Whether Jackson was a stinker or not is not the issue, Jim. The statues that are being torn down do not belong to the vandals, and therefore it is a crime to dismantle them whether you like the person portrayed or not. The president is sworn to uphold the law. I know your hero the Traitor-in-Chief Obama didnâ€™t give a hoot about our laws, but the current president does.
ABC.net.au wrote: President Donald Trump has promised to use the full force of the law on those who vandalise or destroy historical monuments across the US.
â€˘President Donald Trump's actions were prompted by the recent vandalism of a statue of former President Andrew Jackson
â€˘Twitter hid another of Mr Trumpâ€™s tweets behind its 'public interest' notice
â€˘Mr Trump signed a newly-built portion of a wall on the border the US shares with Mexico
He said he would sign an executive order that would allow for the arrest of anyone caught defacing a commemoration to an armed services member on federal land, even though the government already had that power under the 2003 Veterans Memorial Act.
excerpt from,"US President Donald Trump cracks down on statue vandals, signs Mexico border wall, reprimanded by Twitter"
Andrew Jackson was a stinker. However, he put off the Civil War for 30 years by facing down the South Carolinians.
B. McCausland wrote: "Thou hast given a banner to them that fear thee, that it may be displayed because of the truth"
Sister B, firstly, you said: "...presently you are assuming things not intended or said..."
My apologies for that, especially if I have caused you grief.
Now this banner business. You have furnished me with a proof text, yes? Well it is a poor one. That is my opinion.
Let us think a minute. How do you analyse a professing Christian or Christian group?
How about: read and re-read, over and over, over and over, the NT texts, and get what the word of God says Christianity is, and what it is like in practice. Once you have that, test any professing Christian or group against that. Let us try that with banner-carrying Protestants found in NI called Orangemen.
So I'm sitting by the roadside watching an Orange march go past. The men are uniformed and they are marching in step like an army; they carry banners and flags; they are accompanied by a marching military style band which makes a huge amount of noise, especially the drums. It is an intimidating presence, scary, which it is designed to be.
I compare notes with my NT blueprint, and cannot find anything like it. So it is NOT Christian.
John, you used to be able to read accurately other people's takes, or at least took great pains to understand them to your uttermost, however, presently you are assuming things not intended or said, misreading, and misrepresenting.
There has been enough said to figure out the sense, meaning and intend of my position, but you are constantly twisting the argument, ignoring facts and reason to trumpet yourself as the only champion for Scripture.
Frankly, your last statement borders insult out of presumption.
All mentioned was to illustrate intend, however, you turned it into unfounded attacks.
Your take that Scripture does not permit memorials because it does not strictly 'command' them, is a child of the regulative principle. If not commanded, it becomes indifferent when it does not affront other specific commands.
Christ's main memorial is visualised by bread and the cup, and was visualised before by the blood on the Egyptian doors. Ensigns matter when based on reality and checked by sound theology.
And all started because your statement about the Geneva memorial was checked against. And now you end accusing me of standing for something else than the Word of God! ?!?!
This is a total offence, and makes enough reason to terminate dialogue. Fare well
Sister, let me repeat, just so that you know I am serious about what I say.
"Now beloved sister, if you wish to convince me of anything, you must needs approach me through the apostles' doctrine, not how your local or national church does things."
Of course it is your prerogative to ignore that, but then what are you hoping to achieve? Why are you discussing with me? I ignore everything you say which is not based upon scripture but the tradition of the elders.
Do you wish to convince me of anything? That can be a good motivation, if I am astray in anything. But arguments from anything other than scripture are not going to do me any good, because it is the word of God that is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path.
And when I read words like, "Protestants set up our banners!" in that militant way which cares nothing for souls, but simply wishes to be aggressive, in accordance with the sinful nature, then it really turns me off.
I am for Bible Christianity. This is what the Reformers were all about. But you seem to be more interested in the Reformation and huge spiritual leaders than you are in what they sought to restore to the church - THE BIBLE.
John, you are out of focus while you stand behind the tree of worship as the goal and issue of the discussion, then missing the forest of passing on biblical culture or knowledge of the past to the next generations. Two different things. You are charging iconoclastic tendencies where there are NONE in view. They are not promoted either because the intend is completely foreign to such issue.
Israel gloried in God lifting up their banners as identity icons, nothing else.
If you remain exclusively mounted on your particular wing of truth, you will easily get the topic out of balance. Bye
"We will rejoice in thy salvation, and in the name of our God we will set up our banners" Psalm 20
Sister B, in mine own opinion, I have never been more sharply in focus than I am today, and it is getting sharper all the time. Whether or not it be by divine revelation I cannot tell, but I do see more and more the need to "Get Back To The Bible" lest the apostasy swallow up every denomination, Christian group, and Fellowship around the world.
The word of God to me is a lamp to my feet, and a light to my path, showing me the way, the narrow road which leads to life, the difference between truth and error, the judge between the sheep and the wolf, the direction to go, the commands to obey, the revealer of false doctrine.
You see, sister, this is how the church began, before it went astray:
Acts 2:42 KJV (42)Â And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.
