Does government need an unchanging, immutable foundation to insure permanence and sucess? If so, which concept best fulfills this: THEONOMY - God's unchanging law ; or AUTONOMY - man's flexible law?
What view did our founders have? Has it remainined or has it been stealthly changed? As I have studied our Consitituion and the Bible, with a strong historical overview, I have come to see that this is the essential "breaking point". Most modern political theory, from the Supreme Court to Congress and executive branch, posits that man is now free from the "constraints" of God's unchanging law, and under the concept of "legal positivism", man makes or remakes law according to his rational mind. This insures the arbitrary and tyrranical nature of our society and it's legal rulings and practice. I am amazed to find that most conservatives and libertarians fight tooth and nail against tyrrany but seem to miss this foundational issue. Can anyone comment?
I, personally, do not dispute the authority of God to be the ultimate lawgiver. However, because God created this earth life as a TESTING GROUND to see what man will do with his individual proclivities as they interact with the promptings of divine conscience, it is clear that God has chosen to NOT give a complete body of law sufficient to govern men's affairs. He has only given a bare minimum of laws and commandments dealing mostly with interpersonal affairs, and left everything else for man to battle out.
That does not mean that man is free to disregard God's law, for there will be eternal consequences. But God has not chosen to enforce those moral laws through the secular state. Don't confuse the old testament religious state (a covenant society) which did enforce pre-agreed covenant punishments, with a pluralist state of many different creeds which has no moral authority to do so.
In short, because God has not chosen to dictate a complete legal system, man has no choice but to use his free agency to come up with both logical and inspired principles to ajudicate conflict here on earth. You see, there is a middle ground between the two alternatives you assert (God's partially revealed will and man's logic)--Man can seek inspiration in working with reason. That is precisely the purpose of this forum--to try and hammer out principles of law that will match the overall framework of liberty we can assume from God's word--but without having to use God's incomplete scriptures as the sole basis of law--which much of the world's people would not accept. If such a framework is universal in scope , and does not contradict God's will for this earth test, then it should also be appealing to all good people, whatever their religion.
I do not intend to engage in a work similar to Rusdoony's "Institutes of Biblical Law" which attempts to extract by interpretation from the Bible all of the laws necessary to govern society today. There is simply too much stretching of scriptural texts in his work to serve as a sound basis--even Christians cannot agree. Since God has never chosen to force the whole world to accept his holy word nor even His existance, we should not attempt to do so by basing all our deliberations on the minimal framework of law that God revealed in the scriptures. Once again, I am not saying this because I do not honor what God has revealed or inspired to be written, but rather out of recognition that the skeletal nature of the scriptures does not support the notion that it was God's intent to integrate Biblical law into a pluralistic secular society.
In the current proposal I am making, virtually all of the Biblical laws which protect victims from crimes against their will are also protected. The only Biblical laws that are not, are private sins which we must leave to God to judge and punish. You will note that my government proposal allows for extra-legal covenant societies like the Mosaic Law community, so people who want to band together and agree to enforce God's law as in the Old Testament (by initial unanimous consent) are free to do so. As for the world who doesn't want to live God's law, this free society doesn't mean man is "free" to disregard them (with impunity) since there will be eventual consequences--but God will judge and meet out the punishment. However, we do not give the secular state the power to enforce moral laws (where no fundamental rights are violated) precisely because the majority that controls the state could choose to enforce any type of moral or immoral law they choose. It might start out with a Christian majority, but what kinds of laws would be enforced if evil people became a majority. A Marxist majority could well decide to enforce anti-Christian laws under the same color of law as Christians might want God's Laws enforced. The only solution is to not let anyone enforce any law where their isn't a true violation of fundamental rights.
Joel Skousen
I'm beginning to wonder if God omitted secular law because it's unnecessary. If God is supposed to be the ultimate example, maybe we ought to look more closely into how He runs things: "Do as you like--I'm not going to force you into anything. If you love me, keep my commandments. But if not, suffer the natural consequences." It may be profitable to study more closely "natural consequences".
First, I have to say that what follows is not flamebait- the subject of God's Law v. Man's law really needs to be discussed in depth. I come from the school that believes that Law is given from a superior to an inferior. People can get together and make rules, but these rules can never rise to the level of Law. It's the difference between Mala in se and Mala Prohibitia.
Joel said:
...it is clear that God has chosen to NOT give a complete body of law sufficient to govern men's affairs. He has only given a bare minimum of laws and commandments dealing mostly with interpersonal affairs, and left everything else for man to battle out.
I have to disagree- God's Law is sufficient in the area of Law for governing a nation, which leaves ample room for stare decisis and petty regulations. I was taught that what is not stated in Law is always as or more important as what was stated. Several disseparate issues come to mind immediately, namely economics and punishment of lawbreakers. My favorite is the issue of what to do with people who transgress the Law. God never said to build a prison. God actually provided for a two tiered system of punishment- either the person was put to death for serious crimes- usually those for which no restitution could be made, or there was corporal punishment and/or restitution.
I believe that one of the bedrock foundations for an ideal state would be a return to just such a two tiered system of justice. It is hubris (at best) to think that we can lock people in cages with other lawbreakers and "rehabilitate" them. At worst it is a criminal mockery of justice and the people who are forced to pay for these follies.
On the subject of economics, David Knox Barker wrote a book called Jubilee on Wall Street in 1987 that predicted the coming economic crash that would follow as the result of the Kondratieff long wave economic cycle theory. The interesting part of his book (for me) was how the law of Jubilee perfectly counteracts the economic cycle of boom and bust. I find it interesting that what many would consider an obscure "religious" rule is in fact a beautiful answer to a current economic problem that exists on a scale unimaginable at the time the Law was given.
When I debated atheists and agnostics and christians on the issue of abortion, I found it quite simple to reduce the controversy to the fundamental rights issues. At the root level, there is only God's Law or the law of the jungle- might makes right. There is nothing else because either our rights come from a Superior with the right to make Law, or result from individual opinions about what is right or wrong. Either all of our rights derive from God's Law, or they are the ephemeral decisions of men that are based solely on such mens ability to defend and enforce them.
Joel said:
However, we do not give the secular state the power to enforce moral laws (where no fundamental rights are violated) precisely because the majority that controls the state could choose to enforce any type of moral or immoral law they choose.
All law is an issue of morality because it makes a value judgement. How then can we say this? Who defines what fundamental rights are? Perhaps we need to return to an earlier viewpoint- namely that God's Law provides not only the foundation of all of our rights, it also lays out the responsibilities people have toward one another and toward God. If God has the right to make Law, does it not follow that God has certain fundamental rights of His own? Are His rights and prerogatives to be considered in our legislation?
We are "free" to disregard God's Law, but at our own peril. I am one of those fundamentalists who believe God judges nations for their corporate actions. I believe that history justifies this belief. History also tells me that every institution becomes corrupt after a time, so I do not believe it is possible to set up an "ideal" state with an indefinite lifespan. Perhaps I am wrong, but my view of history tells me that the secret to lasting and stable government has as much to do with a uniformity of race, ethnicity, culture and religion among the population as the particular laws that govern it.
Finally, a question. With respect to what some consider the "unacceptable" portions of God's Law, such as the classification of homosexuality as a capital crime, where does the concensus of this forum lie?
Gunnar Ericson
This is an interesting discussion and one that I have contemplated for some time. The question of God's law vs. man's law is the reason for man's current and continuing state. The rejection by Adam and Eve of God's laws was a foreseen (on God's part) and necessary part of the human experience and sadly is hardly understood and rarely addressed.
God made a covenant with Adam in the garden. This covenant can be traced throughout scripture from Adam to present day humans. Someone (at least one person) has always, since the days of Adam, kept this covenant on the Earth. This covenant was made with Adam. (Hosea 6:7(NIV) Like Adam, they (Israel) have broken the covenant-- they were unfaithful to me there.)
This covenant was also given to Noah. (Gen 6:1 And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; and every thing that is in the earth shall die. (18) But with thee will I establish my covenant; and thou shalt come into the ark, thou, and thy sons, and thy wife, and thy sons' wives with thee.)
God gave it to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and then to their descendents, the nation of Israel. (Psa 105:6 O ye seed of Abraham his servant, ye children of Jacob his chosen. (7) He is the LORD our God: his judgments are in all the earth. (8) He hath remembered his covenant forever, the word which he commanded to a thousand generations. (9) Which covenant he made with Abraham, and his oath unto Isaac; (10) And confirmed the same unto Jacob for a law, and to Israel for an everlasting covenant.)
This covenant is everlasting, meaning eternal or forever. Jesus died and shed his blood to forgive us for breaking the everlasting covenant. (Heb 13:20 Now the God of peace, that brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, that great shepherd of the sheep, through the blood of the everlasting covenant.)
What is this covenant and why is it pertinent to this discussion?
First, let's define what a covenant is. A covenant is a contract. A contract is a legally binding agreement between two or more parties which starts with an offer from one person but which does not become a contract until the other party signifies an unequivocal willingness to accept the terms of that offer. The moment of acceptance is the moment from which a contract is said to exist, and not before. Acceptance need not always be direct and can, in certain circumstances, be implied by conduct.
