Looks like there is gong to be a show on our Public TV station here in Minnesota, about justifying religion and politics. In the commercial they asked, "How do you j justify religion and politics?"
My answer would be that, as Christians, our religios beliefs, should be the basis for our political beliefs and our political policies.If God is at the center of Christianity, especially our personal Christian religious beliefs, then nothing can be fairer to all people, of any race, creed color or ethnicity, than the beliefs He espoused as Jesus the Christ.
Being Christains, governing by our Christian beliefs, we should treat all people with fairnesss, kindness, love and chairty - using some of the riches of the rich, to help the poor, but certainly not socialism. Much of this should come from the beliefn (possibly of the private sector) that, as Christains, we as a nation, believe it is our duty to see that all people have basic human rights - food, shelter, clothing, health care, and schooling being some or those basic guarnteed rights.
Out court systems should be governed tha same way. Our votng should be governed by our beliefs and our understanding of those running for office.
Our whole country should be run, based on the beliefs of Chrstianity, because, if you are a Chrstian, you believe they are mandeted by the one and only true god - the all knowing, all loving, omniptent, omni-present Yahweh.
We can let the history of ancient Israel be our example of what occurs when you do not completely intermingle religious and politics. When israel followed the tenets of the early montheism of Moses, and eventually Judaism - they prospered. When the political leaders, priests and people of Israel did not follow those religions tenets - the country as a whole, fropm the people to the leaders - suffered, financially, moraly, ethically, and often experienced war and complete take over by non-Christain countries.
The US, and Israel, should be examples, for the entire world, as to how to justify (not just any religion, because many of them are false or currupt, and there is only one real religion) - but Chrisianity, and politics - as a way to standardize how to run families, cities, counties states, countries and the whole world.
Think about it - How do you think we will be governed once Jesus comes back, or after the Battle of Gog and Magog, when Yahweh Himself will be our God and leader?
Feel free to comment.
God bless,
T.R.
__________________
May Yahweh-God bless you and yours,
I believe the founding fathers knew what they were doing when they separated church and state--possibly they had in mind what Christ said about the topic. Matthew 22:21
I wil vote for a Christian, and expect them to maintain Christian values, but govern by the law of the land, as they have sworn to do when elected.
I don't believe food, shelter, clothing, health care, and schooling are basic human rights, and forcing the gov't to provide these certainly is socialism. I believe it's the duty of a Christian to help their neighbor when they are in need, but that is the extent of it.
I would NEVER vote to abolish our Constitution in favor of a government run by a religion, for several reasons. One, who's beliefs should be adhered to? Mine, yours, someone else's? Two, politics corrupt. Three, and most importantly to me, is there is no Biblical authorization for such--to the contrary, Christ said to render unto Caesar what belongs to Caesar, and to God what belongs to God.
__________________
"We can have no '50-50' allegiance in this country. Either a man is an American and nothing else, or he is not an American at all."-- Theodore Roosevelt
A wise man's heart is at his right hand; but a fool's heart at his left. Ecclesiasties 10:2
The last four letters in American..........I Can
The last four letters in Republican........I Can
The last four letters in Democrats.........Rats
Maybe I used the wrong terminology, but I firmly believe that all humans should have the opportunity to have food, shelter and health care, provided to or for them. - Not throught socialism, but through taxes and contributions from those who want to help. In this nation - they should be, and I believe were meant to be - "rights". If theare not - they should be. Let "love and care for your brothers and sisters", extend to the underpriviliged, homeless, starving, too cold, too hot, those without health insurance and others - as i should be on our minds as Christians - always- forever.
If you do not believe in that, check your beliefs, they are lacking ... Love and help your fellow man l- fot it is also helping Christ. "What sovever you do ...
I am not one who believes the the so called "separation of church and state" in the constitution - was meant to keep religious beliefs out of federal government, 1. because you simply cannot do it - people will (and are) allowing their religious beliefs to invluence who they vote for and what they vote for and how we run this country. 2. anytime you tell people that "you can't" do something, many of them will do it anyhow, just to go against what they were ordered to do.
I think the fathers and founders of this country knew that, so they did not mean that statement to mean "keep religion out of politics and government". It just does not make sense top add those words with that in mind ... To belivee anything else is to be in denial or just be stupid. So what is an alternative (and more likely) interpretation of the terminology and what they really meant?
I believe the separation of church and state was (and is) meant to keep the government out of religion 1. because many of the forefathers and founders were trying to escape governmental rule of churches. It only makes sense that they would try to assure that it did not occur again, by including "separation of church and state" in the constiution.
