In every political/economic system

I understand where you're coming from now. You actually want socialism to take over in America because you don't see anything special about the blessings God have given us. That would explain just about every one of your points. It's that kind of thinking that can contribute to bringing down America. Hopefully there will always be enough who think otherwise to counter your kind of foolish thinking. It's hopeless to argue with someone who's reached such a point. Twisting of words - including scripture - is a specialty of such. Such debate does for a while with due tolerance serve the positive purpose of strengthening one's own resolve, however, and for that I thank you for the opportunity to take up for the America that I know was founded and prospered by and through God's providence. Despite the faults here and there, the service of all veterans, including me, in the defense of this nation was not at all in vain and I'm glad we still have a nation as great as we do. I hope we will be blessed with leaders who can get us back on track - reverse some of the bad trends - and keep us there in the future. I hope your ideas fall flat on their face as they well deserve and we never see the light of single day in any other type government such as you think is our equal until, of course, the day the Lord returns and all else will be naught.

 

Are you pitching for organized labor again? I can't help but ask noting the comment about the lay off of employees in the North.

I'm glad America put an end to slavery in our nation! Aren't you? Those English, who'd outlawed it, had continued the lucrative trading of slaves with their African partners - yes, they were in it as well - to be sold in America as well as trading with the Colonies for the products of their labor. I'm glad America eventually rose above all that and more towards the ideals established by its independence. Aren't you?

The Americans objected to paying taxes to a foreign King whom they believed had no jurisdiction to do so - not to their own government which they believed was lawful. They got tired of working as slaves for the King of England. But, of course, this was one of many motivations. Who gives whom the right to tax others?

What were the Canadians trading with England and France? What was the status compared to ours? Maybe it's too cold for tea parties in Canada!

Why did God tell the Jews to go take the land from existing occupants, kill all the men, women, and children except the women who were still virgins who could be kept as slaves? Surely He did not condone murder and slavery, did He? I want to know where America was at the time?

Can anyone establish themselves as a government and command the obedience of others without their consent and be considered legitimate under God's law? Is such a dominion perpetual and binding on all descendants forever? Would we be obligated to obey such a power under Romans 13 as some conclude given that Rome took over the land of the Jews? I want to know just in case we're invaded by Mexico or China or France? Surely, such a comparison, we should refuse to fight against it if it God's intent that we subject ourselves to their rule!

I'm also wondering what happened to all the native tribes in Europe that were displaced by the settlers who moved in? Surely they were allowed to retain their sovereign nation status and have lived in prosperity to this day following their old ways? I know France, England, Spain, etc. all handled this properly, didn't they?

 

One more time, Eric B, it is our economic and political systems that are better than any other yet known to man - not the individuals who are blessed to live under it. Don't you see that or do you think socialism and communism are better systems?

 

Yes, I have admitted that I'm a sinner and a bad one at that!

Bingo, Eric B, the way a collective group of sinners produces a good system is by and through the providence of God. That's how we established and sustained this nation.

What's tasteless is your lack of recognition and appreciation for the economic and political systems that America has and you're inference that it's all the product of sinfulness.

 

So, Eric B, I never claimed the Bible specifically defined our particular economic and political systems so there's no "now" in it!

I do not know the mind of God - He's too big for me and for you too! But it's clear from history that what we have has worked better than any other systems, that foundation of our law is Biblical law, and that our founders generally had a reverence for the blessings God bestowed upon us for whatever reasons He willed. They desired to reduce some of the injustice that was prevalent in the royalty of the times.

I will note that God was reluctant to give the Jews a king like the pagans had but that's what they wanted and that's what He gave them. There are other clues in the Bible as well although nothing absolute. But, then the purpose of the Bible, is not to be a manual for the organization and management of economic and political systems. The principles are what matter and discerning men acting under the providence of God did establish good systems for our nation. I'm glad for that!

What economic and political systems do you think are best if you don't think ours are? Do you like socialism? Do you like communism? Do you want an earthly King? Do you want to be ruled by a United Nations? What do you want?

 

Will you stop with this already? It is getting sickening when all you and your ilk do is argue by accusing the other side of favoring "the enemy". If you can criticize the liberal government in America without being an ememy of America, then why can't anyone criticize other things about it? You have your mind made up that one aspect of this nation is all good and above reproach, and the other is all bad, and unAmerican; so you get to dictate what can be criticized in this country, and what makes one an enemy if they criticize.

