Paul's contradiction of Jesus?

[pinko]

I've been reading here for about 8 or 10 months I suppose...Have read everything Ray has writ and listened to all the bible teachings on audio. And I am grateful for all he's shared with us.  Most of which, I believed inside already, only couldn't reconcile it with scripture as I'd been dutifully indoctrinated during my life in 'Christendom'... But now I know better.

One area of thought I've not seen much from Ray, however is his views on the state and politics in general.  I'm an anarchist, as I believe Jesus was (and is).. And I've recently seen what could be considered a "contradiction" in the NT teachings of Paul and Peter vs. those of Jesus.  But, I know, 'the scriptures do not contradict'...which is why I'm asking.

Paul's notorious pericope in Romans 13 is a problem.. It's a stumbling block for many.. I've probably read more commentary on this passage than most and none have remedied my cognitive dissonance.  Perhaps some here can help?

Here's my dilemma:  Paul says "Let every person be subject to the governing authorities; for there is no authority except from God and those authorities who exist have been instituted by God. Therefore, whoever resists authority resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment."

Then of course, there's 1 Peter 2:13-18...(you guys can read it yourselves)...More of the same.

Now I know much of the NT teachings seem to contradict this teaching--in spirit--if not in letter, but one incident in particular is recorded in 3 of the Gospels---namely Jesus' temptation by Satan, wherein he was offered "all the kingdoms of the world. And the devil said to him, 'To you I will give their glory and all this authority, for it has been given over to me, and I give it to anyone I please. If you then will worship me, it will all be yours.'"

Jesus did not dispute this claim of Satan that all earthly (governmental) authority--all states--were rightfully the Devil's; were given to him; and therefore flowed from him to all the kings of the earth. 

How then does this passage not undeniably refute Paul's (and Peter's) claim that 'all government authority comes from God.'...and that we should even "honor the emperor" (and thus his 'authority')?   

Jesus had nothing but utter disdain for the 'governing authorities' of his day..Matter of fact, he was actually executed for the crime of treason to Rome.. Remember he was brought before Pilate with the accusation that "We found this man perverting our nation, forbidding us to pay taxes to the emperor, and saying that he himself is the Messiah, a king." (Lk 23:1-2)  None of which were denied...   

How then can Jesus and Paul both be right?

[deftarchangel]

I found this thread in the forum archives, which seems to address your question, or at least part of it.  Don't know if it suffices, and may require more insight from others with more knowledge of the Scriptures, but I hope it provides some assistance.

http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/topic,4645.0.html

Kind regards,

Rob

[Ninny]

Pinko, I believe you just answered your own question! Governments are put in place by God. How and Why? God has made the devil the god of this world, (2 Cor. 4:4) if God gives authority to and institutes governments and if satan is the god of this world, then there is no contradiction! We obey the civil authorities because God says to! satan is the god of this world because God says so! Every form of earthly government is corrupt and sinful, because satan is the head of it! satan is the head of it because God put him there!
I know that is really too simplistic and hopefully I don't offend you with preschool answers!
Some things are just not that hard to understand. You will remember that Jesus paid his taxes (the money in the fish). That was an example of how to obey those in authority over you.

Anarchy isn't the answer to a corrupt government because as long as satan is lord of this world, even that would be corrupted and sinful! the world is what it is because God has ordained it to be so! Period.
That's the way I see it!
Kathy

[Ninny]

We do have to obey God rather than man,  when it comes to civil matters we obey the civil law, when it comes to God's commands we obey God. If the two conflict then God's law has to be obeyed no matter the consequence!
Kathy

[aqrinc]

Hi Pinko,

I would like to have a discussion with you; however please review the red highlited part of your post
in relation to the scriptures i posted below. Jesus was not Crucified for treason to Rome.
You say; you have read all of Rays papers and listened to all the audio; so why then are you finding
contradiction. I am not disputing just asking for clarification of your post and the Scriptures.

I've been reading here for about 8 or 10 months I suppose...Have read everything Ray has writ and listened to all the bible teachings on audio. And I am grateful for all he's shared with us.  Most of which, I believed inside already, only couldn't reconcile it with scripture as I'd been dutifully indoctrinated during my life in 'Christendom'... But now I know better.

