I guess we knew it was coming.
It's here.
First time in U.S. History that a Christian is put in jail for refusing to deny her beliefs. This should be alarming to anyone who has beliefs they would not deny, and who would not put their name to a document displaying that denial; whatever those beliefs might be.
FreeKimDavisNow.com
She was a government employee that refused to do her job. She should of resigned if she felt that strongly about it - or been fired.
But sent to jail? Fired yes. Sent to jail? No way is that right.
The officials in Hitlers government were government officials as well. When their laws changed and became immoral they also should have refused to obey them. For some of us, backing down quietly will not be an option.
She is an elected official and cannot be fired. She can be impeached. Yet in the mean time, her name is on those documents.
When the government or anyone else forces me to perform/endorse (put my name on) an act that to me is immoral, I will respond in a similar way.
This country was founded on freedom of religion. This is a sad day in history.
FreeKimDavisNow.com
Then she should of resigned. She had that option.
Should Daniel have resigned as well? Or how about at least hiding in a closet to do his religion?
Peter, John, and Paul each had opportunities to avoid prison. Don't you wish they had become obedient to those Godless laws In Authority over them? Because if they had you would have a strong case. Down side is, neither would so many have seen their lives and heard their words of faith.
That is not even close to being the same thing. She is being paid to fulfill and office that supports the law. She should of resigned if she cannot fulfill her duties.
"Whether it is right before God to listen to you more than to God, you judge" (Acts 4:19)
Are we really in a position to judge what Kim Davis "should have" done?
You are able to define what her actions should have been? You are saying then that Kim Davis is in defiance to Gods will for her life. God would not tell her to do something you say she "should not have done" or, more specifically, not done something she should have. It's an awesome responsibility to have the mind of God in this matter. I hope we are up to it.
You have stated you are "in the closet" about some of your beliefs. She might not know how to live that way.
Quote from: HungerForTruth on September 04, 2015, 09:42:51 PM
That is not even close to being the same thing. She is being paid to fulfill and office that supports the law. She should of resigned if she cannot fulfill her duties.
It is exactly the same thing. Daniel was in the service of the government which he defied when the law changed and became immoral.
The flood gates are opened. Get ready. Flood waters approaching a closet near you.
...look for employment options for christians with consciences to decline. not being able to 'buy or sell' we can appreciate
Jesus judgement/rewarding of those who 'were hungry and you fed me,naked and clothed me,sick and in prison and you
visited me" I tell you the truth..what you have done for one of these little ones who believe in me..ye have the same as done
it to me."
He who takes your outer-garment,give unto him your inner garment also.They took her outer garment/means to sustain her
outward man. Her inner garment needs to be given also to them[spirit of Christ] Christians should be expecting this kind of thing. They
are cutting off christians heads in some countries. though they pillage us of the material..we have an inheritance laid up that no-one can
touch.
expect 100 fold back..anything given up...be they fields,houses,spouses or your life.
now,they may take freedom of religion to the courts...and try them. But,I do not look for any protection to come this way.
this country is done hard set in it's course,imo.
this is going to 'make and break' nominal christians...there will be no 'fence' sitting.trials by fire are coming...for purification.
when the wicked rule..and everything is turned upside down...good is called 'evil' and evil is called 'good' therefore..keeping a
'good' conscience before God will land you as 'evil' and in jail as a criminal.
sin will be paraded and righteousness will hide in the closet. whereas sin used to remain in the clost and what is right was
openly displayed.
...look for employment options for christians with consciences to decline. not being able to 'buy or sell' we can appreciate
Jesus judgement/rewarding of those who 'were hungry and you fed me,naked and clothed me,sick and in prison and you
visited me" I tell you the truth..what you have done for one of these little ones who believe in me..ye have the same as done
it to me."
He who takes your outer-garment,give unto him your inner garment also.They took her outer garment/means to sustain her
outward man. Her inner garment needs to be given also to them[spirit of Christ] Christians should be expecting this kind of thing. They
There are no laws against the above. :iagree:
Good post sheila.
