> General Discussions

Paul's contradiction of Jesus?

<< < (4/9) > >>

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.   :D  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:

--- Quote from: mharrell08 on January 18, 2009, 09:37:29 AM ---


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.

--- End quote ---

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.


--- Quote ---
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]

--- End quote ---

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)


--- Quote ---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.
--- End quote ---

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.


--- Quote ---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.
--- End quote ---

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.


--- Quote ---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.
--- End quote ---

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. :)



--- Quote from: pinko on January 17, 2009, 10:04:43 PM ---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?

--- End quote ---

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:

--- Quote from: aqr on January 18, 2009, 01:51:57 PM ---
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.
--- End quote ---

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!


--- Quote ---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.
--- End quote ---

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.


--- Quote ---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. :)
--- End quote ---

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.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page