Trump sez: Transgenders B gone!

[Tambora]

Yup, on the one hand he advocates all of this crazy stuff and on the other he acknowledges that appointed governances in the present age are ordained and the very same have no truck with his legalism.

Oops.

And there lies the dilemma of those that claim one must abide by the Mosaic law if it conflicts with our civil law.
And thus they flip-flop between the two laws with whichever suits their personal agenda.

I mean, how can one legitimately say that the civil laws are wrong if it is the civil laws GOD says to obey?
That's just saying that GOD tells us to obey what HE does not really want us to obey.
How whacked is that!

 

[JudgeRightly]

And there lies the dilemma of those that claim one must abide by the Mosaic law if it conflicts with our civil law.
And thus they flip-flop between the two laws with whichever suits their personal agenda.

I mean, how can one legitimately say that the civil laws are wrong if it is the civil laws GOD says to obey?
That's just saying that GOD tells us to obey what HE does not really want us to obey.
How whacked is that!

So let's take this to the extreme for a moment to see if your logic holds up:

If a government (who is God's minister) hands you a gun and tells you to shoot the little boy in front of you, do you obey him because God says to obey the authorities? or do you disobey because what they're telling you to do is evil?

 

[ok doser]

(formatting error)

great response JR, but i think you're wasting your time

notice that she doesn't even reprimand the two God-hating losers who are cheering her on :sigh:

 

[ok doser]

So let's take this to the extreme for a moment to see if your logic holds up:

If a government (who is God's minister) hands you a gun and tells you to shoot the little boy in front of you, do you obey him because God says to obey the authorities? or do you disobey because what they're telling you to do is evil?

i would have gone with abortion, if only to show that tam doesn't really believe the load she's shoveling

 

[JudgeRightly]

great response JR, but i think you're wasting your time

notice that she doesn't even reprimand the two God-hating losers who are cheering her on :sigh:

Perhaps. I'll give them another few rounds, there's a few things I want to point out first before I stop casting pearls...

(fixed the formatting error, btw)

 

[JudgeRightly]

i would have gone with abortion, if only to show that tam doesn't really believe the load she's shoveling

I'll get to abortion, but first I want to go this route.

 

[quip]

So let's take this to the extreme for a moment to see if your logic holds up:

If a government (who is God's minister) hands you a gun and tells you to shoot the little boy in front of you, do you obey him because God says to obey the authorities? or do you disobey because what they're telling you to do is evil?

That's the pickle!

Disobey God's order (to obey the authorities) or Disobey God's commandment not to kill?

What's your answer JR?

 

[JudgeRightly]

That's the pickle!

Disobey God's order (to obey the authorities) or disobey God's commandment not to kill?

What's your answer JR?

How about you answer the question first, considering I'm the one who asked it.

 

[quip]

How about you answer the question first, considering I'm the one who asked it.

Oh. I thought you'd figure that out.
It's easy...I'm not subjected to the dilemma, I'd simply follow my own moral consciousness not to do harm. :idunno:

Your turn.

 

[Arthur Brain]

And there lies the dilemma of those that claim one must abide by the Mosaic law if it conflicts with our civil law.
And thus they flip-flop between the two laws with whichever suits their personal agenda.

I mean, how can one legitimately say that the civil laws are wrong if it is the civil laws GOD says to obey?
That's just saying that GOD tells us to obey what HE does not really want us to obey.
How whacked is that!

Especially if said governing authorities have been ordained by God to begin with. JR's invented a corner of his own making, not that he'll admit it.

 

[Arthur Brain]

great response JR, but i think you're wasting your time

notice that she doesn't even reprimand the two God-hating losers who are cheering her on :sigh:

Oh, Tam would give her blunt opinion about stuff she disagrees with me on, we've been there a few times as it is. Unlike you, she isn't an out and out troll just stirring the pot. Thought you knew but eh, you do now.

 

[Arthur Brain]

So let's take this to the extreme for a moment to see if your logic holds up:

If a government (who is God's minister) hands you a gun and tells you to shoot the little boy in front of you, do you obey him because God says to obey the authorities? or do you disobey because what they're telling you to do is evil?

