Ah but that is where we disagree . Its apparent through my own studies of the bible that no government of man will ever prosper . God's plan does not allow for it. If you want to strengthen the moral fiber and knowledge of God in this nation, you should do it door to door as the bible tells us to do. You should do it by example, in a food pantry, or free after school program for children. It cannot be done through political parties or government, nor judges, the bible clearly tells us this. Even Christ did not go against the government , nor try to change it while he was here on earth. Slavery was common during Christs life. He did not speak out against it. Instead he told slaves to live such Godly lives they might through their service influence their masters to come to God.
Nope volunteer what you propose goes directly against the bible and God's plan. After all if what you want happened we'd be a nation unlike any other on the planet that has ever been. We'd be a nation that truly follows the teachings Of Christ . Read the bible , that will not happen. It is depressing , but true none the less.
Atheism? Why in the world should this be any different than what has happened before. When Christ walked this earth, Rome ruled the world with their pagan multiple Gods . They worshipped the SUN and helena the God of the underworld , among literally hundreds of other fake Gods. You can be sure that Atheists were alive and well during Christs life, because smart people figured out all those false gods had no power and payed omage only for political reasons ,IE to not be shunned or killed for not worshiping the Kings favorite diety. you can bet many lost faith in gods or a God all together.And they talked about it , in bath houses and gatherings , just like we do today. The only difference is we have Radio and TV now, and we do have entire radio and TV stations dedicated to the Christian voice. I can't think of one dedicated solely to the Atheist voice. So give them a program here and there. there is no way to stop it, and Christs example does not point to the fact we are supposed to.
[SIZE="4"] King Soloman said there is no new thing under the SUN, no not one, what is , has been and will be again. This is nothing new. [/SIZE]
Involvement in government is not the answer volunteer. The answer is to produce fruit for the witness of Christ in your own life or in groups that work towards that goal. Invlovement in government is dangerous from what I see in my studies. God may blind the eyes of those that think a man made institution can bring peace, holiness , and prosperity to the world. I have some religious study mentors that believe it is a waste of time to talk about God to people who are holding govermental office while they are in office as they believe they are there because God allows it and like Pharaoh God has hardened their hearts to the truth . I agree , but like with anything else there are always exceptions.
But hey voluteer I am now sure you have been warned.
If you must dabble in the government of the world , I will pray for you.
Because the bible clearly says that the world for now is the kingdom of Satan.
I wouldn't touch it with a ten foot pole.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_church_and_state
Separation of church and state is a political and legal doctrine which states that government and religious institutions are to be kept separate and independent of one another. The term most often refers to the combination of two principles: secularity of government and freedom of religious exercise.[1]
The phrase separation of church and state is generally traced to a letter written by Thomas Jefferson in 1802 to the Danbury Baptists, in which he referred to the First Amendment of the United States Constitution as creating a "wall of separation" between church and state. The phrase was mentioned in an eloquent letter written by President John Tyler on July 10, 1843. The phrase was then quoted by the United States Supreme Court first in 1878, and then in a series of cases starting in 1947. This led to popular and political discussion of the concept, including criticism that it overstates the limits created under the Constitution. However, it originated much earlier, and was implicit in the flight of Roger Williams from religious oppression in Massachusetts to found what became Rhode Island on the principle of state neutrality in matters of faith.
The phrase is never stated in the constitution. The first amendment states that government will not create a national religion however government officials have the right to practice any religious ideas that they want.
Although the term is primarily discussed in the context of United States constitutional interpretation, the concept parallels various other international social and political ideas, including secularism, disestablishment, religious liberty, religious pluralism and la?cit?.
Islamic views
Many Muslims consider the Western concept of separation of Church and State to be rebellion against God's law. There is a contemporary debate in Islam whether obedience to Islamic law is ultimately compatible with the Western secular pattern, which separates religion from civic life. However, some majority Muslim nations are secular, such as Turkey, Senegal, Albania and Azerbaijan.
Other religious views
Religious opponents of secular government hold that while the state should not establish a particular state religion or require religious observance, it still must be infused with religious ethics and values in order to operate "properly", and needs to encourage ethical and beneficial religious belief, both inside and outside of government. These persons argue that the teachings of religion are the basis of law and civil society and that a society which discourages the promulgation of those beliefs cannot function. Furthermore, these groups argue that religious groups ought to be involved in politics in order to assure that laws are passed which reflect what they perceive as universal truths.
Other religious persons argue that the State ought to maintain an established church.