What is offered and what is accepted and by whom?
God made promises to all before man existed and revealed it to Abraham. (Titus 1:2 In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began.)
A promise is an offer. The offer is of eternal life and it is to all of mankind that accepts it. (Eph 3:5 Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit; (6) That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel.)
God has only revealed it to those of the human race who He has chosen at this time and no one else. Those to whom it is revealed have the choice of acceptance or rejection. One leads to immortality and the other leads to the second death. The vast majority of humanity who have never been exposed to this secret (Psa 25:14 The secret of the LORD is with them that fear him; and he will show them his covenant.) will be resurrected by God and taught all of His ways during the 1000 year reign of Christ. It will be at this time that all legislatures will become extinct. Jesus will rule and reign with a rod of iron. (Isa 9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.)
Jesus is the lawgiver. (Isa 33:22 For the LORD is our judge, the LORD is our lawgiver, the LORD is our king; he will save us.)
What law? As we have seen, it was established with the nation of Israel. (Psa 105:10 And confirmed the same unto Jacob for a law, and to Israel for an everlasting covenant.)
The everlasting covenant is the law of God. This covenant is conditional. (Exo 15:26 And said, If thou wilt diligently hearken to the voice of the LORD thy God, and wilt do that which is right in his sight, and wilt give ear to his commandments, and keep all his statutes, I will put none of these diseases upon thee, which I have brought upon the Egyptians: for I am the LORD that healeth thee.)
Jesus later gave the whole law, i.e. the commandments, the statutes (Holy Days) , and the judgments (the judicial rulings for crimes and offences) to the nation of Israel. (Read all of Exodus 20-24:8)
Israel accepted the terms of the agreement and sealed it in blood. (Exo 24:7 And he took the book of the covenant, and read in the audience of the people: and they said, All that the LORD hath said will we do, and be obedient. (8)And Moses took the blood, and sprinkled it on the people, and said, Behold the blood of the covenant, which the LORD hath made with you concerning all these words.)
What is violation of law called? (1 John 3:4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.)
All since Adam have violated this law. (Rom 5:12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned.)
It is Jesus' blood that forgives us of our sins. (Heb 9:20 Saying, This is the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you. (21) Moreover he sprinkled with blood both the tabernacle, and all the vessels of the ministry. (22) And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.)
I must of necessity take issue with Joel’s statement that God did not give all the laws necessary to live among mankind. (… it is clear that God has chosen to NOT give a complete body of law sufficient to govern men's affairs. ) The Everlasting Covenant IS the law of Almighty God. It is the COMMANDS of that God to all humanity. It will be the body of law used to rule when the Kingdom of God is set up on the Earth. Not all have been exposed to it yet. However, all those who have been exposed and accept the Everlasting Covenant and are obedient to it AND who accept the one and only way out of our conviction for breaking that Everlasting Covenant, i.e. The Lord Jesus Christ, will be pardoned and be given eternal life when Jesus returns to set up His government. Obedience and adherence to the Everlasting Covenant is required from then on in a person's life. Once you accept this Everlasting Covenant, you are no longer a citizen of this or any other country, but an ambassador to the Kingdom of God/Heaven. (2 Cor 5:20 Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God.)
Ambassadors have NO dealing with the internal political affairs of the host nation. They are to abide by the laws as best they can up to the point where it causes said ambassador to break the laws of his native land. Otherwise, he/she is to live in peace in the host nation until recalled.
Either one will chose to attempt to create his own set of rules and try to get the rest of mankind to live by them or he/she will recognize that ALL attempts by mankind though out recorded history have been complete and utter failures. This includes the government of the united States of America. Why? It is because mankind cannot rule himself separate and apart from God and His perfect law and judgment. (Psa 19:7 The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple.) When one recognizes this fact, they will be well on their way to accepting the ultimate authority. God has his ways of doing things and they are not the ways of mankind. (Psa 103:7 He made known his ways unto Moses, his acts unto the children of Israel. (8) The LORD is merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and plenteous in mercy.) It is only when mankind thinks more highly of himself than he does of God that he gets into trouble.
Mankind is about to have its final exam to the ultimate lesson.
The solution is out there.
The question stands: Will you accept or reject the terms of this covenant/contract? The question has eternal consequences.
Will you repent and be converted to God’s perfect governmental structure?
I really enjoyed this post to a large degree. From what I have studied, it seems that there is a continuous confrontation between God's covenant law and the "doctrine" of humanism; God's will versus Man's will. As I study the law of God as given in the Torah, it seems that the laws given were sufficient to govern a people as a political/governmental body.
While I do believe Israel was and is a covenant society, I also notice that God did not impose his law at Sinai upon other nations as they had not entered covenant with him (as far as we know).
Notice that in the promised land, God established a covenant society. Is not this supposed to be the case as well for the Amercian Continent; all of North and South America as the Zion of God. If this is the case, then would it not follow that God has a covenant society meant for this land as a whole. As in ancient Israel when the children of Israel conquered the land, God swept off those peoples who would not come in and be numbered among the covenant. Some of the peoples had become so defiled that God sent the word to utterly destroy them so that not even their cattle, etc. would be left.
When God establishes a covenant society as a whole he does not allow for idolatry to exist in his land of promise at all except that the covenant curses are brought into play.
What do you think?
Biblical and logical thought on God's law versus Man's law . . .
Biblical Anarchism, by Stephen W. Carson
One thing that you must take into consideration is that all man made laws are falliable. If you believe in God then you also will believe in devine law, as it comes part and parcel with religious belief.
The three major religions have some form of structure, all other religions fall at the wayside because they do not preach or tell you how to live your life. Christianity, Islam and Judaism do tell you how to live your life and Islam goes further and mentions that Islam is a complete way of life.
I don't want to turn this into a debate on which religion is best, but would like to point out what I know as a member of the Islamic faith.
Islamic jurisprudence is complete in what is known as the Sharia. Unfortunately there is no current day Islamic Country practising Islam in its totality. Some would argue and say look at afganistan they were and Islamic country under the Taliban? I however would say that they had the islamic knowledge with all their scholars, so were fit to rule on a Islamic level, but they did not possess the essential worldly education which is necessary to interact with the rest of the world.
Islam preaches there should a balance between the the deen and the dunya (the faith and the worldly affairs)
Please forgive me I have wondered off the topic.
Okay we have established that Islam offers a complete way of life, you would probably argue that was for and in the days of 1400 years ago, how does this apply today in the modern day. Well up until 600 years ago in Spain, there is evidence that all three major religions lived peacefully for 200 years until muslims got greedy and started fighting each other. More evidence can be gleaned from the Ottoman empire which ruled from 1453 to 1900, the same application of peaceful co-existance can be seen here too. Nowhere in history can it be seen that other religions whilst in power allowed religious freedom as the Muslims did. (unless my ignorance gets the better of me!)
Islamic law, Allah's law on earth, means one law for everyone, it is equal for both Muslims and Non-muslims alike. We keep harking back to the days of our elders when we talk/hear about when we could leave our front door open all night and nothing would happen. These principles are from religion that if you did wrong then you would be punished severely in this life and in the hereafter.
We don't need very much evidence to pursue the crime angle, but for the sake of giving religion 1 upmanship i will present a few facts.
Secular law has produced the following mentality especially amongst the new generation, lack of belief in god therefore there is no hereafter and everything I live for is today! This means trying things which may seem rebelious and dangerous just to satisfy ones need such as drugs, alcohol, sex and other acts which are hard to supress especially amongst a peer group who have seen their peers talk about such things and then try and attempt such things for themselves.
After all you only live once!
Every day we see cases where youngsters try to model themselves on people who they mix with or have seen being portrayed in the media.
Having children at early ages, there was a case last year in the UK where a 12 year old became pregnant! Where's the morality and upbringing regulations for that individual coming from. Unfortuantely it is the parents who modelled themselves on a secular idiology, who when they were being brought up protested at their parents for being too harsh and promised that they would be easy on their children. It is this mentality which originates from Secularism that is where the cycle of fate arises.
It isn't all bad and it does not mean the end of the world, especially since Secualrism has taken the choice things from religion and brought them into everyday life and law. Such as you don't go out and kill anyone i.e. barbarism! Thank god we have not become that lenient!
The bottom line is that Secularism is the system and world we are living in today, if we want a system to live to and adopt which will benefit future generations then it has to come from divine law not man made falliable law for whose problems have been outlined in more than enough detail.
Your comments are greatly appreciated.]
Kind Regards
Imran.
I think this message by Randy J. is pertinent to this discussion.
, God's perfection can not be improved upon. All man made
government is a departure and rejection of what God established in the
garden. God gave Israel a government only after going to the bring of
genocide - wiping out Israel all together and starting the covenant all
over again - because they rejected this family membership of face to face
communication. [When Moses came off the mount they did not want to accompany him. They told Moses to go talk to God for him. They then received the lesser law.] If our starting point is this knowledge, man made governments
in what ever form may be useful to help people get back to this original
state of being. [face to face communication]
The problem is when people worship governments - when they look to them for
their protection, daily bread, education, and welfare checks. At that point
government is idolatry. Any discussion on government without realizing that
any man made government is a rejection of God to begin with - and was only
ordained of God instead of a well deserved genocide - leaves men comfortable
with it instead of working to eliminate it.
