THE REST OF STORY REGARDING PATRICK HENRY - if only Paul Harvey had made this known!
"...Convinced the Constitution would fail to secure and protect liberty, Patrick Henry [who refused to attend the Constitutional Convention as one of Virginia's delegates, declaring 'I smelt a rat!'] voiced his concerns to the Virginia Ratifying Convention in 1788:
'…I say our privileges and rights are in danger. …the new form of Government … will … effectually … oppress and ruin the people…. In some parts of the plan before you, the great rights of freemen are endangered, in other parts, absolutely taken away…. There will be no checks, no real balances, in this Government: What can avail your specious imaginary balances, your rope-dancing, chain-rattling, ridiculous ideal checks and contrivances? …And yet who knows the dangers that this new system may produce: they are out of the sight of the common people: They cannot foresee latent consequences.... I see great jeopardy in this new Government.'67
"In contrast to the federalists’ failed predictions, this and nearly everything the anti-federalists forecast about the Constitution has come true [even after the Bill of Rights, aka a Bill of Goods,* were added]...."
Find out how much you really know about the Constitution as compared to the Bible. Take our 10-question Constitution Survey in the sidebar and receive a free copy of the 85-page "Primer" of "BL vs. USC."
I just spent 10 minutes writing a reply and then hit the wrong tab. YEAH!!
Here is what I see, Pastor Ted…“A regrettably large share of our legal experiences operate not in the shadow of the Constitution and its constraints, but rather in the shadow of explicitly unconstitutional rules, actions, and orders. In the time it takes for improper Executive Orders to be reined in, for illicit administrative decisions to be corrected, and for misinterpretations of constitutional power to be overturned, so much of society’s activity is framed by what we might call the not-Constitution — all those acts of government that are deemed illegal only after they have caused enduring harm. A most troubling aspect of government power is its insistence on pushing past constitutional constraints and operating in a blurry legal wilderness of its own creation while forcing Americans to prove that those power grabs lack legitimacy.” –J.B. Shurk
in another words, the Constitution is a paper tiger. Without the first 13 words of the second amendment in force an effect and the people controlling the monetary system it’s a big joke.
With Notes of Reference to the Constitution and Laws of the Federal Government of the United States and of the Commonwealth of Virginia, as the “true palladium of liberty.” In addition to checking federal power, the Second Amendment also provided state governments with what Luther Martin (1744/48–1826) described as the “last coup de grace” that would enable the states “to thwart and oppose the general government.” Last, it enshrined the ancient Florentine and Roman constitutional principle of civil and military virtue by making every citizen a soldier and every soldier a citizen.
Where I run into a problem is the idea of using “Gods” law as our governing system is that MEN have to figure out what that law is and how to administer it. MEN have to carry out the penalties for violating it and decide who is worth of death for violating the sabbath. We can’t even decide when the sabbath IS let alone establish a code for violating it! And who is damaged by someone “violating the sabbath”? Can God Himself come into a court and claim damage? Why can’t we simply learn to love our CREATOR with all of our heart, mind body and soul and love our neighbor as our self? And that doesn’t mean love a robber, rapist or murderer. As a matter of fact loving ourselves is an issue in and of itself. As the lyrics in Write it On My Heart say 𝐀𝐧𝐝 𝐈 𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐠𝐞𝐭 𝐭𝐨 𝐭𝐫𝐮𝐬𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐭𝐫𝐮𝐭𝐡 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐈 𝐛𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐞𝐯𝐞
𝐈 𝐭𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐛𝐲 𝐧𝐨𝐰 𝐢𝐭 𝐰𝐨𝐮𝐥𝐝 𝐛𝐞 𝐬𝐞𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐝 𝐧𝐚𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞
𝐓𝐨 𝐥𝐨𝐯𝐞 𝐦𝐲 𝐧𝐞𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐛𝐨𝐫 𝐚𝐬 𝐦𝐲𝐬𝐞𝐥𝐟
𝐁𝐮𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐧 𝐬𝐨𝐦𝐞 𝐭𝐢𝐦𝐞𝐬 𝐈 𝐜𝐚𝐧’𝐭 𝐪𝐮𝐢𝐭𝐞 𝐭𝐞𝐥𝐥
𝐈𝐟 𝐈 𝐥𝐨𝐯𝐞 𝐦𝐲𝐬𝐞𝐥𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐰𝐞𝐥𝐥
Loving oneself can become an issue for sure. How many people actually DO and not in a narcissistic way? Men are messed up and frankly can’t be trusted to keep their own house in order so why should we trust them with a theocracy? Yahshua didn’t. Why should we? Remember if you gain the power to avoid healing a blind man on the sabbath!
First, regarding the impotent Second Amendment: America was sold down the river when the 18th-century founders replaced Biblical responsibilities (based upon the moral law of God) for Enlightenment rights, and nothing demonstrates it better than the Second Amendment.
Think about it: The Amendment WITH the wording "shall not be infringed" is the MOST infringed, licensed, and limited Amendment of the entire twenty seven. Furthermore, a future generation of our posterity is likely to see the Second Amendment whittled away entirely or repealed altogether. This is inherent nature and danger of optional Enlightenment rights versus non-optional Biblical responsibilities, such as the following:
"Let the high praises of God be in their mouth, and a two-edged sword [or today's equivalent] in their hand ... this honor have all his saints. Praise ye Yah." (Psalm 149:6-9)
"But if any provide not for his own, and especially for those of his own house [beginning with spiritual and physical protection], he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel." (1 Timothy 5:8)
Which is more potent: 1) An optional right, or 2) A non-optional responsibility?
Which is more likely to be infringed, licensed, and ultimately abolished altogether?
Which did the pre-Second Amendment Americans look to for their authority to bear arms, with little or nor infringement?
At this same location, you will also find a radio interview Larry Pratt (Executive Director of Gun Owners of America) conducted with me on this same subject. I think you'll find Mr. Pratt's remarks especially interesting.
