ChristiaNet MallWorld's Largest Christian MallChristian BlogsFree Bible QuizzesFree Ecards and Free Greeting CardsLoans, Debt, Business and Insurance Articles

Theocracy In America

I have concerns regarding anyone setting up a theocracy in this country. Comments anyone?

Join Our Free Dating and Take The Christian Living Quiz
 ---NurseRobert on 9/6/10
     Helpful Blog Vote (3)

Post a New Blog



question: how can we be a nation "under God" when we call ourselves a democracy?
---aka on 10/12/10


part 1
many religious figures like pat robertson, james dobson wants to unite church & state.
pat robertson said that separation of church & state is unconstitutional.
and pat robertson is influencing who to vote for.
he even accepted $14 million in faith based initiative from the bush administration.
---mike on 10/8/10


part 2

the things people do in the name of god
pietro carafa or pope paul IV issued the ffg ordinances regarding the jews
jews are to own no real estate
jews are to hire no christian servant
taxes on the jews are to be increased
jews are to live in distinct quarter cut off from other section of the city only on entrance to be locked at sundown

this what would happen is US becomes a theocracy.
only certain people will interpret the bible & if you disagree with them, you will be called a heretic, alienated & denied civil rights.
---mike on 10/8/10


Our relationship with Christ may be personal, but it better not be private.
Matthew 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
---micha9344 on 9/16/10


The Declaration of Independence is a document listing grievances of the American colonies against the rule of England, and declares our intention and right to break away from England and form a separate nation. The references to God and the Creator are typical in the style of writing at the time.

It's in the Constitution that religious freedom is established as one of our basic rights.

The Founding Fathers were either Christians or Deists, looked at the history of Europe saw what government-mandated religious belief had done between Protestant and Catholic causing untold misery. The Founding Fathers took action to assure that such divisions would not be part of the new nation, by making religion a personal, not a public matter.
---Larry on 9/16/10




Larry, the way I see it is if America did not win her independence from England we would have been ruled by England and at that time, if I'm not mistaken the Church of England.

Many faiths came here because of freedom of religion not wanting a pope or church dictate what one could and could not believe. This is why so many escaped Europe because of religious dictatorship.

Now yes, many of our founding fathers practiced christian principles, and were also MASONS ( totally contrary to the Chrisatian Faith!)

Thomas Jefferson did not even believe in the deity of Christ.

I believe we wee established on freedom of conscience....which gives each individual rights, that cannot be controlled by any inquisitions.

---kathr4453 on 9/16/10


Sister Kathr, the Declaration of Independence nor any other federal document makes any reference to the separation of church and state. It was Jefferson's "interpretation" of the first admendment in a letter promising Baptists the federal government would leave them alone. Atheists have repeated the lie so often even Christians believe its in the Declaration or Constitution.
The sole federal document on the separation of church and state was the Treaty of Tripoli signed in 1797 to which President Obama referred angering religious conservatives.
It said "As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion."
---larry on 9/15/10


We cannot be hypocrits.

If youre gonna lead a man to believe decorating a tree to make it beautiful is the same as worshipping that tree then there are tons of other things that have to refrain from as well.

Topping icecream with sprinkles
Putting on makeup
Color pages in a coloring book
Decorating a birthday cake
Wearing anything other than brown clothes
Coloring our hair
Whitening our teeth

I mean just think about how far this topic can be taken.
---JackB on 9/15/10


\\"They set up a theocratic state, spied on and turned on their neighbors, made Christmas trees ILLEGAL and fined anyone who had one...it's a legalistic system."\\

Actually, Christmas trees were not a seasonal custom until about the Victorian era--nearly two centuries AFTER the Puritans in Colonial America.

Now, it IS true that during the Protectorate in Britain, heralds would go through the streets crying, "No Christmas! No Christmas!" and government agents would try to catch people celebrating it.
---Cluny on 9/15/10


Micha, you did very good in explaining what you wanted to say.

