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

Explain Roman 13:1-5

What does Romans 13:1-5 mean?

Join Our Free Singles and Take The Wisdom Bible Quiz
 ---Leon on 5/15/15
     Helpful Blog Vote (2)

Reply to this BlogPost a New Blog



Nicole_Lacey:

You said: You can buy all the herbs and seeds from China legally through the mail without the FDA. Done every day,

Yes, they probably don't worry about plants, unless they are classified as controlled substances (e.g. marijuana seeds would NOT be OK).

Still, the point I was trying to make earlier was that the FDA still has jurisdiction for products (i.e. drugs) coming into this country, even if they are not made here or even sold here. The issue is one of jurisdiction, and they exercise it for some things, even if they don't do so for all.
---StrongAxe on 6/25/15


Again not me but my sisters.
You can buy all the herbs and seeds from China legally through the mail without the FDA. Done every day
---Nicole_Lacey on 6/24/15


Nicole_Lacey:

You said: But, I SWEAR somehow my sisters were able to get Lortabs without a RX over the internet. I guess through a loophole.

Of course it's possible, and usually easy, to import drugs from overseas by mail. It's just usually not legal, and you will get punished (sometimes severely, depending on the drugs in question) if you're caught.
---StrongAxe on 6/24/15


Strongaxe, you quoted me correctly of me speaking on food. Where in your statement has the word food.
All I saw was speaking about drugs. Unless you were unable to complete the rule due to space.


"The United States Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (Act) (21 U.S.C. section 331) prohibits the interstate shipment (which includes importation) of unapproved new drugs.
U.S. approved drugs, that have not been manufactured in accordance with and pursuant to an FDA approval." ---StrongAxe on 6/22/15

But, I SWEAR somehow my sisters were able to get Lortabs without a RX over the internet. I guess through a loophole.
---Nicole_Lacey on 6/23/15


Strongaxe, you quoted me correctly of me speaking on food. Where in your statement has the word food.
All I saw was speaking about drugs. Unless you were unable to complete the rule due to space.


"The United States Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (Act) (21 U.S.C. section 331) prohibits the interstate shipment (which includes importation) of unapproved new drugs.
U.S. approved drugs, that have not been manufactured in accordance with and pursuant to an FDA approval." ---StrongAxe on 6/22/15

But, I SWEAR somehow my sisters were able to get Lortabs without a RX over the internet. I guess through a loophole.
---Nicole_Lacey on 6/23/15




Nicole_Lacey:

You said: Buying food or herbs on the internet isn't against the law. The buyer just have to be aware the FDA hasn't reviewed it.

Google: drug import regulations. First hit is FDA site, top of which says:

"The United States Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (Act) (21 U.S.C. section 331) prohibits the interstate shipment (which includes importation) of unapproved new drugs. Thus, the importation of drugs that lack FDA approval, whether for personal use or otherwise, violates the Act. Unapproved new drugs are any drugs, including foreign-made versions of U.S. approved drugs, that have not been manufactured in accordance with and pursuant to an FDA approval."
---StrongAxe on 6/22/15


Strongaxe, the FDA doesn't control everything.
Buying food or herbs on the internet isn't against the law. The buyer just have to be aware the FDA hasn't reviewed it.

Anything means anything not just importing controlled substances
---Nicole_Lacey on 6/22/15


Nicole_Lacey:

You said: You can buy anything over the internet including drugs. My sisters have done so many of times and I have warned them of the dangers of NOT being FDA approval. Go ahead and try it. You will be shock.

Yes, but the fact that you can easily buy such things does not make them legal. Importing controlled substances violates FDA laws and can get you prosecuted if you're caught. The fact that many people don't get caught doesn't change this.

Enforcement of border policy is at Executive discretion, not "making a law".
Appointment of government officials is an Executive action, constrained to Senate approval. He thought he didn't need it, but was overruled - not "making a law".
---StrongAxe on 6/21/15


You can buy anything over the internet including drugs. My sisters have done so many of times and I have warned them of the dangers of NOT being FDA approval. Go ahead and try it. You will be shock.

Dreamers. The one the 2 court systems placed a hold on.
Remember when all the children came over the broader last year?
ICE had to babysit instead of turning them away.

Fast and Furious.

