Bio not provided
The confusion represented at different points from both positions in this piece disappears when the terms "Israelites," "Jews" ("Judahites"), and "gentiles" are biblically and, therefore, correctly identified. Until this is accomplished, confusion will persist and both sides will be attacking straw men.
As one example, to identify all twelve tribes as Jews (Judahites) and to then represent them all (all twelve tribes ) as having returned with Ezra and Nehemiah is to do ignore not only the distinction between the two-tribed house of Judah (Judah and Benjamin) and the ten-tribed house of Israel, but it also ignores the text that unequivocally identifies the Israelites that returned with Ezra and Nehemiah as being only from the tribes of Judah and Benjamin. For one example:
"And they made proclamation throughout Judah and Jerusalem unto ALL the children of the captivity, that they should gather themselves together unto Jerusalem; and that whosoever would not come within three days, according to the counsel of the princes and the elders, all his substance should be forfeited, and himself separated from the congregation of those that had been carried away. Then ALL THE MEN OF JUDAH AND BENJAMIN gathered themselves together unto Jerusalem within three days." (Ezra 10:7-9)
For more, regarding the Biblical identification of the Israelites, Judahites, and gentiles (even the usual capitalization of gentiles is incorrect), see free online book "The Mystery of the Gentiles: Who Are They and Where Are They Now?" at http://www.missiontoisrael.org/mystery-of-gentiles/index.php.
2 days, 21 hours ago on Prophecy Writers Making Predictions Again
Joel, if this is recorded and audio CDs will be made available, please be sure to advise on how to acquire them following the debate. May God use you for King and kingdom!
6 days, 18 hours ago on Theonomy Debate: McDurmon vs. Hall
@JohnBPachol @TedRWeiland Thanks for responding.
You can find my suggested Biblical Constitution (a replacement for today's Biblically seditious Constitution's Preamble and First three Articles) at http://www.bibleversusconstitution.org/biblicalConstitution.html.
2 weeks, 2 days ago on Misguided outrage on Obama’s “unconstitutional” executive action
"...When judicial proceedings are conducted according to Yahweh’s protocol, grand juries are as unnecessary and inherently flawed as are petit, or trial, juries. (See Chapter 6
for information concerning the United States Constitutional Republic’s
unbiblical jury system.) Yahweh has provided the following six
safeguards in His Word...."
For those six safeguards and more, see online Chapter 14 "Amendment 5: Constitutional vs. Biblical Judicial Protection" of "Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective" at http://www.bibleversusconstitution.org/BlvcOnline/biblelaw-constitutionalism-pt14.html.
2 weeks, 2 days ago on Deadly justice: Ferguson and beyond
"For they have sown the wind, and they shall reap the whirlwind...." (Hosea 8:7)
not overlook that in this passage both the wind and the whirlwind are
wicked. The whirlwind is somewhat akin to the Pharisees' proselytes
described by Christ, in Matthew 23:15, as "twofold sons of hell."
is akin to the twofold sons of hell, but those who empowered him are
nevertheless sons of hell themselves. And WHO was it who made it
possible for Obama to inhabit America's high place but the late 1700
founders who replaced the 1600 Christian Colonial governments of, by,
and for God, based upon His immutable moral law, with their own
humanistic government of, by, and for the people, based upon capricious Enlightenment and Masonic concepts.
As one example, Obama could
have never become President had the constitutional framers not replaced
biblical elections with constitutional elections and had they not, in
Article 6, banned Christian tests and with them biblical qualifications.
In other words, Obama and his actions are just more fallout (another whirlwind consequence) resulting from a much more foundational problem--the humanistic wind sown by the late 1700 founders. Thus, until we deal with the wind, today's whirlwind (even if "fixed") will inevitably be replaced by another whirlwind, probably even more tumultuous.
To help get to the core of the problem, see online Chapter 3 "The Preamble: WE THE PEOPLE vs. YAHWEH" of "Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective" at http://www.bibleversusconstitution.org/BlvcOnline/blvc-index.html.
