"The Myth of a Christian Nation" vs. "For God and Country"

[TG123]

And where does this fit into "God gives us choice"? Sounds more right than middle of the road to me.

Sorry, I don't follow. What do you mean by 'God gives us choice'?

Then of course I agree with the tax cuts but the rest of it is pretty much situational. (Tired of hearing the word "secular" used so often by Christians Secular usually denotes Christians who decide where and how God wants them to work or not, instead of doing it the other way around IMHO)

By secular I mean hiding one's faith and adhering to societal customs and/or standards that Christians should not follow. It means basically being a Christian only one hour a week, in church.

No one “stole” anything.

Please tell me you are kidding. Native Americans who lived on this continent were tricked or forced into giving up their land so it could be settled by Europeans. They were put into reservations, kept in poverty and hunger. Alcohol was introduced and their traditions were forcefully destroyed. Those who resisted were killed.

They fought to develop a civilized country

A 'civilized country'- built over the ashes of the homes of the people they displaced. They 'fought'- murdered, enslaved, impoverished thousands of people to take their land and occupy it. It was an evil and satanic conquest.

Jesus had drastically different ideas about how we should treat other people- with love.

and the recent political groupies are doing their best to debunk that all in the name of capitalism.

I'm not a capitalist, sorry.

If Illegals really wanted/needed to do the right thing they would overthrow their own governments and become civilized too. Quit making excuses for criminals that are bogus and call it "Of God". God said to follow the law, unless it is unjust. There is nothing unjust about following a set of rules that are mandated by God himself.

I was speaking about Native peoples, not illegal immigrants. Since we are on that topic though, as Christians we are called to take in and feed and shelter people who are in need- and these people coming across the border are in need. In Canada we have many immigrants as well.
You suggest that they 'overthrow their own governments'- do you realize that a lot of these governments are US allies and receive political and at times military aid from your leaders? And are you advocating violent revolution?

Cristo Vive!
- Tomasz

 

[ImmortalTechnique]

Thankfully, this country, even if it was founded largely by Christians, wasn't founded by good Christians.

you cannot have a revolt form a Christian nation. A Christian must obey ALL ordinances of man, for there is no power but of God, and the powers that be are ordained of God.

There is no Christian basis for revolution or civil disobedience. Without them, you don't have America.

 

[Flynmonkie]

Sorry, I don't follow. What do you mean by 'God gives us choice'?

My point exactly... think it over.

By secular I mean hiding one's faith and adhering to societal customs and/or standards that Christians should not follow. It means basically being a Christian only one hour a week, in church.

My point exactly, "secular" means:layman: someone who is not a clergyman or a professional person
laic: concerning those not members of the clergy; "set his collar in laic rather than clerical position"; "the lay ministry"; "the choir sings both sacred and secular music" wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

Or another good definition:
Something that is not religious.
Now read your answer, your earlier premise, and think that one over too.

Please tell me you are kidding. Native Americans who lived on this continent were tricked or forced into giving up their land so it could be settled by Europeans. They were put into reservations, kept in poverty and hunger. Alcohol was introduced and their traditions were forcefully destroyed. Those who resisted were killed.

First of all, Native Americans are and have been compensated as best as possible for the mistreatment. However, read your history books, the Native Americans ALSO acquired their "land" by the same fashion. Again, think that one over.
(Which I am, my family history is in the National Archives. I am Cherokee, Choctaw and Blackfoot. Mainly out of the Carolinas. You don't have to tell me about the genetic disposition to alcoholism and the Native Americans CHOICE to drink to obsession, most of our family fortune was lost in this manner.)

A 'civilized country'- built over the ashes of the homes of the people they displaced. They 'fought'- murdered, enslaved, impoverished thousands of people to take their land and occupy it. It was an evil and satanic conquest.

See above answer about Native Americans process of aquiring their land. This has nothing to do with Americans, everything to do with illegals.

Jesus had drastically different ideas about how we should treat other people- with love.

Love allows consequence to be suffered to learn. Sometimes mercy is given through Grace, however, sometimes; a good swift kick in the hoo-hoo is needed. If you have children, or know children, or even as a child... what did it take for your parents to do for you to "get" the difference between a right and wrong action? Consequence. (we are speaking of just consequence nothing abusive here.)

I'm not a capitalist, sorry.

I did not claim you were.

I was speaking about Native peoples, not illegal immigrants. Since we are on that topic though, as Christians we are called to take in and feed and shelter people who are in need- and these people coming across the border are in need. In Canada we have many immigrants as well.

You have lost your mind. Tell you what, why don't you figure out how to feed an estimated 20MM people that have been born and bred in a lifestyle of crime and corruption? People that have obviously NO desire to be a part of what we stand for in a societal sense. No concept of the rule of law. You will soon find your country with a permanent social underclass of people and looking for spades to dig yourself out of the quagmire it creates. Actually, if they continue to allow the NAFTA superhighway.... they are coming your way... brace yourself. Then talk to me about what God wants.

You suggest that they 'overthrow their own governments'- do you realize that a lot of these governments are US allies and receive political and at times military aid from your leaders? And are you advocating violent revolution?

