Why Are Voters Swinging Anti-Democrat in This Election? (and some sad but enlightening interaction with two gay men, one a professing Christian and one an atheist)
Just watched the “debate”, and I am not sure where or how to respond. Your opponent dominated the talk by his assumptive soapbox speechmaking manner and an alike related point of view established of his insistence of aggressivly gerrymandering the debate forum policy boundaries [especially during the final sections of the forum]. The immediate audience did not accept this, but, it seems the USA already has according to S.
This outcome seemed to be the case primarily because of very poor moderation of the debate itself [where the moderator did not intervene in a needed manner to balance the Q & A sections, as they were happening, as a seasoned TV network anchorman in such a role might have]. It is clear that the rules were not respected, because of the Rabbi’s own sense of social outrage. He mentioned having a counselor’s sensibilities holding more than having Torah sensibilities, and ran with that.
Michael Brown was very accurate in determining that folks on hand, scripture, and research policy groups did not share the Rabbi’s assumptions: where the Rabbi also simply could not process that such societal anomolies as 80 million evangelicals were going to reach homosexuals with any relevant or commiserate Message that was a New Testament Gospel Message, regardless of any known or cited Biblical reference to morality and sexual practices.
According to the Rabbi the die was already cast, and there is no going back, becase of adult consentual choice (whatever the cast of sin). Christianity, if standing against homosexuality, was going to lose any respect among the democratic masses for its claims and heart accordingly.
This is not to say that S. even responded to what he was requested to at all. [But then, as mentioned, this was never really a debate by its poor management and independent of particpants topical pursuits]. It was not a “debate”, it was not even a discussion, it was almost a comparison of positions. This was in a climate of unacceptance of the topic itself, with one participant predeciding it was the stuff to be stirred up as crazymaking, of an alike famous Scopes [Monkey] Trial substance in the making: as far as anyone of education or intellectual scruples comprehending a largly held relevance of an already decided inevitable societal change. How do Evangelicals view evolution, and how do they view homosexuality may be of a similar importance in forming “camps” rather than one truly overcoming or respectfully challenging another’s position. Oh, for a true moderator to stay on task!
M. Brown made the mistake of being reasonable, when he did not readily discern that it was not a reasonable forum from the Q & A responses forward. It does not hurt a Christian witness, or Messianic witness to occasionally state the character of the opponent’s approach to the subject at hand, certainly Jesus did this often.
The laws, rules, and unspoken rules of culture have already asserted a fast paced marketplace driven club dance environment media normalized approach to the subject–where the guise of equal rights and an equated political “civil rights entitlement” ideation have pulled the wool over the public eye. That eye has its cornia stuck glued to the new TV standard screen, and enjoys the dazzling colors and bokeh, with no other standards in view.
Help us out in the future by going back a few years to an evening radio show approach, with commentators after the fact, and a respected omniscent moderator.
Unfortunately, voters have the attention span of a cocker spaniel. How quickly they forget that George Bush and the Republican juggernaut took us to the precipice of the cliff and it was President Obama who took us back from the edge.
It takes time to turn back an economy from a near depression, so I am disappointed in my fellow Americans for not giving our President a chance to heal our economic wounds incurred by the republicans two unfunded wars and reckless free market “shenanigans”.
I am willing to put my money were my mouth is in order to ensure that my fellow Americans have access to affordable health care. Its a moral responsibility that we as Americans must pursue and embrace!
The number 1 issue is morality, not economy, but just to prove a point I am going to list some statistics for you. You say that President Obama took us back from the edge. Really? What amazing thing has President Obama done that has greatly impacted our nation for the better? There have been a couple of little things, but they are far outweighed by the many big things He has done to push us even closer to the edge. Since President Obama has been president, unemployment has never consistantly improved. The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) is the government’s very own statistics department and their statistics show no job growth, instead the unemployment rate is climbing. It currently stands at 17.1%, you can go to bls.gov to see this is true.
Here are some statistics: $13.6 Trillion: Current National Debt. (U.S. Treasury Department, Accessed 10/19/10)
$3.0 Trillion: Amount Added To The National Debt Since Obama Took Office. (U.S. Treasury Department, Accessed 10/19/10)
$2.5 Trillion: True Cost Of ObamaCare Once Fully Implemented. (Sen. Max Baucus, Floor Remarks, 12/2/09)
$1.42 Trillion: Federal Budget Deficit For FY2009 – Highest In U.S. History. (Congressional Budget Office, 10/7/10)
$1.29 Trillion: Federal Budget Deficit For FY2010 – Second Highest In U.S. History. (Congressional Budget Office, 10/7/10)
$814 Billion: Price Tag Of Obama’s Failed Stimulus. (Bloomberg, 8/20/10)
$575 Billion: Amount Of Medicare Cuts In ObamaCare. (CMS Chief Actuary Richard S. Foster, Memo, 4/22/10)
$569.2 Billion: Amount Of Taxes In ObamaCare. (Letter to Speaker Nancy Pelosi, 3/18/10)
14.8 Million: Unemployed Americans. –It was 13 million when he took office. (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 10/8/10)
5.4 Million: Number Of Properties Receiving Foreclosure Filings Since Obama Took Office. (RealtyTrac, Accessed 10/19/10)
3.8 Million: Increase In the Number Of People Who Were In Poverty In 2009 Over 2008. (NPR, 9/16/10)
2.6 Million: Jobs Lost Since Stimulus Was Passed. (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 10/8/10)
22,000: Number Of Seniors In MA, NH And ME That Will Lose Their Medicare Advantage Plans As A Result Of ObamaCare. (The Boston Globe, 9/28/10)
79: Percent Of Stimulus Funds For Wind, Solar And Geothermal Energy Projects That Went To Foreign Firms. (Investigating Reporting Workshop/ABC’s World News Tonight/Watchdog Institute, 2/8/10)
20: Straight Months That Food Stamp Participation Has Hit A Record. (Bloomberg, 10/5/10)
14: Straight Months With Unemployment Above 9.5%. (Bureau Of Labor Statistics, 10/8/10)
Do you really want to compare Bush and Obama? Let’s look at Bush’s 2003 Tax cuts vs. Obama’s 2009 Stimulus and see what helped our economy.
Net Jobs Gained or Lost 16 Months After Each Initiative 2003 Bush Tax Cuts–Gained (plus) +1.4 Million 2009 Obama Stimulus— Lost (minus) -2.6 Million Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) U.S. Dept. of Labor
16 Month Comparison: Unemployment Rate 2009 Obama Stimulus 9.5% – 16 months after stimulus 2003 Bush Tax Cuts 5.7% – 16 months after tax cuts Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) U.S. Dept. of Labor
Cost To Taxpayers 2003 Bush Tax Cuts— $0 2009 Obama Stimulus—$862 billion Source: Congressional Budget Office (CBO)
16 Month Comparison: Disposable Personal Income–Per Capita (Every Man, Woman and Child) BUSH (plus) + $758 Obama (plus) + $82 Source: Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) U.S. Dept. of Commerce
16 Month Comparison: Average GDP Growth Bush 2003 Tax Cuts–4.05% Obama 2009 Stimulus–2.45% Source: Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) U.S. Dept. of Commerce
The recession started 11 months after democrats took congress. The recession was not Bush’s or the republicans fault. Bush did some things I disagree with, but Bush has been gone for 2 years and it is time we stop blaming him and start looking at Obama’s stats. The numbers speak for themselves.
Obama does not need more time. You asking for more time is like me having your credit card and placing you in higher debt and costing you tons of money and then asking you to give me more time with your credit card because getting you financially stable takes time. His 2 years in office have proved he does not have what it takes to run a nation, and the primary reason is he does not have God.
You say funding healthcare is a moral responsibility, but what about your moral responsibility to stand against abortion which is the murder of an innocent life? What about the moral responsibility to stand against gay marriage? The issues you are raising are money issues and you try to say that is morality while ignoring the true morality of life and purity in marriage. The day you make voting decisions based on money and not Biblical values, you just made money your idol, welcome to idolatry. I agree the economy is an important issue, but I believe God blesses the nation who stands for Him. Our economy issues would be fixed if we would stop killing innocent babies, and stop sexual impurity, and stop tearing God out of our lives.
The econmoy is getting weaker is because God is showing us how weak our “god”, the almighty dollar, is.
“You say funding healthcare is a moral responsibility, but what about your moral responsibility to stand against abortion which is the murder of an innocent life? What about the moral responsibility to stand against gay marriage?”
Problem with this argument is the same thing in the homosexuality debate. “What about the Bible mandate against hurting the poor? What about divorce rate?” Remember,just because X is wrong, that doesn’t mean Y is wrong as well.
Jacob — Sometimes some things talked about, can be both X and Y are wrong, then what needs to be done? The answer is whatever the Lord leads for us to do, and He will lead in the correct way, because He knows what He is doing. The two major political parties both have some good things about them, and some bad things about them, so the Lord can lead someone to vote for either one of them, or to not vote at all, it all depends on what the Lord wants in the specific time period. Sometimes what must be done is to foregive the sins, in order to establish God’s purposes. That can cause any individual that is serving the Lord to choose either of the political parties.
Travis, I fully agree. After rereading my post, I realize wasn’t as coherent as I wished (I think it might have to be the fact that I needed to take my lunchbreak at work, haha).
What I meant to say was this: if health care is a moral responsiblity, that does not affect the issue of abortion and vice versa. I agree that God often calls and motivates individuals to focus on a specific issue. For example, I do not think if someone has a call to help homeless teens, we would say “What about abortion?”. People do not look at Reinhart Bohnke and say “But what about Turkey?”. Like you said, God can direct people to specific issues. The argument I was responding to seemed to be saying, “Health care? What about abortion?” We do not need to divide up these issues like they are competing for the crown of “Top Moral Issue.”
So, with my blood sugar back up, I’m hoping at least slightly more coherent 🙂
Jacob,
We have a biblical responsibility to stand for the truth of God’s word in our voting. The issue of the poor is very important, but that is a matter of what party you think has the best economics plan. It is objective on whose idea of fixing the economy will work, but with gay marriage or abortion, it is black and white. Either you are for it or against it…period. So I must vote on black and white biblical issues and then give my life to taking care of the poor and needy. Taking care of th poor is not even the governments job, it is the church’s responsibility. So if a political figure has a not so good economic plan the poor people are still alive for me to give money to and help, but if a candidate is pro-abortion, the babies are dying daily and I cannot help them. I am not sure what divorce has to do with this topic. It is not a political issue. I hate divorce and we should strive to see marriage be all that it is supposed to be according to God. 1 Man and 1 Woman for life. But divorce is not a political issue to be voted on, gay marriage and abortion are.
Travis,
This is not a party issue, it is a candidate issue. I would vote democrat, republican, independant, green party, etc. I don’t care about party. It is about biblical moral values. What candidate stands for God’s values. Nothing more, nothing less.
Well, I didn’t vote this election because I’m just not happy with either party. Please let me explain. I’m a social conservative who sees the damage done to God’s beautiful creation by polluting corporations and I can find no common ground with Republicans on that issue. “Deregulation!” is what they cry for, claiming that environmental regulations strangle companies and hurt their bottom lines. Yet the CEO’s of these companies are multimillionaires — how much profit is enough profit? Often the actual founders of these companies struggled at one point, even living without paychecks to make sure they met payroll, until the company could grow bigger. But today’s CEO’s don’t seem to deny themselves anything. Therefore I don’t buy the rant that pollution controls are cutting into their profit margins. Again: how much profit is enough profit? And Republicans want to cut back on money for the poor, who are constantly painted as “welfare queens” and assorted layabouts. The Taxed Enough Already (TEA) Party rode that issue — and it included an odd-assortment of people, some of whom don’t even pay that much tax to begin with, but love beating on the poor, who pay little to no tax. There is no single party in America today which represents the point of view I’ve come to, but I know these positions are supported by the Bible. Aren’t we to help the poor? Proverbs 19:17 (NIV) “Whoever is kind to the poor lends to the LORD, and he will reward them for what they have done.” And didn’t God say that He will destroy those who are destroying the earth? Revelation 11:18 (NIV) “The nations were angry, and your wrath has come. The time has come for judging the dead, and for rewarding your servants the prophets and your people who revere your name, both great and small— and for destroying those who destroy the earth.”
I agree with Republicans on homosexuality (although their ranks are becoming more “inclusive” of gays) and on abortion, but I am utterly opposed on their environmental and social welfare views. The internal conflict brought about by this personal dilemma kept me from endorsing any candidate by my vote.
So I represent that portion of Americans who stayed away from the polls this week, being anti both parties, not just one. And while I can agree with Greens on the environment, I cannot agree with their platform on homosexuality…so again, there doesn’t seem to be any party that entirely fits what I believe is a totally moral perspective.
It’s difficult for me to accept this — it’s not without a lot of pain that I’ve come to this, and I don’t know how I’ll resolve it in the future. I support organic agriculture by voting with my dollars, and I can find other ways to give back — but until the Republican Party seriously examines the morality of all of its pet issues, I can’t actively back them.
Good post, Ruth.
I appreciate your honesty Ruth, I too feel those types of things. Here are some thoughts I have had, the Republican right often wants to declare war often, and help the rich without assisting the poor, yet they do oppose abortion, and same sex marriages. The Democrats often pursue gay rights in a way that is to far, and often try to establish abortion, but they often try to stop war, and help the poor. Children in abortion are innocent, but also war causes innocents to be killed. Also the rich already have enough, and scripturally the rich are supposed to give to the poor, yet so many people are greedy. Same sex marriages shouldn’t be approved, but gays should be protected from the violent. The far right negative part is called facism, and the far left negative part is called socialism, these are really only negative when the wrong people use them wrongly, because both can be a positive addition, if people are doing things correctly. The Democrats are often more accepting of other people, which I like, but that accepting can go to far. The Republicans are often less accepting of people, which I like, but that less excepting can, and has gone too far. The two parties have been set up by the Lord, to keep a balance, and order, when one goes to far the other comes, and establishes order, it seems to have happened several times.
Well worded, Travis.
The common denominator, I would say, is man is selfish and sinful. Therefore, I have a hard time seeing any political perspective as a true answer. Didn’t Jesus send us out in 2’s? Wasn’t His solution to impact the world one heart at a time?
The early church was looking for Jesus to overthrow the government and establish Himself as King. Instead, Jesus sent them out in 2’s to establish the Kingdom in the hearts of men. All the while Himself being murdered by the political/religious environment of His day.
If the hearts of men change there is hope for a righteous government. If hearts remain corrupt there is not hope in the political system, even if “righteous laws” are implemented.
I agree that both parties have their flaws, but I do not agree that Democrats help the poor and needy in God’s way. It was never the governments job to come in and help the poor. It is the church’s job. Democrats desire bigger government. In the book of Acts, it was the church that took care of the poor. Taking care of widows and orphans (and all of the poor) is pure and undefiled religion, not pure and undefiled government. We do not need to vote for politicians to set up government programs to help the poor. We need to give our lives to helping the poor. When is the last time most people who vote Democrat sold items they have to make money to feed the poor. It is not the Governments job, it is ours. Again, economic policy is debatable. I think Democrats system for the poor is flawed and actually promotes laziness (a quality God does not like) and dependence on government instead of God.