Argue over what I say, not what you want to imagine me saying so you can hold up the "socialist" card and think you win by default that way. Else, you show you have no argument!

And if you're using that as justification for the that occurred slavery here; then that was on the Old Testament, and you objected yesterday to me comparing America in your ideology to Israel.

And this claim still ends up glorifying those individuals in that collective, who can now justify anything their collective does, and still call themselves "good"; though not individually, just collectively, because it was "God" who made them good. ANYONE can do that! That is why I mentioned Islam, because this is exactly what they do. Now don't go and accuse me of favoring them again; I'm critical of both of you, because I see y'all doing the same exact things. It's a giant battle of huge religious egos vying for supremacy in the world, and using God's name for their own validation.
You're using a cyclical argument. Their system was good, because of God's providence, and that it was God's providence is proven, because their system was so good. But not everyone believes it was so good. That does not convince everyone, unless you have a preconception of its goodness. Of course, when this is pointed out, you just make the person an enemy of the state (ad-hominem).

I'd seem more appreciative of it, if people weren't trying to place blame all on one side, and refuse to deal with the errors of the other side. (And to return this to the original point, it was about private sector vs govt. not the founders or God's providence. You really hijacked this down a rabbit trail, so you could demonize the other side as anti-American!)

That's disputable, as things were twisted, and too much was taken from the Old Testament out of context, and not taking into consideration the changes brought by the Cross. Again, there is no commission in the NT to go conquering other lands, killing heathens, enslaving them (whether they already warred and enslaved each other or not), burn witches, or any of that other stuff.

I don't know which I favor. I'm used to this one, and would be afraid to try another, so I can't say from any comparison which is better for myself. So I realize all of them are corrupt and fallen, and realize there would be other problems in the other systems. Some would be "worse" (meaning harder to live in). Yet I've also seen people who came from the eastern bloc who were disillusioned with this country (even though some things might be better), and they related to my complaints.
So I've given up on any idealistic hope regarding politics, and just try to live the best way I can in the system I am in and be a good, law-abiding citizen. But that does not mean I have to like everything about it, any more than you don't like everything about it. We just fault different things for what we see wrong. I do not say the things you fault have no part in the blame, and that you are anti-American government for it, or favor Nazi/fascism, which is actually extreme Right and says some of the same things conservatives do.

 

It would be good if you would do that!

With regard to the socialist question you still haven't answered. So, again, are you a socialist or not? I ask because you seem to really be down on capitalism.

Also, there's really no winning or loosing in this forum in case you haven't figured that out yet! No one is going to concede and no one is going to call a winner or a loser. I am not doing this to win a debate with you - I don't care if you agree or not!

 

What don't you stop your blanket categorizations? I don't object to criticism about the short comings our system nor ideas as to how it can be improved. But I certainly do object to the tearing down of the very foundations of those systems such as your assertion that God has not blessed our nation from its beginnings until now and that it is fundamentally no better than any other systems in the world otherwise known as normalization.

 

First, I didn't address this to you but I see you've grabbed all the comments to Billwald as well. I think you want to argue the point! No it's not a justification for slavery. You conveniently left out some of the additional comments I made didn't you? You know what I'm talking, don't you? This part: "I'm glad America eventually rose above all that and more towards the ideals established by its independence. Aren't you?" So, since you jumped on this, can you answer the question or do you think it's all about winning some argument? It's not!

 

Now just who's going down the rabbit trail? I think we started with you "demonizing" capitalism and equating the power of government to the power of business. I keep making the point that capitalism works very well even though it does have some faults and there is a role for government to regulate it in the interest of justice. I also have made the point that government has the force of law behind it while free market regulates capitalism.

I will call being anti-American what it is because it is a grave threat to our nation regardless the motive behind it. We can destroy this country from within before an enemy even starts to attack from without. One big step towards that is the idea that socialism might be a good replacement for capitalism and using the government is the way to get there.

 

I think you are going around in circles here with your words!

Just what part of the American economic or political systems do you think is not the best yet invented and what would you desire to change? If you've got some great idea to lay on the table let's hear it. But if you just want to talk abstracts then I say you're selling something we don't need and don't want and it most likely is something that's already been tried and failed to dire consequences of its victims. So come out with, Eric B, if you've got it and the rest of dummies don't!

 

So then I guess, by this position, we should scrap the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, the Pledge of Allegiance, the National Anthem, etc. because they all, in some way or another, point to God's providence in establishing and sustaining of our nation.

