-
Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.
Is the USA Babylon the Great? Should Christians leave?
- Thread starter FollowingHim
- Start date
UntoldGlory said:
I reject killings at all times.
If someone tells me God told them to kill, I do not believe them.
If someone tells me they are lead to "serve" someone else (a "leader") in a military capacity, I do not believe them.
Killing violates the sixth commandment.
Obeying authorities, following rules and paying taxes is what empowers these gangs.
And sometimes leads to farcical situations like world war one where "Christian" armies slaughtered each other.
Or world war two where "Christian" countries empowered atheist USSR to victory.
And sometimes leads to farcical situations like world war one where "Christian" armies slaughtered each other.
Or world war two where "Christian" countries empowered atheist USSR to victory.
I wasn't there during the revolutionary war, so cannot really tell you if it was justified or not. All I can tell you is that the American government is the one that is over me from the time of my birth. As we've established, none of the world's governments are fully righteous.
I know you reject all killings. I would be highly suspect of anyone who told me that God had told him to kill someone. I just know that it happened in the Bible, quite a lot. That's why I say that someone had better be darn sure God told them to do something like rebel against their government before they did so, as they will bear the responsibility should they actually be acting outside the will of God. However, NOT acting when told to by the Lord also carries great consequence, like for Saul when he did not destroy utterly the people he was told to destroy, along with their goods and livestock.
I know you reject all killings. I would be highly suspect of anyone who told me that God had told him to kill someone. I just know that it happened in the Bible, quite a lot. That's why I say that someone had better be darn sure God told them to do something like rebel against their government before they did so, as they will bear the responsibility should they actually be acting outside the will of God. However, NOT acting when told to by the Lord also carries great consequence, like for Saul when he did not destroy utterly the people he was told to destroy, along with their goods and livestock.
I would like to point out that the great whore is called Mystery Babylon the great, and she rules over the kings of the earth, including the USA. We are just as much controlled by her, as any of the nations we are currently subjecting for her.
The USA was not born in rebellion. The colonists were trying to hold king George to his word, and wanted to return to an earlier state of affairs, where they were self governing colonies, but loyal to the king (this is how the term revolution was used in that time). The king instead of honoring his agreement, declared them out of his protection, and hired mercenaries to come against them. Like an abusive husband is not authorized to hurt his wife, the king was not authorized to wage war on his own subjects. This breaks the contract, and the colonies declared their independence. Just like God separated the two houses of Israel, He had a hand in those events.
Romans 13 is another matter, and certainly one should ask, why Paul wrote so much from prison?
In the verses immediately following Romans 13, one reads the description of the authority, and this bears no resemblance to what we have today. Furthermore the word is authority, and to have any one must be subjected to authority (the centurion Jesus spoke with understood this, and said he was a man UNDER authority) Those under authority HAVE authority. They are doing what the one over them has authorized. Anyone acting on their own power is limited to their own means.
The only thing Ceasar was due under God's law was DEATH. God never authorized any but Israelite kings, to rule over Israel. He was there only because of Israel's disobedience. If Israel had repented and got right with YHWH they would have been totally authorized to rise up against that king, and remove him. They would NOT have been authorized to remain under Ceasar's rule.
In early America we had no "Ceasar" and God was our king. No king but king Jesus was the battle cry of the revolutionary war. It was not until the ratifying of the constitution, that YHWH was displaced from His position as king, and replaced with this government created by man. Now instead of government by God, we have government by man, with all the evils that accompany it.
George (not the king)
The USA was not born in rebellion. The colonists were trying to hold king George to his word, and wanted to return to an earlier state of affairs, where they were self governing colonies, but loyal to the king (this is how the term revolution was used in that time). The king instead of honoring his agreement, declared them out of his protection, and hired mercenaries to come against them. Like an abusive husband is not authorized to hurt his wife, the king was not authorized to wage war on his own subjects. This breaks the contract, and the colonies declared their independence. Just like God separated the two houses of Israel, He had a hand in those events.
Romans 13 is another matter, and certainly one should ask, why Paul wrote so much from prison?