And Kathr's attacks on the Puritan's is even worse. They come by her herectical views on Jesus Christ. If she could come close to what the Puritan's taught, she would be on better ground then where she is now. She says about them,
"They set up a theocratic state, spied on and turned on their neighbors, made Christmas trees ILLEGAL and fined anyone who had one...it's a legalistic system."
I guess she would have wanted them to be liberal like herself. Where everything goes. Don't make rules and laws, do what you want, don't follow God. Christmas trees came from a pagan concept not from the Bible. At least they had the right purpose in mind.
---MarkV. on 9/15/10




\\Does anyone KNOW what the movie Gangs of New York was really about, a fight between Old country RCC beholden to Rome and New American Catholics not.\\

Yes, I know what GANDS OF NEW YORK was about.

It was about Anglo-American anti-Irish prejudice, as they were the "new kids in town." Later, it became the Italians, then the Jews, and then Asians, then other groups, but that is not the subject of the movie.

Religion had nothing to do with it. Most of the Irish gang members were NOT that devout.
---Cluny on 9/15/10


I'm not saying they are not true. I'm saying that your helpless attempt to connect the Declaration of Independence with the Bible is false.

---Cluny on 9/15/10

Here Cluny I agree, the ONLY LIBERTY we have is IN CHRIST.

I believe the declaration of Independence separates church and state, not forcing any Church of America on anyone, or giving way to Rome ruling America. Does anyone KNOW what the movie Gangs of New York was really about, a fight between Old country RCC beholden to Rome and New American Catholics not.

A Democracy cannot support a Theocracy. Israel didn't VOTE on Kings, or issues. And look what happened when king Solomon brought in other gods with his many wives. The Kingdom was divided and scattered!
---kathr4453 on 9/15/10


\\Either the Declaration of Independence is false or not when it declares these truths.\\

I'm not saying they are not true. I'm saying that your helpless attempt to connect the Declaration of Independence with the Bible is false.

Life is a GIFT from God. God gave it, and as long as Jesus tarries, there will be a time that God's providence will take it away.

**As we can clearly see, and even more so as that final day approaches, there is no fellowship with light and darkness: we Christians are of one body, even Christ: and the dissers are of another, and none of Christ.**

And we know which one you are.
---Cluny on 9/15/10


As we can clearly see, and even more so as that final day approaches, there is no fellowship with light and darkness: we Christians are of one body, even Christ: and the dissers are of another, and none of Christ.
---Eloy on 9/14/10

You have a truth.

And using the scriptural formula above we can conclude that eloy honoring/standing/kneeling in defense/support..... with a baby killing, pervert promoter is yoked with darkness.

Christians through scripture hold a flashlight and cut through the darkness easily....dissss-missing the unrighteous things.
1 Corinthians 6:9
Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? ...
---Trav on 9/15/10


As we can clearly see, and even more so as that final day approaches, there is no fellowship with light and darkness: we Christians are of one body, even Christ: and the dissers are of another, and none of Christ.
---Eloy on 9/14/10


Your mind is already made up Cluny.
You will only hear what you want to hear and ignore the rest.
Either the Declaration of Independence is false or not when it declares these truths.
Either life is a right endowed by our Creator or it is not.
Quit riding the fence.
'Does the Declaration of Independence speak falsely?\\No, but your exegesis does.'
So life is a right?
'Genesis 2 says that life is a GIFT from God, not a right.'
So life is not a right?
Commitment Cluny, not double mindedness.
---micha9344 on 9/14/10


Read These Insightful Articles About Christian Products


\\The LAW of Moses was the rule, as God placed Kings over Israel. \\

Look again.

When the Israelite elders went to Samuel for a king, God told him, "They have not rejected you. They have rejected Me."

I Sam 8:7 ff.
---Cluny on 9/14/10


NurseRobert, the ONLY Theocracy was one God set up in Israel. The LAW of Moses was the rule, as God placed Kings over Israel.

