Do you believe abortion is wrong?
Not only that, but that it's murder?
Do you believe that homosexuality is un-biblical?
Do believe that according to the constitution a man has a right to keep and bear arms, without having to inform the Gov. of your possession?
Do you believe that a man has a right to own his own land?
Do you believe that judges should judge according to the word of God?
Do you say the pledge?
My dear friends, did you answer yes to any of those questions? How about any but the last one?
I pledge allegiance to the flag
"Thou Shalt Not Murder" (Exodus 20:13, Deut., 5:22 Matt. 5:21)
"(a) For the stage prior to approximately the end of the first trimester, the abortion decision and its effectuation must be left to the medical judgment of the pregnant woman's attending physician. Pp. 163, 164.(http://womenshistory.about.com/library/etext/gov/bl_roe_a.htm)
Of the united states of America
"Thou Shalt Not Commit Adultery" (Exodus 20:14, Lev. 18:22 Romans 1:27)
"Mass. General Laws c.207. The same laws and procedures that govern traditional marriage also apply to same-sex marriages. There are no special procedures for a same-sex marriage." (http://www.lawlib.state.ma.us/gaymarriage.html)
And to the *republic* for which it stands
"the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." (2nd Amendment of the constitution)
One Nation
"The Heritage Index greatly exaggerates the security of property rights in the U.S. The ever-expanding asset seizure laws have made American property rights among the least secure." (http://www.vdare.com/roberts/tax.htm)
Under God
"The Supreme Court went against legal precedent of the past 200 years...and banned the Ten Commandments when it appeared to be presented as a religious doctrine." "Last week, the justices rejected an appeal from a high-profile crusader for Ten Commandment monuments, ousted Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore, who lost his job after defying a federal order to dismantle a Ten Commandments monument."(http://10commandments.biz/biz/newsletter/2005/june/supreme_court_ten_commandments.php) (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6232020) (
Indivisible, with liberty and justice
"Thus, when a flat rate Federal income tax was enacted in 1894, it was quickly challenged and in 1895 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled it unconstitutional because it was a direct tax not apportioned according to the population of each state." (http://www.treasury.gov/education/fact-sheets/taxes/ustax.shtml http://www.teapartyday.com/)
For All.
"Abortion is a safe and legal way for women to choose to end pregnancy."
http://www.plannedparenthood.org/health-topics/abortion-4260.htm
Do you not see? If you answered 'YES' to any of my questions, why do you still say the pledge? Why do you give your allegiance to a nation that murders babies, promotes adultery, and goes against it's own laws and original documents. Fellow Christians, I mourn for you. Why is it that we believe we are doing the greatest good by saying the pledge; when it is so obvious that everything our country does now is exactly the opposite, and getting worse? We are not truly loving our country, as it was intended to be, and most importantly, we are not truly loving nor honoring our God when we pledge our allegiance to our flag. You want to be a witness? You want a chance to explain to people about the Christian life? Don't say the pledge, people will ask you why, (I can guarantee it) and you can tell them it's because you love your God, and you are a true patriot. Will it be easy? Assuredly not, of that I have knowledge. Is that course of action right? Certainly I believe so, and would desire proof otherwise, besides sagas of sentimentalization.
"Surely I have taught you statues and judgments, just as the LORD my God commanded me, that you should act according to them in the land which you go to possess. Therefore be careful to observe them; for this is your wisdom and your understanding in the sight of the peoples who will hear all these statutes and say "Surely this great nation is a wise and understanding people"
Deuteronomy 4:5-6
11 comments:
Nice to have you back in the Blogosphere. :-)
"I did pledge allegiance to the flag ... and to the republic for which it stood ... UNDER GOD."
Jonathan Potter
I'm hoping Ethan that you removed that comment because you realized the answer was obvious.
It will be fun to meet you in karate class!
I, too, used to "thwack" people upside the head with God's Word. Standing over them and beating them with the "law" while never providing them the answer to life's ills (i.e. a broken, sinful, fallen world) through Jesus Christ. Your ideas are well-placed, but their communication is so vitriol-filled that you will lose those who might otherwise take your side. I know. I tend to have the same problem.
I was once EXTREMELY legalistic. I was so holy I never even went to movies or went to eateries that sold alcohol (what a shiny halo I had). I would usually win the arguement, but I would lose the soul.
There is a time for coming down with the law, but such must be used cautiously. A far better approach is that which the prophet Nathan used with King David: Tell a story, lead them in, and then "turn on the lights." And always, always make sure that in the end you point to Jesus Christ and the restoration that can only come by Grace through Faith through Him. Without that last part, you've left them wounded and bleeding and without hope.
