Immigration

[Swordsmyth]

https://www.biblegateway.com/blog/2018/06/what-does-the-bible-say-about-refugees-and-foreigners/
Matthew 25:35-40

For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’

“Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’

“The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’ —(New International Version)

Charity begins at home:

[h=1]Matthew 26:11[/h] “For ye have the poor always with you;”

King James Version (KJV)

Leviticus 19:33-34

When immigrants live in your land with you, you must not cheat them. Any immigrant who lives with you must be treated as if they were one of your citizens. You must love them as yourself, because you were immigrants in the land of Egypt; I am the Lord your God.

It doesn't say how many we have to let in.

 

[RJB]

What's the reference for the nations with weak borders passage of the Bible that you're talking about?

I think it's clear that pretty much everything you've said on this issue is the diametric opposite of what Jesus taught. I don't see how you can even dispute that.

There are many references to the nations. How do you have many nations without respect for borders. Do you wish for a new Roman Empire? This would be a good debate for the religion forum, eh E?

And again you have yet to tell me where God would disagree with me. And you have yet to explain the difference between an invasion of an army that wants to violently disarm me an those who vote to violently disarm me.

 

[Superfluous Man]

LOL

Why then did he say that anyone without a sword should sell his garment and buy one?

Wait. Are you suggesting that he said that people should buy swords to use them to stop people from immigrating? That's just weird.

In fact, he positively prohibited his disciples from using the sword to rule over others like the rulers of the nations do.

And notice that the passage to which you're referring doesn't end with that verse, but it goes on to relate how his disciples responded to him by taking up swords and bringing them along when he was arrested, at which point they asked if they should use them in defense of him (with one of them cutting off a soldier's ear), and he prohibited them from doing so. This context should always be kept in mind when citing that verse.

 

[Swordsmyth]

Suicide Christian...Kindness that can kill.

Somehow he isn't responsible for the harm his policies will cause.

Is it not ungodly to deprive people of their rights?

[h=1]2 Chronicles 19:2[/h] “And Jehu the son of Hanani the seer went out to meet him, and said to king Jehoshaphat, Shouldest thou help the ungodly, and love them that hate the LORD? therefore is wrath upon thee from before the LORD.”

King James Version (KJV)

 

[Swordsmyth]

Wait. Are you suggesting that he said that people should buy swords to use them to stop people from immigrating? That's just weird.

In fact, he positively prohibited his disciples from using the sword to rule over others like the rulers of the nations do.

And notice that the passage to which you're referring doesn't end with that verse, but it goes on to relate how his disciples responded to him by taking up swords and bringing them along when he was arrested, at which point they asked if they should use them in defense of him (with one of them cutting off a soldier's ear), and he prohibited them from doing so. This context should always be kept in mind when citing that verse.

He said they should buy swords to defend themselves, keeping out immigrants that will destroy our liberty is defending ourselves.

Is it not ungodly to deprive people of their rights?

2 Chronicles 19:2

“And Jehu the son of Hanani the seer went out to meet him, and said to king Jehoshaphat, Shouldest thou help the ungodly, and love them that hate the LORD? therefore is wrath upon thee from before the LORD.”

King James Version (KJV)

 

[Superfluous Man]

There are many references to the nations.

That's a strange argument. Yes, there are many references to all kinds of sin as well. But what's the takeaway from those passages? It's not that sin exists, so we ought to sin. One important reference to nations is Jesus commanding his disciples to repudiate the methods of the rulers of the nations to rule over others.

Do you wish for a new Roman Empire?

I don't wish for one. But Jesus calls his followers to follow the approach he took in dealing with that Empire.

 

[Superfluous Man]

He said they should buy swords to defend themselves

That's not what he said. And in fact, in the following verses that you disregarded they asked if they should use them for that purpose, and he said no.

Is it not ungodly to deprive people of their rights?

Yes it is, provided "rights" are defined according to God's law, which is why I refuse to support depriving people of their rights.

 

[Superfluous Man]

Suicide Christian...Kindness that can kill.

You've said that before, and my response is still the same. Do you call Jesus that same name? He actually went to his death following this way of life.

 

[RJB]

That's a strange argument. Yes, there are many references to all kinds of sin as well. But what's the takeaway from those passages? It's not that sin exists, so we ought to sin. One important reference to nations is Jesus commanding his disciples to repudiate the methods of the rulers of the nations to rule over others.



I don't wish for one. But Jesus calls his followers to follow the approach he took in dealing with that Empire.

You totally ignored every question and point I made in my last post except for my sarcastic one. Why?

 

[Swordsmyth]

That's not what he said. And in fact, in the following verses that you disregarded they asked if they should use them for that purpose, and he said no.

He said they should not use them to stop his arrest because it was time for his sacrifice.

Yes it is, provided "rights" are defined according to God's law, which is why I refuse to support depriving people of their rights.

