Paul was a Citizen of Rome

[juststartingout]

I don't know if this belongs here or under the Citizenship discussion, but seeing as it is about Citizenship and Religion I will post it here.



In my journey I have come across quite a few that believe/write that as Believers, our citizenship is in Heaven and we should not claim citzenship anywhere else. While it all sounds good and makes sense - how these Sovereigns get to their conclusions - one thing still lingers in the back of my mind.



If they are claiming this based on Scripture - what about Paul, who mentioned that he was a citizen of Rome? He was CLEARLY a citizen of the kingdom of heaven, but yet claimed citizenship of another country here on earth and put himself under that jurisdiction (or so it seems) for that moment in time.



What I have been trying to grasp at and have not been able to put together is: What does this mean for us? The example of Paul claiming he was a citizen of Rome and yet he is a citizen of Heaven at the same time. I have read some person's interpretation that we cannot serve two masters that it means we cannot have two gov'ts that we serve. So how does this all come into play?



I appreciate anyone's thoughts on this.

[wirlwind]

I don't think that we can state that we re only citizens of Heaven, because while we are still on this earth there is a plan for our lives from Our Father. I once heard it said that some people were so focused on Heaven that they were no earthly good to the Lord. We still have to live our lives on this earth and there is a multitude of work that has to be done for The Lord before His return.



snyway, that is my humble opinion.



Donna

[Ice]

Before Paul became a citizen of Heaven he was a citizen of Rome. He allowed their their presumption of his citizenship to continue FOR THE GLORY OF THE FATHER. It was for His glory that Paul went to Rome. Paul had to appear before the enemy. Read it a few times and keep in mind that all things happened for His Glory.



We are just sojourners... we are only passing through.

[KaosTheory]

At the time that Paul was speaking, he was a citizen of Rome. Legally, this carried certain benefits.



No one here on earth can prove that they are a citizen of Heaven. There is no verse in the Bible that says this. There is no verse in the Bible that says that Christians go to Heaven when they die. What is said is that we will be resurrected at the appointed time to live in the Kingdom that will be re-established here on earth. At least, this is what my Bible says.



Even Paul agrees with this when he says "Some of our brothers have fallen asleep" He did not say that they had gone to Heaven. Jesus said that He descended from Heaven but that is not a license to claim that we will go to Heaven when we die. Where did Lazarus go when he died? Nowhere. He stayed in his tomb until he was resurrected at the appointed time. This was done give us a preview of things to come and to show that our death is not final if we rely on Jesus, who has power and authority to resurrect our dead bodies.



Anyway, that is the way I understand it at the time.



KT

[fulltitle]

Originally Posted by juststartingout

I don't know if this belongs here or under the Citizenship discussion, but seeing as it is about Citizenship and Religion I will post it here.



In my journey I have come across quite a few that believe/write that as Believers, our citizenship is in Heaven and we should not claim citzenship anywhere else. While it all sounds good and makes sense - how these Sovereigns get to their conclusions - one thing still lingers in the back of my mind.

If they are claiming this based on Scripture - what about Paul, who mentioned that he was a citizen of Rome? He was CLEARLY a citizen of the kingdom of heaven, but yet claimed citizenship of another country here on earth and put himself under that jurisdiction (or so it seems) for that moment in time.



What I have been trying to grasp at and have not been able to put together is: What does this mean for us? The example of Paul claiming he was a citizen of Rome and yet he is a citizen of Heaven at the same time. I have read some person's interpretation that we cannot serve two masters that it means we cannot have two gov'ts that we serve. So how does this all come into play?

I appreciate anyone's thoughts on this.

WITHOUT PREJUDICE
What comes to mind is the NT exhortation to work as though you are working for God. To obey the statutes, ordinances--the applicable ones. If you are working for a boss and God says obey that boss, are you doing what the boss is telling you or are you doing what God is telling you. If God says obey the statutes but obey God above and beyond the states are you obeying God or the state? I am convinced those exhortations are there as a blanket protection to keep us single-mastered.

Relevant to the temporal issues, even in the military (contrary to what may be popular opinion), obeying a command does not mean doing something inherently wrong. A senior officer who demands a lower ranking solider to betray one's fellow soliders to which one has an oath of allegience, for example, would not be obeying an order because the senior officer's directive would not be an order by definition.

"Well, see God my Grand Dragon KKK leader told me that since their skin is brown we should..."

"Well, see God the president told me to put my baby on the lap of Molech and..."

"Well, see God..."

"We were only obeying orders..." -Nuremberg trials

***

As far as citizenship in heaven.

"Our conversation is in heaven."

Conversation is used in various places in the Epistles and I'd say its worth looking up the definition of conversation.

Ephesians 1,2 indicate that we were raised to sit together in Lord Jesus the Christ who himself was set in the heavenlies at the right hand of God above all power, and principality and might and dominion and above every name that is named. The word sit/set are governmental terms not necc. just about a comfy place to sit down.

