A Biblical View of the Refugee Crisis

[Stranger]

Yes, out of Adam God created all races in His image. Now your turn, but somehow I doubt your going to answer any of my questions.

Our conversation just reminded me of a little episode that occurred in my home town not so long ago:

My town’s soccer-team hosted a game against another team, notorious for its fascist fans. Be it on purpose be it by accident, two of these fascist fans strolled into a bar, notorious for its extremely left-wing guests. Didn’t take long for one of the local Antifa's black-block guys to walk up to the Nazis' table and ask “Are you Nazis, or what?” The two stood up, looked him straight into the face and said: “yes”. (Don’t know whether it was a miracle or the patron’s amazing peace-keeper qualities, but the two made it out of there in one piece. Thank God for that.)

Now I got to give it to these two Nazis: while I certainly find their ideology despicable, at least they had the guts to own up to it.

junobet, junobet. Nice attempt.

First of all I disagree with you that climate has anything to do with the creation of the races which you indicated in post #42. Second of all, you say now 'out of Adam God created all races in His image'. That is just another way for you to say the same as you did in #42. My question to you is did God create the races of man? Not, did God create all races in His image?

But I can see you are not willing to be forthright in your answer so I will forgo my question to you. As to your questions to me, yes every one born of Adam is created in the image of God as Adam was created in the image of God. As to your question about God loving white people more than black people, God loves who He loves. Some are white, some are black, some are brown, etc. etc. But that doesn't change a thing about the race of men, that it exists and is to be considered in this life.

Stranger

 

[APAK]

Yes, 43min is long, but I find that listening to sermons or listening-books while you're at them makes boring tasks such as scrubbing floors and peeling potatoes much more enjoyable. :)
However, I see your point. So here’s my attempt at a summary:

In his opening words David Platt, President of the Southern Baptist Convention's International Mission Board, points to the enormity of the global refugee crisis as one of the greatest humanitarian crisis in modern history with 60 million people being displaced, put in danger or forced from their homes. Half the population of Syria have either been displaced or killed. He bemoans that most Christians in the USA are paying little or no attention to this crisis, and if they do it’s through the lense of political punditry. “If there is any response it seems to be coming from a foundation of fear rather than of faith, flowing from a view of the world that is far more American than it is Biblical,far more concerned with the preservation of this country than it is with the accomplishment of the great commission.” He says that the church cannot sit still and not stay silent and that we need to know how the Bible informs us how we view crisis like this in the world and then act accordingly:

He then goes to what he sees as five Biblical truth’s concerning the refugee crisis starting with

Point 1: Acts 17:24, which tells us that God created all mankind and that God reigns sovereign over all things. We can find comfort in knowing that the world is not run by various dictators or politicians and that – pointing to Job, the almighty God is even sovereign over suffering.

Point 2: God oversees the movement of all people and uses the scattering of people for his own purpose, to be sought and found by all people.

Point 3: God generally establishes government for the protection of all people (Romans 13). Thus government, particular representative governments such as ours, have the responsibility to promote good and restrain evil.

Point 4: God commands the church to provide for His people especially and to do good to everyone whenever the opportunity arises (Galatians 6:10). We are to love all our neighbours as ourselves and Christ is suffering with our brothers and sisters in crisis (Matthew 25:31-46), so we must not turn a dead ear to them.

Point 5: care for refugees is right and even required because of the character of God. “God seeks, shelters, serves and showers the refugee with his grace”. Book of Ruth – a Moabite woman - in which Boas mirrors God giving refuge: We are compelled to reflect our redeemer likewise.

Summary: The good news of the gospel is that God is not detached from our suffering and familiar with our pain. Christ Himself was a refugee. The greatest news is that Christ turned suffering into victory over sin to give us eternal life. Refugees need to hear this gospel, but they won’t unless we preach it. The refugee crisis gives us an unprecedented opportunity to do just that. We should go to refugees, hear their stories and meet their needs, both their material need and their need for the gospel. Sure there are risks involved in that, but referring to Matthew 16:24: “where in the world did we get the idea that Christianity is devoid of risk. Self is no longer our God, therefore safety is no longer our concern.” We ought to pray for Gods mercy “with our kids for kids like them, who sit in a boat right now or sleeping outside waiting at some Hungarian border” and act with mercy, justice and faithfulness (Mathew 23:23). Love even strangers sacrificially (Good Samaritan). We don’t want to sit idly by when God is calling us to act.

junobet:
Quick comments of the first 4 points....

