You're a theist against immigration?

[Huggy Bear]

I'm not against immigration, I just have no sympathy for those that voted against their own interests.

[Drich]

This is only 1/2 the equation.. the other 1/2 was the catylist for the revolutionary war between the uS and england.

That other 1/2 though doesn't have anything to do with what Jeer had to say about being allowed to hold your government in contempt because the guy you voted for lost. God allows for civil disobedience so long as it directly conflicted with a stated command of His. However this has nothing to do with liking your leaders. You like in the case of trump can hate the man but also accept he has done nothing outside the purview of Power that God allows. In truth he has not halted immigration, he simply chose to enforce the same laws that obama chose to up hold and enforce. Even up holding abortion is not a reason for their to be a 'christian break' from this country. What would deem a break necessary is if the leadership decides to start rewriting the bible via changing constitutional religious liberties." Meaning the constitution is amended to allow the government to argument what a christian or any other religion deems moral or immoral. to demand the worship of God which include certain mandates while excluding others is not the business of the government. 

I'm attacking the reasoning, Drich, that obedience towards appointed leaders is justified because they are, "not a terror to good conduct, but to bad."  Even if we ignore those cases where the leaders oppose biblically justified precepts, we have plenty of examples of government being a terror to those who are good, as well. 

like michael Brown?

So, as an argument for obeying your leaders, it's a bad one, based on a fantasy, not the reality. 

honestly it was one of the primary reasons we (the otherside who see this mandate as a way of centering or coming to a balance between an oppressive church state and a government for the people) did not self divide into civil war when our lasts socialist president nearly broke the common ground we as a nation do have, and turned us on our selves. Seriously this is not about you or some social warrior douche. this is about joe everyman who thinks and reacts simply. rather than getting his way every election this passage quells the idea that 'we' always need get our way... (See how your side reacts without this passage after the next trump victory.) or rather see this the first time a republican was elected president ever. Again this is more about balance and not allowing the church or the secular government gain too much over the other as if either side wins... the country is always doomed. example So me a good theocrasy or show me a working example of socialism not how it supposed to work but a working example where everything is both DIVERSE in population and still works. The best examples is when everyone is the same like qubec or sweden... and even then things like health care are atroish. Friend dad needed knee surgery come back in 2 years. Doctor can't walk. either wait or go to the us and we will offer a voucher for like "our cost"...

If this is an argument from your God, then your God is either unaware of how government can be a terror to those who are good (in which case, he's not omniscient), or he's just making a bad argument (which would contradict the belief that he is perfect).  Either way gets you to the conclusion that your God does not exist, based on reasoning from a clear bible passage.

Again bigger picture than always right always wrong... BALANCE is the goal not a alway good or just life.

Maybe it was my buddhist side grandparents teaching kicking in but I look for balance in everything God says and does, and guess what... it is ALWAYS present. God is not always looking out for your ease wonderful story book up bringing or life style he seeks balance for us above all. he sometime intentional turns us into hardship and heart ache so that we may not only learn to navigate the rough waters but not loose our minds when things are great.

Balance is how this happens. So to is balance needed in government. God knows what man does when He speaks with the power and authority of God in government (but not necessarily on God's behalf) you wind up with the literal dark ages... We also know what happens when man is allow to be the ultimate authority in caring for itself In government as well.. I see a great example well intentioned Nazis who started a movement that quickly became corrupt because their money could not support the good will/give aways the german people were promised.


When man is allowed to go to his ultimate version of 'government' it always turns out evil.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7f8of3NAX-c

I don't see that your video adds anything to your point.  Maybe you meant it to convey something, but what, I don't know.[/quote]
If clinton were elected she sought to change deeply held religious beliefs that interfered with anything she deemed a human right. She would have to first remove the first amendment (ironically) which she planned to do with all the supreme court justices she would be submitting. "I would look for candidates for SCOUT who saw the constitution as a living document and not necessarily what the founding father had intended.." The removal of this HUMAN/American Right would be the beginning of the end for the church and the end of the limits God places on us to 'honor' the government.

Meaning this would be an example where 'we'/followers are allow to 'speak up resist.'

