Ron Paul Odds Slashed Dramatically: 15 to 1 from 200 to 1

Brother James you keep avoiding my question. If you vote against God's chosen then do you honestly think He is going to positively reward you for directly opposing Him?

Yes I believe it is, because voting is not the way Christians are to make Truth known. We have no Scripural mandate to voice our opinion with a vote. Again you are participating in this world system, which we are to be separated from. Our fight is not with flesh and blood. Our fight is not with nudie bars. Our fight is with the powers and principalities behind the nudie bars.

You can not legislate morality. It's an impossibility. The only way morality can be legislated is by the active Hand of God in a person's life, not government.

Our only madates are to obey and pray. Outside of that we are never instructed to get involved.

 

I'm not avoiding the question, I think I have answered it. If God has chosen to give this country over to reprobates, and I vote for the reprobates do you think I will be positively rewarded since I picked the winner? I think if a man votes his conscience (his conscience being enlightened by the word of God and the Holy Spirit), he will be guiltless before God. If conscience dictates that you don't vote, don't vote.

We are also mandated to preach.

Matthew 10:27 What I tell you in darkness, that speak ye in light: and what ye hear in the ear, that preach ye upon the housetops.

One way I can preach is with my vote.

 

I just don't understand how you can see active rebellion against God as something that can receive a positive reward. That's just beyond my understanding I guess.

I don't ever see preaching equated with voting, but you are entitled to that understanding I guess .

By the way can you give me any Biblical example of open rebellion against God being positively rewarded?

EDIT: I just noticed the last part of this verse that you are using to support voting.

Preaching seems to be something that is done where others know what you are doing, yet voting is secretive. So at every turn I see no Biblical support for voting.

 

Sorry brother, I cannot reconcile voting as active rebellion against God, it's more like active praying. It seems that if God really did not wan't Christians voting, He could have given us a different form of government, and by not voting perhaps you are in active rebellion

 

Praying is not acting. Voting is action. If you vote for someone other than the person God wants in office you are taking direct action against God. How can that not be seen?

You are acting contrary to what God wants. How can that be anything other than rebellion?

That is true, but you are basing your doctrine on a presumption. That is very dangerous. There is nothing that says God established the US so that Christians could vote. Romans were able to participate in their government, but we do not see Paul encouraging the Romans to participate in their government in his letter to them.

Again I think that it is very shaky at best to base something on anything other than solid foundation. And there is no solid foundation for participation.

Well I see no instructions that I am supposed to be, so I think I'm safe. I am told to obey and pray. And if I do not do those then I will have to answer for it, however voting is not required by law, so I'm not disobeying by not voting.

 

It couldn't be direct action against God unless God had given clear revelation of His will in the matter.

I don't know what God wants, so the answer is don't do anything.

We don't see Paul encouraging them to eat breakfast either, do you think that God would rather you wait for lunch? I think I could make a better argument for that than you are making for not voting.
Ecclesiastes 10:16 Woe to thee, O land, when thy king is a child, and thy princes eat in the morning!

Maybe so.

 

God does not have to reveal His will in detail for someone to act in rebellion against it.

We could certainly visit this question in other areas of life, but let's just stay with voting. The answer is yes. We don't have to do anything. We don't need to do anything and we are not instructed to do anything, because God has told us He's got this. It's done. His guy/gal is going to win. Period. So not only do we not know God's will heading into the matter, we don't need to know His will in the matter, because He's going to take care of it.

Come on James. Seriously.

 

That is because it is not in scripture! It is the historical record of the USA!

God established the USA with CHRISTIANS!

Christians HAD TO PARTICIPATE or else rebel against God's calling to establish the USA.

This is not rocket science here. It is the FACTS!!!!!

You want it both ways....."Yes God established the USA (involving Christians I might add).....and.....NO, God does not want Christians involved in running the USA"....BUT WE KNOW AS FACT, God used Christians to do the establishing. You cannot get around it. Your position is derailed historically and therefore biblically carries no truth.

God Bless!

 

Exactly that's been my whole point.

Who were acting against Scripture. They were being disobedient to the authority that God had placed over them. Just because they were Christians and just because God is capable of using even negative things to further His plan, doesn't mean it was the right thing for them to do.

I am certainly happy to be living in the fruits of what has been established, but I don't think we need to praise their disobedience. I thankful that God can use our mistakes and make something negative work out to His glory, but that doesn't mean we need to continue to make the same mistakes does it?

Yes but again the facts don't back up your claim that we are supposed to be voting. I'm not disputing the facts of history.