Point 1: Acts 17:24, which tells us that God created all mankind and that God reigns sovereign over all things. We can find comfort in knowing that the world is not run by various dictators or politicians and that – pointing to Job, the almighty God is even sovereign over suffering.

The preacher is taking advantage and misapplying Acts 17:24 that suits his cause. Reading the verse will show my point very clearly.

Point 2: God oversees the movement of all people and uses the scattering of people for his own purpose, to be sought and found by all people.

I guess he is speaking of Acts 17: 26-27 here. The preacher again took liberties and added in words like ‘oversees the movements of all people’ that is clearly biased towards his cause of helping refugee movements and calls then somehow God-driven or God controlled or planned.

Point 3: God generally establishes government for the protection of all people (Romans 13). Thus government, particular representative governments such as ours, have the responsibility to promote good and restrain evil.

Romans 13 is completely void of his intent and meaning. There is nothing in Romans 13 that speaks of protecting human governments. It is more like what the US forefathers spoke of: a power not to be messed with and not underestimated…and then they added, to be tamed by the people….somehow…

Point 4: God commands the church to provide for His people especially and to do good to everyone whenever the opportunity arises (Galatians 6:10). We are to love all our neighbours as ourselves and Christ is suffering with our brothers and sisters in crisis (Matthew 25:31-46), so we must not turn a dead ear to them.

Galatians 6:10 is speaking of doing good to all people, especially believers in God/Christ. The context of this verse like most in scripture for doing good, etc., is on a personal level, one-on-one level and not on a national or a ‘church’ club level. Some folks would disagree with me as this preacher would and say it is the same thing as doing good on a personal level. Now is it really? if I knew that ALL the true body of Christ was doing it then I would agree. Can anyone know this to be true? Of course not, it is impossible on this earth. A secular meaning is being imposed here.

Matthew 25:31-46 is the supreme guilt trip scripture used over the centuries to make folks cough up money and resources in the pews of the ‘churches’. This is one of the most misused scripture of all time. And it is one of the reasons I don’t do ‘church’ anymore. The preachers that misuse this scripture are frauds and should be ashamed of themselves.

Again, Jesus the King wants us to do good on a personal level from our hearts not as a heart collective. If it were that all did good for a cause from the heart, then it is truly from the body of Christ. The spirit of God guided one to give freely and cheerfully. In this scripture, the King knows if you gave from you heart and not from your outer carnal mind, which means nothing. They are those of the scriptural ‘left’ and not related to the political left. The King does not recognize things of the carnal human mind as being good. These preachers try to tell you that the King does not care and there is no difference as long as you give, because the ‘church’ supports it. It is a lie.

I recently debated a Messianic rabbi on this same subject of refugees – he used more OT scripture though…he did not have answers for my queries. I guess he may come back later...it has been a week or so..

Giving an extra tip at a restaurant waiter, to a person that works hard and has a family to support is my version of giving to stranger and 'refugee' in my community. Lending a hand to an elderly person comes from the heart. I don't expect any gains, economic, politic, ego or otherwise to come out of it...

Bless you,


APAK

 

[bbyrd009]

We can find comfort in knowing that the world is not run by various dictators or politicians

...and when you cry out for relief from this king that you have chosen for yourself, God will not hear your prayers in that day

just on the fly here tho

 

[Jay Ross]

Well, Jay Ross, probably every generation of Christians sported a fraction that was convinced to see the signs for the time being nigh and that connected the Book of Revelation to all kinds of characters and events of their respective times. I’m a New Covenant mainline Christian, who believes that Christ may come back this second or in thousands of years. So let’s just agree to disagree on the validity of your prophetic Biblical interpretations.

There in lies your problem, Christ did not provide any teaching on the "New Covenant" belief that many Christians presently believe is the basis of their salvation. Christ came during His first Advent and taught about the ancient Salvation Covenant that has existed since the time of the Garden of Eden and Mankind. Many people have latched onto the wrong covenant(s) in their understanding of Christs message. They have chosen to believe that the Kingdom of Priest and a holy nation and God's possession within the Nations Covenant(s) which is still to be made like new again in our near future with the nation of Israel, was the purpose for Christ's first advent.

Christ came to tell Israel that they needed Salvation and that they had lost their way and that the burden of the visitation of their iniquities would be greater than the light yoke of His Salvation message of Believing in Him who God has sent to them.

You have also passed judgement on what I wrote about the events of our present time when you wrote that you disagreed with the validity of my prophetic Biblical Interpretations. You then went on to espouse the theory that Christ could come at any moment. within the next second, i.e. Imminent coming or in the distant future. That is a false theology.