In the verses immediately following Romans 13, one reads the description of the authority, and this bears no resemblance to what we have today. Furthermore the word is authority, and to have any one must be subjected to authority (the centurion Jesus spoke with understood this, and said he was a man UNDER authority) Those under authority HAVE authority. They are doing what the one over them has authorized. Anyone acting on their own power is limited to their own means.
The only thing Ceasar was due under God's law was DEATH. God never authorized any but Israelite kings, to rule over Israel. He was there only because of Israel's disobedience. If Israel had repented and got right with YHWH they would have been totally authorized to rise up against that king, and remove him. They would NOT have been authorized to remain under Ceasar's rule.
In early America we had no "Ceasar" and God was our king. No king but king Jesus was the battle cry of the revolutionary war. It was not until the ratifying of the constitution, that YHWH was displaced from His position as king, and replaced with this government created by man. Now instead of government by God, we have government by man, with all the evils that accompany it.
George (not the king)
ylop said:
Killing is too broad of a word. That which is forbidden is more properly translated murder. (The Hebrew ratsach H7523).
What is not forbidden, and is actually commanded is to be 'put to death'. (muwth H4191)
The same Moses speaking for the same God said "Thou shalt not kill" and also said, speaking of a man who tries to draw his friends after other gods "But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people."
This is unintelligible and contradictory unless we are willing to accept that our english word "kill" is too inclusive and that translating multiple different hebrew words into the same english word leads to confusion.
Anybody want to give this one a go? Does the synagogue of satan have anything to do with Babylon, you think? Several times the scripture prophesies of the synagogues persecuting believers, one time in reference to the assembly in Philadelphia, and also to the Smyrna assembly. The Greek does say synagogues, not ecclesia in these instances. Who are those who think they are Jews, but are not? I think we have to remember that there were MANY Jews who gathered together in the synagogues to hear Moses read on the Sabbath, who became believers in the NT, but the Jewish religious leaders who rejected Yahusha Messiah and handed him over to the Romans to be killed were told by Yahusha they were not the seed of Abraham, but sons of the devil, the father of lies. Let us remember Yahusha and his disciples themselves were Jews who kept the law. Are the unbelieving Jews and synagogues part of Babylon, taking part in fornicating with her, like the rest of the nations, drinking the wine of her fornication and getting drunk on it. What does that mean?
"I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan." Revelation 2:9
'I know your deeds. Behold, I have put before you an open door which no one can shut, because you have a little power, and have kept My word, and have not denied My name. Behold, I will cause those of the synagogue of Satan, who say that they are Jews and are not, but lie-- I will make them come and bow down at your feet, and make them know that I have loved you. Because you have kept the word of My perseverance, I also will keep you from the hour of testing, that hour which is about to come upon the whole world, to test those who dwell on the earth.…"
Revelation 3:8-10
'…and there will be great earthquakes, and in various places plagues and famines; and there will be terrors and great signs from heaven. "But before all these things, they will lay their hands on you and will persecute you, delivering you to the synagogues and prisons, bringing you before kings and governors for My name's sake. "It will lead to an opportunity for your testimony.…' Luke 21:11-13
"And everyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man, it will be forgiven him; but he who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven him. "When they bring you before the synagogues and the rulers and the authorities, do not worry about how or what you are to speak in your defense, or what you are to say; for the Holy Spirit will teach you in that very hour what you ought to say." Luke 12:10-12
"Nevertheless among the chief rulers also many believed on him; but because of the Pharisees they did not confess him, lest they should be put out of the synagogue:" John 12:42
Then all the Greeks took Sosthenes, the chief ruler of the synagogue, and beat him before the judgment seat. Acts 18:17
"And I said, Lord, they know that I imprisoned and beat in every synagogue them that believed on thee:" Acts 22:19
"And I punished them oft in every synagogue, and compelled them to blaspheme; and being exceedingly mad against them, I persecuted them even unto strange cities." Acts 26:11
"I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan." Revelation 2:9
'I know your deeds. Behold, I have put before you an open door which no one can shut, because you have a little power, and have kept My word, and have not denied My name. Behold, I will cause those of the synagogue of Satan, who say that they are Jews and are not, but lie-- I will make them come and bow down at your feet, and make them know that I have loved you. Because you have kept the word of My perseverance, I also will keep you from the hour of testing, that hour which is about to come upon the whole world, to test those who dwell on the earth.…"