@Tionico @TedRWeiland I'm pleased to hear you're not a Mormon.
Of course you're contract to sell your house is NOT morally neutral. If, unlike the Constitution, it's drawn up with no Biblically errant components, it's Biblically compatible. If, like the Constitution, it's rife with Biblically hostile components, it's Biblically incompatible.
1 month ago on We have returned to ground zero for liberty; fix this or else
@Tionico @TedRWeiland So you DO believe it's a morally neutral document--despite the fact there is hardly an Article or Amendment that's not hostile to Yahweh's sovereignty and morality!?!
You've never answered my question: Are you a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (commonly known as the Mormon church)?
@Tionico @TedRWeiland You wrote "The issue is not one of a failure of the Constitution...."
You know as well as I that there are no moral vacuums in life. The Constitution is a legislative instrument and it is either based upon and promotes Yahweh's sovereignty and His perfect law as the standard for society or it's opposed to both. It's one or the other.
Consequently, easy enough to find out which it is: Examine the Constitution line by line, Article by Article, and Amendment by Amendment by Yahweh's immutable moral standard as codified in His commandments, statutes, and judgments and see which it is. When this is actually done, the Constitution falls flat on its face as Biblically compatible document. In fact, there is hardly an Article or Amendment which is not antithetical, if not seditious to Yahweh's sovereignty and morality.
For evidence, see free online book "Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective," in which every Article and Amendment is examined by the Bible, at http://www.bibleversusconstitution.org/BlvcOnline/blvc-index.html.
@Tionico @TedRWeiland Once again, you demonstrate that idols die hard.
The late 1700 State Constitutions were a far cry from the 1600 Constitutions. Albeit better than the Federal Constitution, they were already rife with Enlightenment concepts. Returning to either of these accomplishes nothing.
Time to scurry as fast as you can from what might be described as Mt. Carmel Christianity. See blog Article "Today's Mt. Carmel Christianity" at http://www.constitutionmythbusters.org/todays-mount-carmel-christians/, followed by "Could You be a Disciple of Baal and Not Know It?"
@Mark On our hearts and minds to be put into practice with our hands and feet. Why else would Yahweh put it on our hearts and minds?
“The law sends us to
the gospel for our justification; the gospel sends us to the law to
frame our way of life.” Puritan minister Samuel Bolton (1606-1654)
You have failed to address the list of New Testament passages provided you. Instead of harmonizing what the New Testament declares about Yahweh's moral law as it applies under the New Covenant, your doctrine pits Scripture against Scripture.
@Mark thanks for replying. I'm not sure what to make of your statement: "the law has past" and a country's law "must be based on Yahweh's perfect law." You seem to contradict yourself.
We are certainly neither under the law nor justified by the law, but Yahweh's immutable moral law (for us as individual and a society) certainly has not been done away, as regrettably so many modern Christians have been led to believe.
In addition to the one Chuck Michaelis shared with you, let me provide you some additional New Testament passages for your consideration:
“…truth [is] in the law.” (Romans 2:20)
“…by the law is the knowledge of sin.” (Romans 3:20)
“Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.” (Romans 3:31)
“Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.” (Romans 7:12)
“For we know that the law is spiritual….” (Romans 7:14)
“That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.” (Romans 8:4)
“Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.” (Romans 8:7)
“Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the keeping of the commandments of God.” (1 Corinthians 7:19)
“But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully.” (1 Timothy 1:8)
“For this is the [New] covenant
that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the
Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their
hearts….” (Hebrews 8:10)
“And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.” (1 John 2:3)
“Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.” (1 John 3:4)
“By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep his commandments.” (1 John 5:2)
“For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous.” (1 John 5:3)
“And the dragon was wroth with the
woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the
commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.”
“Here is the patience of the
saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith
of Jesus.” (Revelation 14:12)
“Blessed are they that do his
commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may
enter in through the gates into the city.” (Revelation 22:14)
Summed up: Puritan minister Samuel Bolton (1606-1654) wrote, “The law sends us to
the gospel for our justification; the gospel sends us to the law to
frame our way of life.”
