Quote:
it doesn't say that though. It reads like whatever is handed down by those ruling authorities might as well be from God himself. "Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also as a matter of conscience."
It says we are to be subject to governing authorities. We can be "subject" to them without obeying them, especially when their laws are a roadblock to fulfilling the Great Commission. If he had been arrested, he should accept the punishment. Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego were "subject" to Nebuchadnezzar. They didn't obey him when he demanded they adhere to the law. Peter said it is better to obey God than man.
And no, whatever is handed down from those authorities is not a case of "might as well be from God himself". That's asinine, unless of course you believe atrocities such as the holocaust or any countless number of state-sanctioned genocides are from God. While God can work through things, He is not the source of evil. This mindset is how you get the church to go along with all manner of evil that comes from the state.
Quote:
I find it strange that yall are equating this situation to sharing the word of God itself being illegal or being an overtaken and subjugated people. I know that it's super sexy in the Christian world to die trying to reach a lost people but I can't this as being analgous to reaching the lost in Indian or China or where the very act of spreading the Gospel is illegal.
When the state makes it against the law to go to the island, they make it against the law to spread the gospel to the Sentinelese. The law may not explicitly prohibit missionary activities, but they are prohibited by the law nonetheless.
Quote:
I assume you are for Planned Parenthood protestors actually destroying clinics? (same thing applies, no? the ends justify the means?)
Goodness. You just got done talking about what you think is a bad analogy, then you follow with this? The ends (spreading the gospel) and means (risking one's life or freedom to spread the gospel) aren't in conflict. He wasn't going there to destroy anything. He was going there to build relationships and, in time, share the gospel message.
Quote:
edit: Pacifist...I see you with the editting!
Okay? I edited because I wasn't satisfied with what I wrote as I don't believe it adequately conveyed my point.