Jump to content

Dan_79

Removed from Forums for Breaking Terms of Service
  • Content Count

    301
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

78 Excellent

About Dan_79

  • Rank
    Advanced Member
  • Birthday 07/11/1979

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    England

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Dan_79

    IDENTIFYING THE CRUEL CURESES...

    Hi, How many of these things have you personally experienced? My guess is with the intention of everyone who reads this finding at least a few of these common effects being felt, making EVERYONE feel demonic or cursed? I only say so respectfully upon the fact you have ommited mention of anything resembling how to lift or even how to prevent these "curses" in Jesus name while knowing EVERYONE falls short of the glory of god. This reminds me of the info sheet of paper inside the box of pills, listing of side effects covering every eventuality to manage the risk of blame back onto the person who should be expected to gain at least some side effects. The Holy Spirit is a very powerful thing to be in posession of..... also the LAW covers all of this list and is to be obeyed thus giving you protection from lawlessness. Fear God! Not Demons...or yourself.
  2. Hi Gary. You confuse chaos as somehow only being orderly through government. LAW or works of the law make distiction between what is right and what is wrong. It is the ONLY guide for man and comes from the HIGHEST AUTHORITY. ie Theft is wrong. Paul does in fairness outline what this government IS that you are to submit too, he is wrong to make any commands to honor theft but his limitations haven't stopped most of this forum accepting something much lower in accordance to Paul's admission: people who are of God to lead those of God. He never got as far as saying if we are to submit to anyone lower than the highest authority...even at the cost of members calling my sanity, character etc into question. I dont care what people think of me. People are not my judge. People can and will accuse me or you of being satanic indirectly using scripture, or use scripture to scare me or you into conceding an arguement (many of the churches I visited used this method)... The joke is on them, now that anything written "isnt what is meant" or what is meant "was not scripture". The LAW is not about the vague. No I havent seen this until now and makes some sense from a historical point of view yes! But it is not based on scripture. For a contract to be valid it has to be entered into freely without coersion... That part and some of the history follows... However if you KNOW the governing authority ... they get your consent freely by your willing participation to use their market system and unit of currency. If you use the government system you are automatically ok with swaping your GOD given rights for government priviledges and benefits. You stop being man and are given a title (MR GARY LEE) for example.. You effectively choose government to replace GODS LAW with man made rules (acts statutes stipulations nuptials rituals the list is long...changes from season to season to suit Rome) You lose the protection of GODS LAW as you now have given consent to be policed by Rome.
  3. ....an answer that might satisfy you. Lol Just keep with the biblical truth.. Jesus taught the Torah. Also there were no 13 apostles in the vision of the lamb. Whats all this "esoteric" stuff for? A new age pagan ? It says property is theft (pillar of communism). It is not about having property being sinful (what about the tools of your trade?) it is about the theft of peoples property... peoples hard work being "taken" from them at source by modern day money changers (swet of your brow into tax credits). Paulanist = Roman socialism.. The religion of government, the belief it is an extension of God & thus holy by default (according to Paulanists) which condones the theft of peoples productive efforts from the working classes and must be obeyed even at the cost of breaking commanding law as faith cleanses the soul of all wrong doing....Let us prey... Hmmmmm NO.
  4. Are you a leader of truth now? Roman Law? Who could kill a perfect Jesus? A perfect government? Next you will be usi g scripture to show us Jesus worked for the Romans (civic duties). If you are not of the state (chattel or subject) you do not come under its Jurisdiction... but you knew that right?
  5. Im not talking about Jesus, he was indeed perfect. But your now confusing Jesus being deemed faultless by Pilate as somehow an endorsement for the same government that later killed him!
  6. Neighbor.. That is because you let a thief into the fold... Scripture warns you hiw it happened and who the thief is. None of you have much to say do you about your tribute. Lol The truth can easily defeat a lie. Or do you prefer censorship?
  7. The commandment (Exodus 20) "Thou shalt not steal" implies the right to private property, and this is everywhere assumed in Scripture (even in Acts 5). If princes had the unlimited right to tax, to any extent and for any purpose, there could be no private property. All would belong to the state, or to the prince personally. Since this is not so, there must be limit to the allowable extent and purpose of taxation "For, for this cause pay you tribute also; for they are God's ministers, attending continually upon this very thing." Here the apostle argues the duty of paying taxes, from this consideration that those who perform the duty of rulers, are continually attending upon the public welfare. But how does this argument conclude for paying taxes to such princes as are continually endeavoring to ruin the public? And especially when such payment would facilitate and promote this wicked design! "Render therefore to all their dues; tribute, to whom tribute is due; custom, to whom custom; fear, to whom fear; honor, to whom honor." Here the apostle sums up what he had been saying concerning the duty of subjects to rulers. And his argument stands thus—"Since magistrates who execute their office well, are common benefactors to