For more, see free online book "Law and Kingdom: Their Relevance Under the New Covenant" at http://www.bibleversusconstitution.org/law-kingdomFrame.html.
Joel McDurmon: "Dear friends, you are watching Washington politicians wrangle about the
exigencies of tyranny under the banner of the land of the free, and
meanwhile the real castle walls of freedom have already crumbled and
fallen around you."
I've said it this way: While trying to save the Republic, Christian have but lost the kingdom to the antichrists and non-Christians.
Unless, I missed it, case in point: this article.
The "REAL castle walls of freedom" were officially and nationally assailed when the 1700 founders replaced the 1600 governments of, by, and for God, based upon His immutable law of liberty (Psalm 19:7-11, 119:44-45, James 2:12) for their own humanistic government of, by, and for the people, based upon capricious Enlightenment and Masonic concepts (Judges 21:25, Matthew 15:6-9, etc.)
For more regarding these two antipodal governments, see online Chapter 3 "The Preamble: WE THE PEOPLE vs. YAHWEH" of "Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective" at http://www.bibleversusconstitution.org/BlvcOnline/biblelaw-constitutionalism-pt3.html.
@RaymondRoss @Richard Frank @TedRWeiland Hangs, not abolished. In other words, love of Yahweh and our fellow man rather than for justification (as under the Mosaic Covenant) is our motivation for keeping the Ten Commandments and their respective statutes and judgments under the New Covenant. In other words, we're no longer under the law but now empowered by Yahweh's Spirit to keep what was otherwise impossible in the flesh:
"For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth. (Romans 10:4)
Note, Christ is the end of the law period (as you would have it), but the end of the law FOR RIGHTEOUSNESS (or justification, as in Deuteronomy 6:25).
And don't overlook that Paul, the author of Romans 10:4, is also the author of the following passages:
"Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.” (Romans 3:31)
1 month, 1 week ago on What Would Jesus Do? Not what this liberal says He would do
@RaymondRoss @GaryLincoln @Richard Frank @TedRWeiland Raymond, everyone here, I'm sure, agrees that righteousness does NOT come by keeping the law. Righteousness, justification, forgiveness of sins, salvation is bestowed to us only by means of the blood-atoning sacrifice and resurrection of Christ.
Everyone here, I'm sure, accepts and praises God for Galatians 2:21 and the other Scriptures you've employed in this debate.. The problem is, it would seem, you don't accept the New Testament list of Scriptures on the law that I supplied you as it pertains to how we're to conduct our lives as individuals and as a society. Thus, my reason for saying your theology is one based upon pitting Scripture against Scripture.
If you'll permit me, I would like to recommend to you again "Law and Kingdom: Their Relevance Under the New Covenant" in which the New Testament Scriptures on the law are harmonized rather the pitted against each other.
You can find a free online copy at http://www.bibleversusconstitution.org/law-kingdomFrame.html. Or, if you would like the book itself, I would be pleased to send you (or anyone else here) a complimentary copy. Use our contact button on our website to provide me with your name and address and I'll get a copy right out to you.
@AmyAkins @TedRWeiland I'm pleased to hear you claim Christ as your Savior.
No one is angry here that I can tell. Just merely a case of Proverbs 27:17, honing our understanding and challenging others to do the same.
That said, you're initial remark seems to have been of the caliber of what sickens you. It had a tone of condemnation, so much so that one would think it was coming from a non-Christian paradigm and, unlike the other posts, added nothing to the Bible study going on betwixt men.
Just something to think about.
1 month, 2 weeks ago on What Would Jesus Do? Not what this liberal says He would do
@RaymondRoss @TedRWeiland Your forgiveness is not determined by what you think about Yahweh's salvation but upon what Yahweh thinks about your salvation. Among a number of other passages (see my list previously provided you), the following testify against your pitting-Scripture-against-Scripture theology:
"Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law." (Romans 3;31)
"For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ." (Jude 1:4)
@Markurious @GaryLincoln Check out "WWJD? Are You SURE You Want to Know?" Part 1, at http://www.constitutionmythbusters.org/wwjd-are-you-sure-you-want-to-know-pt-1/, in which I deal with this very question.