One area of thought I've not seen much from Ray, however is his views on the state and politics in general.  I'm an anarchist, as I believe Jesus was (and is).. And I've recently seen what could be considered a "contradiction" in the NT teachings of Paul and Peter vs. those of Jesus.  But, I know, 'the scriptures do not contradict'...which is why I'm asking.

Paul's notorious pericope in Romans 13 is a problem.. It's a stumbling block for many.. I've probably read more commentary on this passage than most and none have remedied my cognitive dissonance.  Perhaps some here can help?

Here's my dilemma:  Paul says "Let every person be subject to the governing authorities; for there is no authority except from God and those authorities who exist have been instituted by God. Therefore, whoever resists authority resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment."

Then of course, there's 1 Peter 2:13-18...(you guys can read it yourselves)...More of the same.

Now I know much of the NT teachings seem to contradict this teaching--in spirit--if not in letter, but one incident in particular is recorded in 3 of the Gospels---namely Jesus' temptation by Satan, wherein he was offered "all the kingdoms of the world. And the devil said to him, 'To you I will give their glory and all this authority, for it has been given over to me, and I give it to anyone I please. If you then will worship me, it will all be yours.'"

Jesus did not dispute this claim of Satan that all earthly (governmental) authority--all states--were rightfully the Devil's; were given to him; and therefore flowed from him to all the kings of the earth. 

How then does this passage not undeniably refute Paul's (and Peter's) claim that 'all government authority comes from God.'...and that we should even "honor the emperor" (and thus his 'authority')?  

Jesus had nothing but utter disdain for the 'governing authorities' of his day..Matter of fact, he was actually executed for the crime of treason to Rome.. Remember he was brought before Pilate with the accusation that "We found this man perverting our nation, forbidding us to pay taxes to the emperor, and saying that he himself is the Messiah, a king." (Lk 23:1-2)  None of which were denied...   

How then can Jesus and Paul both be right?

11-And Jesus stood before the governor: and the governor asked him, saying, Are you the King of the Jews? And Jesus said to him, You say.

12-And when he was accused of the chief priests and elders, he answered nothing.

13-Then said Pilate to him, Hear you not how many things they witness against you?

14-And he answered him to never a word; so that the governor marveled greatly.

15-Now at that feast the governor was wont to release to the people a prisoner, whom they would.

16-And they had then a notable prisoner, called Barabbas.

17-Therefore when they were gathered together, Pilate said to them, Whom will you that I release to you? Barabbas, or Jesus which is called Christ?

18-For he knew that for envy they had delivered him.

19-When he was set down on the judgment seat, his wife sent to him, saying, Have you nothing to do with that just man: for I have suffered many things this day in a dream because of him.

20-But the chief priests and elders persuaded the multitude that they should ask Barabbas, and destroy Jesus.

21-The governor answered and said to them, Whether of the two will you that I release to you? They said, Barabbas.

22-Pilate said to them, What shall I do then with Jesus which is called Christ? They all say to him, Let him be crucified.

23-And the governor said, Why, what evil has he done? But they cried out the more, saying, Let him be crucified.

24-When Pilate saw that he could prevail nothing, but that rather a tumult was made, he took water, and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, I am innocent of the blood of this just person: see you to it.

25-Then answered all the people, and said, His blood be on us, and on our children.

26-Then released he Barabbas to them: and when he had scourged Jesus, he delivered him to be crucified.

george.

[Deborah-Leigh]

Hi Pinko

Ray has said that most of his emails he receives are questions on contradictions. We know that the carnal mind sees contradiction. The spiritual mind sees the mystery of God's  Plan and Purpose to cause His transformation of us into His Son. The way that God does this is expounded throughout the teachings here in Bible Truths (BT)

What is of concern to me is that there are seductive teachers outside of BT who's  conclusions that Paul is a deception appointed by God in His Plan is not what is taught here in BT. Paul is seen as a spiritual giant here in BT and not as a spiritual deception.

As Jesus said, render to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's. Non can serve two masters.


Does Jesus contradict Himself?

Arc

[pinko]

George— If not for treason, why then did Rome crucify him?

23-And the governor said, Why, what evil has he done? But they cried out the more, saying, Let him be crucified.

24-When Pilate saw that he could prevail nothing, but that rather a tumult was made, he took water, and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, I am innocent of the blood of this just person: see you to it.