Wadif, you've swayed me some on this. I obviously was against her going to jail, thinking the judge was just activist wanting to make a point. However, my hesitancy came in regarding the whole "obey the law of the land thing", and also thinking perhaps of other options such resigning or allowing someone else in her office to issue the ridiculous licenses. But your post(s) helped bring things into a little more clarity for me. At what point does 'obey the law of the land" no longer apply? I'd think when it was in obvious direct opposition to what God says, such as in this case. In this case or similar, if something is clearly Written, how can a true believer, blood-washed blood-bought saint take a direct action for "Caesar" that's in direct opposition to God and His Way? Also, "hiding in the closet" is another salient topic in this; I wonder how often "we" (hypothetical we, including "me") hide our true beliefs so we don't "get in trouble" with the world. Really some things to think about, as things wind up and tighten up. There will likely come a time - maybe soon - when speaking anything from scripture that's against the world's (and apostate "namers of the name of Christ') beliefs, will be LEGALLY (with punishments and penalties). The adversary is kicking hard. He either doesn't know God's plan of redemption and reconciliation (Victorious Gospel), or he does know and it scares him to death so he's throwing a fit. Come Lord Jesus quickly. Reign so the world will learn your righteousness.
Quote from: sheila on September 04, 2015, 10:52:22 PM
when the wicked rule..and everything is turned upside down...good is called 'evil' and evil is called 'good' therefore..keeping a
'good' conscience before God will land you as 'evil' and in jail as a criminal.
sin will be paraded and righteousness will hide in the closet. whereas sin used to remain in the clost and what is right was
openly displayed.
"...some things to think about as things wind up and tighten up". Jabcat
Jabcat, what brought me here and got me studying is the realization that it is time for me to know what I believe. Whatever that is, am I willing to go to prison for it or die for it? And how does what I believe dictate my actions in view of persecution of those next to me; even when I might disagree with some of their beliefs.
I have decided to stand up for them and help them to the point of giving my life if that is what it takes for me to help them.
As a kid I heard of things like this in over-seas locations. It is hard to watch things "wind up and tighten up" here in my home.
I have a new quote in my book of quotes. As uncomfortable as it makes me, it is powerful in its truth. I don't know the name of the woman who penned it, but she goes by "Cardinal".
"
If God doesn't judge this nation's sins and let it fall, He'll have to apologize to Sodom and Gomorrah" -Cardinal
Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand
Quote from: sheila on September 04, 2015, 10:37:05 PM
now,they may take freedom of religion to the courts...and try them. But,I do not look for any protection to come this way.
this country is done hard set in it's course,imo.
this is going to 'make and break' nominal christians...there will be no 'fence' sitting.trials by fire are coming...for purification.
I think you might be right, Sheila. People have been so complacent about Christians being tortured, murdered, and persecuted in other countries. I don't understand why they don't realize that it will trickle down to us......
to them, soon, too. Or how we can watch our brothers and sisters in Christ, die, and not feel a kinship with them. I am not of the mind to say, " Oh, well, the end of the world is coming, anyway.....nothing I can do about it." as many seem to do. Show me in the Bible where we are to sit back and become spectators in life, because we
think the world is going to end?
We need to keep on going. Now, I was not particularly upset by her arrest, as I expected it. I would guess she was offered to resign. Sorry, I have not been following the news stories as well as I should. If you disobey the law of the land, you will be treated accordingly. Yet, this is all very unsettling, as the law of the land seems to be increasingly against Christian thought.
We are going to need to be strong. I think of my children, just starting their adult lives, and of my potential grandchildren, being born in this climate. It is not what I pictured, years ago. But then, much of my life is not as I pictured years ago.
God be with us......and He will. I think it is going to be a very rough ride.
My :2c:
D. :Pray:
For one I have the feeling the motivation for this arrest is purely political. I don't think it was right for her to be sent to jail for not providing a marriage license. Objectively she should be fired or merely get another judge. It is the reason why marriage should not be controlled by state.
HungerForTruth is right the judge's responsibility is different than the citizen like Peter or John. What happens if the judge was religion X and that religion states that two people of different religion can't get marry. Should the judge decide not to marry the two people. Do you see logical problems with this? It is just not that simple. If she had the option to resign she should have taken it.
it's really a matter of the people saying 'He shall not be King over us" and killing the heir. The parable of the tenants.
Luke 20;17.......'The stone the builders rejected has become the capstone. Everyone who falls on that stone will be broken
to pieces,but he on whom it falls will be crushed"[crushed head of the serpent]
a stone not cut out by human hands..will strike the image at it's feet.
