Poll
Question:
Who Are You Voting For ?
Option 1: John McCain
votes: 10
Option 2: Barack Obama
votes: 2
Option 3: Neither
votes: 2
Did anyone else see where Obama slipped up on a tv interview and told people he was muslim ? If my memory serves me right didnt he a few weeks back say he was christian ????? I am totally going to vote for John McCain ! If you havent had a chance to see this interview click on this link to watch it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oIXRt57tM3Q (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oIXRt57tM3Q)
my computer is too slow for video. :sadbounce:
i have heard about it though. it was anounced that it was a word play mix up and he is really a christian. now i dont beleive this is what happened but it is what they say. (IMO) he told the truth about being a musslim!
there was that thing about swearing in on a corran. "I" never heard him rebuke that info.
then there was that thing about the lapel usa pin!! funny! now he doesnt seem to want to wear a suit coat. hmmmmm! MCpain and polland does.
If you pay attention to the context in which Obama referred to "my Muslim faith," it's not difficult to understand that it was a perfectly normal slip of the tongue.
It is in NO way "proof" that he's actually a Muslim.
Obama wont salutle the American Flag and he wont sing the national anthem. Please read the article below :
Hot on the heels of his explanation for why he no longer wears a flag
pin, presidential candidate Senator Barack Obama was forced to explain
why he doesn't follow protocol when the National Anthem is played.
According to the United States Code, Title 36, Chapter 10, Sec. 171,
During rendition of the national anthem when the flag is displayed, all
present except those in uniform are expected to stand at attention
facing the flag with the right hand over the heart.
'As I've said about the flag pin, I don't want to be perceived as
taking sides,' Obama said. 'There are a lot of people in the world to
whom the
American flag is a symbol of oppression. And the anthem itself conveys
a war-like message. You know, the bombs bursting in air and all. It
should be swapped for something less parochial and less bellicose. I
like the song 'I'd Like to Teach the World to Sing.' If that were our
anthem, then I might
salute it.'
Yes, ladies and gentlemen, this could possibly be our next president!!
I, for once, am speechless. He has absolutely NO pride in this
country!!!!!
While I don't agree with what Mr. Obama stands for, I do realize that he is a good pubic speaker and I understand why people are swayed by his words. I feel uneasy about this next presidential election, but at the same time am not too worried about it. I understand that it's going to happen whether I agree with/like it or not because that is how it is meant to be. All this bashing and name calling is doing no one any good, and only making us look bad. For once, I am not taking sides in this one. I really don't feel at liberty to do so. In fact, I feel I've already lost my liberty to do a lot of things these days.
Quote from: Cody P on September 14, 2008, 01:56:40 AM
Obama wont salutle the American Flag and he wont sing the national anthem. Please read the article below :
Hot on the heels of his explanation for why he no longer wears a flag
pin, presidential candidate Senator Barack Obama was forced to explain
why he doesn't follow protocol when the National Anthem is played.
According to the United States Code, Title 36, Chapter 10, Sec. 171,
During rendition of the national anthem when the flag is displayed, all
present except those in uniform are expected to stand at attention
facing the flag with the right hand over the heart.
'As I've said about the flag pin, I don't want to be perceived as
taking sides,' Obama said. 'There are a lot of people in the world to
whom the
American flag is a symbol of oppression. And the anthem itself conveys
a war-like message. You know, the bombs bursting in air and all. It
should be swapped for something less parochial and less bellicose. I
like the song 'I'd Like to Teach the World to Sing.' If that were our
anthem, then I might
salute it.'
Yes, ladies and gentlemen, this could possibly be our next president!!
I, for once, am speechless. He has absolutely NO pride in this
country!!!!!
You're supposed to cite the reference when you post an article. Where did you find this?
I received it in a email.
Quote from: Cody P on September 14, 2008, 02:50:46 AM
I received it in a email.
Just wondering, but, ..... how do you know it's for real - instead of yet another "urban legend" spreading like wildfire over e-mail?
Was a link provided in the e-mail you received?
According to this website http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/o/obama-pin.htm (http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/o/obama-pin.htm) , Its a hoax however , On this website http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/o/obama-salute.htm (http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/o/obama-salute.htm) it actually shows him not saluting the flag. Take a look at it . :pound:
Quote from: Cody P on September 14, 2008, 03:30:48 AM
According to this website http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/o/obama-pin.htm (http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/o/obama-pin.htm) , Its a hoax however ,
On this website http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/o/obama-salute.htm (http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/o/obama-salute.htm) it actually shows him not saluting the flag. Take a look at it .
That's funny because both stories are from the same web site. However, the second article actually mentions the "hoax" story, and provides an internal link to their article on it (that would be the same one as the first link in your post above).
Anyway, here's some of that second article:
Quote
Summary of the eRumor:
A picture of Senator Barack Obama (below), Governor Bill Richardson of New Mexico, Senator Hillary Clinton, and one other person all on a platform and backed by an American flag. The eRumor says that the National Anthem was being played at the time and that all but Senator Obama saluted.
The Truth:
The picture is authentic. It was published in Time magazine and was taken 9/16/07 at an event in Indianola, Iowa where six Democratic presidential candidates appeared. ... Not seen in the picture are three other candidates who were standing out of view on the right side of the platform, Senator Chris Dodd, Senator John Edwards, Senator Joe Biden.
At question is what was going on with Senator Obama? His critics are circulating the picture and saying that he is not respecting the flag or the National Anthem, especially since the protocol, according to the United States Flag code, is that civilians should have their right hands over their hearts and that they should be facing the flag. His supporters are saying that this little lapse should not be held against him since there have been plenty of other events at which he has saluted the flag---so it did not mean that he would, in principle, avoid doing it.
Some supporters have suggested that perhaps the picture does not tell the whole story and that he may have raised his hand shortly after it was taken.
An ABC News video, however, shows that Senator Obama did not salute at any time during the Anthem and that everybody else on the platform did.
A spokesperson for the Senator told Fox News that it was ridiculous to suggest that Obama was making any kind of a statement and that sometimes "he does and sometimes he doesn't place his hand over his heart during the National Anthem."
(http://www.truthorfiction.com/images/salute.jpg)
Personally, .... on certain occasions I will stand at attention during the playing of the National Anthem - well, ... ok, ... I'll stand
mostly at attention, but not rigidly so - and I'll even face the flag; but I do not place my hand over heart, nor salute the flag, nor give it my "allegiance" in any other way. It's a flag, for cryin' out loud - a piece of cloth.
And besides (and quite significantly), it no longer comes anywhere close to representing the ideals that this country was founded on: the manner in which the flag is used and promoted to the American people (in our modern age) makes that flag now represent nothing less than that horrible beast known as "Nationalism", and its twin brother, otherwise known as "supporting the government" (with little or no question), in an almost blind-like fervor euphemistically referred to by the government as "patriotism" (but which is actually just "Nationalism" wrapped in an American flag). And that is why the government so eagerly promotes such false "patriotism", wanting us falling all over ourselves in a dazed fervency to fawn over the flag and to "pledge our allegiance" to it - (in a "my country, right or wrong" type fashion, which in reality somehow always manages to be applied instead as a "my
government, right or wrong" stubborn zeal, and a refusal to view a situation through anything but government issued "red, white, and blue" nationalistic shades).
....... Ok, ok. :mad: Enough already. I've had my rant for the day. .... Carry on.
*L*
I think all americans should salute the flag and sing The National Anthem. Especially if your running for President of The United States. I mean I dont want anyone as president if they cant even salute The American Flag or Recite The National Anthem. :smirk:
Quote from: titushome on September 14, 2008, 01:21:39 AM
If you pay attention to the context in which Obama referred to "my Muslim faith," it's not difficult to understand that it was a perfectly normal slip of the tongue.
It is in NO way "proof" that he's actually a Muslim.
Yeah, and I often slip and refer to my Catholic faith when speaking, too! *Rolls eyes*
Well I mean I guess we are all aloud to have our own opinion on things but there are other reasons and issues for why im NOT voting for Obama. Im going to vote for McCain and Sarah Palin. Just out of curiosty who are you voting for? :roll:
I find this to be an almost outrage. the first statement is really what gets me. Why in all her adult life as an American can she say this is the only time she is proud of her country. Was she not proud when they were letting her have the money to go to some of Americas finest schools. Was she not proud when the rest of us were standing together on 9-11. Maybe what Obama said was a slip of the tongue, but I am always proud to be an American.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jzdbdqWxgW8
I may not always be happy with the decsions that The United States makes however I still am proud to be an american and I will still salute The Amercian Flag and recite The National Anthem. I truely believe that down deep if Obama gets the presdiency that it will be the perfect time for the Anti- Christ to appear. I believe that if he gets the presidency that its only because God set him in there as a part to fullfill the endtime prophecy.