2. Much of the Constition, and Federal Government laws and statutes, are based, not only Christian beliefs, but Jewish and Biblical beliefs. One good example is bankruptcy. The Constituion was written ny Christians, with the beliefs of their Christainity in mind when they wrote it. Christianity, not any other religion, but stronly influenced by Christianity.
But, once Jesus and then Yahweh rule on eath, I dont believe there is any chance that the entire world will be ruled by their rules, not Mohammed's of Vishnu's or Mother Earth's ruels.
The world will be governed by the tenets, beliefs, rules, statutes and laws of Judaism-Christianity or any other guiding beliefs of the Triune God yahweh - so you might as well get accustomed to it. If you belive otherwise, you are only deludign yourself.
That separation of church andstate was to keep the government and the politicians from interfering in any religious belief, or any religion.
Should not our beliefs, and thus our political decisions - be based on what Christ would want them to be governed by? We do not have to wait until He comes to try to implement those beliefs, we can let them influence out political beliefs, choices and votes - now.
If letting our religious beliefs influence our political beliefs and responsibilities - is okay for God - then it should be alright for all of us - now.
Your religious beliefs, if you are a Christian, especially a "born again" Christain, should govern every decison you make.
How about we start a "feed the children" campaign, and do something really worthwhile? Serioulsy. When see some of the commerrcials, I begin to cry ...
because I feel for those children. We have so much, and they need so little. Letps share. Any ideas ????????
God bless,
T.R.
__________________
May Yahweh-God bless you and yours,
Not throught socialism, but through taxes and contributions from those who want to help.
If it's through taxes, then it's socialism. I think I am a pretty generous person, but I want to maintain control of where the money I donate goes. I'm all for my money going to a charity like "Catch-a-Dream", but I'm firmly against it going to pay some "artist" to avoid getting a real job in favor of desecrating a picture of Christ and calling it "art". I don't have that kind of control with taxes, and I do not pay them cheerfully for that reason.
Quote:
In this nation - they should be, and I believe were meant to be - "rights".
We are guaranteed the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. I'll have to look it up, but I recall a Biblical situation where the standard was "if a man won't work, neither let him eat". There's no "right" to education, healthcare, etc. in the Bible.
Quote:
I am not one who believes the the so called "separation of church and state" in the constitution - was meant to keep religious beliefs out of federal government,
Keeping them separate doesn't mean they are mutally exclusive. I see it simply as it is--one isn't supposed to be in charge of the other. No church should run the gov't, the gov't should not establish a church.
Quote:
To belivee anything else is to be in denial or just be stupid.
Quote:
If you belive otherwise, you are only deludign yourself.
Something I've learned over the years. When someone tells me "If you don't think the same way I think, you are wrong/an idiot", it tells me a lot about that person. Usually it's a sign of an overbearing attitude and closed mind. Someone that holds themselves and their opinions in very high regard, but gives little value to any opinion that is different. Someone that is accustomed to being listened to, but rarely listens themselves. It also tells me that when that sort of tactic is relied upon to back an opinion, it's generally all there is to back that opinion.
Quote:
But, once Jesus and then Yahweh rule on eath, I dont believe there is any chance that the entire world will be ruled by their rules, not Mohammed's of Vishnu's or Mother Earth's ruels.
Prime example there. You believe totally different than I do here. So, if religion is to be in charge of the gov't, who's religion should it be? Mine, yours, or someone else's?
Quote:
Should not our beliefs, and thus our political decisions - be based on what Christ would want them to be governed by?
Your interpretation , or mine? What if my interpretaion is different? Do we flip a coin? Individually, yes I think so--but you shouldn't be forced into what I believe, or vice-versa.
Quote:
If letting our religious beliefs influence our political beliefs and responsibilities - is okay for God - then it should be alright for all of us - now.
Influence--yes--I agree. I just don't agree with letting a church take over the government's job. #1 reason, God didn't authorize it. There are plenty of examples in the Bible where man thought he was smart enough to make those kinds of decisions--none ended well.
Quote:
How about we start a "feed the children" campaign, and do something really worthwhile?
If you want to do that, great. I don't agree with being forced to do it.
Quote:
We have so much, and they need so little. Letps share. Any ideas ????????
I have local charities and families that I help support. I know where my money goes, and who gets what. I don't have to be concerned about some CEO making a 6-figure salary running a "charity". I don't have to worry about it being wasted, embezzled, etc. I don't have to worry about the gov't taking their share off the top. This is besides what the gov't forces me to pay. What I give voluntarily I also give cheerfully. I am not happy about what it taken from me. God loves a cheerful giver.