As far as stopping war, God called us to be peacemakers. I am not saying I agree with every war and every facet of every war, however if there is an evil man, Sadaam Husein for instance, who is guilty of genocide and all kinds of evils, then if we do nothing to stop him are we really making peace. No we are letting evil and murder continue. War against evil is justified and sometimes the only way to make peace. Again I am not saying that war is good, or that I agree with every war and the reasons behind them, but war is not a black and white issue. Would voting for a Democrat who is anti-war be moral if there was a war that is justified and needed to save American lives and the Democrat does not go to war and American lives are lost because of it. What about the wars of the Bible? Surely you are not suggesting that true morality changes with culture and time. If the wars of the Old Testament were God initiated then they had to have been moral unless God is immoral. So when did God initiate war, when evil reached its peak. So again sometimes war is justified and is debatable on whose war policy is correct at the time.
Again I must vote on the moral black and white issues of scripture. Abortion and gay marriage are wrong…..period. There is no justification for them. So where as economic and war policies are debatable depending on the situation, abortion and gay marriage are black and white. We should vote based on the black and white issues, not the debatable ones.
I do not believe giving is real giving if it is forcefully taken. It then becomes stealing. But I do believe that we are in a mess because we are unloving and selfish to the poor. I also believe and have seen some of the poor here in America be lazy or feel entitled. So both ends have big problems. The Church must do more to give and to share the gospel to change the heart. I don’t think anyone here really believes that we should say yes to healthcare for the poor if it means we also have to say yes to enabling more babies to be murdered. This is a trick of satan. We don’t throw babies under the bus in order to help the poor. God is much bigger and can do much more than that!
The fact is that votes do enable things to happen and also have consequences. Abortion is a prime example of that. Since it became legalized and expanded, a staggering amount of abortions have taken place. In the tens of millions. If it had not been legalized, kept legalized, and expanded by the support of voters, this would not be so.
Matt & Rebbecca — It is important to understand something, both innocent babies are killed with abortion, and innocent poor people are killed because they are not able to afford health care, both are wrong, and against the will of Eloheem/God. We as always are to give to the government what they require, that does include taxes, Messiah/Christ talked about giving to the government the things that are the governments, and to El/God the things that are His. Yes, the innocent that are rich & poor are the main concern, but remember Messiah loves the unjust too, He blesses both the just, and unjust.
Another thought I have considered some of the Republican right, have pursued basically socialism in Arizona, maybe more acurately facism, then they come back and attack that in the Democrats. Two wrongs, that are existing right now, the Republicans pursuing the basically facist actions in Arizona, and the Democrats trying to make Israel give up more land. I have explained that socialism, and facism is not really what matters, it is that people are serving the Lord, loving Him, and people correctly. Socialism & facism could both correctly be used, if the correct people are making the correct judgements, of course the middle of those two can be correct too, if the correct people are making the correct judgements, otherwise the middle can be wrong too in the political spectrum. God’s commands don’t change for anyone, His commands are His commands, for everyone, the church is the example for everyone, everyone is supposed to follow the church, the church is supposed to have the rich give to the poor. “For I mean not that other men be eased, and ye burdened: But by an equality, that now at this time your abundance may be a supply for their want, that their abundance also may be a supply for your want: that there may be equality: As it is written, He that had gathered much had nothing over; and he that had gathered little had no lack. 2 Cor. 8:13-15″
Also the Messiah showed us that any physical violence that hurts others is not what He wants His people to do, the church is not supposed too do it, and the Lord’s commands are for everyone.”From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members? Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not. Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts. James 4:1-3”
Now it is never the Lord’s ultimate perfect will to have physical violence hurt, and kill people. Those that Love the Lord in the way He desire will not hurt others physically, nor will they approve of any of it, but there is a lesser will, that He has, that He uses to make sure there is order that is kept, sometimes wars use that lesser will of His, that is not His will, but is His lesser will, to provide for and protect people that are mistreated, hurt, and killed.
I do appreciate everyone’s input — I’m still ruminating over your points; thanks
Travis- Babies are not killed because of abortion, they are murdered. Yes we should help people get treatment for sicknesses but not with the condition that we have to enable and participate in outright murder.
A rant.
Abortion is murder. It is not even comparable to the health care issues we have.
Most of us in this country are rich by historical standards and in comparison with most the population of our current world. YHWH instructs us to remember the poor over and over. YHWH does not say to give our money to a government so that the poor will be helped. The rich are not supposed to be stolen from to help the poor. The government is not supposed to steal by taxation.
We are supposed to be generous to the ones that need our help. The government wastes much of what it gets. It helps people that are not truly poor. It gives aid to help the poor of other nations just to have it pilfered by the governments of those nations.
The rich are the ones that employ most of the population. If we tax them more, we make it less probable that they will employ as many or be as generous to the ones they do employ. They are accountable to YHWH in these matters. We should not penalize someone just because he is wealthy.
It is wrong to have respect of persons. Everyone is to be equal in the sight of the law. A tiered tax system is not equal weights and measures. The rich will get what they have coming if they have gotten their wealth by dishonest means. So will the poor if they steal it form the rich.
We are not guaranteed a right to health insurance. Most people can walk into a hospital emergency room and get treated. There are laws that prevent health care providers from denying care. We do not have the right to force someone to work for us for free. We do not have the right to force them to work for less than it takes for them to pay their bills. If they do it voluntarily…great.
We live better and longer than at any time in history, but we want to live longer with less pain. We are like Hezekiah that wanted to extend his life. We will probably turn to idols like he did also. Maybe we already have. It sure feels like a pagan temple when I walk into the doors of a hospital.
Government usually fixes nothing. When it does, which is rarely, it does it at a cost much greater than is necessary.
If we would have taken care of our elderly parents ourselves we might not have had the curse of social security draining 15% of our incomes to provide substandard lively hoods to our elders. How about the hearts of the fathers and children being turned to one another. We refused to do this and our land is struck with a curse.
I am not a doctor. I am not rich by American standards. I am not an employer. I am not a republican or democrat.
The problem is not our government. It is us. We want to be babysat and nursed along. We lust after others wealth. We worship health and happiness. We do not want to grow up.
If you want the poor to be helped, stop spending money on anything other than the bare necessities and give your wealth to the poor. You will get treasure in heaven. But if you vote for other people’s money to be given to the poor you are an accessory to theft and the reward for that is not treasure in heaven.
If you want free or inexpensive health care at the expense of others, you are covetous, which is idolatry. Let’s get the beams out of our own eyes…maybe then we can see clearly to get the splinters out of the eyes of our duly elected officials.
Maybe this is what was happening in this election…maybe not. I have a funny feeling we will be wanting to return to Egypt by the time of the next election. I am not so sure that we ever left. We like our taxmasters (taskmasters)too much.
We would rather have it easy instead of having our freedom. Is that the lust of the flesh or what?
Shalom
“When is the last time most people who vote Democrat sold items they have to make money to feed the poor?”
I believe it was right around the same time people who vote Republican sold items that they have to make money to feed the poor.
Everything belongs to the Lord.* Therefore, if the Lord gives to the poor through whatever means He chooses — such as when He brought His people out of Egypt and the Egyptians gave them their wealth as they were leaving** — well, it’s all His to do with as He pleases…maybe having great wealth can make people forget that it really isn’t truly theirs afterall. Maybe that’s why James chose to write about the terrible fate of the rich.***
Voting for a system (by a choice we can make today) is fair. Taxing proportionately is humane. I surmise that only materialistic greed would make someone object to paying higher taxes if they earn more. Notice how even though the wealthy always insist that they need more tax breaks, they still have plenty of time to frolic in Nice, buy up foreclosures and indulge in the latest technology and fashions. And did you know that corporate welfare (bailouts and grants and other government freebies) is roughly ten times higher than the cost of domestic welfare? (I’m really feeling their pain.) Paying your taxes is Biblical.****
Abortion is wrong. Making people who don’t believe in it have to pay for it is also wrong. The tax code could be amended so that money for state-funded abortions would be a separate, ear-marked tax that people who object to abortions would never have to pay. At least one could withhold tax for what one doesn’t support, as Henry David Thoreau did when he refused to pay the tax that supported the U.S.’s war with Mexico. (By the way: choosing to seize someone else’s land because you like it is covetousness. Killing them to obtain it is murder. And no, I’m not referring to the saga of the children of Israel.)
*Psalm 24:11 “The earth is the LORD’s, and everything in it, the world, and all who live in it”
**Exodus 11:2; 12:35-36; 39:10
***James 5:1-6; also see Luke 6:24
****Romans 13:6-7: “This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God’s servants, who give their full time to governing. Give to everyone what you owe them: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor.”
“(By the way: choosing to seize someone else’s land because you like it is covetousness. Killing them to obtain it is murder. And no, I’m not referring to the saga of the children of Israel.)”
Good point…how quickly we forget!
When it comes to politics, I like to sit on the fence and watch the game played out on both sides. The only problem is, the game never ends! As you may have guessed, I am what the new catch phrase calls, “an independent voter”. I don’t promise my vote to anyone. It’s mine and I’ll use as I see fit in any particular election. Sometimes I vote Republican, and sometimes I vote Democrat.
Matt M wrote: “The recession started 11 months after democrats took congress. The recession was not Bush’s or the republicans fault.” Do you not recall the scramble at the zero hour, when the candidates were still campaining for President (i.e. Obama and McCain) and the Bush appointee, Fed. Reserve Chairman, Ben Bernanke came forward with the immediate, very dire plea to Congress, which a Republican Majority held at that time, to take immediate action concerning an injection of 700 Billion Dollars, or, the entire free market would fail?!! The Republican Congress, (not the President) left the American People with 1.3 TRILLION DOLLARS OF DEBT beginning 2008, when they began their service to us with a sound economy, left by the previous Congress. But, was 2007 the end of the crisis? No. The dye had been cast, the dominoes were already falling and the free market was no longer free. Even with the injection of this money, banks held on to their “reserves” rather than lending. In effect, the banks “pulled back” from the free market because of the practices of the Fed. Reserve and Alan Greenspan and the stock market took a major nosedive. Sub-prime mortgages were blamed even though Bernanke stated in Sept. of 2007, and I quote, “We do not expect significant spillovers from the subprime market to the rest of the economy or to the financial system.” So much for his prognosticating!
Perhaps the leaches saw the winds blowing in the direction of the Democrats and knew their days of writing their own legislation and loop-hool after loop-hole and bad economic practices were numbered. Just an idea.
Here is what one economic analyst says about September, 2007 and the events that happened prior to the crisis we now face. (THAT’S RIGHT, 2007, WHILE THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION WAS STILL IN OFFICE–HOW SOON WE FORGET):
“The alleged remedies were equally predictable: more regulation, more government intervention, more spending, more money creation, and more debt. To add insult to injury, the very people who had been responsible for the policies that created the mess were posing as the wise public servants who would show us the way out. And following a now-familiar pattern, government failure would not only be blamed on anyone and everyone but the government itself, but it would also be used to justify additional grants of government power. “The truth of the matter is that intervention in the market, rather than the market economy itself, was the driving factor behind the bust.
“The recession or depression is the necessary, if unfortunate, correction process by which the malinvestments of the boom period, having at last been brought to light, are finally liquidated. The diversion of resources into unsustainable investments out of conformity with consumer desires and resource availability comes to an end, with businesses failing and investment projects abandoned. Although painful for many people, the recession/depression phase of the cycle is not where the damage is done. The bust is the period in which the economy sloughs off the malinvestments and the capital misallocation, re-establishes the structure of production along sustainable lines, and restores itself to health. The damage is done during the boom phase, the period of false prosperity that precedes the bust. It is then that the artificial lowering of interest rates causes the squandering of capital and the initiation of unsustainable investments. It is then that resources that would genuinely have satisfied consumer demand are diverted into projects that make sense only in light of the temporary and artificial conditions of the boom.
“Adding fuel to the fire of the most recent boom (2007 AND PRIOR) was the so-called Greenspan put, the unofficial policy of the Greenspan Fed that promised assistance to private firms in the event of risky investments gone bad. The Financial Times described it as the view that “when markets unravel, count on the Federal Reserve and its chairman Alan Greenspan (eventually) to come to the rescue.” According to economist Antony Mueller, “Since Alan Greenspan took office, financial markets in the U.S. have operated under a quasi-official charter, which says that the central bank will protect its major actors from the risk of bankruptcy. Consequently, the reasoning emerged that when you succeed, you will earn high profits and market share, and if you should fail, the authorities will save you anyway.” The Financial Times reported in 2000, in the wake of the dot-com boom, of an increasing concern that the Greenspan put was injecting into the economy “a destructive tendency toward excessively risky investment supported by hopes that the Fed will help if things go bad.
“When things do go bad, pumping more money into the banking system, thereby lowering interest rates once again, only exacerbates the problem, because it encourages the continued wasteful deployment of capital in unsustainable lines that will eventually have to be abandoned anyway, and it forces healthy, wealth-generating firms to have to go on competing with bubble firms for labor and capital. When interest rates are made artificially low, they encourage the kind of investment that would normally occur only if more saved resources existed to fund them than actually do. Continuing to force interest rates down only perpetuates the allocation of capital into outlets that the economy’s current resource base cannot sustain.
“In response to the dot-com and NASDAQ collapses and the modest recession that accompanied them in 2000 and 2001, that Alan Greenspan and the Fed chose to embark on a robust policy of inflation, an approach that culminated in lowering the federal funds rate (the rate at which banks lend to each other) to a mere one percent from June 2003 to June 2004. Already by early 2001 the Fed had begun to ease once again. That year saw no fewer than 11 rate cuts. The unsustainable dot-com boom could not, in the end, be reignited, and thank goodness – the resource misallocations in that sector were unhealthy for the economy. But the Fed’s easy money and refusal to allow the recession of 2000 to take its course led to an even more perilous bubble elsewhere. That was the only recession on record in which housing starts did not decline. Not coincidentally, that was also the moment at which people began to conclude that house prices never fall, that a house is the best investment one can make, and so on. By intervening in the market then, the Fed prevented the market from making a full correction, thereby perpetuating unsustainable investment and consumption decisions. In so doing it merely postponed what it was trying to avoid, and made the crash worse when it finally came.” (Thomas E. Woods, Jr.)
You can read all about the current economic crises and where and when and why it happened in the book, “Meltdown: A Free-Market Look at Why the Stock Market Collapsed, the Economy Tanked, and Government Bailouts Will Make Things Worse” by Thomas E. Woods, Jr.
So, when Americans were caught off balance concerning their pocketbooks and these dire forcasts made by a “Republican Administration”, they decided to swing to the Democrats in record numbers in that same year, and in 2008 the Presidency went to Barack Obama. Together with disenchanted middle America, new voters came out in record numbers to vote for their perception of who was the “better” of two evils at the time. And then, another massive injection was needed, according to the Fed. Reserve and we find ourselves where we are today. And banks are “STILL NOT LENDING MONEY”, what a surprise! They did, however, have enough to pay themselves HUGE bonuses for a “scam well done”. So, wake up American Christians, as most are sorely uneducated when it comes to your perception of “who” is to blame, rather, than asking, “what is the source of the problem”. Could it be possible that Republicans are for “big businesses and the very greedy” rather than the Christian Coalition, to whom they occasional throw a bigger bone? Why do they always bring up “the abortion issue” at election time, and then, turn their backs on doing anything about this crisis when they come to office? Election time=ABORTION ISSUE. In office=I FORGOT.
We are mistaken when we believe that politicians, overall, feel that they owe any allegiance to God, let alone the American public, although I do think some are genuine believers. No. They owe their allegiance, for the most part, to those who pad their election campaigns and who they allow to wisper in their ears. With the newest ruling by the Supreme Court that says, “corporations”, (who incidentally, are classified as “one” entity having the same first admendment rights as each and every “one” of us, regardless of “how many individuals actually make up that entity”), can contribute as much money as they want to any candidate they want! Do any of us have 100’s of millions of dollars to give to the candidate of our choice? I know if I had 100’s of millions of dollars, I could feed a third world country with it! We should all go to Congress and demand to be heard in order to gain “redress” for those policies we don’t agree with, and for the legislation that is written and is contrary to our moral standards. The “buck stops here.” I think we need a “literal” Christian “walk to the halls of Congress” and demand to be heard!