Yes we could die at any moment and be on the journey to meeting Christ when we are resurrected, but the second advent of Christ when He comes to Judge the living and the resurrected dead, is not until the very end of the Millennium Age.

One point I hope we can agree on is that, we ought to be awake and ready for His coming at all times. To me – and hopefully to you, too - being awake and ready means to follow Christ’s all-engulfing commandment to love God and to love my neighbour like I love myself. Love for my neighbour includes love for my enemies. And to love people like myself means to put myself into their shoes and then do unto others as I would have others do unto me.

Now I give you that it may be a bit hard for you to put yourself into a Muslim refugee’s shoes when you never met one and when you quite apparently don’t know much about the circumstances that made these people flee their countries.

But if I was in a Syrian's shoes, this is what I'd want: I would not want to be killed, nor would I want to be forced to kill. I would not want to waste my life away being fed in some refugee camp whilst waiting for a war to end that’s been raging for years. I would not want welfare, I’d want the chance to build a viable future for myself and for my family. I might even be desperate enough to go on a treacherous journey for that. And I’d want all the help I can get.

Now if you had carefully read my previous post, you would have noted that I had said the following: -

Yes we should be ministering to the needy and loving those who also hate us and showing God's nature through our actions to them. A Loving God who cares for their salvation.

and that I was in agreement with you.

But I then went on to qualify that also written in the scriptures is the fact that if our peace is not accepted that we are to walk away from those people and move on to the next group to present the Kingdom of Heaven salvation message. How we go about that, is dependent on what we are being lead to do by God and we can only be obedient to His voice and leading. That to me is the difficult bit.

But, in bringing to them the salvation message through our care for them as they "flee" their homelands because of the conflicts in them has a God set limit. Jesus said when he sent out the seventy disciples to minister in the towns and cities that if they enter a house and their peace is not reciprocated to them, then they are to shake off the dust of the house/city from their feet and move on to another house/city where your peace is welcomed and returned to you.

So please exercise more caution in your rebuttals of those who are presenting a very different methodology in meeting the same outcome of Helping the refugees.

Shalom

 

[junobet]

There in lies your problem, Christ did not provide any teaching on the "New Covenant" belief that many Christians presently believe is the basis of their salvation. Christ came during His first Advent and taught about the ancient Salvation Covenant that has existed since the time of the Garden of Eden and Mankind. Many people have latched onto the wrong covenant(s) in their understanding of Christs message. They have chosen to believe that the Kingdom of Priest and a holy nation and God's possession within the Nations Covenant(s) which is still to be made like new again in our near future with the nation of Israel, was the purpose for Christ's first advent.

Christ came to tell Israel that they needed Salvation and that they had lost their way and that the burden of the visitation of their iniquities would be greater than the light yoke of His Salvation message of Believing in Him who God has sent to them.

You have also passed judgement on what I wrote about the events of our present time when you wrote that you disagreed with the validity of my prophetic Biblical Interpretations. You then went on to espouse the theory that Christ could come at any moment. within the next second, i.e. Imminent coming or in the distant future. That is a false theology.

Yes we could die at any moment and be on the journey to meeting Christ when we are resurrected, but the second advent of Christ when He comes to Judge the living and the resurrected dead, is not until the very end of the Millennium Age.



Now if you had carefully read my previous post, you would have noted that I had said the following: -

and that I was in agreement with you.

But I then went on to qualify that also written in the scriptures is the fact that if our peace is not accepted that we are to walk away from those people and move on to the next group to present the Kingdom of Heaven salvation message. How we go about that, is dependent on what we are being lead to do by God and we can only be obedient to His voice and leading. That to me is the difficult bit.



So please exercise more caution in your rebuttals of those who are presenting a very different methodology in meeting the same outcome of Helping the refugees.

Shalom

I’m sorry if I didn’t make my appreciation clear enough: a lot of what you write makes me think you’ve got your heart in the right place, that’s why I suggested that while our eschatology may differ in many ways we can probably agree on what it means to be ready for the Lord’s return. However, I’m afraid your weird way of reading the Bible has led you to victim-blaming. And from the point of view of the majority of Christendom it is a weird way to read the Bible. However, discussing the New Covenant etc. would probably lead us too far off topic here. You may want to open a new thread on that.

 

[junobet]

junobet:
Quick comments of the first 4 points....

