Jesus Christ Is Lord

That every knee should bow and every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father!

Posts Tagged ‘Romans 13’

On The FBI Arresting The Hutaree “Christian” Militia Because They Made Threats Against Muslims

Posted by Job on March 29, 2010

First, allow me to say that nothing in the Bible justifies having a “Christian” militia. Quite the contrary, when Peter assaulted the Jewish temple guardsman who came to arrest Jesus Christ, Jesus Christ rebuked Peter, healed the man whose ear Peter cut off, and told Peter “he who lives by the sword dies by the sword.” The early church faced severe persecution, with the Roman Empire killing millions of Christians over 300 years, yet never at any time was there an armed resistance against the persecution. Those people took the words of Jesus Christ literally when He said that those who would be persecuted for His sake would be considered blessed, and followed the example of Peter and John who considered it a blessing and honor to be counted worthy to suffer mistreatment for Jesus Christ’s Name.

And it goes without saying that threatening violence against a Muslim or anyone else is – as this Hutaree “Christian” militia allegedly did –  clearly incontrovertibly a sin. People like this have to realize that Jesus Christ began His ministry during the time of armed uprisings by Jews against a very evil, tyrannical Roman government. (However, it should be noted that had the Jews not taken up arms against the Romans, the Romans would have generally left them alone.) The Jews were looking for a political messiah to defeat the Romans and re-establish a sovereign, Davidic kingdom. Many false messiahs promising just that came, and many followed Jesus Christ hoping that He was a messiah of that sort. They even mistook the miracles that Jesus Christ performed as evidence that He would use power from God to defeat the Romans.

However, when Jesus Christ made it known that His mission was not to establish an earthly kingdom, many lost interest and followed others, the ones who Jesus Christ referred to as “thieves and robbers”, which in the vernacular of the day referred to the seditious false messiahs leading rebellions. Jesus Christ repeatedly and consistently told His followers that it was wrong to rebel against Rome (especially violently) and that was what the significance of issues like paying taxes to Rome were all about. Later, Paul wrote Romans 13 about submitting to Rome as opposed to rebelling against them, and Peter wrote that Christians should pray for their leaders rather than rebel against them. And in the Olivet discourse, Jesus Christ told His followers not to defend Jerusalem from the attacking Romans, but instead to flee.

Needless to say, Jesus Christ’s words were rejected. He who came in the Name of God they did not follow, but those who came in their own name, including the false messiahs, they followed. This pattern of rejection of the true Messiah and His spiritual message and their embrace of false messiahs who offered a message of this world (i.e. political liberation, which included many economic benefits as well) was best symbolized when the Jews demanded that Pontius Pilate release the seditious murderer Barabbas – one of those involved in the violent liberation movements – in the place of Jesus Christ. By continuing to reject Jesus Christ and follow such people in their violent uprisings against Rome (they failed to listen to not only Jesus Christ but to even secular and Jewish leaders like Josephus and Yochanan ben Zakkai), the Jews brought the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD upon their nation, which resulted in the death of over 1 million Jews and the destruction of the temple (which fulfilled the near term “this generation” prophecies of the Olivet discourse). And in 132 AD, still following false messiahs like Simeon bar Kochba who promised that God would use them to defeat the Roman Empire, the Jewish liberation movement suffered their final defeat by the Romans, who burned what was left of Jerusalem to the ground, renamed it, and made it a capital crime for any Jew to re-enter the city. So, no Jewish liberation projects would exist for over 1700 years until 1897 when Theodor Herzl formally created the Zionist movement (although pre-Zionist movements had existed since at least the French Revolution).

So, by forming “militias” and certainly by threatening Muslims, these people do nothing but reject anything resembling the true literally interpreted teachings of the New Testament. By doing so, they reject Jesus Christ for Barabbas, and for that matter Jesus Christ for the Jews who delivered Christ to the Romans to be killed, and had Barabbas released in His stead. So let it be clear … the teachings of the New Testament and the unfolding of history (not only Jewish history, but the violent, failed “revolutions” of certain Anabaptist and Donatist Christian groups, as well as the violent death of the very vicious Ulrich Zwingli) supports nothing of the kind.