"For our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ..." Phillipians 3:20

politeuma - conversation ->

1) the administration of civil affairs or of a commonwealth

2) the constitution of a commonwealth, form of government and the laws by which it is administered

3) a state, commonwealth

a) the commonwealth of citizens

....

American Hertiage Dictionary:

1. a. The spoken exchange of thoughts, opinions, and feelings; talk. b. An instance of this: held a long conversation on the subject. 2. An informal discussion of a matter by representatives of governments, institutions, or organizations.

....

The seat of governance is where _____? (Hint: begins with 'h')

[Livefire]

Great post fulltitle,

I will add that it is a part of military regulations that only LAWFUL orders are to be obeyed! In other words, if an officer gives an order that countermands a regulation, the regulation prevails.

[macerico]

In a way, this topic is ironic.

In Roman times, you had Citizens and you had slaves.

Citizens had rights. Slaves did not.

Slaves paid taxes. Citizens did not.

Paul being a Citizen of Rome was favored compared to many of his Christen brethern who were servants of Rome via occupation and subjugation.

Something to think about.

If you are a "citizen" in the USA, do you have "rights" anymore or are you regarded as a servant and slave by the state?

[idknow]

Originally Posted by juststartingout

I don't know if this belongs here or under the Citizenship discussion, but seeing as it is about Citizenship and Religion I will post it here.



In my journey I have come across quite a few that believe/write that as Believers, our citizenship is in Heaven and we should not claim citzenship anywhere else. While it all sounds good and makes sense - how these Sovereigns get to their conclusions - one thing still lingers in the back of my mind.



If they are claiming this based on Scripture - what about Paul, who mentioned that he was a citizen of Rome? He was CLEARLY a citizen of the kingdom of heaven, but yet claimed citizenship of another country here on earth and put himself under that jurisdiction (or so it seems) for that moment in time.



What I have been trying to grasp at and have not been able to put together is: What does this mean for us? The example of Paul claiming he was a citizen of Rome and yet he is a citizen of Heaven at the same time. I have read some person's interpretation that we cannot serve two masters that it means we cannot have two gov'ts that we serve. So how does this all come into play?



I appreciate anyone's thoughts on this.

--

re hi, hullew, morning, evening and day.

we are
- citizens of heaven;
- citizens on the land where we were born;
- ambassadors for christ (the anointing)
- we are new creatures [beings] created, formed and made in the image of god.

we are not
- citizens of the earth.

[idknow]

Originally Posted by KaosTheory

[snipt]
No one here on earth can prove that they are a citizen of Heaven. There is no verse in the Bible that says this.

-- q.v. eph 2.19
-- Kaos, it's okay to logical infer the conclusion of a satement from god's word. our heavenly father gave us minds to use for critical analysis.

[snipt]
There is no verse in the Bible that says that Christians go to Heaven when they die.

-- q.v. 2co 5.6 while we are at home *in* the [this] body, we are absent [separated from] the lord

-- q.v. 2co 5.8 [...] to be absent from (separated from) the body is to be **present with the lord**

-- When the flesh ceases to live, breathe, be animated, our spirit "has left the building" we who are reborn go home to be (joine) with the lord.

-- while we are alive, that is, while our spirit resides in our appointed flesh, we are separated from the lord.
What is said is that we will be resurrected at the appointed time to live in the Kingdom that will be re-established here on earth. At least, this is what my Bible says.

-- The word of God refers to Man and to His Holy. man can't live beyond 70-80 years, because god's spirit will not always strive with man. we are not Man. we are NEW Creatures, new beings, old things are dead, gone and passed aways, indeed all things are made anew.

[snipt]

Anyway, that is the way I understand it at the time.

KT

Dearest brother, i respectfully disagree with your conclusion that god's word does not tell us what our disposition is going to be.

I encourage you to expand your use of translations which are not Alexandrian in origin.

seek the light, walk in the sight, be the light.

your anointed brother idknow.

Fulltitle wrote:

Relevant to the temporal issues, even in the military (contrary to what may be popular opinion), obeying a command does not mean doing something inherently wrong. A senior officer who demands a lower ranking solider to betray one's fellow soliders to which one has an oath of allegience, for example, would not be obeying an order because the senior officer's directive would not be an order by definition.

"Well, see God my Grand Dragon KKK leader told me that since their skin is brown we should..."

"Well, see God the president told me to put my baby on the lap of Molech and..."

"Well, see God..."

"We were only obeying orders..." -Nuremberg trials

Yes, I agree. This is exactly why I cannot believe that "god" would ever tell anyone to kill a child... and if "god" did tell anyone to kill their child, (even as a so-called "test") they would have to disobey because to kill a child would be "inherently wrong"... right?

*