Quote from: Cody P on September 14, 2008, 07:44:47 PM
I may not always be happy with the decsions that The United States makes however I still am proud to be an american and I will still salute The Amercian Flag and recite The National Anthem. I truely believe that down deep if Obama gets the presdiency that it will be the perfect time for the Anti- Christ to appear. I believe that if he gets the presidency that its only because God set him in there as a part to fullfill the endtime prophecy.
actually, the edtime clock has been ticking for a while now. oborax would be a good excuse or scape goat for a lot of unexplained occurences that may present themselves in the future. the breakdown of currency and jobs and social unrest leading to one world government and currency with the mark of the beast and haveing a choice to choose God or god, thus leading to prison camps and martyrs.
(IMO) the clock started ticking
mostly with clinton. he is actually the cause of our economy failing today. his party beleifs are toward that type of government, so it doesnt surprise me if oborax is a major player in the endtimes.
the main thing is vote your concious and do what you feel Jesus would do, or the best choice that would line up given the circumstances.
i do not pledge my allegiance to any government.
Quote from: Chérie on September 14, 2008, 08:00:10 PM
i do not pledge my allegiance to any government.
??? a rebel without a cause? a mercenary? a gorilla soldier? a gorilla rebel!!???
all have something to stand for, or they fall for anything.
i'm sorry are you comparing me to a mercenary?
Quote from: Chérie on September 14, 2008, 08:16:04 PM
i'm sorry are you comparing me to a mercenary?
i am simply saying: with so many that have died for the government you so blatenly deny, i wish they could deny such people when they are in need.
but our american government wont do that and help even those who dont pledge allegiance! *sigh*
the american government is "of the people, by the people, for the people".
and you wont pledge alligeince to our country or any? (IMO) those kinda people aught to live on a boat in the middle of the sea away from any civilization.
Quote from: yosemite on September 14, 2008, 08:20:58 PM
Quote from: Chérie on September 14, 2008, 08:16:04 PM
i'm sorry are you comparing me to a mercenary?
i am simply saying: with so many that have died for the government you so blatenly deny, i wish they could deny such people when they are in need.
but our american government wont do that and help even those who dont pledge allegiance! *sigh*
i'm still confused. you talk in circles. how am i a mercenary because i don't pledge my allegiance to any government?
Quote from: yosemite on September 14, 2008, 08:07:40 PM
Quote from: Chérie on September 14, 2008, 08:00:10 PM
i do not pledge my allegiance to any government.
??? a rebel without a cause? a mercenary? a gorilla soldier? a gorilla rebel!!???
all have something to stand for, or they fall for anything.
I'll tel ya what: show me in the scriptures what human government the Apostles ever pledged their allegiance to (and in what scriptures they even so much as just encourage any such allegiance "pledging"), and then I'll at least be willing to revisit the possibility of my pledging such an allegiance to an earthly government.
But until then, as the song says, "I Pledge Allegiance To The Lamb" (and to
His government only).
didnt paul say not to talk against the government and the law of the land is mentioned a couple of times. even joeseph was alligent to his masters in egypt.
he served them well in all areas that did not cross his beleifs.
seems to me we could get off our high horse of pride and do the same. we have it made in this country!! we can worship and praise here and that is all they ask is to be loyal to your country, and we cant even do that!
*sigh*
I think that if some of these people who dont pledge the allegance was to be shipped over to these other coutnries that have dictators and not so much freedom , I believe when they came back to The United States there mind and philopshy on Pleding the Allegance would change. :smirk:
Joseph was Old Testament: and there are certainly more examples in the Old Testament of folks who pledged their allegiance to their earthly government(s).
However, in the New Testament - in which we live - Christ has established his own kingdom and government, of which there will be no end, and of which we are supposed to be "Ambassadors". It's a funny thing about Ambassadors, but they never pledge their allegiance to their host nations: the reason that they don't is quite simple - such an allegiance would be a gigantic "conflict of interest" with both their existing allegiance to their own country, and also with their ability to be a competent Ambassador (the kind that always bears in mind and acts according to solely the best interests of their actual country, rather than their host country).
As for Paul's admonishments about government, they do not in any way admonish us to pledge any kind of "allegiance" to those governments, but instead admonish us to essentially "keep our noses clean" so that we do not draw any unnecessary and adverse attention and/or conflict(s) with or from those governments. ....... and that is some very excellent advice, indeed, to say the least.
But again, since we are now under the New Testament - and Christ's kingdom and government established therein - where are there any examples of the Apostles ever pledging their "allegiance" to an earthly government, or admonishing us to do so? There simply aren't any - and that makes perfect sense in light of Christ's kingdom and government, and our "citizenship" of the same.
There was no swearing allegiance to any government by the apostles, however, they were taught to obey the laws of the land, (render unto Ceasar what was Ceasar's) obey those that have rule over you and to conduct themselves as christians at all times.
Whoso lives here and will not swear allegiance to this country -- should leave!
Quote from: Cody P on September 15, 2008, 01:38:26 AM
I think that if some of these people who dont pledge the allegance was to be shipped over to these other coutnries that have dictators and not so much freedom , I believe when they came back to The United States there mind and philopshy on Pleding the Allegance would change. :smirk:
Would you say the same of the Founding fathers, who pledged their allegiance only to a set of ideals (and to each other), and who never pledged their allegiance to an acting government (even that of the United States) because they simply didn't trust governments - even the ones that they themselves established?
Personally, I love the ideals upon which the United States was founded. But that is just one more reason why I will not pledge allegiance to the government - a government that on a daily basis ignores, violates, and just generally "thumbs its nose" at those very ideals.
Quote from: Rattlesnake on September 15, 2008, 01:56:50 AM
Whoso lives here and will not swear allegiance to this country -- should leave!
Why?
P.S. - by the way, I could just as easily say that anyone who dares pledge allegiance to "this country" should just go ahead and renounce Christ, because they are no longer fit to be Ambassadors from his kingdom (you can't serve two masters). However, I try not to be that judgmental. ;)
When you say that the founding fathers did not swear allegiance to this country, you have been sadly mislead! Not only did they swear allegiance to the flag, country and it's people, they swore allegiance to the preservation of the people, the union and the Government as a whole.
It was not the Government they distrusted (they formed it) it was the people who refused to swear allegiance to this country and it's beliefs and tried to destroy the very thing America stood for ---- FREEDOM!!!!!!
I would hate to think I stood before the signers of the constitution, one's who lost their lives because they swore allegiance to this county, framed the "ONLY" government that has stood firm for the last 200+ years and shed their blood and died for its preservation - and tell them, You did not swear allegiance!!!! WOW!!!!
When Jesus establishes his kingdom here, I will be the first to swear allegiance, until then, I will continue to follow what has been instilled in me by God himself - to be proud of who I am, defend the place I live and to swear allegiance to the preservation of this great nation in which we live. Its called PATRIOTISM!!!!!!
Confusing patriotism and saying to be a patriot is to somehow disassociate you're self with Christ is simply wrong.
You may not swear allegiance to this country - my statement again ----- leave on the first boat you can get a ticket for.
Quote from: Rattlesnake on September 15, 2008, 02:23:22 AM
When you say that the founding fathers did not swear allegiance to this country, you have been sadly mislead! Not only did they swear allegiance to the flag, country and it's people, they swore allegiance to the preservation of the people, the union and the Government as a whole.
It was not the Government they distrusted (they formed it) it was the people who refused to swear allegiance to this country and it's beliefs and tried to destroy the very thing America stood for ---- FREEDOM!!!!!!
I would hate to think I stood before the signers of the constitution, one's who lost their lives because they swore allegiance to this county, framed the "ONLY" government that has stood firm for the last 200+ years and shed their blood and died for its preservation - and tell them, You did not swear allegiance!!!! WOW!!!!
Ummmmmmm,
Would you please go back and check your facts? Because the founders never swore any allegiance to the government, and they did in fact distrust the very government they themselves formed - that's why they tried (in vain, unfortunately) to shackle it with all those restrictions.
Jefferson even said that the government needed to be overturned (by the spilling of blood, via revolution) every few decades, to keep it from overstepping its bounds. How much more distrusting of government can one get than to say that the people should routinely rise up in arms and overthrow it?? Not to mention how much allegiance could he have truly sworn to the government (that he himself was a MAJOR player in setting up) when he himself promoted the idea of routine revolutions against it??
Washington said that
all government (including that of the U.S.) was "evil", and should not be trusted! And that was WHILE he was serving as President!!
I think you are mistaking the Founders' swearing of allegiance and support to the nations' founding ideals, and to the ideals they set forth in
its Constitution, for an allegiance to the government they established - but those things are in no way one and the same.
Quote from: Rattlesnake on September 15, 2008, 02:40:30 AM
You may not swear allegiance to this country - my statement again ----- leave on the first boat you can get a ticket for.
Sorry, but I refuse to do either. What you espouse is not "patriotism"; on the contrary, it is the very definition of "nationalism".
However, an allegiance to IDEALS (instead of an allegiance to the current incarnation of the government, whatever that may be at the time) is the very kind of "patriotism" for which the founders of this country risked their very lives - and were very much willing to die in their efforts to perhaps attain those ideals (rather than live without them). They did so for ideals, not for a government!
I happen to agree with them. But if you do not, you have every right to disagree if you so choose.