Still, we must wonder why it took mere threats against Muslims to bring the FBI down against these people. Unless, of course, they had evidence that these groups were going to act on their threats. So far, the FBI has everything sealed. Right now, a lot of LEGITIMATE Christians and a lot of conservatives are wondering about the double standards … why were these “Christians” arrested when other groups – including Muslims – who make similar threats all the time go free? I do not deny that there is not some element of this going on, or that the Obama administration does not have a propaganda motive to do this shortly after the passage of health care legislation and during the rise of the Tea Party movement and things of that nature. So, this is as good a time to go after conservative anti-government groups as any, and this provides fodder for anti-Christians who have long wanted the government to start ramping up their activities against Christians, starting with illegitimate Christian movements but only until going after their real targets – legitimate Christians – can be justified.

However, we must have the ability to acknowledge that in general, if armed groups make threats, the government shouldn’t just sit around and wait for them to act on their threats. (For instance, “making terroristic threats” is indeed a crime.) So, the issue should be whether the threats against Muslims made by these groups were legitimate. If the government doesn’t reveal the nature of these threats the way that they did with the many Muslim terror suspects that they have arrested, then that is indeed a cause for concern. Especially since “making terroristic threats” is a common offense, so common that a lot of people don’t even know that it is illegal.

Now as a Christian, my position is always going to be not to make terroristic threats. It is not only a sin in and of itself, and it is also against a legal code that does not cause Christians to violate scripture, which makes it also a sin by violating Romans 13. However, Paul according to the Acts narrative asserted not only his Christianity, but also asserted his Roman citizenship when it was in the interests of the gospel of Jesus Christ to do so. Now again, though this Hutaree group is not a legitimate Christian outfit, as a law abiding citizen of this country I am curious as to precisely what it was that made the FBI go after this group of people making terroristic threats while ignoring the many others. We do have a right to know precisely such a thing, and it is in our interests to pursue these rights to their fullest extent. The reason is that Jesus Christ commanded us to discern the times, and if these charges against the non-Christian Hutaree militia are spurious or are evidence of clear double standards, legitimate Christians can use it to take note of the times that we are entering.

Christian militia group arrested, allegedly threatened Muslims, Hamas-linked CAIR plays victim card

P.S. I purposefully resisted making an issue of the Hutaree militia’s premillennial dispensational beliefs. The reason is that I am 100% certain that there are very many legitimate Christians who are dispensationalists. The Hutaree group is not a legitimate Christian group. So, associating legitimate Christian dispensationalists with people like the Hutaree militia that have rejected the true teachings of Jesus Christ while adopting some themes or ideas … how is that different from associating Christians with Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses, or, say, Muslims who affirm the virgin birth? Now though I am no longer a dispensationalist, I am not going to use this as an excuse to go after Christians who are.

Now so-called Christians who use their dispensationalist beliefs in a manner like John Hagee (who demanded that George W. Bush attack Iran to “defend Israel”, and gave one of his many failed prophecies that the attack would happen before the end of Bush’s presidency with the rapture to occur soon after) and to whip up a fearful frenzy and hatred against Muslims that may lead to threats and violence … THOSE associations (between one false Christian who rejects the Bible but finds dispensationalism useful like Hagee and another) I can countenance, though I will not pursue them myself at this time. The issue is not differing views on eschatology, but those who accept the teachings of the New Testament versus those who reject it. Using premillennial dispensationalism to have your feet in both camps (meaning the church and the world) is what leads to stuff like this. However, this is by no means limited to premillennial dispensationalism. After all, Ulrich Zwingli, who massacred members of his own Bible study because they refused to join his church-state, was an amillennialist.