You cannot mandate through politics GRACE. Politicians cannot mandate the Law of Moses over Gentiles. The law was never nade for Gentiles to begin with.

The Puritans through Calvinistic teachings tried to rule England, were thrown out, and came to America, south Africa etc. Just look at what happened in Massachusetts. They set up a theocratic state, spied on and turned on their neighbors, made Christmas trees ILLEGAL and fined anyone who had one...it's a legalistic system.( and just look at the Salem witch hunts - hummm)
---kathr4453 on 9/14/10


\\Life-Gen 2:7
Liberty-Gal 5:1
Pursuit of Happiness-1Cor 9:24-25
Does the Declaration of Independence speak falsely?\\

No, but your exegesis does.

Genesis 2 says that life is a GIFT from God, not a right.

Your claim that the liberty "with which Christ as freed us" is referred to in the Declaration of Independence is false.

Galatians is talking about being freed from the bonds of Jewish law. Christians (and everyone else) still had what we consider civil rights limited by the imperial government.

And 1 Cor 9 is NOT talking about "pursuit of happiness" but what all ancient writers (even pagan ones) called "temperance".

Would you like to try again?
---Cluny on 9/14/10


Micha: Left-wingers apparently don't like our Declaration of Independence. They believe that:

(1) Our "rights" derive from the government - not from God.

(2) Babies do not have the right to life.

(3) Liberties are to be restricted for the law abiding but showered upon criminals (particularly the Washington elite). Airport security is a good example.

(4) Happiness is continually restricted by increasing government regulation and taxation.
---jerry6593 on 9/14/10


Read These Insightful Articles About Christian Divorce


'We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.'
These are given by God to all men:
Life-Gen 2:7
Liberty-Gal 5:1
Pursuit of Happiness-1Cor 9:24-25
Does the Declaration of Independence speak falsely?
If these are foundational truths, should we not find them in the Bible, especially since they are given to us by God?
Would not most the founding fathers be thinking about certain verses when dealing with King George's attrocities?
I wonder what the other 'unalienable rights' are?
---micha9344 on 9/13/10


\\This nation was founded on Biblical principles, not to impose or dictate to anyone, but as a foundation for liberty.\\

Can you please tell me WHAT Biblical principle, giving book, chapter, and verse, the United States of American is based upon, cross-referencing the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution?

As a matter of fact, the Treaty of Tripoli, ratified by the Senate, and therefore like all treaties part of the public law of the United States, explicitly states that the government of the USA is in NO WAY founded on the Christian religion.
---Cluny on 9/13/10


I quit paying attention to Eloy a couple of years ago. He totally wastes my time.

I am with cluny on this.
---Rod4Him on 9/12/10

Interesting to see him dig mightily, then fall in his own pit.

Proverbs 28:10
Whoso causeth the righteous to go astray in an evil way, he shall fall himself into his own pit: but the upright shall have good things in possession.
---Trav on 9/13/10


NurseRobert:

Theocracy as "rule by God" is the best possible government. Sadly, since other than in Eden and in the Millenium God does not directly rule human affairs, theocracy instead means "rule by God's representatives". The messy part is - who gets to decide who those representatives are? And which version of "God's Law" gets implemented?

Baptists wouldn't want to be in a country run by Pentecostals, and Pentecostals wouldn't want to be in a country run by Catholics, and Catholics wouldn't want to be in a country run by Baptists.