Quote from: Rattlesnake on September 15, 2008, 02:40:30 AM
When Jesus establishes his kingdom here, I will be the first to swear allegiance....
Jesus has already established His kingdom here. That's what He meant when He announced that the kingdom of God was "at hand" - that is, it has arrived, and is among us, and every man and woman is invited to be a part of it.
Gentlemen,
In an effort to be rational and somewhat passive, I will leave you to you're own devices, but before I go, let me just say this:
The next time we loose thousands, don't be suprised to find that the ones who helped kill our loved ones are the ones who live among us, having been taught by so eloquent teachers that do not know what the true definition of Patriotism is and that it is somehow wrong to swear allegiance to a country so great as ours and is ok to burn our flags and help kill its inhabitants. (They used to swear on the bible to uphold this constitution)
As far as Nationalism, that is not what I was describing, only in the mind of someone who does not understand what it means to be a patriot would they confuse the 2.
You may choose to not swear allegiance to this country (or any other) but that also puts you in a posistion to have no rights, no say so as to how the country in which you live is run.
That puts you in a posistion (if this country goes to war) to be put in a place where you can do no harm to the country or its inhabitants because you cannot be trusted.
Do you really believe that the founding fathers thought it a good thing to overthrow this government occasionally? WOW!!!!
Quote from: titushome on September 15, 2008, 03:36:19 AM
Quote from: Rattlesnake on September 15, 2008, 02:40:30 AM
When Jesus establishes his kingdom here, I will be the first to swear allegiance....
Jesus has already established His kingdom here. That's what He meant when He announced that the kingdom of God was "at hand" - that is, it has arrived, and is among us, and every man and woman is invited to be a part of it.36Jesus answered,
My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.
can some one relate to me what II peter 2:10 means?
Quote from: Rattlesnake on September 15, 2008, 03:39:50 AM
Do you really believe that the founding fathers thought it a good thing to overthrow this government occasionally? WOW!!!!
I can only read the words they themselves wrote and spoke, and it is a fact that Jefferson wrote just that.
Quote from: Thomas Jefferson, in a letter to James Madison, on January 30th, 1787
from here:
I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical. Unsuccessful rebellions, indeed, generally establish the encroachments on the rights of the people which have produced them. An observation of this truth should render honest republican governors so mild in their punishment of rebellions as not to discourage them too much. It is a medicine necessary for the sound health of government.
And here are some further quotes from Jefferson concerning liberty, and that definitely relate to this discussion (taken from none other than
Monticello.org, found
here):
Quote from: Thomas Jefferson
1775 June 26-July 6. "Our attachment to no nation upon earth should supplant our attachment to liberty." (Declaration of the Causes and Necessity for Taking Up Arms, B.1.215)
1787 Nov. 13. "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure." (to W. S. Smith, B.12.356)
Here are some more of Jefferson's comments preceding that second quote above (in the same letter, of course):
Quote
"God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion. ... And what country can preserve its liberties, if it's rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure."
So what do you say now? ..... "WOW!" would still be good - only in a more surprised, newly enlightened type of way. :freaky2:
i love when people start preaching about the founding fathers. do they not know that they were the epitome of rebellion against government?
Quote from: yosemite on September 15, 2008, 03:57:33 AM
can some one relate to me what II peter 2:10 means?
As with all scriptures, it must be considered in context, and with reason. And just to clarify that: God indeed "transcends" reason, but he doesn't disregard it completely or shred it into tiny bits to destroy it. In fact, he even asks us to "Come let us reason together": so reason itself is not some horrible "carnal" evil, nor is trying to understand the scriptures with (or within) reason any kind of horrible evil, either. God gave us our brains (and our reasoning abilities) for a ....... errrrrrrrrr, ..... "reason". :grin: *L*
In other words, that scripture doesn't mean what you've probably been led to believe that it does. It has to be looked at both within reason, and in context. For instance, if you'd lived in Nazi Germany and "despised" the Nazi government for its obvious evil (as any moral person rightly should have), would that scripture then mean that your righteous disgust at that government was somehow "carnal" or "sinful" in the eyes of God?, and that in His eyes it made you "walk after the flesh in the lust of uncleanness"??
......... A literal, unbending interpretation of that text would make it mean
just that! But a
reasonable view and interpretation of that text would consider it in context of the entirety of the scriptures, and would realize that the whole thing really does depend on what government is specifically in question, and on exactly what specific aspect(s), act(s), or action(s) of that government one happens to be despising?
Referring once again to the simple, yet polarizing example of the Nazi government: I find it completely unfathomable and unreasonable to think that God would have viewed the despising of (or even downright rebelling against) that government (and its horrific acts) as somehow being a "sin". Call me crazy if you want to, but I don't consider it to even be in the realm of possibility that God would have considered that to be "wrong", much more a sin.
So in that light, the meaning of that scripture isn't quite so "black and white" now, is it? There's a lot more subtlety to it than that.
Quote from: Chérie on September 15, 2008, 05:44:44 AM
i love when people start preaching about the founding fathers. do they not know that they were the epitome of rebellion against government?
Yyyyyyyyyyyyyessssssssssss! That is nigh unto a "You sunk my Battleship!" direct hit.
*JD gives Chérie a hearty "Hoo-Wah" for that one* Good show, mon Chérie. *L*
My loyalties are thus:
I do not pledge allegiance to the government that rules my country, rather to the country itself and what my country means to me. I understand that not everyone feels the same way, but don't criticize those who choose to pledge allegiance to their government, flag, or country. By the same token, don't criticize those who don't share those values.
Maybe I am a Nationalist, I don't know. Considering the primary definition of Nationalism is
Devotion to the interests or culture of one's nation - source http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/nationalism (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/nationalism), maybe I am. I know that when I see the flag flying or hear "The Star Spangled Banner" my heart swells with pride, as I know without a doubt and without reservation that I live in the greatest country on earth. Of course, I would expect that any Australian, Canadian, Brit, French, German, Russian, Angolan (insert name of any other country) to feel the same when they see their flag and hear their own national anthem.
I do not, however, blindly follow wherever my government may try to lead and I don't agree with many of the policies of the government. To imply that I do, simply because I proclaim allegiance to country, is unjust.
BenJammin
Quote from: jdcord on September 15, 2008, 02:14:08 AM
Why?
P.S. - by the way, I could just as easily say that anyone who dares pledge allegiance to "this country" should just go ahead and renounce Christ, because they are no longer fit to be Ambassadors from his kingdom (you can't serve two masters). However, I try not to be that judgmental. ;)
I would encourage that we not get this ugly about what we feel about the country. To make this statement shows you are being judgemental. and does not refelct a Christ like attitude.
QuoteYeah, and I often slip and refer to my Catholic faith when speaking, too! *Rolls eyes*
Sis, to be fair to Obama, he's been questioned about this repeatedly. If you had to deal with hundreds of questions regarding whether or not you were a Catholic, you might inadvertently slip up too.
Also, as to this supposed "quote" from Obama:
'As I've said about the flag pin, I don't want to be perceived as
taking sides,' Obama said. 'There are a lot of people in the world to
whom the American flag is a symbol of oppression. And the anthem itself conveys
a war-like message. You know, the bombs bursting in air and all. It
should be swapped for something less parochial and less bellicose. I
like the song 'I'd Like to Teach the World to Sing.' If that were our
anthem, then I might
salute it.' The quote is clearly fake. I don't see how people could even look at the quote and not think that...lol...
QuoteI would encourage that we not get this ugly about what we feel about the country. To make this statement shows you are being judgemental. and does not refelct a Christ like attitude.
He was being tongue in cheek as a response to all those "If you won't pledge allegiance get out of this country" comments. I don't think he really believes that those who say the pledge are renouncing Christ.
Quote from: Rattlesnake on September 15, 2008, 03:49:38 AM
Quote from: titushome on September 15, 2008, 03:36:19 AM
Quote from: Rattlesnake on September 15, 2008, 02:40:30 AM
When Jesus establishes his kingdom here, I will be the first to swear allegiance....
Jesus has already established His kingdom here. That's what He meant when He announced that the kingdom of God was "at hand" - that is, it has arrived, and is among us, and every man and woman is invited to be a part of it.
36Jesus answered,
My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.
No, Jesus' kingdom is not OF this world. But it is IN this world.
Jesus' followers understand that our true enemies are "not flesh and blood, but... spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places." That's why Jesus said His servants wouldn't fight for Him [in the physical sense].
Quote from: jdcord on September 15, 2008, 05:21:00 AM
Quote from: Rattlesnake on September 15, 2008, 03:39:50 AM
Do you really believe that the founding fathers thought it a good thing to overthrow this government occasionally? WOW!!!!
I can only read the words they themselves wrote and spoke, and it is a fact that Jefferson wrote just that.
Quote from: Thomas Jefferson, in a letter to James Madison, on January 30th, 1787
from here:
I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical. Unsuccessful rebellions, indeed, generally establish the encroachments on the rights of the people which have produced them. An observation of this truth should render honest republican governors so mild in their punishment of rebellions as not to discourage them too much. It is a medicine necessary for the sound health of government.