Absolutely. I figure with the estimated population in Mexico alone, along with the 20MM estimated here.. They would have no problem cleaning up the mess and straightening up and prove they want to be a part of the US. I have no problem with immigration; I have a problem with illegal immigration. Illegals leave those who wish to immigrate here and do it the right way (which is riddled with bureaucracy and red tape) pushed to the back of the line. It takes 7-23 years to do this the right way. Amnesty sends out a strong message about our Nation, no one seems to care about the political ground lost.

We are to help the needy, but we cannot help the needy if we become needy because of poor decision making.

 

[Parmenio]

A 'civilized country'- built over the ashes of the homes of the people they displaced. They 'fought'- murdered, enslaved, impoverished thousands of people to take their land and occupy it. It was an evil and satanic conquest.

Jesus had drastically different ideas about how we should treat other people- with love.

Just another quote here.

20 "See, I am sending an angel ahead of you to guard you along the way and to bring you to the place I have prepared. 21 Pay attention to him and listen to what he says. Do not rebel against him; he will not forgive your rebellion, since my Name is in him. 22 If you listen carefully to what he says and do all that I say, I will be an enemy to your enemies and will oppose those who oppose you. 23 My angel will go ahead of you and bring you into the land of the Amorites, Hittites, Perizzites, Canaanites, Hivites and Jebusites, and I will wipe them out. 24 Do not bow down before their gods or worship them or follow their practices. You must demolish them and break their sacred stones to pieces. 25 Worship the LORD your God, and his blessing will be on your food and water. I will take away sickness from among you, 26 and none will miscarry or be barren in your land. I will give you a full life span. 27 "I will send my terror ahead of you and throw into confusion every nation you encounter. I will make all your enemies turn their backs and run. 28 I will send the hornet ahead of you to drive the Hivites, Canaanites and Hittites out of your way. 29 But I will not drive them out in a single year, because the land would become desolate and the wild animals too numerous for you. 30 Little by little I will drive them out before you, until you have increased enough to take possession of the land.
31 "I will establish your borders from the Red Sea [a] to the Sea of the Philistines, [b] and from the desert to the River. [c] I will hand over to you the people who live in the land and you will drive them out before you. 32 Do not make a covenant with them or with their gods. 33 Do not let them live in your land, or they will cause you to sin against me, because the worship of their gods will certainly be a snare to you."

-Exodus 23:20-33

Just sayin'

 

[TG123]

Just another quote here.



-Exodus 23:20-33

Just sayin'

The Old Testament rules on warfare were acceptable for the Hebrews because then they were not exposed to the complete Word of God, Jesus Christ. Jesus revealed the Full Message; the Son of God came down to live among us and we are to follow Him.

Christ has made it explicitly clear that enemies are to be treated with love, and that turning the other cheek and not violence is the order of the day. Neither He or His apostles killed anyone, even in self-defence. Christians did not use violence against others until the heretical 'just war' theory took over the church in the 4th century along with other ideas that transformed it into a political power instead of a witness to the glory of God.

What white colonists did across the Americas were acts of mass murder, conquest, and theft of land. Even worse, they claimed to be Christians.

 

[TG123]

My point exactly... think it over.

Enlighten me please, I really don't know what you are trying to get at here.

My point exactly, "secular" means:layman: someone who is not a clergyman or a professional person
laic: concerning those not members of the clergy; "set his collar in laic rather than clerical position"; "the lay ministry"; "the choir sings both sacred and secular music" wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

Or another good definition:
Something that is not religious.
Now read your answer, your earlier premise, and think that one over too.

I said that Christians need to follow Jesus and reject political ideas that conflict with what He taught. I said that our 'founding fathers' were not following Jesus and that neither the political right or left do either.

First of all, Native Americans are and have been compensated as best as possible for the mistreatment. However, read your history books, the Native Americans ALSO acquired their "land" by the same fashion. Again, think that one over.

If they have been compensated 'as best as possible' why is there so much poverty on the reserves?
True, Native Americans also used violence against others, but they did not do it in the name of Christ or say they were building a 'Christian nation'. Do you believe that injustices committed by some Native American tribes (and not all were imperialists like the Europeans who came to North America) justified the injustices by the Europeans?

(Which I am, my family history is in the National Archives. I am Cherokee, Choctaw and Blackfoot. Mainly out of the Carolinas. You don't have to tell me about the genetic disposition to alcoholism and the Native Americans CHOICE to drink to obsession, most of our family fortune was lost in this manner.)

I am very sorry to hear that alcohol played a destructive role in the life of your family. I don't believe that Native Americans or Native Canadians are 'genetically disposed' to drink, I know First Nations people in my city who do not drink. I believe that a lot of that was caused by the European conquests, since as they displaced people from their land and put them on 'reserves' at the same time they also made alcohol available. Many people, not only Native people, can be driven to alcohol when feeling desperate and hopeless. I'm Polish btw and I know that alcoholism is a problem among many of my people as well, but I wouldn't say that 'genetics' has anything to do with it.

See above answer about Native Americans process of aquiring their land. This has nothing to do with Americans, everything to do with illegals.