I am the first to say that I haven't seen God face to face and that I don't
know of a group of Celestial people not in need of anything other than God's
patriarchal family. Discussions like yours can move people closer to the
truth and are very important. I believe that the government that Jesus
Christ presides over for a 1000 years in the millennium will be nothing more
than the same patriarchal government he was born as King over, became the
high priest of, that He reorganized, and appointed to His Apostles as His
father had appointed to Him (Luke 22:25 - 30). I Also believe the
Constitution is a continuation of that very same government that Jesus
Christ embodied as the Patriarch of the entire family of Adam and
established for His Disciples. I cant but help believing that during the
millennium there will be a terrestrial law for those not willing to be
subject to the full Celestial law yet.
If the law is to go forth form Zion for a 1000 years as it surely will,
perhaps an area of discussion should be on what Sovereignty shall the
terrestrial government rest, what functions will it have and how will it
operate. It seems to me that working towards any other government is
pointless in light of prophecy, whose children we are, and whose planet we
are on - God's. How will God's Celestial family government interact with
Chinese and Muslims during the Millennium is a wide open area that is almost
never even thought about let alone discussed. I rather think there will be
many more of the above than supposed Christian left during the millennium as
they generally live chaste and moral lives without rejecting such a greater
light.
As for setting the uSA in order - simply remove the 14 th amendment (which
makes America into the modern Roman Empire) and subsequent ones, Article 1,
Section 8, Clause 17 should be amended to subject Washington DC to common
law, and Article 6's open ended treaty and debt clause should be reworked /
abolished. Other than that, the Constitution of 1797 is quite workable for a
bridge into terrestrial Constitution that Jesus Christ may preside over ...
so long as righteous men hold office.
Last thought, in all your discussions please remember that Jesus Christ
forbids His government / patriarchal family to ever exercise lordship and
dominion over men like the gentiles, only to lead as younger brother and as
a servant - with the obvious exception of self defense by miracles / arms
if need be.
Love & Healing
This is an interesting thread! I would like to throw in my opinion if I may...
I agree with much that has been said about the necessity of implementing a government based on God's Law rather than man's. The question I would raise is "how do we establish such a government without breaking God's Law? Let me explain what I mean.
There are two related items that I feel are important to consider in this endeavor.
1. Accommodating for differences in belief.
2. Not enforcing God's Law by force. That would go contrary to my understanding of God's Law of "free agency." (Call it what you may. The point is that God seems to have placed people on this earth and then allows us to choose if we will follow him to heaven, or follow the devil to hell.)
Let me explain both thoughts in a little more detail.
1. Accommodating for differences in belief.
I believe we are in agreement that God's way is the best way... and the only acceptable way to live. So, like you, I want to live in a society that is based on God's Law. The problem is that people want to live in a society based God's Law as *they* understand it. But look around. Do people agree on a single interpretation of God's Law and what it is? Not remotely!
Consider this. Most religions are based on people attempting to create an organization based on God's 'religious' laws. Yet there are thousands of different religions! Many of the differences are fundamental. Even among sincere Christians - all believing in the same bible look at the variety of interpretations. Even among people who agree on what books constitute "God's authoritative word" there is very little agreement on what the same scriptures mean. And have you ever tried to convince someone that your interpretation of an issue was right? Now consider other non-Christian people, be they Jewish, Baha'i... People do not easily change their belief system.
So in forming a government based on God's Law, the first challenge I see is coming up with an interpretation of God's Law that all good people will agree upon.
Let me add a point here, lest I be misunderstood. Most religions are waiting for God to appear to mankind in His Glory. This is also an important part of my religion. So when he does come, I expect that he will come in manner where all will know Him and worship Him. If that is the case, then these concerns may no longer exist. In reality - truth is truth without reference to the opinions of man. But for the present at least, it seems that God has left people as free to believe as they will. He seems to guide the sincere in heart of all religions. He permits, even calls people to declare His word. But so far, he does not seem to be inclined to reveal himself (yet) in a manner where all people will share a single interpretation of His will. So when he comes suddenly, agreement may be easier to come by. In the meantime, it would be very presumptuous of me to assume that my views are all in-line with his will, and any interpretation other than mine is wrong and I have the right to deny them their opinion.
2. Not enforcing God's Law by force.
My second concern is that (according to my understanding of the scriptures) God does not use force to impose His Divine law upon mankind. But if we do not all agree on a unified interpretation of God's will, how then could we establish a government based on God's Law, as we understand it? We have no right to force it on others. We would not want to!
What I believe we all DO want is the right to live under God's Law, as we understand it - and to permit others to do the same.
So there are the two concerns I have on how to implement God's Law. Now I would like to suggest a possible solution.
We do need to have a government that is able to defend us from other nations who would attack our freedoms. We do need to have a level of enforcement that prohibits ones neighbor from infringing on our fundamental rights. If we lived in a better world, perhaps that would not be necessary. But the fact is that this world is full of people who want nothing more than to usurp power and exercise dominion over others... On individual as well as national levels. We do need a way to defend ourselves from them if we want to persevere until the day when God may fight our battles. For now it seems he wants us to defend our own liberties, with his help.
So suppose a group of people were to establish a government based on their collective wisdom and understanding of God's Law... They make certain that it is done in manner that they believe would please God.
They invite all to join them in this "government", but are committed to *not* attempt to impose it upon anyone.
At the same time, we need to ensure that all are free to do this. So suppose we outline a "federal" level government that is very limited. Its primary purpose is to protect everyone's right to live God's Law as they understand it, and allow others to do likewise. It would be vital that this "federal government" be carefully written and that it be consistent with God's Law... but it would not to seek to define that law for us. It would leave that to smaller covenant societies. It would however defend our fundamental right to do so.
This would need to be very carefully written so that we could be sure it protects without infringing upon fundamental rights. The whole focus of this 'constitution' would be to ensure the proper balance and limitation of powers. It could be written such that it would be useless as a tool to exercise power or lordship over others...
The system allows values to be competing - not compulsory. I believe that in such an environment, a God-fearing people would 'get it right' and would create a group of people that truly do follow God's Law. I also believe that if the playing field were level (all are protected in their rights etc) that such a group would THRIVE. In a world of competing values, God’s true values would stand out and would grow and would spread out until it included all the pure in heart.
This is the only scenario that I have heard that would allow me to live in a government that is based on God's Law as I believe - without me forcing my neighbor to believe as I do.
I encourage everyone to continue to study Joel's work on this topic. I will do the same. I expect I am missing many of his points, but I think this is the general idea.
Any Thoughts?
Enjoyed Jeffrey's e-mail, although I would change "God-fearing" to "God-loving". Individuals today in government are at some level also trying to create their idea of a government...I believe if we are willing to stand back and observe how God works we will discover how to live our lives and through this discover how to govern ourselves.
So far things I have observed is that God gives us complete freedom. If we want to murder someone, we have the freedom to do so. God does not stop us. If we want to help others, we also are given this same freedom.
With this freedom comes responsibility. Some religions call it karma. I look at it as when we make choices to interfere with another's freedom, life sets up experiences to teach us better. Many times we do not relate our experiences with our violation of this Natural Law. But that does not matter as we keep getting the experiences until we learn the lesson - it is not important that we connect the dots.
We will never create a perfect governmental system here, it is just not possible with so many individuals all coming in for different experiences - some more negative, some more positive. However, it is as a group consciousness that we earn what kind of government will be set up. We can design what we think is the perfect government, only to see corrupt individuals attaining power and corrupting the whole system. (As is what has happened today). We must all take responsibility for the type of government we collectively have earned today. As more of us grow spiritually we will start to see the truth behind so many in government and that is when things will change.
Bottom-line I believe the best way to help facilitate a better governmental system is to learn as much about God's love and to grow spiritually so that I may act as a pebble thrown into a calm body of water...creating ripples that spread. When enough of us do this, when enough of us are willing to look at ourselves as citizens of the universe, when enough of us are willing to stop judging what is right and what is wrong, then we will see a mass change in not only our government, but also our corporations, our neighbours and the world.
I must confess I have not read the above responses, there is just too much for me to read. I do not have the time (i am a slow reader) and (time does not really exist, it is a construct) and if I did, i would not remember much of it anyway. Having glanced through, i have a flavor for what has been written.
The proposition of a perfect government, i believe, is flawed immediately, since it is earth we are talking about here. Do we know what our real position and purpose is on earth?
The other part is, of course, who is God and what is his character. What is his views. Most here rely on the Bible for the answers. Reading the Bible will get one answers. Unfortunately, they may be all over the map. Everyone has their interpretation.
I prefer more direct feedback from God than is available from the Bible or prayer. (I believe in prayer, and some people get very good feedback from it. It apparently is on a need basis). Jesus said that the Bible is true. I have no problem with that, but i studied the Bible with my pea brain for 17 years, and concluded that from my perspective, from the interpretations I was getting from fundamentalist main line religions, if they were true, then God must be insane. i do not believe that God is insane, let me state that up front. But - well - there is something wrong somewhere.