Islam desires to use force, the force of law, to impose the worship of Allah on all men and women. Our political system is based upon awareness of who God is and that all power comes from Him and through Him but leaves the matters of religion to a Church free of control by the State.

We use God's name in praise for His blessings - not to justify our actions past, present, or future although we certainly ought to pray that what we do is truly His will.

 

I haven't given up on America! I know it's not perfect. I know man is fallen and inherently sinful. But I also know God is great and works His will through His providential acts at the individual and national level.

I know that when men pray and seek His will they are much more likely to do it. I believe that's what happened when this nation was founded. I believe God has blessed this nation because for generations we maintained a strong awareness that He was behind it all and we feared the consequences of turning away from Him. I'm not so certain about the future but I haven't given up on America and certainly not of God's ability to chasten us back into the right paths.

I do see differences in the political ideology of various groups that can have an impact on that. I do see the dangers of socialism and other systems that can harm America.

I do not want to meander through life thinking it makes no difference what I say or what I do even though I know God is in control regardless. When someone - and many have tried and failed - can fully explain the concurrent existence of God's sovereignty and man's individual will then maybe I can understand how doing nothing but following the leader is okay. In the mean time I hope to remain active in political issues so as to impact the direction our nation goes or does not go.

By the way, what on earth are you doing participating in a political forum if you think it's all corrupt, none of it matters, and you've given up hope? Such a negative view will add no helpful direction to the process!

 

This is your personal interpretation.... although it is highly representative of what most people think.

Paul references his Roman citizenship repeatedly in various passages of scripture related to his own defense and even his resistance to demands to honor man's law over God's authority.

In this passage, he gives no reference to Romanish law and government. God did initiate government..... the passage is correct. And God's plan for government was to serve the good of man and be a terror to lawbreakers.

The plan which God gave man...... permitted all kinds of liberty but established stops for criminal injury and immorality, which harms others.... and for dishonoring his (God's) authority.

The summation of law which God gave man..... was to love God, and love your neighbor as yourself.
The model of God's government was latter rejected when the nation clammored for a king. God told the prophet Samuel, that this human system would be corrupted and the people would come to regret their decision, but he would appoint a king to get them started. But before man's govervment...........

God established a plan for the government of man...... consult the OT to see how his plan was set up.......
The following I take from pg 16 in the book The 5000 Year Leap, a miracle which changed the world:

Prior to the formation of the Israelites as a nation, the patriarchs were the heads of state over their families, their slaves and servants and servants children, their cattle and lands and they derived their authority from God and honored God.

When Israel became a nation and left Egypt, the government given to it was.... God the supreme authority, Moses as leader by God's election, Aaron over internal affairs, and Joshua over military. Proceeding downward in authority by degrees.... the next was the Council of Seventy....(a 'senate' type)..... then elected representatives (a congress type).
This comprised the leadership of the nation.

Then we have the breakdown into smaller governmental divisions:
600 groups of 1000 families
6,000 groups of 100 families
12,000 groups of 50 families
60,000 groups of 10 families
more than 600 thousand families
to the least governmental unit
more than 3 million people responsible to God for governing themselves.

At each tier was a justice system and a system of appeals. The requirements for prosecution were very strict on evidence and witnesses, so prosecution, though with severe consequences, was likely infrequent.
-----------------
I don't know that I agree with this interpretation entirely, but it does give us something to think about with regard to our own system of government.

 

We are living in a generation which expects instant coffee, food, relief, gratification, knowledge, health, cure, etc.. Books which would take days or weeks to read... are watched on screen as a movie in less than 2 hours. There's even been abridgments of the Bible published, for those who want compact information without redundancy. We no longer use sentences, diagram structure or word usage. Instead of writing letters we use email and abbreviate phrases (imo-in my opinion, pov-point of view, iow-in other words). We expect instant solutions to problems: Unwilling to take apart their complexities and wrestle the time to determine the smaller elements.... and examine each one to see if its the area which is working or the area which needs fixing.... we often scrap the whole shebang and expect to jump from problem to solution without identifying intermediate steps which spell failure if missed.

