Posted on 04/08/2015 10:23:23 AM PDT by Zakeet
In the wake of the Indiana donnybrook over religious liberty, which somehow was transformed overnight into a question of gay rights, it couldn’t be long before the New York Times weighed in against Christians.
Yet who could have expected the draconian measures the Times would propose? Either Christians fully embrace the gay lifestyle, or you will be coerced into doing so.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
There is no tradition of refusing to bake cakes for homosexuals in the church, which was founded within the Roman empire which was noteable for having gay men out in the open and in charge, heck, there were homosexual emperors. Certainly our founders purposefully emulated Rome in a lot of ways, read John Adams.
It was a setup by the libertarians is what it was!
Very good......
The 14th Amendment shall be used to avenge victims of previous privileged classes. Victims are defined as those who contribute the most money to election campaigns and can generate the most LIV votes. PERIOD.
He said out loud what good liberals think.
BILL WHITTLE EXPLAINS OUR “PROGRESSIVE” NIGHTMARE & THE CONSERVATIVE SOLUTION
PART 1:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FB3BcUKmSlo
PART 2:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vNhtoY_pu7o
Inside every liberal is a fascist struggling not to out himself. Some lose the struggle.
And Muslims?
In America, there tended NOT to be church battles by the sword, although most believers participated willingly in battles on behalf of the nation in general.
So you might want to revise your last statement to make it truthful.
Also the purchase of the sword was only an interim measure. “One like Him” was going to be “sent” i.e. the Holy Spirit.
Resorting to fleshly measures on behalf of the gospel always vitiates the gospel.
This is no “church battle.” It’s lawless tyrants trying to use the force of government, with its power of the sword, to force Christians to accept what God calls abominations.
The shedding forth of the Holy Spirit in the hearts of believers in no way precluded the righteous use of the sword.
Read Romans chapter thirteen. God instituted human government as a restraining power against evil and evil-doers.
And while you’re thinking about it, remember this, in America We the People are the sovereign, under God. We are the government.
With the recognition that American Christians generally did not take up arms to wage church battles, is also the recognition that America was a unique shelter to these Christians. It welcomed them as citizens under its general armed umbrella (whose arms were borne on behalf of a country, not on behalf of a faith).
The present troubles should not be viewed as an excuse for Christians to go worldly hawk on their own behalf. Also, conditions considerably less friendly have not stopped Christians from being missionaries from other countries... think Canada, think Mexico, for example.
Don’t let the relative luxuries of the USA spoil you.
Please notice Romans 13 is about government in general. I.e. Caesar (note that Nero was on the throne at that time).
Nice try, no cigar, unless there is some serious bid at forming a Christiania where Caesar is the church (and notice history is not kind to that).
Jews must be made to embrace the Neo Nazis. They must be forced to enjoy shellfish and pork.
Muslims must be made to embrace the gay lifestyle and also eat pork. Their women must be made to remove their head coverings.
Buddhists must be made to eat meat. Sikhs must be made to be hairdressers. Atheists must be forced to embrace Gd.
Again, this is no “church battle.” I don’t know where you’re getting that idea.
And if citizens are sovereign then ipso facto your gay atheist neighbors are, too... no escape along these lines except the illusory escape that tries to merge Caesar and the church.
But you are insinuating that every which way while officially shunning the words.
Romans thirteen is about legitimate government, as instituted by God. Nero was a tyrant who acted illegitimately. So you’re simply mistaken.
Nero did not lose his right to execute murderers because of his own ill conduct. So you are wrong.
Because consider, even a Nero government is superior to an anarchy in many ways.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.