A country where everyone can worship as they please may be mediocre, but is also less evil than if anyone else's religion is put into power over yours.
---StrongAxe on 9/13/10


Send a Free Apostate Church Tract


This nation was founded on Biblical principles, not to impose or dictate to anyone, but as a foundation for liberty.
We, as Christians, show an example which leads others to Christ.
It would be a poor Christian example if the the government of the people, by the people, and for the people did not do likewise.
That being said, the government is likewise subject to corruption, even more so when the general consensus shifts away from Biblical moral standards.
Obama said it best-Whatever we once were, we are no longer.
But, by the grace of God acting through the faithful by Jesus Christ our Lord, we can return.
Such was the repeated case of Israel in Judges.
---micha9344 on 9/13/10


Birds of a feather flock together: Christians with Christians, and dissers with dissers.
---Eloy on 9/13/10

Interesting species comment. I've seen that false prophets flock with with profits. I as a disser, dismiss/rebuke unauthorized preached opinion when it does not flock together with scriptural witnesses.
I'm proud to be a disseloy'er. I'll stand with Christ against sodomite supporters and fetus murderers.
---Trav on 9/13/10


Im going to drag this discussion, kicking and screaming it seems, back to the original question.

Has anyone read or heard about Dominion theology, Christian reconstructionism and Rousas John Rushdoony? Rushdoony felt we needed a government base strictly on the Bible, including Levitical law. My feeling is this flies in the face of what America stands for.

Other than more "you dissed me, so I dis you" comments, I would like to hear peoples opinion of the original statement.
---NurseRobert on 9/13/10


\\Birds of a feather flock together: Christians with Christians, and dissers with dissers.
---Eloy on 9/13/10\\

Eloy, why do you think that people who disagree with you, to say nothing about disproving some of your wilder statements, are not Christians?

And, btw, "disser" is not an English word.
---Cluny on 9/13/10


Read These Insightful Articles About Christian Marriage


Rod4Him, I give you no time to waste.
---Eloy on 9/13/10


Birds of a feather flock together: Christians with Christians, and dissers with dissers.
---Eloy on 9/13/10


I quit paying attention to Eloy a couple of years ago. He totally wastes my time.

I am with cluny on this.
---Rod4Him on 9/12/10


Eloy:

You accuse multiple people of "dissing" you, including Cluny, myself, and others. So what he said goes for me as well:

I disbelieve the wild theories that you have but nobody else does, and go against centuries of Christian beliefs and teachings, and have no scriptural support.

I dismiss your claims with no corroboration (i.e. no "two or three witnesses" the Bible continuously demands).

I disregard your disapproval of me, because ultimately, at the final judgment, I will answer to Jesus not to you.

But this is not disrepect of you personally. On those occasions when you DO say things that are right, I agree with you, and have even tried to mark you up as a useful blogger.
---StrongAxe on 9/12/10


Read These Insightful Articles About Debt Consolidation


//Cluny, who is the "we" when only "you" yourself is addressing me? Are you delusional in thinking that you are speaking for others with your own dissing?//
It was StrongAxe who used the word WE, not Cluny.
---Pedant on 9/13/10


Cluny, who is the "we" when only "you" yourself is addressing me? Are you delusional in thinking that you are speaking for others with your own dissing?
---Eloy on 9/12/10


\\Eloy:

We don't "diss" you. \\

I do.

I DISbelieve him.

I DISapprove of his weird ideas.

I DISmiss what he says, and finally

I DISregard him.

And if that DISappoints him, too bad.
---Cluny on 9/12/10


Eloy:

We don't "diss" you. We post facts that disagree with your strange claims, but unlike those claims (ideas no Christian in 2000 years has ever had), what we post is researched and can be easily verified by many witnesses over hundreds of years.

Verses with "son" alone:
Luke 10:22, John 5:21-22, 8:34-36, Hebrews 5:8, 12:8, 1 Cor 15:28, Gal 4:6-7
In ALL of these, "son" means "Jesus" or occasionally "good son", NEVER "son of perdition".

Your view of Mark 13:32 was first expressed by Harold Camping in 2008. He needs it to claim May 21 2011 as the end of the world, just as Jehovah's Witnesses need "other" in Col 1:15 to prove Jesus is not God.
---StrongAxe on 9/12/10


Read These Insightful Articles About Refinancing


\\Cluny, you post more falsehood and dissing, you waste more time.
---Eloy on 9/12/10\\

Eloy, are you saying that ancient mss DID have capital letters as we use them today, especially for Divine Persons and pronouns referring to them?

