XPost: alt.christnet.christianlife, alt.religion.christian.baptist   
   From: shell-stamford@cox.net   
      
   "A Watcher"  wrote in message   
   news:m8xnk.17093$tc1.7322@newsfe24.ams2...   
   >   
   > "Chuck Stamford"  wrote in message   
   > news:cHmnk.15680$LF2.12142@newsfe09.iad...   
   >>   
   >> "A Watcher"  wrote in message   
   >> news:_zbnk.148082$Lw1.14166@newsfe29.ams2...   
   >>>   
   >>> "Chuck Stamford"  wrote in message   
   >>> news:GL7nk.15702$1N1.15195@newsfe07.iad...   
   >>>>   
   >>>> "Mike Painter"  wrote in message   
   >>>> news:7h7nk.16194$cW3.6902@nlpi064.nbdc.sbc.com...   
   >>>>> Chuck Stamford wrote:   
   >>>>>   >>   
   >>>>>>> You mean you do not find it disturbing and quite inappropriate for   
   >>>>>>> Christ's brethren to fight and kill each other?   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Christ's "brethern" were enjoined by their God and Lord to obey the   
   >>>>>> legitimate authorities over them, as all authority comes ultimately   
   >>>>>> from Him.  The fact men exercise this God given authority over one   
   >>>>>> another practically guarantees there will be conflicts.  Is there   
   >>>>>> something in any of this you find contradictory?   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Who decides which authority is right. That argument was used by kings   
   >>>>> and emporers for thousands of years with great success.   
   >>>>> If their authority comes from the same god(s) why is there no piece   
   >>>>> and why did kings loose power?   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Mark Twain's War Prayer sums it up nicely.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Not familiar with much of Mark Twain's body of work beyond Tom Sawyer.   
   >>>> I liked that story as a kid.  It was nice to see that some kids, at   
   >>>> least, got to have some fun.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> But I digress.  As to you question:   
   >>>>   
   >>>> "Who decides which authority is right."   
   >>>>   
   >>>> God does.  All I need to know, as a disciple of Jesus Christ, is that   
   >>>> the authority I'm following isn't an obvious enemy of the Gospel, or   
   >>>> isn't requiring me to do something that directly contradicts a command   
   >>>> of God as understood and interpreted by His Son, Jesus Christ.   
   >>>   
   >>> You mean like these direct commands......"43 Ye have heard that it hath   
   >>> been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy. 44 But I   
   >>> say unto you, LOVE your ENEMIES, bless them that curse you, do good to   
   >>> them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and   
   >>> persecute you;" Matt 5:43-44 (KJV)   
   >>>   
   >>> "21 ``You have heard that the ancients were told, `YOU SHALL NOT COMMIT   
   >>> MURDER' and `Whoever, commits murder shall be liable to the court.' 22   
   >>> ``But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother shall be   
   >>> guilty before the court;" Matt 5:21-22 (NASB)   
   >>>   
   >>> Which would certainly rule out killing any of them.   
   >>   
   >> Are you suggesting the the proposition, "It's impossible to kill someone   
   >> without being angry with them" is true?   
      
   Maybe you missed this question, so I'll point it out to you again.  It's not   
   rhetorical.  I expect an answer from you on this, as it is fundamental to   
   the larger issues involved here, and we can't proceed reasonably without   
   having first settled it between us.   
      
      
   >>   
   >>>   
   >>> "Good Master, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life? 18 And   
   >>> Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but   
   >>> one, that is, God. 19 Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit   
   >>> adultery, Do NOT KILL, Do not steal...." Mark 10:17-19 (KJV)   
   >>> See above.   
   >>>   
   >>> "38 Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth   
   >>> for a tooth: 39 But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but   
   >>> whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other   
   >>> also." Matt 5:38-39 (KJV)   
   >>>   
   >>> This is the commanded passive response to any form of attack on the   
   >>> person who is following Christ.   
   >>> Christ does not say "Once he has smitten you on one cheek, immediately   
   >>> strike your adversary back on his" He says to offer the other side of   
   >>> your face and allow him to hit the other.   
   >>>   
   >>> Is that not correct Chuck?   
   >>   
   >> It most certainly is.  And?   
   >   
   > Is it not true Christ's brethren were commanded to love each other, even   
   > their enemies and do good to those who might despitefully use them?   
      
   Yes, that is true, but now I must insist that if we are going to continue   
   this, you start acting like this is the two way street it is, and answer the   
   question I asked you above.   
      
   >   
   >   
   >   
   >   
   >   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)