The Police Officer

[Kenny_ms]

he was going to get a speeding ticket and yet whose fault was it? HIS.

And who is arguing with that? I'm not even sure why you think you need to explain some of that stuff.

I must have missed something along the line or I've slipped into bizzaro world and can't find my way out.

Maybe I just need to restart my computer.

 

[jasonc]

you didn't. the other did.

OK, lets back up here...exactly what was said that some seemed to take offense to, and/or what you are answering to?

you need not response. ltd is a pacifist. context is that. she doesn't believe any form of self defense. that is a given when she said with love they should respond. love must also PROTECT. it means deadly force or less then lethal force to stop the crime or capture.

 

[Kenny_ms]

Well, you would think so and do a though background check. But it appears that sometimes even the background check doesn't work.
"Records from the Independence Police Department obtained by CNN include comments from a supervisor detailing what they called "a pattern of lack of maturity, indiscretion and not following instructions," a "dangerous loss of composure during live range training" and an "inability to manage personal stress."

"I do not believe time, nor training, will be able to change or correct these deficiencies," Independence Deputy Chief Jim Polak wrote in a November 2012 memo."
http://www.cnn.com/2014/12/04/justice/cleveland-police-officer-timothy-loehmann/

That's scary, Deb, but not surprising.

 

[AirDancer]

By all means, if any want to further disrespect and malign those in law enforcement, you're free to do so. Just be sure to include every single occupation, and every single person, for that matter. No occupation is free from the occasional troublesome employee(s).

I won't follow suit. I don't buy into the nonsense being spewed against law enforcement personnel these days.

The majority of law enforcement have answered a calling to that particular occupation. They care about the well-being of the citizenry in their district. Theirs is not an easy job. They are hated by criminals. They're even hated by some of the law-breakers who were given tickets. Because of their occupation, their families are sometimes put at risk.

Even with doing their jobs correctly, officers' careers can be ruined in the blink of an eye, as was the case with young Officer Wilson of Ferguson. Even the Federal Department of Justice found he had acted with justification. But by that time, his career was over.

 

[iLOVE]

I love when Christians are posting from the spirit and not the flesh...keep both feet in our kingdom at all times.

 

[jasonc]

you didn't. the other did.

OK, lets back up here...exactly what was said that some seemed to take offense to, and/or what you are answering to?

he was going to get a speeding ticket and yet whose fault was it? HIS.

And who is arguing with that? I'm not even sure why you think you need to explain some of that stuff.

I must have missed something along the line or I've slipped into bizzaro world and can't find my way out.

Maybe I just need to restart my computer.

you need not response. ltd is a pacifist. context is that. she doesn't believe any form of self defense. that is a given when she said with love they should respond. love must also PROTECT. it means deadly force or less then lethal force to stop the crime or capture.

there are criminals being defended here by implication. seriously i grew up without water or electricity at times. my mom and dad were investigated for child abuse. nothing of the sort. we had dcf watching us. yet we weren't taken from our parents. so i don't see that, what i see while cops can harass is the leftist view of the old well its the white man picking on the black man. i have never seen a cop that wasn't punished in my county in the last few decades for violating rights of inmates or citizens. it has happened and the cops were fired and arrested. i also made the caveat of the disparity of wealth. Gifford the average wage is 20000 a year verses the county average is double that. yet i know of know white cops in Gifford trolling for the poor to go to jail. never seen it. i have seen them sitting on the main road a few times and not pulling folks over. they had plenty of poor cars to do that too. yet they didn't. im not seeing it here.

 

[AirDancer]

Background checks and psychological tests cannot with 100% accuracy predict how a person will respond in future to a life-altering event. It can't be done.

Civil service testing, followed by interviews, then background checks & psych tests, followed by interviews. Most departments try their best to hire the best they can.

 

[LovethroughDove]

you need not response. ltd is a pacifist. context is that. she doesn't believe any form of self defense.

Stop, you are being narrow-minded. I don't believe in deadly force. I think I like tasers?

 

[Kenny_ms]

By all means, if any want to further disrespect and malign those in law enforcement, you're free to do so.

Who did that?

Can anyone show exactly what post they are complaining about?

Just be sure to include every single occupation, and every single person, for that matter. No occupation is free from the occasional troublesome employee(s).

Did that, way back in the thread.

 

[reba]

Hey do we need to let this thread cool off...