---

I'm not against immigration, I just have no sympathy for those that voted against their own interests.

Their interest would be to have everyone trying to enter from syria vetted properly, because when isis took the capitol city they took the embassy. which means they literally can print 100% authentic passports putting a terrorist or someone on a no fly list on an air plane despite who they really are.

[Angrboda]

I'm attacking the reasoning, Drich, that obedience towards appointed leaders is justified because they are, "not a terror to good conduct, but to bad."  Even if we ignore those cases where the leaders oppose biblically justified precepts, we have plenty of examples of government being a terror to those who are good, as well. 

like michael Brown?

So, as an argument for obeying your leaders, it's a bad one, based on a fantasy, not the reality. 

honestly it was one of the primary reasons we (the otherside who see this mandate as a way of centering or coming to a balance between an oppressive church state and a government for the people) did not self divide into civil war when our lasts socialist president nearly broke the common ground we as a nation do have, and turned us on our selves. Seriously this is not about you or some social warrior douche. this is about joe everyman who thinks and reacts simply. rather than getting his way every election this passage quells the idea that 'we' always need get our way... (See how your side reacts without this passage after the next trump victory.) or rather see this the first time a republican was elected president ever. Again this is more about balance and not allowing the church or the secular government gain too much over the other as if either side wins... the country is always doomed. example So me a good theocrasy or show me a working example of socialism not how it supposed to work but a working example where everything is both DIVERSE in population and still works. The best examples is when everyone is the same like qubec or sweden... and even then things like health care are atroish. Friend dad needed knee surgery come back in 2 years. Doctor can't walk. either wait or go to the us and we will offer a voucher for like "our cost"...

If this is an argument from your God, then your God is either unaware of how government can be a terror to those who are good (in which case, he's not omniscient), or he's just making a bad argument (which would contradict the belief that he is perfect).  Either way gets you to the conclusion that your God does not exist, based on reasoning from a clear bible passage.

Again bigger picture than always right always wrong... BALANCE is the goal not a alway good or just life.

Maybe it was my buddhist side grandparents teaching kicking in but I look for balance in everything God says and does, and guess what... it is ALWAYS present. God is not always looking out for your ease wonderful story book up bringing or life style he seeks balance for us above all. he sometime intentional turns us into hardship and heart ache so that we may not only learn to navigate the rough waters but not loose our minds when things are great.

Balance is how this happens. So to is balance needed in government. God knows what man does when He speaks with the power and authority of God in government (but not necessarily on God's behalf) you wind up with the literal dark ages... We also know what happens when man is allow to be the ultimate authority in caring for itself In government as well.. I see a great example well intentioned Nazis who started a movement that quickly became corrupt because their money could not support the good will/give aways the german people were promised.


When man is allowed to go to his ultimate version of 'government' it always turns out evil.

In all that blather you haven't said that the argument presented was a good one, only that the consequence of following a bad argument might ultimately be desirable. That isn't justifying the bad argument, so my point still stands. At the end of the day, you have a supposedly divinely inspired book talking pure nonsense. The only conclusion I can draw from that is that your bible is not divinely inspired, and so is not a sound basis for belief in God. Now if you want to make the claim that the argument that Paul presents here is a good argument for obeying earthly authorities, including the Nazis, then step right up and make your case.

(Note, I'm also not saying that there aren't good arguments for obeying those in authority, just that for a book that is, "inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work," the argument presented is not particularly good for teaching, for reproof, for correction, OR for training in righteousness.)

[Godscreated]

Guess what dummy, laws and orders are two different things. the laws of this country were established to protect the people and must be kept if we are to be a society of law abiding people and be the country the rest of the world wants to come to, laws vanish so does the country. It's a shame I have to even write something you already know to be true, you just want to take the opposite side I do just because I'm a law abiding Christian citizen.

GC

 Man has no right to tell people to disobey laws and I have great respect for Martin Luther King Jr. Christ did tell His followers not to obey laws that were against His teachings, that they were the highest of all laws.

GC

[The Grand Nudger]

The laws of -this- country were established by a bunch of people who decided not to obey the laws of a king, silly.