My original point was that the US (and Canada) were not founded on Christian values. I also believe that Christianity conflicts with many of the ideas and values and actions of the 'left' and the 'right'. I don't see where illegal immigration fits in here, but I have nothing against going off on tangents so why not.

Love allows consequence to be suffered to learn. Sometimes mercy is given through Grace, however, sometimes; a good swift kick in the hoo-hoo is needed.
If you have children, or know children, or even as a child... what did it take for your parents to do for you to "get" the difference between a right and wrong action? Consequence. (we are speaking of just consequence nothing abusive here.)

You make some very interesting points here. I agree with you children do need consequences, I'm actually a student teacher and have worked with kids in jr. high and high school and yes, you need to be firm. I don't have kids of my own but of course you need to set parameters and consequences.
Now, you also mention you don't approve of abuse. I completely agree with you.
If your child was starving b/c of a mistake s/he made would you watch them starve? Would you throw them out of the house onto the street where you knew they could get raped, beaten, shot, die of AIDS, turn to drugs or gangs to get by? When we deport people to impoverished countries they fled from, that is often what we are sending them back to.

Jesus did not tell Christians to give anyone a 'swift kick in the hoo-hoo', or not even judge or condemn them. We are pretty lucky He didn't give us a good swift kick, choosing to die on the cross for us instead of saying 'OK, smartasses. Try to to figure out this whole salvation thing on your own.'

You have lost your mind. Tell you what, why don't you figure out how to feed an estimated 20MM people that have been born and bred in a lifestyle of crime and corruption? People that have obviously NO desire to be a part of what we stand for in a societal sense. No concept of the rule of law.

Why were they born and bred in this crime and corruption? What kind of system allows for people to be born and live in such conditions?

You will soon find your country with a permanent social underclass of people and looking for spades to dig yourself out of the quagmire it creates. Actually, if they continue to allow the NAFTA superhighway.... they are coming your way... brace yourself. Then talk to me about what God wants.

He will continue to demand that we use our resourced to help the poor. We may suffer economically as a result, so be it. It is our living faith in Christ (and one aspect of it is feeding, clothing and sheltering the poor), not our prosperity, that we will be judged on.

Absolutely. I figure with the estimated population in Mexico alone, along with the 20MM estimated here.. They would have no problem cleaning up the mess and straightening up and prove they want to be a part of the US. I have no problem with immigration; I have a problem with illegal immigration. Illegals leave those who wish to immigrate here and do it the right way (which is riddled with bureaucracy and red tape) pushed to the back of the line. It takes 7-23 years to do this the right way. Amnesty sends out a strong message about our Nation, no one seems to care about the political ground lost.

Before we begin crying for 'po America' as its flooded with people looking for a better way of life, don't forget that a lot of them are fleeing from poverty and corruption that exist in their countries because of US policies.

Did you know that in El Salvador many people die because the water they drink is contaminated with chemicals spilled by Canadian mining companies? Or that the Colombian army and allied paramilitary death squads receive millions of dollars of American military aid?

So much misery in the countries these people flee is caused by the actions of our political and business leaders. Want to stop illegal immigration? Pressure your government to stop contributing to creating the hell of poverty and social injustice in so many of the countries these 'illegals' come from.

We are to help the needy, but we cannot help the needy if we become needy because of poor decision making.

If our comfort needs to be sacrificed in order that we follow Jesus' words, then so be it.

Cristo Vive!
- Tomasz

 

[Flynmonkie]

You need to educate yourself before you discuss this topic.....

Native Americans Genetic Predisposition
Here is one study for starters:
ALCOHOL DEHYDROGENASE POLYMORPHISMS IN NATIVE
AMERICANS: IDENTIFICATION OF THE ADH2*3 ALLELE
http://alcalc.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/reprint/32/2/129.pdf

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=9210750&dopt=AbstractPlus

http://www.indiana.edu/~rcapub/v17n3/p18.html

http://www.nature.com/npp/journal/v18/n4/full/1395141a.html

Native Americans are affected much like the rest of America at this point. They HAVE a choice in the matter. They choose to live in this lifestyle. No one is forcing them to do so. What happened at say Wounded Knee, and other injustices in that era, have been acknowledged. There is not much that can be done to change the past, but by changing the future. The Native Americans are no different than any other Americans at this point. It is a mute subject in a call to protect our Constitution.

Unless someone else can answer any more of your post, my response will not come until later, I am rather busy this afternoon.

 

[gengwall]

The fundimental question in this historical subdiscussion right now is this: recognizing that injustice has happened, what do you say about the corresponding fact that much of it happened "in Jesus name"? Flynmonkie?

It matters not to me if Native Americans are predisposed to drinking or not, made their bed and now lie in it or not, were just as cruel as some government authorities or not. What matters to me in this thread is how should Christians respond? Do we sit and argue about causes, or do we deal with the real world effects? How do we deal with those effect?