Appointing 3 Labor board Personnel when the Senate was in session, and the President said no they were not.
They were threw out by the Court a year ago because the Court SAID CONGRESS states when they are in session not the President.
---Nicole_Lacey on 6/21/15


Nicole_Lacey:

You said: I can buy food .from China not approved by the FDA.
Unapproved food and drugs from other countries cannot be sold in this country. Even try buying codeine in Mexico and bring it in with your luggage and see how quickly you are arrested.

In other words, the Judge like the President can't pass laws. Only Congress can.

Yes, only Congress can pass laws. Please tell me which laws the President has passed without Congress's approval, so we can discuss specifics. One will do.
---StrongAxe on 6/21/15




The FDA was approved (passed) by Congress FIRST to be a agency.
Like the VA. They both make rules, not laws for their agencies that effects us, but I can buy food from China not approved by the FDA. I can eat it without the protection the FDA gives by it's rule.
I am not bonded by the FDA.

Notice you said the Judge has discretion on the sentence to give on a person, but not to give a sentence. That's called enforcement.

If the person didn't break a law on the books, the Judge would be FORCED to let the person go because he can't pass a law to sentence him to jail on his made up law.

In other words, the Judge like the President can't pass laws.
Only Congress can.
---Nicole_Lacey on 6/20/15


Nicole_Lacey:

You said: You admit the President can enforce the laws or not.

Enforcement isn't making law.


The example I gave before, of Congress creating the FDA, and giving it the authority to decide which drugs are legal, is a matter of Congress implementing a law, and FDA deciding policy, not making law - even though it LOOKS like the FDA is making law. It's the same with presidential orders. Congress gives him the power to do so (within limits), and he's just implementing policy at his legally authorized discretion.

Just as police have the discretion to arrest or not, and judges have the discretion of what sentences to impose.
---StrongAxe on 6/20/15


You admit the President can enforce the laws or not.

Enforcement isn't making law.

A Police Officer sees me and I am 17 years ago drinking beer.

He has 2 choices? He can turn his head not arrest me.
Or do his job and enforce the law by arresting me.

The Police Officer didn't pass the law he just doing his job by ENFORCING the law.
He is a peacemaker. He is trained to know the law so he can make sure everyone is following it.
Congress passed the age for drinking.

Now, put the President in the role play of the police officer,
Congress passes laws
President enforces the laws
Supreme court settles disputes between Congress and the President.

WHAT A WONDERFUL COUNTRY WE HAVE!
---Nicole_Lacey on 6/20/15


Nicole_Lacey:

I said: One can cede RIGHTS to others:

You said: That's why I gave you the example of the 15 year Jail sentence.
If you pay me a million dollars to do your jail sentence I might take your offer and GIVE UP MY RIGHTS!


If I go to jail, the state has a right to incarcerate me. You may be willing to take my place (you have the right to try), but since the incarceration is a matter of the state's rights against me, rather than your rights or mine, they will refuse.

Your example doesn't work in U.S. law (other countries may vary), but it is the cornerstone of Christianity, as Jesus died in our place.

The President is part of the Executive, who actually implement laws as they see fit.
---StrongAxe on 6/19/15


One can cede RIGHTS to others: ---StrongAxe on 6/19/15

That's why I gave you the example of the 15 year Jail sentence.
If you pay me a million dollars to do your jail sentence I might take your offer and GIVE UP MY RIGHTS!
But as you said it is someone else OBLIGATION to go to jail and against the law to pay someone else to do your obligation.
You keep making my point.

Where in Article 1, Section 8 states Congress can give their OBLIGATION to the President?

IT DOESN'T.

We are going in circles because you feel Congress can sake off in doing their job.
THEY CAN'T!
---Nicole_Lacey on 6/19/15


Nicole_Lacey:

You said: If the Judge sentence you to jail for 15 years, you can't pay someone to take your place in jail. You have to go to jail.

This is completely different, as I don't have the RIGHT to go to jail, I have the OBLIGATION to go to jail. One can cede RIGHTS to others:

Article 1, Section 8: To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

That is, they make the laws, and give the Executive the power (and discretion) to enforce them as it sees fit.
---StrongAxe on 6/19/15


Read These Insightful Articles About Health Treatments


Strongaxe you are missing the point. If the Judge sentence you to jail for 15 years, you can't pay someone to take your place in jail. You have to go to jail.