Are you saying Pilate believed he was innocent yet crucified him anyway?  If so, then his "washing of the hands" was a farce.. Of course he would have been 100% responsible for the death of an innocent man as he both knew it was evil, and had it in his power to stop it.  And did not.

I'm not "finding a contradiction", only an apparent contradiction... Kind of like when Ray sees in Genesis that God "brought a flood of waters upon the earth to destroy ALL FLESH, wherein is the breath of life from under heaven and EVERY THING that is in the earth shall die"... it doesn't yet contradict his belief that it was only a local flood, and in fact not all flesh died. 

We're supposed to be dividing the spiritual from the physical here, right?

[Marky Mark]

I'm an anarchist, as I believe Jesus was (and is)..

  Hello Pinko, 

    If by definition you live your life by this insertion into your post(anarchist),me thinks that the Spiritual condensation that we all seek here is missing.The Father is most certainly in charge of everything that Jesus had to endure through His commission while walking and ministering,as is our Father in charge and responsible for the entirety of all things. As has been said so many times here in the past,when one starts to see the Spiritual in place of the carnal the process is so enlightening that one wants to scream for joy,wanting to yell it from the the roof tops .
    When the times come to me (and there are many) that I cant quite put my finger on a verse or scripture, that is the time I put on my Spiritual thinking cap and to remember that it is Spirit that really matters, and not the physical.It seems that once one starts to understand Spirit,and believe me, I have much yet to understand,then, and only then, does one start to understand what to be free is all about


  Peace...Mark
     

[Deborah-Leigh]

Perhaps this will explain it better for you Pinko

In statement (1) the editor of Strong's cites seven more Scriptures that are used symbolically and figuratively to demonstrate "the holiness of God, which CONSUMES ALL that is inconsistent therewith." It doesn't consume their physical bodies, nor does it burn their physical bodies to produce pain, but it "CONSUMES" all that is not consistent with God's holiness. And these are the things of the heart, mind and spirit! It is not the "body" that needs chastisement and purification, it is the MIND, HEART, AND SPIRIT that needs purification from unholiness. You cannot burn pride and vanity out of one's heart with REAL FIRE (besides the advocates of torturing with real fire for all eternity admit that it accomplishes NOTHING). It takes the fire of God's spirit to burn away evils that have their origin in the realm of spirit.http://bible-truths.com/lake3.html



Arc

[pinko]

Hi Pinko

Ray has said that most of his emails he receives are questions on contradictions. We know that the carnal mind sees contradiction. The spiritual mind sees the mystery of God's  Plan and Purpose to cause His transformation of us into His Son. The way that God does this is expounded throughout the teachings here in Bible Truths (BT)

What is of concern to me is that there are seductive teachers outside of BT who's  conclusions that Paul is a deception appointed by God in His Plan is not what is taught here in BT. Paul is seen as a spiritual giant here in BT and not as a spiritual deception.

As Jesus said, render to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's. Non can serve two masters.


Does Jesus contradict Himself?

Arc

First, I do not think Paul is anything less than a 'spiritual giant' myself.  I'm just not so sure that everything that was attributed to Paul was actually said by Paul.  As Ray has aptly pointed out, there's been some tinkering with the scriptures over the years...  I choose to look at the Bible as a whole--and it should be consistant as a whole. When something doesn't seem to fit, I have to question whether 'I'm reading it right'... After all, my disdain for the concept of an eternal hell and my failure to see how it could be biblical at all is how I stumbled onto this site in the first place.  So, some things are not as they seem, no?

But to answer your question---no, I don't think Jesus contradicts himself at all when he said to "render to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's. No one can serve two masters."  

In fact, I take that quite literally.  I think Jesus meant exactly what he said...Obviously, since no man CAN serve two masters, any who would serve Jesus, could not also serve Caesar!  Further, since "all the world is the Lord's and everything in it", I reckon we should be "rendering" all to God, and nothing to Caesar.. Which is precisely what Jesus in effect said.

Matter of fact, this 'render unto Caesar' thing needs to be destroyed once and for all.  It has been so misconstrued and purposely twisted, it is now being held to teach the exact opposite of what was intended.  I hope Ray will take this matter up one day with the same vigor as he dismantled the eternal hell error.

[pinko]

I'm an anarchist, as I believe Jesus was (and is)..