Blessings and I look forward to karate class with you.
Randy Keyes
Christ Lutheran, Lansing
I appreciate your insight Mr. Keyes, but this particular post was written towards Christians, not unbelievers, who already believe in God and His redeeming love for us and should be ready to handle more than "milk".
In fact, most (if not all) of the posts you will find on this site are directed towards fellow believers.
I to look forward to meeting you in martial arts class. May I inquire as to how you knew this was me and my blog? It was a bit of a funny surprise to me.
Still, remember that beating Christians up with the law is no better than beating up the unsaved.
While their are three purposes to the law (mirror, curb, guide), without the peace of the Gospel, it can be more abusive than helpful. A well-intentioned beating can still leave people more hurt than helped unless the proper healing is also applied.
Sensei Arnold shared this with me. I think it's ok for me to say he was curious about his students and so he googled you "kids" (I'm old so I can call you that)and found your blogs. He suggested I take a look and so I did.
I know you mean well, but you are mixing your concepts of "Law" and "Gospel." Don't feel bad, as I used to do the same thing. We can talk more about later if you like or simply google "Law and Gospel" and have fun with it.
God's Peace as you walk with Jesus. See you in class Thursday.
Randy
I'm not contending that a Christian is saved by the law. I fully understand that a Christian is saved by the gospel, that Christ does all the saving.
Undoubtedly the differences that are arising between you and I is the divide in theology. I am of reformed beliefs, and you are Lutheran.
I have not had to deal with this issue in such a deep aspect. However, I HAVE had a general overview of this subject and do not believe myself to be in error. I'm going to read John Frame on this, and continue this discussion with you once I understand your point of view better.
I can say right now that I have no intention (good or otherwise) of beating anyone over the head. Legalism is a doctrine that teaches one is saved by law. There is nothing in what I've written that would suggest that. If you believe otherwise please point it out to me. If you cannot find something that is teaching legalism in my writings I would ask that you would refrain from sticking me with that label.
Unfortunately my siblings and I will not be in class on Thursday, as we have a prior engagement, so you and I will have to postpone our meeting until next Tues if you will not be in class this Tues.
Blessings in Christ.
Dear Shieldwolfdefense,
I read what Miss. Nana wrote and I don't see how your charge of "Legalisitc" can stick. For example Ms. Nana wrote,
"Do you not see? If you answered 'YES' to any of my questions, why do you still say the pledge? Why do you give your allegiance to a nation that murders babies, promotes adultery, and goes against it's own laws and original documents. FELLOW CHRISTIANS, I mourn for you. Why is it that we believe we are doing the greatest good by saying the pledge; when it is so obvious that everything our country does now is exactly the opposite, and getting worse? We are not truly loving our country, as it was intended to be, and most importantly, we are not truly loving nor honoring our God when we pledge our allegiance to our flag. You want to be a witness? You want a chance to explain to people about the CHRISTIAN LIFE? Don't say the pledge, people will ask you why, (I can guarantee it) and you can tell them it's because YOU LOVE YOUR GOD, and you are a true patriot..."
Please note what I've capitalized. Miss. Nana's assumption all the way through what she wrote is that these people who are making a mistake by saying the pledge are CHRISTIANS. If Miss. Nana was being Legalistic that would be a very strange thing for her to assume.
Surely, Mr. Shieldwolf you understand that there is a difference between Lutherans and Reformed. While the Reformed retain hermeneutical categories of Law and Gospel the way that many Reformed people explain that hermeneutical technique is different from the way that Lutherans handle it. For example, the Reformed have a far higher view of the third use of the law than many Lutherans.
I am thankful for your reminder that Christians as well as pagans need the Gospel. We are agreed that the third use of the Law should end with the reminder to Christians who are under conviction that God forgives them for the sake of Christ and calls them His own.
However for those who refuse to repent when the third use of the law comes to them we have a need to speak to them the way that the Apostle did in Galatians 5:19-21. To not recognize the legitimacy of speaking the way the Holy Spirit does to Christians in the Scripture might put someone in the category of antinomiman. I'm glad you are not one of those people.