I just want to know how it would work with MEN being the ones to decide how it will all work. That's the problem. Just like MEN ignore the provisions of the 2nd amendment and infringe and murder because of it, so how can we have true freedom outside of anarchy which is basically no rulers? The rules would e simple. DO NO HARM. Don't expect someone else to care for you. I'm convinced that I have two spirits dwelling in me. The flesh one that wants me to do whatever I want to satisfy it and the one of Yahweh that says...don't do that Mark. If I listen to that voice, which I manage to do quite well most of my of my life I do fine. If I don't well...turmoil is the result. Wasn't it MEN who used a convoluted understanding of the word to justify burning women at the stake in Salem? I know that you mean well Pastor Ted...no doubt it my mind, but the big question is HOW.
There is something called 'Ubuntu' in South Africa, that used to be (and still is in some cases) practiced by some tribes, It entailed surrounding the malefactor with the whole tribe and telling him/her that they know he/she is better than that, that he/she can make amends. That he/she is a person as they are persons, and they all accept this, that the malefactor is a part of this society, as are those surrounding him/her. That each needs the other to be whole. It is a psychological approach to wrong doing in contrast to punishment. To me that smacks of self love and therefore love for others comes easier.
I will do a search for it. That’s an interesting concept. HOWEVER what if the detractor is murdering or some heinous act with a victim or multiple victims?
That did cross my mind, , and this reply is from my imaginings only... The more we apply lovingness and respect into our society, the less likely, I believe, would it be that such a society creates purposeful murderers. The big question, of course is how to get such a society started? Lots of imagination, change of mindset, co-operation and determination needed, without that the swamp will get bigger.
Sometimes Substack just plain stinks. Again I was in the middle of a response and wanted to rid myself of duplicate windows, one of which was block my effort. When I xed out of that one, my comment disappeared. Which was how does society create "purposeful murderers"? Murder is usually motivated by revenge, hate, or trying to eliminate witnesses to a crime. Psychopaths are more likely to murder and if they get to have a job in the government can get away with shooting kids in the back, mothers in the head and burning churches to the ground with 17 small children in side as well as other innocent people. Devising a test that can keep them out of a profession would be a start. https://www.courageouslion.us/p/problem-psychopathic-control-freaks
How does society create 'purposeful murderers?'. I have to answer that one... Hurt a person enough throughout their childhood and they may well feel pretty murderous towards some around them and may well 'purposefully' kill them one day. that's what I meant.
I feel the same about Substack sometimes...things I spent time on just disappeared!
As to psychopaths, I remember reading about a survey done of leading CEOs of very large companies and very successful politicians, they were nearly all within the spectrum of psychopathy. They possess a ruthless determination to get what or where they want regardless of whom they may hurt in the process. Not all psychopaths are 'hands on ' killers, politicians are often a fine example sending soldiers off to kill and be killed.
If our way of bringing up kids and our way of educating them didn't, under some circumstances create psychopaths, we'd have no wannabe leaders, and wouldn't life be nicer!
Lastly, what Mr. Shurk depicted is some of the 100s of 1000s of consequences of the whirlwind today's America is reaping thanks to the wind sown by the constitutional framers when they replaced the Bible's immutable/unchanging moral law with their own capricious man-made Enlightenment and Masonic tradition - aka the biblically seditious Constitution:
"[B]ecause they have ... trespassed against my law ... they have sown the wind, and they shall reap the whirlwind...." (Hosea 8:1, 7)
Today's America is reaping the inevitable ever-intensifying whirlwind resulting from the wind sown by the constitutional framers and fanned by today's hoodwinked Christians and patriots who have been bamboozled into believing today's whirlwind can be dissipated by appealing to the wind responsible for spawning the whirlwind.
Next, regarding theocracies: Theocracy is not optional. Every government that exists today (including the Constitutional Republic), that has existed in the past, and will exist in the future, is, has been, and/or will be a theocracy.
There are no vacuums when it comes to legislated morality or what's, more often than not, immorality. Consequently, a nation's foundational ethical standard determines its God.
Thus, there is likewise no vacuums when it comes to religious-influenced governments, be it even Secular Humanism in its multifaceted forms, and it usually is.
When one understands that idolatry is not so much about statues as it is statutes, it becomes clear that all governments are theocratic (god ruled), serving either the true God or some false god, demonstrated by what laws they keep and consider the supreme law of the land.
Question: Were the governments in the Old Testament under the god Baal (or any other false god named in the Old Testament) theocracies?
Answer: Of course, they were.
Question: Was Baal (or any other god named in the Bible) real or were they merely ancient forms of We the People?
Answer: Merely ancient forms of We the People. See 1 Corinthians 8:4-6.
Consequently: "...There is no escaping theocracy [or theonomy]. A government’s laws reflect its morality, and the source of that morality (or, more often than not, immorality) is its god. It is never a question of theocracy or no theocracy, but whose theocracy. The American people, by way of their elected officials, are the source of the Constitutional Republic’s laws. Therefore, the Constitutional Republic’s god is WE THE PEOPLE.
"People recoil at the idea of a theocracy’s morality being forced upon them, but because all governments are theocracies, someone’s morality is always being enforced. This is an inevitability of government. The question is which god, theocracy, laws, and morality will we choose to live under?..."
A theocracy is rule by a religious faith of some sort like many middle east countries. A DEMOCRACY is rule by men and their laws which may mirror divine law but can also contradict it in a major way. Demos has to do with man where theos has to do with a "god" of some sort. I see the US as a mixture since COMMON LAW was based on the understanding of divine law. There had to be a VICTIM. Babylonian statutory law doesn't need a victim. The "state" is always considered the "victim". Thus the State of Nebraska vs Ted R Weiland for traveling down the highway 2 MPH faster than the sign states is allowed. "They" are also guilty of making laws that result in the murder of a child and mother in the case of Ruby Ridge or the murder of many more in Waco Texas because of the lack of the payment for some sort of "license" or "permit". The Bryan Malenowski case comes to mind. https://www.courageouslion.us/p/thanks-to-all-tyrants-friends-atf
There are no vacuums when it comes to legislated morality or what's, more often than not, immorality. Consequently, a nation's foundational ethical standard determines its God.
Thus, there is likewise no vacuums when it comes to religious-influenced governments, be it even Secular Humanism in its multifaceted forms, and it usually is.
When one understands that idolatry is not so much about statues as it is statutes, it becomes clear that all governments are theocratic (god ruled), serving either the true God or some false god, demonstrated by what laws they keep and consider the supreme law of the land.
