HOUSTON â€” Bringing polygamist families closer to regaining custody of their children, a divided Supreme Court of Texas agreed Thursday that the state had illegally seized 468 girls and boys from a West Texas ranch last month on unproven grounds of physical and sexual abuse.
State officials said they would move swiftly to return the children.
The decision upholding a ruling of the Third Court of Appeals last week directed a state judge to revoke the custody order taking the children from the Yearning for Zion ranch in Eldorado....
No, Vigilante, God is supreme, but man has always ignored his law in this country, of course those who try to impose "God's Law" on any country without the physical presence of Christ, always create a mess. THEONOMY,which it should be pointed out has more to do with some elements of Reformed Theology than with Anabaptism.
Yes, Mike, as the human leaders interpret and practice it. If one has a disagreement with that, q.v., then they use various methods that have been determined to be constitutional, e.g., "The Salvation of the State is Watchfulness in the Citizen". Many in officials in this state have forgotten that during the Populist revolt in Nebraska, the People were given a right for direct democracy. Sometimes they have to be reminded of that.
Jim Lincoln wrote: Christ respected the government. Of course, I'm not an anarchist, Vigilante. There are only a few reasons not to obey or support the government of the country you are in. The Believer and Politics and Rendering To Caesar: A Biblical Perspective On Government. Thomas Muntzer and John of Lyden were no more mainline Anabaptists, than the United Church of Christ or the Unitarian/Universalists are an actual part of the Reformed Movement. Christians who are not supportive of the state they are in not actually Christian.
Christians are to obey the law of the land, not "support the state" The law of the land here is the Constitution, not the political establishment, which is also subject to the Constitution. Hope you understand the difference.
Christ respected the government. Of course, I'm not an anarchist, Vigilante. There are only a few reasons not to obey or support the government of the country you are in. The Believer and Politics and Rendering To Caesar: A Biblical Perspective On Government. Thomas Muntzer and John of Lyden were no more mainline Anabaptists, than the United Church of Christ or the Unitarian/Universalists are an actual part of the Reformed Movement.
Christians who are not supportive of the state they are in not actually Christian.
Vigilante, when did the Apostle Paul support a state church? He was saying obey authorities and do what churches are suppose to do and to preach the gospel. But hey! All of you should like the state of Texas, instead of doing their duty, the courts, don't you love 'em? returned them to these abusers with a slap on the wrist. I see that Texas, will turn Islamic/RCC in the near future. As I pointed out to before, look over, Rendering To Caesar: A Biblical Perspective On Government, a good Anabaptist statement on the subject.
Ah, but tired of that one excellent reference I gave on this anti-Christian group, well here's a secular look at it, Polygamy: A World Apart.
Polygamy was rightfully outlawed in the U.S. A 100 years ago, it is time that courts start enforcing that law.
By no means would I defend the doctrines of this church.
Them now us later. This is the thin end of the wedge, the secular authorities are going after the religious extremes now but will soon be widening their criteria for intervention/interference. It won't be long before fundamentalist homeschoolers will be next.
Many in authority percieve the teaching of our children scripture nothing short of brainwashing and indoctrination, they see it as abuse.
The persecution as described in scripture for witnessing for Jesus is on its way. What better way to discredit a faith group than to accuse it of abusing its own children.
Watch out there maybe a non-beleiving neighbour watching you and on the phone right now reporting you to those social workers!
Vigilante wrote: Jim, why do you insist on attempting to defend your religion with scripture?
What do you suggest he defend it with? If man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God, there is no greater argument than the testimony of scripture. "To the law and to the testimony, if they speak according to this word, there is no light in them."
Vigilante, for an Anabaptist, you have seemed to involved yourself in politics, The Believer and Politics, would be a good sermon to listen to, I have tried to refrain from commenting on Nebraska or Federal government leadership, because it is not biblical to do so, and any political comments I make by accident or purpose, have absolutely no connection to my local church.
Romans 13 3 For rulers are not a terror to the good work, but to the evil. And wouldest thou have no fear of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise from the same: 4 for he is a minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is a minister of God, an avenger for wrath to him that doeth evil. 5 Wherefore [ye] must needs be in subjection, not only because of the wrath, but also for conscience' sake. 6 For this cause ye pay tribute also; for they are ministers of God's service, attending continually upon this very thing. 7. Render to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute [is due]; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honor to whom honor.
Jim, once again, you're making assumptions. You keep pushing your state religion as if it is of God, that it is protecting the good and punishing evil, and a little common sense can tell the common man, be he Christian or heathen, that what is known as the "U.S. Government," as a system, is a punisher of good and a protector and builder of evil.