Revelation 3:8-10
'…and there will be great earthquakes, and in various places plagues and famines; and there will be terrors and great signs from heaven. "But before all these things, they will lay their hands on you and will persecute you, delivering you to the synagogues and prisons, bringing you before kings and governors for My name's sake. "It will lead to an opportunity for your testimony.…' Luke 21:11-13
"And everyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man, it will be forgiven him; but he who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven him. "When they bring you before the synagogues and the rulers and the authorities, do not worry about how or what you are to speak in your defense, or what you are to say; for the Holy Spirit will teach you in that very hour what you ought to say." Luke 12:10-12
"Nevertheless among the chief rulers also many believed on him; but because of the Pharisees they did not confess him, lest they should be put out of the synagogue:" John 12:42
Then all the Greeks took Sosthenes, the chief ruler of the synagogue, and beat him before the judgment seat. Acts 18:17
"And I said, Lord, they know that I imprisoned and beat in every synagogue them that believed on thee:" Acts 22:19
"And I punished them oft in every synagogue, and compelled them to blaspheme; and being exceedingly mad against them, I persecuted them even unto strange cities." Acts 26:11
enlargeourtents wife here
George/American Israelite:
Spot on! I don't know how to copy a quote from another post, but what you said about only an Israelite was to rule over YaH's people is scripture! Yes, there were times pagan nations conquered Jerusalem and ruled over them, but YHUH always said it was because of Israel's disobedience to His law/word.
We recently had friends who kept Sabbath by the moon, but a different new moon than ourselves. Those who keep Torah will understand what I am talking about, others may not, but the father of this family had a virtuous daughter of marrying age, who enjoyed our company as much as we enjoyed hers. We were very like-minded in many ways. She even told me that she was praying and had asked YHUH to reveal to her when the true new moon was, so that she would be able to know if she was keeping the right Sabbath. Up to that point, she had simply been following the new moon her father had decided the family would go by. Well, my husband fell in love with her, our whole family did, and he asked her father for her hand in marriage. We were expecting the man to ask for a dowry and we were ready to pay one. However, that was not all the father had in mind. The man was uncircumcised, not just in the flesh, but we found out later that he was uncircumcised in the heart as well. He would later tell us that he believed himself to be a gentile, and that he is to remain that way, and only keep the laws the gentiles have to keep. (we have not found such laws in Torah) He seemed to struggle with the verses about the gentiles being grafted into Israel, becoming citizens and heirs just like Israel, being members of the same body as Israel, the same laws for Israel and the foreigner living among them, one law for Jew and gentile, etc...Anyway, when my husband asked for her hand in marriage, the father said he would CONSIDER talking more about it, IF FIRST, my husband gave up everything we owned to show that we were not idolaters. He said we could give it all to him, or give it to the poor, but we needed to give it all up if we were going to follow Messiah. He said if we weren't willing to give it all up, we were idolaters. Now, this man probably had 10 times as many possessions as we had, plus he was running several businesses operated by the many members of his large household. He was not poor. Not only did he demand we give up everything to marry his daughter, but he demanded that we also join his family, come under his roof and his rules, and recognize him as our authority, our pastor over the assembly. He said if we did not agree to all of this, it was because we hated authority. We weren't even keeping the same Sabbath, and he was trying to merge us together under him, making us financially dependent upon him. Now, all this, with no promise of my husband being able to marry his daughter, only an agreement to "talk about" "moving forward toward that". How would my husband be able to be head of his own body/family/home in that situation? Would we be pressured to give up our own convictions and follow him instead of Messiah so that we could partake in their financial blessings, so that we could have his daughter added to our family, so that we could have fellowship with his family? Most likely. So we walked away, and it hurt. But praise YaH that He had shown us that an uncircumcised gentile who does not love the law is not to rule over an obedient body of Israel, so in that situation YHUH showed us that He was not putting us under this man's authority, as he rejected the law, or picked and chose which parts of it he wanted to believe and obey, while we embraced all of the law. To willingly subject ourselves to him to gain his daughter would be disobedience to the law, and we would be disobedient to Messiah because my husband would be making her father his head, instead of Messiah.