And here are some further quotes from Jefferson concerning liberty, and that definitely relate to this discussion (taken from none other than Monticello.org, found here):
Quote from: Thomas Jefferson
1775 June 26-July 6. "Our attachment to no nation upon earth should supplant our attachment to liberty." (Declaration of the Causes and Necessity for Taking Up Arms, B.1.215)
1787 Nov. 13. "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure." (to W. S. Smith, B.12.356)
Here are some more of Jefferson's comments preceding that second quote above (in the same letter, of course):
Quote
"God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion. ... And what country can preserve its liberties, if it's rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure."
So what do you say now? ..... "WOW!" would still be good - only in a more surprised, newly enlightened type of way. :freaky2:
I wonder why you can not give us the full speach and only a few lines from here ot there that changes the whole meaning. I will grant that maybe Obama had a slip of words about what he beleived, as most people aren't sure why the believe what they are anyway. But the fact remains that until his family became part of the system his wife was not proud to be an American.
Quote from: bishopnl on September 15, 2008, 01:40:49 PM
QuoteYeah, and I often slip and refer to my Catholic faith when speaking, too! *Rolls eyes*
Sis, to be fair to Obama, he's been questioned about this repeatedly. If you had to deal with hundreds of questions regarding whether or not you were a Catholic, you might inadvertently slip up too.
Also, as to this supposed "quote" from Obama:
'As I've said about the flag pin, I don't want to be perceived as
taking sides,' Obama said. 'There are a lot of people in the world to
whom the American flag is a symbol of oppression. And the anthem itself conveys
a war-like message. You know, the bombs bursting in air and all. It
should be swapped for something less parochial and less bellicose. I
like the song 'I'd Like to Teach the World to Sing.' If that were our
anthem, then I might
salute it.'
The quote is clearly fake. I don't see how people could even look at the quote and not think that...lol...
QuoteI would encourage that we not get this ugly about what we feel about the country. To make this statement shows you are being judgemental. and does not refelct a Christ like attitude.
He was being tongue in cheek as a response to all those "If you won't pledge allegiance get out of this country" comments. I don't think he really believes that those who say the pledge are renouncing Christ.
so nate, are you voting for obama now? ;)
Quote from: jdcord on September 15, 2008, 06:01:42 AM
Quote from: yosemite on September 15, 2008, 03:57:33 AM
can some one relate to me what II peter 2:10 means?
As with all scriptures, it must be considered in context, and with reason. And just to clarify that: God indeed "transcends" reason, but he doesn't disregard it completely or shred it into tiny bits to destroy it. In fact, he even asks us to "Come let us reason together": so reason itself is not some horrible "carnal" evil, nor is trying to understand the scriptures with (or within) reason any kind of horrible evil, either. God gave us our brains (and our reasoning abilities) for a ....... errrrrrrrrr, ..... "reason". :grin: *L*
In other words, that scripture doesn't mean what you've probably been led to believe that it does. It has to be looked at both within reason, and in context. For instance, if you'd lived in Nazi Germany and "despised" the Nazi government for its obvious evil (as any moral person rightly should have), would that scripture then mean that your righteous disgust at that government was somehow "carnal" or "sinful" in the eyes of God?, and that in His eyes it made you "walk after the flesh in the lust of uncleanness"??
......... A literal, unbending interpretation of that text would make it mean just that! But a reasonable view and interpretation of that text would consider it in context of the entirety of the scriptures, and would realize that the whole thing really does depend on what government is specifically in question, and on exactly what specific aspect(s), act(s), or action(s) of that government one happens to be despising?
Referring once again to the simple, yet polarizing example of the Nazi government: I find it completely unfathomable and unreasonable to think that God would have viewed the despising of (or even downright rebelling against) that government (and its horrific acts) as somehow being a "sin". Call me crazy if you want to, but I don't consider it to even be in the realm of possibility that God would have considered that to be "wrong", much more a sin.
So in that light, the meaning of that scripture isn't quite so "black and white" now, is it? There's a lot more subtlety to it than that.
That is certainly saying a lot of nothing. Did you bother to think he was not talking about government of this world. He was not talking to the Roman empire. But he was talking to the Church and about the rebellious people in the Church. We must understand we as Christains are part of two governments. One is America and the other is Christ's. We should as far as we can follow peace with all men but our main concern is the Kingdom of God.
Quote from: BenJammin on September 15, 2008, 12:50:59 PM
My loyalties are thus:
I do not pledge allegiance to the government that rules my country, rather to the country itself and what my country means to me. I understand that not everyone feels the same way, but don't criticize those who choose to pledge allegiance to their government, flag, or country. By the same token, don't criticize those who don't share those values.
Maybe I am a Nationalist, I don't know. Considering the primary definition of Nationalism is Devotion to the interests or culture of one's nation - source http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/nationalism (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/nationalism), maybe I am. I know that when I see the flag flying or hear "The Star Spangled Banner" my heart swells with pride, as I know without a doubt and without reservation that I live in the greatest country on earth. Of course, I would expect that any Australian, Canadian, Brit, French, German, Russian, Angolan (insert name of any other country) to feel the same when they see their flag and hear their own national anthem.
I do not, however, blindly follow wherever my government may try to lead and I don't agree with many of the policies of the government. To imply that I do, simply because I proclaim allegiance to country, is unjust.
BenJammin
This is probably the best example of how we should be about our country I have read. Thank you.
QuoteI wonder why you can not give us the full speach and only a few lines from here ot there that changes the whole meaning.
Bro. Dad,
Any familiarity with Jefferson's writings at all would let you know he was deeply distrustful of government. How out of context can a statement like "a little rebellion now and then is a good thing" be?
That statement, btw, was lifted from a letter Jefferson wrote to James Madison (the Father of the Constitution) shortly after Shay's rebellion. Shay's rebellion was a violent, armed uprising by farmers in Massachussetts over debts and taxes (that's the very abbreviated version of it).
Here's the letter in it's entirety, which can also be found here. (http://www.earlyamerica.com/review/summer/letter.html)
Paris, January 30th, 1787
Thomas Jefferson Dear Sir,
My last to you was of the 16th of December; since which, I have received yours of November 25 and December 4, which afforded me, as your letters always do, a treat on matters public, individual, and economical. I am impatient to learn your sentiments on the late troubles in the Eastern states. So far as I have yet seen, they do not appear to threaten serious consequences. Those states have suffered by the stoppage of the channels of their commerce, which have not yet found other issues. This must render money scarce and make the people uneasy. This uneasiness has produced acts absolutely unjustifiable; but I hope they will provoke no severities from their governments. A consciousness of those in power that their administration of the public affairs has been honest may, perhaps, produce too great a degree of indignation; and those characters, wherein fear predominates over hope, may apprehend too much from these instances of irregularity. They may conclude too hastily that nature has formed man insusceptible of any other government than that of force, a conclusion not founded in truth or experience.
Societies exist under three forms, sufficiently distinguishable: (1) without government, as among our Indians; (2) under governments, wherein the will of everyone has a just influence, as is the case in England, in a slight degree, and in our states, in a great one; (3) under governments of force, as is the case in all other monarchies, and in most of the other republics.
To have an idea of the curse of existence under these last, they must be seen. It is a government of wolves over sheep. It is a problem, not clear in my mind, that the first condition is not the best. But I believe it to be inconsistent with any great degree of population. The second state has a great deal of good in it. The mass of mankind under that enjoys a precious degree of liberty and happiness. It has its evils, too, the principal of which is the turbulence to which it is subject. But weigh this against the oppressions of monarchy, and it becomes nothing. Malo periculosam libertatem quam quietam servitutem. Even this evil is productive of good. It prevents the degeneracy of government and nourishes a general attention to the public affairs.
I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical. Unsuccessful rebellions, indeed, generally establish the encroachments on the rights of the people which have produced them. An observation of this truth should render honest republican governors so mild in their punishment of rebellions as not to discourage them too much. It is a medicine necessary for the sound health of government.
If these transactions give me no uneasiness, I feel very differently at another piece of intelligence, to wit, the possibility that the navigation of the Mississippi may be abandoned to Spain. I never had any interest westward of the Allegheny; and I will never have any. But I have had great opportunities of knowing the character of the people who inhabit that country; and I will venture to say that the act which abandons the navigation of the Mississippi is an act of separation between the Eastern and Western country. It is a relinquishment of five parts out of eight of the territory of the United States; an abandonment of the fairest subject for the payment of our public debts, and the chaining those debts on our own necks, in perpetuum.
I have the utmost confidence in the honest intentions of those who concur in this measure; but I lament their want of acquaintance with the character and physical advantages of the people, who, right or wrong, will suppose their interests sacrificed on this occasion to the contrary interests of that part of the confederacy in possession of present power. If they declare themselves a separate people, we are incapable of a single effort to retain them. Our citizens can never be induced, either as militia or as soldiers, to go there to cut the throats of their own brothers and sons, or rather, to be themselves the subjects instead of the perpetrators of the parricide.
