| Whatsoever
Things Are True
by Dan Coburn Pastor, Emmanuel Baptist Church pastordan@mtida.net I'm not so frustrated with current affairs as much as I am with professing Christians attacking each other over contemporary issues. In my humble opinion, the rift de joure is over Illegal immigration, and is defined by the following. One side, although accused of being calloused or heartless on the subject, believes the USA has a right to govern the number and character of those who enter in. There has for a long time, been a mechanism for this we call our Immigration Policy (law). Nugget: If these laws are bad, let's debate, discuss and change them. Meanwhile, let's obey existing law or the result is Chaos. That's coincidently, something else the first group seems to be for is law and order, while the other side, only so long as it furthers their agenda. If not, not so much. The Bible doesn't speak so much about any given country (people group, nation, clan or climb)'s policies. In fact, it's palpably absent. Paul lived in times arguably more evil than us, and you never saw him wearing a sandwich board reading "Dump Nero". He preached Christ and Him crucified. That's it. What the Bible does address at length however, is law and order most often in the form of "personal" responsibility. Professing Christians accuse me of not having Godly compassion w/regard to Illegal immigration. This fascinates me as only God is the discerner of the thoughts and intentions of man. Let's turn the Spiritual Switch. When Ananias and Sapphira died in Acts 5, it wasn't for keeping some of their money (anti communalism) but for lying to the Holy Spirit about it. Peter even said: "Wasn't it yours to do with as you pleased?". This is personal, not communal. The single most illustrative account in the Bible is the account of The Good Samaritan. There was a man who was beaten unconscious by thieves, and left for dead. A religious man came across him, said a few kind words and was on his way. Soon a Samaritan (thought to be of very low moral fiber) found the man and loaded him on his donkey, hauled him to town, paid for a room in the Inn, paid for some food and told the innkeeper: "If this poor victim should need anything else, give it to him and I'll pay you for it when I return". Nugget. If this had a more liberal author (other than Jesus), the Samaritan would have demanded all the patrons of the Inn kick in to support the victim. Then He would insist the Innkeeper cover the balance at his own expense. People fascinate me as they demand my support of their cause never knowing (or caring) how much I give or to whom. In conclusion, there were many similar arguments in Romans. The Biblical conclusion is this: "Who are you to judge another man's servant". Do justly, love mercy and walk humbly with your God.
|
|