to Christ. It is not the mission to deliver the law to the world but to live righteously in it. Righteousness does not come by the keeping of the law but by faith in God. Keeping the law and requiring others to do so is to reject the gospel of Christ. If you keep the law you are not under grace. You are yet in your sin because you have not believed Christ and yes in that case you do in fact sin as you clam that you do.

You are right if you are talking about believers. Because believers are not under law but under grace. But you deny the Word of God if you say that unbelievers are not still under law.

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

E4E: Can you supply a Bible verse which shows that Christ is the end of the law for people who DON'T believe?

24 Therefore the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. 25 But after faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor.

E4E: Can you supply a Bible verse which shows that people are no longer under a tutor (THE LAW) BEFORE they exercise saving faith?


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.

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, and if there is any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine,


Here is your choice E4E: Deny what the Word of God clearly says, or accept it.

 

[PKevman]

Righteousness does not come by the keeping of the law but by faith in God.

That is exactly right, and the Law shows them their need for a Savior.

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.

 

[elected4ever]

Romans 8:6 For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.
7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.
8 So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.
9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.

 

[PKevman]

Romans 8:6 For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.
7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.
8 So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.
9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.

That is your answer? Do you realize you have strengthened my argument with that?

When Paul says "ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit" who is he talking to?
A. Believers
B. Unbelievers

 

[PKevman]

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

E4E: Can you supply a Bible verse which shows that Christ is the end of the law for people who DON'T believe?

Bible: Therefore the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. 25 But after faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor.

E4E: Can you supply a Bible verse which shows that people are no longer under a tutor (THE LAW) BEFORE they exercise saving faith?

 

[Mystery]

Only the Jews had the Law.

 

[elected4ever]

I can only be judged by the law once. I became guilty and became dead to God. That death is permanent but God and his mercy gave me life in the spirit and not life in the flesh.. The dead remains dead. Dead men have no law.

 

[PKevman]

I can only be judged by the law onced. I became guility and became dead to God. That death is permanent but God and his mercy gave me life in the spirit and not life in the flesh.. The dead remains dead. Dead men have no law.

It sure doesn't seem to me that you are even arguing what the rest of us are talking about. I am not going to derail this thread any further by getting into a "Christians cannot sin" debate with you. The Bible plainly says the Law is for unbelievers, and that when a Godly government enforces the Law it is a deterrent to crime.

If you want to go somewhere, start a country, and make murder, child molestation, slavery, adultery, and whatever else you like legal, more power to you. Or you could just join the Libertarian party.

 

[PKevman]

Only the Jews had the Law.

That is incorrect. God wrote the first two tiers of law: Law to God, and Law to men, on the hearts of mankind. So even in remote tribes, they know intrinsically that it is wrong to murder and it is wrong to commit adultery.

 

[elected4ever]

It sure doesn't seem to me that you are even arguing what the rest of us are talking about. I am not going to derail this thread any further by getting into a "Christians cannot sin" debate with you. The Bible plainly says the Law is for unbelievers, and that when a Godly government enforces the Law it is a deterrent to crime.

If you want to go somewhere, start a country, and make murder, child molestation, slavery, adultery, and whatever else you like legal, more power to you. Or you could just join the Libertarian party.

No I am arguing against reconstructionism. reconstructionism or Dominionism is unbiblical.

 

[PatriotBeliever]

It would be a "disaster" for the innocent unborn child.

We already have the disaster you speak of from a federal "mandate", not the States. Assumptions that the States would handle it any worse than the federal government already has, are unfounded, unconstitutional and inconsistent with the arguments being presented against States dealing with it like any other form of murder or violent crime. At least a dozen states would likely outlaw abortion as soon as possible upon passage of the Sanctity of Life Act removing Supreme Court jurisdiction. How would this be worse than the federal ban in all states that exist now? The Supreme Court has proven it's lack of trustworthiness, willingness and thus it's ineffectiveness in this regard.

 

[Mystery]

"Therefore remember, that formerly you, the Gentiles in the flesh, who are called "Uncircumcision " by the so-called "Circumcision," which is performed in the flesh by human hands remember that you were at that time separate from Christ, excluded from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world."

 

[PKevman]

"Therefore remember, that formerly you, the Gentiles in the flesh, who are called "Uncircumcision " by the so-called "Circumcision," which is performed in the flesh by human hands remember that you were at that time separate from Christ, excluded from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world."

Right but now God has turned to the Gentiles and made salvation open to all men equally, and men no longer have to become proselyte Jews to get saved. This does nothing to disprove the previous Bible verses already quoted Mystery my friend.... :think:

 

[PKevman]

Ephesians 2:11-18

11 Therefore remember that you, once Gentiles in the flesh—who are called Uncircumcision by what is called the Circumcision made in the flesh by hands— 12 that at that time you were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. 13 But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ.

14 For He Himself is our peace, who has made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of separation, 15 having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances, so as to create in Himself one new man from the two, thus making peace, 16 and that He might reconcile them both to God in one body through the cross, thereby putting to death the enmity. 17 And He came and preached peace to you who were afar off and to those who were near. 18 For through Him we both have access by one Spirit to the Father.