  Hello Pinko, 

    If by definition you live your life by this insertion into your post(anarchist),me thinks that the Spiritual condensation that we all seek here is missing.

Hi Mark-- that word (anarchist) has been terribly besmirched by those who have used it to justify their lawlessness and ungodliness over the centuries.  I use it, however, in it's original meaning...the sense in which Jesus used it when he said this:

25and Jesus having called them near, said, `Ye have known that the rulers of the nations do exercise lordship over them, and those great do exercise authority over them,

26but not so shall it be among you, but whoever may will among you to become great, let him be your ministrant;

27and whoever may will among you to be first, let him be your servant;

28even as the Son of Man did not come to be ministered to, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.'  (from Matt., chap 20)

And the servant is not greater than his master.. If jesus was here to serve, then are we here to serve and not to rule over others.  Archists live their philosophy of dominating others... and they do it ultimately with the threat of force or fraud.  That is the only way people can rule over others.  But the principles which Jesus espoused (remember the sermon on the mount) are ANarchist.  We, children of the kingdom of God, are NOT LIKE the archists... we who would be great in the kingdom, as Christ said, will be the servants of others.

[mharrell08]

I'm an anarchist, as I believe Jesus was (and is)..

Definiton of anarchism from Free Dictionary website:

anarchism
noun

1. The theory or doctrine that all forms of government are oppressive and undesirable and should be abolished.
2. Active resistance and terrorism against the state, as used by some anarchists.
3. Rejection of all forms of coercive control and authority
4. A political theory advocating the elimination of governments and governmental restraint and the substitution of voluntary cooperation among individuals.

Pinko,

What scriptures do you believe Jesus states and supports these definitions (particularly the ones in bold)?

1. You know the Lord is coming to set up His Kingdom or government, right? [I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom...2 Tim 4:1] and [The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever...Rev 11:15]
2. You know Jesus showed no resistance and/or terrorism when he was oppressed? [He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter...Isa 53:7] and [I was daily with you in the temple teaching, and ye took me not: but the scriptures must be fulfilled...Mark 14:49]
3. You know that Jesus never rejected His Father's authority? [My meat is to do the will of him that sent me, and to finish his work...John 4:34] and [The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do...John 5:19]
4. You know that all the voluntary cooperation among individuals still results in wickedness and corruption? [O that there were such an heart in them, that they would fear me, and keep all my commandments always...Deut 5:29] and [And they (people of Babel) said, Go to, let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven (signifying pride, haughtiness, self-worship)...Gen 11:4]

Pinko, this may seem harsh, but one cannot bring the Lord down to where one is with their personal beliefs...we must repent and humble ourselves and the Lord will lift us up. This entire concept is you attempting to bring the Lord into agreement with your personal beliefs...this is a huge idol of the heart that we all have done in one form or the other.

You are even willing to disregard the very words of the apostles Peter and Paul to try and 'conform' Christ to your personal beliefs. You even stated that 'if something doesn't seem to fit, I have to question whether what I'm reading is true'...again, this is that idol of the heart. You are saying if the words of God do not fit with your beliefs, it must be questioned to whether or not it is true. With this line of thinking, (1) you will never humble yourself and question your own heart and intentions, just any of the word of God you believe contradicts your beliefs and (2) you set yourself in your temple (body) as your own god and all must be in agreement with this god.

Pinko, the Lord is changing and conforming our mind to the mind of Christ [Rom 8:29, 12:2] and it is done through humility and being teachable. Attempting to make His Word 'fit' with our beliefs is not that humility or being teachable that is required.


Hope this helps,

Marques

[Marky Mark]

Hi Pinko

Ray has said that most of his emails he receives are questions on contradictions. We know that the carnal mind sees contradiction. The spiritual mind sees the mystery of God's  Plan and Purpose to cause His transformation of us into His Son. The way that God does this is expounded throughout the teachings here in Bible Truths (BT)

What is of concern to me is that there are seductive teachers outside of BT who's  conclusions that Paul is a deception appointed by God in His Plan is not what is taught here in BT. Paul is seen as a spiritual giant here in BT and not as a spiritual deception.

As Jesus said, render to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's. Non can serve two masters.


Does Jesus contradict Himself?