Now beloved sister, if you wish to convince me of anything, you must needs approach me through the apostles' doctrine, not how your local or national church does things.
Every doctrine can be stretched to extreme without its due checks, and such checks is what you seem to effectively lack when approaching the topic. Yes, the Romish iconography is detestable, but it rooted out of an apostate church.
Sister B, you are fast losing the plot and getting further away from scripture, holding to traditions of the elders rather than listen to what God has to say. I'm sorry but that is how it is.
God's word says,
Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path. Ps 119:105
But the majority of Christians and Christian churches today are saying,
Your word is NOT a lamp unto MY feet and a light unto MY path.
This is the cause of falling away, of course it is.
Instead of "I am of GOD", we get,
I am of Paisley, I am of Spurgeon, I am of Rutherford, I am of Smith, I am of Knox, I am of Graham, I am of Finney, I am of Whitefield, I am of Wesley, I am of Booth, I am of etc. etc.
Sister, your life is your own, and you are responsible for it, not me. So if you want to have a statue of Calvin in your back garden to remind you daily that there was a Reformation, that is up to you not me.
But as for me, I must conform myself to what God says, not what falling away people try to tell me to do.
Oh it is sooooooooo easy to backslide and fall away from God. Unless the church stands together around God, it is doomed, doomed to fail and disappoint God.
B. McCausland wrote: John, you distort what is simple by using hyperbolic reasoning. If there is any thing worthy of praise... think on this. On visiting Belfast Martyr's Memorial complex the visitor gets to seeing captions with brief comments under numerous paintings, photographs and busts representing martyrs, reformers, preachers, biblical commentators, missionaries or evangelists of renown. Never in any of that church's service iconography is preached, exalted or observed. Where the true gospel is preached there is no chance of confusing things. Attenders know well the purpose and difference of culture derived and entail in the true gospel. The memory of the just is blessed
So Sister, you DO justify the erecting of statues within the church building, and would be happy to see all those figures found in the Geneva Wall on display at Martyr's Memorial? Or perhaps have them outside on more public display?
Now if you are going to argue with me on THAT, how on earth are you going to argue for and justify the statues in Geneva?
John, you distort what is simple by using hyperbolic reasoning.
If there is any thing worthy of praise... think on this.
On visiting Belfast Martyr's Memorial complex the visitor gets to seeing captions with brief comments under numerous paintings, photographs and busts representing martyrs, reformers, preachers, biblical commentators, missionaries or evangelists of renown. A vivid history lesson.
Yet, never in any of that church's services iconography is preached, exalted or observed, contrarily it is dissuaded. Where the true gospel is preached there is no chance of confusing things. Attenders know well the purpose and difference of culture derived and entrail in the true gospel from false iconography.
Know and use judgement aright, please.
The memory of the just is blessed
Yet the day of destroying the snare of the bronze serpent may arrive to any apostate church.
B. McCausland wrote: The command forbidding images comes related to worship, say it forbids the bowing down to them.
Sister, I truly believe the answer to all these questions and answers is a proper understanding of the commandments, and I am not saying that I have got it yet.
You remember how the Lord Jesus dealt with the commandments, showing how really depthy they were, while the Jews simply took them at face value?
Someone says, "I never killed anyone in my life."
But the other says, "No, but have you ever hated someone?"
Knowing this, and knowing that the commandments are far more complex than appear at first sight, I put it to you that the second commandment has a complexity far beyond what we would imagine it to have. If what you say is true, we could have a line of statues in our church buildings, honouring them and reminding ourselves of their being used by the Lord in history. Eh?
The way you are going, you would have iconography taught in the most robust Christian churches, and have the worshippers use the icons merely as aids to worship God; not worshipping the icons themselves, but only God. But I will disagree with you every time on this.
Do you believe God is sovereign ? Do you believe that Gods Counsel shall stand ? Do you believe God raise up one and put down another? If you do believe these things, why would you state that to put a man into bondage would " mar his character." Color has nothing whatsoever to do with the subject. Perhaps you should study Gods Holly word and learn what he says, and not what you want him to say.
B. McCausland wrote: Thanks, John. 1. The principle of remembering is Biblical. 2. Honour to whom honour is due. Regards
Thank you Sister B. Now then.....
1. Absolutely! And I'm sure both of us could spend many happy hours recalling scripture where the Lord called upon his people to remember something important, such as Passover etc. What we can't find is a scriptural example of God's people sculpting something to remind them of something, unless you count Aaron's golden calf, who he said brought them up out of Egypt. Naturally we say that is wrong. But why is it wrong? It is wrong because God says it is wrong.
2. Now here is a tricky one, because the text can be used to justify almost anything relating to the exaltation of men by honouring them; or, if you agree, to the exaltation of women also, by honouring them. So how shall we do this?
Hebrews 11 gives us the gallery of people of faith, naming certain men and women and saying why they were so honoured as to be counted worthy of mention in the NT text. But NO statue of them! Why not? Because making statues of men and women is wrong. And why is it wrong? Because God says so.