Manifest destiny is an idea which proclaims Christian blessing and even genesis. What would Jesus think about manifest destiny? How would Jesus approach the problems of illegal immigration, reservations, slavery, etc.? Would Jesus try to use the government to accomplish His objectives in these areas, or might he try a radical new approach? I think Jesus teaching makes that last question rhetorical, but lets hear what you all have to say. Most importantly, are we Jesus' body or not, do we follow his teaching or not, are we His hands and feet or not? Are we mearly subjects of an earthly government, bound not only to its laws but also its philosophy? Or are we in fact bound to a higher "law" and teaching, and how does that manifest itself in our interactions with our fellow humans?

 

[Flynmonkie]

The fundimental question in this historical subdiscussion right now is this: recognizing that injustice has happened, what do you say about the corresponding fact that much of it happened "in Jesus name"? Flynmonkie?

It matters not to me if Native Americans are predisposed to drinking or not, made their bed and now lie in it or not, were just as cruel as some government authorities or not. What matters to me in this thread is how should Christians respond? Do we sit and argue about causes, or do we deal with the real world effects? How do we deal with those effect?

Manifest destiny is an idea which proclaims Christian blessing and even genesis. What would Jesus think about manifest destiny? How would Jesus approach the problems of illegal immigration, reservations, slavery, etc.? Would Jesus try to use the government to accomplish His objectives in these areas, or might he try a radical new approach? I think Jesus teaching makes that last question rhetorical, but lets hear what you all have to say. Most importantly, are we Jesus' body or not, do we follow his teaching or not, are we His hands and feet or not? Are we mearly subjects of an earthly government, bound not only to its laws but also its philosophy? Or are we in fact bound to a higher "law" and teaching, and how does that manifest itself in our interactions with our fellow humans?

I think generally we have been given good minds and two hands to act in such a manner that would represent the best of utilizing those abilities. We were given anger, even hatred to motivate us when things are wrong. Yes, normal healthy responses as Christians too. I came from a place where I had only seen what I believe was the "loving side" of Christ. I did not think that “we” as Christians should be a part of “government”. I did not believe or understand when it was time to utilize these God given emotions and capabilities. I no longer feel this way. But I do not agree with forcing religious belief down others throats. If God created us, all of us, in His image, he also gave us the ability to act in such a manner to promote justice. In the promotion of justice, we see that God gave us choice -- good or bad, right or wrong, circumstance and consequence, even the choice to "come" to Him. (That is if you’re not still stuck in the "elect" or "non-elect" argument) People have a right not to choose God. Of course I don't agree with that choice, but we are taught to "get along if be it all possible" there is a reason for this. Witness is not shoving God down others throats, witness is how we apply Christ like principals in your life, both for ourselves (first and foremost) and then this should “show” to others. Not self directing others lives to get them to do what we want.

For instance, in the abortion argument, I personally am for pro choice. Do I like this? No. But I see the big picture. I see a Christian society that shuns unwed mothers, at the same time I don’t see Christian led systems in place to help deal economically with these issues, yet I see the same Christians advocating No choice. What I see stemming from that is a whole lot of back alley abortions that deals with 2 souls, not just one. I know I can help one, the other is in Gods hands. You cannot shun and chastise at the same time as claiming to love a person in this manner. People should WANT to make the right decisions based on your actions, if they do not; this is an individual thing they must suffer. Who stands up for the Baby? God. Who are we most concerned about? The mother. But instead Christians run around screaming murder and worthless at the same time. These women cannot win for loosing. Until I see that there are ample resources and psychological attitude change within the “Church” in these situations, I would rather leave it in the hands of a collective society. (IOW – if you’re going to talk the talk, walk the walk) Personally, I think one of the problems with today’s society is how boys (and girls) are being raised to be “manly men” and don’t know how to maintain “womens work” and they hit reality out there and have NO idea what to do with it. But that is another thread in and of itself.

Right now, our government is what we have to work with in finding that balance. It is of my opinion that we should not mandate laws because we think "God said so" or because of Religious oppression. We should mandate laws that are logical and offer a balance to humanity. We should look at every possible option and how this will affect a witness or sometimes simply what is obvious. I believe that with correct discernment of scripture this works very nicely. I think the government is how God keeps overzealous and immature Christians in check as well as those who don’t choose to be moral.

BUT, we first have to take care of our home (The US). This is a new millennium, people have choices, we can donate and offer assistance to other countries that are not working to, or are behind in setting up their social structures such as we have in the US, but we quite simply cannot take on the whole of the world at this time. It is impossibility with so many differing opinions. So we see to find that resolved by law. In fact, one of our academic honors students researched the resources we have available in correlation to our population and growth; she found we are truly using our resources more than we will have the ability to handle in the future. This is no a load of bunk. This is scientific evidence. Do I believe God will always provide? Of course, but also I know we have been taught to be stewards of this earth. What happens when we don't take care of the things God gave us? They are taken away.