Things did not make a lot of sense to me. They still don't, but at least now I am understanding more, and have a feeling of why things don't make sense. The problem is ours of course, not God's. God has a perfect plan, and everything in this crazy world makes sense, to Him. It is not supposed to make sense to us. The biggest mistery on earth is the Faith part. As a scientist, I am not supposed to take things on faith. Proof is the regor to separate truth from fiction. The scientific methodology to show that something is true. Faith is the antithesis of that. That is where the insane part comes in. Requiring Faith without proof is what makes no sense. it is insanity almost by definition.
OK, where is this anarchist going from here. Well, I believe there is more direct and equally authoritative evidence about why we are here and what is the nature of God. God is speaking very clearly through many channels. One of them is the Near Death Experience. This is not new knowledge. People have been hearing from the otherside this way for as long as we have been human. Of course, modern medicine has allowed more to occur today than in the past. I would say that at the core of all reigions at some points are Near Death Experiences or similiar so called Psychic phenomina such as out of body travel where contact is made with the spirit world. The apostle Paul had a NDE on the road to Damascus, where he went to the other side and talked with Jesus. The NDE is a primary tool of God. Certainly, He knows all about it for sure. Much of the new testiment is attributed to Paul.
To cut to the chase, I recommend going to www.Near-death.com. There are about 62 NDE experiences recorded there. There are also research conclusions from all those accounts. There are accounts from Atheists, Christians, Jews, Muslims, Buddists, Tebetians. Be sure to read everything you can and compare notes. Why are we here and who is God and what is on the other side will become more clear. This will not make you all knowing. You will have to wait for that to come later (on the other side). But these are snapshots of the other side, like 62 snapshots randomly from the earth. God is huge. The worlds of God are just as huge. The love of God is huge, there is no limit. God's plan is perfect, we should not fear. We are here for a purpose. Go find out what it is.
Be a seeker of truth. It takes some hard work. it takes perseverance. It takes asking questions and not giving up until they are answered. No matter how pea brained you are. After you do this (note, there is a huge amount of material at that site alone, not to mention the many books referensed on the subject.) You will see the Bible in a whole new light.
Love to all.
PS: God says we are in the End Times, right at the door to steal a phrase from the Bible. After this, Jesus will rule for 1000 years. Whether here or somewhere else, I do not know. The Bible talkes about us being changed, and about a new heaven and earth. The NDE's talk about the nature of man being changed as well. No need for houses, the weather changed by prayer ect. We will be much more spiritual beings, yet with bodies still. Not real clear to me.
The New Agers talk about coming earth changes, where the earth will change its axis (and people will become more spiritually aware). It is not clear how this is accomplished, but the effect on people living on earth will be devistating. This is mentioned by some NDEs. It is not clear to me if there will be any survivors. That may be the real purpose of the rapture, to provide for re-population of the earth at a later date. Who knows. The devistation of Revelations may in part be this change in axis of the planet.
There are indications that this type of earth change has happened before. There are indications of past advanced civilations that have disappeared. There is evidence of cities and such underwater. Off the coast of India and Cuba. We will have access to the truth when we go to the other side and meet God. Of course, some people go to the other side, but not meet God. But they eventually will be saved. I do not know the real meaning of my last sentence, since there is no time over there, but ??? the NDEs indicate that Jesus saves over there as well as here. Never give up hope.
Danbert1,
"PS: God says we are in the End Times, right at the door to steal a phrase from the Bible."
The church that I attend is a very conservative one that spends a great deal of time studying the Book of Revelations. Perhaps you've heard that many of us believed that the Anti-Christ would appear in the year 2000. What was once just a whisper in my church is now talked about openly. We feel that the Anti-Christ did, in fact, appear in the predicted year and that his name has been revealed.....George W. Bush.
What leads you and your church to believe that GW Bush is the anti-christ? What source(s) do you derive your information from?
Our source of information is the Book of Revelations. Read the description and see if you don't agree.
Where in the Book of Revelations do you draw your opinion from? What verses? What context? What Bible?
It's interesting how someone can express an opinion, or attempt to sway an opinion, without backing it up with facts!
Rumors unchecked normally turn into lies!
I'm sorry to see someone with the tag "Christian" referring to the Word of God as "rumors" and "lies". Biblical interpretation is very complex and this subject would take up more space than this forum could comfortably supply, however, you might want to take this small aspect into consideration:
The Number of the Beast
The Bible shows us a way to prove whether or not a person is the Antichrist, through numerology. Rev 13:18 says: "Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six." That is, the number 666.
The way biblical scholars and numerologists convert the names of men into numbers is through a numerical code. One method is assigning the 26 letters of the alphabet the numbers 1 through 26. It looks like this:
a 1
i 9
q 17
y 25
b 2
j 10
r 18
z 26
c 3
k 11
s 19
d 4
l 12
t 20
e 5
m 13
u 21
f 6
n 14
v 22
g 7
o 15
w 23
h 8
p 16
x 24
Now if you add up the numbers of his name, George Walker Bush, according to the table above you get 7+5+15+18+7+5 for George, +23+1+12+11+5+18 for Walker, and +2+21+19+8 for Bush, which all adds up to a total of 177 = 1+7+7 = 15 = 1+5 = 6. That's our first six..
The most common method used by numerologists today is the Pythagorean System, named for the Greek philosopher and mathematician Pythagoras, who invented it in the fifth century BC. It looks like this:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
X
Y
Z
Now if you add up the numbers of his name using this system, according to the table above you get 7+5+6+9+7+5 for George, +5+1+3+2+5+9 for Walker, and +2+3+1+8 for Bush, which all adds up to a total of 78 = 7+8 = 15 = 1+5 = 6. Once again the number is six..
The next most commonly method in numerology is the Chaldean System, which has its roots in ancient Babylon and is related to the Hebrew Kabbala::
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
A
B
C
D
E
U
O
F
I
K
G
M
H
G
Z
P
J
R
L
T
N
W
Q
S
X
S
If you add up the numbers of his name using the Chaldean System you get 3+5+7+2+3+5 for George, +6+1+3+2+5+2 for Walker, and +2+6+3+5 for Bush, which adds up to a total of 60 = 6+0 = 6. Once again the number is still six..
That’s our third six – 666 – using the three most commonly used methods in numerology. The chances of this ever happening randomly are 1 in (9 x 9 x 9), or 1 in 729. But we are far from finished yet.
Revelation says the number of the beast (the Antichrist) is 666 – it does not say this is the number of his name, though that could be part of it - it just says that somehow we can identify the Antichrist by using this number – 666. This number may indeed be connected to his name, but it cannot only be connected to his name or else it would have simply said so, and saved us the trouble of broadening our search. It indicates that we are to construct the number by compiling individual digits "Six hundred threescore and six", so let's use his name for the first 6, and go on to his date of birth.
Mr. Bush was born July 6, 1946. If you add up all the digits in his date of birth you get 7+6+1+9+4+6 = 33 = 3+3 = 6. There - now we have our second six.
The antichrist's first step in his goal of attaining complete world domination for Satan, was achieved on that fateful day Mr. bush was first elected governor of Texas - his first elected office - on November 8, 1994. Again, just by adding up the digits we get 1+1+8+1+9+9+4 = 33 = 3+3 = 6. The third six.
Then after losing the popular vote on November 7, 2000, the antichrist took his next giant leap towards ruling the earth when he was inaugurated president of the United States on January 20, 2001. 1+2+0+2+0+0+1 = 6. Another, fourth six to replace the one he had as Governor.
There you have it - 666 – again the number of the Beast. Wasn’t too difficult, was it? That’s because it was never meant to be.
What are the chances that a world leader having a name/date of birth/date of acquiring power that is equal to 666? As previously outlined, the chances of a world leader, or anyone else for that matter, having a name that is numerically equal to the number 6 in all three major numerological systems is 1 in 729. The chance of him having a date of birth that is numerically equal to the number 6 is 1 in 9. The chance of any politician first acquiring political power on a date associated with the number 6 is again 1 in 9. And the chance of a president assuming leadership of the most powerful nation on earth on a day associated with the number 6 is once again 1 in 9.
By themselves, the chances of any one of these things happening in isolationis relatively insignificant. But the chance of all these things happening together for any particular world leader suddenly becomes very much significant: It becomes 1 chance in (729 x 9 x 9 x 9), or 1 chance in 531,441. Since the Bible says that the Antichrist will be the most powerful leader in the world, and George bush is already the most powerful leader in the world today, that would mean we would have to see another 531,441 powerful world leaders come and go before we would have a good chance of seeing another most-powerful-world-leader that was as strongly associated with the number 666. Even if all these powerful world leaders only lasted an average of 4 years and followed one right after another - as with a single presidential term - it would still take well over two million years before we'd have a fair chance of seeing another world leader as strongly associated with the number 666 as George = 6 Walker = 6 Bushjr = 6.
But there is still one more very remarkable piece of evidence: For hundreds of years various prophets and Biblical scholars have both prophesied and speculated about what would happen at the end of the second millennium – and in particularly the significance of the year 1999.