Update: Confederate Yankee says that the FBI claims that the militia was plotting to kill police officers. That angle is repeated here. Confederate Yankee is skeptical, but his reasoning for being skeptical – that police officers represent the local and not federal government – is wanting.

Advertisements

Posted in Bible, Christianity, false doctrine, false religion, false teaching, Jesus Christ | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 42 Comments »

Joe Farah Calls On Christians To Reject Romans 13:1-4 With Regards To Barack HUSSEIN Obama

Posted by Job on January 20, 2009

In it, Farah claims that Romans 13:1-4 does not apply to evil rulers, claiming that people who do so fail to look at the entire context. Well, the context that I am aware of is that Romans was written by the very same Apostle Paul whom the fascist murderous Roman Empire executed! In this same Roman Empire, homosexuality, child molestation, abortion, etc. were freely practiced. There were no free markets or personal freedom (especially if you were a noncitizen, as the overwhelming majority of the population of the Roman Empire was) and tax rates were crushing. Oh yes, and at the time the Roman emperor was also worshiped as a god in the Roman state religion. So the difference between Caesar when Paul was writing Romans and Obama right now is what exactly?

So, Joe Farah’s application would have made Romans 13:1-4 useless and contradictory not only to the people that Paul wrote Romans to, but also to the first 300 years of Christianity. (And regarding those of us who regret and oppose Constantinism and believe that the evil of the Roman state continued long after its merger with Christianity, for hundreds of years thereafter. Of course, Farah will not take that position, for many of his writers and supporters are Roman Catholics).

Now I do agree that Christians are to reject obedience to rulers if said obedience causes us to sin. New Testament example and the behavior of the early church bears this out. However, what Farah is calling for is civil disobedience and rebellion of the very sort that he would call evil and demonic rebellion against God were it to take place under a president that he politically agrees with such as George W. Bush or Ronald Reagan.

Pray Obama fails

“That’s why I do not hesitate today in calling on godly Americans to pray that Barack Hussein Obama fail in his efforts to change our country from one anchored on self-governance and constitutional republicanism to one based on the raw and unlimited power of the central state. It would be folly to pray for his success in such an evil campaign.”

I do not disagree with that statement. But there is a huge difference between praying for the failure of policies, or even for the ultimate failure of the administration that seeks to enact these policies, and telling Christians that Romans 13:1-4 are situational. As a matter of fact, in my opinion, praying that Obama fails to enact his agenda and telling Christians to discard Romans 13:1-4 in the case of rulers that they do not like have nothing to do with each other. The former is resisting evil, as Christians are called to do. The latter is sedition, which the Bible calls sin, and makes clear that those who commit it are going to have their place in the lake of fire.

Christians have to realize that the Bible was not written for modern day Americans, but for all Christians in all situations and all times until Jesus Christ comes back. The vast majority of Christians who have walked the earth, indeed perhaps the majority of Christians living yet today do so in political situations where the very idea of nation-states “anchored on self-governance and constitutional republicanism” were complete folly. Again, that was the very situation where Christianity was born and existed for hundreds of years and (again) the situation that the epistle to the Romans was authored to begin with: in an evil pagan Roman Empire that had absolute control, and one that became only slightly less evil, slightly less pagan, but actually MORE POWERFUL once it assumed control over Christianity.

“I want Obama to fail because his agenda is 100 percent at odds with God’s. Pretending it is not simply makes a mockery of God’s straightforward Commandments.”

Well Joe Farah, I say the same about you. The reason is that you are willfully creating confusion between using spiritual warfare, evangelism, foretelling and forthtelling, etc. to oppose evil rulers and their policies, and between being a sinful seditionist. Lots of Christians have spent YEARS opposing the wickedness of George W. Bush without resisting and defying to and lying on the Holy Spirit by misrepresenting Romans 13:1-4 and telling people to be seditionists. As a matter of fact, Farah, you have done the same in opposing much of what George W. Bush has done. But in doing that, Farah, you NEVER claimed that Romans 13:1-4 did not apply to people living under Bush. Why? Not because of scripture, but because of your own political preferences. Well what of Christians whose politics disagree with yours? Where in the Bible does it say that Christian unity and love extends to political policy agreements?