@AmyAkins Quit trying to crash our party. We're having fun! If you're not a Christian, you'll never understand. It's called ironing sharpening iron. I hope you'll be able to join in some day.
"Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me." (John 14:6)" Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved." (Acts 4:12)
@GaryLincoln @DarrenCamp1 Not to toot my horn. But, you might find "Law and Kingdom: Their Relevance Under the New Covenant" helpful. You can find it online at http://www.bibleversusconstitution.org/law-kingdomFrame.html.
You will also find a series of ten booklets on each of the Ten Commandments and their respective statutes, and judgments on our Online Books page, as well.
1 month, 2 weeks ago on Jefferson’s law of castration and maiming: the tyranny of humanistic law
@RaymondRoss @Richard Frank @TedRWeiland Raymond, tragically, you've actually condemned yourself as as enemy of Christ by your antinomian tirade here, as perfectly described by Jude:
"For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness,* and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ." (Jude 1:4)
*NASB translates "lasciviousness" as "licentiousness." If you have access to an 1828 Webster's Dictionary, look up Webster's definition.
"Do we then make void the law through faith [or grace]? God forbid: yea, we establish the law." (Romans 3:31)
Puritan minister Samuel Bolton (1606-1654) wrote, “The law sends us to
the gospel for our justification; the gospel sends us to the law to
frame our way of life.”
@GaryLincoln @TedRWeiland @DJustice No problem; I'm pleased you shared your thoughts.
@DJustice @TedRWeiland Let's say, you are kidnapped and held hostage for five years and are then escape. Later the kidnapper is identified and apprehended: Are you saying that he should not be prosecuted under Exodus 21:16?
The phrase "be found in his hand" refers to someone alive as juxtaposed to a person kidnapped who has either been murdered or sold.
@DJustice @waffleater A kidnapping involves an abduction in which the one abducted is held hostage against her (or his) will, regardless the location or for how long. Ask any woman who's been raped whether she was kidnapped or not.
@Richard Frank @RaymondRoss @TedRWeiland Amen! Well said!
@RaymondRoss @TedRWeiland Amen to these Scriptures, but not to your interpretation of the ones I've provided. You've merely pitted Scripture against Scripture and do not understand what Paul meant by "under law" vs. "under grace."
For how these Scriptures are properly harmonized, see free online book "Law and Kingdom: Their Relevance Under the New Covenant" at http://www.bibleversusconstitution.org/law-kingdomFrame.html.
Puritan minister Samuel Bolton (1606-1654) shows the Scriptural balance: “The law sends us to
the gospel for our justification; the gospel sends us to the law to
frame our way of life.”
@waffleater @TedRWeiland @vRico Is it true that kidnapping is a capital crime? Is true that rape involves a kidnapping? Then rape is a capital crime regardless who's its victim. This would likewise apply to pedophiles.
I don't suppose to know the mind of the Lord in Deuteronomy 22:25-27 and his reason in that instance for choosing to include the word "engaged." But I do not know that His choice in doing so doesn't negate the kidnapping/rape connection.
@waffleater @vRico Not true! Because every rape involves a kidnapping and Exodus 21:16 makes kidnapping a capital crime, rape of anyone's woman (fiance, wife, or daughter) is punishable by death.
@MM Sorry, your opinions do not trump Yahweh's immutable moral law in Leviticus 20:13.
“For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot
or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be
fulfilled.” (Mathew 5:18)
“Whosoever therefore shall break
one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be
called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and
teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.”