Point 1: Acts 17:24, which tells us that God created all mankind and that God reigns sovereign over all things. We can find comfort in knowing that the world is not run by various dictators or politicians and that – pointing to Job, the almighty God is even sovereign over suffering.

The preacher is taking advantage and misapplying Acts 17:24 that suits his cause. Reading the verse will show my point very clearly.

May I ask what is your Point?

Point 2: God oversees the movement of all people and uses the scattering of people for his own purpose, to be sought and found by all people.

I guess he is speaking of Acts 17: 26-27 here. The preacher again took liberties and added in words like ‘oversees the movements of all people’ that is clearly biased towards his cause of helping refugee movements and calls then somehow God-driven or God controlled or planned.

I think Platt's point is that everything that happens is driven, controlled or planned by God.
While he finds sufficient proof for this in Acts 17, he goes on to give other Biblical examples of God scattering people for his own purposes: “at His appointed time God sends Israel to Egypt, at His appointed time God brings Israel from Egypt. God orchestrates the exile from Jerusalem, and then He orchestrates the return to Jerusalem (…)” God even uses suffering (the stoning of Steven) to scatter the church so that the gospel may be preached to the ends of the world.

Point 3: God generally establishes government for the protection of all people (Romans 13). Thus government, particular representative governments such as ours, have the responsibility to promote good and restrain evil.

Romans 13 is completely void of his intent and meaning. There is nothing in Romans 13 that speaks of protecting human governments. It is more like what the US forefathers spoke of: a power not to be messed with and not underestimated…and then they added, to be tamed by the people….somehow…

You must have misunderstood: Of course Romans 13 speaks of the government’s duty to protect people. Surely back then the Roman Government didn’t need protection itself, least of all from the newly founded small Christian sect. Paul tells these early Christians to be law-abiding citizens. (Of we find that he, too, had his limits: no idol worship. Or as Peter puts it more generally: "We must obey God rather than men." (Acts 5:29)

​

Point 4: God commands the church to provide for His people especially and to do good to everyone whenever the opportunity arises (Galatians 6:10). We are to love all our neighbours as ourselves and Christ is suffering with our brothers and sisters in crisis (Matthew 25:31-46), so we must not turn a dead ear to them.

Galatians 6:10 is speaking of doing good to all people, especially believers in God/Christ. The context of this verse like most in scripture for doing good, etc., is on a personal level, one-on-one level and not on a national or a ‘church’ club level. Some folks would disagree with me as this preacher would and say it is the same thing as doing good on a personal level. Now is it really? if I knew that ALL the true body of Christ was doing it then I would agree. Can anyone know this to be true? Of course not, it is impossible on this earth. A secular meaning is being imposed here.

Matthew 25:31-46 is the supreme guilt trip scripture used over the centuries to make folks cough up money and resources in the pews of the ‘churches’. This is one of the most misused scripture of all time. And it is one of the reasons I don’t do ‘church’ anymore. The preachers that misuse this scripture are frauds and should be ashamed of themselves.

Again, Jesus the King wants us to do good on a personal level from our hearts not as a heart collective. If it were that all did good for a cause from the heart, then it is truly from the body of Christ. The spirit of God guided one to give freely and cheerfully. In this scripture, the King knows if you gave from you heart and not from your outer carnal mind, which means nothing. They are those of the scriptural ‘left’ and not related to the political left. The King does not recognize things of the carnal human mind as being good. These preachers try to tell you that the King does not care and there is no difference as long as you give, because the ‘church’ supports it. It is a lie.

I recently debated a Messianic rabbi on this same subject of refugees – he used more OT scripture though…he did not have answers for my queries. I guess he may come back later...it has been a week or so..​

Secular meaning? Very clearly Galatians 6:10 asks us to do good to everybody, i.e. to take action in this world. Living in a democracy that includes taking action in the democratic process. IMHO it would be schizophrenic to privately volunteer to work in a food-bank for example whilst publicly advocating policies against the poor. The least we can do privately is to cry with those who now suffer hell on earth in East-Ghuta (Romans 12:15). If we then cold-heartedly refuse the people fleeing such hell any help and instead support political groups that stir up hatred against refugees, our tears would be crocodile tears.

Matthew 25:31-46 is very very clear. Tough teaching, I know, and I myself have fallen short of it many a time. Still that’s no reason to renounce it.
Is all of this just addressed to private individuals?
So the limbs shall do good but the body of Christ, which is the collective church, shall not?