Arc

First, I do not think Paul is anything less than a 'spiritual giant' myself.  I'm just not so sure that everything that was attributed to Paul was actually said by Paul.  As Ray has aptly pointed out, there's been some tinkering with the scriptures over the years...  I choose to look at the Bible as a whole--and it should be consistant as a whole. When something doesn't seem to fit, I have to question whether 'I'm reading it right'... After all, my disdain for the concept of an eternal hell and my failure to see how it could be biblical at all is how I stumbled onto this site in the first place.  So, some things are not as they seem, no?

But to answer your question---no, I don't think Jesus contradicts himself at all when he said to "render to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's. No one can serve two masters."  

In fact, I take that quite literally.  I think Jesus meant exactly what he said...Obviously, since no man CAN serve two masters, any who would serve Jesus, could not also serve Caesar!  Further, since "all the world is the Lord's and everything in it", I reckon we should be "rendering" all to God, and nothing to Caesar.. Which is precisely what Jesus in effect said.

Matter of fact, this 'render unto Caesar' thing needs to be destroyed once and for all.  It has been so misconstrued and purposely twisted, it is now being held to teach the exact opposite of what was intended.  I hope Ray will take this matter up one day with the same vigor as he dismantled the eternal hell error.

  I feel that Father being (Spirit), and then giving Jesus (Spirit) the duty of creation in the physical, ie; all that we as humans can understand and see is with out a doubt a rendering of sorts. We have to be in the physical and at the same time we have to be learning the Spiritual, no? To give on to Ceaser could also be said like to give on to any worldly government.
   We as citizens of the world have to follow the rules and laws and regulations in order to keep civil,but ultimately, the reason for being, in the first place, is to learn righteousness and to follow the Spirit of Jesus. So we can not follow two masters,one the world, and the other God,but, I think we do have to follow the physical LAWS in order to keep chaos from setting in and destroying what little peace we do have as a people.


Peace...  Mark

[Kat]

Hi Pinko,

Jesus did not dispute this claim of Satan that all earthly (governmental) authority--all states--were rightfully the Devil's; were given to him; and therefore flowed from him to all the kings of the earth.  

Satan is the ruler of this world only under God's sovereign.  

Rom 13:1  Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.

The answer Christ gave Satan did not go over his statement point by point, but it clearly shows that Christ certainly did not go along with Satan's statement to Him.

Luke 4:6  And the devil said to Him, "All this authority I will give You, and their glory; for this has been delivered to me, and I give it to whomever I wish.
v. 7  Therefore, if You will worship before me, all will be Yours."
v. 8  And Jesus answered and said to him, "Get behind Me, Satan! For it is written, "You shall worship the LORD your God, and Him only you shall serve."'

How then does this passage not undeniably refute Paul's (and Peter's) claim that 'all government authority comes from God.'...and that we should even "honor the emperor" (and thus his 'authority')?  

Jesus always states that we should put God first and since the governments of the world were established ultimately by God...  So even in all their corruption we should live at peace with this world and that would seem to entail going by their laws the best we can.

http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php?topic=5675.0 ------

Rom 13:7  Render to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honor to whom honor.

This is talking about the laws of the land, the governments, the enforcement people and everything else, and all of the regulations that come out of cities and counties and so on.  "...tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom..."   You may be familiar with someone who has as much as spit on this.   You don't just have to obey the laws, it says you have to obey the customs too.  
---------------------------------------------------------

mercy, peace and love
Kat

[Ninny]

I'm not really understanding why you are combining the words "none can serve two masters" with the verses such as Mark 12:17 Which says "Render unto Caesar..." These were two different situations in one Jesus was talking about your relationship with the government and the other, He is telling the people to lay up treasure in heaven..the relationship between you and your money. Unless I have COMPLETELY missed the meaning of those verses! I know that the Bible is a parable, but sometimes you can take the verses for what they actually say!
Jesus was saying that you obey government authorities, but when it comes to your treasure (whatever that means to you) you must render that unto God because God is the one you serve and not your money!