Congress represents us. They can't give their duties to the President.
It's their duties as sent by us who placed them in office.
That's why they only get 2 years to serve at a time. Because they make laws, we the people can kick them out quickly if they don't do what we ask of them.

Forget about the last 100 years. President Wilson started this progressive movement trying to move us away from our Founder's intent slowly so we don't notice the change.
I see it is working on you.
---Nicole_Lacey on 6/18/15


Nicole_Lacey:

You said: That isn't how the FOUNDERS set up our Country.

Have you ever read the full text of the constitution, and its amendements? It's an interesting read. The founders didn't set up our country based on how they thought it should be run. They set it up based on the words they actually wrote in the Constitution, and whether that agrees with your notion of how it ought to work (or how they thought it ought to work) doesn't matter. The Constitution is the governing document that describes the procedures, separation of powers, etc. and gives Congress the power to delegate its authority as it sees fit, by establishing agencies in the Executive to do so.
---StrongAxe on 6/18/15


so Congress doesn't have to micro-manage everything. If the president oversteps his bounds, anyone who disagrees with him can challenge such a decision in the court system (up to the Supreme Court), or even impeach him, but this rarely happens, since most executive decisions are within his legal discretion.StrongAxe on 6/18/15

That isn't how the FOUNDERS set up our Country.
You get a President who believes he is king because he knows the court systems TAKES A LONG TIME.
So, he behaves like a king while in Office.

Yes, Congress should micro manage. That is why we put them in office. If they don't want to do their job, then they shouldn't run for Congress.
Simple as that.
---Nicole_Lacey on 6/18/15


Nicole_Lacey:

You said: Supreme Court rules if a law passed by Congress, and an executive order stated by the President is invalid.

Congress makes laws. The executive implements those laws. Some of those laws made by congress give the executive discretion in how to run things (e.g. it grants FDA the power to decide which drugs are legal, and the president powers to issue certain orders), so Congress doesn't have to micro-manage everything. If the president oversteps his bounds, anyone who disagrees with him can challenge such a decision in the court system (up to the Supreme Court), or even impeach him, but this rarely happens, since most executive decisions are within his legal discretion.
---StrongAxe on 6/18/15


Read These Insightful Articles About Affiliate Program


Congress and only Congress makes laws.

The President can only enforce the laws made by Congress.

Supreme Court rules if a law passed by Congress, and an executive order stated by the President is invalid.

Now The President tries to make law through the Supreme Court when filling the vacant chair. But the Senate has to confirm the person.
---Nicole_Lacey on 6/17/15


\\Either way the Supreme Court override Congress's Law.
---Nicole_Lacey on 6/16/15\\

That's not being denied. Supreme Court nullification goes back as far as Marbury vs. Madison.

But SCOTUS cannot revoke a constitutional amendment.

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 6/16/15


In 1870 the Supreme Court declared the Legal Tender Act invalid by a vote of four to three.

President Grant added 2 Supreme Court Justices to vote with the 3 to change it back.

Either way the Supreme Court override Congress's Law.
---Nicole_Lacey on 6/16/15


Nicole, there is a provision in the US Constitution that says that ALL Amendments have the same force as the rest of the Constitution, and shall be considered as part of the original document.

So, StrongAxe is right. The SC cannot declare a constitutional amendment unconstitutional.

But you are right in saying that the SC can say that an Act of Congress or law passed by a lower body (such as a provision of a State constitution) is unconstitutional, that is, the US Constitution nullifies it.

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 6/15/15


Send a Free Thank You Ecard


Nicole_Lacey:

You said: The Supreme Court has the power to SAY A LAW IS UNCONSTITUTION. That is part of their powers and has been done many times before.

Yes, but you still miss the point. The Supreme Court can judge laws based on the constitution, but constitutional amendments let Congress change what the constitution itself says. Once Congress passes a constitutional amendment, the Supreme Court cannot nullify it by saying it isn't constitutional, because by definition, it IS constitutional, since the new amendment is now part of the constitution. In fact, constitutional amendments can supercede or nullify other parts of the constitution (e.g. Repeal of Prohibition nullified Prohibition).
---StrongAxe on 6/15/15


Strongaxe, you are wrong again. The Supreme Court has the power to SAY A LAW IS UNCONSTITUTION. That is part of their powers and has been done many times before.