So in light of these ideas of choice in how we act or how we do not act, what we are responsible for or what we are not responsible for rests in the realization that each one of us were given choices, and still are. Part of those choices is to protect from harm, and work towards agreement. This cannot be accomplished by screaming Love, love, love... unfortunately; this is not part of our human nature. Our nature is to survive, to protect ourselves and what we have. For the most part, yes, we can do it, but not when we have so many that are individualists (in fact the US is HIGHLY individualist. Not to say that collectivism has all the answers, but I believe we will find that balance in between.) We are simply going to continue to have to sort out our difference in this venue, yet we know as Christians – God works through this. (Bringing all things together for the good)

Christ would throw tables around if he found us breaking the "law". Christ would throw tables around if we were using his name to force laws that would stifle his general message that God LOVES every one and wants them to come to Him. That God sees each of us individually, and understands we will come to him in many states. Yet that is NOT the message most are trying to convey through our government. This is why Religious belief should be separate from Government. God does not need us to enforce morality at a spiritual level.

 

[Flynmonkie]

Enlighten me please, I really don't know what you are trying to get at here.

I responded about choice, generally and specifically to abortion in the earlier post to gengwall.

I said that Christians need to follow Jesus and reject political ideas that conflict with what He taught. I said that our 'founding fathers' were not following Jesus and that neither the political right or left do either.

That is not always so cut and dry. It will leave you quite frustrated if you don’t have a correct discernment of what that is

If they have been compensated 'as best as possible' why is there so much poverty on the reserves?
True, Native Americans also used violence against others, but they did not do it in the name of Christ or say they were building a 'Christian nation'. Do you believe that injustices committed by some Native American tribes (and not all were imperialists like the Europeans who came to North America) justified the injustices by the Europeans?

Why was I born a rape baby, given an evil stepfather then thrown out on the streets at 14, abused and beaten, marry a control freak that has harassed me for 20 years, and struggle out of poverty through work and training, to land unemployed with a disabled child? This happened about the same way you explain the plight of the native Americans, partly because life happens, partly because of poor choice; both educated and uneducated; and partly because it is history, and I cannot move forward with my life while dwelling on something that is not re-occurring. We learn, and move on, or we do not. This topic deserves a thread in and of itself. The suggestion of Native Americans has nothing to do with Illegals. Native Americans are not the only Americans that are privy to poverty, mistreatment and just plain poor choice. Your comment was that the US took land from the Indians, however, you neglected to recognize that this is the exact means in which the Indians acquired their land, by overtaking other tribes.

BTW you did mention how we should “open our doors” and “Feed the world” and my response was about illegals, not immigrants.

My original point was that the US (and Canada) were not founded on Christian values. I also believe that Christianity conflicts with many of the ideas and values and actions of the 'left' and the 'right'. I don't see where illegal immigration fits in here, but I have nothing against going off on tangents so why not.

On this we agree. Again, it was not a tangent, my response again was to your assertion that we should should “open our doors” and “Feed the world”. (BTW my children are Cuban; their father was born in Cuba. I do know a bit about the nightmare of immigrating legally. Mainly through the DR.)

You make some very interesting points here. I agree with you children do need consequences, I'm actually a student teacher and have worked with kids in jr. high and high school and yes, you need to be firm. I don't have kids of my own but of course you need to set parameters and consequences.
Now, you also mention you don't approve of abuse. I completely agree with you.
If your child was starving b/c of a mistake s/he made would you watch them starve? Would you throw them out of the house onto the street where you knew they could get raped, beaten, shot, die of AIDS, turn to drugs or gangs to get by? When we deport people to impoverished countries they fled from, that is often what we are sending them back to.

Again, why should we help those who break our laws, when there are those that have spent years in the system doing it the right way? Also, we are not talking of political asylum here, which is another topic. No, not all illegals fit into the category of criminal, but neither do the slaves in other countries. The problem is that we must set a systematic way of doing this, not allowing others to push to the front of the line. Unfortunately, we have to make distinctions. Then hold on to our faith that we are making the best choices with the circumstance and tools we have been given.

Jesus did not tell Christians to give anyone a 'swift kick in the hoo-hoo', or not even judge or condemn them. We are pretty lucky He didn't give us a good swift kick, choosing to die on the cross for us instead of saying 'OK, smartasses. Try to to figure out this whole salvation thing on your own.'

I somewhat disagree with this, Jesus was quite clear by his actions when people tried to make a mockery of our Father. Either you believe God works by faith and the holy spirit (Hebrews 11:1), or you do not. May be that is the misconception here. NO ONE can change a heart but God and inner working of the Holy Spirit, we can lay the groundwork, but we cannot change a heart. God does not expect us to be completely illogical in our choices either i.e.: Stand in the middle of a busy interstate and just pray. Will He protect us if this happens? I believe so, but we are taught not to test it either. Condemnation is for Christians, not unbelievers. How do you condemn someone and expect them to understand? That is abusive.

Why were they born and bred in this crime and corruption? What kind of system allows for people to be born and live in such conditions?

Because this is a product of living in this world.

He will continue to demand that we use our resourced to help the poor. We may suffer economically as a result, so be it. It is our living faith in Christ (and one aspect of it is feeding, clothing and sheltering the poor), not our prosperity, that we will be judged on.

Yes, no one is arguing we should not help, but FIRST we should get our home in order.

Before we begin crying for 'po America' as its flooded with people looking for a better way of life, don't forget that a lot of them are fleeing from poverty and corruption that exist in their countries because of US policies.