"...if only you listen obediently to the voice of YHUH your aluhym, to observe carefully all this commandment which I am commanding you today. "For YHUH your aluhym will bless you as He has promised you, and you will lend to many nations, but you will not borrow; and you will rule over many nations, but they will not rule over you.: Deut 15:16
"When you enter the land which YHUH your aluhym gives you, and you possess it and live in it, and you say, 'I will set a king over me like all the nations who are around me,' you shall surely set a king over you whom YHUH your aluhym chooses, one from among your countrymen you shall set as king over yourselves; you may not put a foreigner over yourselves who is not your countryman." Deut 17:14-15
That man, though he has many possessions, is very much in debt, and not in a position to loan money to anyone. We, who do not have so much stuff, are debt-free and have extra to spare. Who is the idol worshipper, who is the slave? Who is the head, who is the tail? We choose Messiah Yahusha as King over THIS body! We pray this man's daughter will be counted among the righteous, that she will soon realize her father's greed and desire for power in his attempt to rule over those who desire to obey Messiah, and that she realizes her father is looking to build his own kingdom, not YHUH's, and that he is not looking out for her best interests.
George/American Israelite:
Spot on! I don't know how to copy a quote from another post, but what you said about only an Israelite was to rule over YaH's people is scripture! Yes, there were times pagan nations conquered Jerusalem and ruled over them, but YHUH always said it was because of Israel's disobedience to His law/word.
We recently had friends who kept Sabbath by the moon, but a different new moon than ourselves. Those who keep Torah will understand what I am talking about, others may not, but the father of this family had a virtuous daughter of marrying age, who enjoyed our company as much as we enjoyed hers. We were very like-minded in many ways. She even told me that she was praying and had asked YHUH to reveal to her when the true new moon was, so that she would be able to know if she was keeping the right Sabbath. Up to that point, she had simply been following the new moon her father had decided the family would go by. Well, my husband fell in love with her, our whole family did, and he asked her father for her hand in marriage. We were expecting the man to ask for a dowry and we were ready to pay one. However, that was not all the father had in mind. The man was uncircumcised, not just in the flesh, but we found out later that he was uncircumcised in the heart as well. He would later tell us that he believed himself to be a gentile, and that he is to remain that way, and only keep the laws the gentiles have to keep. (we have not found such laws in Torah) He seemed to struggle with the verses about the gentiles being grafted into Israel, becoming citizens and heirs just like Israel, being members of the same body as Israel, the same laws for Israel and the foreigner living among them, one law for Jew and gentile, etc...Anyway, when my husband asked for her hand in marriage, the father said he would CONSIDER talking more about it, IF FIRST, my husband gave up everything we owned to show that we were not idolaters. He said we could give it all to him, or give it to the poor, but we needed to give it all up if we were going to follow Messiah. He said if we weren't willing to give it all up, we were idolaters. Now, this man probably had 10 times as many possessions as we had, plus he was running several businesses operated by the many members of his large household. He was not poor. Not only did he demand we give up everything to marry his daughter, but he demanded that we also join his family, come under his roof and his rules, and recognize him as our authority, our pastor over the assembly. He said if we did not agree to all of this, it was because we hated authority. We weren't even keeping the same Sabbath, and he was trying to merge us together under him, making us financially dependent upon him. Now, all this, with no promise of my husband being able to marry his daughter, only an agreement to "talk about" "moving forward toward that". How would my husband be able to be head of his own body/family/home in that situation? Would we be pressured to give up our own convictions and follow him instead of Messiah so that we could partake in their financial blessings, so that we could have his daughter added to our family, so that we could have fellowship with his family? Most likely. So we walked away, and it hurt. But praise YaH that He had shown us that an uncircumcised gentile who does not love the law is not to rule over an obedient body of Israel, so in that situation YHUH showed us that He was not putting us under this man's authority, as he rejected the law, or picked and chose which parts of it he wanted to believe and obey, while we embraced all of the law. To willingly subject ourselves to him to gain his daughter would be disobedience to the law, and we would be disobedient to Messiah because my husband would be making her father his head, instead of Messiah.