Giving an extra tip at a restaurant waiter, to a person that works hard and has a family to support is my version of giving to stranger and 'refugee' in my community. Lending a hand to an elderly person comes from the heart. I don't expect any gains, economic, politic, ego or otherwise to come out of it...

Bless you,


APAK

Keep up the good work. I agree that it’s the small things in life with which we can make a difference. However, see above: If you give a generous tip to the waiter, it won’t do him much good if at the same time you support a policy that allows his boss to keep the tips (Opinion | The Trump Administration to Restaurants: Take the Tips!).

 

[APAK]

...and when you cry out for relief from this king that you have chosen for yourself, God will not hear your prayers in that day

bbyrd: YOU are mistaken, I never said this. Why did you think I said,

"We can find comfort in knowing that the world is not run by various dictators or politicians"

junobet said this...go back and see for yourself..I did not appreciate it.

Please be more careful and not add words or misquote me.

APAK

 

[Jay Ross]

I’m sorry if I didn’t make my appreciation clear enough: a lot of what you write makes me think you’ve got your heart in the right place, that’s why I suggested that while our eschatology may differ in many ways we can probably agree on what it means to be ready for the Lord’s return. However, I’m afraid your weird way of reading the Bible has led you to victim-blaming. And from the point of view of the majority of Christendom it is a weird way to read the Bible. However, discussing the New Covenant etc. would probably lead us too far off topic here. You may want to open a new thread on that.

Have you considered the inverse of what you wrote above. Because your views line up with apparently many other, then your expressed view, you consider are not weird because of the sheer number of people who agree with your views.

Can I suggest, that your expressed views in this thread are weird and that I am rebutting those weird views from my understanding of the scriptures.

I was directly addressing the ideas presented and not attacking the person as you have just done in the quoted post above.

A very flawed argument tactic. If this is your way of discussion then I am sure that people will withdraw from futher discussion with you.

Shalom

 

[junobet]

junobet, junobet. Nice attempt.

First of all I disagree with you that climate has anything to do with the creation of the races which y7QUOTE]ou indicated in post #42. Second of all, you say now 'out of Adam God created all races in His image'. That is just another way for you to say the same as you did in #42. My question to you is did God create the races of man? Not, did God create all races in His image?

But I can see you are not willing to be forthright in your answer so I will forgo my question to you.

Didn’t you see my explicit “yes”? The rest was just additional explanation as to how God created the races, i.e. “from one blood” (Acts 17:26). I’m not surprised you don’t agree with what science has to say about that. It’s certainly easier to accept the findings of modern anthropology when one is not bugged by the thought that all our ancestors were black at some point.

As to your questions to me, yes every one born of Adam is created in the image of God as Adam was created in the image of God. As to your question about God loving white people more than black people, God loves who He loves. Some are white, some are black, some are brown, etc. etc.

So you do believe all races stem from Adam and that thus all races are created in God's image?

But that doesn't change a thing about the race of men, that it exists and is to be considered in this life.

Stranger

So what’s to be considered other than which sun-tan to use and that it’s probably not a good idea to offer your Chinese friends a milk-shake?

 

[junobet]

Have you considered the inverse of what you wrote above. Because your views line up with apparently many other, then your expressed view, you consider are not weird because of the sheer number of people who agree with your views.

Can I suggest, that your expressed views in this thread are weird and that I am rebutting those weird views from my understanding of the scriptures.

I was directly addressing the ideas presented and not attacking the person as you have just done in the quoted post above.

A very flawed argument tactic. If this is your way of discussion then I am sure that people will withdraw from futher discussion with you.

Shalom

I'm sorry you feel personally attacked. IMHO weird isn't necessarily bad. Victim blaming is bad, but I gathered that your intent wasn't.

 

[APAK]

May I ask what is your Point?

I think Platt's point is that everything that happens is driven, controlled or planned by God.
While he finds sufficient proof for this in Acts 17, he goes on to give other Biblical examples of God scattering people for his own purposes: “at His appointed time God sends Israel to Egypt, at His appointed time God brings Israel from Egypt. God orchestrates the exile from Jerusalem, and then He orchestrates the return to Jerusalem (…)” God even uses suffering (the stoning of Steven) to scatter the church so that the gospel may be preached to the ends of the world.