Another view is that the state should provide a default religion for the large number of citizens who wish to identify themselves as religious believers without actively choosing between the various alternatives. A slightly more extreme version of this is that the state should determine (or at least have the power to determine) the doctrine and structure of the state religion - this is the position in England, and has links to ideas underlying Erastianism. However, there need not be obligation on individuals to follow the state in religion in such cases.
Secular views
Some people desire the legal separation of church and state in order to keep a religion from enforcing its social or ethical paradigm on the government. For example, many atheists, agnostics and freethinkers believe it inappropriate for government to be controlled by a religion.
It is hardly "mythical", the separation of Church and State, but one of the precepts this nation was founded upon, for very important reasons.
Because "freedom" is a paramount value, and the seat of our belief as Americans, as mentioned in the "Secular views" section..."in order to keep a religion from enforcing its' social or ethical paradigm on government", it is necessary to maintain and enforce the separation, while acknowledging the freedom of people to express their religions or their non-religions, within the framework of society.
And you seem to be "over-the-top", with your suggestion that "hate crimes legislation now being considered as an ammendment to the FY 2008 Defense Appropriations Act, if this passes, Christians will be prohibited from teaching their children the Word of God and church leaders will be prohibited by law from preaching the Gospel." If this means in a public school setting, then I, personally, think it is appropriate to prohibit the teaching from the Bible and the preaching of the Gospel, as that is a function of the church and a practice within the confines of a home. It should not be forced down someone's throat, or be required. Christ beckoned those to come to Him, that were heavy-laden...not under threat of damnation or at the tip of a sword, but "freely", of their own volition. How then now, are we( or better, 'you") to force your beliefs on others?
Romans 13:1 let every soul be subject to the higher powers. For there is no power but God: the powers that be are ordained by God.
Considering the bible tells us that none will rule except God allows it. I am considering not voting in the next election. I have never missed a election volunteer , but my studies are leading me to believe it may not be the place of a Christian to vote in secular elections. I am still studying the bible on this one. We are to be in the world and not of it. Voting is certainly a worldly activity.
And I do not know about you, but I do not let anything into my house that I do not want here. TV's have locks that can keep kids from watching improper things. I didn't have cable till my children were older teens and that solved a lot of problems. Children should always be supervised on computers for their own safety. When my children were young the computer sat in a corner of my living room, bad as it did not match my decor it allowed me to supervise , which was more important than my decor.
It is the job of the family to stand for God in a world that obviously does not. It is not and never will be the job of a man made government . You are in for a lot of disappointment volunteer.
Voting is a worldly activity if the only choice you have is to vote for corrupt politicians or politicians who are in bed with evil.
We do the same with respect to what we allow into our home and we sweep the house and keep it clean.
The hotter the fire the stronger the steel. God won't let the fire get too hot for us to survive (Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego), and if He does, then it is His will. He hasn't called me home yet.
Daniel 3:16-18, "Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego replied to the king, "Nebuchadnezzar, we don't need to give you an answer to this question. If the God we serve exists, then He can rescue us from the furnace of blazing fire, and He can rescue us from the power of you, the king. But even if He does not rescue us, we want you as king to know that we will not serve your gods or worship the gold statue you set up.""
Please stop quoting scripture...you haven't the foggiest notion what you are talking about.
Talk about fog.
Yes...you're in one....and it obviously is your comfort zone...but it is a source of annoyance and pomposity to a large section of the rest of us....Believe whatever you like....but like a recipe for my mother's rum cake...some people are not into "rum cake", likewise, not too many people want to hear your version of your faith...it's personal...keep it to yourself. Talk about what it's done for you...not how we should practice it.
Look Aaron, as the secularists are wont to say, you don't have to put your computer on this channel if you don't like what you read. (paraphrased)
No, I won't stop quoting Scripture.
Well, I won't stop chastising you for it, either. And how dare you attempt to define who I am and what I'm about. I'm no secularist. I just don't wear my religion on my sleeve, and am wont to dictate my version of what is right and what is wrong....I am a child of the universe, no less than the trees and the stars...and I have a right to be here. I wasn't put here to please the likes of you, as you weren't for me.....but somehow, you feel it your bounden duty to tell me what the Bible says, and how wrong I am. You are not judge and jury. You don't speak for God Almighty. He speaks to everyone, equally. You're not in the equation, although you think that you are. Sounds like mental illness to me.
What is a secularist and why would you believe I was calling you one? You should really stop being disingenuous. You know you dictate your views in almost every post and expect others to behave according to your dictate. Otherwise you wouldn't say things like,"Please stop quoting scripture...you haven't the foggiest notion what you are talking about." There is dictate and judgement in that post.
