Re: How to Become a Christian, Version 1.01
From: Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD (nospam6_at_heartmdphd.com)
Date: 09/28/04
- Next message: Mark & Steven Bornfeld DDS: "Re: Gall bladder complications"
- Previous message: MU: "Re: Michael Underwood = MU"
- In reply to: Bob (this one): "Re: How to Become a Christian, Version 1.01"
- Next in thread: Bob (this one): "Re: How to Become a Christian, Version 1.01"
- Reply: Bob (this one): "Re: How to Become a Christian, Version 1.01"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 28 Sep 2004 14:02:17 -0700
"Bob (this one)" <Bob@nospam.com> wrote in message news:<10lip9imv20hk42@corp.supernews.com>...
> Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote:
> > "Bob (this one)" <Bob@nospam.com> wrote in message news:<10lh240qhjv9a5@corp.supernews.com>...
> >
> >>Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote:
> >>
> >>>Answer: Again, no sect here. I have read Romans 13. Does not change
> >>>what I think about the government.
> >>>
> >>>From Romans 13:
> >>>
> >>>1Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there
> >>>is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities
> >>>that exist have been established by God. 2Consequently, he who rebels
> >>>against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted,
> >>>and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. 3For rulers
> >>>hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do
> >>>you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is
> >>>right and he will commend you. 4For he is God's servant to do you
> >>>good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword
> >>>for nothing. He is God's servant, an agent of wrath to bring
> >>>punishment on the wrongdoer. 5Therefore, it is necessary to submit to
> >>>the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also
> >>>because of conscience. 6This is also why you pay taxes, for the
> >>>authorities are God's servants, who give their full time to governing.
> >>>7Give everyone what you owe him: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if
> >>>revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor.
> >>
> >>So... the revolution that established the USA was a wrong thing?
> >
> > No. Why would you believe that God's establishment of "one nation
> > under God" was a wrong thing, Bob?
>
> <LOL> So it was right for Washington (et al) to refuse to "submit
> himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except
> that which God has established." Somehow, it became ok to do exactly
> opposite what it says in the passage. Gotcha.
The proof of Washington et al being in the will of God is evident in
the outcome. Washington et al became the authority established by
God.
> That "under God" wasn't added until the 1950's at the height of the
> anti-communist lunacy. Perhaps you recall the discussions here a
> while back about the founding fathers who were Deists, not Christian,
> for the most part. I knew you would...
Perhaps you recall the discussion about non-Christians being used by
God according to His will. I knew you would...
> But this is a perfectly wonderful example of my "prophecy" at the
> bottom of the original post - "Just seeing if you can make this into
> another "Chung's always right" post." <LOL> Came through, Andrew, just
> like I knew you would.
With the blessing of His power, it is easy to "come through" and
glorify Him without any effort.
> >>It
> >>was to reject the authorities and kill them.
> >
> > God unmaking what He has made is not a sin for Him.
>
> Did God shoot all those redcoats and Hessians?
If the deaths of those redcoats and Hessians were not according to His
will, they would not have died (i.e. He could have had the musket
balls bounce off harmlessly).
> Colonists overthrew the
> king and all his "authorities that exist [which] have been established
> by God."
God used the colonists to replace one government with another of His
choosing.
> This is wonderful, just terrific. <LOL> Like I said in
> another post, *everything* confirms your "discernment" of truth.
And so you bear witness to the infinite power of the truth.
> >>if need be.
> >
> > Yes, God is in control past, present, and future. We call that
> > *forever*.
>
> <LOL> And we call not answering the question *evasion*.
Your "if need be" was not a question, fyi.
> So God shot
> all those redcoats and Hessians?
See above.
> God convened the continental
> congress?
"for there is no authority except that which God has established"
> God made them all do what they did but they were exercising
> free will. Got it. <LOL>
He is omnipotent. For the Creator of the universe, directing the
course of history without taking away the free will of individuals is
a trivial undertaking.
> >>Conscience
> >>means that we shouldn't have rebelled against God's emissaries on
> >>earth - the duly appointed authorities?
> >
> > Not individually. However, the establishment of new governments
> > happens all the time with God's blessing even here in the U.S. We
> > call it elections, Bob.