 

[jasonc]

Stop, you are being narrow-minded. I don't believe in deadly force. I think I like tasers?

tasers, don't stop all the time. being tazed and trained in them i know the weaknesses. i can ride out the shocking and then pull the wire from my skin and go after the officer. i have seen that done and the cop was knocked out. tasers and oc spray are tools not be all cure all. some agencies don't allow that for the reason of well people have died from that use. remember you can fall and hit you head and die. or the heart issues from the crack users. less then lethal its called that for a reason. it still can kill. a baton in my hand isn't by nature deadly if i hit the muscle regions designated but if you move your head into the position of the end of the stick and die its well deadly then. it happens. nothing is perfect.

 

[jasonc]

the maximum time a taser can be held is 45 seconds. criminals that have been tazed a few times will know that. i have watched vidoes of an 85 pound female escaper her handcuffs and come out throw back windshield and remover her cuffs while leaving her skin in them. there is small percentage of those in this world.

 

[sojourner4Christ]

...sometimes even the background check doesn't work.

"..."a pattern of lack of maturity, indiscretion and not following instructions," a "dangerous loss of composure during live range training" and an "inability to manage personal stress."

"I do not believe time, nor training, will be able to change or correct these deficiencies,"...

]US Court Says it’s Okay for Police Departments to Refuse to Hire Someone who is Too Smart[/COLOR][/SIZE]

Romans 13:4 NKJV tells us that the police officer is a minister of God for our good.

Not quite.

My question is why is there a rising disconnect between the police officer and citizens? What does the word of God say about this subject?

In Romans 13, does verse 1 say, "let every soul be subject unto all governments"? Or does it say, "let every soul (including governing authorities such as kings, judges, police, etc.) be subject unto the higher powers"? Who do souls belong to? God says:

Ezekiel 18:4, "Behold, all souls are mine."

And the second part of verse 1 tells us who the higher powers are: "...For there is no power but of God."

The souls of the governmental powers belong to God, and they are not the higher powers, the higher powers are held by Christ himself (Matthew 28:18). Is our Lord not the higher power, then, if all power has been committed unto him (John 17:2)? Christ is the governor among the nations (Psalms 22:28). All power over earthly kings has been given unto him (Romans 14:9). All judgment has been given unto him (John 5:22,27). Notice the separation of power in Romans 13:1. All power comes from, and belongs to, God (Psalm 62:11) and not the one exercising it. And remember that most men, especially those constituting the "governing authorities," usually deny that power given to Jesus (2 Timothy 3:5).

In reply to the blind opinion that all kings, princes, and governments are set up and "ordained" by God, we will quote the following passage, which is spoken into the ears of Hosea by God Almighty himself. We pray that those who have eyes to see and ears to hear will no longer engage in such opinions:

They have set up kings, but not by me: they have made princes, and I knew it not. (Hos 8:4)
Also,

Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing? The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD, and against his anointed, saying, Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us." (Psa 2:1-3)

There's no Godly ordination there.

When scripture speaks of obeying and submitting ourselves to those who have the rule over us, God’s word is not talking about heathen governments, but those "rulers" within Jesus Christ's assembly. Notice carefully Heb. 13:17 says these rulers "watch for your souls." Governments of men cannot govern or watch for anyone's souls, for they can only govern outward acts, not the inward being. But true spiritual leaders do watch for our souls.

Those who "have the rule over you" at Hebrews 13:17 is specifically defined a few verses earlier in Hebrews 13:7, "Remember them which have the rule over you, who have spoken unto you the word of God: whose faith follow, considering the end of their conversation."

As we can see, scripture itself defines these "rulers" as those who speak the word of God and have faith. Secular governments avoid, and often forbid, speaking the word of God within their system through outlawing prayer in their schools and replacing it with such unrighteousness as "the theory of evolution," and by taking down the "Ten Commandments" from their courtrooms. These are not the rulers we are to submit to.

 

[AirDancer]

Why would a department not want to hire someone who is "too smart"?

If the person is arrogant, doesn't have common sense, doesn't have people skills, has an attitude against all those who don't share the same 'smart' level, has health issues, or has a criminal record.

(These are merely the initial thoughts that popped into my head; therefore, it is by no means an exhaustive list.)

There are any number of reasons why some "too smart" people wouldn't qualify for law enforcement work.

 

[Kenny_ms]

US Court Says it’s Okay for Police Departments to Refuse to Hire Someone who is Too Smart

Not quite.