Bush declared his candidacy for president on June 12, 1999. By turning the day into a product of simple addition, we easily come up with the date 6/(6+6)/1999. That's a right-side up 666 next to an upside down 666, separated by a 1 that is holding the place for 1,000 years. This 1,000years is the millennium of peace, which will come after Christ defeats the Antichrist (the right side up 666) and rules the world for 1,000 years in the name of the one true God. After the 1,000 year millennium, according to the Bible Satan will once again be released from hell (the upside down 666 = coming up from hell) but he is quickly defeated and thrown into the lake of fire forever (Revelation 20:7-10).
So what are the chances? Obviously, the chances of any other world leader introducing himself to the world on 6/6+6/1999 are nil - it simply didn’t happen. Bush is the only one who did and so he is the only world leader in history who is so intimately connected to what must be the most inauspicious day in world history.
The upshot is that on this particular date you have an abbreviation of the entire book of Revelation – the rise of the Antichrist, his defeat and the ensuing 1,000 year millennium, and then the final battle against Satan after he is briefly released from hell. Bush said on this day "there is no turning back", and indeed there was at that point no turning back for the world after that day either. He already had the Republican nomination sewed up, and as he demonstrated in Florida he intended to do whatever he had to do in order to gain power. The rich and powerful were backing him – the entire kingdom of Satan was behind him – how could he not succeed?
The fact that the world didn’t, and still doesn’t understand the true significance of bush's intimate connection to the number 666 is certainly not because the Bible hasn’t warned us about it, and numerous prophets and Biblical scholars all warned us, and it is not because it was too difficult to figure out - what I did it would take anybody else about fifteen minutes to do. Nor is it because Mr. Bush failed to announced his intentions on the most inauspicious day in history. It’s only because there are none so blind as those too caught up in their own sins. There will be no excuses for those who failed to solve the 666 prophecy, because it was their insatiable greed and lust for power that allied them to the the Antichrist, gave him power, and made them blind to the truth.
As I've said Christian, this subject has been deeply studied by my church and cannot adequtely be discussed here. I present it only as a thought for the forum's consideration in what might be considered the ultimate "church and state" issue to confront us.
PilotSam,
My own pastor was talking about this very thing only yesterday. He was encouraging us all to pick up this new book on the subject (I think the title is "AntiChrist Alive!", not sure though) that's on sale in our church bookstore. I went down to have a quick look at it, and it seemed to have some of what you put in the above message. The picture of Bush on the cover pretty much says it all. I was going to wait until Feb to buy it (the paperback is supposed to be out then) but maybe I'll break down and buy the hardcover.
Now, more than ever, I hope everyone has a blessed Christmas.
sono'texas
You know, all this reminds me that there's a reason the Law of Moses and the Gospel of the Lord don't have "necessary and proper" clauses . . .
My husband had this to say:
"Whether or not Bush fits all the prophecies, by their fruits ye shall know them: and his fruits are the worst I've ever seen."
I shudder to think of the seas of innocents' blood that cries from the ground even now against him. I remember hearing on the news a few months ago that after dropping twelve thousand bombs, the US still wasn't sure if bin Laden was dead. I couldn't believe my ears. A government can drop bombs with impunity, over targets which merit destruction through mere suspicion; while an individual often is punished severely for using deadly force against an individual in direct defense of life or property while the agressor is in the act.
Daisy cutters, depleted uranium, ad infinitum.
Twelve thousand . . .
Okay! First let me say that I do believe that I am a Christian. Now, let me say that throughout my little-humble life I have studied from numerous sources about how this person or that person IS the anti-Christ. Each of the material that I have read was full of "proofs" about how their choice for the anti-Christ was the real anti-Christ. Before George W. Bush it was William Jefferson Clinton. Before William Jefferson Clinton is was George Herbert Walker Bush. Before GHW Bush is was Yasser Arafat. Before Arafat it was Mikhail Gorbachev (remember the mark on his forehead?). The list is endless and I'm sure that there are enough smart people out there that someone can come up with some "proof" to prove that even I, your humble critic, am the anti-Christ.
Throughout my life I have heard so many rumors about the anti-Christ, the Mark of the Beast, and the New World Order that I've come to the conclusion that people don't have a clue of what is what. I've also come to the conclusion that the smarter a person professes to be the less factual they are. I think people need to watch a lot less of Art Bell and do more to become closer to our Heavenly Father!
Let me tell you something else. Who really cares who the anti-Christ is? What we should be doing is trying to figure out who Jesus Christ is? If you know him then what does it matter who the anti-Christ is? Study your scriptures and pray often and I don't think you'll go wrong!
Amen!
Christian, for the time being we still have something akin to "Freedom of Religion" and freedom of thought so you can believe what you choose to believe. Speaking only for myself, I've never really given much thought to the Anti-Christ before now but the existing evidence is pretty compelling. The folks in my church aren't given to fanciful thought or listening to Art Bell, they're true conservatives and they see Bush as "a wolf in sheep's clothing" who claimed to stand for freedom but has put us all in chains.
As to searching for Jesus in our lives, I couldn't agree more! Darkness is aproaching, time to hold "the Light" close to us.
Christian, I've got to stand with PilotSam on this one. My church has started a Thursday evening study group about this, which I attend. Personally, I don't appreciate having my deeply held spiritual beliefs mocked and associated with crackpots like Art Bell. If you choose to believe otherwise, fine, but you might try respecting the spirituality of others, even if it conflicts with your own.
PatriotsMother...I hear ya! I've got a grandson in the Air force and he thinks the whole thing is evil and wants no part of it. What to do, eh?
Okay Folks,
I'm not denouncing anyone's religion or religious belief and if you've taken offense to my inquiry then I apologize. I am concerned that those who have taken offense to my postings may have done so not because I'm wrong but because I have challenged their belief-system. People naturally do not like to be told that they are wrong. I have always found it interesting how when someone is challenged they site their Constitutional rights and how my questions somehow violate those rights.
What I am doing is challenging you to provide scriptural evidence that George W. Bush is the anti-Christ. I would like to know what the current President has done, or is going to do, that meets the scriptural criteria for the anti-Christ. I'm not interested in numerology, or in someone's mathematical theories, but in scripture. Has anyone in the Bible stated that George W. Bush, the 43rd President of the United States of America, would become the anti-Christ? A charge about the President being the anti-Christ is very big and should not be taken lightly. An opinion, from a pastor or anyone else, without facts is still just an opinion.
Regarding evidence, I would like to know what evidence you had back in the Clinton-administration to prove that William Jefferson Clinton IS the anti-Christ. I would also like to know what evidence you had back in the previous Bush-administration to prove that George Herbert Walker Bush IS the anti-Christ. I would also like to know what evidence you had back in the 80's to prove that Mikhail Gorbachev IS the anti-Christ. Get my drift? Every leader is bound to be root of all evil or the cause of the world's destruction no matter what they do or don't do!
Now a little about my opinion...
In my opinion George W. Bush has done much to cause our beautiful and inspired Constitution to become dangled like a thread. Although I may like that man I totally disagree with his policies. Ask anyone who is a member of the 89th Air Wing or the Marine Exec Det or who works in the "basement" and they will tell you that the current administration has brought respect, patriotism, and GOD to the White House. A nice change compared to the last adminstration.
In my opinion William J. Clinton was the most immoral and corrupted man to ever hold the office of the Presidency. From what I have observed he is pure evil! He has done more to turn the world against us and tear down our defenses than any one else. He IS the most unpatriotic, unreligious, anti-American, and anti-Christian person that I have ever known. Again, ask any one who is a member of the 89th or the Marine Exec Det or who works in the "basement" and they will tell you a "few" things about that man and his wife. They could also tell you a few stories about old Al.
I have no idea who the anti-Christ is and right now I really don't care. My biggest concern is that I do what is right in the eyes of my Heavenly Father, my wife, and my child. I firmly believe that if I am on God's side then I'm on the right side and nothing else matters!
Amen!
Christian,
I'm not exactly sure how to approach this with you without you thinking I'm coming down on you personally. You see, you say you're not interested in numerology, but like it or not, that's what is used as a scriptural identifier of the AntiChrist (666 didn't come from some secular source, it came from the Old Testament. Surely you know that). If you deny biblical teaching then it's really kind of pointless to pursue it with you, don't you think?
As to Bush bringing respect and patriotism into the White House (I'm not even going to touch the "God" aspect of your message given this thread), you might want to reconsider. Go to your favorite search engine and put in "Bush National Guard AWOL" and you'll discover that he simply walked away from his duty (apparently because he couldn't pass the pilot drug test) and this, during wartime. Do your military buddies know that the President that is leading them into war was likely a deserter? Doesn't that matter just a little? Did you know that his first business partner was Osama bin Ladin's older brother? Isn't that just a little...odd? Why is he fighting any and all investigation of 9-11? Why did he sit there at the Booker school reading a story about goats to kids (for 20 minutes!) after hearing about the second World Trade tower impact? Just prior to 9-11 he'd been on a month long vacation with fighter jets circling his ranch 24 hours a day (that's unprecidented, by the way). What did he know then and what is he hiding now?