The quandary is yours, not Tam's. If you believe (as you've quoted) that all civil governance is chosen by God and to be adhered to then that includes the current system and administration. Unless you think God is mistaken in who's been appointed at any time?

 

[Tambora]

Uh, no, God's will is that we also obey HIM rather than man (at least in issues pertaining to morality).

It cannot be true of GOD to say to obey civil authorities and then in the next breath say the civil authorities are wrong to obey.


If the civil law concerning adultery (don't stone them) is against the Mosaic law, and therefore you should be obeying the Mosaic law of adultery because it is moral and the civil law is not moral; then you should be stoning adulterers.
So again, what's the holdup of stoning adulterers since you claim one should do the moral thing per the Mosaic law even if the civil law opposes it?

You cannot use the excuse of obeying the civil authorities and not stone them to death if you truly believe GOD wants you to be doing the moral thing (stoning them) despite what the civil law says.
So is it still your contention that we must do the moral thing (stone them) since the civil law is not the moral thing to do?
If so, be moral and stone them to death.
NOT stoning them would be immoral, right?

 

[Arthur Brain]

It cannot be true of GOD to say to obey civil authorities and then in the next breath say the civil authorities are wrong to obey.


If the civil law concerning adultery (don't stone them) is against the Mosaic law, and therefore you should be obeying the Mosaic law of adultery because it is moral and the civil law is not moral; then you should be stoning adulterers.
So again, what's the holdup of stoning adulterers since you claim one should do the moral thing per the Mosaic law even if the civil law opposes it?

You cannot use the excuse of obeying the civil authorities and not stone them to death if you truly believe GOD wants you to be doing the moral thing (stoning them) despite what the civil law says.
So is it still your contention that we must do the moral thing (stone them) since the civil law is not the moral thing to do?
If so, be moral and stone them to death.
NOT stoning them would be immoral, right?

As long as there's some sorta judge, a quick trial and two to three witnesses...

 

[Tambora]

So let's take this to the extreme for a moment to see if your logic holds up:

If a government (who is God's minister) hands you a gun and tells you to shoot the little boy in front of you, do you obey him because God says to obey the authorities? or do you disobey because what they're telling you to do is evil?

We don't have to take it to the extreme.
Either you are being immoral by not stoning them to death (as the civil law says), or you can be moral and stone them to death.
Which should you be doing now --- being moral and stoning them to death or being immoral and not stoning them to death?
You can't use the excuse of not stoning them per the civil law if you say you must do what is moral despite what the civil law says.

 

[Tambora]

As long as there's some sorta judge, a quick trial and two to three witnesses...

A tangled web they weave for themselves.

One the one hand they say one should not obey the civil law if it is not moral.
And that stoning them to death is the moral thing to do, and one should do the moral thing no matter what the civil law says.
But then they say they don't do the moral thing (stone them to death), but instead obey the civil law that says not to while still insisting that one must do the moral thing no matter what the civil law says.

 

[Arthur Brain]

A tangled web they weave for themselves.

One the one hand they say one should not obey the civil law if it is not moral.
And that stoning them to death is the moral thing to do, and one should do the moral thing no matter what the civil law says.
But then they say they don't do the moral thing (stone them to death), but instead obey the civil law that says not to while still insisting that one must do the moral thing no matter what the civil law says.

And don't forget, they also quote verses saying that the governing authorities are appointed by God and to be obeyed...

 

[Arthur Brain]

Oh. I thought you'd figure that out.
It's easy...I'm not subjected to the dilemma, I'd simply follow my own moral consciousness not to do harm. :idunno:

Your turn.

:thumb:

 

[Arthur Brain]

Perhaps. I'll give them another few rounds, there's a few things I want to point out first before I stop casting pearls...

(fixed the formatting error, btw)

Whatever you've been casting thus far sure haven't been pearls...

 

[fool]

So, no Subscription Sale?