__________________
"We can have no '50-50' allegiance in this country. Either a man is an American and nothing else, or he is not an American at all."-- Theodore Roosevelt
A wise man's heart is at his right hand; but a fool's heart at his left. Ecclesiasties 10:2
The last four letters in American..........I Can
The last four letters in Republican........I Can
The last four letters in Democrats.........Rats
Maybe I used the wrong terminology, but I firmly
believe that all humans should have the opportunity to have food,
shelter and health care, provided to or for them. - Not throught
socialism, but through taxes and contributions from those who want
to help. In this nation - they should be, and I believe were meant
to be - "rights".
You don't make sense when you conflate different concepts.
To say humans should have an opportunity to aquire something is
very different than saying they should have it provided for them.
Which is it? The way you structured the sentence indicates you
believe they should have the opportunity to have something
provided for them. No offense but What the heck does that mean?
Taxes and contributions are also very different. Providing
benefits to individuals through taxes is socialism. Providing for
people through voluntary contributions is not. That's called
charity. To say someone has a right to "food shelter and health
care, provided for them" is to claim a right to force another to
work for them or in other words to claim a right to enslave them.
I couldn't more vehemently disagree! Nobody has a right to the goods, services, property or labor of another person!
As far as the rest of your post is concerned, you are basically calling for a theocracy and again I couldn't more vehemently disagree. LBR summed up my position on that quite well so there's no need for me to comment further. In fact it's best I don't because I have a tendency to get pretty nasty when I hear people basically call for the destruction of the founding principles of this nation so I'll just ditto LBR's post. He handled it much more diplomatically than I would have.
If it's through taxes, then it's socialism. I think I am a pretty generous person, but I want to maintain control of where the money I donate goes. I'm all for my money going to a charity like "Catch-a-Dream", but I'm firmly against it going to pay some "artist" to avoid getting a real job in favor of desecrating a picture of Christ and calling it "art". I don't have that kind of control with taxes, and I do not pay them cheerfully for that reason.
We are guaranteed the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. I'll have to look it up, but I recall a Biblical situation where the standard was "if a man won't work, neither let him eat". There's no "right" to education, healthcare, etc. in the Bible.
Keeping them separate doesn't mean they are mutally exclusive. I see it simply as it is--one isn't supposed to be in charge of the other. No church should run the gov't, the gov't should not establish a church.
Something I've learned over the years. When someone tells me "If you don't think the same way I think, you are wrong/an idiot", it tells me a lot about that person. Usually it's a sign of an overbearing attitude and closed mind. Someone that holds themselves and their opinions in very high regard, but gives little value to any opinion that is different. Someone that is accustomed to being listened to, but rarely listens themselves. It also tells me that when that sort of tactic is relied upon to back an opinion, it's generally all there is to back that opinion.
Prime example there. You believe totally different than I do here. So, if religion is to be in charge of the gov't, who's religion should it be? Mine, yours, or someone else's?
Your interpretation , or mine? What if my interpretaion is different? Do we flip a coin? Individually, yes I think so--but you shouldn't be forced into what I believe, or vice-versa.
Influence--yes--I agree. I just don't agree with letting a church take over the government's job. #1 reason, God didn't authorize it. There are plenty of examples in the Bible where man thought he was smart enough to make those kinds of decisions--none ended well.
If you want to do that, great. I don't agree with being forced to do it.
I have local charities and families that I help support. I know where my money goes, and who gets what. I don't have to be concerned about some CEO making a 6-figure salary running a "charity". I don't have to worry about it being wasted, embezzled, etc. I don't have to worry about the gov't taking their share off the top. This is besides what the gov't forces me to pay. What I give voluntarily I also give cheerfully. I am not happy about what it taken from me. God loves a cheerful giver.
Many people seem to miss the differnce between a "socialist idea" or soicialist program" such as government providing some benefits for poor who have lost everything to flood, fire or other disaster - and "socialism" - they are not the same thing. I belive in one but not the other, And I see no problem using taxes to help support socialist programs. After all that is part or the definition of what "socialist" means
As to all of your other questions of comments. I believe I originally prefaced everything I wrote by stating " If you (Meaning anyone who reads it) are a Christian".
If you are not - then none of what I wrote applies to you, or your beliefs, because your beliefs are different than mine, and from other Christians. ---- I am unequivocaly a Christain.
Our beliefs are different, and I believe some of yours may be wrong, but that is just my personal opinion.
I know mine are right, because Jesus said so - about many of my beliefs, not all, but many. And Jesus is a living God, the only one I know of who gave his life for the sins of all men to be forgiven (ven non-believers), and promised we would also be resurrected (as a spirit), and go to Heaven to live with Him.
