June 11, 2016 by
Most of the Christians that Paul wrote to the Romans were Jewish believers.
1 I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God, which is your spiritual service. 2 And be not fashioned according to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is the good and acceptable and perfect will of God. Romans 12:1 & 2
We are all influenced by the world and the way of thinking of the world. For many Americans this is the result of government education, corporate advertising, media propaganda and the various disciplines of science that has established themselves as the gods of our age. Therefore our reading of the Bible tends to be influenced by these worldly influences and it takes deliberate effort to discern the truth of Scripture. Reading the Bible alone will not transform your mind. There are thousands of Jehovah Witnesses and Mormons who do not know Christ. Renewing our minds come from reading the Bible by spiritual discernment.
But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.(1Co 2:14 & 15)
Legalism is the heart of natural thinking. Legalism is the means of self-justification. James tells us that if we break one commandment we have broken them all (James 2:10). But legalism tells us that if we do one good thing, we are good in all things. Through our narrow definition of goodness, we judge others according to our own standard. If we see others fail in one thing, we condemn them as utterly worthless. How unlike our King who believes we are worth saving no matter what we have done. Legalism turns us into hypocrites.
Legalism makes right and wrong a game. Lawyers are a prime example of what I mean. They do not care about what is right or wrong, only what is legal. Natural thinking seeks only for the benefit of self. We are awash in our culture in this kind of thinking.
The influence of natural thinking distorts both our reading of Scriptures and affects the way godly men translate the Scriptures. We need to read the Bible through the eyes of Christ. Since He is the King, we assume he is like a worldly king, and he is not. Jesus does not “rule” by force. He rules by example and is the standard we are to compare ourselves by. Jesus changes us just as a good marriage changes both partners. We love one another in marriage, so defer to one another. We love Jesus and defer to his good example because we want to please him and to be like him. Read the rest of this entry →
May 17, 2012 by
The sovereignty of the people
If you read or listen to any of the many websites, podcasts and radio broadcasts from the patriot community, you will hear the expression, “sovereigns” used frequently. The expression tends to be confusing both because governments and kings claim the term in reference to their authority over their subjects and because organized religion uses the expression as meaning the total control of God over His creation as the Sovereign Lord. The term needs clarification for the Church (i.e., the people that are born again) and the people towards their governments.
First, the patriot community rightly understands that governments are not sovereign but the people who create their governments. The American government was created “by the people, for the people” (from Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address). It is a logical conclusion that the creator is greater than the created. Thus the people who create the government are greater than the government that was created, and the people have the sovereign rights while the government has privileges granted by the people.
The Creator, Yahweh who became Y’shua, is also the Sovereign Lord who grants us our rights. Unlike humans, God can not take back that which He gives because all that He says and does is eternal. Eternal means from his unchanging nature which has no beginning nor end. Therefore His Word is immutable. So our human rights are not privileges given us from God because what He gives He can not take back (Romans 11:29). Read the rest of this entry →
January 09, 2011 by
Jurisdictionary author Dr. Frederick Graves JD and wife
It has been said by another patriot, “How can we obey the law when we do not know the law?” When it comes to going to court most Americans are totally ignorant of both the law or the rules of court, and are routinely fleeced by the the lawyers and courts who take advantage of that ignorance.
There are, however, lawyers of character who genuinely care about America and the people of God. Dr. Frederick Graves is one those men. He is a believer in Christ with a deep faith in the Lord and a lawyer with over 20 years of a case winning record. He has a course that every American needs to take on law and the courts. His course is called, “Jurisdictionary” and comprises of flash videos, mp3 files and pdf documents. He gives both the very practical steps of winning a lawsuit and the basis for laws to understand why the courts exist and how to use them. What he can not do, and what is imperative for anyone who takes his course to learn, is give the documentation of actual laws in state and federal legislation, nor the rules of court procedure since they vary from every jurisdiction. But he does give many reference resources to find case law and court rules.
His course provides the groundwork that is necessary to launch a study of those other matters from, and a perspective that establishes the right priority in understanding the system. To help the reader understand his course, I am going to liberally quote his work. He begins his program with a simple outline of the process involved in a lawsuit with a free flowchart. Read the rest of this entry →
October 23, 2010 by
People are in God's stead
To listen to a reading of the article, click the podcast link.
My gym has no air conditioning, so the garage door is frequently left open for the classes. An open door provides entry to a variety of creeping and flying insects, bees are one example. When a bee flies in the children naturally panic. I tell them that fear only causes the bees to become afraid as well and are more likely to sting them. Instead I gently shoo the bee out the door with my hands. That bee has no interest in us. He is only looking for plants. Gentle shooing lets him know that I am not trying to kill it, but only direct it outside again.
I told the kids that they need to understand their authority over creation. Genesis 9:2 tells us that the “fear and dread” of men would be upon all animals. They are terrified of us, and we should not be afraid of them.
One of the families in my gym is going through a lawsuit. When I talked to the mother about it, she was clearly confused regarding lawful laws. So we talked about why laws exist in the first place. This is apart from the typical answers given by organized religion which are theoretical and never connect with practical reality. Read the rest of this entry →
August 08, 2010 by
Morals are not the same as ethics.
There is no difference between the meanings of the two words, ethics and morality from an etymological view. They are from two different languages: ethics being a Greek word, and morality being a Latin word, which means manner and customs of people. Ethics, however, carries the additional connotation of internal standards because of Aristotles’s philosophical treaties on ethics, “Nicomachean Ethics“. Morals, on the other hand, tends to lean in meaning towards the mores of a people or the outward manners and customs of a people just as the word customs is the root to the word costume.
The technical distinctions aside, words have a predominant meaning by the current usage. In deed, most words are used by people without regard to the etymological meaning. For example, the word “blessed” has moved beyond Christian usage and is used by people of all faiths to mean privileged and favored, with happy circumstances. The etymology of blessed is uniquely Christian, however, because it literally means “blood-covered” (bled-sion) and comes from Medieval Catholicism. To be covered in the blood means to be in covenant with God through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Consequently, such a covenant brings favor and privilege in happy circumstances. But the word is used without any regard to its origin.
Likewise, I wish to elaborate on the deeper differences between our subconscious usage of the words “ethics” and “morality” which merit having two different words from two different languages grafted into English usage. Ethics, in my opinion, leans more towards decisions of the conscience, whereas morals leans towards accepted public opinions and customs. As such, ethics are expressions of God’s will, and morals are the expression of man’s will. Read the rest of this entry →