My enemies may call me a fundamentalist and/or Anabaptist, and I do accept the broad labels, so a general idea of my beliefs can be gleaned from that.
Ron Paul? Well, I don't involve myself with the antichristian nonsense of the political theater. It doesn't matter who is in office because the institution itself is the problem. Theonomy? Well, not knowing about it I checked the link and I don't think that's me.
Your question cannot be answered, as the premise is that the state is good and seeks nothing but good for all people. If the state is evil, then I am not able to answer whether a child-abusing, antichristian, anti-social institution is capable of placing children in "normal" families. And you are assuming, again, that adoption is the business of the regime. Children are of the kingdom of heaven, so it seems to me that this matter is to be handled by the churches.
Thank you Dr. Phil. A vigilante often ignored the due process of law.
Well, Vigilante, we really have no information about your beliefs except the anti-Christian one on not respecting the government and supporting polygamy.
You could be one of those broken pots that down hold water (and I might add life giving at that) and supports the likes of Ron Paul, What Paul Is Running For or you may even be a believer in Theonomy. Only you know where you stand on most issues.
I don't need to defend any of my church's positions, they are well covered in sermons and pamphlets. By the way, political positions which I may take are entirely my own, since IHCC eschews politics, and I'm just a member and not an official of IHCC.
But one question I should ask, what if some of these state governments came to their senses and not only banned homosexuals from adopting children, but rightly decided that such a setting would be harmful to these children and took them away, and placed those children with normal families -- would you be against that also? At least I could say you were consistent, if you were against that.
reason wrote: From Dictionary.com vigilante: "member of a vigilance committee," 1856, Amer.Eng., from Sp. vigilante, lit. "watchman," from L. vigilantem (see vigilance). Vigilant man in same sense is attested from 1824 in a Missouri context. Vigilance committees kept informal rough order on the frontier or in other places where official authority was imperfect.
From Websters: "vigilance committee": a "volunteer" committee of citizens organized to "suppress crime summarily"
"summarily": done without delay or formality: quickly executed
"For ye shall not go out with haste, nor go by flight: for the Lord will go before you; and the God of Israel will be your rereward." Isa 52:12
"he that is hasty of spirit exalteth folly". Pr.14:29
"member of a vigilance committee," 1856, Amer.Eng., from Sp. vigilante, lit. "watchman," from L. vigilantem (see vigilance). Vigilant man in same sense is attested from 1824 in a Missouri context. Vigilance committees kept informal rough order on the frontier or in other places where official authority was imperfect.
Spanish, watchman, vigilante, from Latin vigilāns, vigilant-, present participle of vigilāre, to be watchful, from vigil, watchful; see weg- in Indo-European roots.
The former assistant secretary of treasury in the Reagan administration, called the "Father of Reaganomics", who is a former editor and columnist for the Wall Street Journal, Business Week, and Scripps Howard News Service, and, said:
"Ask yourself: Would a government that has lied us into two wars and is working to lie us into an attack on Iran shrink from staging "terrorist" attacks in order to remove opposition to its agenda?" He goes on to say:
If the Bush administration wants to continue its wars...
Jim Lincoln wrote: Vigilante, I'm not worried about moving off of SermonAudio, being a member of a church that has sermons on this board, and I hope that I usually reflect where they stand. I can only hope that the polygamist supporters see the errors of their ways and note how anti-Christian it is. Are you a Mormon, Vigilante your support for this illegal practice would suggest that you are. I would suggest you read the booklet, A Biblical Perspective On Government, to get a more biblical perspective of government, which is established for our good. Anne, polygamy has always been illegal in Canada, Polygamy in Canadaand like in the U.S. the laws are rarely enforced. I doubt if it is hard to prove, it is just hard to get prosecutors to do their jobs.
I think you hit a nerve with "Vigilante". What a name for a "Christian" whose weapons are not supposed to be carnal, and who believe "vengence in mine saith the Lord"! Of course, like Mohamut with the Koran, Joe Smith may have a few verses in the B O M that give some freedom to do a little "vigilante" work - at least against those who do not have their point of view.
Jim, you assume your so-called church is a real church - those called out and separated unto God. I question that. Anyway, the problem you are having is not necessarily with this Mormon topic, it is with your state idolatry. My postings do not indicate my being a Mormon, and neither do they imply my support of multiple wives. The issue, again, is your eating up state-run media propaganda as gospel and being a servant to the state rather than Jesus Christ, and then having the audacity to blame your Moloch worship on God! Phonies like yourself are the ones that persecute true Christians, and will have them slaughtered in the future, since you have no king but Caesar.