In Romans 13, does verse 1 say, "let every soul be subject unto all governments"? Or does it say, "let every soul (including governing authorities such as kings, judges, police, etc.) be subject unto the higher powers"? Who do souls belong to? God says:

Ezekiel 18:4, "Behold, all souls are mine."

And the second part of verse 1 tells us who the higher powers are: "...For there is no power but of God."

The souls of the governmental powers belong to God, and they are not the higher powers, the higher powers are held by Christ himself (Matthew 28:18). Is our Lord not the higher power, then, if all power has been committed unto him (John 17:2)? Christ is the governor among the nations (Psalms 22:28). All power over earthly kings has been given unto him (Romans 14:9). All judgment has been given unto him (John 5:22,27). Notice the separation of power in Romans 13:1. All power comes from, and belongs to, God (Psalm 62:11) and not the one exercising it. And remember that most men, especially those constituting the "governing authorities," usually deny that power given to Jesus (2 Timothy 3:5).

In reply to the blind opinion that all kings, princes, and governments are set up and "ordained" by God, we will quote the following passage, which is spoken into the ears of Hosea by God Almighty himself. We pray that those who have eyes to see and ears to hear will no longer engage in such opinions:

They have set up kings, but not by me: they have made princes, and I knew it not. (Hos 8:4)
Also,

Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing? The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD, and against his anointed, saying, Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us." (Psa 2:1-3)

There's no Godly ordination there.

When scripture speaks of obeying and submitting ourselves to those who have the rule over us, God’s word is not talking about heathen governments, but those "rulers" within Jesus Christ's assembly. Notice carefully Heb. 13:17 says these rulers "watch for your souls." Governments of men cannot govern or watch for anyone's souls, for they can only govern outward acts, not the inward being. But true spiritual leaders do watch for our souls.

Those who "have the rule over you" at Hebrews 13:17 is specifically defined a few verses earlier in Hebrews 13:7, "Remember them which have the rule over you, who have spoken unto you the word of God: whose faith follow, considering the end of their conversation."

As we can see, scripture itself defines these "rulers" as those who speak the word of God and have faith. Secular governments avoid, and often forbid, speaking the word of God within their system through outlawing prayer in their schools and replacing it with such unrighteousness as "the theory of evolution," and by taking down the "Ten Commandments" from their courtrooms. These are not the rulers we are to submit to.

OK, lets start here:

Romans 13 King James Version (KJV)
13 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.

And you say:

In Romans 13, does verse 1 say, "let every soul be subject unto all governments"? Or does it say, "let every soul (including governing authorities such as kings, judges, police, etc.) be subject unto the higher powers"?

Some versions say "government" but we'll stick with the KJV for the moment.

Then you say:

And the second part of verse 1 tells us who the higher powers are: "...For there is no power but of God."

That is the first glitch in your interpretation. No, it does not answer who the higher "powers" (plural) are, it answers who the higher "power" (singular) is. Best I can tell, that still leaves it open for the "powers" to be defined as the governments. Also "there is no power but of God", as I see it, means that power "of god" is the government. Of god as in "of this world" and to be clear "of this world" has nothing to do with the conversation, I just use that as an example of how "Of god" is used here.

It's late so that's all I'll touch on for now but I will say, if you are going to turn the understood meaning for those verses on their head and teach something completely different, I suggest you use your eyes to see what you did there and explain why the discrepancy. I grant you, it's a small discrepancy but IMO, one well worth considering on such an important issue/claim.

Had I looked into it more, maybe, but I'm not convinced you are wrong yet but I'm not convinced you are right either.

 

[sojourner4Christ]

That is the first glitch in your interpretation. No, it does not answer who the higher "powers" (plural) are, it answers who the higher "power" (singular) is. Best I can tell, that still leaves it open for the "powers" to be defined as the governments.

Romans 13 has been widely interpreted to simply mean all believers should obey the government because government has been ordained of God. This particular view is a gross distortion of the truth. In this context, I've found that when a superficial reading of a certain text somehow doesn't seem logical, it's useful to look at the actions of the writer to see if his life and actions are consistent with your interpretation of his teaching. In short, when Paul writes that "they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation," but the book of Acts shows Paul repeatedly doing just that, there must be something wrong with our understanding of the text. And that's precisely what we see throughout the New Testament.

