The Beasts Smell Blood

Read my post again. The unalienable rights mentioned were specifically not to a nation nor to any government. Rather they emanate from the Creator directly to human creatures.

Unless you are interpreting Creator to mean government. Surely you are not attempting to impose on the DOI some sort of atheistic naturalism?

IMO, neither is America, nor any government, God. And neither are America's, nor any government's, documents the Bible.

What one is and has prior to becoming a Christian might be a good question to address. It would certainly not invalidate the Gospel.

However, we already know how Christians who were even apostles treated the right of Roman citizenship. Is there some good reason to ignore this? I see none.

 

Again, read my posts. They don't say that. And the last one specifically said they don't say that. I might as well tell you to quit trying to treat the DOI as if it were the Bible. We both already know it is not, and neither of us has said it is.

As for Paul avoiding that beating in Jerusalem, your assertion doesn't seem to hold. He had once been stoned and left for dead. Besides, it doesn't matter why Paul asserted his earthly citizenship rights, the fact is that he did so. But there is no indication that every situation afforded the opportunity to do so.

Perhaps it would help to put it this way. The government does not have the authority to say, "As a Christian, you are not entitled to the rights and freedoms recognized for other citizens."

 

Aren't you a Moderator?
Now you are going beyond just to express your opinion.
Oh, that's right, you get to protect your opinion by censorship.
You are name calling.
Please resign but don't leave the forum.

 

Do you recognize that these "unalienable rights" were espoused by Deists who viewed God as the great clockmaker who created and left his creation to know Him through reason and rationalism? This is what Jefferson meant when he penned that phrase.

Where do we find those teachings in scripture?

 

Law of the land wouldn't care, now would it? But there is a capricious nature to these challenges, that suggests a fundamental flaw in understanding.

So let's turn this around and see where the problem lies. Where in Scripture does it deny these rights? How do you read it?

 

You are trying to argue from silence. It's like me asking where the Bible forbids using cocaine.

Jefferson wrote his declaration based upon observation in nature of universal human traits via Deism. God may desire this for humans, but there is no explicit declaration of such in scripture.

 

2 Corinthians 3:17 Now the LORD is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the LORD is, there is liberty.

 

Maybe, sort of, but not quite. It is already rather clear where all of this leads.

Bill Cosby’s dad telling him as a kid, “I brought you into this world, and I can take you out,” while having a humorous element, is self-evidently false.

Everyone knows that would be murder, thus wrong. But Christians know that murder is so wrong that God commanded Noah and his descendants to execute murderers.

Then God blessed Noah and his sons, saying to them,… “And for your lifeblood I will surely demand an accounting. I will demand an accounting from every animal. And from each human being, too, I will demand an accounting for the life of another human being. Whoever sheds human blood, by humans shall their blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made mankind.” –Genesis 9:1a, 5 & 6​

Obviously, per God's word, a man has the right to his life, that is no one has the right to take it, unless God who gives it commands otherwise.

 

Actually, the accusations are much better aimed the other way. The given is that a man has life. Otherwise, there would be no discussion. One should have to prove the right to take a man’s life, not for the man to keep it.
"You are badly mistaken."

 

All humans know, internally that murder is wrong. Thus Jefferson deduced from observation that the Creator endowed people with life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Ultimately the argument is from reason and rationalism.

 

Where is this from ("All humans know, internally"), the bible?
If so, how did abortion become legal?

 

True, when Christ tells us if He makes us free, we will be free indeed, it is not freedom to sin, it is freedom from the effect of the wages of sin which is death.
We become slaves of God. And God is a benevolent tyrant. His commands are not burdensome, but they are absolute. The sons are free of this world.

Matthew 17:25-27
New King James Version

25 He said, “Yes.”

And when he had come into the house, Jesus anticipated him, saying, “What do you think, Simon? From whom do the kings of the earth take customs or taxes, from their sons or from strangers?”

26 Peter said to Him, “From strangers.”

Jesus said to him, “Then the sons are free. 27 Nevertheless, lest we offend them, go to the sea, cast in a hook, and take the fish that comes up first. And when you have opened its mouth, you will find a piece of money; take that and give it to them for Me and you.”


2 Corinthians 12:14
Love for the Church
Now for the third time I am ready to come to you. And I will not be burdensome to you; for I do not seek yours, but you. For the children ought not to lay up for the parents, but the parents for the children.
1 John 5:3
For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments. And His commandments are not burdensome.

 

That is talking past and sounds like complete confusion of the issue.

No one said God cannot follow his own will in a matter. God obviously holds the ultimate determination. This is easily and readily agreed to and not at all in question.

The DOI is not fist-shaking at God, but acknowledging that the Creator, not government, is the source and determiner of life. A government that does not acknowledge this is an invalid government indeed, and so recognizes the DOI.

Is there a law anywhere that even presumes to protect from an act of God? Perhaps that is where we need to start, since your objections seem to presuppose it.