I’m going to make a prediction, right here on this blog. The economy will see a major climb up in the very near future and everyone will breath a sigh of relief. Banks will start loaning money again for start up businesses, and the stock market will enjoy a major gain. The unemployment numbers will drop significantly by the end of next year, if not within the next six months, and we will feel justified in the votes we cast. How do I know? Let’s see…”the boys are back in town”, “the boys are back in town”… And everyone will praise the Republicans for what they perceive as a major political cue by the voters, when the reality is that behind the scenes, it was the money contributed by corporations who really elected our Representatives of Congress. Sorry for bursting your bubble, but, we need to get down and dirty when it comes to upholding “Kingdom Standards” as opposed to “worldly standards” as we are vastly outnumbered and outspent by those who stand to gain the most.
Oh yeah, get ready to catch that bone coming our way soon!
Applauding your post, Sheila (:
Travis — Both Republicans and Democrats agree that Health crae needs to be reformed, but it is a debatable thing as to who has the better plan on how to do it. It however is not debatable on whose abortion stance is right. I think that universal government-ran healthcare is not helping the poor and actually increases the financial burden on the American people, but the argument with abortion is black and white. I have never said that healthcare does not need to be reformed, I have however said that we must vote on black and white issues and not on ones that can change depending on point of view, and situation.
As far as the giving the government taxes, I am not against paying taxes, but I do stand against abuses to the taxes I pay. Jesus did speak of giving unto Ceaser what was Ceaser’s, but that was a command to obey governmental authority, not a command to agree with and vote (if they had the ability to vote) on whatever the government decides. Surely Jesus was not saying that God desired Israel to be under the authority of Rome. It was His desire from old to New Testament for Israel to be a people under God and God alone. They were never meant to be under the authority of a foreign power. So Jesus was saying obey the authority that is over you, but He was not saying blindly agree with the government and vote for higher taxes. Again I do not think that my paying higher taxes to pay for universal healthcare is a way to properly help the poor. I am all for helping the poor, but I believe the republicans have a better way of doing it. Again healthcare, economy, and taxes are all debatable issues that can be argued on whose plans are better, but abortion and gay marriage are black and white issues that cannot be debated. We must vote on what is clear and black and white, not on what is debatable.
I do not see how the requirement to check immigration status in Arizona is fascism. Republicans are all for immigration and the allowing people to come to America in pursuit of a better life, but they are against illegally coming. How is a stand against illegal immigration fascism? They are seeking nothing more that to stop the illegal immigrants from coming into Arizona taking money from legal immigrants and citizens and many of the illegal immigrants are apart of a drug ring there. They are not promoting racism, fascism, or anything like that. Again views on illegal immigration and how to deal with it effectively is debatable, Israel giving up the land God promised them is not debatable biblically. Again the black and white issues should dictate our votes, not the issues that are debatable and can change with the situation.
Socialism and fascism can never be right with flawed human beings. I agree that we must seek to know the Lord, love Him and people right, that is the goal of our lives.
I agree that God’s commands don’t change for anyone, His commands are His commands. And I agree that the church is the example for everyone, everyone is supposed to follow the church, the church is supposed to have the rich give to the poor. Everyone is supposed to take care of the poor, but it is not the government’s job, it is the job of the individual. Government cannot house every homeless person, but individuals can take people into their home. Are you honestly saying that welfare and abortion are the same? I can feed the poor and clothe the naked and help the homeless individually, but I cannot individually make abortion illegal. Look at this from another perspective, if there was a candidate who had the greatest policies to help the poor and hated war, but this candidate was going to make it legal to rape children and make the sex trade legal in America, would you vote for that candidate. What if the other candidate was absolutely against legalizing the sex trade and the rape of children but you personally didn’t think their economic polices or welfare policies etc were as good. Who would you vote for? I am sure you would vote against the guy who wanted to legalize the rape of children, but why? The problem is you do not view abortion and gay marriage as sick detestable and evil as God says they are. Again, I am not saying that taking care of the poor is not important; I am just saying that whose polices is the best to take care of the poor is debatable. But abortion and gay marriage, just like raping children and the sex trade are black and white issues and should be the factor that decides our vote.
Yes, God hates war and violence and so do I, but God also hates people going to hell, but we know people still go there. Why? Because God is just and their rejecting of Jesus made their going to hell justified. The same with war, God desires that no war will ever exist, but at the same time there are cases when war is justified. (Not that we provoke war, but that if war is provoked by another we fight for peace.) For example, the Bible is full of references to Jesus coming back to wage a war on the antichrist and His followers. The passage in James 4:1-3 that you quoted says over and over lust because you have not and cannot obtain. It is speaking of warring (both personally and nationally) to gain more stuff and for selfish reasons. That is absolutely wrong, but say a man is evil (Hitler for example) and we go to war to stop the brutal murdering of innocent Jewish men, women, and children, that war is not what is described in James 4. War for selfish reasons is sinful and wrong, war to fight against sin and evil is justified.
Where does the Bible speak of an ultimate will and a lesser will? God has one ultimate will, and then we have free will. Now He allows us to have free will, but our free will can choose something outside of His will. If someone goes to hell, that is not apart of God’s lesser will. Someone’s will is their desire, not what they permit to happen. I can allow my child to face struggles, but it is not my desire for them to face struggles, but I will allow my child to face struggles knowing that they can learn from it. It was not my desire to see Saddam Hussein killed or to see him hurt, it was my desire to see him saved. But, at the same time the war to take him out I believe was justified to save the countless millions that He tortured daily. The war was a result of Saddam’s free will to choose evil, not a result of a lesser will. It was not God’s desire to see Saddam choose sin, but war was the necessary result of that sin and free will choice. It was not an issue of God’s will, but rather of Saddam’s free will. Just like it is not God’s desire or will to see people go to hell, but that is the necessary result of their sin and free will, hell is justified when a person chooses sin over God, war is also justified when a person chooses evil on a national level.
Matt,
You wrote:
“The problem is you do not view abortion and gay marriage as sick detestable and evil as God says they are.”
That was an incredibly presumptuous thing to say just because someone doesn’t have the same political views. How do you know someones views on abortion just because they bring up points about other things that burden their heart? Maybe the issue is that you are too black and white, unable to fathom how someone would think different than you. Isn’t it fact that the vast amount of abortions happen in the poor communities? Have you ever considered why these communities are as they are as they are? The facts that slavery and segregation did not only happen on the church’s watch, but was largely IMPLEMENTED by these so-called believers should say something. It should say that the value of life as a whole was greatly diminished because we basically told them they were sub-human. Then there is no real resolving of the problem, not to mention repentance from it(at least on the scale it should be addressed). It took a man from their own race to stand up peacefully for what is right just to get hosed down and assasinated and begin the cause for true civil rights. But we fight on and on trying to keep these “less-than-human people” from dining at our tables and sitting in our churches…
Oh, but no…we can just stand up and declare the evils of these people. We won’t make things right. We won’t sacrifice anything to help bring about change. But we will glory in the fact the we are living in decent neighborhoods and have nice things. Did you and I, personally do these things. No. But we are responsible to try and make them right.
No this doesn’t change the fact that abortion is evil. I agree. You may just want to be a little more aware of the true state of things in this country and why they are the way they are. What would Rush Limbaugh…I mean Jesus do?
Exactly why we need direct democracy, with individuals voting on the issues, not merely following along with whatever the party line might be. One way to have it would be to have direct input into Congress through e-voting. The congressperson would have to vote according to the wishes of the voters in their district. I know I rarely contact a congressperson — it seems very iffy that they’ll respond according to some personal letter or formletters through email. More likely they’ll respond to a professional lobbyist or a personal phone call from another politician in the grapevine, pulling in a “favor” here or there. But if a system was set up so that each issue, separately, is voted on and the representative must vote to reflect those votes, then a proposed bill would not have contrary issues stuffed into it, but would be bundled only with other issues which had been already voted on. Sure, it might delay some processes, but it would be much faster in many other ways, too, actually streamlining. What you’d have in broad terms is ‘we the people’ being more satisfied with the Congress and feeling that our voice was heard and acted on. The us vs. them football game atmosphere of Republican/Democrat politics would be over. It would be all about the issues.
Yes, I’m dreaming of a brighter future, but realities begin with dreams.
Dave – I apologize if my comment sounded presumptuous. It was not intended to be. What I was trying to point out was that if you would not vote for someone who wanted to legalize the rape of children even though they had policies to help the poor, then why would you vote for people who are supporting the legalizing of murder of innocent children because they have policies to help the poor (policies that I believe do a very poor job of helping the poor). My point was that the rape of innocent children is grotesque and so is the murder of innocent children, but yet people who would never justify voting for a pro-legal-rape-of-children candidate because of helping the poor policies do try to justify voting for a pro-murder-of-children candidate because of helping the poor policies. My point was not specifically about Travis as a person, but rather the ideology that would justify supporting the murder of a child for the sake of welfare and other government programs.
I am far from “too” black and white, and I love when people think differently from me. I love hearing and studying other beliefs. Isn’t it rather presumptuos of you to make that comment about me just because I can on here discussing my views on voting.
Yes the vast amount of abortions happen in poor communities. Isn’t it interesting that these communities are filled with people on government systems that are supposedly supposed to help the poor, yet these people are still poor. The Democrats say they want to help the poor, but then support abortions that are a majority of the time murdering the people they claim to be helping. That is like saying here I will give you money and then kill your children. That is not the kind of helping the poor I think God was speaking of in scripture.
Again, I am all for helping the poor. I have indeed strived to help the poor. I have had the oppurtunity to help many homeless have food and shelter and clothes and most importanty find Christ. I have personally given so much away for the sake of helping the poor. I do not say that to brag on myself, God Forbid, but to make the point that I am not against helping the poor. And GOD FORBID, I never have and never will think of them as sub-human. They are the apple of God’s eye and we should absolutely take care of them for that is true and undefiled religion. I would never stop them from dining at my table or sitting in my church, actually the opposite, I invite them to my table and call them to the church. I love them and desire for them to be taken care of. But I do not believe the government programs set up by Democrats actually help the poor, nor do I believe that it is their responsibility. It is the church’s responsibility and then every single individual on earth as they follow the church’s example. It is not the government’s responsibility.
I agree we are responsible to make them right, but I know people on the government programs who are just as poor as before. The government and the Democrat party cannot make it right. The church can through the power of the Holy Spirit. Again a political parties plans to help the poor can be debated, the stance on abortion and gay marriage can’t.
By the way, I am not a Rush Limbaugh fan, nor do I care about party. I care about morality and biblical standards. I am very aware of the state of things in this country. I have seen first hand the results of poverty in America. I have seen prejudice against the poor. I have seen what a nation that has turned its back on God has produced and I know the blessing of God to help the poor does not come through Democrats or government, it comes when a nation turns back to God and stands against the murder of innocent children and stands against gay marriage and stands for biblical truth. Then God will bless America again and our economic and poverty problems will start to get better. Abortion and gay marriage is a cause recession is an effect.
Ruth – I do not vote for a party at all. And I like your idea, but unfortunately unless the Church in America rises unp with the Spirit of God in Revival, that would do nothing to bring good change. We do not need a different system of voting and politics, we need Revival and Jesus to radically move in our nation.
Matt,
I wasn’t in anyway trying to align you with those comments I made about believers…it was a generalization. I apologize for not being clear on that. I can see though that my criticisms don’t help anything. I get frustrated when ideology supersedes people, which so often happens in political dialogue. I do, however, see your very valid point which is the protection of people, specifically babies.
And yes, my insinuation that you were “too black and white” was presumptuous, and I apologize.
This is why I like to stay away from political debate! I get too worked up, to be honest.
Ruth:As a political science grad student, I have read the literature on representative democracy. Direct democracy that you suggest is problematic for two reasons. 1) This is a country of 300 million people, and there is no way to have a direct democracy that is fairly representates the view of the people and even more so, one that works efficiently. 2) The Founders of the U.S. understand the importance of having a republic where there exists a buffer between the people and the execution of the government. The government is supposed to represent the interest of the states or district they represent. While at times it may seem “undemocratic”, in the long run I personally believe it has been better for the U.S.
Have you people looked at the scripture to see what kinds of taxes were instituted by righteous rulers? If I am not mistaken, there are only two kinds of taxes. A tax per person and a even percentage tax.
It is not righteous to tax rich people more percentage than the poor. This is respect of persons.
Exodus 23 2 Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil; neither shalt thou speak in a cause to decline after many to wrest judgment: 3 Neither shalt thou countenance a poor man in his cause.
Exodus 30 11 And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, 12 When thou takest the sum of the children of Israel after their number, then shall they give every man a ransom for his soul unto the LORD, when thou numberest them; that there be no plague among them, when thou numberest them. 13 This they shall give, every one that passeth among them that are numbered, half a shekel after the shekel of the sanctuary: (a shekel is twenty gerahs:) an half shekel shall be the offering of the LORD. 14 Every one that passeth among them that are numbered, from twenty years old and above, shall give an offering unto the LORD. 15 The rich shall not give more, and the poor shall not give less than half a shekel, when they give an offering unto the LORD, to make an atonement for your souls.
Leviticus 19 15 Ye shall do no unrighteousness in judgment: thou shalt not respect the person of the poor, nor honour the person of the mighty: but in righteousness shalt thou judge thy neighbour.
Genesis 47 24 And it shall come to pass in the increase, that ye shall give the fifth part unto Pharaoh, and four parts shall be your own, for seed of the field, and for your food, and for them of your households, and for food for your little ones. 25 And they said, Thou hast saved our lives: let us find grace in the sight of my lord, and we will be Pharaoh’s servants. 26 And Joseph made it a law over the land of Egypt unto this day, that Pharaoh should have the fifth part; except the land of the priests only, which became not Pharaoh’s.
Leviticus 27 30 “Every tenth of the land’s produce, grain from the soil or fruit from the trees, belongs to the LORD; it is holy to the LORD… 32 Every tenth animal from the herd or flock, which passes under the /shepherd’s/ rod, will be holy to the LORD.
If there is a progressive tax in the scripture, I am not aware of it. When we honor the person of the poor by allowing him to pay less percentage, we are not being righteous judges. When we take more form the rich and dish it out to the poor, we are stealing.
It is the rich persons own responsibility to be generous, not our job to make sure he is generous. It is the poor persons responsibility to not be covetous of the more affluent persons money.
No hand outs for able-bodied poor people!
The rich are supposed to leave the edges of their fields for the industrious poor to reap, not give harvested grain to freeloaders. At least the signers on the street corners have the guts to ask, and put forth some effort to obtain their money. Do you really think that someone that can buy cigarettes and cable TV should get free money at the more wealthy citizens expense? Americans are not the same kind of poor that the scripture counts as poor…at least the vast majority of cases are not truly poor.
Be generous! Be frugal! Be industrious! Be scriptural! By all means be righteous! Do not be covetous! Do not countenance the poor man in his cause! Think! Obey YHWH!
YHWH will take vengeance on the unrighteous rich person…it is not our job to do so. Our job is to help truly poor people from our own pockets, not to help them with our neighbors wealth.
In the scripture, someone with an evil eye is one that is covetous or stingy. The poor as well as the rich can fit this category. If you think you are poor and think that it is good to let the government give you another persons money, you are covetous. If you are rich and harden your heart to the poor, you have an evil eye too. An evil eye makes the whole body full of darkness. If you are neither poor nor rich, and vote for taxes and laws that facilitate this sort of thing, you are guilty too.
Shalom
Even so, come, Lord Jesus.
Bo,
I would vote for you! Would you please run for President in 2012?
The sad truth, though, is that the “persons of the mighty” are the ones writing the laws and taking advantage of the loop-holes that they have built in for themselves. Let’s face it, the whole head is sick and it is all outlined in the words of the prophets.
Rebbecca — They are both forms of evil murder. If you look in the Hebrew ratsakh, and harag, both mean murder, and kill. Both murder and kill, can be righteous, or evil. So when the Holy Spirit killed the two in Acts, He also murdered them in a righteous way.
Bo — When you see this scr. does this look like the rich are giving more to the poor, than the poor are to the rich?
“For I mean not that other men be eased, and ye burdened: But by an equality, that now at this time your abundance may be a supply for their want, that their abundance also may be a supply for your want: that there may be equality: As it is written, He that had gathered much had nothing over; and he that had gathered little had no lack. 2 Cor. 8:13-15″
Matt — Certain abortion, and other people being killed because they don’t have insurance are both terrible. They are both wrong, and both shouldn’t be done, yet we can also consider this question. Who is in more danger spiritually, aborted children, or adults that don’t know Messiah as well as they need to yet?
Matt — Taxes need to be given because of what Yeshua/Jesus the Messiah said, if it is required then He gave the reason why we need to do it. We don’t do it for evil reasons.
Here is a definition of facism. http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/facism I think that the Republicans for doing what they did in Arizona fit that. It is not solely about illegal people, also people even in the past have been stopped just because of their face, and skin.
The Lord is not doubleminded, what He did in Messiah he showed physical violence, hurting other people physically is never correct, so it is not His will ever, but He has control of everything, and everyone, so He has a will that is a lesser will, that is not His perfect will. For example government, consider all the governments of the world, some are better than others, the Lord controls all to keep some order, the further they get away from the Lord, the lesser the will they are in. The antichrist is very evil, but the Yah/Lord allows it, even giving satan the right to do his evil, satan can’t do it unless Eloheem/God lets satan. Eloheem/God is in control, but the antichrist is a lesser will of Eloheem/God, it is not the perfect will of Yah.
Rebecca — I am sorry for mispelling your name. Blessings to all in Messiah Yeshua/Jesus.
Travis Mansfield,
In context, we find that Paul was not “Commanding” this to be the case. He was allowing the Corinthians to give if they wanted to, not forcing them to help by taxation.
2 Corinthians 8 8 I speak not by commandment, but by occasion of the forwardness of others, and to prove the sincerity of your love. 9 For ye know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that, though he was rich, yet for your sakes he became poor, that ye through his poverty might be rich. 10 And herein I give my advice: for this is expedient for you, who have begun before, not only to do, but also to be forward a year ago. 11 Now therefore perform the doing of it; that as there was a readiness to will, so there may be a performance also out of that which ye have. 12 For if there be first a willing mind, it is accepted according to that a man hath, and not according to that he hath not. 13 For I mean not that other men be eased, and ye burdened: 14 But by an equality, that now at this time your abundance may be a supply for their want, that their abundance also may be a supply for your want: that there may be equality: 15 As it is written, He that had gathered much had nothing over; and he that had gathered little had no lack.
2 Corinthians 9 5 Therefore I thought it necessary to exhort the brethren, that they would go before unto you, and make up beforehand your bounty, whereof ye had notice before, that the same might be ready, as a matter of bounty, and not as of covetousness. 6 But this I say, He which soweth sparingly shall reap also sparingly; and he which soweth bountifully shall reap also bountifully. 7 Every man according as he purposeth in his heart, so let him give; not grudgingly, or of necessity: for God loveth a cheerful giver.
So you see this equality was according as “each man purposed in his heart,” not according to how we vote or the government forces people to “give.” YHWH loves cheerful givers, not covetous takers, or well meaning thieves.
A man with a few rental units told me a story that went something like this:
He was conversing with one of his renters and found out that this renter was going to vote for a mill levy increase on property tax. The landlord told him that it would end up costing this renter and not himself. The renter did not understand that when the landlords costs go up, the price of rent goes up to cover those costs. So the renter was, by voting for the landlords taxes to increase, actually voting for his own costs to go up also.
This is what happens in other aspects of taxation and regulation. The end results are that the increase in cost is passed down to the end consumer or the business moves out of country and jobs are lost. The poor end up paying in lost jobs or higher priced products.
Redistribution of wealth by the government only lasts as long as the time it takes for the costs to be passed down. The whole thing just continues in a never ending cycle.
But politicians get elected by promising that they will help the poor with the rich man’s money. And these politicians get high paying jobs with huge benefits and an outrageous retirement policy that makes social security look like crumbs for the dog to eat. So in actuality, we get back just a small portion of our investment in the social security system and we give them Cadillac health insurance and a huge pension from the money they have stolen from us.
Give a man a fish…feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish…feed him for a lifetime. I have no problem giving the poor a helping hand to help get them back on their feet, but if we do not do something to teach them how to walk in sound economic principles, we will only be making the poverty worse in the end. Many times poverty is self induced, not the product of calamity and unforseen problems.
There is a reason why payday loan type businesses are thriving. The poor (and many others that are on the path to poverty) have not learned, or will not practice, the principles of common sense and economic stability with the wealth they do have. These usury establishments exist because of covetousness. The people that run them are covetous and will be judged for taking advantage of the poor. The people that use these services are covetous, or they would not be willing to give up a large percentage of their wages just to have what they want…now. If they will not be faithful with unrighteous mammon…who will give them true riches?
A wise man once told me, “If you divide up all the wealth in the world equally, it would only take 5 years for it to be back in the previous owners hands.” We see this happen over and over with lottery winners and inheritance spenders. What is in a persons heart will come out. Covetous is manifested in many ways. One of which is spending more than we have at the time so that we can live above our means. Debt is a curse, according to the scripture. It is lust to want to live in houses, drive cars, etc. that we cannot pay cash for. Our whole economy is based on covetousness. Our whole lives are based on it. When we can get this log out of our eyes, maybe we can see clearly to help the less blessed (not to say fortunate).
I have painted this with too broad of strokes. My generalizations do not tell the whole story. There are many that do no fit these descriptions. Please forgive my overstatements and try to see the points I am trying to make.
Shalom
Bo,
Your statements are actually quite reasonable and they are points well taken.
Travis,
I would disagree that with the statement that God is in control. I believe He is in charge, not control. He gave us the freedom to choose right and wrong. Is God in control when genocide or ethnic cleansing occur? Of course He COULD be in control, but He has given us all as humans a choice to decide. And these choices have the power of life and death.
I definitely believe God intervenes at times. The scripture is also clear that He, in His mercy, is “restraining” things from fully falling apart before His appointed time, but I don’t know scripturally where it states He is in control. Does that make sense?
BTW, this statement has nothing to do with political opinion, just the subject of God being in control.
God knows all the shocking evil that goes on in the world, but I really can’t get 100% behind any system of government. I do appreciate the good things that America has done (all of which I can’t know, either), but I also know that there are people in all governments, including ours, who are also responsible for some horrible maneuverings, even if they are not known now and may not even be known until some future point — at which time historians will have the documents to analyze — but by then, there won’t be any way to prosecute. Just like we recently learned of government experiments on giving prisoners syphilis until well past the point that it can be remedied by law (and no, a presidential apology is not enough). Let’s not forget in our woo-haa approach to the Us vs. Them model of politics that the governments of this world are still a single, many-headed beast…?
Bo — You are correct it is a choice, to give, but also we are required to give, if we have things to give, and others are suffering. First and foremost we must give to brethren in Messiah, but also Messiah gives to the unjust too. We don’t have to choose to give, but if we have something that others need, and we don’t give it how do we have the love of God? “Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer: and ye know that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him. Hereby perceive we the love of God, because he laid down his life for us: and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren. But whoso hath this world’s good, and seeth his brother have need, and shutteth up his bowels of compassion from him, how dwelleth the love of God in him? 1 John 3:15-17”
Certainly the scr.s in Matt. 25:34-46 explain. “Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: 35For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: 36Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me. 37Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink? 38When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee? 39Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee? 40And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me. 41Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels: 42For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink: 43I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not. 44Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee? 45Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me. 46And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal. Matt. 25:34-46
Bo — that last post explains the need to give according to love, so even though we don’t have to give, rather we must give because of the love required for us to give.
Dave – the teaching Rom. 9 of Mosheh/Moses, and Pharoah apply to everyone. “For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy. For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth. Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth. Rom. 9:15-18”
Bo — It is important to remember the true church(congregation) is the example to the other people, and organizations in the world, they should be following our righteous way of doing things. Who is in more danger spiritually, aborted children, or adults that don’t know Messiah as well as they need to yet?
Travis Mansfield,
No force should be used to make people be generous. You do not deserve your borther’s wealth. If you want more…go glean in the rich brothers field.
Shalom
Travis,
Yes, those teachings do apply to everyone, that God will have mercy on whom He chooses. But sovereignty is different than being in control. Sovereignty speaks to authority, not control. Do you really think God is directing every single thing on this earth? Maybe we are not thinking the same thing when you use the word “control”? I really think the only honest answer here is that we don’t know. God decided not to make clear all of these things…BECAUSE He is God and is Sovereign and He does as He pleases.
The first, and most basic example of this is Adam and Eve. According to your theory aren’t you saying that God then hardened Adam and Eve’s heart? Weren’t they tempted and decided to do what they wanted?
I am not speaking to you directly when saying this, but a lot of times people just cling to “God is in control” because it helps them make sense out things they don’t understand. Yes, He turns all things to good for those who believe. Of course He is omniscient and omnipotent. I’m not trying to debate God’s abilities, but rather how He interacts with man.
God responds to our prayer. He has given US control. The reason the world is spinning out of control is because of how we are using the control He has given us.
“No force should be used to make people be generous.”
Love is the only force powerful enough to truly change a heart to generosity.
“You do not deserve your brother’s wealth.” (And he may not deserve it, either!)
“If you want more…go glean in the rich brothers field.” (Gee, it kind of has a Biblical sound to it: “go and glean in your brother’s field!” Sort of like Ruth and Boaz, only brothers. One pictures a field of grain, swaying softly in the gentle breeze. Two men dressed in ancient Israelite clothes; one dressed in finely-woven garments, the other in the most basic, hand-loomed cloth, humbly and gratefully gleaning diligently whatever the reapers left.
Problem?
What is the modern equivalent? Finding your level? Finding a niche in whatever falls from the rich brother’s table? Well, economies do tend to work that way; this is because we still have a plutocracy. Government by and for the rich. Think about it. What is capitalism? It’s money-ism, it’s about who has the money having most of the power. We all know it at a very visceral level, that we live in a plutocracy, but as long as we get a slice of it, we pretend it’s a democracy. If it were a true democracy, it wouldn’t function as it does at present.
Now — it’s nothing new! So — you can apply ancient analogies of the poor brother gleaning in the rich brother’s field. Because it’s been that way since…? Considering that Sumer and Egypt had plutocracies, it would appear that it has been that way for a very, very long time. Only by series of revolts have the “common people” gained more and more humane treatment.
But were those revolts just? Wasn’t the American Revolution in that category, of just revolts? Certainly we’re taught that from an early age. The TEA Party is counting on you drawing that comparison. Are there times when bucking the status quo or governing authorities can be Biblically supported?
Dave — I am saying that just as Eloheem/God controled the hearts of Moses, and of Pharaoh, he does that with everyone, then Moses, and Pharaoh made the choices they made because He chose to have mercy on Moses, and to harden the heart of Pharaoh. Here are some different things to consider when looking about making the choices that we are supposed to make, that is righteous choices. We walk by aman(faith, trust, belief) and not by sight. We can see the truth about my last paragraph, but we don’t walk by sight, we walk by faith, that means we must also consider the choice that Eloheem/God has given to us. Faith(trust, belief) in Messiah is what we are all commanded to have, this will cause us to chose righteous things in our lives. Here is another way to see things. There are three roads to look down to see things. One The Holy Spirit does all the work, two we work with the Holy Spirit, three we do the work, all are true. Those three ways of seeing things appear to be a contradiction, but rather they are different ways to explain the truth. So I am talking about different ways to explain the truth. So certainly He answers prayer.
Travis – To answer your question, an adult who is unsaved and dies due an illness not being treated because they do not have insurance is at more spiritual risk than a child aborted. But both Republicans and Democrats want healthcare reform, Democrats however want Universal Healthcare that breeds communism while Republicans want to lower the cost of healthcare while giving people the choice to opt-out. Which one sound more like God, the one that gives choice or the one that involves not choice and no options. Again Republicans are not against helping everyone get healthcare, but Democrats, for the most part, are against saving the lives on millions of innocent children murdered through abortion.
A Harvard Medical Study Links Lack of Insurance to 45,000 U.S. Deaths a Year, however there are an average of 1,370,000 abortions per year in the U.S. So 45 thousand per year for lack of insurace, but 1.37 million per year for abortions. That is over 30 times more people die from abortions each year in the U.S. than die from not having insurance.
Plus, Universal healthcare as President Obama has supported and many Democrats want does not really help. Why? Because the focus is on cheaper prices instead of quality of healthcare. Canada and other nations around the world have universal healthcare and it did make things cheaper, but not better.
For example, a typical Canadian seeking surgical or other therapeutic treatment had to wait 18.3 weeks in 2007 — an all-time high. Approximately 875,000 Canadians are currently on waiting lists for medical treatment.
It’s no better across the Atlantic. The average wait time for bypass surgery in New York is 17 days — compared to 72 days in the Netherlands and 59 days in Sweden.
Patients with serious illnesses such as cancer face much worse odds of survival in government-run health care systems. In the United Kingdom, the five-year survival rate for patients diagnosed with breast cancer early on is 78 percent — compared to 98 percent for similar patients in the U.S.
If consumers don’t pay for these services directly, they will pay indirectly through higher taxes. As the perceived price decreases, demand will increase. In other words, when people believe that they won’t have to pay for their healthcare, they will use more health services.
As demand increases to exceed the available supply of health services, the government will have to take action. The government will have to limit the amount of services to keep the cost of the healthcare system from exploding. There are several ways to do this. First, they might impose rationing and limit the availability of services. A second option would be increase the amount that patients pay for their healthcare. This could be similar to the health insurance premiums and co-payments that many health insurance policies contain now. A third option would be for the government to do nothing and simply allow shortages to build in the system.
So then the question goes back to you, what about the people dying because of the poor medical services and waiting on waiting lists for excessive amounts of time like the other countries.
Do you see my point, healthcare and economic positions are debatable as to what is really going to work, but abortion and gay marriage are not debatable. We should make our decisions based on the things that are clear, not on issues that are debatable.
As far as Taxes, I have said it many times, I have no problem paying taxes, but I do have a problem when my tax dollars are abused. For example using my tax dollars to fund the murdering of innocent babies.
On another note, God allowing something to happen is not the same as His will. Will means goal and desire, so to say lesser will means His lesser goal and desire. It is not God’s desire ever for people to go to hell, but we know He allows it because of our free will. People choose hell and He lets them choose it not because it is His will, but because it was the persons will. He however, can use what we choose to work together for His ultimate will. So in other words, God only has one will (not an ultimate will and a lesser will), but He chooses to work out His will based on our choices and will rather than dictating.
So my main point is this – I agree we need to take care of the poor and reform healthcare etc (both Republicans and Democrats agree with this), but those issues are debatable about who has the best ideas and plan to do it. Things like abortion, gay marriage, and Israel are not debatable and therefore should hold the weight of where our vote goes.
Just watched the “debate”, and I am not sure where or how to respond. Your opponent dominated the talk by his assumptive soapbox speechmaking manner and an alike related point of view established of his insistence of aggressivly gerrymandering the debate forum policy boundaries [especially during the final sections of the forum]. The immediate audience did not accept this, but, it seems the USA already has according to S.
This outcome seemed to be the case primarily because of very poor moderation of the debate itself [where the moderator did not intervene in a needed manner to balance the Q & A sections, as they were happening, as a seasoned TV network anchorman in such a role might have]. It is clear that the rules were not respected, because of the Rabbi’s own sense of social outrage. He mentioned having a counselor’s sensibilities holding more than having Torah sensibilities, and ran with that.
Michael Brown was very accurate in determining that folks on hand, scripture, and research policy groups did not share the Rabbi’s assumptions: where the Rabbi also simply could not process that such societal anomolies as 80 million evangelicals were going to reach homosexuals with any relevant or commiserate Message that was a New Testament Gospel Message, regardless of any known or cited Biblical reference to morality and sexual practices.
According to the Rabbi the die was already cast, and there is no going back, becase of adult consentual choice (whatever the cast of sin). Christianity, if standing against homosexuality, was going to lose any respect among the democratic masses for its claims and heart accordingly.
This is not to say that S. even responded to what he was requested to at all. [But then, as mentioned, this was never really a debate by its poor management and independent of particpants topical pursuits]. It was not a “debate”, it was not even a discussion, it was almost a comparison of positions. This was in a climate of unacceptance of the topic itself, with one participant predeciding it was the stuff to be stirred up as crazymaking, of an alike famous Scopes [Monkey] Trial substance in the making: as far as anyone of education or intellectual scruples comprehending a largly held relevance of an already decided inevitable societal change. How do Evangelicals view evolution, and how do they view homosexuality may be of a similar importance in forming “camps” rather than one truly overcoming or respectfully challenging another’s position. Oh, for a true moderator to stay on task!
M. Brown made the mistake of being reasonable, when he did not readily discern that it was not a reasonable forum from the Q & A responses forward. It does not hurt a Christian witness, or Messianic witness to occasionally state the character of the opponent’s approach to the subject at hand, certainly Jesus did this often.
The laws, rules, and unspoken rules of culture have already asserted a fast paced marketplace driven club dance environment media normalized approach to the subject–where the guise of equal rights and an equated political “civil rights entitlement” ideation have pulled the wool over the public eye. That eye has its cornia stuck glued to the new TV standard screen, and enjoys the dazzling colors and bokeh, with no other standards in view.
Help us out in the future by going back a few years to an evening radio show approach, with commentators after the fact, and a respected omniscent moderator.
Unfortunately, voters have the attention span of a cocker spaniel. How quickly they forget that George Bush and the Republican juggernaut took us to the precipice of the cliff and it was President Obama who took us back from the edge.
It takes time to turn back an economy from a near depression, so I am disappointed in my fellow Americans for not giving our President a chance to heal our economic wounds incurred by the republicans two unfunded wars and reckless free market “shenanigans”.
I am willing to put my money were my mouth is in order to ensure that my fellow Americans have access to affordable health care. Its a moral responsibility that we as Americans must pursue and embrace!
The number 1 issue is morality, not economy, but just to prove a point I am going to list some statistics for you. You say that President Obama took us back from the edge. Really? What amazing thing has President Obama done that has greatly impacted our nation for the better? There have been a couple of little things, but they are far outweighed by the many big things He has done to push us even closer to the edge. Since President Obama has been president, unemployment has never consistantly improved. The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) is the government’s very own statistics department and their statistics show no job growth, instead the unemployment rate is climbing. It currently stands at 17.1%, you can go to bls.gov to see this is true.
Here are some statistics:
$13.6 Trillion: Current National Debt. (U.S. Treasury Department, Accessed 10/19/10)
$3.0 Trillion: Amount Added To The National Debt Since Obama Took Office. (U.S. Treasury Department, Accessed 10/19/10)
$2.5 Trillion: True Cost Of ObamaCare Once Fully Implemented. (Sen. Max Baucus, Floor Remarks, 12/2/09)
$1.42 Trillion: Federal Budget Deficit For FY2009 – Highest In U.S. History. (Congressional Budget Office, 10/7/10)
$1.29 Trillion: Federal Budget Deficit For FY2010 – Second Highest In U.S. History. (Congressional Budget Office, 10/7/10)
$814 Billion: Price Tag Of Obama’s Failed Stimulus. (Bloomberg, 8/20/10)
$575 Billion: Amount Of Medicare Cuts In ObamaCare. (CMS Chief Actuary Richard S. Foster, Memo, 4/22/10)
$569.2 Billion: Amount Of Taxes In ObamaCare. (Letter to Speaker Nancy Pelosi, 3/18/10)
14.8 Million: Unemployed Americans. –It was 13 million when he took office. (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 10/8/10)
5.4 Million: Number Of Properties Receiving Foreclosure Filings Since Obama Took Office. (RealtyTrac, Accessed 10/19/10)
3.8 Million: Increase In the Number Of People Who Were In Poverty In 2009 Over 2008. (NPR, 9/16/10)
2.6 Million: Jobs Lost Since Stimulus Was Passed. (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 10/8/10)
22,000: Number Of Seniors In MA, NH And ME That Will Lose Their Medicare Advantage Plans As A Result Of ObamaCare. (The Boston Globe, 9/28/10)
79: Percent Of Stimulus Funds For Wind, Solar And Geothermal Energy Projects That Went To Foreign Firms. (Investigating Reporting Workshop/ABC’s World News Tonight/Watchdog Institute, 2/8/10)
20: Straight Months That Food Stamp Participation Has Hit A Record. (Bloomberg, 10/5/10)
14: Straight Months With Unemployment Above 9.5%. (Bureau Of Labor Statistics, 10/8/10)
Do you really want to compare Bush and Obama? Let’s look at Bush’s 2003 Tax cuts vs. Obama’s 2009 Stimulus and see what helped our economy.
Net Jobs Gained or Lost 16 Months After Each Initiative
2003 Bush Tax Cuts–Gained (plus) +1.4 Million
2009 Obama Stimulus— Lost (minus) -2.6 Million
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) U.S. Dept. of Labor
16 Month Comparison: Unemployment Rate
2009 Obama Stimulus 9.5% – 16 months after stimulus
2003 Bush Tax Cuts 5.7% – 16 months after tax cuts
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) U.S. Dept. of Labor
Cost To Taxpayers
2003 Bush Tax Cuts— $0
2009 Obama Stimulus—$862 billion
Source: Congressional Budget Office (CBO)
16 Month Comparison: Disposable Personal Income–Per Capita (Every Man, Woman and Child)
BUSH (plus) + $758
Obama (plus) + $82
Source: Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) U.S. Dept. of Commerce
16 Month Comparison: Average GDP Growth
Bush 2003 Tax Cuts–4.05%
Obama 2009 Stimulus–2.45%
Source: Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) U.S. Dept. of Commerce
The recession started 11 months after democrats took congress. The recession was not Bush’s or the republicans fault. Bush did some things I disagree with, but Bush has been gone for 2 years and it is time we stop blaming him and start looking at Obama’s stats. The numbers speak for themselves.
Obama does not need more time. You asking for more time is like me having your credit card and placing you in higher debt and costing you tons of money and then asking you to give me more time with your credit card because getting you financially stable takes time. His 2 years in office have proved he does not have what it takes to run a nation, and the primary reason is he does not have God.
You say funding healthcare is a moral responsibility, but what about your moral responsibility to stand against abortion which is the murder of an innocent life? What about the moral responsibility to stand against gay marriage? The issues you are raising are money issues and you try to say that is morality while ignoring the true morality of life and purity in marriage. The day you make voting decisions based on money and not Biblical values, you just made money your idol, welcome to idolatry. I agree the economy is an important issue, but I believe God blesses the nation who stands for Him. Our economy issues would be fixed if we would stop killing innocent babies, and stop sexual impurity, and stop tearing God out of our lives.
The econmoy is getting weaker is because God is showing us how weak our “god”, the almighty dollar, is.
“You say funding healthcare is a moral responsibility, but what about your moral responsibility to stand against abortion which is the murder of an innocent life? What about the moral responsibility to stand against gay marriage?”
Problem with this argument is the same thing in the homosexuality debate. “What about the Bible mandate against hurting the poor? What about divorce rate?” Remember,just because X is wrong, that doesn’t mean Y is wrong as well.
Jacob — Sometimes some things talked about, can be both X and Y are wrong, then what needs to be done?
The answer is whatever the Lord leads for us to do, and He will lead in the correct way, because He knows what He is doing. The two major political parties both have some good things about them, and some bad things about them, so the Lord can lead someone to vote for either one of them, or to not vote at all, it all depends on what the Lord wants in the specific time period. Sometimes what must be done is to foregive the sins, in order to establish God’s purposes. That can cause any individual that is serving the Lord to choose either of the political parties.
Travis, I fully agree. After rereading my post, I realize wasn’t as coherent as I wished (I think it might have to be the fact that I needed to take my lunchbreak at work, haha).
What I meant to say was this: if health care is a moral responsiblity, that does not affect the issue of abortion and vice versa. I agree that God often calls and motivates individuals to focus on a specific issue. For example, I do not think if someone has a call to help homeless teens, we would say “What about abortion?”. People do not look at Reinhart Bohnke and say “But what about Turkey?”. Like you said, God can direct people to specific issues. The argument I was responding to seemed to be saying, “Health care? What about abortion?” We do not need to divide up these issues like they are competing for the crown of “Top Moral Issue.”
So, with my blood sugar back up, I’m hoping at least slightly more coherent 🙂
Jacob,
We have a biblical responsibility to stand for the truth of God’s word in our voting. The issue of the poor is very important, but that is a matter of what party you think has the best economics plan. It is objective on whose idea of fixing the economy will work, but with gay marriage or abortion, it is black and white. Either you are for it or against it…period. So I must vote on black and white biblical issues and then give my life to taking care of the poor and needy. Taking care of th poor is not even the governments job, it is the church’s responsibility. So if a political figure has a not so good economic plan the poor people are still alive for me to give money to and help, but if a candidate is pro-abortion, the babies are dying daily and I cannot help them. I am not sure what divorce has to do with this topic. It is not a political issue. I hate divorce and we should strive to see marriage be all that it is supposed to be according to God. 1 Man and 1 Woman for life. But divorce is not a political issue to be voted on, gay marriage and abortion are.
Travis,
This is not a party issue, it is a candidate issue. I would vote democrat, republican, independant, green party, etc. I don’t care about party. It is about biblical moral values. What candidate stands for God’s values. Nothing more, nothing less.
Well, I didn’t vote this election because I’m just not happy with either party. Please let me explain. I’m a social conservative who sees the damage done to God’s beautiful creation by polluting corporations and I can find no common ground with Republicans on that issue. “Deregulation!” is what they cry for, claiming that environmental regulations strangle companies and hurt their bottom lines. Yet the CEO’s of these companies are multimillionaires — how much profit is enough profit? Often the actual founders of these companies struggled at one point, even living without paychecks to make sure they met payroll, until the company could grow bigger. But today’s CEO’s don’t seem to deny themselves anything. Therefore I don’t buy the rant that pollution controls are cutting into their profit margins. Again: how much profit is enough profit? And Republicans want to cut back on money for the poor, who are constantly painted as “welfare queens” and assorted layabouts. The Taxed Enough Already (TEA) Party rode that issue — and it included an odd-assortment of people, some of whom don’t even pay that much tax to begin with, but love beating on the poor, who pay little to no tax. There is no single party in America today which represents the point of view I’ve come to, but I know these positions are supported by the Bible. Aren’t we to help the poor? Proverbs 19:17 (NIV) “Whoever is kind to the poor lends to the LORD, and he will reward them for what they have done.” And didn’t God say that He will destroy those who are destroying the earth? Revelation 11:18 (NIV) “The nations were angry, and your wrath has come. The time has come for judging the dead, and for rewarding your servants the prophets and your people who revere your name, both great and small— and for destroying those who destroy the earth.”
I agree with Republicans on homosexuality (although their ranks are becoming more “inclusive” of gays) and on abortion, but I am utterly opposed on their environmental and social welfare views. The internal conflict brought about by this personal dilemma kept me from endorsing any candidate by my vote.
So I represent that portion of Americans who stayed away from the polls this week, being anti both parties, not just one. And while I can agree with Greens on the environment, I cannot agree with their platform on homosexuality…so again, there doesn’t seem to be any party that entirely fits what I believe is a totally moral perspective.
It’s difficult for me to accept this — it’s not without a lot of pain that I’ve come to this, and I don’t know how I’ll resolve it in the future. I support organic agriculture by voting with my dollars, and I can find other ways to give back — but until the Republican Party seriously examines the morality of all of its pet issues, I can’t actively back them.
Good post, Ruth.
I appreciate your honesty Ruth, I too feel those types of things. Here are some thoughts I have had, the Republican right often wants to declare war often, and help the rich without assisting the poor, yet they do oppose abortion, and same sex marriages. The Democrats often pursue gay rights in a way that is to far, and often try to establish abortion, but they often try to stop war, and help the poor. Children in abortion are innocent, but also war causes innocents to be killed. Also the rich already have enough, and scripturally the rich are supposed to give to the poor, yet so many people are greedy.
Same sex marriages shouldn’t be approved, but gays should be protected from the violent.
The far right negative part is called facism, and the far left negative part is called socialism, these are really only negative when the wrong people use them wrongly, because both can be a positive addition, if people are doing things correctly. The Democrats are often more accepting of other people, which I like, but that accepting can go to far. The Republicans are often less accepting of people, which I like, but that less excepting can, and has gone too far. The two parties have been set up by the Lord, to keep a balance, and order, when one goes to far the other comes, and establishes order, it seems to have happened several times.
Well worded, Travis.
The common denominator, I would say, is man is selfish and sinful. Therefore, I have a hard time seeing any political perspective as a true answer. Didn’t Jesus send us out in 2’s? Wasn’t His solution to impact the world one heart at a time?
The early church was looking for Jesus to overthrow the government and establish Himself as King. Instead, Jesus sent them out in 2’s to establish the Kingdom in the hearts of men. All the while Himself being murdered by the political/religious environment of His day.
If the hearts of men change there is hope for a righteous government. If hearts remain corrupt there is not hope in the political system, even if “righteous laws” are implemented.
I agree that both parties have their flaws, but I do not agree that Democrats help the poor and needy in God’s way. It was never the governments job to come in and help the poor. It is the church’s job. Democrats desire bigger government. In the book of Acts, it was the church that took care of the poor. Taking care of widows and orphans (and all of the poor) is pure and undefiled religion, not pure and undefiled government. We do not need to vote for politicians to set up government programs to help the poor. We need to give our lives to helping the poor. When is the last time most people who vote Democrat sold items they have to make money to feed the poor. It is not the Governments job, it is ours. Again, economic policy is debatable. I think Democrats system for the poor is flawed and actually promotes laziness (a quality God does not like) and dependence on government instead of God.
As far as stopping war, God called us to be peacemakers. I am not saying I agree with every war and every facet of every war, however if there is an evil man, Sadaam Husein for instance, who is guilty of genocide and all kinds of evils, then if we do nothing to stop him are we really making peace. No we are letting evil and murder continue. War against evil is justified and sometimes the only way to make peace. Again I am not saying that war is good, or that I agree with every war and the reasons behind them, but war is not a black and white issue. Would voting for a Democrat who is anti-war be moral if there was a war that is justified and needed to save American lives and the Democrat does not go to war and American lives are lost because of it. What about the wars of the Bible? Surely you are not suggesting that true morality changes with culture and time. If the wars of the Old Testament were God initiated then they had to have been moral unless God is immoral. So when did God initiate war, when evil reached its peak. So again sometimes war is justified and is debatable on whose war policy is correct at the time.
Again I must vote on the moral black and white issues of scripture. Abortion and gay marriage are wrong…..period. There is no justification for them. So where as economic and war policies are debatable depending on the situation, abortion and gay marriage are black and white. We should vote based on the black and white issues, not the debatable ones.
I do not believe giving is real giving if it is forcefully taken. It then becomes stealing. But I do believe that we are in a mess because we are unloving and selfish to the poor. I also believe and have seen some of the poor here in America be lazy or feel entitled. So both ends have big problems. The Church must do more to give and to share the gospel to change the heart. I don’t think anyone here really believes that we should say yes to healthcare for the poor if it means we also have to say yes to enabling more babies to be murdered. This is a trick of satan. We don’t throw babies under the bus in order to help the poor. God is much bigger and can do much more than that!
The fact is that votes do enable things to happen and also have consequences. Abortion is a prime example of that. Since it became legalized and expanded, a staggering amount of abortions have taken place. In the tens of millions. If it had not been legalized, kept legalized, and expanded by the support of voters, this would not be so.
Matt & Rebbecca — It is important to understand something, both innocent babies are killed with abortion, and innocent poor people are killed because they are not able to afford health care, both are wrong, and against the will of Eloheem/God. We as always are to give to the government what they require, that does include taxes, Messiah/Christ talked about giving to the government the things that are the governments, and to El/God the things that are His. Yes, the innocent that are rich & poor are the main concern, but remember Messiah loves the unjust too, He blesses both the just, and unjust.
Another thought I have considered some of the Republican right, have pursued basically socialism in Arizona, maybe more acurately facism, then they come back and attack that in the Democrats. Two wrongs, that are existing right now, the Republicans pursuing the basically facist actions in Arizona, and the Democrats trying to make Israel give up more land. I have explained that socialism, and facism is not really what matters, it is that people are serving the Lord, loving Him, and people correctly. Socialism & facism could both correctly be used, if the correct people are making the correct judgements, of course the middle of those two can be correct too, if the correct people are making the correct judgements, otherwise the middle can be wrong too in the political spectrum.
God’s commands don’t change for anyone, His commands are His commands, for everyone, the church is the example for everyone, everyone is supposed to follow the church, the church is supposed to have the rich give to the poor. “For I mean not that other men be eased, and ye burdened: But by an equality, that now at this time your abundance may be a supply for their want, that their abundance also may be a supply for your want: that there may be equality: As it is written, He that had gathered much had nothing over; and he that had gathered little had no lack. 2 Cor. 8:13-15″
Also the Messiah showed us that any physical violence that hurts others is not what He wants His people to do, the church is not supposed too do it, and the Lord’s commands are for everyone.”From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members? Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not. Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts. James 4:1-3”
Now it is never the Lord’s ultimate perfect will to have physical violence hurt, and kill people. Those that Love the Lord in the way He desire will not hurt others physically, nor will they approve of any of it, but there is a lesser will, that He has, that He uses to make sure there is order that is kept, sometimes wars use that lesser will of His, that is not His will, but is His lesser will, to provide for and protect people that are mistreated, hurt, and killed.
I do appreciate everyone’s input — I’m still ruminating over your points; thanks
Travis- Babies are not killed because of abortion, they are murdered. Yes we should help people get treatment for sicknesses but not with the condition that we have to enable and participate in outright murder.
A rant.
Abortion is murder. It is not even comparable to the health care issues we have.
Most of us in this country are rich by historical standards and in comparison with most the population of our current world. YHWH instructs us to remember the poor over and over. YHWH does not say to give our money to a government so that the poor will be helped. The rich are not supposed to be stolen from to help the poor. The government is not supposed to steal by taxation.
We are supposed to be generous to the ones that need our help. The government wastes much of what it gets. It helps people that are not truly poor. It gives aid to help the poor of other nations just to have it pilfered by the governments of those nations.
The rich are the ones that employ most of the population. If we tax them more, we make it less probable that they will employ as many or be as generous to the ones they do employ. They are accountable to YHWH in these matters. We should not penalize someone just because he is wealthy.
It is wrong to have respect of persons. Everyone is to be equal in the sight of the law. A tiered tax system is not equal weights and measures. The rich will get what they have coming if they have gotten their wealth by dishonest means. So will the poor if they steal it form the rich.
We are not guaranteed a right to health insurance. Most people can walk into a hospital emergency room and get treated. There are laws that prevent health care providers from denying care. We do not have the right to force someone to work for us for free. We do not have the right to force them to work for less than it takes for them to pay their bills. If they do it voluntarily…great.
We live better and longer than at any time in history, but we want to live longer with less pain. We are like Hezekiah that wanted to extend his life. We will probably turn to idols like he did also. Maybe we already have. It sure feels like a pagan temple when I walk into the doors of a hospital.
Government usually fixes nothing. When it does, which is rarely, it does it at a cost much greater than is necessary.
If we would have taken care of our elderly parents ourselves we might not have had the curse of social security draining 15% of our incomes to provide substandard lively hoods to our elders. How about the hearts of the fathers and children being turned to one another. We refused to do this and our land is struck with a curse.
I am not a doctor. I am not rich by American standards. I am not an employer. I am not a republican or democrat.
The problem is not our government. It is us. We want to be babysat and nursed along. We lust after others wealth. We worship health and happiness. We do not want to grow up.
If you want the poor to be helped, stop spending money on anything other than the bare necessities and give your wealth to the poor. You will get treasure in heaven. But if you vote for other people’s money to be given to the poor you are an accessory to theft and the reward for that is not treasure in heaven.
If you want free or inexpensive health care at the expense of others, you are covetous, which is idolatry. Let’s get the beams out of our own eyes…maybe then we can see clearly to get the splinters out of the eyes of our duly elected officials.
Maybe this is what was happening in this election…maybe not. I have a funny feeling we will be wanting to return to Egypt by the time of the next election. I am not so sure that we ever left. We like our taxmasters (taskmasters)too much.
We would rather have it easy instead of having our freedom. Is that the lust of the flesh or what?
Shalom
“When is the last time most people who vote Democrat sold items they have to make money to feed the poor?”
I believe it was right around the same time people who vote Republican sold items that they have to make money to feed the poor.
Everything belongs to the Lord.* Therefore, if the Lord gives to the poor through whatever means He chooses — such as when He brought His people out of Egypt and the Egyptians gave them their wealth as they were leaving** — well, it’s all His to do with as He pleases…maybe having great wealth can make people forget that it really isn’t truly theirs afterall. Maybe that’s why James chose to write about the terrible fate of the rich.***
Voting for a system (by a choice we can make today) is fair. Taxing proportionately is humane. I surmise that only materialistic greed would make someone object to paying higher taxes if they earn more. Notice how even though the wealthy always insist that they need more tax breaks, they still have plenty of time to frolic in Nice, buy up foreclosures and indulge in the latest technology and fashions. And did you know that corporate welfare (bailouts and grants and other government freebies) is roughly ten times higher than the cost of domestic welfare? (I’m really feeling their pain.) Paying your taxes is Biblical.****
Abortion is wrong. Making people who don’t believe in it have to pay for it is also wrong. The tax code could be amended so that money for state-funded abortions would be a separate, ear-marked tax that people who object to abortions would never have to pay. At least one could withhold tax for what one doesn’t support, as Henry David Thoreau did when he refused to pay the tax that supported the U.S.’s war with Mexico. (By the way: choosing to seize someone else’s land because you like it is covetousness. Killing them to obtain it is murder. And no, I’m not referring to the saga of the children of Israel.)
*Psalm 24:11 “The earth is the LORD’s, and everything in it, the world, and all who live in it”
**Exodus 11:2; 12:35-36; 39:10
***James 5:1-6; also see Luke 6:24
****Romans 13:6-7: “This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God’s servants, who give their full time to governing. Give to everyone what you owe them: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor.”
“(By the way: choosing to seize someone else’s land because you like it is covetousness. Killing them to obtain it is murder. And no, I’m not referring to the saga of the children of Israel.)”
Good point…how quickly we forget!
When it comes to politics, I like to sit on the fence and watch the game played out on both sides. The only problem is, the game never ends! As you may have guessed, I am what the new catch phrase calls, “an independent voter”. I don’t promise my vote to anyone. It’s mine and I’ll use as I see fit in any particular election. Sometimes I vote Republican, and sometimes I vote Democrat.
Matt M wrote: “The recession started 11 months after democrats took congress. The recession was not Bush’s or the republicans fault.” Do you not recall the scramble at the zero hour, when the candidates were still campaining for President (i.e. Obama and McCain) and the Bush appointee, Fed. Reserve Chairman, Ben Bernanke came forward with the immediate, very dire plea to Congress, which a Republican Majority held at that time, to take immediate action concerning an injection of 700 Billion Dollars, or, the entire free market would fail?!! The Republican Congress, (not the President) left the American People with 1.3 TRILLION DOLLARS OF DEBT beginning 2008, when they began their service to us with a sound economy, left by the previous Congress. But, was 2007 the end of the crisis? No. The dye had been cast, the dominoes were already falling and the free market was no longer free. Even with the injection of this money, banks held on to their “reserves” rather than lending. In effect, the banks “pulled back” from the free market because of the practices of the Fed. Reserve and Alan Greenspan and the stock market took a major nosedive. Sub-prime mortgages were blamed even though Bernanke stated in Sept. of 2007, and I quote, “We do not expect significant spillovers from the subprime market to the rest of the economy or to the financial system.” So much for his prognosticating!
Perhaps the leaches saw the winds blowing in the direction of the Democrats and knew their days of writing their own legislation and loop-hool after loop-hole and bad economic practices were numbered. Just an idea.
Here is what one economic analyst says about September, 2007 and the events that happened prior to the crisis we now face. (THAT’S RIGHT, 2007, WHILE THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION WAS STILL IN OFFICE–HOW SOON WE FORGET):
“The alleged remedies were equally predictable: more regulation, more government intervention, more spending, more money creation, and more debt. To add insult to injury, the very people who had been responsible for the policies that created the mess were posing as the wise public servants who would show us the way out. And following a now-familiar pattern, government failure would not only be blamed on anyone and everyone but the government itself, but it would also be used to justify additional grants of government power.
“The truth of the matter is that intervention in the market, rather than the market economy itself, was the driving factor behind the bust.
“The recession or depression is the necessary, if unfortunate, correction process by which the malinvestments of the boom period, having at last been brought to light, are finally liquidated. The diversion of resources into unsustainable investments out of conformity with consumer desires and resource availability comes to an end, with businesses failing and investment projects abandoned. Although painful for many people, the recession/depression phase of the cycle is not where the damage is done. The bust is the period in which the economy sloughs off the malinvestments and the capital misallocation, re-establishes the structure of production along sustainable lines, and restores itself to health. The damage is done during the boom phase, the period of false prosperity that precedes the bust. It is then that the artificial lowering of interest rates causes the squandering of capital and the initiation of unsustainable investments. It is then that resources that would genuinely have satisfied consumer demand are diverted into projects that make sense only in light of the temporary and artificial conditions of the boom.
“Adding fuel to the fire of the most recent boom (2007 AND PRIOR) was the so-called Greenspan put, the unofficial policy of the Greenspan Fed that promised assistance to private firms in the event of risky investments gone bad. The Financial Times described it as the view that “when markets unravel, count on the Federal Reserve and its chairman Alan Greenspan (eventually) to come to the rescue.” According to economist Antony Mueller, “Since Alan Greenspan took office, financial markets in the U.S. have operated under a quasi-official charter, which says that the central bank will protect its major actors from the risk of bankruptcy. Consequently, the reasoning emerged that when you succeed, you will earn high profits and market share, and if you should fail, the authorities will save you anyway.” The Financial Times reported in 2000, in the wake of the dot-com boom, of an increasing concern that the Greenspan put was injecting into the economy “a destructive tendency toward excessively risky investment supported by hopes that the Fed will help if things go bad.
“When things do go bad, pumping more money into the banking system, thereby lowering interest rates once again, only exacerbates the problem, because it encourages the continued wasteful deployment of capital in unsustainable lines that will eventually have to be abandoned anyway, and it forces healthy, wealth-generating firms to have to go on competing with bubble firms for labor and capital. When interest rates are made artificially low, they encourage the kind of investment that would normally occur only if more saved resources existed to fund them than actually do. Continuing to force interest rates down only perpetuates the allocation of capital into outlets that the economy’s current resource base cannot sustain.
“In response to the dot-com and NASDAQ collapses and the modest recession that accompanied them in 2000 and 2001, that Alan Greenspan and the Fed chose to embark on a robust policy of inflation, an approach that culminated in lowering the federal funds rate (the rate at which banks lend to each other) to a mere one percent from June 2003 to June 2004. Already by early 2001 the Fed had begun to ease once again. That year saw no fewer than 11 rate cuts. The unsustainable dot-com boom could not, in the end, be reignited, and thank goodness – the resource misallocations in that sector were unhealthy for the economy. But the Fed’s easy money and refusal to allow the recession of 2000 to take its course led to an even more perilous bubble elsewhere. That was the only recession on record in which housing starts did not decline. Not coincidentally, that was also the moment at which people began to conclude that house prices never fall, that a house is the best investment one can make, and so on. By intervening in the market then, the Fed prevented the market from making a full correction, thereby perpetuating unsustainable investment and consumption decisions. In so doing it merely postponed what it was trying to avoid, and made the crash worse when it finally came.” (Thomas E. Woods, Jr.)
You can read all about the current economic crises and where and when and why it happened in the book, “Meltdown: A Free-Market Look at Why the Stock Market Collapsed, the Economy Tanked, and Government Bailouts Will Make Things Worse” by Thomas E. Woods, Jr.
So, when Americans were caught off balance concerning their pocketbooks and these dire forcasts made by a “Republican Administration”, they decided to swing to the Democrats in record numbers in that same year, and in 2008 the Presidency went to Barack Obama. Together with disenchanted middle America, new voters came out in record numbers to vote for their perception of who was the “better” of two evils at the time.
And then, another massive injection was needed, according to the Fed. Reserve and we find ourselves where we are today. And banks are “STILL NOT LENDING MONEY”, what a surprise! They did, however, have enough to pay themselves HUGE bonuses for a “scam well done”. So, wake up American Christians, as most are sorely uneducated when it comes to your perception of “who” is to blame, rather, than asking, “what is the source of the problem”. Could it be possible that Republicans are for “big businesses and the very greedy” rather than the Christian Coalition, to whom they occasional throw a bigger bone? Why do they always bring up “the abortion issue” at election time, and then, turn their backs on doing anything about this crisis when they come to office? Election time=ABORTION ISSUE. In office=I FORGOT.
We are mistaken when we believe that politicians, overall, feel that they owe any allegiance to God, let alone the American public, although I do think some are genuine believers. No. They owe their allegiance, for the most part, to those who pad their election campaigns and who they allow to wisper in their ears. With the newest ruling by the Supreme Court that says, “corporations”, (who incidentally, are classified as “one” entity having the same first admendment rights as each and every “one” of us, regardless of “how many individuals actually make up that entity”), can contribute as much money as they want to any candidate they want! Do any of us have 100’s of millions of dollars to give to the candidate of our choice? I know if I had 100’s of millions of dollars, I could feed a third world country with it! We should all go to Congress and demand to be heard in order to gain “redress” for those policies we don’t agree with, and for the legislation that is written and is contrary to our moral standards. The “buck stops here.” I think we need a “literal” Christian “walk to the halls of Congress” and demand to be heard!
I’m going to make a prediction, right here on this blog. The economy will see a major climb up in the very near future and everyone will breath a sigh of relief. Banks will start loaning money again for start up businesses, and the stock market will enjoy a major gain. The unemployment numbers will drop significantly by the end of next year, if not within the next six months, and we will feel justified in the votes we cast. How do I know? Let’s see…”the boys are back in town”, “the boys are back in town”… And everyone will praise the Republicans for what they perceive as a major political cue by the voters, when the reality is that behind the scenes, it was the money contributed by corporations who really elected our Representatives of Congress. Sorry for bursting your bubble, but, we need to get down and dirty when it comes to upholding “Kingdom Standards” as opposed to “worldly standards” as we are vastly outnumbered and outspent by those who stand to gain the most.
Oh yeah, get ready to catch that bone coming our way soon!
Applauding your post, Sheila (:
Travis — Both Republicans and Democrats agree that Health crae needs to be reformed, but it is a debatable thing as to who has the better plan on how to do it. It however is not debatable on whose abortion stance is right. I think that universal government-ran healthcare is not helping the poor and actually increases the financial burden on the American people, but the argument with abortion is black and white. I have never said that healthcare does not need to be reformed, I have however said that we must vote on black and white issues and not on ones that can change depending on point of view, and situation.
As far as the giving the government taxes, I am not against paying taxes, but I do stand against abuses to the taxes I pay. Jesus did speak of giving unto Ceaser what was Ceaser’s, but that was a command to obey governmental authority, not a command to agree with and vote (if they had the ability to vote) on whatever the government decides. Surely Jesus was not saying that God desired Israel to be under the authority of Rome. It was His desire from old to New Testament for Israel to be a people under God and God alone. They were never meant to be under the authority of a foreign power. So Jesus was saying obey the authority that is over you, but He was not saying blindly agree with the government and vote for higher taxes. Again I do not think that my paying higher taxes to pay for universal healthcare is a way to properly help the poor. I am all for helping the poor, but I believe the republicans have a better way of doing it. Again healthcare, economy, and taxes are all debatable issues that can be argued on whose plans are better, but abortion and gay marriage are black and white issues that cannot be debated. We must vote on what is clear and black and white, not on what is debatable.
I do not see how the requirement to check immigration status in Arizona is fascism. Republicans are all for immigration and the allowing people to come to America in pursuit of a better life, but they are against illegally coming. How is a stand against illegal immigration fascism? They are seeking nothing more that to stop the illegal immigrants from coming into Arizona taking money from legal immigrants and citizens and many of the illegal immigrants are apart of a drug ring there. They are not promoting racism, fascism, or anything like that. Again views on illegal immigration and how to deal with it effectively is debatable, Israel giving up the land God promised them is not debatable biblically. Again the black and white issues should dictate our votes, not the issues that are debatable and can change with the situation.
Socialism and fascism can never be right with flawed human beings. I agree that we must seek to know the Lord, love Him and people right, that is the goal of our lives.
I agree that God’s commands don’t change for anyone, His commands are His commands. And I agree that the church is the example for everyone, everyone is supposed to follow the church, the church is supposed to have the rich give to the poor. Everyone is supposed to take care of the poor, but it is not the government’s job, it is the job of the individual. Government cannot house every homeless person, but individuals can take people into their home. Are you honestly saying that welfare and abortion are the same? I can feed the poor and clothe the naked and help the homeless individually, but I cannot individually make abortion illegal. Look at this from another perspective, if there was a candidate who had the greatest policies to help the poor and hated war, but this candidate was going to make it legal to rape children and make the sex trade legal in America, would you vote for that candidate. What if the other candidate was absolutely against legalizing the sex trade and the rape of children but you personally didn’t think their economic polices or welfare policies etc were as good. Who would you vote for? I am sure you would vote against the guy who wanted to legalize the rape of children, but why? The problem is you do not view abortion and gay marriage as sick detestable and evil as God says they are. Again, I am not saying that taking care of the poor is not important; I am just saying that whose polices is the best to take care of the poor is debatable. But abortion and gay marriage, just like raping children and the sex trade are black and white issues and should be the factor that decides our vote.
Yes, God hates war and violence and so do I, but God also hates people going to hell, but we know people still go there. Why? Because God is just and their rejecting of Jesus made their going to hell justified. The same with war, God desires that no war will ever exist, but at the same time there are cases when war is justified. (Not that we provoke war, but that if war is provoked by another we fight for peace.) For example, the Bible is full of references to Jesus coming back to wage a war on the antichrist and His followers. The passage in James 4:1-3 that you quoted says over and over lust because you have not and cannot obtain. It is speaking of warring (both personally and nationally) to gain more stuff and for selfish reasons. That is absolutely wrong, but say a man is evil (Hitler for example) and we go to war to stop the brutal murdering of innocent Jewish men, women, and children, that war is not what is described in James 4. War for selfish reasons is sinful and wrong, war to fight against sin and evil is justified.
Where does the Bible speak of an ultimate will and a lesser will? God has one ultimate will, and then we have free will. Now He allows us to have free will, but our free will can choose something outside of His will. If someone goes to hell, that is not apart of God’s lesser will. Someone’s will is their desire, not what they permit to happen. I can allow my child to face struggles, but it is not my desire for them to face struggles, but I will allow my child to face struggles knowing that they can learn from it. It was not my desire to see Saddam Hussein killed or to see him hurt, it was my desire to see him saved. But, at the same time the war to take him out I believe was justified to save the countless millions that He tortured daily. The war was a result of Saddam’s free will to choose evil, not a result of a lesser will. It was not God’s desire to see Saddam choose sin, but war was the necessary result of that sin and free will choice. It was not an issue of God’s will, but rather of Saddam’s free will. Just like it is not God’s desire or will to see people go to hell, but that is the necessary result of their sin and free will, hell is justified when a person chooses sin over God, war is also justified when a person chooses evil on a national level.
Matt,
You wrote:
“The problem is you do not view abortion and gay marriage as sick detestable and evil as God says they are.”
That was an incredibly presumptuous thing to say just because someone doesn’t have the same political views. How do you know someones views on abortion just because they bring up points about other things that burden their heart? Maybe the issue is that you are too black and white, unable to fathom how someone would think different than you. Isn’t it fact that the vast amount of abortions happen in the poor communities? Have you ever considered why these communities are as they are as they are? The facts that slavery and segregation did not only happen on the church’s watch, but was largely IMPLEMENTED by these so-called believers should say something. It should say that the value of life as a whole was greatly diminished because we basically told them they were sub-human. Then there is no real resolving of the problem, not to mention repentance from it(at least on the scale it should be addressed). It took a man from their own race to stand up peacefully for what is right just to get hosed down and assasinated and begin the cause for true civil rights. But we fight on and on trying to keep these “less-than-human people” from dining at our tables and sitting in our churches…
Oh, but no…we can just stand up and declare the evils of these people. We won’t make things right. We won’t sacrifice anything to help bring about change. But we will glory in the fact the we are living in decent neighborhoods and have nice things. Did you and I, personally do these things. No. But we are responsible to try and make them right.
No this doesn’t change the fact that abortion is evil. I agree. You may just want to be a little more aware of the true state of things in this country and why they are the way they are. What would Rush Limbaugh…I mean Jesus do?
Exactly why we need direct democracy, with individuals voting on the issues, not merely following along with whatever the party line might be. One way to have it would be to have direct input into Congress through e-voting. The congressperson would have to vote according to the wishes of the voters in their district. I know I rarely contact a congressperson — it seems very iffy that they’ll respond according to some personal letter or formletters through email. More likely they’ll respond to a professional lobbyist or a personal phone call from another politician in the grapevine, pulling in a “favor” here or there. But if a system was set up so that each issue, separately, is voted on and the representative must vote to reflect those votes, then a proposed bill would not have contrary issues stuffed into it, but would be bundled only with other issues which had been already voted on. Sure, it might delay some processes, but it would be much faster in many other ways, too, actually streamlining. What you’d have in broad terms is ‘we the people’ being more satisfied with the Congress and feeling that our voice was heard and acted on. The us vs. them football game atmosphere of Republican/Democrat politics would be over. It would be all about the issues.
Yes, I’m dreaming of a brighter future, but realities begin with dreams.
Dave – I apologize if my comment sounded presumptuous. It was not intended to be. What I was trying to point out was that if you would not vote for someone who wanted to legalize the rape of children even though they had policies to help the poor, then why would you vote for people who are supporting the legalizing of murder of innocent children because they have policies to help the poor (policies that I believe do a very poor job of helping the poor). My point was that the rape of innocent children is grotesque and so is the murder of innocent children, but yet people who would never justify voting for a pro-legal-rape-of-children candidate because of helping the poor policies do try to justify voting for a pro-murder-of-children candidate because of helping the poor policies. My point was not specifically about Travis as a person, but rather the ideology that would justify supporting the murder of a child for the sake of welfare and other government programs.
I am far from “too” black and white, and I love when people think differently from me. I love hearing and studying other beliefs. Isn’t it rather presumptuos of you to make that comment about me just because I can on here discussing my views on voting.
Yes the vast amount of abortions happen in poor communities. Isn’t it interesting that these communities are filled with people on government systems that are supposedly supposed to help the poor, yet these people are still poor. The Democrats say they want to help the poor, but then support abortions that are a majority of the time murdering the people they claim to be helping. That is like saying here I will give you money and then kill your children. That is not the kind of helping the poor I think God was speaking of in scripture.
Again, I am all for helping the poor. I have indeed strived to help the poor. I have had the oppurtunity to help many homeless have food and shelter and clothes and most importanty find Christ. I have personally given so much away for the sake of helping the poor. I do not say that to brag on myself, God Forbid, but to make the point that I am not against helping the poor. And GOD FORBID, I never have and never will think of them as sub-human. They are the apple of God’s eye and we should absolutely take care of them for that is true and undefiled religion. I would never stop them from dining at my table or sitting in my church, actually the opposite, I invite them to my table and call them to the church. I love them and desire for them to be taken care of. But I do not believe the government programs set up by Democrats actually help the poor, nor do I believe that it is their responsibility. It is the church’s responsibility and then every single individual on earth as they follow the church’s example. It is not the government’s responsibility.
I agree we are responsible to make them right, but I know people on the government programs who are just as poor as before. The government and the Democrat party cannot make it right. The church can through the power of the Holy Spirit. Again a political parties plans to help the poor can be debated, the stance on abortion and gay marriage can’t.
By the way, I am not a Rush Limbaugh fan, nor do I care about party. I care about morality and biblical standards. I am very aware of the state of things in this country. I have seen first hand the results of poverty in America. I have seen prejudice against the poor. I have seen what a nation that has turned its back on God has produced and I know the blessing of God to help the poor does not come through Democrats or government, it comes when a nation turns back to God and stands against the murder of innocent children and stands against gay marriage and stands for biblical truth. Then God will bless America again and our economic and poverty problems will start to get better. Abortion and gay marriage is a cause recession is an effect.
Ruth – I do not vote for a party at all. And I like your idea, but unfortunately unless the Church in America rises unp with the Spirit of God in Revival, that would do nothing to bring good change. We do not need a different system of voting and politics, we need Revival and Jesus to radically move in our nation.
Matt,
I wasn’t in anyway trying to align you with those comments I made about believers…it was a generalization. I apologize for not being clear on that. I can see though that my criticisms don’t help anything. I get frustrated when ideology supersedes people, which so often happens in political dialogue. I do, however, see your very valid point which is the protection of people, specifically babies.
And yes, my insinuation that you were “too black and white” was presumptuous, and I apologize.
This is why I like to stay away from political debate! I get too worked up, to be honest.
Ruth:As a political science grad student, I have read the literature on representative democracy. Direct democracy that you suggest is problematic for two reasons.
1) This is a country of 300 million people, and there is no way to have a direct democracy that is fairly representates the view of the people and even more so, one that works efficiently. 2) The Founders of the U.S. understand the importance of having a republic where there exists a buffer between the people and the execution of the government. The government is supposed to represent the interest of the states or district they represent. While at times it may seem “undemocratic”, in the long run I personally believe it has been better for the U.S.
Have you people looked at the scripture to see what kinds of taxes were instituted by righteous rulers? If I am not mistaken, there are only two kinds of taxes. A tax per person and a even percentage tax.
It is not righteous to tax rich people more percentage than the poor. This is respect of persons.
Exodus 23
2 Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil; neither shalt thou speak in a cause to decline after many to wrest judgment:
3 Neither shalt thou countenance a poor man in his cause.
Exodus 30
11 And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,
12 When thou takest the sum of the children of Israel after their number, then shall they give every man a ransom for his soul unto the LORD, when thou numberest them; that there be no plague among them, when thou numberest them.
13 This they shall give, every one that passeth among them that are numbered, half a shekel after the shekel of the sanctuary: (a shekel is twenty gerahs:) an half shekel shall be the offering of the LORD.
14 Every one that passeth among them that are numbered, from twenty years old and above, shall give an offering unto the LORD.
15 The rich shall not give more, and the poor shall not give less than half a shekel, when they give an offering unto the LORD, to make an atonement for your souls.
Leviticus 19
15 Ye shall do no unrighteousness in judgment: thou shalt not respect the person of the poor, nor honour the person of the mighty: but in righteousness shalt thou judge thy neighbour.
Genesis 47
24 And it shall come to pass in the increase, that ye shall give the fifth part unto Pharaoh, and four parts shall be your own, for seed of the field, and for your food, and for them of your households, and for food for your little ones.
25 And they said, Thou hast saved our lives: let us find grace in the sight of my lord, and we will be Pharaoh’s servants.
26 And Joseph made it a law over the land of Egypt unto this day, that Pharaoh should have the fifth part; except the land of the priests only, which became not Pharaoh’s.
Leviticus 27
30 “Every tenth of the land’s produce, grain from the soil or fruit from the trees, belongs to the LORD; it is holy to the LORD…
32 Every tenth animal from the herd or flock, which passes under the /shepherd’s/ rod, will be holy to the LORD.
If there is a progressive tax in the scripture, I am not aware of it. When we honor the person of the poor by allowing him to pay less percentage, we are not being righteous judges. When we take more form the rich and dish it out to the poor, we are stealing.
It is the rich persons own responsibility to be generous, not our job to make sure he is generous. It is the poor persons responsibility to not be covetous of the more affluent persons money.
No hand outs for able-bodied poor people!
The rich are supposed to leave the edges of their fields for the industrious poor to reap, not give harvested grain to freeloaders. At least the signers on the street corners have the guts to ask, and put forth some effort to obtain their money. Do you really think that someone that can buy cigarettes and cable TV should get free money at the more wealthy citizens expense? Americans are not the same kind of poor that the scripture counts as poor…at least the vast majority of cases are not truly poor.
Be generous! Be frugal! Be industrious! Be scriptural! By all means be righteous! Do not be covetous! Do not countenance the poor man in his cause! Think! Obey YHWH!
YHWH will take vengeance on the unrighteous rich person…it is not our job to do so. Our job is to help truly poor people from our own pockets, not to help them with our neighbors wealth.
In the scripture, someone with an evil eye is one that is covetous or stingy. The poor as well as the rich can fit this category. If you think you are poor and think that it is good to let the government give you another persons money, you are covetous. If you are rich and harden your heart to the poor, you have an evil eye too. An evil eye makes the whole body full of darkness. If you are neither poor nor rich, and vote for taxes and laws that facilitate this sort of thing, you are guilty too.
Shalom
Even so, come, Lord Jesus.
Bo,
I would vote for you! Would you please run for President in 2012?
The sad truth, though, is that the “persons of the mighty” are the ones writing the laws and taking advantage of the loop-holes that they have built in for themselves. Let’s face it, the whole head is sick and it is all outlined in the words of the prophets.
Rebbecca — They are both forms of evil murder. If you look in the Hebrew ratsakh, and harag, both mean murder, and kill. Both murder and kill, can be righteous, or evil. So when the Holy Spirit killed the two in Acts, He also murdered them in a righteous way.
Bo — When you see this scr. does this look like the rich are giving more to the poor, than the poor are to the rich?
“For I mean not that other men be eased, and ye burdened: But by an equality, that now at this time your abundance may be a supply for their want, that their abundance also may be a supply for your want: that there may be equality: As it is written, He that had gathered much had nothing over; and he that had gathered little had no lack. 2 Cor. 8:13-15″
Matt — Certain abortion, and other people being killed because they don’t have insurance are both terrible. They are both wrong, and both shouldn’t be done, yet we can also consider this question.
Who is in more danger spiritually, aborted children, or adults that don’t know Messiah as well as they need to yet?
Matt — Taxes need to be given because of what Yeshua/Jesus the Messiah said, if it is required then He gave the reason why we need to do it.
We don’t do it for evil reasons.
Here is a definition of facism.
http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/facism
I think that the Republicans for doing what they did in Arizona fit that. It is not solely about illegal people, also people even in the past have been stopped just because of their face, and skin.
The Lord is not doubleminded, what He did in Messiah he showed physical violence, hurting other people physically is never correct, so it is not His will ever, but He has control of everything, and everyone, so He has a will that is a lesser will, that is not His perfect will. For example government, consider all the governments of the world, some are better than others, the Lord controls all to keep some order, the further they get away from the Lord, the lesser the will they are in.
The antichrist is very evil, but the Yah/Lord allows it, even giving satan the right to do his evil, satan can’t do it unless Eloheem/God lets satan. Eloheem/God is in control, but the antichrist is a lesser will of Eloheem/God, it is not the perfect will of Yah.
Rebecca — I am sorry for mispelling your name. Blessings to all in Messiah Yeshua/Jesus.
Travis Mansfield,
In context, we find that Paul was not “Commanding” this to be the case. He was allowing the Corinthians to give if they wanted to, not forcing them to help by taxation.
2 Corinthians 8
8 I speak not by commandment, but by occasion of the forwardness of others, and to prove the sincerity of your love.
9 For ye know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that, though he was rich, yet for your sakes he became poor, that ye through his poverty might be rich.
10 And herein I give my advice: for this is expedient for you, who have begun before, not only to do, but also to be forward a year ago.
11 Now therefore perform the doing of it; that as there was a readiness to will, so there may be a performance also out of that which ye have.
12 For if there be first a willing mind, it is accepted according to that a man hath, and not according to that he hath not.
13 For I mean not that other men be eased, and ye burdened:
14 But by an equality, that now at this time your abundance may be a supply for their want, that their abundance also may be a supply for your want: that there may be equality:
15 As it is written, He that had gathered much had nothing over; and he that had gathered little had no lack.
2 Corinthians 9
5 Therefore I thought it necessary to exhort the brethren, that they would go before unto you, and make up beforehand your bounty, whereof ye had notice before, that the same might be ready, as a matter of bounty, and not as of covetousness.
6 But this I say, He which soweth sparingly shall reap also sparingly; and he which soweth bountifully shall reap also bountifully.
7 Every man according as he purposeth in his heart, so let him give; not grudgingly, or of necessity: for God loveth a cheerful giver.
So you see this equality was according as “each man purposed in his heart,” not according to how we vote or the government forces people to “give.” YHWH loves cheerful givers, not covetous takers, or well meaning thieves.
A man with a few rental units told me a story that went something like this:
He was conversing with one of his renters and found out that this renter was going to vote for a mill levy increase on property tax. The landlord told him that it would end up costing this renter and not himself. The renter did not understand that when the landlords costs go up, the price of rent goes up to cover those costs. So the renter was, by voting for the landlords taxes to increase, actually voting for his own costs to go up also.
This is what happens in other aspects of taxation and regulation. The end results are that the increase in cost is passed down to the end consumer or the business moves out of country and jobs are lost. The poor end up paying in lost jobs or higher priced products.
Redistribution of wealth by the government only lasts as long as the time it takes for the costs to be passed down. The whole thing just continues in a never ending cycle.
But politicians get elected by promising that they will help the poor with the rich man’s money. And these politicians get high paying jobs with huge benefits and an outrageous retirement policy that makes social security look like crumbs for the dog to eat. So in actuality, we get back just a small portion of our investment in the social security system and we give them Cadillac health insurance and a huge pension from the money they have stolen from us.
Give a man a fish…feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish…feed him for a lifetime. I have no problem giving the poor a helping hand to help get them back on their feet, but if we do not do something to teach them how to walk in sound economic principles, we will only be making the poverty worse in the end. Many times poverty is self induced, not the product of calamity and unforseen problems.
There is a reason why payday loan type businesses are thriving. The poor (and many others that are on the path to poverty) have not learned, or will not practice, the principles of common sense and economic stability with the wealth they do have. These usury establishments exist because of covetousness. The people that run them are covetous and will be judged for taking advantage of the poor. The people that use these services are covetous, or they would not be willing to give up a large percentage of their wages just to have what they want…now. If they will not be faithful with unrighteous mammon…who will give them true riches?
A wise man once told me, “If you divide up all the wealth in the world equally, it would only take 5 years for it to be back in the previous owners hands.” We see this happen over and over with lottery winners and inheritance spenders. What is in a persons heart will come out. Covetous is manifested in many ways. One of which is spending more than we have at the time so that we can live above our means. Debt is a curse, according to the scripture. It is lust to want to live in houses, drive cars, etc. that we cannot pay cash for. Our whole economy is based on covetousness. Our whole lives are based on it. When we can get this log out of our eyes, maybe we can see clearly to help the less blessed (not to say fortunate).
I have painted this with too broad of strokes. My generalizations do not tell the whole story. There are many that do no fit these descriptions. Please forgive my overstatements and try to see the points I am trying to make.
Shalom
Bo,
Your statements are actually quite reasonable and they are points well taken.
Travis,
I would disagree that with the statement that God is in control. I believe He is in charge, not control. He gave us the freedom to choose right and wrong. Is God in control when genocide or ethnic cleansing occur? Of course He COULD be in control, but He has given us all as humans a choice to decide. And these choices have the power of life and death.
I definitely believe God intervenes at times. The scripture is also clear that He, in His mercy, is “restraining” things from fully falling apart before His appointed time, but I don’t know scripturally where it states He is in control. Does that make sense?
BTW, this statement has nothing to do with political opinion, just the subject of God being in control.
God knows all the shocking evil that goes on in the world, but I really can’t get 100% behind any system of government. I do appreciate the good things that America has done (all of which I can’t know, either), but I also know that there are people in all governments, including ours, who are also responsible for some horrible maneuverings, even if they are not known now and may not even be known until some future point — at which time historians will have the documents to analyze — but by then, there won’t be any way to prosecute. Just like we recently learned of government experiments on giving prisoners syphilis until well past the point that it can be remedied by law (and no, a presidential apology is not enough). Let’s not forget in our woo-haa approach to the Us vs. Them model of politics that the governments of this world are still a single, many-headed beast…?
Bo — You are correct it is a choice, to give, but also we are required to give, if we have things to give, and others are suffering. First and foremost we must give to brethren in Messiah, but also Messiah gives to the unjust too. We don’t have to choose to give, but if we have something that others need, and we don’t give it how do we have the love of God?
“Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer: and ye know that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him.
Hereby perceive we the love of God, because he laid down his life for us: and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren.
But whoso hath this world’s good, and seeth his brother have need, and shutteth up his bowels of compassion from him, how dwelleth the love of God in him? 1 John 3:15-17”
Certainly the scr.s in Matt. 25:34-46 explain.
“Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:
35For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in:
36Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me.
37Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink?
38When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee?
39Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee?
40And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.
41Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:
42For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink:
43I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.
44Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?
45Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me.
46And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal. Matt. 25:34-46
Bo — that last post explains the need to give according to love, so even though we don’t have to give, rather we must give because of the love required for us to give.
Dave – the teaching Rom. 9 of Mosheh/Moses, and Pharoah apply to everyone.
“For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.
So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.
For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.
Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.
Rom. 9:15-18”
Bo — It is important to remember the true church(congregation) is the example to the other people, and organizations in the world, they should be following our righteous way of doing things.
Who is in more danger spiritually, aborted children, or adults that don’t know Messiah as well as they need to yet?
Travis Mansfield,
No force should be used to make people be generous. You do not deserve your borther’s wealth. If you want more…go glean in the rich brothers field.
Shalom
Travis,
Yes, those teachings do apply to everyone, that God will have mercy on whom He chooses. But sovereignty is different than being in control. Sovereignty speaks to authority, not control. Do you really think God is directing every single thing on this earth? Maybe we are not thinking the same thing when you use the word “control”? I really think the only honest answer here is that we don’t know. God decided not to make clear all of these things…BECAUSE He is God and is Sovereign and He does as He pleases.
The first, and most basic example of this is Adam and Eve. According to your theory aren’t you saying that God then hardened Adam and Eve’s heart? Weren’t they tempted and decided to do what they wanted?
I am not speaking to you directly when saying this, but a lot of times people just cling to “God is in control” because it helps them make sense out things they don’t understand. Yes, He turns all things to good for those who believe. Of course He is omniscient and omnipotent. I’m not trying to debate God’s abilities, but rather how He interacts with man.
God responds to our prayer. He has given US control. The reason the world is spinning out of control is because of how we are using the control He has given us.
“No force should be used to make people be generous.”
Love is the only force powerful enough to truly change a heart to generosity.
“You do not deserve your brother’s wealth.” (And he may not deserve it, either!)
“If you want more…go glean in the rich brothers field.” (Gee, it kind of has a Biblical sound to it: “go and glean in your brother’s field!” Sort of like Ruth and Boaz, only brothers. One pictures a field of grain, swaying softly in the gentle breeze. Two men dressed in ancient Israelite clothes; one dressed in finely-woven garments, the other in the most basic, hand-loomed cloth, humbly and gratefully gleaning diligently whatever the reapers left.
Problem?
What is the modern equivalent? Finding your level? Finding a niche in whatever falls from the rich brother’s table? Well, economies do tend to work that way; this is because we still have a plutocracy. Government by and for the rich. Think about it. What is capitalism? It’s money-ism, it’s about who has the money having most of the power. We all know it at a very visceral level, that we live in a plutocracy, but as long as we get a slice of it, we pretend it’s a democracy. If it were a true democracy, it wouldn’t function as it does at present.
Now — it’s nothing new! So — you can apply ancient analogies of the poor brother gleaning in the rich brother’s field. Because it’s been that way since…? Considering that Sumer and Egypt had plutocracies, it would appear that it has been that way for a very, very long time. Only by series of revolts have the “common people” gained more and more humane treatment.
But were those revolts just? Wasn’t the American Revolution in that category, of just revolts? Certainly we’re taught that from an early age. The TEA Party is counting on you drawing that comparison. Are there times when bucking the status quo or governing authorities can be Biblically supported?
Dave — I am saying that just as Eloheem/God controled the hearts of Moses, and of Pharaoh, he does that with everyone, then Moses, and Pharaoh made the choices they made because He chose to have mercy on Moses, and to harden the heart of Pharaoh.
Here are some different things to consider when looking about making the choices that we are supposed to make, that is righteous choices. We walk by aman(faith, trust, belief) and not by sight. We can see the truth about my last paragraph, but we don’t walk by sight, we walk by faith, that means we must also consider the choice that Eloheem/God has given to us. Faith(trust, belief) in Messiah is what we are all commanded to have, this will cause us to chose righteous things in our lives.
Here is another way to see things. There are three roads to look down to see things. One The Holy Spirit does all the work, two we work with the Holy Spirit, three we do the work, all are true. Those three ways of seeing things appear to be a contradiction, but rather they are different ways to explain the truth. So I am talking about different ways to explain the truth. So certainly He answers prayer.
Travis – To answer your question, an adult who is unsaved and dies due an illness not being treated because they do not have insurance is at more spiritual risk than a child aborted. But both Republicans and Democrats want healthcare reform, Democrats however want Universal Healthcare that breeds communism while Republicans want to lower the cost of healthcare while giving people the choice to opt-out. Which one sound more like God, the one that gives choice or the one that involves not choice and no options. Again Republicans are not against helping everyone get healthcare, but Democrats, for the most part, are against saving the lives on millions of innocent children murdered through abortion.
A Harvard Medical Study Links Lack of Insurance to 45,000 U.S. Deaths a Year, however there are an average of 1,370,000 abortions per year in the U.S. So 45 thousand per year for lack of insurace, but 1.37 million per year for abortions. That is over 30 times more people die from abortions each year in the U.S. than die from not having insurance.
Plus, Universal healthcare as President Obama has supported and many Democrats want does not really help. Why? Because the focus is on cheaper prices instead of quality of healthcare. Canada and other nations around the world have universal healthcare and it did make things cheaper, but not better.
For example, a typical Canadian seeking surgical or other therapeutic treatment had to wait 18.3 weeks in 2007 — an all-time high. Approximately 875,000 Canadians are currently on waiting lists for medical treatment.
It’s no better across the Atlantic. The average wait time for bypass surgery in New York is 17 days — compared to 72 days in the Netherlands and 59 days in Sweden.
Patients with serious illnesses such as cancer face much worse odds of survival in government-run health care systems. In the United Kingdom, the five-year survival rate for patients diagnosed with breast cancer early on is 78 percent — compared to 98 percent for similar patients in the U.S.
If consumers don’t pay for these services directly, they will pay indirectly through higher taxes. As the perceived price decreases, demand will increase. In other words, when people believe that they won’t have to pay for their healthcare, they will use more health services.
As demand increases to exceed the available supply of health services, the government will have to take action. The government will have to limit the amount of services to keep the cost of the healthcare system from exploding. There are several ways to do this. First, they might impose rationing and limit the availability of services. A second option would be increase the amount that patients pay for their healthcare. This could be similar to the health insurance premiums and co-payments that many health insurance policies contain now. A third option would be for the government to do nothing and simply allow shortages to build in the system.
So then the question goes back to you, what about the people dying because of the poor medical services and waiting on waiting lists for excessive amounts of time like the other countries.
Do you see my point, healthcare and economic positions are debatable as to what is really going to work, but abortion and gay marriage are not debatable. We should make our decisions based on the things that are clear, not on issues that are debatable.
As far as Taxes, I have said it many times, I have no problem paying taxes, but I do have a problem when my tax dollars are abused. For example using my tax dollars to fund the murdering of innocent babies.
On another note, God allowing something to happen is not the same as His will. Will means goal and desire, so to say lesser will means His lesser goal and desire. It is not God’s desire ever for people to go to hell, but we know He allows it because of our free will. People choose hell and He lets them choose it not because it is His will, but because it was the persons will. He however, can use what we choose to work together for His ultimate will. So in other words, God only has one will (not an ultimate will and a lesser will), but He chooses to work out His will based on our choices and will rather than dictating.
So my main point is this – I agree we need to take care of the poor and reform healthcare etc (both Republicans and Democrats agree with this), but those issues are debatable about who has the best ideas and plan to do it. Things like abortion, gay marriage, and Israel are not debatable and therefore should hold the weight of where our vote goes.