It is noteworthy that modern copyrighted “versions” of .The Holy Bible have changed the phrase “higher powers” to merely “governing authorities,” thereby obscuring the necessary distinction between Godly authority and ungodly authority, between God’s kingdom and Satan’s kingdom.

When Paul writes in the opening statement of Romans chapter 13, "Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers," the obvious question is who or what are the higher powers? This phrase would have to apply to any higher powers, be they spiritual or earthly. Obviously, in the spiritual realm, there are good and bad powers. On one side we have the Lord and his great angelic host. In the other group, we find Lucifer and "the angels which kept not their first estate" (Jude 1:6). This fallen host most certainly qualifies as a "higher power," for Satan is referred to as the "prince of the power of the air" (Ephesians 2:2). Later in that same book, Paul tells us "We wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places" (Ephesians 6:12).

Common sense tells you that Paul is not telling us to be "subject to" the Satanic higher powers in the spiritual .realm, so why do we assume he is telling us to be subject to evil earthly .powers? How could it be scriptural for us to cooperate with the earthly agency of that spiritual wickedness? The next verse says "Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation." If we resist the evil .in the spiritual .realm, it's clear we don't receive damnation as a result! How then, could this verse mean if we resist evil in the earthly .realm we receive damnation? In other words, in cases where the evil is vested in government, the idea that we are no longer to resist this evil is ludicrous.

Paul is telling us we must not resist the righteous power of God - whether it is manifested in the heavenlies or in various earthly sectors - including righteous government.

 

[Northman]

I didn't justify actions deemed innapriopriate.but she is a pacifist response to any law broken is not to call the cops.the cops must enforce laws.you have leeway in some methods of detention.but either way if their is enough evidence to arest they have to.I don't justify improper uses of force
are their travesty of justice of course.but we westerners have no clue about an oppressive government.try having an armed man pointing a gun at you saying pay the toll or tax to the private war lord to travel down this road.I have seen that.that is a bad government.or anarchy I'm not ignoring the encroachING of the government on basic rights.I know that is an issue.

The only reason I spoke is because an insult was dropped.

What I see here is constant elevation of employees of the state over fellow believers. It's all picking and choosing and being selective. The same folks that get all upset at the mere mention of someone in uniform doing something wrong have zero problems mouthing off about someone higher in the chain of command(usually all the way to the top).

The fact that someone would treat someone here with contempt because they simply spoke their mind about a genuine issue to them involving the powers that be shows me that those here are not their family.

As far as being a westerner goes, yes Jason I do understand differences and oppression and tribalism and all that, and I'm not the only one from this continent that hasn't been a soldier that does. You don't have to be a soldier or pilot or police officer or whatever for the government to be able to understand killing, loss, psychology or anything else.

If Romans 13 means everything that a good chunk of the body below the 49th says it means, then why would we, as followers of Christ, support worldly entities that trample on all the God given authority of rulers in foreign lands?

 

[jasonc]

The only reason I spoke is because an insult was dropped.

What I see here is constant elevation of employees of the state over fellow believers. It's all picking and choosing and being selective. The same folks that get all upset at the mere mention of someone in uniform doing something wrong have zero problems mouthing off about someone higher in the chain of command(usually all the way to the top).

The fact that someone would treat someone here with contempt because they simply spoke their mind about a genuine issue to them involving the powers that be shows me that those here are not their family.

As far as being a westerner goes, yes Jason I do understand differences and oppression and tribalism and all that, and I'm not the only one from this continent that hasn't been a soldier that does. You don't have to be a soldier or pilot or police officer or whatever for the government to be able to understand killing, loss, psychology or anything else.

If Romans 13 means everything that a good chunk of the body below the 49th says it means, then why would we, as followers of Christ, support worldly entities that trample on all the God given authority of rulers in foreign lands?

we toppled a lawful elected official called hitler who lawfully in his land was killing men of my kindred and others. one of three that we toppled or controlled(Japan's Hirohito was allowed to rule as ceremonial purposes).he too was following the will of the people. albeit in deception but he had enough control that one million civilians believed him and fought against American troops when we landed in Okinawa.that is what we felt the need to bomb japan with the at a bombs. the military was hard that even after that they didn't want to surrender. they tried to kill Hirohito for suggesting it. he felt it was enough. there would be nothing left of Japan if the war went on. his people were suffering as we blockaded them for months.

 

[sojourner4Christ]

Northman has highlighted dangers when one tries to serve two masters:

What I see here is constant elevation of employees of the state over fellow believers. It's all picking and choosing and being selective.