So American constitution can not be replace by communism or Sharia, because it is not constitution.
Just because a large group of people decide they want a different Country, 5 of the 9 Justices can shut them now!
---Nicole_Lacey on 6/15/15


I just was listing some things called abominations without comment, for what they're worth.
---learner2 on 6/12/15


learner2:

I was specifically replying to Trav's claim that Abominations are about to be legalized nationwide.

You quoted Proverbs 6:16-19. These don't apply here:
1,3,4,7) There are already no laws against proud looks, lying, abortion, reasonable self-defense against assault, imagination, sowing discord, so none of these are "about to be legalized nationwide".
2,3,5,6) There are laws against perjury, assault, conspiracy. I am not aware that any of these are planning to be repealed any time soon.
---StrongAxe on 6/11/15


Read These Insightful Articles About Abortion Facts


Nicole_Lacey:

I said: They could even replace the American constitution by communism or Sharia, if they passed a constitutional amendment to do so

You said: No sir, that when the Supreme Court steps into the process.

The Supreme Court interprets the validity, according to what the constitution says. Congress has the power to alter the constitution via constitutional amendments. The Supreme Court has no authority to judge the validity of the constitution itself, because it is, itself, UNDER the constitution.

Congress has frequently altered the very nature of government via the constitution, and this has never been questioned (e.g. directly elected senators, presidential term limits, etc.).
---StrongAxe on 6/11/15


Yes, those payday loan places are certainly an abomination.
---learner2 on 6/11/15


Abominations..

These six things doth the Lord hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him:A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood,An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief,A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren.

Proverbs 6:16-19
---learner2 on 6/11/15


Trav:

You said: Abominations are about to be legalized nationwide.

Really? Which ones? The following things explicitly described as "abominations" in scripture are already legal in all 50 states:

Catfish and shellfish (Lev. 11:11-12), men lying with men (Lev. 18:22), freedom of worship (Deut. 18, 27:15, 29:17, 32:16, and many others), unisex clothing (Deut. 22:5), remarrying your ex (Deut. 24:4), being froward (Prov. 3:32, 11:20), pride (Prov. 16:5), scorn (Prov. 24:9), adultery, usury, and oppressing the poor (Ezek. 18:10-13).

Or do you pick and choose which abominations you think are more abominable than others?
---StrongAxe on 6/11/15


Read These Insightful Articles About Acne Treatment


They could, if they passed a law doing so. They could even replace the American constitution by communism or Sharia, if they passed a constitutional amendment to do so--StrongAxe on 6/11/15

No sir, that when the Supreme Court steps into the process.

Our Country is ran by 3 branches. States rights are also protected.

That is why the President is has been SLAPPED several times by the Court system.

Congress CANNOT and never has DELEGATED their responsibility to the President.

The President keeps trying to obtain more power, but THANK GOD he been denied!
---Nicole_Lacey on 6/11/15


The Bible is a testament between God and His called, elect, and chosen. God never intended Scripture to apply to everyone.
---aservant on 6/10/15

Even the Parables bear this witness.
It can be a light to any that seek it, appeal for it.
Even the woman Christ called a dog, faith healed her child.
She didn't try to rearrange scriptures or come up with a doctrine favorable to her.
As do the Churches. The result is confusion and non unity of 34,000 denominations in the world.
Isa_65:22 They shall not build, and another inhabit, they shall not plant, and another eat: for as the days of a tree are the days of my people, and mine elect shall long enjoy the work of their hands.
---Trav on 6/11/15


Nicole_Lacey:

You said: Congress can not delegate their responsibility to the President.
They represent us.


They could, if they passed a law doing so. They could even replace the American constitution by communism or Sharia, if they passed a constitutional amendment to do so (although that would take an overwhelming approval by all of the states, and all of the people, and good luck with that). If the American people ever actually voted for either of those, they would get what they wanted, and deserve what they got.

(Moderator: Why is it that when the site goes down, like on Memorial Day or last week, it says posts will be approved later, but they all disappear?)
---StrongAxe on 6/11/15


Now if you are calling the scripturally confused "Church Authority's" leaders. Then they should lead. Few do.
Abortion is common. Abominations are about to be legalized nationwide. Yet these thousands of Denom false leaders remain silent.