"...if only you listen obediently to the voice of YHUH your aluhym, to observe carefully all this commandment which I am commanding you today. "For YHUH your aluhym will bless you as He has promised you, and you will lend to many nations, but you will not borrow; and you will rule over many nations, but they will not rule over you.: Deut 15:16
"When you enter the land which YHUH your aluhym gives you, and you possess it and live in it, and you say, 'I will set a king over me like all the nations who are around me,' you shall surely set a king over you whom YHUH your aluhym chooses, one from among your countrymen you shall set as king over yourselves; you may not put a foreigner over yourselves who is not your countryman." Deut 17:14-15
That man, though he has many possessions, is very much in debt, and not in a position to loan money to anyone. We, who do not have so much stuff, are debt-free and have extra to spare. Who is the idol worshipper, who is the slave? Who is the head, who is the tail? We choose Messiah Yahusha as King over THIS body! We pray this man's daughter will be counted among the righteous, that she will soon realize her father's greed and desire for power in his attempt to rule over those who desire to obey Messiah, and that she realizes her father is looking to build his own kingdom, not YHUH's, and that he is not looking out for her best interests.
"The wicked will not rule the land of the righteous, for then the righteous might be tempted to do wrong." Psalm 125:3
If we are being ruled by the wicked, we should wonder if we are meeting YaH's standard of righteousness. May we consider our ways...
If we are being ruled by the wicked, we should wonder if we are meeting YaH's standard of righteousness. May we consider our ways...
AmericanIsraelite said:
I don't understand. Why did Jesus command that people pay the taxes to Caesar if it was not due?
Where did Jesus ever say to pay tribute?
In Ezra chapter 4 there is a story that indicates that the Israelites did not pay taxes/tribute, to non Israelite kings.
Then when Peter was asked if his master paid tribute, he answered out of turn, without instruction from Jesus, and Jesus corrected him. Mt 17:24
Jesus told him to pay it, so as not to offend them, and the money was found in the mouth of a fish. Jesus never said it was required of us to pay tribute.
In Luke 20:20 we have the clearest picture of what happened when they came trying to trip Jesus up. These men were trying to get Jesus to say something they could use against Him, so they could deliver Him unto the power and authority of the governor. They fully expected him to say it was unlawful to pay tribute to Caesar, because they knew the law. Jesus neatly sidestepped their trap, and in telling them to give Caesar what he was due, he exposed them as friends of the world, who did presumptuously, rather then executing the judgment on Caesar that the law required. Jesus never defined what was Caesar's, but the scripture does. Psalm 24:1 tells us that the world, the fullness of it, and all they that dwell in it are YHWH's. That doesn't leave anything but Judgment for Caesar. Jesus spoke the truth, but Caesar thought, and many people continue to think, He contradicted the earlier law, and made it lawful for believers to support antichrist governments.
George
In Ezra chapter 4 there is a story that indicates that the Israelites did not pay taxes/tribute, to non Israelite kings.
Then when Peter was asked if his master paid tribute, he answered out of turn, without instruction from Jesus, and Jesus corrected him. Mt 17:24
Jesus told him to pay it, so as not to offend them, and the money was found in the mouth of a fish. Jesus never said it was required of us to pay tribute.
In Luke 20:20 we have the clearest picture of what happened when they came trying to trip Jesus up. These men were trying to get Jesus to say something they could use against Him, so they could deliver Him unto the power and authority of the governor. They fully expected him to say it was unlawful to pay tribute to Caesar, because they knew the law. Jesus neatly sidestepped their trap, and in telling them to give Caesar what he was due, he exposed them as friends of the world, who did presumptuously, rather then executing the judgment on Caesar that the law required. Jesus never defined what was Caesar's, but the scripture does. Psalm 24:1 tells us that the world, the fullness of it, and all they that dwell in it are YHWH's. That doesn't leave anything but Judgment for Caesar. Jesus spoke the truth, but Caesar thought, and many people continue to think, He contradicted the earlier law, and made it lawful for believers to support antichrist governments.
George
But Jesus made a point of making them say whose image was on the coin before commanding to give him what was his. That would be a non-sequiter if what he meant was to give Caesar the sword.
The idea of using Matt. 17 in this context doesn't fit very well. Jesus was exempting Himself from any legitimate requirement to pay the temple tax because it belonged to His Father. And yet he paid it so as not to stumble those who expected Him to pay.
Jesus said that those who believe in him would do His works. I would expect to see believers paying taxes and tributes that didn't technically apply to them for the same reason.