Question: Were the governments in the Old Testament under the god Baal (or any other false god named in the Old Testament) theocracies?
Answer: Of course, they were.
Question: Was Baal (or any other god named in the Bible) real or were they merely ancient forms of We the People?
Answer: Merely ancient forms of We the People. See 1 Corinthians 8:4-6.
Consequently: "...There is no escaping theocracy [or theonomy]. A government’s laws reflect its morality, and the source of that morality (or, more often than not, immorality) is its god. It is never a question of theocracy or no theocracy, but whose theocracy. The American people, by way of their elected officials, are the source of the Constitutional Republic’s laws. Therefore, the Constitutional Republic’s god is WE THE PEOPLE.
"People recoil at the idea of a theocracy’s morality being forced upon them, but because all governments are theocracies, someone’s morality is always being enforced. This is an inevitability of government. The question is which god, theocracy, laws, and morality will we choose to live under?..."
Such insightful words. This man was one for the ages! All he says here has been borne out over time. While I believe the original meaning and words of the Great Voice of Truth was in line with Divine law of love and liberty I don't see that in what Moses received from the fallen angel on Mount Sinai.
The first Christian martyr Stephen tells his stoners in Acts that Moses spoke to the angel on Mount Sinai, elsewhere we are warned not to worship angels. "Yahweh" or "I am" is ego, the god of the material world. His law is written in stone not in the heart, he is worshiped in temples of stone. This worship is based on fear, the fear of punishment and death and how to placate. Jesus spoke of the law of Love which is written in the heart, because it is living like we are, it is not fearful because perfect love casts out fear. "What I feared most has come upon me"... Job. Materialism is the claim that matter is what.. well.. matters. Don't care what is in your heart only that you fear and obey. What the material body does. Look at all the fear around Mt. Sinai, people were terrified. The fruits of that were genocide in the lands of Palestine, because fear is fulfilled in rage and projection of guilt onto others.
Another very interesting view that a new denomination can rise from. You make a lot of sense. A LOT. But how do you get the average idiot who has spent his/her life listening to someone like Kenneth Copeland tell them what the "truth" is to realize that they are living in la la land? You have to admit...it's a MESS and what the way out of it may be a reset button where Yahweh just blows the whole planet up and starts over with a new one.
"stoners" , that's a good one! Reminds me of how many fellowships that I've been in that are stoned on the false words of the head cult leader.
What is happening to Palestinians has NOTHING to do with God or Mt. Sinai! Isrealis are NOT Israelites!! They admit so themselves!!!
"Identity Crisis!
The following quotations (all of them from recognized Jewish authorities) have loads to say about the Zionists' claims to alleged fulfilled prophecies and the never-ending Middle East conflicts:
"Strictly speaking, it is incorrect to call an ancient Israelite a 'Jew' or to call a contemporary Jew an 'Israelite' or a 'Hebrew.'” (Richard Siegel and Carl Rheins, eds., “Identity Crisis,” The Jewish Almanac, (New York, NY: Bantam Books, 1980) p. 3.)
That sentence is the opening sentence of the First Chapter entitled "Identity Crisis" of the 1980 Jewish Almanac. That today's Jews are not genetic Israelites is also admitted in "The Jewish Encyclopedia," the "Encyclopedia Judaica," "The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia," "The Standard Jewish Encyclopedia," and by many of their historians.
According to three Jewish encyclopedias and Flavius Josephus, the entire Edomite nation was forced into converting to Judaism and became known as Judahites at the time of the high priest John Hyrcanus (Maccabaeus):
"…in the days of John Hyrcanus (end of the second century B.C.E.) … the Edomites became a section of the Jewish people." (“Edom,” Encyclopaedia Judaica (Jerusalem, Israel: Encyclopaedia Judaica Company, 1971) Volume 6, p. 378.)
"They were then incorporated with the Jewish nation…." (“Edom, Idumea,” The Jewish Encyclopedia (New York & London: Funk and Wagnalls Company, 1904) Volume V, p. 41.)
"…from then on they constituted a part of the Jewish people, Herod [King of Judea] being one of their descendants." (Cecil Roth and Geoffrey Wigoden, “Edom (Idumea),” The New Standard Jewish Encyclopedia (Garden City, NY: Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1977) p. 589.)
"…they submitted to the use of circumcision, and the rest of the Jewish ways of living; at which time … they were hereafter no other than Jews." (Flavius Josephus, “The Antiquities of the Jews,” Josephus, (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 1960) Book XIII, Chapter IX, Verse 1, p. 279.)
We keep hearing that if we don't bless the modern State of Israel (which America has been doing since at least 1948) that we will be cursed. However, it seems it's been just the opposite, Since 1948, you name it, and there's not an area in America wherein she hasn't become worse off.
Could it because America has identified the wrong people as Israel. And, today's Jews are not the only ones with an identity crisis.
For more, listen to the two-part audio series "Israel, Edom, and Ishmael: Three Keys to Understanding the Bible and Current Events" on our Broadcast Library page at MissiontoIsrael.org. Scroll down to T 1402 for Part 1.
Take our 10-question "In Defense of True Israel" Survey, in the right-hand sidebar and receive a free copy of the book "Israel's Identity: It Matters!""
So few seem to understand how complicated it really is. I always disliked that they called their new nation state "Israel" when they meant "Judea" and even that was very deceptive since many of them had no true Jewish heritage at all but were "Jews" in name only having a satanic version as a state religion from the tenth century. There are far more actual blood Israelites in the UK and America than ever have been in the nation state deceptively called "Israel." If you could prove you were of the tribe of Ephraim would they give you citizenship in "Israel?" I don't think so.
Salvation, justification, forgiveness, and all things comparable are provided us exclusively by God's grace via the blood-atoning sacrifice and resurrection of Christ. Praise Yahweh! This fact, however, does not mean that Christ abolished His Father's morality as reflected in His Ten Commandments and their respective statutes and judgments (although a part of, not the same as the Mosaic Covenant) as society's standard--God forbid!