---Trav on 6/10/15


Agree. We are the salt and the light, and we have failed to be so. Too much seeking the approval of men. We want comfort and prosperity in a cursed world.

Most were never taught we are sacrificial offerings to God. Jesus is our example.

Tell the Truth that Jesus would tell. This is the only repair.
---aservant on 6/10/15


Read These Insightful Articles About Bad Credit Loans


Another version:

Rom 13:1 Everyone must obey state authorities, because no authority exists without God's permission, and the existing authorities have been put there by God. (GNB)

Heb 9:16 For where a testament is . . .
Heb 9:17 For a testament is of force . . .

The Bible is a testament between God and His called, elect, and chosen. God never intended Scripture to apply to everyone.

The last will and testament of Mr. Smith does not apply to everyone who reads it. The last will and testament of Mr. Smith applies only to those He has chosen.

God intends the same was His Old/New testaments. They only apply to His chosen.
---aservant on 6/10/15


What does Romans 13:1-5 mean?
Rom 13:1 submit to all leaders. God put them in office
---aservant on 6/10/15

Well the unique thing in our blessed country is the authoritys/leaders you fall before are called "Public Servants".
Kneeling before these makes you look like an idiot.
I do not kneel before a servant.
They do our wishes.
Now if you are calling the scripturally confused "Church Authority's" leaders. Then they should lead. Few do.
Abortion is common. Abominations are about to be legalized nationwide. Yet these thousands of Denom false leaders remain silent.

Rom 13:3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil....
---Trav on 6/10/15


What does Romans 13:1-5 mean?

Rom 13:1 submit to all leaders. God put them in office

2 Resisting leaders = resisting God, and will result in being damned

3 Only evildoers need to fear leaders. Do good to have the praise of leaders

4 God established leaders for your good, but be afraid if you do evil, for God gave them swords to punish as God's minister, and to use their swords on the evildoers

5 It is necessary you yield, not just to avoid the punishment of the sword, but to exhibit the character that God desires you to show.
---aservant on 6/10/15


StrongAxe we agree. I am saying that the President can't be both branches.
He can't take over Congress job just because Harry Reid held up everything when he was senator Leader.

He has to follow the rules.
Congress can not delegate their responsibility to the President.
They represent us.
---Nicole_Lacey on 6/2/15


Read These Insightful Articles About Bankruptcy


Nicole_Lacey:

You said: "delegation of authority" if it is your authority to delegated.

Because Congress has the right to regulate drugs, etc., it can to delegate that authority to bodies that it may create to perform those functions. If I hire someone to fix my car, I choose whom to hire, and let them do what they do best without bothering me. In larger cases (e.g. I want to build a fleet of cars), I give someone the authority to hire the leaders, and they choose the best people based on their own best judgment.

Plus as a Senator the man always voted 'present'.

And at the next election, if his constituent are more passionate, they can vote "not present anymore".
---StrongAxe on 6/2/15


StrongAxe, "delegation of authority" if it is your authority to delegated.

If my car is broken at least I can pick the company to work on my car. If there is only one mechanic, he can charge any price and take his sweet time fixing my car.

Executive branch can not change it's role because The President thinks the other branch is working too slow.
He should have stayed as a Senator if he was really concerned about it's speed.

Plus as a Senator the man always voted 'present'.
No action and he has the nerve to complain about someone else.
---Nicole_Lacey on 6/2/15


Nicole_Lacey:

You said: Strongaxe, all those government agencies are the problems.

This is called "delegation of authority", and is universally practiced among any organization having more than about a dozen people. If Congress had to all its time deciding every single food additive and medicine and car to legalize, among other things, they wouldn't have time to pass any laws. And best leave those experts who KNOW what they are doing.

If your car breaks down, do you go to a mechanic, sit there all day, and tell him where to put every screw? Or do you drop it off in the morning, trust the expert to do his job, and pick it up later?
---StrongAxe on 6/2/15


Strongaxe, all those government agencies are the problems.
Congress makes the laws.
This President tries to make rules through those crazy agencies and calls the law.