You see Christian, there's an awful lot you don't know about him, maybe that you've choosen to ignore about him. Included in these things might be the signs that he IS the AntiChrist...you might want to inquire rather than just following him blindly.
Mr. Sheriff John,
First let me say that I do support President Bush. I believe that he is a good man and that he is doing what he thinks is right for our country. Now, although I may like the man I totally disagree with his policies or the direction that he is taking our country. I do not believe that war is the answer for everything, but for this, with what we know, war will do a lot for those of you who take FREEDOM for granted. To liberate another people from such as the Iraqi-dictator is worth going to war over. To protect Americans from even the possiblity of another 9-11 is worth going to war over.
As far as following him to war. Yes, I would go to war if he, President George W. Bush, commanded it because I trust him as do a lot of military members. For those of you who don't know, the previous President did everything he could to send us off into losing battles. He never allowed us to win. He tore us down and then slammed us for our failures. President Bush is not like that at all. I KNOW that he cares for his troops and would not send us off to doing the same type of humanitarian-babysitting that Clinton did. When one of us falls President Bush feels our loss just as he should. The President should feel the pain for every soldier, sailor, airman, and marine that falls in battle. But let me tell you, the previous President never showed the same compassion as this President does. All I ever saw from him was disrespect, contempt and maybe some alligator-tears when the cameras were there. He never praised us and he certainly never showed the same admiration as President Bush.
Okay now, about this silly notion of President Bush being the anti-Christ. Do any of you know President Bush personally? Do you know what his daily activities are? Do you know his countenance? Do you know anyone who works in the Whitehouse? Do you know about the Bible studies and prayer meetings that are taking place in the Executive Building and in other administrative buildings? I can tell you that they didn't occur during the previous administration. Do you know who has been attending those meetings? I think you may be surprised!
You stated that President Bush was likely a deserter? Do you know that for sure? Do you have any evidence that he is a deserter? I know about his actions, or inactions, during the Vietnam conflict, but is that any comparison to what President Clinton did? How many people, good people, were against the war and did not want to take part in it? If you were totally opposed to the war, as many were, and you had a way of not being involved, would you take it? Honestly? I don't think those who are in the military, right now, care much about the stories of George Bush being a deserter. At least we have a President who cares!
Also, you need to remember that his political enemies did their best to find ammo to use against him and the best they could come up with was a DUI that took place many years ago. Do you know what he has done since? Do you know about him expressing regrets for the past, for the pain he has caused his family and friends? Can you honestly say that you know George W. Bush well enough to judge him?
Now I don't know how old you are but have you ever done anything when you were young and regretted it? Have you repented of whatever it is that you have done? Do you feel that you have been forgiven of whatever it is that you have done? No one around here wears a halo, no one! No one is perfect and if we are really going to expect our leaders to be perfect then we might as well not have any leaders until the King of Kings comes back! President Bush has been more than open with what he's done in the past and has openly expressed his regrets. Now there are some things that he will not go into and I really don't think it's any of our business, just like I didn't think some of what President Clinton did was our business and I'm not talking about Monica or the others!
About my statement regarding numerology, I know that there are significant numbers in scripture such as 666, 6, 7, 12, and 144,000. Does anyone know exactly what they mean? Can anyone tell me what the numbers mean in their original translation? Can anyone tell me what corralation the number 666, in the Bible, has with President Bush?
This comes to an issue of mine regarding the accusations of President Bush being the anti-Christ. Can anyone tell me what exactly the criteria is for someone to be the anti-Christ? Can anyone tell how this President fits your interpretation of the anti-Christ? Please don't be vague. Please just answer the question!
I've been studying subjects such as the anti-Christ, the mark of the beast, the new world order, etc. for many many years and all it's left me with is a library of books. I have books proving that Mikhail Gorbachev is the anti-Christ. I have books proving that George H. W. Bush is the anti-Christ. I have books proving that William Clinton is the anti-Christ. When I was living in Europe there was even a scare, and plenty of books, about British Prime Minister, Tony Blair being the anti-Christ. The list goes on and on and personally I think were are going the wrong direction with these accusations. In my opinion President Bush is too puny of a person to be the anti-Christ. He will only be President for another couple of years, maybe six if he's lucky, and then he's history. Afterwards the new President will become the topic of your accusations.
Now, I had hoped that this site would be about the philosophy of law and government. I have a very strong interest in the subject and I would hope that we could re-focus on the issues that Mr. Joel Skousen has proposed on this website.
Amen!
Christian, I hardly know where to begin. You mention Clinton's name repeatedly (how did he get into this conversation?) telling us how awful he was/is, yet we're supposed to forgive Bush for his sins because he was once young and wild?
As far as numerology goes, PilotSam gave you a quick course on it and how it relates to Bush...you might want to give it a re-read. How can any of us talk to you about this Antichrist thing if you won't even do that?
As for Bush being AWOL and a deserter, I repeat, do a Goggle search on it. The guys that are screaming the loudest about this are part of a veterns group that doesn't share your admiration and forgiveness of Bush. It's just my opinion but "a president who cares" wouldn't be lining up young recruits to die simply to line the pockets of his oil buddies with profits from the Iraqi oilfields.
I've been in law enforcement for almost 25 years Christian, during which time I've interviewed more witnesses, victims and perps than you'd ever believe. Even when you've got a thick skull like mine you eventually start to get a sense of who's telling the truth about things and who isn't. All I can tell you is when Bush starts talking about Iraq........ my "BS" alarms start redlining. If you want to ignore my instincts, fine, no problem, but the thing is Christian, I get the feeling that you're ignoring your own instincts about the man and that IS a problem.
I understand that Bush's policies are a big problem for the US. I believe that his administration has done more harm to our nation than good. I also believe that if we Americans don't take a stand, against President Bush and any other non-constitutionalist, then this country is going to collapse and soon.
Although I haven't been in law enforcement for as long as you, Mr. Sheriff John, my experience in law enforcement and other communities have taught me a lot. When I was with NATO I had many an opportunity to be "that fly on the wall" and the things I saw and heard...
I have lived a life that most people could only experience in the movies. Let me tell you Mr. Sheriff John, George W. Bush is no anti-Christ. He is a little man in a very big and frightening world. He is only a player and a short-termed one at that. You may be able to provide the "numbers" but I'm telling you that "numbers" were also provided for every other Tom, Dick and Harry who held positions of power. President Bush is a nobody in the world of the NWO. He's a little pebble in a very big pond. I could tell you experience upon experience of people that I've had contact with, very big and important people, who fit more of the anti-Christ-mold then Bush.
About his personal activities, I believe that he IS a good man who believes that he is doing the right thing for America. I totally disagree with what he's doing, but again, he believes he's doing the right thing.
I have a lot of friends who worked in the Whitehouse, and in the military support detachments, during the Clinton-administration and then the Bush-administration. It is night and day when you compare the two. Clinton openly showed contempt for the military and the civilians who worked in the Whitehouse and on AF One and Two. Bush is just the opposite. He's an actual person who can be respected and who's orders a person can willingly carryout.
With regards to Clinton, from what I've experienced (I mean with my eyes and ears) Clinton fits more with the idea of an anti-Christ then Bush could ever do. There is a darkness about him that can't be explained. He has shadows everywhere!
You may disagree with me and that's fine. I've been studying this for a very long time and in my opinion President George W. Bush is not the anti-Christ.
Amen!
Christian, it's pretty clear to me that your heels are dug in on this one so there's not much more I can say save for I guess we'll all have to watch how it all pans out.
I feel that I should point out a couple of things to you though. You state: "President Bush is a nobody in the world of the NWO". As his father was the very man who first coined the term "New World Order" for his intended path, well, I'd hardly call him a nobody in that regard. He is, after all, the most powerful human on the planet right now and the totalitarian empire he's moving us toward certainly apes his father's intentions.
" He's an actual person who can be respected and who's orders a person can willingly carryout." You yourself start your last message by saying that if we don't stand up against Bush's policies then the country will collapse (and soon!). Christian, I'm trying to listen to you closely, so that I won't be guilty of misinterpreting what you're saying but there are many points in your chain of messages on this issue that don't seem to jibe with one another. Is Bush, in your opinion, a monster who's robbing us of our liberties, or is he a good man that we should follow, even to war? Is he a puny person of no importance or does he have his finger on the proverbial button capable of world destruction? Is he a true Christian or is he the ultimate anti-Christian?
Mr. Sheriff John,
I've asked this before but instead of answers I get accused of bashing another's religion. What is the Biblical definition of the anti-Christ? What must a person do to fit the criteria of the anti-Christ? Where do you derive your sources from? How does President Bush fit the Biblical definition and meet the criteria for being the anti-Christ?
I have a feeling that you are going to say that plenty of evidence HAS been provided. You may believe that but evidence has also been provided that we Americans are all evil-Zionists who are out to take over the world. That we want the world and all of its citizens to become American. Ever heard of Pax Americana? (Just as a side note: I find it interesting how people from other countries complain on how America is imposing its values and culture on everyone in the world, yet their governments are funded mostly with American "aid" and everyone who's complaining is wearing American-clothes.) You may say that they don't know what they are talking about but may I remind you that we are but 300 million which is a small fraction compared to the rest of the world. You may say that what the rest of the world says or believes doesn't matter but I would have to disagree since it was the rest of the world who caused the numerous world-wars, religious wars, famines and genocides.