These are two different issues entirely. The first has to do with the remnant's individual salvation, the second with whose ethics God intends for us to govern our lives. As to the latter, it's quite clear where the Apostles Paul and John stood on the matter, as reflected in the following New Testament passages:
“…truth [is] in the law.” (Romans 2:20)
“…by the law is the knowledge of sin.” (Romans 3:20)
“Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.” (Romans 3:31)
“Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.” (Romans 7:12)
“Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.” (Romans 8:7)
“Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the keeping of the commandments of God.” (1 Corinthians 7:19)
“But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully.” (1 Timothy 1:8)
“And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.” (1 John 2:3)
“Whosoever commits sin transgresses also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.” (1 John 3:4)
“By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep his commandments.” (1 John 5:2)
“For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous.” (1 John 5:3)
“And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.”
(Revelation 12:17)
For more on how the Bible's immutable/unchanging moral law (the Ten Commandments and their respective statutes and judgments) applies and should be implemented today as the law of the land) see free online book "Law and Kingdom: Their Relevance Under the New Covenant" at https://www.bibleversusconstitution.org/law-kingdomFrame.html
Then, at the same location, "A Biblical Constitution: A Scriptural Replacement for Secular Government."
And it will ALWAYS be mere mortal fallible sinful MEN and WOMEN who will have to decide how this is all going to work in reality. I can write about THREE different incidents at “Churches” recently that show me that this can’t work. How about an incident where I was simply trying to get involved with the music ministry and because I wasn’t following some sort of protocol to do so was threatened with ARREST for CRIMINAL trespass if I were to set foot on the “church” property? I can just IMAGINE those folks being in charge of a group of people using the penalties for violating the sabbath on their congregation. And, Ted, can you please tell the folks reading your comments, exactly what is “using the Lords name in vain” and what it means? What exactly IS the Sabbath day? Sunday? Saturday? Rotating every year? WHO will decide? What MAN is going to decide? What exactly is a “graven image”? Is the Washington Monument one? Can someone EXPLAIN to me what one is? What MAN will decide? What does it mean by adultery? Race mixing or having an affair? Stealing…duh? Murder - pretty obvious. Bearing false witness. Pretty obvious. Covet? What does that mean? Honoring your father and mother? What if both of them as in my case were child abusers? What if you had had your head at the age of 11 smashed through a plaster wall because you said something that was consider “back talk”? What if they had cancelled you and never came to visit your children for ever due to your political or religious beliefs? Help me out here. I want to understand how this is all going to work in REAL LIFE.
Mark, think about what you're implying - that is, that it's impossible for subjects of the KING of kings (at some point) to carry out His dominion commission over government and society, per Romans 13:1-7 and related passages.
In turn, this would mean His commission is worthless, and, in turn again, would mean that the God who gave the commission is likewise worthless. Leaving His subjects with no alternative but to seek whatever fickle finite men can provide instead.
If we have a reigning King right now over heaven and earth (and we do), then His genuine subjects have no alternative but to advance His Kingdom (and thus His triune moral law) here on earth *as it is in heaven,* per Matthew 6:33. There's no where in heaven that He's not Sovereign and no where in heaven where His morality (as reflected here on earth in His Ten Commandments and their respective statutes and civil judgments) isn't supreme. THAT is, in part, the commission of HIS SUBJECTS here on earth.
Part of your problem is in looking to today's churches (most of which are antinomian, not to mention not even Christian, being they've rejected the biblical plan of salvation) as the means for accomplishing biblical dominion.
Your timing's off as well. Presently, because today's alleged Christians have removed themselves nearly completely from nearly everything biblical (especially as it concerns Yahweh's moral law), that puts us back in the 2 Corinthians 10:4-6 stage - that is, in the 1st-century infant church stage. We are no where close to actually taking dominion and setting up His laws as society's standard. But that doesn't relieve from our responsibility of doing whatever we can do toward that end.
I address this in more detail in the book "Ecclesia vs. Church: Why Understanding the Difference is Critical to Our Future" at repentorperish@protonmail.com
There are a plethora of passages (Exodus 1, Judges 6, Acts 4 & 5, 17:6-7, etc.) that dictate Christians reject any government mandate requiring them to disobey their Lord and King. Romans 13 is not one of them.
Romans 13:1-7 has absolutely nothing to do with secular civil government. Rather everything therein depicts a biblical civil government, making it our commission for dominion over government and society.
The one word "continually" or "devoted" (depending upon your Bible version) in Verse 6 (amplifying Verses 3 & 4) alone proves the point. And it's just one of ten contextual reasons proving the same thing.
Unless someone's prepared to claim the Roman Empire (one of the most notorious for murdering Christians) was a government that *continually* blessed Christians and terrorized/punished the wicked, they best rethink their theology regarding this extremely important passage of Scripture.
A union is not a country, a union which is unelected, a union which is not Compliant with a Countries, " Fundamental Freedoms ," a union which works on a depopulation agenda, a union which bans production, a union which is not compliant with the Rule of Law, a union which does not work on Peace and Production in all countries, a union which uses net zero to enslave people, a union which is not Compliant with The Magna Carta 1215, The Doctrine Bill of Rights 1688/89 and 1776, The Nuremberg Code 1947 and the Geneva Protocol, which countries would want to be part of such a union, which has taken tax payers money, to wreak havoc on the tax payer ? Pray tell me, do countries comply with war , death and destruction or do countries cut the gordian knot and work on peace and production ? Oh yes, we must be prepared for war, but not to fight for a union, which has no country, which takes away our Fundamental Freedoms, which is in control of elections ?
Great change is afoot and 'they' know it... 'they' are loosing control and control is their life blood, probably because they had no control whatsoever as young children, which situation does tend to create damaged personalities.
In this day and age, as a result of the society we have all helped to build, there is a great deal of damage. I see children on the bus with their mummies... "Mummy, Mummy, look at that bird/dog/man," whatever... Mum doesn't look up from her phone, hands the child something sweet to quiet it, pays the child no more attention. This was already going on thirty years ago or probably even longer as women have been distracted from proper parenting and engagement with their kids by modern life, be it lack of money, makeup or fashion, having to work outside the home to bring in more money, whatever the distraction may have been and continues to be.