Are you saying that English versions of the Bible BEFORE the RSV (including the KJV and Geneva) used quotation marks?

Are you saying that other major English versions BEFORE the NASB of the 1960's capitalized pronouns referring to the Divine Persons?

If you have the evidence, produce it.

Otherwise, YOU are simply posting falsehood and "dissing" (whatever that means).
---Cluny on 9/12/10


Strongaxe, I believe in order to protect the deity of Christ, Eloy found it necessary to change the meaning in Mark 13:32 to say, "the son of perdition." He was protecting the eternal deity of God, but in the process did not protect the incarnated Christ who was 100% human and what His responsibilities were as a human. When Jesus spoke these words to the desciples, even He had no knowledge of the date and time of His return. Although Jesus was fully God (John 1:1,14), when He became a man, He voluntarily restricted the use of certain divine attributes (Phil. 2:6-8). He demonstrated His Omniscience on several occasions (John 2:25,, 3:13), but He voluntarily restricted that Omniscience to only those things the Father wanted Him to know
---MarkV. on 9/12/10


Strongaxe 2: during the days of His humanity (John 15:15). Such was the case regarding the knowledge of the date and time of His return. After He was resurrected, Jesus resume His full divine knowledge (Matt. 28:18, Acts 1:7).
Jesus always did what the Father told Him. He obeyed all that He was instructed to do until death. If He had taken charge as God, He would not have been faithful to the Father as a incarnated Son.
---MarkV. on 9/12/10


Cluny, you post more falsehood and dissing, you waste more time.
---Eloy on 9/12/10


Read These Insightful Articles About Franchises


Eloy:

Yes, biblical Hebrew and Greek have no case, so "son" and "Son" are cannot be distinguished.

It is just as much an error to insist it says "son" as to insist it says "Son". English "my wife" could mean "a wife of mine" or "the wife of mine". We infer which based on context.

Can you find ANY other precedent in the Bible where "son" implies "son of perdition"? If not, adding "of perdition" here is pure conjecture, solely to inject your interpretation into the text, like the Jehovah's Witnesses who add "other" to Colossians 1:15:
"because by means of him all [other] things were created"
---StrongAxe on 9/11/10


\\Therefore the verse is correctly "son" as originally written in the Greek, and Not "Son" as later translated by English translaters.\\

Eloy, not only did Greek Biblical mss (to say nothing about all ancient mss) not have capital letters, but even the custom of capitalizing pronouns and nouns referring to Divine Persons is relatively late.

The first English Bible to even use quotation marks is the RSV of 1946.

And the first English Bible to capitalize divine nouns and pronouns was the NASB of the 1960's, which is relatively late.

Even in Church Slavonic, only the first letter of a sentence is capitalized.

So your trying to make an issue of whether a word is capitalized is meaningless.
---Cluny on 9/11/10


strongax, of course I believe all that I say, ALL, and it is the dissers like you whom disbelieves. Jesus has said out of his own mouth that he is the Almighty, therefore if Jesus is telling the truth that he is God, then he also knows all things, for that is one of the attributes of the Almighty, Knowing all things for all things are naked and open to his eyes, Omniscience, Not semiscience, but Omniscience- ALL Knowing. Therefore the verse is correctly "son" as originally written in the Greek, and Not "Son" as later translated by English translaters.
---Eloy on 9/11/10


catherine:

You are just proving everybody else's point.
---StrongAxe on 9/11/10


Read These Insightful Articles About Lead Generation


Alan: Catherine is a self-proclaimed prophet. But, as you point out, she seems more concerned with feeding the fires of hell than populating the streets of gold. Kinda makes you wonder whose prophet she is!
---jerry6593 on 9/11/10


Such JOY Catherine that so many are going to Hell
---alan8566_of_uk on 9/11/10


Well, shut my mouth. Hallelujah. So many will remain lost and they all deserve hell, too. Hallelujah, hallelujah, and hallelujah.
---catherine on 9/10/10


Cluny ... I have gone back to find out what Catherine gives Hallelujas for.
In nearly every case it is because people are going to be punished in Hell.
I don't recall a single time shes given one because people are going to be saved.
---alan8566_of_uk on 9/10/10


Read These Insightful Articles About Mortgages


Eloy:

In Mark 13:32
"But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father."