“Not every one that saith unto me,
Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth
the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that
day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? And in thy name
have cast out devils? And in thy name done many wonderful works? And
then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that
work iniquity [anomian – lawlessness].” (Matthew 7:21-23)
““And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.” (1 John 2:3)
"The law of Yahweh is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of Yahweh is sure, making wise the simple. The statutes of Yahweh are right, rejoicing the heart: the commandment of Yahweh is pure, enlightening the eyes. The fear of Yahweh is clean, enduring for ever: the JUDGMENTS of Yahweh are true and righteous altogether. More to be desired are they than gold, yea, than much fine gold: sweeter also than honey and the honeycomb. Moreover by them is thy servant warned: and in keeping of them there is great reward." (Psalm 19:7-11)
How tragic that even most theonomists are only two-thirds pronomian, rejecting the altogether righteous judgments of Yahweh's triune moral law (His commandments, statutes, and judgments). Whoever determines what is and what is not crime and metes out judgments rules society.
For more on how the judgments are just as applicable under the New Covenant as are the commandments and statutes, see online Chapter 17 "Amendment 8: Bail, Fines, and Cruel and Unusual Punishments" of "Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective" at http://www.bibleversusconstitution.org/BlvcOnline/biblelaw-constitutionalism-pt17.html.
"'What would Jesus do?' has become a mantra among contemporary Christians. It’s a great question, but only when
answered by the Biblical standard. Far too often, each person is left
to determine his own standard by which to answer this question. This
amounts to forcing upon Jesus one’s own standard rather than seeking
"Truth be known, most Christians don’t want to know what Jesus would
do. This is because the vast majority of today’s churches are antinomian
(opposed to Yahweh’s1 law under the New Covenant2), whereas Jesus was entirely pronomian. If He were living today, today’s antinomian churches would surely excommunicate him.
It was imperative that Jesus keep the law. Otherwise, He would have been a sinner and unable to be our sinless sacrifice...."
For more on what the Biblical Jesus would do, see "WWJD? Are You SURE You Want to Know?" Part 1 at http://www.constitutionmythbusters.org/wwjd-are-you-sure-you-want-to-know-pt-1/, followed by Part 2.
Barney, let's see if I have this correct: Provided I preached Christ crucified, I'm relieved of proclaiming His as resurrected Sovereign and King, and I'm not responsible for the consequences for failing to be not only a light to the world but also salt to the earth, per Matthew 5:13. Providing I know Christ and Him crucified, I'm also not required to fulfill the dominion mandate as found in both Matthew 28:18-20 AND 2 Corinthians 10:4-6.
Great! I can instead look forward to being one of the trampled instead of one of the "tramplers," per Matthew 5:13.
2 months ago on Hall of shame: new critics of Theonomy, same old fallacies
@larryeball Theonomy or Tyranny: Those really are the only two choices.
2 months, 1 week ago on Hall of shame: new critics of Theonomy, same old fallacies
It's because of such pastors that modern Christianity (what in 1600s America was Christendom, Christians dominionizing on behalf of Christ) is best described by Christ, in Matthew 5:13, as salt that's lost its savor, good for nothing but to be trampled under the foot of man.
Men such as Hall obviously don't believe in our commission as ambassadors of the King of kings:
"For the weapons of our warfare are not of the flesh, but divinely powerful for the destruction of fortresses. We are destroying speculations and EVERY lofty thing raised up against the knowledge of God, and we are taking EVERY thought captive to the obedience of Christ, and we are ready to punish ALL disobedience, whenever your obedience is complete." (2 Corinthians 10:4-6)
Part of the problem is that many Christians think the kingdom here on earth is impossible. Hardly! See "10 Reasons the Kingdom Here on Earth Isn't Mission Impossible" at http://www.constitutionmythbusters.org/10-reasons-the-kingdom-here-on-earth-isnt-mission-impossible/.
@Lonestarwife See "10 Reasons the Kingdom Here on Earth Isn't Mission Impossible" at http://www.constitutionmythbusters.org/10-reasons-the-kingdom-here-on-earth-isnt-mission-impossible/.
For anyone, not yet convinced the kingdom already exists, see "Republic or Kingdom: Which Are YOU Promoting?" at http://www.constitutionmythbusters.org/republic-or-kingdom-which-are-you-promoting-pt-1/.