Remember the no war he had even through bombs were falling from the sky killing people.
How stupid does he think we are?
This President is power hungry. Can't you see it?
Courts after Courts keeps telling him NO!

Our Country is a Republic for a reason.
Look up the word.
Obama isn't a King.
---Nicole_Lacey on 6/1/15


Read These Insightful Articles About Cash Advance


Nicole_Lacey (and jerry6593):

You said: This Administration picks and choose which laws to enforce.
Then confuses people by claiming they can make laws by using the term 'regulations'.


In order to not have to nitpick every single trivial detail (e.g. what drugs should be legal, what frequencies should be used for wireless communications, etc.), they create federal bureaucracies like the DEA and FCC, and grant them the authority to make up those millions of rules themselves, while Congress deals with more important matters.


learner2:

Rome was more anti-God than the U.S., taking tax money to conquer the world and fund pagan temples, yet Jesus said "Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's".
---StrongAxe on 5/31/15


///But the church should only be involved in Moral issues.///

Where in Scripture does it say that Sam?
---Leon on 5/31/15


True Leon.

In this country we can act in politics because we have a Republic. As individuals we can act in politics.

But the church should only be involved in Moral issues.

Agape
---Samuelbb7 on 5/31/15


Sam: All governments, whether a monarchy, dictatorship, democracy, theocracy, etc., wouldn't exist if God did not allow them to. That's the overarching point. God allows governments, whether good or bad, to rule over people for seasons of time. Ideally, rulers are ordained as a blessing to law abiding people to maintain law & order (tranquility, peace). At other times, rulers are used by God as rods of correction over sinful/rebellious people.
---Leon on 5/30/15


Read These Insightful Articles About Credit Counseling


Samuel, Paul not only used his citizenship to save his live but to spread the Gospels to nonbelievers. Remember one of them (which one?) asked Paul if he was trying to preach to him.

Paul said he became everything to win souls. Poor, rich, cold, hungry...Whatever it took to spread the Gospel including politics.

But please cite where Paul said not to be in politics. I can't find it.

But, you have to think about your view. If you only allow secular people and nonbeliever as lawmakers then you will get a bad nations.
ALL our Founders believed in a Creater.
God is in their letters and in our laws.
Right to freedom of Religion.
That's why many people came to this country. They could not practice thier beliefs.
---Nicole_Lacey on 5/30/15


Nicole to use your citizenship as a way to save your life is not what most understand as Politics.

He never said to vote and most of the countries he worked in did not have voting. They had no constitutions.

I have no problem with being involved in some politics. We should oppose bad laws.

But that is today not like life was in the days of Paul.

Agape
---Samuelbb7 on 5/29/15


Samuelbb7, please cite from the Bible that Paul spoke against politics.
I truly can't remember. Please tell me.
Because Paul DID play politics to preach to others.
Paul quickly dropped his citizenship at a perfect time. Declaring he was Roman citizen and demanded his rights.

If you are not into politics you can't learn your rights as a citizen.

Paul was a MASTER at politics and used it to preach to Felix.
First he started a fight with the Pharisees and the Sadducees Acts 23:6-10.

Acts 23:23-35...he was a Roman citizen. And desiring to know the charge on which they accused him,... ch24:10-23..Paul replied..."Realizing that for many years you have been judge over this nations, I cheerfully make my defense.
---Nicole_Lacey on 5/29/15


Samuel, exactly right!
---learner2 on 5/28/15


Read These Insightful Articles About Debt Relief


No Paul never said we are to be active in politics. We are to pray for our Government. In many countries and in the days of Paul you could not be active in politics unless you were rich and powerful. A little like today.

Our first job is to spread the Gospel and love all people. We are to be:

Mat 25:37-39
Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink?
When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee?
Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee?

Amazing Grace how sweet the sound.
---Samuelbb7 on 5/28/15


Yes, Jesus and Paul both commanded us to become active in politics in our respective countries.
---learner2 on 5/23/15


People who turned their eyes from the Nazis government wished they hadn't.

The Executive branch can't make regulations and call them laws. That's just a loop hole to make laws and call it something else.

Only the Legislation branch makes laws.
The Judicial branch makes sure everyone plays by the rules.

Executive branch are supposed to ENFORCE ALL laws.