*
But Jesus perceived their wickedness, and said, “Why do you test Me, you hypocrites? Show Me the tax money.” So they brought Him a denarius. And He said to them, “Whose image and inscription is this?” They said to Him, “Caesar’s.”
And He said to them, “Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.”
*
I think it is a bold bit of retconning to say that Jesus (Who came not into the world to condemn it) was trying to smoothly imply that Casear should be killed instead of paid.
The idea of using Matt. 17 in this context doesn't fit very well. Jesus was exempting Himself from any legitimate requirement to pay the temple tax because it belonged to His Father. And yet he paid it so as not to stumble those who expected Him to pay.
Jesus said that those who believe in him would do His works. I would expect to see believers paying taxes and tributes that didn't technically apply to them for the same reason.
*
But Jesus perceived their wickedness, and said, “Why do you test Me, you hypocrites? Show Me the tax money.” So they brought Him a denarius. And He said to them, “Whose image and inscription is this?” They said to Him, “Caesar’s.”
And He said to them, “Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.”
*
I think it is a bold bit of retconning to say that Jesus (Who came not into the world to condemn it) was trying to smoothly imply that Casear should be killed instead of paid.
golden2seal
New Member
I agree with George, The AmericanIsraelite. I also am an American Israelite, not to be confused with an Israeli. To answer the proposed Question, NO. But, the question is, "Who is USA", it's a very misunderstood term. There's, US, USA, 4 different UNITED STATES, United States, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, United States of America, "The United States of America." Where do you live? When you can answer, where do you live, it will be easier to tell whether to leave, or not. All the different terms of United States, are defined in the codes, statutes, ordinances, constitutions, and treaties of the UNITED STATES, INC., your status within this group determines whether you owe the tax, or not. If you live on the geographical area of the lower 48 states, and you want to know where you live, go to "Avalon Project" get on the eighteenth century section, "Articles of Confederation" the first line tells where you live. " The United States of America", is an Israelite Nation. I could tell you more, but I know the truth is very unpopular among religious groups, but, the truth will remain the truth.
If you want to know the difference in Israeli, and Israelite, go to Wikipedia, type in each one separately.
I notice on here, that a lot of the writers are very confused about the difference between an Israelite, and an Israeli, until you come to the understanding of these two very different groups of people, the Scriptures cannot be understood. For a start look at "Wikipedia" what is an Israeli, then, what is an Israelite. The definition of each group is enough to get you to think, once that happens, maybe you'll do the rest of the research.
If you want to know the difference in Israeli, and Israelite, go to Wikipedia, type in each one separately.
I notice on here, that a lot of the writers are very confused about the difference between an Israelite, and an Israeli, until you come to the understanding of these two very different groups of people, the Scriptures cannot be understood. For a start look at "Wikipedia" what is an Israeli, then, what is an Israelite. The definition of each group is enough to get you to think, once that happens, maybe you'll do the rest of the research.
I'll admit to having some trouble making a lot of sense of your post Golden, but I wanted to give it a go, so I looked up articles as you suggested. I didn't find anything surprising there, most specifically I did not find anything that tells me I'm an Israelite or anything like that.
I'd like to refer to Acts 15, where the Apostles give specific instruction to Gentile believers. Some men came from Judea and were telling gentiles that they had to follow the laws and customs of Moses, including circumcision, in order to be saved. The Apostles sent a letter correcting this statement. This is clear evidence to my mind that anyone who has become a believer in Christ but is not of Jewish descent would fall under the instructions given to gentiles.
In fact, throughout the New Testament even when speaking about followers of Jesus the Apostles continue to acknowledge a difference between Jew and Gentile.
As to your assertions about the number of different "USA"s, I really have very little idea what you're talking about there. Yes, the Articles of Confederation list only certain places, but as we added states and territories those were, by extension, afforded the same rights and responsibilities.
I'd like to refer to Acts 15, where the Apostles give specific instruction to Gentile believers. Some men came from Judea and were telling gentiles that they had to follow the laws and customs of Moses, including circumcision, in order to be saved. The Apostles sent a letter correcting this statement. This is clear evidence to my mind that anyone who has become a believer in Christ but is not of Jewish descent would fall under the instructions given to gentiles.