Do you SERIOUSLY believe "the son" means "the son of perdition"?! By the same logic, perhaps "the father" means "the father of lies"?

Since Jesus used the same words when he commanded believers to baptize "in the name of the father, the son, and the holy ghost", is "the son" there also the son of perdition? And if not, why is it different?

Your strange interpretations (that I have never heard from anyone else but you) open tremendously nasty cans of worms if followed to their "logical" conclusions.
---StrongAxe on 9/10/10


\\HELL, is going to be FULL. Hallelujah\\

Once more catherine shows how far her heart is from the God of the Bible Who says He takes NO delight in the loss of a sinner.

**As to Mark 13:32, the Gk. does not capitalize the "s" in "son" in this scripture:**

Eloy is probably not aware that there are no capital letters in ancient Greek Biblical or non-Biblical mss.

For that matter, there are no punctuation marks or chapter and verse divisions, either.
---Cluny on 9/10/10


It is a great danger, one which we must FIGHT, FIGHT, FIGHT, FIGHT, with God's help...A mixing of several gods in one in the minds of worshipers. HELL, is going to be FULL. Hallelujah++Oh, I do sense this evil, I just have not been able to zero in on it. THANKS.
---catherine on 9/10/10


Lawrence, A-men. As to Mark 13:32, the Gk. does not capitalize the "s" in "son" in this scripture: and therefore Christ whom has proven himself in the sight of mankind to be ALL the fulness of the Godhead bodily, and has proven himself to be ALL Mighty, and he the Creator of all indeed knows all things, and has spoken this verse, he was speaking not of himself here, but of the "son of perdition" whom abides in darkness.
---Eloy on 9/10/10


Read These Insightful Articles About Personal Loans


st - ax
Likewise self contradictory.


There Is One God & He has only One salvation plan & One Church.


For false christ, even the popehood is type. For the devil 2nd.Cor.11 v's 14 - 15 has churches & salvation plans making people believe it is God, Man - made trin rcc & her offspring daughters trin churches the presby, aog, luth, metho, naz, cog, bapt etc Rev.17 v's 4 - 6, including the other Man - made gods of, buddha, muslam, hindu etc gods Are All in the family body of the Man - mades.
---Lawrence on 9/10/10


Lawrence:

Then please explain how you see Mark 13:32 in a way that is not self-contradictory.
---StrongAxe on 9/9/10


God gave me the Revelation who He Is.
Psa.111 v 9 Is Jesus to come, Isa.9 v 6 Is Jesus Christ, Matt.28 v 19 Is Jesus Christ, John 14 v's 8 - 9 Is Jesus Christ, 1st.Tim.3 v 16 Is Jesus Christ, Colo.2 v 9 Is Jesus Christ,
Rev.22 v 13 Is Jesus Christ. Again, God gave me & others the Revelation of who He Is. Jesus Christ there is No other name given.

God Is omnipresent, He Is everywhere present All at once at the same time. While God being in the flesh of Jesus Christ when He was in the water, He was also that voice that came down from heaven etc.
---Lawrence on 9/9/10


Lawrence:

No, Jesus is NOT the name of the Father. JHVH is the name of the Father. Jesus is the name of the Son. The two are one, NOT one and the same. Look at married couples - they become "one flesh" but they don't become one person - they are together but still distinct.

Mark 13:32
"But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father."

The Father knows but the Son does NOT know. This would be IMPOSSIBLE if they were one and the same person.