Around the mid point of man's history an earth shaking event took place when a man was hung between heaven and earth for the sins of many: His offering and resurrection made possible spiritual healing and eternal life for all who believe in him: But he also gave us freedom and liberty: No longer did man have to live with the fear of death and afterward the judgement provided we accepted by faith his provision of atonement. For a brief while the church enjoyed its freedoms though attempted restraints of persecution scattered it and followed it. Eventually man's government became entwined with religion and began to interfere in a different way with the community of faith, controlling what was taught, who could know and study the documents, and began judgeing the practice and exercise of faith. The Bible was suppressed and kept for a privileged few. The liberty it teaches is a threat and an indictment to the authority of anyone who would attempt to own and control men's souls or take the place of God. Roughly around the 15th century copies of scripture became available to the common man and more translations and copies appeared. No longer could the truth of God's kingdom nor the faith of a people who are not afraid to die be controlled by the dictates of government. Revolutions of faith and in government structure occurred, feudal systems broke up and reorganized into kingdoms and kings were forced to recognize the voice of their people in the making of law in order to enforce it. Parliamentary representation, or similar constructs, which had been tried by earlier civilizations, were reborn, and some governments in the 'old world' became the laboratory of experience and trial and error which were revisited by our founders as they recognized the increasing tyranny of kings and parliaments which regarded not the equal citizenship of the colonialist. We broke free, and, unencumbered by threats of other nations upon our borders and isolated by sea, our founders, though not all Christians, still had their grounding in the popular works of their day, which included the Bible, Plato and Cicero, Baron Charles de Montesquieu, John Locke, amongst other revered writings. They had respect for God as Creator and provider, and the teachings of Jesus Christ as the highest values of man's noblest ambitions of living. They fought and debated intensely among themselves, and asked for the wisdom and providence of God, before they came to agreements which they placed in documents setting up the best form of government which was in their power to devise. Some were even then reluctant to sign on, but, debate having been exhausted to the point that there seemed no other perfection possible, the signatures were gathered: They readily admitted to themselves and before the people that the government which was now being established was by its own making submissive to and dependent upon the people to maintain and keep it. A lady asked Mr. Franklin about what kind of government did he give her. His reply, "A republic, madame, if you can keep it."

It should be noted, after this, that all the ills with which people criticise the US, came before and after the formation of our government..... but one doesn't find those ills or criticisms present in the documents themselves. Even Frederick Douglass, a former slave and statesman advocate for abolition, appealed to President Lincoln for a constitutional challenge to abolish slavery. He recognized that within those founding documents was all the appeal necessary if intellectual honesty met with moral absolutes regarding the equality in the value of life as God created all mankind.

George Washington, with much foresight, encouraged cautionary approach to treaties and agreements. The strength and spirit of the Monroe Doctrine was to maintain our independence from entanglements into the governments of other nations nor allow them opportunity to entangle theirs with ours. The strength and the spirit of Manifest Destiny was the belief that our government was established upon the blessings and providence of God to be the beacon of hope and an example by which others would follow, and thus every man become free from enslavement; that by our prosperity and abundance, we could import that hope to others through charity and virtue in ministering to their ills: It was at that time believed that what was established as a government of free men within our North American borders, would advance across the continents in the western hemisphere into central and south America.... not particularly as part of our nation, but as a pattern for them to follow. Instead, however, we have made our mistakes in treaties, giving and expecting preference, making promises and devising ways to break them and placing ourselves in positions of obligations to others, which our founders strongly discouraged. People within and without our government have anticipated conflicts and wars and devised ways of manipulating us into those which did not concern us: thus, instead of conservation of our resources and protecting our people from harm, we have offered our resources and the lives of our people to the conflicts of policing the rest of the world and imposing our force or removing their government: Instead of preserving our assets for a time of starvation or time of repair and charity, when the conflicts resolved and the time for healing began and our destiny would be most profitable for them and a fulfillment of our unspoken promise to providence, we've offered our resources and given our blood and suffered with many to prolong their conflict and to add our own debts to theirs and their own resentments of enemies to their envy of us. Almost every conflict in which we've been engaged, has removed us further and further from that Destiny which our forefather's so much believed in..... and which for the most part, we were not acquainted with enough to stand up and shout to those we chose to lead us 'No! and Heck no!" concerning our false involvement as 'peace keepers' or the policemen of other nations.