Nor would that country quit the cost of being retained against the will of its inhabitants, could it be done. But it cannot be done. They are able already to rescue the navigation of the Mississippi out of the hands of Spain, and to add New Orleans to their own territory. They will be joined by the inhabitants of Louisiana. This will bring on a war between them and Spain; and that will produce the question with us, whether it will not be worth our while to become parties with them in the war in order to reunite them with us and thus correct our error. And were I to permit my forebodings to go one step further, I should predict that the inhabitants of the United States would force their rulers to take the affirmative of that question. I wish I may be mistaken in all these opinions.
Yours affectionately,
Th. Jefferson Jefferson clearly believed that the second form of government which he listed (that which the US was) was a necessary evil from which some good could result.
QuoteWe must understand we as Christains are part of two governments. One is America and the other is Christ's. We should as far as we can follow peace with all men but our main concern is the Kingdom of God.
I've never been a "part" of the American government. Other than my vote and my taxes, the former being the government's excuse as to how I'm a "part" and the latter being the tribute exacted by the government to empower them to break their oath of office and flaunt the Constitution.
Thank you I just got phone call and will come back and read it in a bit.
Quoteso nate, are you voting for obama now?
I'd rather have my hand fall off... ;)
Here (http://oll.libertyfund.org/?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php%3Ftitle=802&chapter=86685&layout=html&Itemid=27) is the letter to William Stephens Smith in which Jefferson makes his "tree of liberty" comments (in which he also references Shay's rebellion):
Paris. Nov 13, 1787.
Dear Sir,
—I am now to acknoledge the receipt of your favors of October the 4th, 8th, & 26th. In the last you apologise for your letters of introduction to Americans coming here. It is so far from needing apology on your part, that it calls for thanks on mine. I endeavor to shew civilities to all the Americans who come here, & will give me opportunities of doing it: and it is a matter of comfort to know from a good quarter what they are, & how far I may go in my attentions to them. Can you send me Woodmason's bills for the two copying presses for the M. de la Fayette, & the M. de Chastellux? The latter makes one article in a considerable account, of old standing, and which I cannot present for want of this article.—I do not know whether it is to yourself or Mr. Adams I am to give my thanks for the copy of the new constitution. I beg leave through you to place them where due. It will be yet three weeks before I shall receive them from America. There are very good articles in it: & very bad. I do not know which preponderate. What we have lately read in the history of Holland, in the chapter on the Stadtholder, would have sufficed to set me against a chief magistrate eligible for a long duration, if I had ever been disposed towards one: & what we have always read of the elections of Polish kings should have forever excluded the idea of one continuable for life. Wonderful is the effect of impudent & persevering lying. The British ministry have so long hired their gazetteers to repeat and model into every form lies about our being in anarchy, that the world has at length believed them, the English nation has believed them, the ministers themselves have come to believe them, & what is more wonderful, we have believed them ourselves. Yet where does this anarchy exist? Where did it ever exist, except in the single instance of Massachusetts? And can history produce an instance of rebellion so honourably conducted? I say nothing of it's motives. They were founded in ignorance, not wickedness. God forbid we should ever be 20 years without such a rebellion. The people cannot be all, & always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions it is a lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. We have had 13. states independent 11. years. There has been one rebellion. That comes to one rebellion in a century & a half for each state. What country before ever existed a century & half without a rebellion? & what country can preserve it's liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon & pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. It is it's natural manure. Our Convention has been too much impressed by the insurrection of Massachusetts: and in the spur of the moment they are setting up a kite to keep the hen-yard in order. I hope in God this article will be rectified before the new constitution is accepted.—You ask me if any thing transpires here on the subject of S. America? Not a word. I know that there are combustible materials there, and that they wait the torch only. But this country probably will join the extinguishers.—The want of facts worth communicating to you has occasioned me to give a little loose to dissertation. We must be contented to amuse, when we cannot inform.
Quote from: bishopnl on September 15, 2008, 02:10:17 PM
Quoteso nate, are you voting for obama now?
I'd rather have my hand fall off... ;)
LOL!
Quote from: bishopnl on September 15, 2008, 02:10:17 PM
Quoteso nate, are you voting for obama now?
I'd rather have my hand fall off... ;)
hahahahaha :laughhard: :laughhard: i agree with ya on that one.a typical unlikew for who the repubs have running does not mandate a vote for pure evil.
Jefferson talked about how the form of government they had he felt to be the best. rebelloin he spoke of as a little from time to time was to make the government more accountable. I too would concur with that statement as if we never speak out then the government would run over top of us. This is why I am so thankful we have the "freedom pf speech" in this country. From be to say America is perfect. From time to time we must stand up for what we fill to be right. If we do not stand up against cewrtain laws then the government will take our rights away.
Quote from: Brother Dad on September 15, 2008, 02:29:44 PM
Jefferson talked about how the form of government they had he felt to be the best. rebelloin he spoke of as a little from time to time was to make the government more accountable. I too would concur with that statement as if we never speak out then the government would run over top of us. This is why I am so thankful we have the "freedom pf speech" in this country. From be to say America is perfect. From time to time we must stand up for what we fill to be right. If we do not stand up against cewrtain laws then the government will take our rights away.
exactly!!! :thumbsup2: :thumbsup2:
QuoteIf we do not stand up against cewrtain laws then the government will take our rights away.
I agree with you. So if the government isn't to be trusted, why would we want to pledge allegiance to it?
Jefferson believed a society with no government to be the best, but that is incompatible with large populations, and he acknowledges that fact. Of course, we know that the government run by God is the most perfect form of government, but we won't get that until we get to heaven.
In the words of the late great Thomas Jefferson, he did indeed say that "a little" rebellion is good every now and then because it established the encroachments committed by the government, but in the very next sentence he plainly states:
An observation of this truth should render honest republican governors so mild in their punishment of rebellions as not to discourage them too much. It is a medicine necessary for the sound health of government. Meaning that the rebellion should be nothing more than a redress and not an overthrow.
Also,
It has its evils, too, the principal of which is the turbulence to which it is subject. But weigh this against the oppressions of monarchy, and it becomes nothing. Malo periculosam libertatem quam quietam servitutem. Even this evil is productive of good. It prevents the degeneracy of government and nourishes a general attention to public affairs.
Simply stating that the form of Government we had, was nothing in comparison to the evils of monarchy.
The Kingdom of Jesus Christ is indeed "at hand" spiritually and every man, woman, and child has been given the opportunity to join, however, the millennial reign of Jesus Christ has not been established on this earth as of yet, the Kingdom has not acquired it's rightful status here. There will be a day when that takes place, and everything as we know it, will be dissolved and perfect harmony will ensue!
There seems to be a sudden shift here.... ;)
So now we are all in agreement that Jefferson viewed governments as a necessary evil, but something not to be trusted but rather held accountable at all times?
And that Jefferson saw our government as something that needed to be consistently challenged, not given whole hearted allegiance?
There was a remedy for the rebellion that Jefferson spoke of -- it's called voting......
Quote from: Rattlesnake on September 15, 2008, 03:28:29 PM
There was a remedy for the rebellion that Jefferson spoke of -- it's called voting......
There was voting when Jefferson spoke of rebellion. Jefferson certaintly didn't see the write to vote as a cure-all for the natural problems that man made governments have.
Quote from: Brother Dad on September 15, 2008, 01:31:24 PM
I would encourage that we not get this ugly about what we feel about the country. To make this statement shows you are being judgemental. and does not refelct a Christ like attitude.
That is exactly the point I was trying to make! Did you read the post I was responding to?? You and I both made the same point, only I did so with sarcasm (trying to make the point a little more light-heardtedly than you did).
Quote from: Brother Dad on September 15, 2008, 01:46:45 PM
I wonder why you can not give us the full speach and only a few lines from here ot there that changes the whole meaning. I will grant that maybe Obama had a slip of words about what he beleived, as most people aren't sure why the believe what they are anyway. But the fact remains that until his family became part of the system his wife was not proud to be an American.
.... ??? ....... Ummmmmmmm, .... I didn't quote any speech by Obama in the post you reply to, so I'm not quite sure what you mean. The quotes I gave were all from letters written by Thomas Jefferson (to which I even provided the links, in case anyone would just so happen to want to read the letters in their entirety).
So again, I'm not quite sure what you're objecting to, unless perhaps you meant to reply to a different post, and somehow replied to the wrong post by mistake.
Quote from: Brother Dad on September 15, 2008, 01:56:24 PM
That is certainly saying a lot of nothing. Did you bother to think he was not talking about government of this world. He was not talking to the Roman empire. But he was talking to the Church and about the rebellious people in the Church.
If by "he"you are referring to the Apostle Peter (who wrote the epistle), then YES, I not only did bother to think that, but I have made that very case numerous times on this board.
It seems that you have managed to both misunderstand and misrepresent pretty much every single post that I've made in this thread. How is that possible? Have I done something previously to offend you? Or is it just my stance on the topic of discussion in this thread that has managed to offend you?
Neither did he see insurrection as a cure. As a matter of fact, when he spoke of the insurrection in Mass., he said it was done out of ignorance.