Again, and this isn't rocket science, just because God used the disobedience of Christians to establish a new nation does not mean that we are supposed to continue in the electoral process. Whether or not you want to argue that they weren't disobedient it makes no difference. Just because Christians were used to establish the nation, doesn't mean that we are to be involved now.

My position is far from derailed by history. I have never said that Christians weren't involved in this process, but I think the position I have been adovcating is extremely well founded in Scripture. It is in fact your side of the argument that can not supply a Scriptural mandate for action, but everything reverts back to a non-Biblical foundation that is shaky at best. Sorry I just don't go for those type of arguments.

 

Jump,

Your conclusions are illogical.

The New "Authority" that was established by God was "We the People"..."One nation under God". There is no dictatorship. The new authority established by God was freedom from corrupt Kings and the few telling the masses when to jump and how high.

Guess what brother, you and I IS the government by citizenship. So either you benefit God's established government (all citizens) by voting with God's morals or you just sit back and watch it go further and further to Satan's side. Whos side are you really helping by rejecting what God has established for ALL citizens (Christian or pagan).

Anyone can follow history and see that the more Christians withdraw from voting and public office the more the country slides into paganism and then this country will be ready for the antichrist to take it down.

God Bless! :thumbs:

 

Most laws tend to be a legislation of morality. Such as laws against murder, rape, pedophilia, prostitution, child pornography, theft, larceny, fraud...

 

Absolutley correct. I don't know were the idea of laws never having anything to do with morality ever came from. How did you come to that conclusion JJ?

God Bless!

 

And those laws work 100% of the time? I didn't think so. Just because there is a law doesn't mean people are going to follow them. You don't change people by changing laws. Only God can change people. Surely you wouldn't disagree with that?

 

God says He will take care of the matter and I say okay and that is illogical. Mercy what is Christendom coming to these days. And we wonder why there are some many problems.

Care to show any "hard" evidence with studies on that statement. Because I would be willing to bet that there are far more people that would say yes I am a Christian if asked at the poll than not during our nation's history. But like you I am stating opinion. I don't think you can say that with any kind of assurance unless you have some research behind it.

If you really think you have a voice in this government and the people are the government you need to wake up and take a dose of reality. Politicians don't care what the people think. They just want to get re-elected.

Actually I benefit whether I vote or not. That's the beauty of this country. But guess what if it changes so be it. God said His grace is sufficient enough to get us through. And I believe that.

I'm not rejecting anything. There is no law that says I have to vote. Again how you can come to the conclusion that by staying out of God's way and letting Him take care of what He said He was going to take care of anyway is illogical is just beyond me. But in the end you are entitled to your opinion.

 

By the way I fail to see what the real attraction is for Ron Paul. I watched the last half of the debates last night and the only message he had was end the war.

A couple of things I noticed about the debate. It would be interesting to see the pictures of the democrat debate to see if this held true for them, but I find it odd that the so-called "big three" were placed right next to each other in the middle of all the other candidates.

The candidate from Colorado had some very interesting ideas on immigration, but they sure didn't go over very well.

And it amazes me each time I watch how these people are so slick at answering questions, but not addressing the question itself. The governor from Virginia was just plain obvious in his answer non-answer toward the end of the debate.

 

They don't give him much opportunity to speak about anything else in the debates. But Dr Paul is also against the IRS and the Federal Reserve, and is a strict constitutionalist.

 

That's true of a lot of the other candidates as well. The debates are VERY poorly managed in my opinion. Very biased when the host gets to choose who answers what questions. Not a good format at all unless you are one of the so-called top three

 

That's a critical mistake on his part then focusing on something that people are already very well aware of his stance. That's just my opinion of course

Being against the war and being against pre-emptive strikes (which can be pretty dangerous in these times with Iran - again just opinion) is not going to care him to victory. Matter of fact that stance hurts him with Republicans, because from all that I have seen and heard he's advocating the same cut and run philosophy that the democrats are espousing and that doesn't set well in the GOP.

He better take advantage of what little time he has to talk about some of these other issues. Especially if he wants to change the tax code. That may separate him more positively within the GOP than anything else. But it's pretty hard to run on a one-item agenda these days.

I figured they probably did.

I knew his name, but didn't want to take the time to look up how to spell it Thanks for putting that out there. I actually liked a lot of what he had to say, but talk about getting zero traction.

His idea is really the only idea that will work. Stop cold turkey and fix the problem and then move on. It's the same way with the broken education system. It's unfixable in stride. But neither of these issues are going to be fixed properly.

I'm really thankful for the freedoms we enjoy here, but it sure is a sad state to see what is becoming of this nation. Thankfully this is not my home and my King is coming soon!!! May we not slumber as some have become accustomed these days!