There has been and is sexual and psychological abuse by parents and other adults. There is coercion, violence (in private) and many other forms of nastiness applied to twist poor young souls into not knowing who they are, who to trust, how to enjoy life without continuous oral or other gratification, or total control... Look at the obesity, which comes not only from eating highly processed junk food, but also from psychological deprivation... Have you seen how immensely overweight the head of the Bank of International Settlement is? And he has said... words to the affect, that CBDCs are desired, as it would allow banks to both control and know exactly how monies are spent and where the stuff goes. Psychological deprivation and physical abuse has also long existed in the lives of those called 'the elite', those who so badly fear loosing control.
Were we to bring more compassion into being, and a goodly dose of intelligence, by trying to not repeat that which constantly gives the same awful results (history does repeat itself, doesn't it?), we might well be able to create a life worth living for all, but until we decide to do so, life as it is will go on, but I think many are already realising this fact, and taking action. Even though things appear to be getting worse, which is, I believe, because the 'old' is in its dying throes, lashing about in its agony, and doing quite a lot of damage in its desperation, but die pretty soon it will, because times 'they are a' changin', and fast, if enough people soon decide that enough IS enough!
THE REST OF STORY REGARDING PATRICK HENRY - if only Paul Harvey had made this known!
"...Convinced the Constitution would fail to secure and protect liberty, Patrick Henry [who refused to attend the Constitutional Convention as one of Virginia's delegates, declaring 'I smelt a rat!'] voiced his concerns to the Virginia Ratifying Convention in 1788:
'…I say our privileges and rights are in danger. …the new form of Government … will … effectually … oppress and ruin the people…. In some parts of the plan before you, the great rights of freemen are endangered, in other parts, absolutely taken away…. There will be no checks, no real balances, in this Government: What can avail your specious imaginary balances, your rope-dancing, chain-rattling, ridiculous ideal checks and contrivances? …And yet who knows the dangers that this new system may produce: they are out of the sight of the common people: They cannot foresee latent consequences.... I see great jeopardy in this new Government.'67
"In contrast to the federalists’ failed predictions, this and nearly everything the anti-federalists forecast about the Constitution has come true [even after the Bill of Rights, aka a Bill of Goods,* were added]...."
For more, see Chapter 3 "The Preamble: We the People vs. Yahweh" of free online book "Bible Law vs, the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective" at https://www.bibleversusconstitution.org/BlvcOnline/biblelaw-constitutionalism-pt3.html
Find out how much you really know about the Constitution as compared to the Bible. Take our 10-question Constitution Survey in the sidebar and receive a free copy of the 85-page "Primer" of "BL vs. USC."
*Listen to Michael Gaddy's interview with me, entitled "Bill of Rights or Bill of Goods?," at https://www.bibleversusconstitution.org/tapelist.html#T1306
Second hour at T 1307.
Amen, Brother Ted!!! I smell many rats.......
I just spent 10 minutes writing a reply and then hit the wrong tab. YEAH!!
Here is what I see, Pastor Ted…“A regrettably large share of our legal experiences operate not in the shadow of the Constitution and its constraints, but rather in the shadow of explicitly unconstitutional rules, actions, and orders. In the time it takes for improper Executive Orders to be reined in, for illicit administrative decisions to be corrected, and for misinterpretations of constitutional power to be overturned, so much of society’s activity is framed by what we might call the not-Constitution — all those acts of government that are deemed illegal only after they have caused enduring harm. A most troubling aspect of government power is its insistence on pushing past constitutional constraints and operating in a blurry legal wilderness of its own creation while forcing Americans to prove that those power grabs lack legitimacy.” –J.B. Shurk
in another words, the Constitution is a paper tiger. Without the first 13 words of the second amendment in force an effect and the people controlling the monetary system it’s a big joke.
With Notes of Reference to the Constitution and Laws of the Federal Government of the United States and of the Commonwealth of Virginia, as the “true palladium of liberty.” In addition to checking federal power, the Second Amendment also provided state governments with what Luther Martin (1744/48–1826) described as the “last coup de grace” that would enable the states “to thwart and oppose the general government.” Last, it enshrined the ancient Florentine and Roman constitutional principle of civil and military virtue by making every citizen a soldier and every soldier a citizen.
https://www.courageouslion.us/p/there-is-a-reason-they-dont-listen
Where I run into a problem is the idea of using “Gods” law as our governing system is that MEN have to figure out what that law is and how to administer it. MEN have to carry out the penalties for violating it and decide who is worth of death for violating the sabbath. We can’t even decide when the sabbath IS let alone establish a code for violating it! And who is damaged by someone “violating the sabbath”? Can God Himself come into a court and claim damage? Why can’t we simply learn to love our CREATOR with all of our heart, mind body and soul and love our neighbor as our self? And that doesn’t mean love a robber, rapist or murderer. As a matter of fact loving ourselves is an issue in and of itself. As the lyrics in Write it On My Heart say 𝐀𝐧𝐝 𝐈 𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐠𝐞𝐭 𝐭𝐨 𝐭𝐫𝐮𝐬𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐭𝐫𝐮𝐭𝐡 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐈 𝐛𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐞𝐯𝐞
𝐈 𝐭𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐛𝐲 𝐧𝐨𝐰 𝐢𝐭 𝐰𝐨𝐮𝐥𝐝 𝐛𝐞 𝐬𝐞𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐝 𝐧𝐚𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞
𝐓𝐨 𝐥𝐨𝐯𝐞 𝐦𝐲 𝐧𝐞𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐛𝐨𝐫 𝐚𝐬 𝐦𝐲𝐬𝐞𝐥𝐟
𝐁𝐮𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐧 𝐬𝐨𝐦𝐞 𝐭𝐢𝐦𝐞𝐬 𝐈 𝐜𝐚𝐧’𝐭 𝐪𝐮𝐢𝐭𝐞 𝐭𝐞𝐥𝐥
𝐈𝐟 𝐈 𝐥𝐨𝐯𝐞 𝐦𝐲𝐬𝐞𝐥𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐰𝐞𝐥𝐥
Loving oneself can become an issue for sure. How many people actually DO and not in a narcissistic way? Men are messed up and frankly can’t be trusted to keep their own house in order so why should we trust them with a theocracy? Yahshua didn’t. Why should we? Remember if you gain the power to avoid healing a blind man on the sabbath!
Good morning, Mark!