Rev 11;7 now when they have finished their testimony,the beast that comes up from the abyss,will attack them and overpower
and kill them. Their bodies will lie in the great city that is 'FIGURATIVELY" called sodom and egypt,where also their Lord was
crucified. the inhabitants of the earth will gloat over them and will celebrate for these two wittness'es 'TORMENTED[have you come
to torment us before the proper time] those who live on the earth
Quote from: Aerex on September 05, 2015, 03:51:29 PM
For one I have the feeling the motivation for this arrest is purely political. I don't think it was right for her to be sent to jail for not providing a marriage license. Objectively she should be fired or merely get another judge. It is the reason why marriage should not be controlled by state.
HungerForTruth is right the judge's responsibility is different than the citizen like Peter or John. What happens if the judge was religion X and that religion states that two people of different religion can't get marry. Should the judge decide not to marry the two people. Do you see logical problems with this? It is just not that simple. If she had the option to resign she should have taken it.
If you are comparing interracial marriage to gay marriage, it is testimony to how far we have come. As far as I can discover,in the history of the human race there has never been a religion that sanctioned marriage between two men. She is not being obedient to only Christianity, but to every religion, and to the laws decided upon by the people of Kentucky (75% vote).
The laws she refuses to acknowledge are unconstitutional, illegal, immoral, evil, tyrannical and unprecedented in the history of mankind. Some one like Rosa Parks MUST stand up to tyrannical laws and lawless, activist judges. They are against the "laws of nature and natures God", and against the will of the people.
(This law is not of the people, by the people, or for the people. It is of a God hating agenda, by a God hating agenda, and for a God hating agenda, by five men who were entrusted with more power than the president and who decided to use that power to put their own agenda above the rule of law).
Interesting that once again it is a woman who has enough guts to stand up to tyranny.
You are saying Rosa Parks should have quietly went to the back of the bus? That Christians should have quietly accepted Jim Crow laws?; and carried out racist duties on their jobs because the law required it? Or maybe you are saying Followers of Jesus should have just quit jobs requiring racism, and went back to their closets to pray in peace?
Is this the typical stance of UR believers when faced with evil and abuse of fellow human beings? I really need to know the answer to that. Or; if you want to acknowledge and stand against evil as a UR believer is it required that you be a woman?
Kim Davis is in jail "without bail". Jeffrey Dahmer and other serial killers, child rapists, mass murderers have been given bail.
If God doesn't judge this nations sins and let it fall, He'll have to apologize to Sodom and Gomorrah"
Dan 2;44 In the time of those kings, the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be brought to ruin,nor will it be
left to another people. It will 'CRUSH" all those kingdoms,and bring them to an end. But it will itself endure forever.
Matt 4;8 Again the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world[NWO] and their splendor.
All this I will give you;he said, if you will bow down and worship me" Jesus said ,'away from me satan! for it is written; Worship
the Lord your God and serve Him only"
a place prepared for the woman in the wilderness....and the dragon opened it's mouth and spew floodwaters after the woman
and tried to wash her away of the floodwaters. and the woman was given two wings of an eagle to fly away.............
now Babylon fornicated with the kings of the earth...and rides the beast...the beast shall expose her nakedness..etc.
:cloud9: I'm sure she knew what her options were when she refused, and I think it's safe to say the Spirit convicted her of complicity in their sin. She could have resigned to save herself, but she chose to refuse. I hope people start a legal fund for her.
The harshness of being put in jail without bond, tells you who is running the show, and that this is an all out attack on Christian values, which has been going on for decades now, gaining momentum as it goes. It started with the AIDS crisis, when the push was to hide the fact it started in the homosexual community. Then AIDS became the first disease in history to have a civil rights law applied to it.
Think about it. Every other highly contagious disease in our past was dealt with by quarantine so as not to spread it to the public and create an epidemic, until a cure could be found. It was necessary to them that this not happen so a civil rights argument clouded the issue from what it really was. Then it became necessary to hide those that had AIDS, so we were sold another civil rights law whose inspiration had nothing to do with OUR civil rights, but everything to do with hiding the medical information of those that had AIDS so they could not take adequate measures to protect us. It's called HIPPA.
But back to Kim; I think they probably set her up, looking for a test case and they found it. As always....my :2c: Blessings....
I remember that well,Bex. I was working at the hospital then.always before signs of precautions were posted on the door.This
put on alert the staff and visitors. Universal precautions came into play at that time. We had a gay activist working as 'unit clerk' at
that time......and I was wondering why our med-surg unit had so may aids patients. Then I found out the unit clerk was requesting
all aids patients be sent to our med-surg unit.
not that I would in anyway refuse to offer them compassionate nursing care...the same as any other..tb hepatitis,viral pneumonia.
but that was when it changed.