What other religion can say that?
I'm one of those fanatcis who will not back down - from anyone for any reason, except Yahweh.
And, I understand if others are the same way, even if they do not believe in Jesus and Christianity.
May God bless all of you and your families,
T.R.
__________________
May Yahweh-God bless you and yours,
I believe the Bible is 100% true, and contains 100% of the truth. I realize different people interpret different parts in different ways. Until someone can show me using scripture, I do not believe the Bible advocates a theocracy or socialism.
Quote:
Many people seem to miss the differnce between a "socialist idea" or soicialist program" such as government providing some benefits for poor who have lost everything to flood, fire or other disaster - and "socialism" - they are not the same thing. I belive in one but not the other, And I see no problem using taxes to help support socialist programs. After all that is part or the definition of what "socialist" means
Quote:
As to all of your other questions of comments. I believe I originally prefaced everything I wrote by stating " If you (Meaning anyone who reads it) are a Christian".
That is your opinion and you are entitled to it. My not agreeing with your opinion does not mean I am stupid, in denial, or dellusional. Disagreeing with your opinion certainly doesn't mean I'm not a Christian.
Quote:
I know mine are right, because Jesus said so - about many of my beliefs, not all, but many.
There are no scriptural referances to a theocracy or socialism that I know of. If there are, please referance them.
Quote:
I'm one of those fanatcis who will not back down - from anyone for any reason, except Yahweh.
I'm pretty stubborn myself. I require scriptural referances if I'm going to believe something. I don't put my faith in opinions.
Quote:
And, I understand if others are the same way, even if they do not believe in Jesus and Christianity.
Remarks like that really don't help your position. Again, disagreeing with your opinions doesn't mean someone isn't a Christian. Christians rely on God and His Word, not the opinions of "fanatics".
A great start would be to provide scriptural referances on which to base your opinions.
__________________
"We can have no '50-50' allegiance in this country. Either a man is an American and nothing else, or he is not an American at all."-- Theodore Roosevelt
A wise man's heart is at his right hand; but a fool's heart at his left. Ecclesiasties 10:2
The last four letters in American..........I Can
The last four letters in Republican........I Can
The last four letters in Democrats.........Rats
Many people seem to miss the differnce between a "socialist idea" or soicialist program" such as government providing some benefits for poor who have lost everything to flood, fire or other disaster - and "socialism" - they are not the same thing. I belive in one but not the other, And I see no problem using taxes to help support socialist programs. After all that is part or the definition of what "socialist" means
The distinction you draw here is moot. To, by threat of force, take from some to give to others, for whatever reason, is, by definition, socialist.
Quote:
Originally Posted by trmichels
As to all of your other questions of comments. I believe I originally prefaced everything I wrote by stating " If you (Meaning anyone who reads it) are a Christian".
If you are not - then none of what I wrote applies to you, or your beliefs, because your beliefs are different than mine, and from other Christians. ---- I am unequivocaly a Christain.
Ah, the no true scottsman argument. Well that tired old smug dog just don't hunt. What someone is or is not--or what they claim to be or not claim to be--is not relevant to the validity of what is said.
Quote:
Originally Posted by trmichels
Our beliefs are different, and I believe some of yours may be wrong, but that is just my personal opinion.
I know mine are right, because Jesus said so...
You believe you are right and others are wrong because you believe you understand God's word better than they do. But that,as you said, is just your opinion. I think you are using the terms "to know" and "to believe" interchangably. They are not the same.
Quote:
Originally Posted by trmichels
I'm one of those fanatcis who will not back down - from anyone for any reason, except Yahweh.
Good for you! You'll find pretty much every poster here won't back down either.
2. Much of the Constition, and Federal Government laws and statutes, are based, not only Christian beliefs, but Jewish and Biblical beliefs. One good example is bankruptcy. The Constituion was written ny Christians, with the beliefs of their Christainity in mind when they wrote it. Christianity, not any other religion, but stronly influenced by Christianity.
If the Constitution is based on Christian beliefs do you not think it is a little odd that nowhere in the Constitution is there any mention of God, Jesus, Christianity or the Bible? If the Founding Fathers meant for the United States to be governed as a Christian nation why did they include Article VI in the document which clearly prohibits the use of any religious tests to hold public office in this country?
The Constitution was based on the ideas of the philosophers of the 18'th century Enlightenment who espoused individual liberty and the concept that sovereignty rested in the people, not the King as the Bible teaches.
Justifying Relion & Politics