First, regarding the impotent Second Amendment: America was sold down the river when the 18th-century founders replaced Biblical responsibilities (based upon the moral law of God) for Enlightenment rights, and nothing demonstrates it better than the Second Amendment.
Think about it: The Amendment WITH the wording "shall not be infringed" is the MOST infringed, licensed, and limited Amendment of the entire twenty seven. Furthermore, a future generation of our posterity is likely to see the Second Amendment whittled away entirely or repealed altogether. This is inherent nature and danger of optional Enlightenment rights versus non-optional Biblical responsibilities, such as the following:
"Let the high praises of God be in their mouth, and a two-edged sword [or today's equivalent] in their hand ... this honor have all his saints. Praise ye Yah." (Psalm 149:6-9)
"But if any provide not for his own, and especially for those of his own house [beginning with spiritual and physical protection], he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel." (1 Timothy 5:8)
Which is more potent: 1) An optional right, or 2) A non-optional responsibility?
Which is more likely to be infringed, licensed, and ultimately abolished altogether?
Which did the pre-Second Amendment Americans look to for their authority to bear arms, with little or nor infringement?
For more, listen to "The Second Amendment: A Knife in a Gunfight," delivered at the Springfield, Missouri Firearms and Freedom Symposium, at http://www.bibleversusconstitution.org/#FeaturedMessages
At this same location, you will also find a radio interview Larry Pratt (Executive Director of Gun Owners of America) conducted with me on this same subject. I think you'll find Mr. Pratt's remarks especially interesting.
See also online Chapter 12 "Amendment 2: Constitutional vs. Biblical Self-Defense" of "Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective" at http://www.bibleversusconstitution.org/BlvcOnline/biblelaw-constitutionalism-pt12.html
Greetings Pastor Ted...
I just want to know how it would work with MEN being the ones to decide how it will all work. That's the problem. Just like MEN ignore the provisions of the 2nd amendment and infringe and murder because of it, so how can we have true freedom outside of anarchy which is basically no rulers? The rules would e simple. DO NO HARM. Don't expect someone else to care for you. I'm convinced that I have two spirits dwelling in me. The flesh one that wants me to do whatever I want to satisfy it and the one of Yahweh that says...don't do that Mark. If I listen to that voice, which I manage to do quite well most of my of my life I do fine. If I don't well...turmoil is the result. Wasn't it MEN who used a convoluted understanding of the word to justify burning women at the stake in Salem? I know that you mean well Pastor Ted...no doubt it my mind, but the big question is HOW.
I would encourage you to listen to my two-part audio series "Biblical Dominion vs. Christian Anarchy," beginning at https://missiontoisrael.org/tapelist.php#T1357
See my other response.
I will listen.
There is something called 'Ubuntu' in South Africa, that used to be (and still is in some cases) practiced by some tribes, It entailed surrounding the malefactor with the whole tribe and telling him/her that they know he/she is better than that, that he/she can make amends. That he/she is a person as they are persons, and they all accept this, that the malefactor is a part of this society, as are those surrounding him/her. That each needs the other to be whole. It is a psychological approach to wrong doing in contrast to punishment. To me that smacks of self love and therefore love for others comes easier.
I will do a search for it. That’s an interesting concept. HOWEVER what if the detractor is murdering or some heinous act with a victim or multiple victims?
That did cross my mind, , and this reply is from my imaginings only... The more we apply lovingness and respect into our society, the less likely, I believe, would it be that such a society creates purposeful murderers. The big question, of course is how to get such a society started? Lots of imagination, change of mindset, co-operation and determination needed, without that the swamp will get bigger.
Sometimes Substack just plain stinks. Again I was in the middle of a response and wanted to rid myself of duplicate windows, one of which was block my effort. When I xed out of that one, my comment disappeared. Which was how does society create "purposeful murderers"? Murder is usually motivated by revenge, hate, or trying to eliminate witnesses to a crime. Psychopaths are more likely to murder and if they get to have a job in the government can get away with shooting kids in the back, mothers in the head and burning churches to the ground with 17 small children in side as well as other innocent people. Devising a test that can keep them out of a profession would be a start. https://www.courageouslion.us/p/problem-psychopathic-control-freaks
How does society create 'purposeful murderers?'. I have to answer that one... Hurt a person enough throughout their childhood and they may well feel pretty murderous towards some around them and may well 'purposefully' kill them one day. that's what I meant.
I feel the same about Substack sometimes...things I spent time on just disappeared!
As to psychopaths, I remember reading about a survey done of leading CEOs of very large companies and very successful politicians, they were nearly all within the spectrum of psychopathy. They possess a ruthless determination to get what or where they want regardless of whom they may hurt in the process. Not all psychopaths are 'hands on ' killers, politicians are often a fine example sending soldiers off to kill and be killed.
If our way of bringing up kids and our way of educating them didn't, under some circumstances create psychopaths, we'd have no wannabe leaders, and wouldn't life be nicer!
Lastly, what Mr. Shurk depicted is some of the 100s of 1000s of consequences of the whirlwind today's America is reaping thanks to the wind sown by the constitutional framers when they replaced the Bible's immutable/unchanging moral law with their own capricious man-made Enlightenment and Masonic tradition - aka the biblically seditious Constitution:
"[B]ecause they have ... trespassed against my law ... they have sown the wind, and they shall reap the whirlwind...." (Hosea 8:1, 7)
Today's America is reaping the inevitable ever-intensifying whirlwind resulting from the wind sown by the constitutional framers and fanned by today's hoodwinked Christians and patriots who have been bamboozled into believing today's whirlwind can be dissipated by appealing to the wind responsible for spawning the whirlwind.
Next, regarding theocracies: Theocracy is not optional. Every government that exists today (including the Constitutional Republic), that has existed in the past, and will exist in the future, is, has been, and/or will be a theocracy.
There are no vacuums when it comes to legislated morality or what's, more often than not, immorality. Consequently, a nation's foundational ethical standard determines its God.
Thus, there is likewise no vacuums when it comes to religious-influenced governments, be it even Secular Humanism in its multifaceted forms, and it usually is.
When one understands that idolatry is not so much about statues as it is statutes, it becomes clear that all governments are theocratic (god ruled), serving either the true God or some false god, demonstrated by what laws they keep and consider the supreme law of the land.