You must have misunderstood: Of course Romans 13 speaks of the government’s duty to protect people. Surely back then the Roman Government didn’t need protection itself, least of all from the newly founded small Christian sect. Paul tells these early Christians to be law-abiding citizens. (Of we find that he, too, had his limits: no idol worship. Or as Peter puts it more generally: "We must obey God rather than men." (Acts 5:29)

​

Secular meaning? Very clearly Galatians 6:10 asks us to do good to everybody, i.e. to take action in this world. Living in a democracy that includes taking action in the democratic process. IMHO it would be schizophrenic to privately volunteer to work in a food-bank for example whilst publicly advocating policies against the poor. The least we can do privately is to cry with those who now suffer hell on earth in East-Ghuta (Romans 12:15). If we then cold-heartedly refuse the people fleeing such hell any help and instead support political groups that stir up hatred against refugees, our tears would be crocodile tears.

Matthew 25:31-46 is very very clear. Tough teaching, I know, and I myself have fallen short of it many a time. Still that’s no reason to renounce it.
Is all of this just addressed to private individuals?
So the limbs shall do good but the body of Christ, which is the collective church, shall not?


Keep up the good work. I agree that it’s the small things in life with which we can make a difference. However, see above: If you give a generous tip to the waiter, it won’t do him much good if at the same time you support a policy that allows his boss to keep the tips (Opinion | The Trump Administration to Restaurants: Take the Tips!).

junobet:
I will just answer the one question you asked me to answer, in point 1 and a quick comment on point 4:

In Act 17:24 the preacher adds extra thoughts to the verse to suit his agenda. He added ‘..God is even over suffering.’ How convenient. This is not what is said in this verse.

It is obvious he trying to make the case and one major theme that is not scriptural, that God wants you to take care of the suffering ones on a grand national scale, because he is the sovereign of all etc. So how can anyone refuse…right

(Act 17:24) The God who made the world and everything in it, being Lord of heaven and earth, does not live in temples made by man, (ESV)

This verse means that God lives in the heavens, invisible to us, the creator of all. In contrast to his visible creations. NO mention of being in charge of the suffering.

I disagree with most of what you wrote especially in point 4. My answer to point 4 is scriptural yours is very secular that I've heard many times. You have misused the Galatians scripture to read it as a national secular good cause and also mixed human politics with it to try and convince...It don't work that way in scripture. You assume I may be cold-hearted I guess? Not true, I work with the spirit within me and not with a world spirit of the brotherhood of man.

Bless you,

APAK

 

[Stranger]

Didn’t you see my explicit “yes”? The rest was just additional explanation as to how God created the races, i.e. “from one blood” (Acts 17:26). I’m not surprised you don’t agree with what science has to say about that. It’s certainly easier to accept the findings of modern anthropology when one is not bugged by the thought that all our ancestors were black at some point.

So you do believe all races stem from Adam and that thus all races are created in God's image?

So what’s to be considered other than which sun-tan to use and that it’s probably not a good idea to offer your Chinese friends a milk-shake?

Didn't I just answer your question in post #61? But again, yes, all those born from Adam are created in God's image. Which can only mean that all those races of men, who are born in Adam, are created in God's image.

All races come from three persons. Shem, Ham, or Japheth. Noah's sons. From Shem would come the Godly line resulting in Israel and the blessing from God. From Ham would come the cursed or ungodly line, resulting in the Palestinians and Africa. From Japheth would come a blessed line, blessed with Shem, which resulted in the European and northern white people.

Because of these blessings and curses each line has its own propensities in character. See (Gen. 9:20-27). These blessings and curses have never been removed and are still in place today.

Stanger

 

[bbyrd009]

bbyrd: YOU are mistaken, I never said this. Why did you think I said,

"We can find comfort in knowing that the world is not run by various dictators or politicians"

junobet said this...go back and see for yourself..I did not appreciate it.

Please be more careful and not add words or misquote me.

APAK

ah, God said that lol, at the end of 1Sam8, sorry
1 Samuel 8:18

which i don't think contradicts your premise, exactly
maybe modifies it tho? i dunno
i take comfort in the fact that the blind run the world, myself
at least the part that is passing away, that we are called to leave
even if i still get you.

 

[APAK]

ah, God said that lol, at the end of 1Sam8, sorry
1 Samuel 8:18

which i don't think contradicts your premise, exactly
maybe modifies it tho

All good...thanks

 

[junobet]

Didn't I just answer your question in post #61? But again, yes, all those born from Adam are created in God's image. Which can only mean that all those races of men, who are born in Adam, are created in God's image.

All races come from three persons. Shem, Ham, or Japheth. Noah's sons. From Shem would come the Godly line resulting in Israel and the blessing from God. From Ham would come the cursed or ungodly line, resulting in the Palestinians and Africa. From Japheth would come a blessed line, blessed with Shem, which resulted in the European and northern white people.