I think that if your going to run a country you need to believe in it and follow what has been comanded by the former presidents.
QuoteNeither did he see insurrection as a cure. As a matter of fact, when he spoke of the insurrection in Mass., he said it was done out of ignorance.
That's right. He saw it as a necessary part of keeping government accountable....he didn't call it a cure, he called it
"a medicine necessary for the sound health of government."The fact is, Jefferson never advocated blind allegiance to the government. Quite the opposite. He thought a little insurrection and a hearty distrust of government would actually work to keep the government honest.
*It should go without saying, I think, that Jefferson saw rebellion as the final cure for a government that had become oppressive of the rights of it's citizens.*
Quote from: Cody P on September 15, 2008, 05:03:10 PM
I think that if your going to run a country you need to believe in it and follow what has been comanded by the former presidents.
funny. i thought it was "we the people.." not a bunch of dead old guys.
Quote from: Cody P on September 15, 2008, 05:03:10 PM
I think that if your going to run a country you need to believe in it and follow what has been comanded by the former presidents.
That's a bit troubling....I would think Presidents should be less concerned about what their predecessors had done, and more concerned about what the Constitution says.
Although, I admit, most Americans don't have a clue what the Constitution says.
Quote from: jdcord on September 15, 2008, 04:28:38 PM
Quote from: Brother Dad on September 15, 2008, 01:46:45 PM
I wonder why you can not give us the full speach and only a few lines from here ot there that changes the whole meaning. I will grant that maybe Obama had a slip of words about what he beleived, as most people aren't sure why the believe what they are anyway. But the fact remains that until his family became part of the system his wife was not proud to be an American.
.... ??? ....... Ummmmmmmm, .... I didn't quote any speech by Obama in the post you reply to, so I'm not quite sure what you mean. The quotes I gave were all from letters written by Thomas Jefferson (to which I even provided the links, in case anyone would just so happen to want to read the letters in their entirety).
So again, I'm not quite sure what you're objecting to, unless perhaps you meant to reply to a different post, and somehow replied to the wrong post by mistake.
Bishopnl took care of the post I was talkling about. Sorry I confused you.
Quote from: bishopnl on September 15, 2008, 02:41:50 PM
QuoteIf we do not stand up against cewrtain laws then the government will take our rights away.
So if the government isn't to be trusted, why would we want to pledge allegiance to it?
it is not the government but the individualls that are in government. remember of the people for the people by the people. and that is what we pledge alligence to, under God.
Quote from: jdcord on September 15, 2008, 04:45:12 PM
Quote from: Brother Dad on September 15, 2008, 01:56:24 PM
That is certainly saying a lot of nothing. Did you bother to think he was not talking about government of this world. He was not talking to the Roman empire. But he was talking to the Church and about the rebellious people in the Church.
If by "he"you are referring to the Apostle Peter (who wrote the epistle), then YES, I not did bother to think that, but I have made that very case numerous times on this board.
It seems that you have managed to both misunderstand and misrepresent pretty much every single post that I've made in this thread. How is that possible? Have I done something previously to offend you? Or is it just my stance on the topic of discussion in this thread that has managed to offend you?
My why do you think I am offended. I simply was addressing what you wrote. Once agin sorry for the confusion. I was just wanting to clear up that I feel Peter was more talking about rebeling in the Church.
Quote from: bishopnl on September 15, 2008, 02:47:47 PM
There seems to be a sudden shift here.... ;)
So now we are all in agreement that Jefferson viewed governments as a necessary evil, but something not to be trusted but rather held accountable at all times?
And that Jefferson saw our government as something that needed to be consistently challenged, not given whole hearted allegiance?
in a sence your right same government, different people, and not a monarchy!
later guys and gals!! no phone money equalls no phone, hence there goes the computer too!
whew! this economic crunch is getting to me. this month we had to choose car or phone!!
we will be back when we can afford such luxuries. :cry2: :cry2:
:laughhard: :laughhard:
Quote from: yosemite on September 15, 2008, 05:29:19 PM
later guys and gals!! no phone money equalls no phone, hence there goes the computer too!
whew! this economic crunch is getting to me. this month we had to choose car or phone!!
we will be back when we can afford such luxuries. :cry2: :cry2:
:laughhard: :laughhard:
How will you be able to survive?
The government should always be accountable - as a matter of fact - the government is the people (or started out that way). We the people is a correct statement.
The only thing here that needs to be clarified is the fact about what is meant by "not swearing allegiance". I mean, are you saying there should be no Pledge allegiance to the flag? (because in it, allegiance to the Republic for which it stands is also included).
Are you saying that in an act of war against this country, because you have sworn no allegiance, you are free to commit treasonist acts under the guise (a little rebellion is ok?).
Are you saying that you're fellow citizens, the ones who have to lay down beside you in the same neighborhood, have no right to know who's side you're on? You see, when you say "I don't swear allegiance to a country", people get anxious as to where you really stand!
Swearing allegiance does not mean to bend to every thing that a government trys to impose, but it does mean you're neighbors should be safe in knowing where their friend next door will stand in case of emergency! It does mean that an individual will display a certian sense of loyalty when it comes to the defense of this great nation and it's people! It means that if you can't stand with us in times of trouble, then why would you stand here in times of peace?
Does it mean there are no absolutes, no longer any stand for something or fall for anything? What does it mean? I would really like to know.
Because we have so many here that do not have to swear allegiance, we have more enemies at home - than we do abroad!
My mother was from England, it took her 12 years to get her citizenship, when she finally got it - she had to swear allegiance to this country or be sent back home! I feel that no less should be done today.
Quoteit is not the government but the individualls that are in government. remember of the people for the people by the people. and that is what we pledge alligence to, under God.
Man is always flawed, therefore, man-made and man run government is always going to suffer from corruption and internal strife. No matter who is running it. "We the people" ordained a Constitution to keep in check, as much as possible, the corruption and problems that come with such a government.
As for our neighbors knowing where I stand and all of that:
If my neighbors want to know whether or not I swear allegiance to a bunch of corrupt and immoral politicians, they're free to ask me. Although I would dispute that my neighbors "have a right to know" anything about my political beliefs.
It also lets me know that the spirit of Americans in 1776 and the spirit of Americans in 2008 is not the same.
The Declaration of Independence says:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government.."Yet in 2008, the United States government has become destructive of Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness through multiple policies, and yet we're told, "If you don't swear allegiance to this government, you should get out."
The fact is, if you guys want to swear allegiance to anything, it shouldn't be the government. It should be the Constitution which has been trashed by the same government you are advocating we swear fealty and loyalty too.
Also, it somehow seems that the implication here is that one who doesn't swear allegiance to the American government is an "enemy" and wants to commit "treason." Is that how one views allegiance to the Kingdom of God? That it makes you a traitor to America?
The only thing I am saying is that , We need a president who isnt affraid to fight for our country , one who will stand up and pledge the allegance and salute The American Flag. Obama dosent even like our flag or our National Anthem and that is very sad. I think its funny that Obama is running for The President of The United States and he dont even agree or like The United States. I just think that The United States is going to go even farther down hill if he gets presidency. I am VOTING FOR John McCain , I like his ways , his respones to the questions asked of him and I like what he stands for. And another thing if you cant salute the American Flag or Recite The National Anthem you better be careful and watch what you are saying about The United States because God has his hands on this great counrty. And if Obama gets president I am almost 100 % sure that God will take his hands off of us.
QuoteAnd another thing if you cant salute the American Flag or Recite The National Anthem you better be careful and watch what you are saying about The United States because God has his hands on this great counrty. And if Obama gets president I am almost 100 % sure that God will take his hands off of us.
I see...so God is a Republican?
:hypocrite:
I didnt say that ! , All I am saying is that I dont see why anyone that is a christian would want Obama as their president ? ???
Quote from: Cody P on September 15, 2008, 07:25:49 PM
I didnt say that ! , All I am saying is that I dont see why anyone that is a christian would want Obama as their president ? ???
Hey, I don't see why anyone would want Obama as their president period, whether they are Christian or not!
But I don't think God's waiting on the election to decide the fate of America.
Im not sure about if that is what God is doing or not but anyways , I just wish we could do something to impact more people to vote for John McCain.
Quote from: Cody P on September 15, 2008, 07:10:48 PM
And if Obama gets president I am almost 100 % sure that God will take his hands off of us.
Whether or not God "has His hands on" a people, so to speak, depends on whether or not that people is faithful to Him. It has nothing to do with the person who sits in the White House (although the election of that person is to a degree a reflection of the values and priorities of the people).
One could make the case that God long ago "took His hands off us," due to the increasingly widespread wickedness of the American people.
I think God has his hands on America only in the sense that God is in control of every nation, and he orchestrates all things according to His will.
As to God having his hands on a people in the sense of the favor of God, I think God's favor is not upon any earthly nation, but upon His people.
Quote from: bishopnl on September 15, 2008, 06:27:06 PM
Quoteit is not the government but the individualls that are in government. remember of the people for the people by the people. and that is what we pledge alligence to, under God.