Question: Were the governments in the Old Testament under the god Baal (or any other false god named in the Old Testament) theocracies?
Answer: Of course, they were.
Question: Was Baal (or any other god named in the Bible) real or were they merely ancient forms of We the People?
Answer: Merely ancient forms of We the People. See 1 Corinthians 8:4-6.
Consequently: "...There is no escaping theocracy [or theonomy]. A government’s laws reflect its morality, and the source of that morality (or, more often than not, immorality) is its god. It is never a question of theocracy or no theocracy, but whose theocracy. The American people, by way of their elected officials, are the source of the Constitutional Republic’s laws. Therefore, the Constitutional Republic’s god is WE THE PEOPLE.
"People recoil at the idea of a theocracy’s morality being forced upon them, but because all governments are theocracies, someone’s morality is always being enforced. This is an inevitability of government. The question is which god, theocracy, laws, and morality will we choose to live under?..."
For more, see online Chapter 3 "The Preamble: WE THE PEOPLE vs. YAHWEH" of "Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective" at bibleversusconstitution.org/BlvcOnline/biblelaw-constitutionalism-pt3.html
A theocracy is rule by a religious faith of some sort like many middle east countries. A DEMOCRACY is rule by men and their laws which may mirror divine law but can also contradict it in a major way. Demos has to do with man where theos has to do with a "god" of some sort. I see the US as a mixture since COMMON LAW was based on the understanding of divine law. There had to be a VICTIM. Babylonian statutory law doesn't need a victim. The "state" is always considered the "victim". Thus the State of Nebraska vs Ted R Weiland for traveling down the highway 2 MPH faster than the sign states is allowed. "They" are also guilty of making laws that result in the murder of a child and mother in the case of Ruby Ridge or the murder of many more in Waco Texas because of the lack of the payment for some sort of "license" or "permit". The Bryan Malenowski case comes to mind. https://www.courageouslion.us/p/thanks-to-all-tyrants-friends-atf
There are no vacuums when it comes to legislated morality or what's, more often than not, immorality. Consequently, a nation's foundational ethical standard determines its God.
Thus, there is likewise no vacuums when it comes to religious-influenced governments, be it even Secular Humanism in its multifaceted forms, and it usually is.
When one understands that idolatry is not so much about statues as it is statutes, it becomes clear that all governments are theocratic (god ruled), serving either the true God or some false god, demonstrated by what laws they keep and consider the supreme law of the land.
Question: Were the governments in the Old Testament under the god Baal (or any other false god named in the Old Testament) theocracies?
Answer: Of course, they were.
Question: Was Baal (or any other god named in the Bible) real or were they merely ancient forms of We the People?
Answer: Merely ancient forms of We the People. See 1 Corinthians 8:4-6.
Consequently: "...There is no escaping theocracy [or theonomy]. A government’s laws reflect its morality, and the source of that morality (or, more often than not, immorality) is its god. It is never a question of theocracy or no theocracy, but whose theocracy. The American people, by way of their elected officials, are the source of the Constitutional Republic’s laws. Therefore, the Constitutional Republic’s god is WE THE PEOPLE.
"People recoil at the idea of a theocracy’s morality being forced upon them, but because all governments are theocracies, someone’s morality is always being enforced. This is an inevitability of government. The question is which god, theocracy, laws, and morality will we choose to live under?..."
For more, see online Chapter 3 "The Preamble: WE THE PEOPLE vs. YAHWEH" of "Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective" at https://www.bibleversusconstitution.org/BlvcOnline/blvc-index.html
Such insightful words. This man was one for the ages! All he says here has been borne out over time. While I believe the original meaning and words of the Great Voice of Truth was in line with Divine law of love and liberty I don't see that in what Moses received from the fallen angel on Mount Sinai.
"I don't see that in what Moses received from the fallen angel on Mount Sinai." Can you drop me a PM and tell me what you are claiming here?
The first Christian martyr Stephen tells his stoners in Acts that Moses spoke to the angel on Mount Sinai, elsewhere we are warned not to worship angels. "Yahweh" or "I am" is ego, the god of the material world. His law is written in stone not in the heart, he is worshiped in temples of stone. This worship is based on fear, the fear of punishment and death and how to placate. Jesus spoke of the law of Love which is written in the heart, because it is living like we are, it is not fearful because perfect love casts out fear. "What I feared most has come upon me"... Job. Materialism is the claim that matter is what.. well.. matters. Don't care what is in your heart only that you fear and obey. What the material body does. Look at all the fear around Mt. Sinai, people were terrified. The fruits of that were genocide in the lands of Palestine, because fear is fulfilled in rage and projection of guilt onto others.
Hello Hat...
Another very interesting view that a new denomination can rise from. You make a lot of sense. A LOT. But how do you get the average idiot who has spent his/her life listening to someone like Kenneth Copeland tell them what the "truth" is to realize that they are living in la la land? You have to admit...it's a MESS and what the way out of it may be a reset button where Yahweh just blows the whole planet up and starts over with a new one.
"stoners" , that's a good one! Reminds me of how many fellowships that I've been in that are stoned on the false words of the head cult leader.
What is happening to Palestinians has NOTHING to do with God or Mt. Sinai! Isrealis are NOT Israelites!! They admit so themselves!!!
"Identity Crisis!
The following quotations (all of them from recognized Jewish authorities) have loads to say about the Zionists' claims to alleged fulfilled prophecies and the never-ending Middle East conflicts:
"Strictly speaking, it is incorrect to call an ancient Israelite a 'Jew' or to call a contemporary Jew an 'Israelite' or a 'Hebrew.'” (Richard Siegel and Carl Rheins, eds., “Identity Crisis,” The Jewish Almanac, (New York, NY: Bantam Books, 1980) p. 3.)
That sentence is the opening sentence of the First Chapter entitled "Identity Crisis" of the 1980 Jewish Almanac. That today's Jews are not genetic Israelites is also admitted in "The Jewish Encyclopedia," the "Encyclopedia Judaica," "The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia," "The Standard Jewish Encyclopedia," and by many of their historians.