That would be another discussion in and of itself. America is not the “end all” for the world. People think so because of what we created for ourselves. But we do not hold the economic answers for every individual in the world. This is a ridiculous statement.

Did you know that in El Salvador many people die because the water they drink is contaminated with chemicals spilled by Canadian mining companies? Or that the Colombian army and allied paramilitary death squads receive millions of dollars of American military aid?

Yes, I am also familiar wit the Transnational corporations and their part in the quagmire. I am thoroughly against all of it.

So much misery in the countries these people flee is caused by the actions of our political and business leaders. Want to stop illegal immigration? Pressure your government to stop contributing to creating the hell of poverty and social injustice in so many of the countries these 'illegals' come from.

Again, this is for another thread.

If our comfort needs to be sacrificed in order that we follow Jesus' words, then so be it.

Cristo Vive!
- Tomasz

Well I just do not see that God wants me to test Him in this manner, if we know something will harm us, and we know we are not equipped with the organized effort to accomplish this, I doubt very seriously God wants us making ignorant assumptions unless compelled to do so. I am not so compelled.

 

[maelstrom]

Christians shouldn't participate in violence--our only mandate is to love each other and spread the Gospel. Government, as it exists now, *is* violence, so we shouldn't participate in it. For more on the subject, read Leo Tolstoy's The Kingdom of God is Within You, and Adin Ballou's work.

There is a way to have a government not based on violence. It is possible to have government based on consent rather than force. I write about it extensively in my own work. But there aren't any governments like that yet, so there aren't any governments Christians should participate in--my personal belief is that we Christians should start a new society with a government based on explicit consent (a literal social contract, i.e. everyone has to agree to the constitution before becoming a citzen). By doing that, we will eradicate violence and thus be an example to the rest of the world, moreso than anything else we could do, and especially moreso than we are now, since the so-called "Christian" Right in America has only turned people away from Christ, instead of showing them the light.

In a contractual society, there could still be law enforcement and punishment for crimes--since people would agree to the laws and punishments beforehand, it wouldn't be considered "violence" to enforce them. It can't possibly be violent when you have a person's signature saying they agree to such and such punishment if they are found guilty of a crime.

The problem with America and the rest of the nations of the world is that there is no explicit consent involved. They just declare that everyone in a certain geographical region is supposed to follow their laws, whether those people agree to them or not. Citizenship is thrust upon you by birth, and since most people lack the finances to escape, they are trapped in a social system they don't agree with... That is why there is so much crime, and that is why there is so much teenage suicide. If people were given the chance to accept or reject the social system, the people who didn't agree with the laws wouldn't be there in the first place. That's why heaven is so peaceful--everyone who is there *wants* to be there, and the people who don't want to follow the rules simply aren't allowed there in the first place. Citizenship in the kingdom of God is voluntary, not involuntary. Involuntary citizenship is the essence of tyranny.

If an amendment were added to the US Constitution that guaranteed the right to leave, maybe I might recognize the USA as a legitimate nation. But there is nothing in the Constitution that protects people's right *not* to be citizens if they don't like it--there's nothing that protects the voluntary nature of the social contract. So as far as I'm concerned, the US government is just a bunch of criminals forcing themselves on people, taking without permission the same way a rapist does. And the origins of the nation, the things they did to the Natives, prove it.

 

[gengwall]

Christians shouldn't participate in violence--our only mandate is to love each other and spread the Gospel. Government, as it exists now, *is* violence, so we shouldn't participate in it. For more on the subject, read Leo Tolstoy's The Kingdom of God is Within You, and Adin Ballou's work.

There is a way to have a government not based on violence. It is possible to have government based on consent rather than force. I write about it extensively in my own work. But there aren't any governments like that yet, so there aren't any governments Christians should participate in--my personal belief is that we Christians should start a new society with a government based on explicit consent (a literal social contract, i.e. everyone has to agree to the constitution before becoming a citzen). By doing that, we will eradicate violence and thus be an example to the rest of the world, moreso than anything else we could do, and especially moreso than we are now, since the so-called "Christian" Right in America has only turned people away from Christ, instead of showing them the light.

In a contractual society, there could still be law enforcement and punishment for crimes--since people would agree to the laws and punishments beforehand, it wouldn't be considered "violence" to enforce them. It can't possibly be violent when you have a person's signature saying they agree to such and such punishment if they are found guilty of a crime.

The problem with America and the rest of the nations of the world is that there is no explicit consent involved. They just declare that everyone in a certain geographical region is supposed to follow their laws, whether those people agree to them or not. Citizenship is thrust upon you by birth, and since most people lack the finances to escape, they are trapped in a social system they don't agree with... That is why there is so much crime, and that is why there is so much teenage suicide. If people were given the chance to accept or reject the social system, the people who didn't agree with the laws wouldn't be there in the first place. That's why heaven is so peaceful--everyone who is there *wants* to be there, and the people who don't want to follow the rules simply aren't allowed there in the first place. Citizenship in the kingdom of God is voluntary, not involuntary. Involuntary citizenship is the essence of tyranny.