3 months ago on Taxing like a harlot
I wonder if the following might not have a bearing on what's taking place over in the Middle East, especially from a Biblical perspective:
"Strictly speaking, it is incorrect to call an ancient
Israelite a “Jew” or to call a contemporary Jew an “Israelite” or a
“Hebrew.”" (Richard Siegel and Carl Rheins, eds., “Identity Crisis,” The Jewish Almanac, (New York, NY: Bantam Books, 1980) p. 3.)
That most of today's Jews are not genetic Israelites is also attested to in the Jewish Encyclopedia, the Encyclopedia Judaica, the Universal Encyclopedia, the Standard Jewish Encyclopedia, and by some of their own anthropologists and historians.
For more on the identity of today's Israelites, Jews, and gentiles, see online book "The Mystery of the Gentiles: Who Are They and Where Are They Now?" at http://www.missiontoisrael.org/mystery-of-gentiles/index.php.
3 months ago on Cruzifiction
@DJustice @TedRWeiland Excellent observations!
3 months, 1 week ago on Is there such thing as “legitimate taxation”?
@MichaelPaulTuuri @TedRWeiland @Alex Alexander Amen! What a blessed people we are--blessed ambassadors of the KING of kings--when we submit ourselves wholly to Him and His will for our lives!
@Alex Alexander @TedRWeiland @MichaelPaulTuuri Perhaps the following will help:
"... Because it is impossible for man to make law, he is
either a usurper or merely an administrator of Yahweh’s law.
"Administrators (not to be confused with judges) are law finders, not
lawmakers. An administrator’s responsibility is to implement Yahweh’s
law (government) here on earth at all levels of society—individually,
domestically, and civilly. Every Christian man should be an
administrator of Yahweh’s law on at least the first two levels.
Administrators represent Yahweh,
not the people. It is their duty to search out the law of Yahweh as it
applies to any particular situation, and then to teach and implement
the law(s) appropriate to that situation or need.7
"This does not mean supplementary stipulations cannot be implemented, provided
they are consonant with Yahweh’s prescribed law. For example, a
father, who governs his family by God’s authority and with His law has
the liberty to implement house rules, such as hygienic and household
chores. The same is true on all other levels of society...."
Excerpted from "A Biblical Constitution" at http://www.bibleversusconstitution.org/biblicalConstitution.html.
@MichaelPaulTuuri @Alex Alexander @TedRWeiland Indeed! If only even more alleged pronomians understood as much.
@Christopher_83 @TedRWeiland Thank YOU for being willing to consider both sides.
@Don @TedRWeiland @vRico Yet to deal with these issues!?! Go back and read my responses and "Law and Kingdom: Their Relevance Under the New Covenant" at http://www.bibleversusconstitution.org/law-kingdomFrame.html, in which Galatians 3:23-25 is key to the discussion therein.
The operative word (and key to understanding Paul's position on the law) in Galatians 2:19-21 (like in Roman 10:4 and elsewhere) is "righteousness" in the phrase "if righteousness come by the law Christ is dead in vain."
3 months, 1 week ago on Calvin’s great error on biblical law
@Christopher_83 @TedRWeiland Christopher, believe it or not, just yesterday I was actually hoping someone would provide Hallbrook's diatribe against me that I might have the opportunity to provide my response to a wider audience.
I hope you'll carefully consider my reply "An Open Response to Stephen Hallbrook's "Beware of Ted R. Weiland" at http://www.bibleversusconstitution.org/onlineBooks/stephen-halbrook-response.html.
@MichaelPaulTuuri @TedRWeiland You're right to equate speed laws to the parapet laws, which you are free to build or not build. However, don't build them and you become accountable to lex talionis and related laws if someone falls off your roof and breaks their neck. The same with speeding. The deterrent effect of lex talionis would be enough to dissuade the majority of people from excessive speed. That said, a property owner would have the right to regulate speed on his property, nonetheless.