You do support those who will deprive us of our rights.

 

[Superfluous Man]

He said they should not use them to stop his arrest because it was time for his sacrifice.

He didn't say that either.

And his sacrifice isn't an anomaly that diverges from the kind of life he calls his disciples to live. It's a pattern he calls us to follow.

 

[Swordsmyth]

You've said that before, and my response is still the same. Do you call Jesus that same name? He actually went to his death following this way of life.

He had a divine purpose for his death and it was to save mankind you are demanding that others go to their deaths and it will result in dooming mankind.

 

[Superfluous Man]

You do support those who will deprive us of our rights.

I don't support any action of theirs or anyone else's that deprives anyone else of any rights, properly defined.

 

[Swordsmyth]

He didn't say that either.

Yes he did:

[h=3]John
Chapter 18[/h]10 Then Simon Peter having a sword drew it, and smote the high priest's servant, and cut off his right ear. The servant's name was Malchus.
11 Then said Jesus unto Peter, Put up thy sword into the sheath: the cup which my Father hath given me, shall I not drink it?





He didn't say that we must allow in an unlimited number of immigrants.

 

[Superfluous Man]

He had a divine purpose for his death and it was to save mankind you are demanding that others go to their deaths and it will result in dooming mankind.

It's not me demanding that. Jesus demanded that his disciples take up their crosses and follow him.

Ironically, Jesus proved that this didn't doom him, and won't doom mankind either, but is really the path to victory, not defeat.

 

[Swordsmyth]

I don't support any action of theirs or anyone else's that deprives anyone else of any rights, properly defined.

Your definitions are faulty.

 

[Superfluous Man]

Yes he did:

[h=3]John
Chapter 18[/h]10 Then Simon Peter having a sword drew it, and smote the high priest's servant, and cut off his right ear. The servant's name was Malchus.
11 Then said Jesus unto Peter, Put up thy sword into the sheath: the cup which my Father hath given me, shall I not drink it?

You're mixing up two totally different passages. The sword one we were talking about is in Luke 22.

 

[Zippyjuan]

He said they should buy swords to defend themselves, keeping out immigrants that will destroy our liberty is defending ourselves.

Is it not ungodly to deprive people of their rights?

2 Chronicles 19:2

“And Jehu the son of Hanani the seer went out to meet him, and said to king Jehoshaphat, Shouldest thou help the ungodly, and love them that hate the LORD? therefore is wrath upon thee from before the LORD.”

King James Version (KJV)

When told to buy swords, the apostles showed Jesus they had two swords among them. Jesus said "That is enough." It was not to build an army or a defense force. And they were not to protect anybody from immigrants. When Peter tried to use his sword on the Romans arresting Jesus, Jesus stopped him and healed the ear Peter cut.

"He who lives by the sword shall die by the sword."

https://www.biola.edu/blogs/good-bo...he-biblical-argument-for-gun-control-part-two

The setting is the final week of Jesus’ life. Having just celebrated the Passover with his disciples, Jesus warns them of his impending betrayal and of Peter’s threefold denial. He then cautions them concerning difficulties to come: “Then Jesus said, ‘When I sent you without purse, bag or sandals, did you lack anything?’ ‘Nothing,’ they answered. He said to them, ‘But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.’” The disciples then produce two swords, which prompts Jesus to respond, “That’s enough!” (NIV)

In their accounts of Jesus’ betrayal and arrest in Gethsemane, all four gospel writers record that one of Jesus’ followers draws a sword and attempts to meet violence with violence. We learn from John that the culprit is Peter, who actually sliced off the ear of the High Priest’s slave, Malchus (John 18:10). Apparently, Peter interpreted Jesus’ enigmatic statement on acquiring a sword in the manner that gun-rights advocates suggest, as an endorsement of violent resistance—and is sternly rebuked by Jesus: “No more of this!” (Luke 22:51); “Put away your sword!” (Matt. 26:52; John 18:11). In Matthew’s account, Jesus adds the following rationale to his reprimand: “For all who take up the sword will die by the sword.”

Does he argue for protection?

“If someone slaps your right cheek, turn to them your other cheek also”

 

[Swordsmyth]

It's not me demanding that. Jesus demanded that his disciples take up their crosses and follow him.

That was metaphorical and not a command that we all allow ourselves and our loved ones to be robbed and murdered.

Ironically, Jesus proved that this didn't doom him, and won't doom mankind either, but is really the path to victory, not defeat.

Christ had a purpose in his death that we do not and we have a duty to one another to defend eachother's rights.

 

[Swordsmyth]

You're mixing up two totally different passages. The sword one we were talking about is in Luke 22.

I'm not mixing up anything, you claimed that I was wrong when I said Christ commanded his Apostles not to use their swords to prevent his arrest because it was time for his sacrifice, this is that incident.