Farah is showing the dangers of loving the world and being invested in it. He is bearing witness that loving the world that God will judge (read Revelation, it speaks not merely of judging people, but of nations and political and economic systems, and nowhere does it say that the “good nations” will be spared, despite what all of those endtimes movies and books that you have read that depict America somehow being spared or taking on a leading role for righteousness against the anti – Christ and other notions that are Americanity and not Christianity because they cannot be supported by scripture) means emnity with God the judge.

Well, I will tell you someone else who Romans 13:1-4 applies to: slaves. Under Joe Farah’s logic, Nat Turner, Gabriel Prosser, Denmark Vesey, and the rest who took up arms and started killing whites (including women and children) were fully justified. For that matter, so were those who took up arms and molotov cocktails and rioted in the streets of our cities in the 1960s. Because if you were living as a slave, under Jim Crow, or for that matter as a Native American or a Japanese person stuck in a World War II internment camp, then wow, wouldn’t you have every right to “change this country” according to Farah? Or claim that the commandments of man were in conflict with the commandments of God? Because I have news for you: for slaves, people under Jim Crow etc. our principles of private property, capitalism, representative and limited government etc. did not apply.

Well, I say that Nat Turner, Denmark Vesey, and the 1960s rioters were murderers like Barabbas, the scoundrel who was set free and the innocent Jesus Christ went to the cross in his place. Friendship with the world is emnity with God, and Joe Farah proves it. Because Farah knows full well that Christians aren’t going to simply start being pro – abortion and pro – homosexual and pro – state just because Obama is in office. If they didn’t under Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, and Lyndon Johnson, why should they under Obama? Truthfully, it is REPUBLICAN and CONSERVATIVE politicians like Reagan and especially George W. Bush that do a much better job of getting evangelical Christians to abandon the Bible, and Farah knows it. Farah knows full well that Bush was never criticized by leading or large numbers of Christians for claiming that Muslims, Christians, Jews (and ultimately everyone) prays to the same God. He was not criticized for saying that the Bible should not be interpreted literally. Bush was not even criticized for publicly saying that he opposed overturning Roe v. Wade, or for opposing a constitutional amendment to ban homosexual marriage, or refusing to sign an executive order to ban federal money going to Planned Parenthood, or for being a committed New World Order globalist and Skulls and Bones occultist.

So Farah’s true aim is not to keep Christians from following Obama into apostasy, because if it was, he would not be going anywhere near the blasphemous idea that scripture  is not the final authority in all situations (of course, again, as Farah hangs out and receives much support from Roman Catholics, that was probably never his position anyway). Farah has another agenda, and for that matter he and people like him need to be watched as closely as Obama does.

So it is fine and well to pray that Obama’s evil agenda would be hindered, and in the course of doing so recognizing that Obama is himself evil, has surrounded himself with evil people, and should not be trusted by Christians.  To me, doing such a thing qualifies as spiritual warfare. But also engage in spiritual warfare against people who tell you that it is acceptable to disobey the Bible. Sedition is a sin. Promoting sedition is a sin. Glorifying sedition and taking pleasure in those who glorify or commit sedition is a sin. This is not the case because I say so, it is the case because the Bible says so.

Posted in Christianity | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | 105 Comments »

Should A Christian Issue Marriage Certificates To Homosexual Couples?