In fact, throughout the New Testament even when speaking about followers of Jesus the Apostles continue to acknowledge a difference between Jew and Gentile.
As to your assertions about the number of different "USA"s, I really have very little idea what you're talking about there. Yes, the Articles of Confederation list only certain places, but as we added states and territories those were, by extension, afforded the same rights and responsibilities.
Slumberfreeze, how do you explain them asking Jesus that question in an attempt to get Him in trouble with the authorities?
The story in Ezra is history, and includes a reference to earlier historical records kept by the Babylonian kings, in regards to the Israelites not paying tribute. Jesus told his followers to be wise as serpents, so why would He speak plainly, in the presence of His enemies something that would get Him in trouble, when He could communicate it clearly to them, without everyone understanding what He was saying? They got the message, that's why they went away marveling. In trying to trap Him, they themselves were called out.
When Jesus and Peter did pay, the money came from a source we cannot duplicate, NOT out of their pockets, AND Jesus said it was only to avoid offending them, because of what Peter said. Jesus said the children are free, and if He was exempt because God is His father, we are too.
I don't see how it is retconning to go back to the earlier history, rather then the politically correct version people want to believe now.
The story in Ezra is history, and includes a reference to earlier historical records kept by the Babylonian kings, in regards to the Israelites not paying tribute. Jesus told his followers to be wise as serpents, so why would He speak plainly, in the presence of His enemies something that would get Him in trouble, when He could communicate it clearly to them, without everyone understanding what He was saying? They got the message, that's why they went away marveling. In trying to trap Him, they themselves were called out.
When Jesus and Peter did pay, the money came from a source we cannot duplicate, NOT out of their pockets, AND Jesus said it was only to avoid offending them, because of what Peter said. Jesus said the children are free, and if He was exempt because God is His father, we are too.
I don't see how it is retconning to go back to the earlier history, rather then the politically correct version people want to believe now.
Very good. So Jesus advocates for the assassination of Caesar. His disciples never really seem to pick up on that. Peter does, briefly, but is stopped by Jesus' confusing insistance that he should put up the sword.
Yes, because though Peter could not have known, Jesus had a better plan. He appears to Saul of Tarsus post glorification to enact His master plan. Saul, being a Roman citizen, has a much better chance of getting at Caesar. Predictably, Saul creates a false identity for himself (aka Paul) and uses a combination of rabble-rousing and his rights as a Roman citizen to get himself arrested. He then climbs the ladder through the appellate system and lands himself in the very household of Caesar. There he starts converting the Praetorian guard to the faith and the trap is set completely. Paul now has the ability to call upon his zealous new friends to decapitate the evil Roman system!
Except from there everything goes rather dissappointingly. There is a disturbing lack of killing Caesar happening. Paul appeared to have gone native, having lost his youthful bloodlust. He then spent most of his time preaching some watered-down version of Christianity that doesn't involve stabbing public officials.
---
1- I don't explain it. That is exactly my understanding.
2- Really. I don't see Ezra 4 as having any sort of precedent for Israel being exempted from any imperial tax. Particularly not if all you have to quote are letters that pagans are sending each other. This cannot be expected to over-rule the numerous times that God has raised up heathen countries to punish, plunder, and subjugate Israel because of their disobedience.
3- The "revolutionary freedom-loving" Jesus IS politically correct. He plays very well in conservative circles. The zealots would have loved him, but He did not follow the zealots, He commanded a zealot to follow Him.
Yes, because though Peter could not have known, Jesus had a better plan. He appears to Saul of Tarsus post glorification to enact His master plan. Saul, being a Roman citizen, has a much better chance of getting at Caesar. Predictably, Saul creates a false identity for himself (aka Paul) and uses a combination of rabble-rousing and his rights as a Roman citizen to get himself arrested. He then climbs the ladder through the appellate system and lands himself in the very household of Caesar. There he starts converting the Praetorian guard to the faith and the trap is set completely. Paul now has the ability to call upon his zealous new friends to decapitate the evil Roman system!
Except from there everything goes rather dissappointingly. There is a disturbing lack of killing Caesar happening. Paul appeared to have gone native, having lost his youthful bloodlust. He then spent most of his time preaching some watered-down version of Christianity that doesn't involve stabbing public officials.