I understand that we are called to "serve" our country, but in doing that you are not asked (at least right now) to worship your government!
When a circumstance arises for Christians to choose between government and God we must choose God for that's where our heart and our treasure is!
Now these are just my ramblings, BUT sometimes we are too busy concentrating on the wrong things!
Jesus stated it quite simply to me, it means "pay your taxes, serve God, AND don't be attached to your worldly goods!" Easy!
Kathy

[Dave in Tenn]

What has struck me about how Ray deals with these 'apparent' contradictions is the way a higher truth emerges when dealing with them.  Just because there appears to be two sides to an argument does not mean that one of them is right.  Ray doesn't let others frame the 'debate'.  He takes the Word as it is and shows how both sides are in error under the Higher Truth.  If it seems to you that Paul and Peter are saying one thing about our relationship to authority and Jesus is saying another, it is almost certainly because you are not understanding fully either one of them.

You want to see the whole Scripture as truth?  Look simply at the life and ministry of Christ.  Didn't he praise the faith of the Roman Centurion?  Wasn't the Centurion a tool of the oppressor?  Didn't Jesus berate Peter for his zeal against the soldier who had accompanied the Temple leaders to arrest Him in Gethsemene?  Didn't He go willingly?  Wasn't the manner of His sacrifice (planned and prophecied from the Beginning) at the hands of authority?  Did He resist it?  Who did He speak against--the state or the 'church' ?  Was he 'really' executed for treason?  Or did He lay down His own life because NO MAN can take it from Him?

I spent a little time as well trying to figure out Ray's innate 'politics'.  The clearest statement I've read from him on his core belief is that he is an ambassador for the Kingdom of God--this world is NOT his home--and as an ambassador he ought not to be involving himself in the politics of this world.

On a side (and lighter) note:  I came of age in the mid-70's.  I think some of my anarcho-leaning friends from that period would argue that as soon as you identify as an 'anarchist' you become less of one.    Marques is essentially right, I think.  Don't stop and build an altar to what you think you know.  There's a 'solution' to this apparent contradiction that is meant just for you...be very careful, however, that there is no YOU in there.  It's not just organized religion (and politics) which is false and dangerous--unorganized, disorganized, and our own pet beliefs will bite us too.

Hang in there.

[pinko]

Definiton of anarchism from Free Dictionary website:

anarchism
noun

1. The theory or doctrine that all forms of government are oppressive and undesirable and should be abolished.
2. Active resistance and terrorism against the state, as used by some anarchists.
3. Rejection of all forms of coercive control and authority
4. A political theory advocating the elimination of governments and governmental restraint and the substitution of voluntary cooperation among individuals.

Well, I'd agree to all of the above definitions in blue---with the  qualification that the word "rejection" in #3 not be interpreted to mean any sort of outward, or violent rejection...Passive rejection, yes.

What scriptures do you believe Jesus states and supports these definitions (particularly the ones in bold)?

1. You know the Lord is coming to set up His Kingdom or government, right? [I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom...2 Tim 4:1] and [The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever...Rev 11:15]
2. You know Jesus showed no resistance and/or terrorism when he was oppressed? [He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter...Isa 53:7] and [I was daily with you in the temple teaching, and ye took me not: but the scriptures must be fulfilled...Mark 14:49]
3. You know that Jesus never rejected His Father's authority? [My meat is to do the will of him that sent me, and to finish his work...John 4:34] and [The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do...John 5:19]
4. You know that all the voluntary cooperation among individuals still results in wickedness and corruption? [O that there were such an heart in them, that they would fear me, and keep all my commandments always...Deut 5:29] and [And they (people of Babel) said, Go to, let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven (signifying pride, haughtiness, self-worship)...Gen 11:4]

Why, I believe all of the above scriptures support the definitions in blue-- which are the only legitimate forms of anarchy, IMO.  Btw, the reference you give to the tower of Babel actually makes my point that the City-State is an evil organization and contrary to the ways and laws of God. Beginning in Genesis from Nimrod's first state, we see that this is the rejection of God's Lordship, in favor of the rulership of man (or 'self-rule' as our alleged democracy arrogantly declares)

Pinko, this may seem harsh, but one cannot bring the Lord down to where one is with their personal beliefs...we must repent and humble ourselves and the Lord will lift us up. This entire concept is you attempting to bring the Lord into agreement with your personal beliefs...this is a huge idol of the heart that we all have done in one form or the other.

Ah, but I once had the same idol of the heart of so many Christian statists... I was very much an archist. It took a lot of chastisement from the Lord, I think, to beat out of me the terrible godless, loveless beliefs of my former Baptistic-patriot-militia-type teachers and preachers.  I am a pacifist.  But I was not always a pacifist.  I used to march lock-step with all the 'blessed are the war-makers' crowd...I most certainly did repent, and have been busily shedding all of those formerly held "personal beliefs", I can tell you.