Posted by Job on June 9, 2008

This post by a bunch of Jesus Christ – hating Barack HUSSEIN Obama supporters (a site that oozes hatred for Jesus Christ and Christians all over it) over California court clerks refusing to process GOVERNMENT marriage certificates for homosexuals makes me wonder. I say that a Christian should not perform an abortion unless it is done to save the life of the mother, and under no circumstances should a Christian give out RU – 486. I think that there should be conscience clauses to keep Christians from having to be murderers in the course of having to earn a living in their chosen profession, although the Jesus Christ haters oppose such clauses precisely so they can drive Christians out of the medical profession … I should point out that Barack HUSSEIN Obama’s state of Illinois passed laws requiring pharmacists to dispense RU – 486, so we know where he stands on this issue. John McCain? Well suffice to say that in his 26 years as a Congressman or Senator, he has never once proposed a federal law keeping doctors, pharmacists, and nurses from being forced to choose between committing murder and keeping their jobs despite the fact that such a measure would have passed by a large margin and easily upheld by the Supreme Court. (The fact that Republicans, despite controlling either Congress or the White House and sometimes both since 1980, have never so much as added this item to their agenda proves that they never were a pro – life party, and if that doesn’t prove it then the fact that they have given just as much federal money to Planned Parenthood clinics that JUST HAPPEN to be frequently located in the areas that Barack HUSSEIN Obama used to be a community organizer.)

But not being a murderer – or a knowing accomplice to murder – is an easy clear cut issue. But what if you are an employee in the county clerk office?  Should you refuse to issue marriage licenses to homosexual couples in this case? To me that is more of a gray area. Of a certainty the Bible declares homosexuality to be not only a sin but an abomination. But people are going to sin! As America is not Old Testament Israel (and the concept of a “Christian nation” is a contradiction that can be spotted by anyone who reads the New Testament for himself instead of having it interpreted to him by any member of the religious right or left) we are not called to personally hinder people from sinning if it is their desire to do so. Such is not the job of the Christian individual or the church, AND IT ESPECIALLY IS NOT THE JOB OF THE STATE. Instead, the job of Christian individual and the Christian church is to work to prevent sinners from hurting innocent people, and to influence the state to do the same. So yes, abortion murders innocent people, and street crime has the same effect. Thank you Christian right for pointing that out. But then again, so do unjust wars and unjust economic and corporate policies as well as government corruption and white collar crime. Thank you Christian left for pointing that out. Do negative cultural conditions i.e. illegitimacy and drug use create the climate for crime and abortions? Yes, Christian right. But do negative economic conditions also? Yes Christian left. So ultimately, once you get past A. I will not perform an abortion B. I will not dispense RU – 486 and C. I will not knowingly sell a handgun to a suicidal or otherwise mentally unstable person or to a criminal (sorry NRA, and sorry to you too gun grabbers because that is the start and finish of my gun control position) it really is a huge gray area. 

After all, do not think that you will somehow prevent homosexuality by refusing to give someone a marriage license. Even without their behavior sanctioned and legitimized by the anti – Christ state, such people can and will do what they please. How is that different from “a woman who wants an abortion will be able to get one anyway?” Simple: if you give an abortion or dispense RU – 486, that is you committing murder or being an accomplice to one. (Yes, abortion makes criminals out of women and their doctors, to answer the PR challenge of pro – abortion groups.) But does giving out a marriage license to homosexual couples endorse or aid their sins? I will say … well … no more than being a clerk at a convenience store does, where you will sell alcohol, lottery tickets, cigarettes, pornographic magazines, condoms, and who knows what else. (Full disclosure: I worked at a convenience store in a low income area for a brief time and had to quit; I could not take it anymore. But I followed that up with a job at an, er, leading retailer whose entire business strategy is enticing the poor/lonely/depressed/desperate to waste their hard – earned money on worthless merchandise in a vain attempt to buy happiness. Aaaah, retail …) 