There are also many other cases - Jesus praying to the Father, the Holy Spirit descending down on him at his baptism, etc. NONE of these would make any sense if they were all the same.
---StrongAxe on 9/9/10


Read These Insightful Articles About Auto Insurance


st - ax

Again, God gave the command go ye therefor & Apostle Peter went therefor. Jesus Christ Is The name of The Father, Jesus Christ Is The name of The Son & Jesus Christ Is The name of The Holy Ghost. There is No discrepancy between Jesus & the Apostles, just Fulfillment of what Jesus said to do.
---Lawrence on 9/9/10


Nontheocratic government which is equal to atheism and self-destruction, is like children whom need their father for the necessities of survival, but the immature children in their selfishness think they can make it on their own without the need of their father which father has exactly what they need for life and success. God made government and God owns government, government did not make God. Whenever a government tries to exclude their Maker God from their mode of operandum, they fail miserably.
---Eloy on 9/9/10


To get back to NurseRoberts question..the answer is yes, attempts to set up theocracies are dangerous because they are man-based efforts to install God's kingdom.
God has to do that and has done it only once in Israel.

The only theocracy that would not fall under its own weight and under Satan's oppressive control is a theocracy started and centered by and under God, not unholy efforts by religious conservatives, birther wing nuts, Muslim fanatics or even modern mega-church pastors.

No true theocracies are possible before the second coming, however the concerns you express Robert is another reason we need to be praying more than listening to Glenn Beck or Keith Olberman.
---larry on 9/9/10


Lawrence:

Why do you keep saying Acts 2:38 fulfills Matthew 28:19? All it says is that Jesus said to do it one way, and the Apostles did it a different way. This says that what the Apostles did was ALSO acceptable (unless they were all apostate, but that opens another large can of worms) but it DOES NOT say that it REPLACED what Jesus said. How can you possibly think that someone who does EXACTLY WHAT JESUS SAID TO DO is wrong? Who is your Lord? Jesus, or one of the apostles?
---StrongAxe on 9/9/10


Read These Insightful Articles About Holidays


I'm concerned about statements like " we need a civilian task force" or "at some point you've made enough monie" or "it's a typical white person whos afraid to walk the inner streets at nite" or "in times of trouble some people cling to God and guns" or "this country is no longer a Christian nation" or "there are many ways to God" or TEA party people are just like terriosts" or "under my new taxx perposul your energy bill will sky rocket" or "the gov knows how to unvest your monie better than you do".
---wayne on 9/9/10


st - ax

Acts 2 v 38 Fulfills Matt.28 v 19. Jesus gave the command go ye therefor & Apostle Peter went therefor Acts 2 v 38 & baptized those, The Fulfillment of Matt.28 v 19.

If a minister that baptizes both ways Is just like scripture says, a double minded man is unstable in all his ways.
---Lawrence on 9/8/10


Lawrence:

You totally missed my point. You seem to believe that baptism "in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost" (which WAS, after all, what Jesus himself explicitly commanded) should be ignored because scripture does not record any examples of the Apostles doing it this way.

I was pointing out that, if you use that logic, you must also reject the "drinking of poisons", because although Jesus also said believers would do that, there is no reference in scripture to it actually being done. You can't reject one without rejecting the other. (And no, I don't believe in tempting God by deliberately going after these things).


Cluny:

See above.
---StrongAxe on 9/8/10


\\Just because there are no specific examples in Acts of the Apostles using those words doesn't then mean that Jesus's command is null and void...\\

As a matter of fact, there's a story about St. John the Evangelist being offered a cup of poisoned wine to drink. He blessed it, and the cup shattered as a snake crawled out of the shards.

A similar thing happened in the life of St. Benedict.
---Cluny on 9/8/10


Read These Insightful Articles About Health Insurance


st - ax

For if you drink such & knowing it's poison is tempting God, drinking accidentally is a diff story. Just like I've heard about Missionary's in diff places & the chief of the tribe would mix a pois - drink for the Missionary & the Missionary prayed & then drank, there was no harm came to the Missionary.