You are even willing to disregard the very words of the apostles Peter and Paul to try and 'conform' Christ to your personal beliefs. You even stated that 'if something doesn't seem to fit, I have to question whether what I'm reading is true'...again, this is that idol of the heart. You are saying if the words of God do not fit with your beliefs, it must be questioned to whether or not it is true. With this line of thinking, (1) you will never humble yourself and question your own heart and intentions, just any of the word of God you believe contradicts your beliefs and (2) you set yourself in your temple (body) as your own god and all must be in agreement with this god.

No I think you misunderstand where I'm coming from.. Did the doctrine of eternal damnation ever seem 'to fit' with the scriptures and with your personal understanding of biblical christianity?  ..It did not for me, and yet I was 'forced' to accept it, as the scriptures (as they are translated into the english bibles) do seem to teach it---and certainly every church I'd ever been in and every preacher-teacher dogmatically taught it.  But as we've all seen here, that was a most damnable false-teaching.  I wasn't always certain of that..  I wasn't always certain Jesus wanted his followers to be pacifists and reject statism either.. But I am learning.

Pinko, the Lord is changing and conforming our mind to the mind of Christ [Rom 8:29, 12:2] and it is done through humility and being teachable. Attempting to make His Word 'fit' with our beliefs is not that humility or being teachable that is required.

Yes, He is changing us all.. And if I were not teachable, I wouldn't bother to be here.  Case in point:  I'd spent a good 10 years of my Christian life following the rabbit trails of the Young Earth Creationists, and earnestly believed their doctrine.. I've since been taught otherwise.    I did not expect Ray to convince me on that one.  But I came at it with an open mind, and he did.  ANd neither did I ever expect to believe I should "put up my sword", as Jesus commanded Peter to do, and yet now I see He was right, and my beliefs were so much pride-fed and testosterone-fueled idolatry.  It's funny how some things one once reveled in, we now are sickened by.

[aqrinc]

Hi Pinko,

In all of the posts that you replied to you still have not shown where Jesus Christ was Crucified
for being a Traitor to Rome. Where is your proof in Scripture that your statement i highlited in
Red Bold is true.

Have you taken this up with Ray; and have you got an answer that is counter to or in agreement
with your already established and accepted anarchist belief. Are we supposed to each go our own
way with our relative truths; and forget the (Spiritual Words) which are Life.

Contradictions are usually percieved by one's perspective relative to another in place and time.

Have you read Ray's paper and understood it:

Was Christ Made Sin: http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/topic,6719.msg53823.html#msg53823

george.

I've been reading here for about 8 or 10 months I suppose...Have read everything Ray has writ and listened to all the bible teachings on audio. And I am grateful for all he's shared with us.  Most of which, I believed inside already, only couldn't reconcile it with scripture as I'd been dutifully indoctrinated during my life in 'Christendom'... But now I know better.

One area of thought I've not seen much from Ray, however is his views on the state and politics in general.  I'm an anarchist, as I believe Jesus was (and is).. And I've recently seen what could be considered a "contradiction" in the NT teachings of Paul and Peter vs. those of Jesus.  But, I know, 'the scriptures do not contradict'...which is why I'm asking.

Jesus had nothing but utter disdain for the 'governing authorities' of his day..Matter of fact, he was actually executed for the crime of treason to Rome.. Remember he was brought before Pilate with the accusation that "We found this man perverting our nation, forbidding us to pay taxes to the emperor, and saying that he himself is the Messiah, a king." (Lk 23:1-2)  None of which were denied...   

How then can Jesus and Paul both be right?

[pinko]

You guys are coming at me from all directions and I can't make a coherent point, I guess. Kat and others keep bringing up Romans 13 and rehashing "render unto Caesar",  as if that counters my opinion or somehow satisfies my initial question in this thread... But that IS my question. 

Kat>>  Satan is the ruler of this world only under God's sovereign. 

Rom 13:1  Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.

The answer Christ gave Satan did not go over his statement point by point, but it clearly shows that Christ certainly did not go along with Satan's statement to Him.