>
> Bwah. Like an armed insurrection is the same sort of thing that an
> election is. Could you be sillier in your efforts to force the round
> peg of nonsense into a square hole of unsupportable condition?
Sorry the truth seems silly to you.
> > And, we vote in good conscience. And, yes, God
> > controls the elections as we witnessed 4 years ago when President
> > George Bush was elected.
>
> <LOL> And everybody who had nothing to say about what they did were
> all exercising free will.
It was there choice to say nothing.
> God *CONTROLS* the elections.
Glad you agree.
> So if we as a people decided to overthrow the government of George
> Bush, it would be ok because that, too is God's plan even though he
> has said not to do it.
If it were not God's will, it wouldn't happen no matter how hard
people try.
> Gotcha. God can contradict himself
He could but He doesn't.
> but the
> bible's still accurate in every word, in every idea, in every
> expression.
The Holy Bible remains truthful.
> Gotcha.
Yes, it remains my choice to also be truthful.
> >>If that was a gross wrong - essentially a sin - wouldn't it mean that
> >>you have to reject the fruits of that wrong or be guilty of that same
> >>sin yourself?
> >
> > Your initial premise is in error.
>
> Not my premise.
It was your initial premise that the actions of the Founding Fathers
of the U.S. were a gross wrong. Again, your initial premise is in
error.
> It's from your quotation of Romans 13. Says you have
> to submit to social authority, ecclesiastical authority, patriarchal
> authority, governmental authority ... *all* authority. Says you can't
> subvert their authority. Pretty clear about it, too.
Again what applies to an individual does not apply to a group
(Founding Fathers).
> >>Just seeing if you can make this into another "Chung's always right" post.
> >
> > You seem to confuse me with God who is the source of the spiritual
> > gift of truth discernment that He has bestowed on me.
>
> Nah.
It is what it seems.
> Just watching you play your zany Emett Kelly-like flummery games
> with words and ideas that *always* "prove" your viewpoint. Trust me, I
> don't confuse you with God, any rational being, anyone who understands
> the concept of love or who is really a Christian. And I can only
> imagine the situation where I ever will.
It would seem that you are overusing your imagination.
> >>Whirl, dervish...
> >
> > Why whirl when one is able to discern the truth?
>
> Why, indeed...
And so there is no whirling here except by you.
> Bwah. Poor Andrew has so much invested in his delusional, panicky need
> to be absolutely right that he can't see how silly it all looks. He
> was asked to offer some biblical substantiation about his "gift" and
> cited one sentence that mentioned discerning the truth about a
> specific situation, and the web site of another wacko who actually
> painted a bad picture of people like Andrew who claim to have the gift
> and merely use it to battle others. So much for biblical support for
> his "gift."
Again, sorry the truth bothers you.
> No evidence for this "gift" beyond Chung's insistence that he has it.
Except for the truth which you are unable to discern. I am as
motivated to prove to you that I possess God's spiritual gift of truth
discernment as the seeing would be motivated to prove their vision to
the blind.
> And the manifold errors he's made rather conclusively demonstrate that
> his "gift" is yet another bit of funhouse-mirror self-worship.
You seem to be confusing God's gift of truth discernment with God's
quality of perfection. Hardly unexpected from someone who seems to be
confusing His servant with God Himself.
> Bob
You remain in my prayers, dear Bob whom I love.
Please consider the OP to save yourself:
http://makeashorterlink.com/?I22222129
Servant to the humblest person in the universe,
Andrew
-- Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD Board-Certified Cardiologist http://www.heartmdphd.com/ ** Who is the humblest person in the universe? http://makeashorterlink.com/?L26062048 What is all this about? http://makeashorterlink.com/?R20632B48 Is this spam? http://makeashorterlink.com/?N69721867
- Next message: Mark & Steven Bornfeld DDS: "Re: Gall bladder complications"
- Previous message: MU: "Re: Michael Underwood = MU"
- In reply to: Bob (this one): "Re: How to Become a Christian, Version 1.01"
- Next in thread: Bob (this one): "Re: How to Become a Christian, Version 1.01"
- Reply: Bob (this one): "Re: How to Become a Christian, Version 1.01"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