This Administration picks and choose which laws to enforce.
Then confuses people by claiming they can make laws by using the term 'regulations'.
That's called COMMUNISM.
Bunch of regulations ordered by one person for the massive to follow without their input.
All because our eyes are not on the ball.
Christians have the right and should be in politics.
---Nicole_Lacey on 5/23/15


Leon, yes I did. So the USA doesn't qualify either.
---learner2 on 5/22/15


Read These Insightful Articles About Debt Settlement


Samuel: This blog is about politics.

Please show where in the US Constitution the President alone can write law. I don't think you will find it.


---jerry6593 on 5/20/15


Jesus said...
Mat 28:18
"All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me (also refer to Colossians 2:15).

Of course the LEGAL authorities have been established for this 'world', but for us, there is an "authority" above that in order to fill in the gaps.

"ALL authority" is for US (it is the JEWS who decided to consider THIS WORLD as their goal).

You might find this understanding to be more useful to you when your pastor/clergy starts to preach GUN CONFISCATION and government cooperation/propaganda (for years, pastors have cooperated and given in to the demands of the government....501c tax code requires clergy to cooperate in many secret ways).
---faithforfaith on 5/19/15


Here's my take simply put...don't lie, cheat, and steal, and governments are there drawing lines in the sand of what is permissible. Paul says, live uprightly.
---Rod4Him on 5/19/15


Dear jerry

I must respectfully disagree with you. First I don't wish to discuss politics here.

But radical politics turns people away from Jesus. We need to be uplifting Jesus.

Secondly the regulations passed by the Executive branch and the others you mention, are legal laws. For that is part of the System of government we have always lived under. Since we adopted the current constitution.

Let us keep our eyes on Jesus. We need to be teaching the truth of the Bible.

Agape
---Samuelbb7 on 5/19/15


Read These Insightful Articles About Distance Learning


Gee Jerry, you were doing so well until you fizzled out in "(2)".

L2: Did you understand what Jerry had to say prior to "(2)"? "They must not conflict with the Commandments OF GOD."
---Leon on 5/19/15


Here's my take on the subject:

We are to obey ONLY those laws which meet two criteria.

(1) They must not conflict with the Commandments of God. e.g., if a law commands us to bow down to an idol, to commit murder or to keep a spurious rest day, we are not to obey it.

(2) It must be a legitimate law. In the USA, that means it must be enacted by Congress ONLY. Neither the courts nor the President, nor the EPA are given the power (under our Constitution) to enact laws, and any law so enacted is not legitimate. Of course our government no longer follows the Constitution, but has become a repressive dictatorship.


---jerry6593 on 5/19/15


Leon, do you think that the people living under those regimes were obligated to participate in there murderous pursuits because the government told him they must?
---learner2 on 5/18/15


Leon, do you think that was true of the Nazis or the Bolsheviks or Pol Pot?
---learner2 on 5/18/15


What do you mean? Please elaborate.
---Leon on 5/18/15


Read These Insightful Articles About Education


Leon, do you think that was true of the Nazis or the Bolsheviks or Pol Pot?
---learner2 on 5/18/15


"Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers...[there's] no power but OF GOD: the powers that be are ordained OF GOD.

Whosoever...[resists] the power [OF GOD], [resists] the ordinance OF GOD:...they... will receive...damnation.

For [OF GOD] rulers [aren't] a terror to good works, but to the evil. [Will you] then not be afraid of the power? Do [what] is good, & [you'll] have praise of the same:

For [he's] the minister of God to thee for good. But if [you] do...evil, be afraid, for he [bears] not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon...[evil doers]."
---Leon on 5/18/15


Then we don't have to obey the United States government either because they break God's laws every day themselves.
---learner2 on 5/17/15


We are to obey the authorities which have been placed over us (except when they contradict God's laws) See Acts 5:27-29.
---Rita_H on 5/17/15


Read These Insightful Articles About Home Equity Loans


Leon, what is it?
---learner2 on 5/16/15


L2: Obviously you haven't read Romans 13:1-5 whereas you miss the key point.
---Leon on 5/16/15


Even if they are nazis or bolsheviks.
---learner2 on 5/16/15


The New International Version translates this as meaning that we are to obey governing authorities because they have been allowed in their offices by God.
---Geraldine on 5/16/15


Read These Insightful Articles About Interest Rates


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