I have to say that our society has come a long way from the days when A) motels and inns regularly refused to lodge unmarried men and women in the same room and B) if you could find a motel or inn that would allow you and an unmarried woman to lodge in the same room, IN MANY AREAS IF YOU BY CHANCE OR ACCIDENT REGISTERED YOUR FEMALE COMPANION UNDER YOUR SURNAME SHE WOULD BE LEGALLY CONSIDERED YOUR COMMON – LAW WIFE! Does it mean that our society is less externally moral? Clearly in some ways, yes. But in other ways, no … many of the hotels that would not lodge unmarried men and women in the same room would not lodge black people at all! So the question that we should ask ourselves is not whether our nation at any time was more moral or had better “Christian values” but instead whether our nation at any time had more born again regenerated Christians. Many older people that I talk to, including people who experienced the brunt of our nation’s race and class unfairness, insist that it was. I have no choice but to accept their word for that. But even in that context, the very idea that a nation can have the majority of its citizens be legitimately born again and itself be a moral, righteous, and just society plainly violates everything that the New Testament says. Otherwise, there would be nations – not just individuals but nations – left out of the great judgment against the earth in Revelation. This is not to say that some nations cannot be more decent and moral than others: America is not communist China. But actually legitimately moral? I am sorry, but the Bible directly consistently speaks against it. Otherwise, there would have been no reason for the Bible to say the world hates and has rejected Jesus Christ, and that we are not to put our trust in the things of this world or to be conformed to it.

So the question is this: if the political and legal systems of a city, state, or nation make gay marriage legal – and that does reflect the fallen sinful state of that state or nation regardless of what people indoctrinated from little children into believing that it is a Christian nation; you know our “Christian” FREEMASON, ENLIGHTENMENT, UNITARIAN, and DEIST founding fathers and the whole “pledge of allegiance” in GOVERNMENT schools … teaching VALUES and ETHICS and CULTURE in place of Jesus Christ … regardless of what people indoctrinated in that stuff choose to believe – then what good does refusing to carry out the duties of your job as a representative of the state (or an employee of a corporation) do? Refuse to perform an abortion or hand out RU – 486 (or sell a handgun to someone that has no business having one), and you are refusing to be or participate in murder or any other crime against the innocent. But if the state makes homosexual marriage legal, if you as an employee of the state refuse to give a homosexual couple a license, in my opinion that makes you a subversive insubordinate guilty of violating Romans 13. You don’t agree with civil rights laws concerning homosexuals in this instance? Sorry, but it is the law, and so long as the law does not require you to knowingly harm an innocent person, you have no Biblical justification for breaking it. Otherwise, it is not as if you are sharing the gospel with people. Instead, all you are doing is attempting to impose your will on them. Truthfully, since you have no legitimate interest in these people as individuals – or else you would share the gospel with them – you are actually trying to impose your views on society itself. By trying to coerce either individuals or society to conform to your will rather than to the Will of God as expressed in the Bible, you are sinning. Not only is coercion inherently a sin, but people are not obey God, not you. You are to have no undue influence over anyone that God, your pastor, the state, or your employer has not placed you in a position of authority over. You are disobeying 2 Corinthians 10:2-3 and fighting a secular battle using secular means rather than fighting a spiritual battle with spiritual means. The result is wasted effort that will do no good and possibly do harm. 

If you cannot abide that, then you will just have to quit your job. If you do, good luck finding a job where you won’t have to work for, with, among, or in service to sinners … not only homosexuals but adulterers, fornicators, gossips, liars, thieves, idolators, gluttons, false Christians, you name it. So I say rather than making a show of yourself for refusing to perform your duties in a manner that you promised to when you were hired, and making a public demonstration of quitting your job to show the world how righteous you presume yourself to be by refusing to tolerate certain sinners in the course of doing your job while not only tolerating other sinners at that same job but in many cases in your own church, I say keep your job and do it like a Christian, and that means showing the love for sinners – including homosexuals – that Jesus Christ did.

Bottom line: the world is not the church. The government is not the church. America is not the church. Were it not for the ability of the religious left to deceive people otherwise on “social justice issues” and the religious right to deceive people otherwise with their “family values issues” – and no, none of those have anything more to do with the actual purpose and ministry of Jesus Christ than the other – then we would not have most of these problems. 

Posted in Bible, Christianity, sodomy | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

 
%d bloggers like this: