Libertarianism and

[apothanein kerdos]

I would go back through all the other points AK but will not bother as it would be futile. I also am content that regardless of how you continue to make out like those who challenge your great intellect are all wrong in their interpretation, and lack understanding, that others will see through your rhetoric and see the truth that the verses you provided do not show that the government is responsible to help the poor.

That being said, I do want to respond to your comments on tithing. Tithing was set up in the Old Testament, as were all the scriptures you used to show the government is supposedly responsible to help the poor. The strongest book concerning tithes is Malachi, the final book of the Old Testament. Even the least educated people in the church know a tithe is not an arbatrary number, it means a tenth. Yes, the widow cast in all her living, but was not required to. Tithes were required. Jesus said the Pharisees paid tithes and also said it was something they should do, but not leaving the weightier matters undone.

Also, you are right, that I had my mind made up on this matter coming in, but so did you. You are interpreting scripture to try to prove your side, just as I am interpreting scripture to prove my side. When you fail to convince someone you are right, you revert to personal attacks and attempt to make yourself out right in everyone's eyes by telling everyone how educated you are. The most educated people in Israel at the time of the crucifiction denied Jesus was the Christ, so book knowledge alone doesn't make one spiritually smart. The Apostle Paul, then known as Saul, didn't recognize the Christ until Jesus made himself known to him on the road to Damascus. Saul was very intelligent and highly educated at the feet of Gamileo, yet lacked spiritual discernment.

All that being said, I have no hard feelings concerning this debate over ideas. In many areas I agree with your positions. It just happens that this is one area where I do not. I

have no doubt you are a brother in the Lord. I just wish you would learn to quit getting personal in your attacks when you get frustrated. It doesn't help your arguments. I have been guilty of the same thing in the past, but am trying to exhibit more patience.

It's equally insulting to a person when you lie and misrepresent what a person says when you're in a debate. Don't point the finger at me...by misrepresenting and outright lying (saying I agreed with you on your interpretation of scripture) is JUST as much of an insult.

No, what you did was state that many of those verse you were using could be used in reference to an individual but then tried to make them out as having a greater meaning. In that admission that they could apply to an individual, you inadvertantly agreed with me. You may deny that was agreement, but that is in the eye of the beholder. Besides, to have agreed with me would only have shown you had a greater degree of intelligence since I am obviously right.

It isn't about intelligence mate...it's about the issue.

Regardless, look over what I stated again. No where in there do you see me agreeing with your interpretations. What I am saying is that it can be used as a reference to the individual AND the government. This would be like me debating a Jehovah Witness and saying, "Jesus performed miracles AND was/is God." If they came back and said, "Aha, you agree with me" it would be equally laughable.

Don't know why you're bringing people's intelligence itno this, but oh well. Whatever floats your boat. Think you could actually stick to the issue in th enext post?

[apothanein kerdos]

My point is you are trying to prove a point. If this were a court case, and the evidence you presented by your own admission could mean something that proves your point, but on the other hand may mean something that doesn't prove your point, your side would lose. You have not proven your case. By saying it can mean one thing and yet may mean something else, you have discredited your argument. This doesn't prove you wrong, but neither does it prove you right.

You're missing the interpretation. Here's the thing:

You haven't taken one sentence to even try to go against my interpretations. Until you do, everything you're saying is hyperbole. That is insulting. You are claiming something without providing evidence or going back and refering to what you're talking about. The reason? You can't. You're relying on rhedoric and not actually debating the issue. This is a tactic of someone who has lost a court case.

Also it has been shown that you were wrong in things you said earlier. You claimed the law was intended only for use with judges and prophets, not kings, and I gave scripture that proved there was provision in the law of Moses for use with a king. Israel and Judah got in trouble when they failed to follow it. King Josiah caused judgement to be delayed against Judah when he compelled the nation to follow God's laws again after a period of idolatry.

It still doesn't apply to the overall message. It's like disproving a side note but missing the entire message. Solomon was talking abotu rulers of ALL NATIONS when he made his declarations. Thus he is not refering to just Mosaic law, but a law that stands for all governments.

[Marnie]

While I think some of the posts here have been a little over the top, since I started this mess, let me clarify and conclusively state my position. I believe that freedom is the second most precious gift given to man by G-d. Salvation through Christ being the first.

My core theological position: The omniscient, omnipotent, triune God exists. Only the Old and New Testaments contain the Word of God, which is inerrant and infallible. Jesus is the Son of God, born of the virgin Mary. Justification is by faith in Christ alone, and salvation is by the grace of God alone. Prayer is to be addressed to God alone, and to no other. I deny that "all spiritual roads lead to the same destination," because different religious beliefs are "different roads" leading to very different destinations.

Purpose of Government According to Marnie: The legitimate object of civil government is the protection of individual rights imputed to us from God, regardless of sex, ethnicity, race, religious belief, or economic status, against foreign and domestic aggression.

On Theocracy: The great commission addressed to Christians is not to exercise dominion over humanity by government force, but rather to minister, teach, and baptize by peaceful persuasion.

Other things I hold to be true: The individual person has eternal and not merely temporal value, being created in the image of God. God allows evil to exist in the world so that humanity's freedom of individual action is rendered meaningful. Genuine freedom consists in replacing constraints imposed from "without" or "above" with inner self-government of restraint and discipline. Responsible self-interest is Biblically legitimate. Since we have intrinsic value due to being made in the image of God, we should and must be concerned with and responsible for our own welfare. Salvation is by grace, not by legislation nor politics. God is the author of human association; association is necessary due to the natural inequality and differences of gifts among people.

What I believe concerning Social Order: Natural social authority flows primarily from the family, the church, and voluntary institutions. This natural social authority is not to be confused with coercive, artificial governmental authority imposed from without.

Mediating institutions such as religious bodies, private charitable organizations, voluntary cooperatives, social and fraternal groups and other associations of free and responsible individuals constitue a special sphere of socio-political and cultural life, and ultimately are the only legitimate actors through which benevolence or charity should be exercised on a collective basis -- an associational basis of individual choice and consent.

Presumptively, the principle of subsidiarity should be followed. Legitimate government functions should be exercised only at the most local, feasible level. As a general rule, different levels of government should function within different spheres -- and apart from distinct private spheres of action. The principle of subsidiarity acts as a brake upon the natural development of all civil governments to expand their powers. Where and when mistakes of civil government occur, the principle of subsidiarity limits the extent of damage to individual rights and to the spheres of private civic life. A virtue of limited government is that the ill effects of its actions are limited, as well.

What I believe concerning Private Property: We are both spiritual and corporeal beings. Private property is the necessary extension of the body of the human being into the world of things and nature, and which also becomes an instrument of spirituality. Private property is the intimate link between the individual person and the surrounding world. Private property confirms a human being as a free personality, satisfying the rights of independent action and self-responsibility. It invokes spiritual reasons for hard work, liberates creative initiative and enterprise, and provides self-confidence and confidence in others. It teaches people to distinguish between "mine" from "yours" and thereby to respect the rights of others. Both the Parable of the Vineyard and the Parable of the Talents, as well as the command, "Thou shalt not steal," affirm these positions.

Marnie's views on social compassion: Compassion, properly understood, is genuinely voluntary and is not borne of government force, duress, taxation, or mandate. Jesus never advocated the use of coercive government power to accomplish His objectives; the Good Samaritan did not act under threat of government mandate or exercise of police power; Jesus did not command his disciples to use force, private or governmental, to take the assets of the rich young ruler in order to satisfy some scheme of redistributionist "social justice."

Education: The education of children is a responsibility of parents and family, not civil government. Nowhere in the Bible is civil government deemed to be the caregiver or educator of children. Government domination of education -- by operation of schools, by imposition of property taxes, by compulsory attendance laws -- deprives parents of the responsibility for raising their children, in effect turning children into government assets. The primary purpose of education is to teach individuals to be responsible and free before God; a tax-funded, government-controlled, religiously-neutral or hostile system cannot achieve that goal. Furthermore, tax-supported education allows parents to transfer their financial responsibility of education to childless families and individuals. Using force, or threat of force, to coerce others into bearing one's own responsibilities is not a legitimate Christian activity.

Above all else, I believe in the individual; the power of the individual to do great things, both good and evil. I believe Jesus Christ died for the individual, not for a group of people, but for the individual. I further believe that even if just one, single, solitary soul repented and believed, Jesus would have still gone to the cross. I further believe that because G-d values the individual so much, the needs of the many do not outweigh the needs of the individual. I believe that liberalism and collectivism are evil perversions of the Truth that rob the individual of his G-d given freedoms. It forces individuals to be caring and compassionate instead of allowing them to perform those acts out of their own wills. It assumes man cannot be trusted to help his fellow man and makes the work of the Church harder to perform.

Alright, hit me.

"Being a lover of freedom, when the [Nazi] revolution came, I looked to the universities to defend it, knowing that they had always boasted of their devotion to the cause of truth; but no, the universities were immediately silenced. Then I looked to the great editors of the newspapers, whose flaming editorials in days gone had proclaimed their love of freedom; but they, like the universities, were silenced in a few short weeks...

"Only the Church stood squarely across the path of Hitler's campaign for suppressing the truth. I never had any special interest in the Church before, but now I feel a great affection and admiration for it because the Church alone has had the courage and persistence to stand for intellectual and moral freedom. I am forced to confess that what I once despised I now praise unreservedly." -- Albert Einstein

"If you crush out individuality by the strong arm of the State, then ultimately the state will be all, and the individual and the family will be nothing, and liberty will be destroyed." -- Gresham Machen (1934)

"Now look at Jesus. He never talked about love of souls, and never judged people as a class. He always took the man, the woman, or the child as a person. Jesus respected that sacred thing, Individuality." --Josephine Butler (1869)

" . . . freedom is dependent ultimately upon what is in the hearts of the people. Freedom is not safe if it is written only with ink in the Constitution. It must be written also in the fleshy tables of the heart." -- Gresham Machen (1934)

Edited February 15, 2006 by Marnie

[Sonwalkr]

Thank you Marn for that very good post. Preach on..use words when necessary .

J