You can skip Jim's link and read what the author of the amendment wrote (from article)
The 14th Amendment was actually designed to make citizens of the former slaves freed by the 13th Amendment in 1865, and thus guarantee that they would enjoy all the rights of American citizenship. The phrase â€śand subject to the jurisdiction thereofâ€ť has, of course, been ignored by those promoting the concept of open borders. Clearly, the framers of the 14th Amendment intended that only children â€śborn subject to the jurisdiction thereofâ€ť that is, the jurisdiction of the United States, are considered natural-born citizens. This would, by the clear wording of the amendment, not include the children of illegal aliens or â€śbirth tourists,â€ť because they are still under the jurisdiction of foreign governments.
Senator Jacob Merritt Howard of Michigan, an author of the 14th Amendment, said during the discussions over the effects of the amendment, â€śThis will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners.â€ť
In other words, those who are born in the United States â€śunder the jurisdiction thereofâ€ť would only include those whose parents are American citizens themselves, or those whose parents have placed themselves under U.S. jurisdiction â€” legal residents
John UK wrote: Bro US, thank you for taking the time to share with me the simple fact that you justify the actions found in the article from Nehemiah 4. This is very helpful info and I will bear it in mind. Regarding Luke 22:36-38, when you read it in context, you will discover that the scripture reveals only two swords were required for the purpose. And the purpose was? Self-defense? As in, future self-defense for the apostles and disciples as they went on their missionary journeys? Brother, read the passage prayerfully, and you will come to a better way of understanding it. Ask the Lord Jesus to help you, and he will indeed. I don't need to say anything except to point you to Jesus himself, and get you to ask of him. They are HIS words, and HE knows what he meant by them. So read the words in context, and then ask him what he meant.
Thanks for your kind response. Self correction houses in walled cities were mentioned in the Pentateuch in reference to the year of Jubilee.
Sorry, average reader, but I don't think your comment adds to the discussion. Obviously things are not seen eye to eye but the brethren on both sides are stating their understanding of what the Scriptures teach.
John UK the example in Nehemiah 4 was one of preparation by Nehemiah and the Jewish people for self-defense. (Why do you think they were building the wall?). In many cases they were building the part of the wall that encompassed their home. You canâ€™t say that Nehemiah didnâ€™t pray and trust God. You canâ€™t say he was being a vigilante. You also cannot say that it was part of the law of God for the Old Testament saints because his actions were not covered in the Septuagint. (The first reference to town walls is in Joshua about Rahabâ€™s house in Jericho) It is a Biblical principle, how you apply it is up to you. You name scenarios that have nothing to do with simple self-defense and act like we are trying to start WW3. Our Lord said, a quote yâ€™all seem to conveniently leave out,
Luke 22:36Â Â Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.
We can go back to the days were Christians were persecuted by Catholics (and even Reformers) and you will find that they took up for their own defense. Please donâ€™t waste your time bringing up scenarios, I am talking about the one mentioned in this article, period.
John UK wrote: Well thanks a million brother. You furnish me with a Bible text with no explanation, Nehemiah 4.
This response and the one from 8/20/19 2:12 PM show me you don't care what I think about Nehemiah 4. You have an agenda you are trying to push that I have told you several times is not the same page as what I am talking about. I am not responding to something I am not saying, you have said that you won't either.
John UK wrote: Well thanks a million brother. You furnish me with a Bible text with no explanation, Nehemiah 4. I try to understand what it is you are trying to say by it, and all you can do is repeat ad infinitum, "No, that's not it!" Nehemiah 4:17 KJV (17)Â They which builded on the wall, and they that bare burdens, with those that laded, every one with one of his hands wrought in the work, and with the other hand held a weapon. Let me just say that whatever the situation, we in the UK are not permitted to do that. So what are you suggesting in posting Nehemiah 4? Several things are at stake here: 1. The USA Christians can behave differently from Christians in other countries? 2. The Bible can be interpreted differently in different countries? 3. Culture must be taken into account, and there is no such thing as a "Christian way of life"? 4. Church may or may not be separate from state? 5. Dominionism may or may not be viable? 6. Romans 13 may or may not be rejected as God's plan for the new covenant age?
Finally found the story to which your referred. From the article,
â€śIt has been very hard dealing with this situation as every door of justice seems to be closed simply because we follow a different faith.â€ť] [Pastor Suryam reported an identical experience with authorities to International Christian Concern, saying that every conventional channel of justice had been closed to him,
NOT THE SAME, our government would send police in as additional protection and would NOT prosecute for the killing in self-defense a crazed gunman on our property . Our church protection plan was as in this article trained by law enforcement as to how to act and we have the full support of local law enforcement on our side for what we implemented. It is NOT THE SAME as these brethren in India.
APPLES AND ORANGES John
You continue to bring up situations that do NOT apply to this article.
I leave your discussion to others, as I obviously do not possess the communication skills necessary to discuss this matter with you.
Sorry John your still talking apples when I am discussing oranges. If you donâ€™t believe in self-defense thatâ€™s fine with me. Please make sure you donâ€™t lock your doors, put your money in a safe place, take your keys out if your vehicle or bother looking both ways before crossing the street. Because there is no verse that specifically says you should and you would just be showing your lack of faith.
11 Wherein the king granted the Jews which were in every city to gather themselves together, and to stand for their life, to destroy, to slay and to cause to perish, all the power of the people and province that would assault them
Somehow the Jewish people must have got confused because they celebrate this as God's deliverance for them at the feast of Purim, mentioned by the way in the New Testament
Not the same page!!! Spiritual warfare, Godâ€™s kingdom here on Earth are not the same as protecting yourself from crazed gun shooters randomly taking lives. The discussion on the one side is about apples while the other side is talking about oranges Thus it goes nowhere The Bible, as previously pointed out, does address the matter of self-protection in a positive manner (see response to Johnâ€™s inquiries). If yâ€™all donâ€™t want to acknowledge that itâ€™s on you.
We need to look even at martyrdom with a balanced view. The disciples stopped Paul from speaking to a crowd for fear for his life. He wa let down in basket to avoid being killed. He had two hundred soldiers bring him to safety so as not to be killed for his faith. Peter left to an undisclosed location to preserve his life
I am not on the page and never have been on the page of whether it is right to die for your faith. We agree there. I am speaking about self defense from a random shooter and you keep changing the subject to self defense against those who are specifically persecuting someone for their faith in Christ. Weâ€™re not on the same page