Quote from: Wadif I.M. Rong on September 05, 2015, 04:39:35 PM
If you are comparing interracial marriage to gay marriage, it is testimony to how far we have come. As far as I can discover,in the history of the human race there has never been a religion that sanctioned marriage between two men. She is not being obedient to only Christianity, but to every religion, and to the laws decided upon by the people of Kentucky (75% vote). The laws she refuses to acknowledge are unconstitutional, illegal, immoral, evil, tyrannical and unprecedented in the history of mankind. Some one like Rosa Parks MUST stand up to tyrannical laws and lawless, activist judges. They are against the "laws of nature and natures God", and against the will of the people. (Of the people, by the people, for the people). Interesting that once again it is a woman.
You are saying Rosa Parks should have quietly went to the back of the bus? That Christians should have quietly accepted Jim Crow laws?; and carried out racist duties on their jobs because the law required it? Or maybe you are saying Followers of Jesus should have just quit jobs requiring racism, and went back to their closets to pray in peace?
Is this the typical stance of UR believers when faced with evil and abuse of fellow human beings? I really need to know the answer to that. Or; if you want to acknowledge and stand against evil as a UR believer is it required that you be a woman?
Kim Davis is in jail "without bail". Jeffrey Dahmer and other serial killers, child rapists, mass murderers have been given bail.
If God doesn't judge this nations sins and let it fall, He'll have to apologize to Sodom and Gomorrah"
My argument is not that we should not stand up for what is given but to hold the responsibilities that has been given to you. My example suggests that anyone can deny anything based on their personal beliefs it doesn't matter if the person is Jewish, Christian, Islamic, Hindu, etc. which is not right would you not agree? This is the main reason why marriage should not be own by the state. It should be owned by the church like it has always been. I would agree that the government has too much power. The only legal thing that the woman can do to fight against this is to simply resign or request a different judge. Let God be the judge.
Now without faith it is impossible to please God, for the one who draws near to Him must believe that He exists and rewards those who seek Him.
Kim Davis seems to be exercising her Faith.
We really don't know what we would do if faced with the same circumstances /situation. It's like with every other situation in life, until we have walked a mile in someone else shoes we don't know, nor can know what we would do. I thought I might just resign, would send the same message as being locked up but maybe she will be released and still have her job and maybe that is the best way to go, who knows? I do know this, the world is in such a mess and needs Christ to straighten it out and I pray for that day. Evil will get worse and worse and the people in charge and religious people also will become more and more tolerant of the wrong that is being done in the world. I have wondered whether we who know the salvation of all will get so sick of the things going on in the world that we will stand up and voice our opinion. What did the disciples do? most of them were tortured and killed for their beliefs. Do you see this day coming again?
Just some thoughts.
CHB
Quote from: Aerex on September 05, 2015, 08:08:32 PM
My argument is not that we should not stand up for what is given but to hold the responsibilities that has been given to you. My example suggests that anyone can deny anything based on their personal beliefs it doesn't matter if the person is Jewish, Christian, Islamic, Hindu, etc. which is not right would you not agree? This is the main reason why marriage should not be own by the state. It should be owned by the church like it has always been. I would agree that the government has too much power. The only legal thing that the woman can do to fight against this is to simply resign or request a different judge. Let God be the judge.
I think we agree with each other. We both want the God Ordained dignity and freedom and inalienable rights for all human beings. We are both struggling, perhaps with the best way to protect those freedoms. I am sure others disagree with me, but I strongly beleive that the perfect law Of liberty is: Gods commandments. And Gods commandments according to Jesus, are summed up in the two great commandments of love. His commandments are His plan of liberty and justice for all.
Perhaps the issue we are not all able to agree on has to do with civil disobedience. We have obvious New Testament scripture admonishing strict obedience to governing authorities; written by men who, in every case spent time in jail for civil disobedience. In the case of Paul, it is so blatant when he is set free from prison and refuses to leave prison because his rights had been violated. He would not go quietly until he had confronted government authorities.
I think this is a very important discussion. I want to know God's will and to do it. If God shows me clearly that I am to stand by passively while a woman is brutalized for her faith, then I want to do his will. But with my limited self awareness and understanding, every conceivable part of my being screems that I must help the helpless. If God does not want me to do that He will have to scream louder.