If an amendment were added to the US Constitution that guaranteed the right to leave, maybe I might recognize the USA as a legitimate nation. But there is nothing in the Constitution that protects people's right *not* to be citizens if they don't like it--there's nothing that protects the voluntary nature of the social contract. So as far as I'm concerned, the US government is just a bunch of criminals forcing themselves on people, taking without permission the same way a rapist does. And the origins of the nation, the things they did to the Natives, prove it.

But consent does not equal compliance (which you have acknowledged). Even a government of universal consent has to ensure that the citizens comply to with the contract they consented to, and the only way to do that is through the power of the sword. You can "declare" that it is not violence, but it still is in every practical sense. At the very least, it is not "love".

I like the utopian ideal, but I don't think it is possible in a sin filled, satan ruled world. Unless everyone in such a society agrees to always turn the other check, you have to pick up the sword. Of course, there is a society that has already been set up to run purely on love with no violence under any circumstances. It's called the Church of Jesus Christ. Unfortunately, there is very little compliance with those loving principles even there.

 

[Flynmonkie]

But consent does not equal compliance (which you have acknowledged). Even a government of universal consent has to ensure that the citizens comply to with the contract they consented to, and the only way to do that is through the power of the sword. You can "declare" that it is not violence, but it still is in every practical sense. At the very least, it is not "love".

I like the utopian ideal, but I don't think it is possible in a sin filled, satan ruled world. Unless everyone in such a society agrees to always turn the other check, you have to pick up the sword. Of course, there is a society that has already been set up to run purely on love with no violence under any circumstances. It's called the Church of Jesus Christ. Unfortunately, there is very little compliance with those loving principles even there.

I agree with this post. I think the consensus with most Christians would be the same idealism, but we have to also see the reality. Actually, it is Biblical reality, this is not our home, we will not feel comfortable here and we will never be glorified until that day. We will not see perfection until we see His face. All of this is part of residing in an "imperfect" yet "perfect" world.

I think what begs the question for Many Christians is defining or discerning the whole spectrum of the word "sword".

I look at it this way, the US constitution and bill of Rights offers the same moral thought you gain from Biblical moral thought. There are some things when looking at the big picture, we really should not enforce --laws that may "backfire" on us, and truly is something that is directed more so by God. I believe people have a choice to be something other than Christian, within our [US] set of humanitarian rules. This is what we have been gifted to work with, and I firmly believe God is in control of those things in which we feel we are not, or seem to be contrary to our belief. It is tough to make these choices, I am not knocking it. But there are some that are really obvious that we really should not be meddling in - it thwarts the point of witness.


If someone was going to hurt your child, kill your child, I would not hesitate for a second to do whatever in my power to stop them. If the last resort was to terminate their life, I would do it. Of course, I would not be happy about it, but I would do it. (Not to be confused with justifying war, there is a difference between just and justifying)

I see the US in the same boat. Anyone that tries to infiltrate or harm our system of civilized "contract", I take as a personal attack on our children.

The problem is many people are not teaching their children to respect the law, to understand it, to be involved with it. It seems a handful of people are out there making choices for the whole of the US. This has not been historical. A doctor friend from Germany told me once, "The US keeps citizens busy with games and entertainment, instead of keeping us informed". She recommended I go out and read the BBC, AP and other "clean" sources. I found the difference from everyday mainstream media. Ever since then I realized my fault in all of this, and I am learning too. But the key thing is, many people just simply don't look, or think, and have no clue what is going on. Many just play "follow the leader".( I find it quite interesting that so many held Claims to Bush being such a great Christian, but it is easy to hit youtube.com to see him flipping off the cameras, and other "un-Christianlike" ideals that are denoted to leaders - but that is another thread)

Either Christians believe they should not become involved, or they are so involved that it resembles the religious oppression we so much wanted to flee from. OR the biggie, instead of going out and doing as Christians, Christians have become lazy and want the law to "do it for them". Because God gives us choice, my heart is comforted in the fact that there is only so much I can do, some choices I might disagree with personally, but mandating these things is not what I believe Christian witness is all about.

 

[Parmenio]

The Old Testament rules on warfare were acceptable for the Hebrews because then they were not exposed to the complete Word of God, Jesus Christ. Jesus revealed the Full Message; the Son of God came down to live among us and we are to follow Him.

Christ has made it explicitly clear that enemies are to be treated with love, and that turning the other cheek and not violence is the order of the day. Neither He or His apostles killed anyone, even in self-defence. Christians did not use violence against others until the heretical 'just war' theory took over the church in the 4th century along with other ideas that transformed it into a political power instead of a witness to the glory of God.

What white colonists did across the Americas were acts of mass murder, conquest, and theft of land. Even worse, they claimed to be Christians.

Cristo Vive!
- Tomasz

You're saying this like the Hebrews made them up, which, if you've read your Bible, is completely wrong. God drew up these laws for them and they Obeyed. I was quoting God.