And who is “elevating” them? And for what purpose(s)? Why would we look to the godless State? Simply because we have turned our backs on God and his law.

You don't have to be a soldier or pilot or police officer or whatever for the government to be able to understand killing, loss, psychology or anything else.

Indeed. Even ungodly authority acknowledges that, say, murder is wrong (although even murder is negotiable in Caesar’s arbitrary and capricious world, e.g. abortion is now legal).

And his finale:

If Romans 13 means everything that a good chunk of the body below the 49th says it means, then why would we, as followers of Christ, support worldly entities that trample on all the God given authority of rulers in foreign lands?

That sums up the problem with the present worldly authority, and why believers are not to partake of it.

Imagine this tragedy: believers voluntarily appearing before unbelievers for judgment! And it happens every day, folks, with something as simple as walking into Caesar’s traffic court because Caesar has accused you of violating one of his rules that you previously had agreed to obey. (There’s the kicker: you, the free flesh-and-blood man in Christ, voluntarily submitting yourself to Caesar’s jurisdiction.)

Scripture says, ‘when they haul you before the magistrates.’ Nothing ‘voluntary’ on the believer’s part about that. Caesar enforces his contracts, so when you violate scripture, when you strike hands/contract with the heathen, then Caesar can legally enforce those commercial contracts against you. It’s called “rendering to Caesar what is Caesar’s.”

Conversely, if you want to walk in true liberty in Christ, then avoid the wicked ways of the world and its consequences. Do not contract with the ungodly. Avoid commercial activity. Do not partake of Caesarian benefits packages, which always have unfavorable enforced duties attached. Do not touch the unclean thing. Avoid, not evade.

This is the rotten fruit of trying to serve two masters. This is how God’s people are destroyed for lack of knowledge. The Caesarian government sanctioned churches, partakers of Caesar’s benefits packages, tout the Caesarian partly line to their congregations, telling them the lie that all government is ordained of God, and therefore you must submit to it, including the evil therein. What double mindedness. What rubbish. What lies. What a tragedy.

Rather, you do have choice. Therefore, choose wisely.

 

[Kenny_ms]

Romans 13 has been widely interpreted to simply mean all believers should obey the government because government has been ordained of God. This particular view is a gross distortion of the truth. In this context, I've found that when a superficial reading of a certain text somehow doesn't seem logical, it's useful to look at the actions of the writer to see if his life and actions are consistent with your interpretation of his teaching. In short, when Paul writes that "they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation," but the book of Acts shows Paul repeatedly doing just that, there must be something wrong with our understanding of the text. And that's precisely what we see throughout the New Testament.

It is noteworthy that modern copyrighted “versions” of .The Holy Bible have changed the phrase “higher powers” to merely “governing authorities,” thereby obscuring the necessary distinction between Godly authority and ungodly authority, between God’s kingdom and Satan’s kingdom.

When Paul writes in the opening statement of Romans chapter 13, "Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers," the obvious question is who or what are the higher powers? This phrase would have to apply to any higher powers, be they spiritual or earthly. Obviously, in the spiritual realm, there are good and bad powers. On one side we have the Lord and his great angelic host. In the other group, we find Lucifer and "the angels which kept not their first estate" (Jude 1:6). This fallen host most certainly qualifies as a "higher power," for Satan is referred to as the "prince of the power of the air" (Ephesians 2:2). Later in that same book, Paul tells us "We wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places" (Ephesians 6:12).

Common sense tells you that Paul is not telling us to be "subject to" the Satanic higher powers in the spiritual .realm, so why do we assume he is telling us to be subject to evil earthly .powers? How could it be scriptural for us to cooperate with the earthly agency of that spiritual wickedness? The next verse says "Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation." If we resist the evil .in the spiritual .realm, it's clear we don't receive damnation as a result! How then, could this verse mean if we resist evil in the earthly .realm we receive damnation? In other words, in cases where the evil is vested in government, the idea that we are no longer to resist this evil is ludicrous.

Paul is telling us we must not resist the righteous power of God - whether it is manifested in the heavenlies or in various earthly sectors - including righteous government.

I'm not convinced yet.

Maybe you thought my comments on your comments didn't hold water and you may or may not be right, but in order to get anywhere with this, you at least need to address my post #55. You can't just skip over someones rebuttal and expect that someone to just assume you are correct when they see holes in your theory that need addressing.