I think there are people reading this who will be faced with this decision. Maybe there is no way to know ahead of time what will be required of us by the Holy Spirit.
But I know my flesh cannot be depended on to give me Godly signals for a response in an emergent situation. I feel that a "fleshly response" of a father to use force in protecting his own child, might be a Godly response. I just am unclear. Some of us need to "be transformed" ahead of time by complete and thorough understanding of Gods expectations for the followers of Jesus.
Honest: I don't have an agenda. I just want to know who Jesus was and what he taught, and what the living Messiah expects of me in the growing darkness.
I used to think that would be simple to know.
Is this not an issue of jurisdiction?
By a marriage licence, the state purports to grant people the authority to marry.
In Kentucky, a marriage cannot be solemnized without a licence: http://www.lrc.ky.gov/statutes/statute.aspx?id=36473
But isn't the right to marry given by God directly?
So the "marriage licence" is an artifice, a fabrication, a deception. Kim Davis had presumably sworn an oath of office, by which she voluntarily rendered her services to Caesar, in her case to dispense phony "rights". But the state has not truly usurped God's authority, it is just engaging in political theatre and card tricks. Like the trial of Jesus by the Sanhedrin.
So the play here is to cement the assumption that the state has jurisdiction over marriage.
Just the devil up to his old tricks again, I suggest.
The issue of the "state" has appeared earlier also. Do you guys mean it in terms of the state such as Kentucky the state ? Or "state" meaning generic "government".
Because the bigger issue here to me is not marriage at all. And, by the way, I agree that the story of the marriage of Adam and Eve reveals all the government paperwork required for marriage.
To me the issue is:
1) Tyranny of the federal government over the will of the people of Kentucky brought on by a ruling of five activists judges with their own personal agenda (which just happens to be satanic). The "state" was stripped of any authority in the matter. The ruling was intentionally unconstitutional and illegal, because it is just trendy for those in power to see how much law breaking the people will tolerate. They are finding out we will tolerate any and all of it. And that is how tyranny was born in America over the last six years.
2) The criminalization of Christianity. They knowingly created a way to start putting Christians in jail for their faith. It really has little if anything to do with marriage. It includes marriage, but is way beyond marriage in it's scope. The only thing missing to put you in jail is to: pass firm laws against hate speach, and Identify one of your Christian activities, (or the refusal of non-Christian activities) as a form of hate speech: jail ...without bail.
How will you feel? Will you wish for support from Christians at Tentmaker?
Don't wish too hard, because you know you had the option of hiding in a closet until everyone in the universe is saved. It will be your own fault.
As Cardinal pointed out this is a test case.
It is only the beginning.
I agree that the fact she was jailed without bond, instead of fired, or transferred, shows that this is an issue pf persecution for her beliefs. The simple truth is however, that the law of the land must be followd by clerks and officials because otherwise every religion and belief could refuse to issue various permits and licenses that interfered with their religious beliefs.
She could have resigned, but chose to make an issue of it, imo, to make a point and to proclaim her values and to take a stand for them. I applaud that, but the government is not going to distribute exceptions for every persons religious beliefs. She can also apply for transfer within the bureacracy into another position with different responsibilities- it isnt just "quit, be fired, or go to jail". IMO the government is being manipulated by gay activists in the upper echelon, and so is the media. But I still think it is unreasonable to expect the government to issue exceptions to following the law because of religious beliefs, when there are other reasonable options for the employee.
To think that gay marriage will be overturned or repealed because of these kinds of protests is naive. The time for demonstrations of faith on this issue has past, and as usual most of the "church" slept thru the changes they are now crying about.
Statewide and national fasts called for three days before these laws were passed might have been way more effective.
Quote from: eaglesway on September 06, 2015, 04:31:42 PM
I agree that the fact she was jailed without bond, instead of fired, or transferred, shows that this is an issue pf persecution for her beliefs. The simple truth is however, that the law of the land must be followd by clerks and officials because otherwise every religion and belief could refuse to issue various permits and licenses that interfered with their religious beliefs.
She could have resigned, but chose to make an issue of it, imo, to make a point and to proclaim her values and to take a stand for them. I applaud that, but the government is not going to distribute exceptions for every persons religious beliefs. She can also apply for transfer within the bureacracy into another position with different responsibilities- it isnt just "quit, be fired, or go to jail". IMO the government is being manipulated by gay activists in the upper echelon, and so is the media. But I still think it is unreasonable to expect the government to issue exceptions to following the law because of religious beliefs, when there are other reasonable options for the employee.