How did Christ "not go along" with Satan's claim?   I just don't see that at all.  Of course all that is, is ultimately under God, but ought we to "resist evil" (as followers of Christ)  and "resist not the evildoer" (pacifism) , or is that backwards?  Btw, some translations actually do invert those doctrines!    ..And, do we "wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."?   

Are the governments of this world yet under the god of this world, or has he been formerly cast out?  (What did Jesus say?)  Does Christ NOW rule this world with a rod of iron, or is that yet future?  Or, if the world's kingdoms are  generally anti-christ, then is Christ doing evil that good may come?

Yes, indeed, the beast is within us..  But the BORG is one mind...One Beast, made up of the many.  Resitence is futile, right?  God has even intended for His Elect to be part of the Collective Hive, no?    Human governments, my friends, are made up of individual people.  And the evil they do is always done by the individual.  Of course, they intend to escape the consequences of their actions by hearkening to the 'collective good'..they always believe their sin is washed away by the tide of collective accountability (meaning no one is responsible for anything).

I get the impression that some here believe it was not a sin for the pilot of the Enola Gay to push the button on the bomb doors and unleash a hellish destruction on so many souls, because he was merely "rendering unto Caesar" and "submitting to the powers that be"... doing evil in order that good may come...

Ray has said this:  "Most laws of men are for the benefit of the people. However, some laws and leaders are not carrying out righteous government.  When there is a conflict between God's laws and men's laws, "We ought to obey GOD RATHER THAN MEN"  (Acts 5:29).

OK, so I agree..  in principle. But I take issue with his first statement...that 'most laws are for the benefit of the people'---THAT remains to be proven, but certainly appears patently false on it's face.. In fact, the whole idea of "man's laws" should be anathema to followers of Christ.  How shall man improve on God's laws?  Do we really need more??

Moreover, it can be cogently argued that there is always conflict between man's laws and God's laws.. Maybe it's even axiomatic.

[pinko]

Hi Pinko,

In all of the posts that you replied to you still have not shown where Jesus Christ was Crucified
for being a Traitor to Rome. Where is your proof in Scripture that your statement i highlited in
Red Bold is true.

The statement you highlighted, George, was scripture!  Jesus was accused, as is recorded by Luke, of "perverting our nation, forbidding us to pay taxes to the emperor, and saying that he himself is the Messiah, a king." .. I could go on with adding many scriptures which would conform to my thoughts here, but where is your scriptural proof to counter this charge made by the Jews in Luke's account?  Were these expressly denied by Christ?  No!  He DID claim to be the Messiah in more than a few places in the gospels... He DID confirm to Pilate that You say I am a King (and so he was--yet his kingdom was not of this world)... The only dispute you have is with the third statement, that he was "forbidding us to pay taxes to the emperor".  I happen to think he was.. But that was only one of three seditious charges, two of which you would not dispute.   

As I said before, I recognize what Pilate is recorded as saying as well (in his bogus "washing of the hands"), it's just that I don't buy it.. And I don't think the conclusions commonly drawn from this are correct.  He was in fact executed by Rome, no?  How or why did Pilate knowingly execute an innocent man?  To 'appease the Jews?'  He didn't give a spit about the Jews!

Have you taken this up with Ray; and have you got an answer that is counter to or in agreement
with your already established and accepted anarchist belief. Are we supposed to each go our own
way with our relative truths; and forget the (Spiritual Words) which are Life.

I was not aware Ray had a contrary opnion, George. As I said, I haven't found much of anything on this subject taught by Ray.  If my being an anarchist (in the biblical sense) is counter to Ray's teachings, he will forgive me as he has nowhere stated this... Nor do I  think we are "supposed to each go our own way with our relative truths".. Of course THAT is why I am asking these things!  To determine what, if any, current of opinion is in here regarding these matters. I have searched these things out and continue to search them out.  Anyone else searching, or does everyone merely repeat what they've heard umpteen thousand times on TBN... To wit, "render unto Ceasar and obey the powers that be".   It's nonsense.  I'm saying it's nonsense, and contrary to the teachings of Christ.

Have you read Ray's paper and understood it:

Was Christ Made Sin: http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/topic,6719.msg53823.html#msg53823

george.

Yes, I've read it. Is there anything relevant to this topic--specifically--that should cause me to re-read it?  If so, I will.

Peace.