---
1- I don't explain it. That is exactly my understanding.
2- Really. I don't see Ezra 4 as having any sort of precedent for Israel being exempted from any imperial tax. Particularly not if all you have to quote are letters that pagans are sending each other. This cannot be expected to over-rule the numerous times that God has raised up heathen countries to punish, plunder, and subjugate Israel because of their disobedience.
3- The "revolutionary freedom-loving" Jesus IS politically correct. He plays very well in conservative circles. The zealots would have loved him, but He did not follow the zealots, He commanded a zealot to follow Him.
My natural sympathies lie with you argument AmercanIsraelite, but we do have to reconcile our revolutionary fervor with the other commands to submit to authorities and government. As much as I would like to overthrow the system we are commanded to be good citizens.
Once again, you crack me up slumber. I agree though that violent opposition to Roman rule does not Jive with the rest of his teachings. However I can see some merit to AI's argument about not paying tribute, but I believe it was more that they saw Jesus as a rebel and expected him to give a rebel's answer, which would then incriminate him. That, or they expected him to give a heretics answer that God was not due anything, which would discredit him. I believe they were amazed by the way he said that it is in fact ok to pay taxes, but that those taxes should not take away from God.
I'd also submit that "taxes" and "tribute" are not the same thing. In the case of the Romans it is a grey distinction because they were conquerors, but tribute to me is basically "protection money" he mob shakes you down for, while taxes are actually used to support the people that pay them. Rome did build a lot of roads and such, but I'd say they fall closer to the mob side. From my perspective, my government did not conquer me, and while I do not always (usually) agree with how they spend said money, they do at least attempt to take care of the populace.
I'd also submit that "taxes" and "tribute" are not the same thing. In the case of the Romans it is a grey distinction because they were conquerors, but tribute to me is basically "protection money" he mob shakes you down for, while taxes are actually used to support the people that pay them. Rome did build a lot of roads and such, but I'd say they fall closer to the mob side. From my perspective, my government did not conquer me, and while I do not always (usually) agree with how they spend said money, they do at least attempt to take care of the populace.
As far as the Romans go, tribute is what was demanded. The same word "Phoros" appears in Luke 20 and Romans 13.
When it comes to taxes and tribute and whatnot... I am reminded of 1 Samuel 8. To paraphrase;
"You all think you are so terribly clever because you want a human king. Well, you're going to get it now! He's gonna take your stuff. He's gonna take your sons. He's gonna take your daughters. He's gonna take your food and your luxury items. You will disagree vehemently with what he's gonna take and pray to God for him to take less, but God will not be listening."
As far as I can tell human government has not substantially deviated from this pattern since. A man does not need a perfumer to be a king, but a king will demand perfumers and God specifically promises not to intervene if your daughter is dragged off to be the king's perfumer. America doesn't really do forced government employment. We do overtaxation so that other peope can stay at home and pop out kid to qualify for more hand-outs.
What would I rather have? My daughter helping Michelle Obama fix her hair or my current tax situation? Does it matter?
America is an ok place to live, but just like feminism has obscured the proper roles of men and women; democracy has obscured the proper roles of men and kings. The bible says to honor the king and we respond by outlawing him. That's not clever.
When it comes to taxes and tribute and whatnot... I am reminded of 1 Samuel 8. To paraphrase;
"You all think you are so terribly clever because you want a human king. Well, you're going to get it now! He's gonna take your stuff. He's gonna take your sons. He's gonna take your daughters. He's gonna take your food and your luxury items. You will disagree vehemently with what he's gonna take and pray to God for him to take less, but God will not be listening."
As far as I can tell human government has not substantially deviated from this pattern since. A man does not need a perfumer to be a king, but a king will demand perfumers and God specifically promises not to intervene if your daughter is dragged off to be the king's perfumer. America doesn't really do forced government employment. We do overtaxation so that other peope can stay at home and pop out kid to qualify for more hand-outs.
What would I rather have? My daughter helping Michelle Obama fix her hair or my current tax situation? Does it matter?
America is an ok place to live, but just like feminism has obscured the proper roles of men and women; democracy has obscured the proper roles of men and kings. The bible says to honor the king and we respond by outlawing him. That's not clever.