To think that gay marriage will be overturned or repealed because of these kinds of protests is naive. The time for demonstrations of faith on this issue has past, and as usual most of the "church" slept thru the changes they are now crying about.
Statewide and national fasts called for three days before these laws were passed might have been way more effective.
Very good and sound words, I would say.
CHB
Quote from: eaglesway on September 06, 2015, 04:31:42 PM
To think that gay marriage will be overturned or repealed because of these kinds of protests is naive. The time for demonstrations of faith on this issue has past, and as usual most of the "church" slept thru the changes they are now crying about.
Statewide and national fasts called for three days before these laws were passed might have been way more effective.
:cloud9: Couldn't agree more....too little too late....
Curious fallout...
http://www.businessinsider.com/tennessee-judge-refuses-to-divorce-a-couple-because-of-the-supreme-courts-gay-marriage-ruling-2015-9
Quote from: Wadif I.M. Rong on September 06, 2015, 02:48:10 PM
The issue of the "state" has appeared earlier also. Do you guys mean it in terms of the state such as Kentucky the state ? Or "state" meaning generic "government".
Because the bigger issue here to me is not marriage at all. And, by the way, I agree that the story of the marriage of Adam and Eve reveals all the government paperwork required for marriage.
To me the issue is:
1) Tyranny of the federal government over the will of the people of Kentucky brought on by a ruling of five activists judges with their own personal agenda (which just happens to be satanic). The "state" was stripped of any authority in the matter. The ruling was intentionally unconstitutional and illegal, because it is just trendy for those in power to see how much law breaking the people will tolerate. They are finding out we will tolerate any and all of it. And that is how tyranny was born in America over the last six years.
2) The criminalization of Christianity. They knowingly created a way to start putting Christians in jail for their faith. It really has little if anything to do with marriage. It includes marriage, but is way beyond marriage in it's scope. The only thing missing to put you in jail is to: pass firm laws against hate speach, and Identify one of your Christian activities, (or the refusal of non-Christian activities) as a form of hate speech: jail ...without bail.
How will you feel? Will you wish for support from Christians at Tentmaker?
Don't wish too hard, because you know you had the option of hiding in a closet until everyone in the universe is saved. It will be your own fault.
As Cardinal pointed out this is a test case.
It is only the beginning.
I mean "state" as used in leftist agitprop, Big Brother and all that.
I agree. Clearly it's part of a bigger agenda, which includes attempts to confuse gender, racial and cultural identity and generally debase God's law as written on our hearts in favour of something a bit less indelible, shall we say. The agenda is anti-Christ in its means and ends.
I would hope that Kim Davis would be comforted and fortified by Acts 5:41 where apostles rejoice at being worthy to suffer in Jesus' name.
You'd want to have faith that it's all part of God's plan. As the Tenessee fallout spotted by Laz shows, is exposing fractures in the administration and government foolishness in failing to head off what would seem obvious direct consequences.
Is that not broadly analogous to the lead-up to Calvary? People will eventually look upon the harm done to the sacred principle with their complicity, and then repent and look once more to God for guidance. If anything, should our reasonable response not be to expose the travesty and help win souls? :2c:
Just to mention, according to the news I have read, Kim Davis is a member of a denomination that believes everybody that isnt baptized in Jesus name and filled with the Holy Spirit with the evidence of speaking in tongues is going to hell forever- including the rest of Christians who dont believe like they do. Not sure what her personal beliefs are but if she fellowships in an apostolic church odds are she believes that way.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/09/09/splainer-whats-apostolic-christian-and-why-kim-davis-hair-so-long/71947018/ (http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/09/09/splainer-whats-apostolic-christian-and-why-kim-davis-hair-so-long/71947018/)
The most surprising thing to me is how much I learned about U.R. because of Kim Davis. I am guessing some things were revealed and clarified for other folks in other places as well.
One of those things that make you go "hmmm"
It has been that for me, anyway.
How ironic. A Christian in America is jailed for following her faith.
And, nobody says, boo.
If this is not the end times, I don't know what is.
Quote from: Wadif I.M. Rong on September 04, 2015, 09:03:42 PM
The officials in Hitlers government were government officials as well. When their laws changed and became immoral they also should have refused to obey them. For some of us, backing down quietly will not be an option.
