Help w/ Romans 13

[buckthesystem]

PS to what I just said:

Comparing Christian fundamentalism to Muslim fanatics is quite odd (in my opinion anyway) because Christian fundamentalism does not teach that those who do not "convert" should be killed (or "put to the sword" or whatever) as it would seem is the philosophy of fanatical Islam.

And yet we hear that it is "politically correct" to be "tolerant" of fanatical Islam, but there is not much "tolerance" for Christian fundamentalists, go figure....

(BTW is it out of order to say this on this board?)

[Smalcald]

Well, basically sure you've got a really good point there, but in America now there is the Patriot Act ............

Yup you point out something here, which is a problem. Many conservatives and many conservative Christians oppose this sort of infringement on our freedoms. We may be entering a stage, which is indeed very dangerous for all religious people. I here things in both Europe and the US Left which are saying that ALL fundamentalism is dangerous, that Christian fundamentalist and conservatives are just as dangerous as the violent Islamists. So that is a trend which I will watch very carefully. For me that is the point of resistance. For you see here, we have our Christian brothers and sisters over history refusing to negotiate their faith, refusing to be quite about spreading the Gospel. Consider Stephen, consider Peter when the authorities brought him in and told him to be quite, no he resisted, Stephen resisted to death. Of course we have the ultimate resistance to a government authority by our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ who was executed for refusing to recant or deny what He was about.

So you realise that there is "a point of resistance" and would personally resist demands that all Christians change (or moderate their stance) to be "tolerant" of other religions and political correctness.

However, I am wondering if most others would see a danger in a world trend towards "moderation of religion" and would actually fight it. If they are taught that "governing authorities are put in place by God" and we must obey them on that basis, then they would believe that what ever "governing authorities" dictate is the "modern way" is the right thing to do.

The way I read it, the America's Patriot Act gives way more power to a government - any government - in America (which soon could be Hilary Clinton or even the antichrist) and this practically over-rules the first amendment of the constitution (as well as all the others) guaranteeing "free speech", "freedom to practice religion" etc. Christians might believe that "Christian fundamentalism" will not be compromised under the present government, but what about the the next government, or the one after, or a government that might be under the control of the antichrist?

Do you think people will be able to know where to "draw the line"?

I don't really know if most Christians in the US are ready? Indeed we have been spoiled in my opinion. The question is what form should this resistance take? The examples we have from the New Testament are all non-violent forms of resistance, but it is resistance to the point of death. It would be a good question if Christians were ready to do this in the Western industrialized countries. We know that many Christians today have made this sacrifice and are willing to do so usually in less developed countries.

[buckthesystem]

Smalcald, quote: "I don't really know if most Christians in the US are ready? Indeed we have been spoiled in my opinion. The question is what form should this resistance take? The examples we have from the New Testament are all non-violent forms of resistance, but it is resistance to the point of death. It would be a good question if Christians were ready to do this in the Western industrialized countries. We know that many Christians today have made this sacrifice and are willing to do so usually in less developed countries."

I think we have to change our mindset and stop being so self-centred. People in the west tend to think, when a law is brought in that is - to say the very least - draconian, "Oh it doesn't apply to me and it will only effect criminals and terrorists so that's great". Then when "function creep" ensures that it does effect them, or a "higher power" decides that THEY are a criminal or a terrorist (or at least a "suspected" one or a "potential" one), it is too late to object because they have already hailed the law as being a "good thing".

We cannot afford to be complacent about anything.

Remember the old saying: "They came first for the communists........., they came next for the Jews..........." Ending with "When they came for me there was no one left to stand up for me" (or words to that effect).

When we all took on the Christian belief sytem we also took on the responsibility to defend it. The form any resistance must take, at this stage, is civil disobedience. I don't think people in the US have been affected by the mentality of total despair or "I've seen and heard so much garbage from politicians lately that I will just wear blinkers for the rest of my life and take on the philosophy of 'anything for a quiet life'" that I seem to be hearing from people in Europe and here (it is quite disheartening really).

So instead of just saying "they have it far worse in third world countries and here we don't know how good we have it, why I can get on the internet and say this", we must realise that AT THE MOMENT we can get on the internet and say this, but (a comment I heard this morning) "freedom is going cheap these days" and people seem to be only too willing to trade it for an illusion of security. Christianity is being attacked - even in the US - so it's time to use the "free speech" that we still have (because we won't have it for very long) and debate things and educate people "until we are blue in the face". After doing that for a while, we will have no problem in "defending Christianity to the point of death".