society, and may, in that respect, be properly styled the ministers and ordinance of God; and since they are constantly employed in the service of the public, it becomes you to pay them tribute and custom; and to reverence, honor, and submit to them in the execution of their respective offices." This is apparently good reasoning. But does this argument conclude for the duty of paying tribute, custom, reverence, honor and obedience to such persons as (although they bear the title of rulers) use all their power to hurt and injure the public? Such as are not God's ministers, but Satan's? Such as do not take care of, and attend upon the public interest, but their own, to the ruin of the public? that is, in short, to such as have no natural and just claim at all to tribute, custom, reverence, honor and obedience? It is to be hoped that those who have any regard to the apostle's character as an inspired writer, or even as a man of common understanding, will not present him as reasoning in such a loose incoherent manner; and drawing conclusions which have not the least relation to his premises. For what can be more absurd than an argument thus framed? "Rulers are, by their office, bound to consult the public welfare and the good of society: therefore you are bound to pay them tribute, to honor, and submit to them, even when they destroy the public welfare, and are a common pest to society, by acting in direct contradiction to the nature and end of their office." Thus, upon a careful review of the apostle's reasoning in this passage, it appears that his arguments to enforce submission, are of such a nature, as to conclude only in favor of submission to such rulers as he himself describes; i.e. such as rule for the good of society, which is the only end of their institution. Common tyrants, and public oppressors, are not entitled to obedience from their subjects, by virtue of anything here laid down by the inspired apostle. Socialism is a system based on stealing. The whole point of socialism is for the government to seize control of private property, mainly involving the proceeds of peoples' work, in order to give it to others. (Note the compulsory aspect of socialism, which so differs from voluntary forms of communalism.) This activity is the very thing pronounced as evil by the 8th Commandment: "You shall not steal" (Ex. 20:15). ... While there is a legitimate basis for government taxation, the simple taking of one's possessions in order to give them to others is not one of them. Socialism is evil because it inherently involves stealing. Socialism is theft, as all taxation is theft. Yes, Christ told us to render to Caesar that which is Caesar’s, and because of that, people do… but that doesn’t negate the act of taxation being theft just like “if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also” doesn’t negate the first slap from being assault. If I saw someone getting punched in the face, especially if they are a non-Christian, I wouldn’t tell him “That’s not assault, as Christ told you to turn your other cheek as well.” No, it’s assault and all taxation is theft. How are we to react? Just like Christ told us. But it doesn’t absolve the aggressor (Caesar or an abuser) of their sin. Are you seriously saying that taxation is not theft, simply because Christ told His followers to pay Caesar? What about our non-believing neighbors that abhor paying taxes? I understand that Christ’s words are binding on my soul, they compel me, but my non-Christian neighbor doesn’t feel that way. Is it theft for him? Who will stick up for him? So are taxes theft? Absolutely. We submit to paying those taxes only because the consequences of not paying them are worse. If you no or say the government has evil elements you force yourself to give tribute to Satan! This is no different than a highway bandit that positions himself at the beginning of a route and demands all passers-by pay a toll in exchange for “safe passage” along the road. Is the bandit a thief? Or a champion of wealth redistribution? You are splitting hairs.
  8. You cannot wriggle it. Either you are condoning giving tribute to evil, in the form of an earthly government run by Satan on earth, or All earthly governments are from GOD (mirror his commandments and are holy). You seem confused about differentiating between the two by saying a question is wrong. Can you really serve Satan AND God? Is that question wrong? It is not difficult to answer if you apply discernment to what a government does or expects a child of God to commit to.
  9. You have the same problem in your answer. You assume everyone owes caesar? You say Satan should be avoided, what about his evil earthly government? You leave that part out. Either what others say to us is commanded is holy or evil. Your answer assumes you can serve both at the same time (serve God while serving evil demi-god caesars).
  10. Marilyn. So just to clarify your answer is a yes or a no? Obviously during our wait for the return of Yeshua, the government Paul commands us to submit to is either holy or evil. God is the highest authority there is, hence I am so confused as to why Paul never commanded we submit to him (even after Yeshua says same).
  11. Hi Marilyn. So in the meantime (awaiting the return of Yeshua) are we being asked to give tribute to Satan and his earthly Government?
  12. Supposing the Sons DO WANT TO do their thing right.... blessed are good works.
  13. It is definately a concern my friend. Honor God and honor your parents etc etc but I don't see God at all commanding we honor satan anywhere in the bible. Do you not think it would be even slightly hypocritical to give any tribute to satan, no matter how small, if all of the law hangs on Jesus words: "you must love the LORD your God with all your heart, all your soul, all your mind, and all your strength.'" (that could also read there is little left to give satan after giving the LORD everything you have).
  14. Hi enoob57. Are the governments Paul commanded everyone to submit to in the present dominion, giving tribute to Satan or God? I'm assuming it cannot be both.
×