There is a movement to create a unified State of Europe, Constitution and all, that will encompass the original Roman Empire (and some!). May I remind you that no one over there likes us. They don't agree with anything that we do even if it's in their best interest. In fact most Europeans believe that we are too religious. You see the vast majority of Europe is anti religion, especially anti-Christian. They believe that we are evil Zionists who are out to take over the world. In Europe there are a lot of powerful people who intend on "unifying" the world. They may not be the President of the United States and the may not have their fingers on the "proverbial button" but throughout history they seemed to have gained a lot of power and they seemed to have caused a lot of grief. It's almost as if there's some shadow-government pulling everyone's strings.
I have known a lot of people who "alarmed" others about the New World Order, the anti-Christ, and the Mark of the Beast. From my experience all they do is scare others into false beliefs. I've even fallen for the scare myself during days of Reagan, then Bush Senior, and then Clinton. You alarmists have cried wolf far too many times. You have provided "proof" that various individuals of power are the anti-Christ and will usher in the New World Order. I even remember President Bush (senior) coining the phrase, "The New World Order." Did I believe that he was the anti-Christ back then? Maybe for a time since all of the "proof" that I observed seemed valid. Heck, I was about to go to the Gulf to fight the battle of all battles so of course I thought the end was near. There were even a lot of scriptural verses and numbers involved so all I was reading must have been true. Then there are the Founding Fathers of the United States of America who thought they were ushering in a new world order. Do I believe that they may have been anti-Christs? No but I'm sure some did and they had plenty of proof!
In closing...What are you going to do when it turns out that President Bush runs out his term and doesn't claim the throne of the anti-Christ?
Will you find another?
Christian, I'm sorry to have to point this out but you've failed to address the paradoxes of your previous messages.
Let me boil it down to this one which I'll requote: " Is Bush, in your opinion, a monster who's robbing us of our liberties, or is he a good man that we should follow, even to war?".
This should be easy. I take it from your previous comment that you would consider his actions in regards to the Constitution basically "un-American". Would you sacrifice your own child in the mercenary participation of what any honest man would describe as "oil piracy"? If he/she died in the advancing war, would you feel that it was an honorable death, in defense of their country? Or would another life have been wasted in order to win additional money and power for a corrupt elite?
As to the ambiguity of the Bible in identifying the antiChrist, I suggest you take it up your complaints with the author. From what I read above you've been "burned" so many times on this that you just don't believe it anymore. I'm ok with that, to each his own, but you might want to change your tag from "Christian" to something more appropriate. Just a suggestion...
You know Mr. Sheriff John some people are born with names such as Christian and Mr. Sherrif John. We don't just pick a name but we accept what our mommy and daddy give us!
I find it interesting how you want me to address the "paradoxes" of my previous statements, yet you are unwilling to address my inquiry as to what defines the anti-Christ. Tic for tac, give and take, let's have a dialog!
On the point of President Bush, again, in my opinion, I believe he is a good man, a christian, BUT his policies are so out of wack from my personal beliefs and from my interpretation of the Constitution that I believe that his administration is taking the United States in the wrong direction. I don't like the tax games that are being played (on both sides), I don't believe that the Department of Homeland Security is needed, I don't believe in this inspection process that is being carried out with Iraq, and I don't like the idea of keeping people, combatants or not, in a cell for an indefinite amount of time without any legal counsel, an opportunity to meet the big-guy on the bench, or even the chance of knowing what they're being charged with. There's a ton of other issues that I have with the current administration but that doesn't mean that the President is not a good person. I would hope that you, of all people Mr. Sheriff John, could find one person on this planet who you believe is a good person but who's not doing what you believe is a good thing.
Now when it comes to this "war on terror" I am willing to give the President the benefit of the doubt. You see I'm sure that he knows more of the situation then I and maybe even you. I'm sure he is well informed, at least more than you or me, and I think his experience with 9-11 has turned him into a mother-hen who doesn't want anymore of his citizens to be harmed by the enemy. Would I allow my child to go to war against these....? Yes I would! From what I know this war is much more than a drive for oil (although I know that the oil is a factor). If I could I would go back there myself and do it right this time!
My experiences with the alarmist movement hasn't caused me to feel "burned", but what it has done is teach me to not take the opinions of the alarmists for granted. I've learned to actually research the opinions or "proofs" of others for my own good. There are too many sheeple in the world and for a time I think I was one of them. Now, with my vast collection of books I feel that I have a better understanding of the anti-Christ, NWO, and Mark of the Beast subjects. I'm still learning, of course, and I'm more than willing to discuss the issues for those who are as open minded as I and who are willing to have an open dialog.
My apologies Christian for assuming that that was your choosen name rather than your given name. You did, however, confirm in an earlier message that Christianity was your religion.
As to discussing your inquiries about the AntiChrist, well, you seemed to want nothing to do with PilotSam's lesson in numerology. Numerology is an important facet of "The Book" and is used to identify the AntiChrist ("the number of the Beast is 666"). But if you have studied this issue as long as you imply you have, you already know the importance of it.
Unlike you Christian, I'm entirely new to this. I've a bit of a hard nose and I've never given that part of the Bible my attention. It's only been recently, after a long talk with my minister that I started putting things together. If you have collected this stack of books on the subject and can't be bothered to investigate the most important clue about it, how can we have the dialog you claim you want to have?
Virually everyday I run into someone who's basically a good person but they've done something stupid. Truth be told, that's about 90 percent of my work. That isn't what I'm talking about here though. This war were heading into isn't about terrorism, it's about greed, and it's going to destroy the life that both you and I are living today. The people running the show aren't stupid but good, they're stupid and VERY bad. When you were in the service, did you ever get "gut" feelings about situations that you couldn't explain but turned out to be "on the money"? Well, I get those feelings whenever I turn on the news now.
I'm telling you Christian, Bush is not a "good man", whether you want to look at it in a Revelations context or not. Whatever you do (and I'm aiming this at everyone reading this) don't sacrifice your children for his oil crusade.
BUSH IS NOT A GOOD MAN THAT IS JUST ACCIDENTALY DESTROYING OUR FREEDOM! It is very much intentional. Satans plan in the war in heaven was to destroy the freedom of man. He was defeated, but fights on, with the same plan. Herr Bush has done more to destroy our God given Constitution, more specifically our unalienable rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights, than any other president. Whether knowingly or not, It is he who Bush works for. That fact alone should put him at the top of the suspect list. How about a few more?
He as was his father are members of a secret society, the Skull and Bones. Sounds like a nice bunch of christian boys dosen't it?
He is a globalist member of the NWO. And his dad did not coin the phrase! You yourself declare that there must be a shadow government pulling the strings Christian, and you are right. As a participant on this site one might assume that you would be aware that Bush is in league with that shadow government and that it is their goal to foment world war, which, by the way Bush is doing a marvolous job of.
As to the bible, one pertenant description of the antichrist is that he will decieve the masses. They will believe that he is a "good man". And judging by your aknowledgement that he is doing a lot of evil [my words fitting your description] you may fit that catergory.
I do not know whether Bush is the anti-christ, and I, like you, have heard the accusation before but the pieces have never fit so well.
Ok....I've held out long enough,mainly cause I hate to type,(or should I say can't type) sorry Christian for letting you go without support for so long. Bush is not the anti-christ. I don't care what that non-bible reading shmo says in his (last ditch effort)to make a buck off of we sheeple "christians".
I'd like to know how many $$$millions that those kind of books make go back into ...."harvesting the fields that are ripe".
has no one herd the verse.."study to show thyself approved". When we base a denomination or thesis on one verse we become the same heathen fools who spew scripture from their mouths for "proof" or retoric or what ever twisting they may try to justify themselves. On the lighter side for a good mocking laugh. Take Gore for ie, who during the last election said his "favorite"verse(as if he's read the bible enough to have a favorite) was John 16:3 ,obviosly misquoting the intended 3:16.Read John 16:3 see that what the bible says about God mocking the mockers is true.