Please quote or cite the passages that state particpating in a democratic government is against God's Word. Israel was under Roman rule with a local "King." See below concerning what God's Word has to say about kings.
We are to run the race to win until the end. Individuals can do their part as you state. However, in a participative government, if Christians do not participate, we accept the decisions and values of those who do participate. We are responsible for their decisions as much as they are. A choice not to act is a choice to accept what the other person does.
1 Samuel 8, ?When Samuel grew old, he appointed his sons as judges over Israel. His firstborn son's name was Joel and his second was Abijah. They were judges in Beer-sheba. However, his sons did not walk in his ways?they turned toward dishonest gain, took bribes, and perverted justice.
So all the elders of Israel gathered together and went to Samuel at Ramah. They said to him, "Look, you are old, and your sons do not follow your example. Therefore, appoint a king to judge us the same as all the other nations have."
When they said, "Give us a king to judge us," Samuel considered their demand sinful, so he prayed to the LORD. But the LORD told him, "Listen to the people and everything they say to you. They have rejected you; they have rejected Me as their king. They are doing the same thing to you that they have done to Me, since the day I brought them out of Egypt until this day, abandoning Me and worshiping other gods. Listen to them, but you must solemnly warn them and tell them about the rights of the king who will rule over them."
Samuel told all the LORD's words to the people who were asking him for a king. He said, "These are the rights of the king who will rule over you: He can take your sons and put them to his use in his chariots, on his horses, or running in front of his chariots. He can appoint them for his use as commanders of thousands or commanders of fifties, to plow his ground or reap his harvest, or to make his weapons of war or the equipment for his chariots. He can take your daughters to become perfumers, cooks, and bakers. He can take your best fields, vineyards, and olive orchards and give them to his servants. He can take a tenth of your grain and your vineyards and give them to his officials and servants. He can take your male servants, your female servants, your best young men, and your donkeys and use them for his work. He can take a tenth of your flocks, and you yourselves can become his servants. When that day comes, you will cry out because of the king you've chosen for yourselves, but the LORD won't answer you on that day."
The people refused to listen to Samuel. "No!" they said. "We must have a king over us. Then we'll be like all the other nations: our king will judge us, go out before us, and fight our battles."
Samuel listened to all the people's words and then repeated them to the LORD. "Listen to them," the LORD told Samuel. "Appoint a king for them." Then Samuel told the men of Israel, "Each of you, go back to your city."?
You're not clever, nor sophisticated enough to use reverse psychology on me.
You don't issue "dictates", and when I instruct you to "cease and desist", you turn tables and say that I'm issuing "dictates". You think way too highly of yourself.
secularism
One entry found for secularism.
Main Entry: sec?u?lar?ism
Pronunciation: 'se-ky&-l&-"ri-z&m
Function: noun
: indifference to or rejection or exclusion of religion and religious considerations
I am in no way a "secularist"...I do not reject religion...I am a non-practicing Episcopalian, by birth....and have become more spiritual than religious...but that doesn't mean I have changed my view of church doctrine, or that my faith is lessened.
You're trying to say, because I don't like "preachy", "self-righteous", "holier-than-thou" types, who quote scripture like it's going out of style, and in the wee hours of the morning, do more devilment than the law would allow, that I am somehow, reprobate and "secularist"...I am nothing of a kind.
You need to get you some business, and stay up out of mine.
Nothing self-righteous about me. Only God is righteous.
Oh, it's all about self-righteous "you"....where do you get off telling anybody about themselves? And everybody already knows that God is righteous.....any more Earth shattering revelations to offer? I do my own reading...I don't need your assistance.
You should really calm down and stop being incoherent. In a conversation, people make observations about things the people they are talking with say. If you do this, anyone else can. Even if you don't do this others can. However, you do, do this as shown above.
If we believe God is righteous, then we should behave as though we believe He is righteous.
And you would be the judge of said righteousness???? My, when we liken ourselves to God Almighty, how far is the fall? Talk about incoherency, I doubt if you could make sense of the paragraph you just wrote...
You are wasting good key strokes by telling folk what they already know...we don't need your font of wisdom, an exercise in futility, telling us ground breaking news ...that God is righteous.
Once again, you, Brian, and a few others feel it your bounden duty to tell folks about themselves, and the way to the Cross. I was a choirboy in an Episcopal Boys School, after the English choirboy system in merry olde England. I'm sure we celebrated Mass more times than you have attended anybody's church.
You're not in any position to tell me what a great sinner I am...any more than I am to tell you what a damn foolish and vain person you must be, and quite sad.
Work on Volunteer...because you need much work...well, more than you think.