She is an elected official and cannot be fired. She can be impeached. Yet in the mean time, her name is on those documents.
When the government or anyone else forces me to perform/endorse (put my name on) an act that to me is immoral, I will respond in a similar way.
You are a very wise person.
God Bless.
Read Justice Scalia's scathing dissent of the majority opinion. When have you ever heard a Supreme Court Justice call his fellow Justices, tyrants?
(Christian News Network) As one of the four justices that dissented from today's U.S. Supreme Court ruling declaring that all 50 states must legalize same-sex "marriage," Justice Antonin Scalia issued a sharp rebuke of his colleagues' arrogance, warning that "pride goeth before a fall."
"The opinion is couched in a style that is as pretentious as its content is egotistic," he wrote. "It is one thing for separate concurring or dissenting opinions to contain extravagances, even silly extravagances, of thought and expression; it is something else for the official opinion of the court to do so."
Scalia was speaking of his disapproval of five black-robed justices issuing an edict that he opined was "highly unrepresentative" of the nation and "hardly a cross-section of America."
"Today's decree says that my ruler, and the ruler of 320 million Americans coast-to-coast, is a majority of the nine lawyers on the Supreme Court," he said. "And to allow the policy question of same-sex marriage to be considered and resolved by a select, patrician, highly unrepresentative panel of nine is to violate a principle even more fundamental than no taxation without representation: no social transformation without representation."
"This practice of constitutional revision by an unelected committee of nine, always accompanied (as it is today) by extravagant praise of liberty, robs the people of the most important liberty they asserted in the Declaration of Independence and won in the Revolution of 1776: the freedom to govern themselves," he said.
Scalia then began to speak with sarcasm, stating that he believed the justices' ruling reeked of arrogance.
"[W]hat really astounds is the hubris reflected in today's judicial putsch," he said. "The five justices who compose today's majority are entirely comfortable concluding that every state violated the Constitution for all of the 135 years between the Fourteenth Amendment's ratification and Massachusetts' permitting of same-sex marriages in 2003."
Continue reading
http://bereanresearch.org/justice-scalia-issues-scathing-dissent-in-same-sex-marriage-ruling-pride-goeth-before-a-fall/
Thank you, I wondered where to find Scalia's words.
I had to look up the word "Putsch": "a secretly plotted and suddenly executed attempt to overthrow a government" (Merriam Webster)
:cloud9: Wow. He hit the nail on the proverbial head.... :doh:
I believe if we do anything we believe is against Gods will..it is wrong for that reason if no other.
My thoughts on this: what about a Christian lawyer who deals with divorce (jesus clearly spoke against divorce)...a Christian who works at a drug store and sells condoms to someone who clearly is not married/fornicating...a Christian who works at a supermarket and sells beer to someone who is a known alcoholic. Or for that matter a Jewish person working at a supermarket selling pork or non kosher food. A Buddhist selling meat... I get that there is an agenda with the media and politicians and a clear anti-christian shift in this country. I also agree homosexuality is spoken against in the bible, but I don't agree that homosexuality should be what we as Christians are crusading against.
Most people who are gay (in my experience) aren't Christian, so why do we expect them to follow God's ways without first following God?
:cloud9: I read something about her having been married 4 times, and they are using that against her. Anybody else see that? Blessings...
To me the only "what she should have done" is to be led by the Spirit. That may sound vague, but not every specific situation is covered in scripture. ("Thou shalt not issue immoral licenses" - Book of Addendums 5:3). As someone said, without faith it is impossible to please God, and as many who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God. So when something is not absolutely, directly covered, it becomes a matter for being led, and those on the sidelines can argue either side. Of course, being led is vital in everything, but there are many things that are not up for debate, as they are more directly referenced in scripture.
I would illustrate it further with the story of Corrie Ten Boom. One of her sisters did not believe in lying - ever - even to protect Jews, so she told the truth at one point with consequences that should have been disastrous, but things actually worked out because of her faith. But who could chide the others for lying, in order to protect the Jews? It was a very situational problem.
Ultimately, what matters in any situation for a believer, is the glory of Christ and increase of His kingdom. My problem with so many of these hot button issues is that even the 'Godly' side of the argument rarely proclaims the gospel in any way, but rather focuses on why it is "against" something. At the point where Christ is dropped from the conversation, these things become carnal, intellectual disagreements to a large degree, even though the base of the issue is still spiritual (which is true of anything, really).