When Apostle Paul reached over to get some wood to put on the fire, the snake latched onto his hand. He didn't say, here snaky - snaky bet you cant get me as if he would be tempting God.
---Lawrence on 9/8/10


Lawrence:

Just because there are no specific examples in Acts of the Apostles using those words doesn't then mean that Jesus's command is null and void.

Mark 16:18 says believers would safely drink poisons and take up serpents. In Acts 28:3-6 we have an example of Paul taking up a viper, but there are no examples of anyone drinking poison. Does this mean the second half of Mark 16:18 is valid, but the first half isn't, just because there are no examples?
---StrongAxe on 9/7/10


Darlene

If a minister has 2 lines in the church where he pastors, ( in ref to communion ) 1 line for gr - juice & 1 line for the wine, & he uses 2 water baptism's, 1 in Jesus name & the other in the titles, that minister Is here, James 1 v 8.

Acts 2 v 38 Is correct.

You read from Matt.28 v 19 to the end of Jude & you find me 1 that was baptized in the titles, there is None.
---Lawrence on 9/7/10


Cluny those who simply baptize in Jesus Name are man made,Jesus Christ himself is the man who made them. They aren't organizations but churches. Acts 2:38 Peter replied,repent and be babtized everyone of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins,and you will receive the Gift of the Holy Ghost. People don't realize that when they are baptized in "The Name" of the Father,Son,and Holy Ghost they too are baptized in Jesus Name. For in him(Jesus)dwells all the fulness of the Godhead bodily Colossians 2:9. The Name of the Father,Son,and Holy Ghost is Jesus. Emmanuel,God with us Matthew 1:23. That makes no longer two baptisms but one because no matter which way you do it you are baptizing into Jesus.
---Darlene_1 on 9/6/10


Read These Insightful Articles About Christian Dating


NurseY: Finally, I agree with you over your concern about Obama's intent to make America a Muslim dictatorship.
---jerry6593 on 9/7/10


Talk about a butchered question...

I was originally talking about Dominion theology, Christian reconstructionism and Rousas John Rushdoony.

The info I saw dealt specifically with these areas. Moderator, your "editing" changed the context of the question.
---NurseRobert on 9/6/10


Law can not make people love. Part of God's present theocracy is that people are willingly obedient. "And let the peace of God rule in your hearts, to which also you were called in one body, and be thankful." (Colossians 3:15) This would be a basic law of a Christian theocracy.

All I've heard about previous "Christian" governments is that the doctrinal group in power was killing and torturing and taking property and position from whoever did not copy-cat and parrot their doctrine. But I'm sure there is better than that, wherever that was.

And now I've mainly heard that "Christian" lawmaking efforts are mainly about moral items and cutting taxes, nothing about ending divorce and the abuse of arguing.
---Bill_bila5659 on 9/6/10


More from the heresy chain bound book of cluny.

Man - made Not so, in Acts 2 v 38 that's what it says to do, in the name, Jesus Christ.

It's still for us today Thank God.
---Lawrence on 9/6/10


Read These Insightful Articles About Health Treatments


\\It's like the world being led by worlds largest relig org, such as the Man - made rcc. \\

Sabellian modalists who simply baptize in the Name of Jesus are man-made organizations.
---Cluny on 9/6/10


It's like the world being led by worlds largest relig org, such as the Man - made rcc.

I the which it will lead up to the 1 world Man - made church & Gov.
---Lawrence on 9/6/10


Nurse: History has shown us that even supposed Christian theocracies have been negative in the final analysis. Our Constitution has safeguards right now against such a thing, and I am grateful for that. Even in our country's history, the witch hunts of Salem, and other such events show the importance of tolerating the existance of people who may not worship our Lord.
---Trish9863 on 9/6/10


Copyright© 1996-2015 ChristiaNet®. All Rights Reserved.