Pastor Jeffress - Theological Question

[_MCB]

Welcome, otoh. Shared perspectives and all that.

[_honorentheos]

Hi Hoops,

If I understand correctly, we are relying on Peter's witness that the words of Paul are inspired.

Peter calls Paul's writing inspired and scripture, I don't see any apostle doing the same for Joseph Smith.

Doesn't 2 Peter also say, regarding Paul -

He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction. (NIV Translation)

So while I appreciate what you are saying, I am not sure that Peter closes the gap. Right now, we apparently have Jesus telling us to forgive those that trespass against us, while Pastor Jeffress has suggested that the Words of Paul in Romans carry equal weight and tell us that it's ok for the government to inflict judgment "an eye for an eye" as it were.

It's even more questionable if we do as otoh has reminded us is prudent - read the full of 2 Peter 3 when trying to understand Peter's words regarding Paul. I found it illuminating to see Peter reminding his readers to be found godly when God returns.

It makes it all the more interesting to read the next two verses where the author of this letter tells the reader to be both cautious and to grow in learning of Jesus Christ.

If I were to take those phrases in the context of our current discussion, I would almost think Peter was telling us that while Paul can be misleading the best defense from being led astray with misunderstanding would be to study Christ.

So I feel like we are no further in our discussion than we were before.

Do you still agree with the Pastor that Paul's words carry equal weight to Christ's just because they are in the same book? That any apparent contradiction can't be read as such and sould be reconciled instead? If so, on what grounds?

[_Nightlion]

The first part of Romans 13 regarding the authority of rulers acting as God's ministers you might like to consider this also:

Jeremiah 27:1-11
1 In the beginning of the reign of Jehoiakim the son of Josiah king of Judah came this word unto Jeremiah from the Lord, saying,
2 Thus saith the Lord to me; Make thee bonds and yokes, and put them upon thy neck,
3 And send them to the king of Edom, and to the king of Moab, and to the king of the Ammonites, and to the king of Tyrus, and to the king of Zidon, by the hand of the messengers which come to Jerusalem unto Zedekiah king of Judah;
4 And command them to say unto their masters, Thus saith the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel; Thus shall ye say unto your masters;
5 I have made the earth, the man and the beast that are upon the ground, by my great power and by my outstretched arm, and have given it unto whom it seemed meet unto me.
6 And now have I given all these lands into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon, my servant; and the beasts of the field have I given him also to serve him.
7 And all nations shall serve him, and his son, and his son’s son, until the very time of his land come: and then many nations and great kings shall serve themselves of him.
8 And it shall come to pass, that the nation and kingdom which will not serve the same Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon, and that will not put their neck under the yoke of the king of Babylon, that nation will I punish, saith the Lord, with the sword, and with the famine, and with the pestilence, until I have consumed them by his hand.
9 Therefore hearken not ye to your prophets, nor to your diviners, nor to your dreamers, nor to your enchanters, nor to your sorcerers, which speak unto you, saying, Ye shall not serve the king of Babylon:
10 For they prophesy a lie unto you, to remove you far from your land; and that I should drive you out, and ye should perish.
11 But the nations that bring their neck under the yoke of the king of Babylon, and serve him, those will I let remain still in their own land, saith the Lord; and they shall till it, and dwell therein.

[_honorentheos]

I don't read it, however, as some form of divine protection for government action. I don't read it as condemnation, either. Merely that Paul was telling a group of people in a certain place (and I may be off given the timeline, but I don't recall Rome being a great place to live as a Christian) how to live under that particular government and avoid trouble. In other words, do justly and don't break the laws because God is using the Romans as the sword to punish your breaking of the laws.

I'm also curious now about the statement "there is no power but of God"? Could one interpret this to mean any government that gets established automatically must have the sanction of God for some perhaps unknowable purpose?

I would agree with what you wrote above. I would view those passages as telling the Christians in Rome that when governments are exercising their legitimate authority to enforce the peace then they are fulfilling a God given appointment. I would not take it as implying that whatever a government does is somehow approved by God. As you can imagine, that quote "there is no power but of God" has been abused by secular rulers and tyrants for centuries. I would take it as suggesting that the Christian believers in Rome should accept the authority of the empire. Early Christianity was not a political movement nor aspired to political revolution. Its kingdom was not of this world as Jesus taught. So Paul is advising the believers in Rome to submit to Roman authority and not be seen as rebels and that even the wicked pagan Romans had a legitimate role to play.

You may not have noticed yet, but we lack smileys here. If we had them, I'd give you the Thumbs Up! smiley.

For the time being, we have to make do with making our own...

[_Nightlion]

They can't carry the same weight. Unless, of course, you believe that neither carry any weight at all.

Exactly.

Since religion is based on faith, which is unfounded belief, the foundation writings of religion are of little, if any, real value to humankind.

If one insists that religious scriptures do carry weight (for whatever reason) then the writings in the Old Testament and New Testament clearly carry no more weight than the foundational writings of any other religion, including the dozens of organized non-Christian religions that still exist in the world today, along the hundreds that have passed into history.

Only stupid religion remains faith based. While it is true that the neophyte initiates by faith, only an idiot, a craven pretender who cares nothing about the actual purpose of faith would remain part of religion if nothing substantive came by way of faith.

For example:
In the gospel of Jesus Christ one acts by faith to COME unto Christ.........to be born of him!
Now, if you are not miraculously and divinely wrought upon and quickened in the inner man and made substantively more than you were when you began to believe your faith is vain.

The commandment Christ gave his followers was to stay upon the Lord UNTIL they receive the promise of the Father which IS the baptism of fire and of the Holy Ghost. This is why religion exists. This is why it has had a great impact upon history. Because substantial gains were achieved by those who believed. That salt seasoned the world even still today as the world denies that it ever happened.

Now the money changers, who care nothing about faith and only want to cash in on all things religion have no faith and favor a construct that will facilitate their wealth and power. Religion at the hands of these craven lunatics is utter madness and wantonly evil.
From such turn away. Silly people.

To be literally visited of God, and wrought upon with a new creation cannot be unfounded.
It is to know God. When you begin with the premise that there is no God you simply have to stake in the game. How then does a non-player define anything about it?