What man legalizes is often a Band Aide on a self-inflicted wound. Until under Yahweh's law, the Band Aide (in this instance, speed laws) is better than unrestrained illegality (in this instance, unchecked speeding).
I'm presently preaching on the immigration crisis, on our southern border in particular. It's entitled "Immigration: Lawful, Legal, and Illegal, AKA: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly." I point out in the introductory message that until the Good is implemented, the Bad is better than the Ugly.
@MichaelPaulTuuri @TedRWeiland I have a entire section on lex talionis in the online Chapter 17 "Amendment 8: Bail, Fines, and Cruel and Unusual Punishments" of "Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective" at http://www.bibleversusconstitution.org/BlvcOnline/biblelaw-constitutionalism-pt17.html. I hope it helps.
I don't believe the entire nation would have to repent, anymore than it did here in America in the late 1700s when it only took a minority to bring about a revolution. And don't forget Yahweh is a majority with or without us. Even you haven't already, be sure to read "10 Reasons Why the Kingdom Here on Earth Isn't Mission Impossible" at http://www.constitutionmythbusters.org/10-reasons-the-kingdom-here-on-earth-isnt-mission-impossible/.
Also, don't rule out the impact of Yahweh's judgment upon this wicked nation (very likely meaning most of today's population will be eliminated, Yellowstone's volcano alone would accomplish this), followed by secession by those who would choose to live by government of, by, and for God, based upon His immutable and perfect moral law.
understands that the principal means by which we keep the First Commandment is
by observing Yahweh's other moral laws and that idolatry is not
so much about statues as it is statutes, it becomes clear that all governments
are theocratic, serving either the true God or some surrogate god, demonstrated by
what laws they keep and consider the supreme law of the land.
is no escaping theocracy. A government’s laws reflect its morality, and the
source of that morality (or, more often than not, immorality) is its god. It is
never a question of theocracy or no theocracy, but whose theocracy. The
American people, by way of their elected officials, are the source of the
Constitutional Republic’s laws. Therefore, the Constitutional Republic’s god is
WE THE PEOPLE.
recoil at the idea of a theocracy’s morality being forced upon them, but
because all governments are theocracies, someone’s morality is always being
enforced. This is an inevitability of government. The question is which god,
theocracy, laws, and morality will we choose to live under?..."
For more, see
online Chapter 3 "The Preamble: WE THE PEOPLE vs. YAHWEH" at
Let me provide you with ten reasons, you're wrong: See "10 Reasons Why the Kingdom Here on Earth Isn't Mission Impossible" at http://www.constitutionmythbusters.org/10-reasons-the-kingdom-here-on-earth-isnt-mission-impossible/.
If you're not convinced the restored kingdom already exists, you should begin with the two-part "Republic or Kingdom: Which Are YOU Promoting?" Part 1 can be found at http://www.constitutionmythbusters.org/republic-or-kingdom-which-are-you-promoting-pt-1/.
@MichaelPaulTuuri Speed limits would not be necessary under Biblical law, lex talionis in particular. I should be able to drive whatever speed I like (unless otherwise dictated by private property owners). At the same time, I know that I will also be subject to lex talionis and related laws for any loss of life, limb, or property damaged.
As for Biblical taxes, I agree with you. See my response to Joel's article.
@Don @TedRWeiland @vRico All of your responses are indicative that you have yet to correctly harmonize Paul's teaching and to properly distinguish between what law Paul is referring to in any given context.
Furthermore, Pastor Bolton did not claim that the law improves one character, nor do I. But Holy-Spirit directed character leads us to the law to frame our way of life.
Neither the Spirit, grace, nor faith are at odds with the triune moral law of Yahweh, as you appear to want to make them. They all compliment each other perfectly:
"Do we then make void the law through faith [or grace or the Spirit]? God forbid: yea, we establish the law." (Romans 3:31)
Be careful that you don't find yourself in company with those Jude depicted:
"For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness [licentiousness], and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ." (Jude 1:4)
If you have access to an 1828 Webster's Dictionary, look up the word "licentiousness."