Because of these blessings and curses each line has its own propensities in character. See (Gen. 9:20-27). These blessings and curses have never been removed and are still in place today.

Stanger

The Book of Genesis speaks of European and northern white people, Palestinians and Africans? In a white supremacist’s head maybe, but certainly not in the text.

 

[junobet]

junobet:
I will just answer the one question you asked me to answer, in point 1 and a quick comment on point 4:

In Act 17:24 the preacher adds extra thoughts to the verse to suit his agenda. He added ‘..God is even over suffering.’ How convenient. This is not what is said in this verse.

That God is even over suffering is already implied in this verse which talks about God’s almightiness. But Platt did indeed further illustrates this point by adding a reference to the Book of Job in which the Satan is only able to afflict Job in as much as God allows it. The case he’s trying to make is basic Christian theology as opposed to the ancient Manichean Dualism of good vs evil: Satan is bound, God dominates everything. According to Platt this is what we can find comfort in: Everything happens for a reason and it is through suffering that some may “seek the Lord so perhaps they might reach for Him and find Him, though He is not far from each one of us.” (Acts 17:27).

It is obvious he trying to make the case and one major theme that is not scriptural, that God wants you to take care of the suffering ones on a grand national scale, because he is the sovereign of all etc. So how can anyone refuse…right

See above for the case that Platt actually tries to make. Concerning the point you think he makes, personally I’d say: Exactly! How can anybody refuse the will of God?


When the Old Testament Prophets speak to Israel, and tell it to seek justice and to treat the poor and foreigners well, do they address individuals or all of Israel as a people? Clearly Daughter Zion is not a single person, but a nation. Through the new covenant that God made in Jesus Christ Christians are not just “heirs according to the promise” (Galatians 3:29) made to Abraham, they also are bound to obey Christ’s “new Commandment” (John 13:33-35), not just as individuals but as a church which acts as the body of Christ (Romans 12:5). It seems you don’t like churches much, but while the Bible addresses us also as individuals, when Paul wrote his letters he addressed entire churches. Christianity is community-oriented at its very core.


And while the church should not crave worldly power there’s no denying that churches don’t just have well organized charities to take care of the suffering, they also have an influential voice, which they should use for good. And I agree with Platt that they can’t stay silent in the current refugee crisis.

(Act 17:24) The God who made the world and everything in it, being Lord of heaven and earth, does not live in temples made by man, (ESV)

This verse means that God lives in the heavens, invisible to us, the creator of all. In contrast to his visible creations. NO mention of being in charge of the suffering.

Please read the verse in full. It says God is Lord of heaven and earth. Paul goes on to say that God is “not far from each of us. ‘For in Him we live and move and have our being.’” (Acts 17:27b+28). And why does the idea that God is in charge of the suffering bother you so much? Don’t you believe that in Jesus Christ God suffers with all who suffer and redeems them?

I disagree with most of what you wrote especially in point 4. My answer to point 4 is scriptural yours is very secular that I've heard many times. You have misused the Galatians scripture to read it as a national secular good cause and also mixed human politics with it to try and convince...It don't work that way in scripture. You assume I may be cold-hearted I guess? Not true, I work with the spirit within me and not with a world spirit of the brotherhood of man.

Bless you,

APAK

No, I don’t think you are cold-hearted, but – as Platt says in his sermon - I do suspect your individualism/your refusal to speak out for refugees has more to do with being engulfed in American culture and less to do with an Biblical exegesis that’s truly led by the Spirit.

 

[Stranger]

The Book of Genesis speaks of European and northern white people, Palestinians and Africans? In a white supremacist’s head maybe, but certainly not in the text.

Do a little research on (Gen.9:20-10:32). It is also called the 'Table of Nations'. Even skeptics are amazed at is accuracy.

You will have to leave your bias behind though. It only clouds your judgement.

Stranger

 

[APAK]

That God is even over suffering is already implied in this verse which talks about God’s almightiness. But Platt did indeed further illustrates this point by adding a reference to the Book of Job in which the Satan is only able to afflict Job in as much as God allows it. The case he’s trying to make is basic Christian theology as opposed to the ancient Manichean Dualism of good vs evil: Satan is bound, God dominates everything. According to Platt this is what we can find comfort in: Everything happens for a reason and it is through suffering that some may “seek the Lord so perhaps they might reach for Him and find Him, though He is not far from each one of us.” (Acts 17:27).