Man is always flawed, therefore, man-made and man run government is always going to suffer from corruption and internal strife. No matter who is running it. "We the people" ordained a Constitution to keep in check, as much as possible, the corruption and problems that come with such a government.
As for our neighbors knowing where I stand and all of that:
If my neighbors want to know whether or not I swear allegiance to a bunch of corrupt and immoral politicians, they're free to ask me. Although I would dispute that my neighbors "have a right to know" anything about my political beliefs.
It also lets me know that the spirit of Americans in 1776 and the spirit of Americans in 2008 is not the same.
The Declaration of Independence says: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government.."
Yet in 2008, the United States government has become destructive of Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness through multiple policies, and yet we're told, "If you don't swear allegiance to this government, you should get out."
The fact is, if you guys want to swear allegiance to anything, it shouldn't be the government. It should be the Constitution which has been trashed by the same government you are advocating we swear fealty and loyalty too.
Also, it somehow seems that the implication here is that one who doesn't swear allegiance to the American government is an "enemy" and wants to commit "treason." Is that how one views allegiance to the Kingdom of God? That it makes you a traitor to America?
wow. i can't believe i am saying this... but ditto everything nate just said.
Quote from: Cody P on September 15, 2008, 07:37:16 PM
Im not sure about if that is what God is doing or not but anyways , I just wish we could do something to impact more people to vote for John McCain.
maybe you should preach more fire and brimstone...
Quote from: bishopnl on September 15, 2008, 06:27:06 PM
Quoteit is not the government but the individualls that are in government. remember of the people for the people by the people. and that is what we pledge alligence to, under God.
Man is always flawed, therefore, man-made and man run government is always going to suffer from corruption and internal strife. No matter who is running it. "We the people" ordained a Constitution to keep in check, as much as possible, the corruption and problems that come with such a government.
As for our neighbors knowing where I stand and all of that:
If my neighbors want to know whether or not I swear allegiance to a bunch of corrupt and immoral politicians, they're free to ask me. Although I would dispute that my neighbors "have a right to know" anything about my political beliefs.
It also lets me know that the spirit of Americans in 1776 and the spirit of Americans in 2008 is not the same.
The Declaration of Independence says: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government.."
Yet in 2008, the United States government has become destructive of Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness through multiple policies, and yet we're told, "If you don't swear allegiance to this government, you should get out."
The fact is, if you guys want to swear allegiance to anything, it shouldn't be the government. It should be the Constitution which has been trashed by the same government you are advocating we swear fealty and loyalty too.
Also, it somehow seems that the implication here is that one who doesn't swear allegiance to the American government is an "enemy" and wants to commit "treason." Is that how one views allegiance to the Kingdom of God? That it makes you a traitor to America?
1st, you're political affliations are not in question here, the question was " where do you stand"? Pledging allegiance to the government is not the question here either, although pledging allegiance to the people, who by the way are the government, the country in which you live and to the flag, which stands for liberty, freedom, justice equality among other things would be an honorable thing!
You keep saying swearing allegiance to the American government, I am not talking about an administration, I am talking about a country, People flag e.t.c.
And I in no way insinuated because you would not swear allegiance to any government that would make you want to be a traitor or an enemy, I simply asked a question, which you failed to answer!
God himself tells us that a kingdom divided against itself will not stand, and any common sense at all would tell you that a stance against a "any" government wherein which you live would be against all biblical teaching.
In the case here, you have confused a government entity, with the government (as in people) and the country in which you live. The allegiance with Christ will be of none effect to anyone if they can't follow the teachings ---
Jesus is first, then family, then the government of the USA (THE PEOPLE)!!!
Quote from: bishopnl on September 15, 2008, 08:09:57 PM
I think God has his hands on America only in the sense that God is in control of every nation, and he orchestrates all things according to His will.
As to God having his hands on a people in the sense of the favor of God, I think God's favor is not upon any earthly nation, but upon His people.
Then you just contradicted the word! God made a promise to Abraham to bless anyone who blessed him, regardless of their standing in the kingdom!
Quote from: bishopnl on September 15, 2008, 07:28:32 PM
Quote from: Cody P on September 15, 2008, 07:25:49 PM
I didnt say that ! , All I am saying is that I dont see why anyone that is a christian would want Obama as their president ? ???
Hey, I don't see why anyone would want Obama as their president period, whether they are Christian or not!
But I don't think God's waiting on the election to decide the fate of America.
God could very well be waiting on the outcome of the elecition to decide the severity of our fate! Remember, nations are punished because of their rulers.
Let's lay out a few facts.
We, the people, as stated in the Preamble to the Constitution, is NOT the government of the United States. The people formed a Constitution which would establish a government. Until the government gets back to following the Constitution, you are going to have a hard time convincing me that it's present goal is truly representing "the people."
I have never insinuated that I support treasonous acts or am on anyone's "side" other than God's or the Constitutions, neither of which the current federal government gives any regard too. The quotes from Jefferson, which were initially posted by JD, were done so not to advocate that we all go out and start an armed uprising (the fact that there is even a question of this is ludicrous), but rather to show that Jefferson, along with other founding fathers, never supported allegiance to the government. You said, earlier in the thread:
"Not only did they swear allegiance to the flag, country and it's people, they swore allegiance to the preservation of the people, the union and the Government as a whole."This is patently untrue. The Pledge of Allegiance, which is given "to the Republic" was written by Christian Socialist Francis Bellamy in 1892 and wasn't recognized as the official pledge until 1942, under practically socialist president Franklin Roosevelt. Nowhere did the Founders dictate that we should all swear allegiance to the flag and the government. I have a hard time imagining Jefferson advocating that we all pledge allegiance to the "Republic" (i.e. government) when he was so distrustful of governments that he advocated a "little rebellion" every now and then to keep it honest. Their is no record, to my knowledge, of Jefferson, Madison, or any of the other Founders stating that we owe the government, or the union, our unswerving loyalty. Their own words tell us that they believe government should always be held accountable.
I'm not against those who pledge allegiance to the flag...I've done it many times myself. Most people, like Ben, aren't really thinking of Washington bureaucracy when they say the pledge...they are just thinking about the country in general. Maybe this is what you are saying now. But the statements you made earlier in the thread, like the aforementioned one as well as this one:
It was not the Government they distrusted (they formed it) it was the people who refused to swear allegiance to this country and it's beliefs and tried to destroy the very thing America stood for ---- FREEDOM!!!!!! Lead me to believe that you came into the thread convinced the founders wanted us to swear loyalty to the government as well as the country, but tried to shift when you saw actual letters from the founders stating their distrust of government, and realized you weren't as aware of their positions as you initially thought.
As for the rest of this, you seem to be of the opinion that the Bible commands us to swear allegiance to our earthly government/country. Could you show me where you find this in scripture, please? I see plenty of scripture for obeying authority (as long as you can do so without violating the Word of God), but nowhere do I remember seeing that we have to pledge our undying loyalty to the government or the country.
Further you state:
God himself tells us that a kingdom divided against itself will not stand, and any common sense at all would tell you that a stance against a "any" government wherein which you live would be against all biblical teaching.I take it then, that any Christian member of Nazi Germany in 1939 should have been in wholehearted favor of the annihilation of the Jews--otherwise they were "against all biblical teaching?" Pol Pot, Mussolini, Saddam Hussein...taking a stance against them if you were a citizen of their country is "against all biblical teaching?" Or for that matter, Jefferson, Adams, Washington and the Founders were "against all biblical teachings" when they took up arms against a government that had become oppressive of their basic human rights?
Rattlesnake, I think you're a good guy. I appreciate the fact that you love the US. But this idea that taking a stance against the government with no qualifiers is sin is just dead wrong. Our government has consistently violated the Constitution and in many cases trampled on the 3 basic human rights listed in the Declaration. The Bible says I am to obey the authority over me, but nowhere does it say that I have to swear my allegiance to a government that violates the supreme law of the land. I'll obey it's laws as long as obeying it doesn't conflict with my Christianity, but I'll continue to point out that the entity itself routinely violates both scripture and the Constitution.
QuoteThen you just contradicted the word! God made a promise to Abraham to bless anyone who blessed him, regardless of their standing in the kingdom!
??? What? How is America "blessing God" or His people? The fact that they allow Christianity to exist in this country?
QuoteGod could very well be waiting on the outcome of the election to decide the severity of our fate! Remember, nations are punished because of their rulers.
OK....God sets kings up and sets kings down. (Dan. 2:21) He already knows who is going to be elected. So he's not waiting on anything.
Further, having to choose between McCain and Obama is punishment enough....It's like choosing between fire and brimstone or a flood. ;)
Btw, I shouldn't have to add qualifiers to the things I'm saying, but it's pretty certain, judging from the reactions, that qualifiers might be needed. Obviously, I speak only for myself.
I am extremely grateful to live in America. I love the people (even though many of them frustrate me), I love the rich full history, and there are parts of that history that I'm grateful for and proud of. And there are many things in and about America today that I am proud of. I respect and honor the sacrifices of people who have served, and the country itself I have deep affection and love for.