Dear Shieldwolfdefense,
I read what Miss. Nana wrote and I don't see how your charge of "Legalisitc" is warranted. For example Miss. Nana wrote,
"Do you not see? If you answered 'YES' to any of my questions, why do you still say the pledge? Why do you give your allegiance to a nation that murders babies, promotes adultery, and goes against it's own laws and original documents. FELLOW CHRISTIANS, I mourn for you. Why is it that we believe we are doing the greatest good by saying the pledge; when it is so obvious that everything our country does now is exactly the opposite, and getting worse? We are not truly loving our country, as it was intended to be, and most importantly, we are not truly loving nor honoring our God when we pledge our allegiance to our flag. You want to be a witness? You want a chance to explain to people about the CHRISTIAN LIFE? Don't say the pledge, people will ask you why, (I can guarantee it) and you can tell them it's because YOU LOVE YOUR GOD, and you are a true patriot..."
Please note what I've capitalized. Miss. Nana's assumption all the way through what she wrote is that these people, who are making a mistake by saying the pledge, are CHRISTIANS. If Miss. Nana was being Legalistic that would be a very strange thing for her to assume.
Surely, Mr. Shieldwolf you understand that there is a difference between Lutherans and Reformed. While the Reformed retain hermeneutical categories of Law and Gospel the way that many Reformed people explain that hermeneutical technique is different from the way that Lutherans handle it. For example, the Reformed have a far higher view of the third use of the law than many Lutherans.
I am thankful for your reminder that Christians as well as pagans need the Gospel. We are agreed that the third use of the Law should end with the reminder to Christians who are under conviction that God forgives them for the sake of Christ and calls them His own.
However for those who refuse to repent when the third use of the law comes to them we have a need to speak to them the way that the Apostle did in Galatians 5:19-21. To not recognize the legitimacy of speaking the way the Holy Spirit does to Christians in the Scripture might put someone in the category of antinomiman. I'm glad you are not one of those people.
Bret:
You misunderstand me. I said ** I ** used to be legalistic. I was using that as an example of how I used to beat people up with the Bible. (And I was good, let me tell you). I was a Fundamentalist Baptist (GARBC--trained at GRBC) before becoming Lutheran by God's grace and the leading of the Holy Spirit.
Still, now having said that, while legalism is ultimate a "Law+Grace=saved," the end effect can be the same if a Christian believes that in order to be a "good Christian" or a "real Christian" then you really need to do "X,y,Z." That is a very dangerous place to go and we need to be careful when we head there.
I agree that the Reformed do place a stronger emphasis on the third use. I think that is because Luther's concern was primarily pastoral and Calvin's tended to be more rhetorical/theological. Luther didn't care if his theology fit into "nice tidy little box" so long as he had a scripture for what he believed. It's why we have the view of predestination, the Lord's Supper, and other "mysteries" that we do. Calvin really liked everything nice-n-tidy. A personality difference that did lead to some theological differences.
However, the Blessed Martin, himself, was sometimes a bit harsh on those around him, so it was funny when his friends reminded him to go read his own work on a particular subject. :)
My concern for the "young ones" stems simply from this: In my younger days, I "held forth the Word of Truth" but I did it in such a way that I actually drove people (unsaved and saved) away from the cross. I realize now that was a mistake I made and it pains me when I see others so much younger making what I see as the same mistake.
Blessings in Christ Jesus,
Randy
The Lutheran Celt
Lay Minister, Christ Lutheran
2nd degree black belt, White Crane Karate dojo :)
First, on understanding where I'm coming from, listen to my all-time favorite preacher who is Reformed (actually Presbyterian) and that is Professor Steve Brown at http://www.keylife.org. You will not find a more real or more fun "old white guy" as he likes to call himself. I recommend him to people before any other person for understanding the Love of Christ and real, earthiness of the Gospel. Even though he's Reformed and I'm Lutheran, I would study under him in a heart beat. Granted, I'd correct his view of the Lord's Supper, but that's a different story. (grin)
On understanding the differences between Lutherans and the Reformed:
A couple of great web sites:
http://newreformationpress.com has a lot of Rod Rosenbladt's materials, but go to the freebies section. He is on the White Horse Inn radio program as the "token Lutheran" with Michael Horton and the other good Reformed folk. :)
Also, a deeper one, and one I would suggest you bounce off your folks is a couple of Lutheran ministers who host a podcast called "The God Whispers" (godwhisperers.com). Seriously, these guys are fun, but they are deep. I'd bounce them off your parents, first if you are under their roof and their authority.
And probably the best single Lutheran resource: The Bible. OK, I'm teasing. http://bookofconcord.org -- Think "Canons of Dort" (but more readable).
I am sorry you'll miss class Thursday but look forward to meeting you next week!
Keep up the good study and keep your nose in God's Word.
Blessings,
Randy Keyes
Post a Comment