Christ didn't say anything, though, about how you should treat animals, and, if I recall, that is just about how the conquerors of this New World thought of the inhabitants. Haiti stands out as a good example. Rationalization is oh so easy when semantics lead the way. I'm not saying it is right, but I am saying that genocide has been the way of things since mankind set foot on this earth. If one side was able to kill the other, they did. Even amongst the native inhabitants of North America war was near constant and horrific violence a daily part of life. Believing that the Europeans brought with them some new concept of barbarism is to wash over the entirety of human history.

In quoting Exodus I hoped to highlight the fact that merciless killing done in the name of God has been around far longer than we care to believe.

 

[bgrass1234]

But consent does not equal compliance (which you have acknowledged). Even a government of universal consent has to ensure that the citizens comply to with the contract they consented to, and the only way to do that is through the power of the sword. You can "declare" that it is not violence, but it still is in every practical sense. At the very least, it is not "love".

I like the utopian ideal, but I don't think it is possible in a sin filled, satan ruled world. Unless everyone in such a society agrees to always turn the other check, you have to pick up the sword. Of course, there is a society that has already been set up to run purely on love with no violence under any circumstances. It's called the Church of Jesus Christ. Unfortunately, there is very little compliance with those loving principles even there.

It has nothing to do with utopian views, or what will work or not. It has to the with the morality of your actions. When you use government to do anything, you are using violence. With your vote, you are pushing the button to use violence on others. So what if someone doesn't honor a contract with you. Should you use violence to make them? I can't justify using or threatening violence against another for any selfish reason.

 

[Anita Hyche]

I appreciate all thoughts I've seen and this is my first post. Church and State i n the Constitution is and shall forever be separated. This nation was rudely and violently started when our ancestors that arrived in a land already inhabited with nothing new about it, was settled by Christians. That however does not make this a Christian Nation. We should forever be ashamed of the way we treated the original peoples. How in Christian can you get than to steal land? Kill for it? Jesus wept. If church and government aren't separate both will die. The Evangelical Blitz is horrible and really explicitly planned to dumb down children to make the voter ignorant of truth. Shame on them. So you want the government to take over religion and be a theocracy? Which Christ in sect will forcefully convert everyone? No. It must remain separate to protect all. A d real science must be taught in schools,none of this this science that says the Loch Ness monster disproves evolution. YEes, that was going to be taught. We must actually look at reality and the Bible. It is a guide, not a history book or science book...germs should have been the first thing ki listed.

 

[Anita Hyche]

I have had two extrodinary yet opposing experiences in the last couple of weeks which prompt me to post this for discussion.

Starting with the more recent. Over the weekend we attended a Baptist church in IA while visiting our inlaws. Being a national holiday, there was a slight hint of patriotism in the air (and, apparently, on the church's agenda). During the opening prayer, amongst the obligatory prayers for our leaders, the troops, etc., the pastor made a strange declaration (strange in it's content and that it was part of the prayer.) He declared with certainty that our nation was founded on the Word of God. I quickly reviewed the Preamble to the Constitution in my head and tried to picture Jesus claiming any of it. I must admit, I am still want to find any evidence within either the Word of God or the various documents and principals of our American government to support such a contention. Maybe someone out there can help me understand exactly what part of the Word of God our country was founded on and where such foundation is expressed in the Constitution or the law.

But that was just the beginning of my discomfort. What happened next truly got me squirming in my seat. After the prayer, we proceeded to pledge allegiance to BOTH the American flag and the Christian flag. Since when do God's people, at least while gathered in God's house to worship God, pledge allegiance, first of all, to symbols, and second of all, to the secular symbol of some worldly kingdom? Talk about serving two masters.

Well, that brings me to the second experience, which had happened prior to this service, but which illuminated for me why such goings on should make me uneasy. A week prior to that I had finished reading Greg Boyd's book "The Myth of a Christian Nation". In that book, Pastor Boyd (who lost 20% of his congregation when he preached on these issues), proposes that not only is it inappropriate for Christians to get involved in politics, it is damaging to the true mission of the Church. I can't think of a more stark illustration of the dangers he expresses than what I observed in that little IA church.

So, finally, to the point of discussion. What is the mission of the Church (big "C") and what impact does it have on that mission when Christians ally themselves to flags and countries and try to force people to comply with God and His Word through use of the sword (politics, government, and the law) rather than show them God and His Word through the loving, self-sacrificial power of the cross?

 

[Anita Hyche]

Without exceptions sending missionaries that only dispense medical care and food and wells or shelter or aid IF people convert is coercion and unsavory. I have family that will only help IF you go to their type of church and let your children be indict with HER ideals which damage the brain and all science. This Nation is a secular Nation on purpose and to mix religion and state unamerican. I'm sure many of you k ow about the Evangelical Blitz of purposefully getting people in office to favor their brand of Christianity, as if being Christian makes you better or more worthy of anything in America government related. There is no theocracy from Yeshua. It's a sin to even attempt it. No Baptist wants a Holy Roller teaching Christianity in school. This evil must be stopped. We have freedom of religion and freedom from it as well, and it must be this way or we will be in a Northern Ireland situation.

 

[FireDragon76]

The Christian flag is an old idea, been around a while. Our church had one as a kid.

I do agree the idea that the US was founded on the "Word of God" is ridiculous. The Constitution is the highest law in our land, not the Bible.