It's the government I have a problem with. I don't owe it my allegiance or any loyalty. As a Christian, I should obey the law as long as it doesn't conflict with my service to God, but as a citizen, it's my duty to point out when government is in violation of the law itself. As an American, our primary "duty" so to speak, is to the Constitution...and when the government violates it, it ought to make us angry, not make us want to swear allegiance and turn a blind eye.
Ok, Ok ---- we could go on with this forever!!!! Good points on all sides! I want to say that these conversations are solely for the sharpining of the mind. To make one step out of the box, and to maybe realize there are other options to consider. To make a statement and then watch the reaction is sometimes priceless!
While we all have different opinions, we all as christians are working toward the same goal! Thank God for the differences...
I do believe that when you take a stance, it should be bathed with prayer, so to be sure that the stance we take is in line with biblical teachings "ie" taking a stance against the government (or rulers) I think that would be a more adequate explaination of what is meant here - I think is contrary to what Jesus meant when he said pray for you're rulers, that they might do the will of God. No one is advocating blind allegiance, we must be wise as serpents - yet harmless as doves, but integrity, honesty and loyality are traits inspired by God himself.
If a man cannot be loyal to his brethern and country who he has seen - then how can he be loyal to a God he hasn't? Once again, bilnd allegiance is not advocated. Remember, the scripture? I know it says love, but the afore mentioned are all a part of the charity the bible mentions and says without - we will in no wise enter in. That is how the world will know we are Christians, by the love we have toward one another.
I didn't say fall in love with the government, or any of its views, but I do say that if we intend to go to heaven, we had better understand that no power is given except it be of God, and we had better not be guilty of speaking evil of what God has ordained!
Gentlemen, in short, there are ones among us that are sworn to our hurt, lets join together and lift up this great nation and it's leaders - to the one true God who is able !!!!
Do not think that any of my post are comitted to the hurt of any individual, regardless of his stance or ideas, because simply put - I love you all in Jesus name - and there's nothing you can do about it.
I do want to mention that God indeed still waiting, even until the last minute, in hopes that our mind and hearts will be changed, the door of the ark is and will always be opened until the very last minute!!
Quote from: Brother Dad on September 15, 2008, 05:20:38 PM
Once agin sorry for the confusion.
Me too. Sorry about that.
Quote from: Brother Dad on September 15, 2008, 05:20:38 PM
I was just wanting to clear up that I feel Peter was more talking about rebeling in the Church.
I completely agree with you about that. But you'd be surprised at how many people see such verses as referring to earthly national governments, instead of referring to the leadership (or "governing") of the church.
Quote from: bishopnl on September 16, 2008, 02:30:57 PM
Btw, I shouldn't have to add qualifiers to the things I'm saying, but it's pretty certain, judging from the reactions, that qualifiers might be needed. Obviously, I speak only for myself.
I am extremely grateful to live in America. I love the people (even though many of them frustrate me), I love the rich full history, and there are parts of that history that I'm grateful for and proud of. And there are many things in and about America today that I am proud of. I respect and honor the sacrifices of people who have served, and the country itself I have deep affection and love for.
It's the government I have a problem with. I don't owe it my allegiance or any loyalty. As a Christian, I should obey the law as long as it doesn't conflict with my service to God, but as a citizen, it's my duty to point out when government is in violation of the law itself. As an American, our primary "duty" so to speak, is to the Constitution...and when the government violates it, it ought to make us angry, not make us want to swear allegiance and turn a blind eye.
:clap: :onfire: :goodmod:
Great post, oh mighty one (as is the post before it, also). :pray: I gravel at your feet. (*L*)
Rattlesnake,
You weren't necessarily addressing me with your post, but I'd like to chime in anyway.
Quote from: Rattlesnake on September 15, 2008, 05:43:32 PM
The only thing here that needs to be clarified is the fact about what is meant by "not swearing allegiance". I mean, are you saying there should be no Pledge allegiance to the flag? (because in it, allegiance to the Republic for which it stands is also included).
That's a good place to start. The second is that the pledge was written by an avowed Socialist, with his stated intention being that the pledge would teach children to be loyal to the government (not to the Constitution, or to the ideals upon which the nation was founded - but to the government, specifically). Unfortunately, I'd have to say that Bellamy's Socialist "pledge" has most definitely had its desired effect - many Americans have grown up with an almost blind loyalty to the government, no matter it does, and with a complete disinterest in being a "watchdog" on the government, and an even lesser interest in speaking out or otherwise actively holding it accountable to abide by the Constitution (because they don't even have any interest in such things, anyway).
You may think that the pledge is just an innocent little thing to do, and that it truly promotes just an allegiance to "We, the people", but the Socialist author of the pledge had a far different intention (by his own admission) - the intention of instilling loyalty to the government - and I dare say that he would be very pleased indeed with the results of his seemingly "innocent" little pledge.
Quote
Are you saying that in an act of war against this country, because you have sworn no allegiance, you are free to commit treasonist acts under the guise (a little rebellion is ok?).
Let me change just one or two details of your question, and ask it "right back at ya". ;)
"Are you saying that
the founders, in an act of war against
their country, because
they had sworn no allegiance
to the crown,
that they were free to commit treasonous acts under the guise (a little rebellion is ok?)."
Hmmmmmmmm? ..... makes that question a whole more interesting, wouldn't you say?
Quote
Are you saying that you're fellow citizens, the ones who have to lay down beside you in the same neighborhood, have no right to know who's side you're on?
I definitely would say that. They have no "right" to
know that. They have every right to
ask, but absolutely no right to
know. I would even say that they have every right to
demand to know, but still would have no actual right to
know, and certainly no right to use any force to obtain an answer. ......... but if you've learned anything at all about me in the last week or so, you can probably imagine that they would most likely regret ever having asked me in the first place, because once I got started they would almost certainly have a very hard time getting me to ever shut up. *LOL*
Quote
You see, when you say "I don't swear allegiance to a country", people get anxious as to where you really stand!
They shouldn't. Because whenever this subject has come up I have always been very pointed about exactly where I stand, and why it is that I won't swear allegiance to any earthly government or nation. If I were asked to swear an allegiance to the founding ideals of this nation, or even to the Constitution itself, I would gladly do so (as long as I could do so with the understanding that God and his word supersede any such allegiance on my part). But an allegiance to "the flag" or to "the Republic"? ...... Nah-Ah. Not gonna do it.
And I shouldn't have to point this out, but for further clarification purposes I will anyway: it should be obvious by now that I wouldn't "turn on" my neighbors and "wage war" against them on behalf of any other nation or people (since I clearly would never swear an allegiance to any of them, either). And in the case of an actual invasion, ... God forbid, ... I would definitely stand with my friends and neighbors in any such fight. However, the movie "Red Dawn" not withstanding, and considering the immensity of the military strength of our current "Empire" on the Potomac, I don't foresee any such thing happening anywhere in my lifetime.
Quote
It means that if you can't stand with us in times of trouble, then why would you stand here in times of peace?
For me, that would almost solely depend on what (specifically) was being heralded as "times of trouble", and under what circumstances, of course. I have a feeling that some of the things you might consider "times of trouble", I would consider as just plain "blowback" from any one of the government's numerous arrogant and forceful episodes of interference (and murderous, war-mongering) pretty much anywhere and everywhere on the planet. But as I said above, an actual invasion of of the territorial U.S. would be a different story altogether.
I am admitting up front that I did not read all of this thread...I couldn't stomach it honestly.
A few points:
1. Obama has stated that it was customary for him to place his hand over his heart for the pledge, and stand respectfully during the Anthem. I believe this because this is exactly what I was taught as a child. Also...at a recent event at my high school...I nudged my friend during the Anthem and pointed at the 90% of the crowd that respectfully stood without their hands on their hearts. I guess it's the rule rather than the exception. Either that or there are a buncha 'Merica hatin' commies in the most conservative district in Arkansas.
Seriously...this issue has been done to death.
2. Support for your nation needs to be measured by your actions rather than your words. Does anyone doubt McCain's love for his country? Not in the face of his sacrifices as a soldier. Does anyone really doubt Obama's love for his country? Well...if you want to do that, you will have to discard any and all of the public service he has ever done, as well as his work in government...or adopt a VERY jaded attitude about politics in general. And if you are going to do that, then what would stop you from using the same jaded arguments on McCain.
3. Most people who say the Pledge do not know what it means. Therefore it becomes an empty gesture.
4. Suggesting people should leave America if they don't say the Pledge is to show yourself to be ignorant of the most basic of American principles. Seriously...what is more liberating than being allowed to decline to swear your loyalty to your nation.
5. The Bible says we are not supposed to swear by anything...not even the hair of our own head. Why? Because...we don't know what tomorrow is going to bring...how can we attest to something's validity when we are fallible. I choose not to "swear allegiance" to anything. Doubly so a national standard that has flown over great evil as well as great good.
I do not say the Pledge...it is my right not to. I pay my taxes and I obey the laws of this land. That is the way that I show love for my country.
Thought I would place this on this web. Who is Obama?
http://www.christianfamilytube.com/?c=users_video&s=more&id=1797