In this homosexual debate, which becomes unseemly very quickly, rather than simple pronouncements of "God sees homosexuality as a sin" etc etc, true though they may be, I feel as though it would be better to say (or say in addition) something about how marriage is a picture of Christ and the church, and a beautiful metaphor with many layers that shows forth His glory and His gentleness towards His people. Christ is not homosexual, and the very implication of that would be Christ loving Himself more than the world, as homosexuality is a parable of self-love (lusting after your mirror image, so to speak). Marriage proclaims the gospel in its own way, even down to the tradition of the woman taking the man's name, which is a metaphor for us taking on the nature of Christ and leaving our old nature behind (though I know some cultures do not do this). As with anything, the opportunity is there to proclaim Christ, but instead it feels more like an Old Covenant pronouncement of having broken a law, with no clarification of what this means in a spiritual sense. As GodIsLove said, we are expecting these people to follow God without knowing Him. How can they follow without knowing? And how can they know without hearing? And how can they hear unless the gospel is preached?
:dsunny:
Yes, I agree with how the discussion is rarely Christ centered, but even more than that I disagree with having a discussion at all while the person is still a non-Christian. It is pointless. The apostles were jailed and killed for believing, preaching and converting others to follow Christ. The Holy Spirit convicts us of our sins. And how did they preach the gospel? Wasn't it usually telling people to believe in Jesus as the savior from our sins, repent, be baptized? It wasn't "let me point out all of your sins...nothing else." Even talking about how marriage is a reflection of Christ and the church will fall on deaf ears if the person isn't Christian.
"Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with mena 10nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. 11And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God."
How many Christians today tell alcoholics they are not going to inherit the kingdom of God? Alcoholic or not isn't the true issue, it is Faith in Jesus and the Holy Spirit that washes and cleanses us, and causes us to be able to overcome our sins.
So the passage above said adulterers do not inherit the kingdom:
"8Jesus replied, "Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning. 9I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery."
I think for me I am just upset at how Christians continue to portray themselves as finger pointers, showing others their sin, without sharing the actual good news, and doing so humbly and with love, didn't Paul say "Here is a trustworthy saying that deserves full acceptance: Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners--of whom I am the worst." I know many in the world won't hear because many hearts are hardened, but some may if it is shared with humility and love. I feel like when I tell people I am Christian I also need to explain more so they can get the caricature out of their heads of what they think a Christian is.
Quote from: GodIsLove on October 11, 2015, 04:58:18 AM
I think for me I am just upset at how Christians continue to portray themselves as finger pointers, showing others their sin, without sharing the actual good news, and doing so humbly and with love, didn't Paul say "Here is a trustworthy saying that deserves full acceptance: Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners--of whom I am the worst." I know many in the world won't hear because many hearts are hardened, but some may if it is shared with humility and love. I feel like when I tell people I am Christian I also need to explain more so they can get the caricature out of their heads of what they think a Christian is.
:iagree:
what part of 'ye shall be hated and persecuted because of me by all nations' do you not understand?
did you not know that 'the word of God' come in flesh..would be crucified and put to death? Ot that the scriptures MUST BE FUFILLED.
or that ...many would follow with acts of loose conduct..and because of this..the truth would be spoken of abusively.
there are 'Peters' out there..that cut off ears..and the Christ must put it back on. There are 'judas s'es' out there that rob the collections
and sell out Christ for money. Doubting Thomases out there that won't believe what their brother's tell them they saw. Brother's
mother's and elected officials that think christians are out of their minds.....some of you will be thrown in prison..some of you will
hire those to tickle your'e ears.
don't put your faith in men...Peter denied Christ 3 times..Thomas doubted..Paul and Barnabus got into an argument and parted ways
for a while..two sister's got into it in the congregations. Jezebel taught the people to eat food sacrificed to idols and fornicate.
Nicolaitins taught things Jesus hated. WHY ON EARTH WOULD YOU PUT YOUR HOPE IN MEN???
PUT YOUR HOPE AND FAITH WHERE IT BELONGS!!!!!!!
John 2;24 now..when he was in Jerusalem at the Passover in the feast day,many believed in his name,when they saw the miracles
which he did. BUT JESUS DID NOT COMMIT HIMSELF TO THEM,BECAUSE HE KNEW ALL MEN.
AND NEEDED NOT THAT ANY SHOULD TESTIFY OF MAN;FOR HE KNEW WHAT WAS IN MAN.
a little evil spoils much GOOD.