Yes, we have so very much to be thankful for: And we also, as a people in the charge of maintaining control of our government, we have much to be repentant of. We cannot blame our government without sharing the blame ourselves. It is foolish to think we can go back change history. It is foolish to think we can assume responsibility for other generations. But it is not foolish to observe both the rights and the wrongs of past choices and to do what we can to preventing repeats of similar mistakes. If we observe carefully.... the mistakes which some attribute to government.... were not mistakes in our documents and the law which limits our government but are mistakes made by the people who failed to keep government within its bounds or who failed in their moral obligations and exercise of choice. As for 'stuff done in God's name'.... prove that any government does this and I'll eat any hat you give me (provided its in the flavor and material of my choosing.....:tongue3.

 

It's sad when so called Christians buy into liberal ideology to such a large degree that they end up despising the goodness of God. To deny that God has greatly blessed this nation is to not only deny fact but it is to dishonor God and fail to give Him proper praise. America is here today for one reason - there is a merciful God in heaven who has given us far more than we deserve.

It's sad that so many Americans hate America. I guarantee you that if they lived somewhere else where the government crushes the people under foot, where the people have no individual freedoms, where the there is no sense of equality whatsoever, that these America haters would feel much different. The reason so many people pour into America every year is because, despite our faults and shortcomings, this is still the best country on earth. Give God the praise and glory for everything good in this nation, and pray that He will forbear our current wickedness and preserve this nation for future generations.

 

I think I got you more stirred than anyone has yet. Normally you just post one of two off the wall lines but this time you actually went for the goal! Good for you, Billwald!

Those were the good old days weren't they? Then came the movement that lead to the corruption of organized labor and the harm it has done to America.

The bad part was the beginning of the end of States rights which we've regretted every since - not slavery which needed to end. I'm no fan of Lincoln and I know from my own family's history that the South suffered greatly for around 15 years of occupation and rule under the corrupt carpetbaggers and their friends. The whole deal was bad but I am glad slavery is over. I think it would have and could have been ended without the war but that's another deep subject.

I suspect more of less the same place as you, Billwald, but maybe some of us have gone a little deeper not believing everything we were taught in government school.

It was more than a boat ride, Billwald - it was an escape and a change to start a new life in a new world. George was one of the Kings because, remember your history, America was settled by people from several countries. But George liked the profits that the colonies could generate for him. You know how works being a union guy, don't you? We did all the work and George got all the profits. The revoluntionary war, of course, was against the English but by that time the colonies had their own governments that tended to the needs of people here. They saw no reason to be subjects of foriegn king across the little pond.
Now, if all this was wrong, then we ought to go back to the King of England, beg forgiveness, and pledge alliagence to him. He was after all a divine ruler, wasn't he?

Heck no! We're a long ways from being slaves. People in America enough more liberty, opportunity, prosperity, etc. than anywhere else in the world - descendants of former slaves and freemen alike as well as many immigrants who came after the original founding.

I'm so glad we were more blessed than Canada. By the way, I thought Canada had and has a little problem with its origins as being English or French or both. It seems everything has to be written in two languages in some Provinces. Hey, they don't even States, do they? They beat us to the socialized medicine - a lost moniker - but now with Obamacare we'll be catching up. It was a bad day in Black Rock today! But the Canadians were a great ally in World War II, they're good people, and great neighbors! I wouldn’t wish anything for them they wouldn’t want.

Nope! The question was for you to ponder.

No response!

Nope, don't get too sensitive about it. He was elected even if by a foolish majority of voters.

God will decide whether America lasts longer or not. I think if we give Him to respect, honor, appreciation, and obedience that He deserves we still have a chance. I think if we don't we're doomed to perhaps worse than Rome. But that's just an opinion as I have no ability to see the future.

The land - shore to shore - didn't belong to the Indian people. There's no way the relatively small number of Indians could have legitimately owned and made use of all that land. We bought some from them where they did have a legitimate claim to it. The whole concept that we stole the North American continent from the Indians is as bogus as a three dollar bill. That's what they taught you in school and on television!
As for Romans 13, it has been used by some to argue that our revolution against England was a sinful act.

I'm glad you brought this up! Hitler failed and America and its allies prevailed. World War II is a perfect example of God's providence at work. There's no way we, as the underdog we were at its onset, could have defeated both the Germans and the Japanese and their allies on two sides of the globe. They were, at first, vastly superior in their military might. Praise be to God for the victory we had and the opportunity for peace it provided so many nations even our former enemies.

We do have a principle called "squatter's rights" in this country. But, again, in America's case we did not steal the land from anyone. We even bought a very large part of it from France!

I think America is great! We've got the best economic and political system in the world!