The petition to let Texas secede from the U.S. to be reviewed by the White House
As of 3:40 p.m. ET, more than 25,000 Texans have already signed the petition on The White House website to let Texas peacefully secede from United States of America and “create its own NEW government.”
The petition, created on Nov. 9, argues for secession.
It's interesting that several other states besides Texas have filed petitions for secession. Wow that must be a huge embarrassment for the guv. And what would happen if there is a refusal? Or should I say what will happen when there IS a refusal?
Neil wrote: Interestingly, the "Old 300" settlers led to Texas by empesario Steven F. Austin were required by Mexican law to be Catholics as a condition of citizenship. Either the provincial governor turned a blind eye to it, or else they made phony conversions. Is Texas, like Paris, worth a Mass? ...
Texians took care of that business, if only for a time...
"When the Federal Republican Constitution of their country, which they have sworn to support, no longer has a substantial existence, and the whole nature of their government has been forcibly changed, without their consent, from a restricted federative republic, composed of sovereign states, to a consolidated central military despotism, in which every interest is disregarded but that of the army and the PRIESTHOOD, both the eternal enemies of civil liberty, the everready minions of power, and the usual instruments of tyrants." - Texas Declaration of Independence
John UK wrote: ... I very nearly edited my post to have the Catholics taking control not the Presbys. Those who imagine Giant Pope is dead need to think again.
Interestingly, the "Old 300" settlers led to Texas by empesario Steven F. Austin were required by Mexican law to be Catholics as a condition of citizenship. Either the provincial governor turned a blind eye, or else they made phony conversions. Is Texas, like Paris, worth a Mass?
Many later Texans came from Tennessee, which is why the drawls are similar.
"Lone Star" is a great TX history by Fehrenbach. Informative, & entertaining too.
Christopher000 wrote: Can I poke my head in to give my simple thoughts? I've never understood how there can be so many denominations amongst Bible only believing Christians.
It's a great point Christopher, and the only reason I can think of is that a majority of true believers are most bigoted in their theological positions, and have great enmity with others. You can see this most clearly within the Presby Camp, who hold to perfection of doctrine.
A refreshing example of an attempt to avoid schism within the body is the Free Presbyterians of Ulster begun recently by Rev Ian Paisley, whose statement of practice includes such things as offering to baptise people in whatever mode they choose, rather than imposing a set pattern for all.
But it is a tragedy that the body of Christ is rent asunder by differing beliefs. It is not right, is a bad witness, and fragments believers and their gifts, which could be used for the common good.
Besides which, denominations are unbiblical, unlike Baptists who are nondenominational, Quakers and Brethren also etc.
...I know there are differences of opinion like pre/post tribes, etc but is there really anything so fatal that has caused so many to go in their seperate directions? I don't even know if I made sense here or even a point. I'm typing on a tiny screen and have to go for now. This was probably all off topic too...ha-ha.
Can I poke my head in to give my simple thoughts? I've never understood how there can be so many denominations amongst Bible only believing Christians. Since the Bible is our sole authority, it seems to me that there should not be any sepetation between believers. I feel like all believers should gather under the same roof and solve their minor, non fatal theological concerns in a reasonable way without having to be seperate.
I call myself Baptist but maybe I should simply call myself a follower of Christ. The way I see it is that every man has errors and every denomination will have theological differences which will not satisfy everyone. I've chosen the Bible to believe, without question. Calling myself Baptist does not mean that I'm right and everyone else is wrong and I won't argue the denomination unless there happens to be a fatal concern between one and another. I really don't care for denominations since we are all suppose to be in the same family believing the same exact things. I don't understand the seperation or the fighting between opposing churches because we all have the same Bible which makes no sense to me. I know there are differences of opinion like pre/post tribes, etc but is there really anything so fatal that has caused so many to go in their sep
Neil wrote: Let's be fair: the Republic of Texas had no official church back in the decade following 1836, so why should we believe Presbys would have any more pull in a revived 21st-century Republic? Southern Baptists are the largest nominally Protestant church in Texas; Presbys of any kind (esp. the orthodox sort) are much rarer. The main danger of a TX state church comes from its considerable long-standing RCC presence.
Neil, you are quite correct, and I very nearly edited my post to have the Catholics taking control not the Presbys. Those who imagine Giant Pope is dead need to think again. He is wounded now for many centuries, but the old enemy has not given up on world domination. And so we have the Catholics and Muslims, both of whom believe that God has given them commandment to dominate the world in both a political and a spiritual way.
Why Christians can imagine the saints ruling in power in this world is beyond me. Cromwell tried it once, with the Barebones Parliament in London, which ran for a full six months before disbanding.
As I see it, there is no biblical support for such an endeavour.
historic facts wrote: Whereas Baptist heterodoxy only goes as far back as the 16th century.
John UK wrote: My guess is that religious leaders in Texas are already in preparation for the takeover, when the Texas Republic launches. And I also guess that the Presbys will be first in line to make it a church/state,..
Let's be fair: the Republic of Texas had no official church back in the decade following 1836, so why should we believe Presbys would have any more pull in a revived 21st-century Republic? Southern Baptists are the largest nominally Protestant church in Texas; Presbys of any kind (esp. the orthodox sort) are much rarer. The main danger of a TX state church comes from its considerable long-standing RCC presence.
The petty arrogance exhibited by many Baptist & Presby denominational chauvinists ("we're older than you!") is no help.
Angela Wittman wrote: What has gone astray is the topic of this conversation. FYI - Traditional Reformed Presbyterian teaching is that there is a separation of church and state. But both are under the headship or authority of Christ and should seek to do His will as revealed in Scripture. John from the UK is very good at derailing the discussion; I suppose he has had much practice. As for me, perhaps I'll listen to another sermon.
The 'mere Christianity' around here militates against any adult attempt to develop a systematic theology, in other words a world view. Mere Christianity is the vortex into which all thinking and love will disappear. A hollow and crass biblicism is all that can remain.
What has gone astray is the topic of this conversation. FYI - Traditional Reformed Presbyterian teaching is that there is a separation of church and state. But both are under the headship or authority of Christ and should seek to do His will as revealed in Scripture. John from the UK is very good at derailing the discussion; I suppose he has had much practice. As for me, perhaps I'll listen to another sermon.
Dorcas wrote: Angela Wittman writes: It might be best if I listen to more sermons and comment less. Great advise for us all Angela. May God grant us the grace to do so.
Yes, but I might add that we should then compare their teachings to scripture which I'm sure you will agree with. I personally prefer doing more bible study and then meditating on what I've read independent from anything a preacher might say. You certainly don't come across as a pit-bull with lipstick or as a momma grissly. Good for you.
Angela Wittman wrote: I don't know of any Bishops in the Presbyterian Church. Also, I've heard that the American form of government with its checks and balances is based on the Presbyterian style of church government. As far as the Presbyterians taking over - only if God gives them the increase. As for me, I need to find out where Larry Kilgore is since I've nominated him for President of Texas.
Ha! Good one Angela.
As for bishops in the church....
1 Tim 3:1,2 2 Tim 4:22 Titus 1:7 Titus 3:15
and of course THE Bishop, our Lord Jesus Christ himself - 1 Peter 2:25
And you've got no bishops in your church? That must be why it has gone astray.
101
There are a total of 180 user comments displayed | add new comment |
COMMENTS | 