When we read those commercialized "christian" books that keep us from reading the word(truth), we're no different than a Jehovas' witness thats deceived by reading "the Watch Towers" written by a convicted criminal w/ an 8th grade education that claims he's the only one that can interprit the bible. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for comentaries and the such but when we fail to search/check for ourselves(or as Paul wrote ..."test the spirits" ) we've deceived ourselves..."we parrish for a lack of knowledge". Yes, the book of Revelations,Daniel etc. can be difficult at times and very unclear in others, but is ...."the number of his name" the only clue about the anti-christ,....certainly not. I believe the anti-christ is alive. He is not presently in contol when he is in power he will have
those who are left behind fooled for 42 mos.(at this point it's plain to see i'm
pre-trib.) that's another can of worms ....I'm sure....right! any ways ..... after the believers in Christ(those who are christians(christ-like) by lifestyle)are"caught up"and the 144k sealed jews secondly....have then all left...now it is mid trib.and the ...."abomination of desolation" happens as he...the antichrist takes over the now non- existant third temple behind the "dome of the rock". They are in the process of trying to make that happen(the new temple). He will than set himself up as god in the temple. Now were is "islam" at this point? Yeh...I can really see Bush hanging with the muslims right about now. Now comes the two witnesses. For sake of not having to explain why "I think" who they are, I won't say. Understand that God intended for us to cross ref. other scriptures not just about Rev.,iether. Daniel, Ephesians and others are coupled w/ Rev. and needed to be included w/ the study. The word tells us almost specifically where he'll come out of ....the middle east!I'm tired of typing ! I'll give refferences later.If you can't find them yourself, which I'm confident you can. BTW the ..."spirit of anti-christ" has always been around althogh Hitler,Stalin,Clinton,Bush and whoever may take on that "spirit" does not make him the anti-christ. Remember also no matter how evil governments seem its all been put in place by my/our father. At this point in time putting a real man of God in place wouldn't match up to the timmimg of proficies that God has already put into place.Also you might agree that men in this day and age don't get to the top because they're full of integrity!They have cashed that in along time ago! I'll be back later....I won't hide! God bless all of you who seek truth and not convienience or tradition,there's so much more!
I do not say of assurity that he is Bush but If you declare catagorically that it is not and could not be him then show some evidence. I will agree to disagree on whether our corrupt government as well as the other corrupt governments are put in place by God.
I'll do more than agree to disagree about that one. Governments are made up of people, whose actions may be good or evil, but their actions are their own and not directed by God. I know the Bible fairly well, but I don't know of any verse that contradicts that. Do you?
The AntiChrist is alive but not in control? Well.... I'll admit that Bush seems fairly out of control most of the time but........ ;-)
Perhaps Isaiah can be of help in this discussion. He speaks of two superpowers in His day; Egypt and Assyria. Egypt was traditionally a civilized and industrious nation but suffering from idolatry and economic/political problems. Assyria on the other hand was the ruthless oppressive power from the North very militaristic and seeking world domination. (sound familiar??) As the world ripened in iniquity the King of Assyria suddenly sweeps over the earth destroying and conquering all before Him. This powerful AntiChrist promises world peace but seeks and obtains world domination. Many look to Egypt for protection against Assyria but Assyria exposes Egypts weaknesses and lays seige on their lands.(see Isaiah 20,28,30,31) Only Zion the pure in heart receive protection from this wicked powerful AntiChrist King of Assyria by putting their trust in the Lord and receiving divine deliverance (see Isaiah 37:33-36) Isaiah speaks in types and shadows of future events in the latter days and reminds us to change our hearts so we can receive forgiveness and direction from the King of Kings. I believe his message is particularly important for us today as we watch for the fulfillment of these great prophesies of the past happening before our eyes. Just my 2 cents worth.
I guess I better adress the first concerns that a few have mentioned. I was not antisapating the need to ref. the above concerning,"government(majestrate,secular authority)". BTW no offense taken to your disagreeing w/ me. In my opinion if we never diagree we must not have a mind of our own...thus we are fools to start. I'm no bible scholar myself, I forget passages as well, especialy where to find them again. As exhaustive a "Strongs Concordance" maybe, it can sometimes be of little use when my pitiful memory can not remember the particular key words that aid in finding a particular verse etc.,especialy if you read it in another version. I have a parallel bible.It includes the KJV,NIV,NLT,NASB. If you have a version other than KJV please read it as well.Let me first repeat...I said...."put in place"...,....(NOT! "directed",clearly different) as in set in place ,allowed to be in that position. "Our ways are not Gods ways"...His perspective is much greater than ours.He has His design,purpose,and providence. Who am I to question?(I have to remind my self of this,as also other scriptures)If everything was perfect it sure wouldn't line up w/scripture in regards to how the last days will be. Evil men are allowed to bring us closer to that prophetic end time. Satan is but a pawn as are those who choose his way knowing it or not. God gave satan authority over the earth. Understanding that He who gives the authority is in control. Which was the general idea behind "elected government", that precept has obviously been trashed and "Big Brother"has taking the riegns from us slowly like a "frog in boiling water".As I remember the truth of ,God being ultimatly in control,(w/ His purpose in mind) I am put at peace.Mathew Henry's
commentary is worth a look see as well, along w/ this "government" subject, there are many cross ref. as well. Ok..ok I'll shut up and give you the ref. .....Romans 13:1-7
Gods peace Philipians 4:4-9
-Steven-
Steven,
I agree that Satan has authority here on earth during this biblical administration. After all, he offered the kingdoms of the world to Jesus Christ during his days of temptation in the desert. Matt 4:8,9 http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Mat/Mat004.html#8
I disagree with your interpretation of Romans 13:1-7, though. I've always understood that Romans 13:1-7 refers to church leadership as the "higher powers", not secular government leadership. Notice how it says that "the powers that be are ordained of God." Secular governmental leadership is not ordained of God (clergy are). Governmental leadership are elected by mankind or get into power some other way (e.g. appointed, inherited, or by force), which doesn't seem anything like "ordained by God".
Read this section of scripture at the Blue Letter Bible to see for yourself:
http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Rom/Rom013.html
Regards,
True North
TN, Just a thought, but simply because Satan "offered" Jesus the Kingdoms of the World, doesn't necessarily mean he had them to give. More often than not, Satans temptations are more illusion than reality--lies being the common denominator.
That being said, God has power to administer the affairs of earthly kingdoms however He sees fit to provide an environment of opposition--so His children can choose between good and evil. So, while he is never the source of evil actions by man, he often gives man--and kingdoms--enough rope to hang themselves.
Hey,
Sorry, I've taken so long to get back to this thread. I agree "AB in SC". Thanks, "True North" for reminding me of those resource links. That source looked familiar,then I realized I had seen it on another thread where I had thanked you for your responce. Let me first adress "ordained" as used in the KJV in Romans.13:1. Now just a side note,I find the NIV helpful at times becuase it seems to reduce the amount of word studies that help in determining a meaning/definition and/or context of a particular word. Idealy it may reduce the need for more clarification by 20% if your lucky. The NIV uses the synonym "established" in place of "ordained".The NLT uses "placed in power",adding to that, if you check a thesaurus(microsft word has one)you will see other very viable synonyms such as; certain, designed, fated, meant, intended ,and predestined.
The word "ordained" is just as simple as the rest of its synonyms, it has just been used in a "religious" tone for so long it can fool us in its context if we're not careful.The last I checked ,a churches congragation is made up of the same people/population as those who supposedly elect our represenitives/government.The churches I've been apart of, have all had a supposed choice in who there pastor/sheppard is as well. So to say God only "ordaines" "spiritual leadership"/(clergy) doesn't make sense. Lets go a little further in this passage. Look at vs. 3,since when do I need to be in terror or afraid from my pastor/shepperd/"clergy" because I sin/do evil? Again we find "rulers" in the KJV. What do "clergy" rule over? Now vs.4,..."he is the minister of God".. once again in its verb/ action tense meaning,check the related synonyms. continuing in vs. 4 ...."be afraid for he beareth not the.. SWORD.. in vain"..." to execute WRATH upon him that doeth evil"... I have yet to have read anywhere in the "holy spirit inspired word of God" that held up a requirement for "pastors, deacons, bishops, spiritual sheppards" to be able to keep we folowers of Christ in line by wielding/brandishing a SWORD. I can see it now, all the problems Paul dealt with, instead of admonishing and lovingly disciplining those who sinned/did evil,they could have easily been handled with that head splitting SWORD he kept ever so close..?.......of course not!The early church would have never made it! You can find that type of "purifing" in the "koran". Skip on down to vs.6 and 7 is this speaking of "tith"?Nope!By the way I noticed Mathew Henry's on the list of commentaries as well as others, on the link you mentioned. This thread has become a "pandora's box" for me,and I no longer wish to spend my time testing my apologetical skills(nothing to do with apologizing btw.)I would rather be discipling/teaching a new believer who is hungary for God and His truth, much more enjoyable for the draining time that's spent doing so. In the future I'll try to do a better job at restaint, and not even post on a thread like this I should of known better. See ya'll on other threads.
Because He lives
-Steven-
I have no problem offending someone by speaking some truth,but I hate the idea of someone misunderstanding me and then being offended. I saw that the last bit of my last post could be taken different than I meant. My point was that I'd rather talk/teach/positively enfluence someone in person , that I can see "grow", than debate someone I have no clue who I'm talking to. I was NOT in any way saying those of you who are posting, do not seek God and His truths. So forgive me if you were offended, even if it was only for the second it took to read this correction.
Thanks!
-Steven-
It depends on who's God your talking about. The Christians beleive in Jesus Christ as God in the flesh, the Jews don't beleive in Jesus Christ, then you have people of Hindu and Islam. Each religion has different laws. And then there are people that do not beleive in God at all.
One lawgiver;Isaiah 33:22,10 Laws; Exodus 20:1-17.
I have declared all other dictates of man, that are not an accurate elaboration of those 10 laws, to be null, and void with conviction, and personal resolve.
Conviction, being defined as, "a principle to live by and if need be to die for". By contrast opinions, are as the shifting sands.
...you've got to stand for something or you'll fall for anything.