See above for the case that Platt actually tries to make. Concerning the point you think he makes, personally I’d say: Exactly! How can anybody refuse the will of God?


When the Old Testament Prophets speak to Israel, and tell it to seek justice and to treat the poor and foreigners well, do they address individuals or all of Israel as a people? Clearly Daughter Zion is not a single person, but a nation. Through the new covenant that God made in Jesus Christ Christians are not just “heirs according to the promise” (Galatians 3:29) made to Abraham, they also are bound to obey Christ’s “new Commandment” (John 13:33-35), not just as individuals but as a church which acts as the body of Christ (Romans 12:5). It seems you don’t like churches much, but while the Bible addresses us also as individuals, when Paul wrote his letters he addressed entire churches. Christianity is community-oriented at its very core.


And while the church should not crave worldly power there’s no denying that churches don’t just have well organized charities to take care of the suffering, they also have an influential voice, which they should use for good. And I agree with Platt that they can’t stay silent in the current refugee crisis.




Please read the verse in full. It says God is Lord of heaven and earth. Paul goes on to say that God is “not far from each of us. ‘For in Him we live and move and have our being.’” (Acts 17:27b+28). And why does the idea that God is in charge of the suffering bother you so much? Don’t you believe that in Jesus Christ God suffers with all who suffer and redeems them?



No, I don’t think you are cold-hearted, but – as Platt says in his sermon - I do suspect your individualism/your refusal to speak out for refugees has more to do with being engulfed in American culture and less to do with an Biblical exegesis that’s truly led by the Spirit.

junobet:
Of course you are entitled to have your opinion as do I. I still believe the article presented and now in your writings, being very apologetic to it, is adding to scripture that is not there in intent...ex. (Act 17:24 and before and after)

Paul was speaking to 'religious' people that began treating God as an idol of worship and as being unknown. Paul tells them God (his spirit) is close to all people and wants his spirit to live in men. That God is not in physical man-made things including temples made by man, or any physical building 'churches'....his spirit is within the hearts of believers. So why in the world did you want to underline 'and earth' to me and 'not far from us.' It shows your ignorance of deciphering and intentionally misapplying scripture. YOU must know this...I guess? maybe not..

Look, 'God is in charge of suffering,' is your own theory and axiom, and your truth, it is not mine and most folks will not agree with you. Don't develop a baseless scriptural straw-man case and use it as the truth- it is far from it, mate.

So you ask me, "why does the idea that God is in charge of the suffering bother you so much, you say?" God is in charge of all peoples whether they are happy, sad, killed, suffering or in any condition. The point is you have deliberately singled out 'suffering ' to support your OP and the article and

your blatant disregard and misuse of scripture to support YOUR IDEA, and is absent in the scriptures you have posed.

I do not understand your awkward statement to me: "Don’t you believe that in Jesus Christ God suffers with all who suffer and redeems them?" You can explain what this cryptic statement means, right.?..not waiting around though.

Yes, when people are suffering they usually are much more humble and they tend to reach out beyond man's resources. They reach out to their creator and are more malleable to God and accept his grace for salvation. This is very scriptural, and not what you are weaving here.

What are insinuating here by this statement of yours "I do suspect your individualism/your refusal to speak out for refugees has more to do with being engulfed in American culture and less to do with an Biblical exegesis that’s truly led by the Spirit. "

You know zero about me. My life is not base on the American culture as the religious-world person would be swayed by, that influences his false spiritual views. I in fact have 4 cultures that matured my worldview....of course you would not know that....you presume too much, mate. Anyway, culture and worldview have nothing to do with my spiritual state with God. Maybe because you have brought this subject up, this is where your state and heart is, in the world - your world view takes precedence over a true spiritual view.​

I wonder if you are actually a true believer walking in the spirit of God. I know I am, with 100% confidence.

APAK

 

[Jay Ross]

I'm sorry you feel personally attacked. IMHO weird isn't necessarily bad. Victim blaming is bad, but I gathered that your intent wasn't.

You are doing it again, attacking the writer for expressing His views on the interpretation of prophetic scripture and stating that I am victim blaming, and that this is bad, when in reality I am providing an explanation of the prophecies provided by God in the Bible. I do not believe that in my posts I attributed blame to anyone who is a "genuine or non-genuine refugee."

Perhaps you need to reflect more on what a person has written and curb your obvious biases in what you write in response to other posters.

 

[Helen]

@Jay Ross and @APAK
#78 and #79 very good posts...AMEN!!
Right on.