According to three Jewish encyclopedias and Flavius Josephus, the entire Edomite nation was forced into converting to Judaism and became known as Judahites at the time of the high priest John Hyrcanus (Maccabaeus):
"…in the days of John Hyrcanus (end of the second century B.C.E.) … the Edomites became a section of the Jewish people." (“Edom,” Encyclopaedia Judaica (Jerusalem, Israel: Encyclopaedia Judaica Company, 1971) Volume 6, p. 378.)
"They were then incorporated with the Jewish nation…." (“Edom, Idumea,” The Jewish Encyclopedia (New York & London: Funk and Wagnalls Company, 1904) Volume V, p. 41.)
"…from then on they constituted a part of the Jewish people, Herod [King of Judea] being one of their descendants." (Cecil Roth and Geoffrey Wigoden, “Edom (Idumea),” The New Standard Jewish Encyclopedia (Garden City, NY: Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1977) p. 589.)
"…they submitted to the use of circumcision, and the rest of the Jewish ways of living; at which time … they were hereafter no other than Jews." (Flavius Josephus, “The Antiquities of the Jews,” Josephus, (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 1960) Book XIII, Chapter IX, Verse 1, p. 279.)
We keep hearing that if we don't bless the modern State of Israel (which America has been doing since at least 1948) that we will be cursed. However, it seems it's been just the opposite, Since 1948, you name it, and there's not an area in America wherein she hasn't become worse off.
Could it because America has identified the wrong people as Israel. And, today's Jews are not the only ones with an identity crisis.
For more, listen to the two-part audio series "Israel, Edom, and Ishmael: Three Keys to Understanding the Bible and Current Events" on our Broadcast Library page at MissiontoIsrael.org. Scroll down to T 1402 for Part 1.
Take our 10-question "In Defense of True Israel" Survey, in the right-hand sidebar and receive a free copy of the book "Israel's Identity: It Matters!""
- Brother Ted R. Weiland
MissiontoIsrael.org
BibleVersusConstitution.org
So few seem to understand how complicated it really is. I always disliked that they called their new nation state "Israel" when they meant "Judea" and even that was very deceptive since many of them had no true Jewish heritage at all but were "Jews" in name only having a satanic version as a state religion from the tenth century. There are far more actual blood Israelites in the UK and America than ever have been in the nation state deceptively called "Israel." If you could prove you were of the tribe of Ephraim would they give you citizenship in "Israel?" I don't think so.
Good morning, Hat!
Salvation, justification, forgiveness, and all things comparable are provided us exclusively by God's grace via the blood-atoning sacrifice and resurrection of Christ. Praise Yahweh! This fact, however, does not mean that Christ abolished His Father's morality as reflected in His Ten Commandments and their respective statutes and judgments (although a part of, not the same as the Mosaic Covenant) as society's standard--God forbid!
These are two different issues entirely. The first has to do with the remnant's individual salvation, the second with whose ethics God intends for us to govern our lives. As to the latter, it's quite clear where the Apostles Paul and John stood on the matter, as reflected in the following New Testament passages:
“…truth [is] in the law.” (Romans 2:20)
“…by the law is the knowledge of sin.” (Romans 3:20)
“Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.” (Romans 3:31)
“Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.” (Romans 7:12)
“Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.” (Romans 8:7)
“Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the keeping of the commandments of God.” (1 Corinthians 7:19)
“But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully.” (1 Timothy 1:8)
“And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.” (1 John 2:3)
“Whosoever commits sin transgresses also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.” (1 John 3:4)
“By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep his commandments.” (1 John 5:2)
“For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous.” (1 John 5:3)
“And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.”
(Revelation 12:17)
For more on how the Bible's immutable/unchanging moral law (the Ten Commandments and their respective statutes and judgments) applies and should be implemented today as the law of the land) see free online book "Law and Kingdom: Their Relevance Under the New Covenant" at https://www.bibleversusconstitution.org/law-kingdomFrame.html
Then, at the same location, "A Biblical Constitution: A Scriptural Replacement for Secular Government."
And it will ALWAYS be mere mortal fallible sinful MEN and WOMEN who will have to decide how this is all going to work in reality. I can write about THREE different incidents at “Churches” recently that show me that this can’t work. How about an incident where I was simply trying to get involved with the music ministry and because I wasn’t following some sort of protocol to do so was threatened with ARREST for CRIMINAL trespass if I were to set foot on the “church” property? I can just IMAGINE those folks being in charge of a group of people using the penalties for violating the sabbath on their congregation. And, Ted, can you please tell the folks reading your comments, exactly what is “using the Lords name in vain” and what it means? What exactly IS the Sabbath day? Sunday? Saturday? Rotating every year? WHO will decide? What MAN is going to decide? What exactly is a “graven image”? Is the Washington Monument one? Can someone EXPLAIN to me what one is? What MAN will decide? What does it mean by adultery? Race mixing or having an affair? Stealing…duh? Murder - pretty obvious. Bearing false witness. Pretty obvious. Covet? What does that mean? Honoring your father and mother? What if both of them as in my case were child abusers? What if you had had your head at the age of 11 smashed through a plaster wall because you said something that was consider “back talk”? What if they had cancelled you and never came to visit your children for ever due to your political or religious beliefs? Help me out here. I want to understand how this is all going to work in REAL LIFE.
Mark, think about what you're implying - that is, that it's impossible for subjects of the KING of kings (at some point) to carry out His dominion commission over government and society, per Romans 13:1-7 and related passages.
In turn, this would mean His commission is worthless, and, in turn again, would mean that the God who gave the commission is likewise worthless. Leaving His subjects with no alternative but to seek whatever fickle finite men can provide instead.
If we have a reigning King right now over heaven and earth (and we do), then His genuine subjects have no alternative but to advance His Kingdom (and thus His triune moral law) here on earth *as it is in heaven,* per Matthew 6:33. There's no where in heaven that He's not Sovereign and no where in heaven where His morality (as reflected here on earth in His Ten Commandments and their respective statutes and civil judgments) isn't supreme. THAT is, in part, the commission of HIS SUBJECTS here on earth.
Part of your problem is in looking to today's churches (most of which are antinomian, not to mention not even Christian, being they've rejected the biblical plan of salvation) as the means for accomplishing biblical dominion.
Your timing's off as well. Presently, because today's alleged Christians have removed themselves nearly completely from nearly everything biblical (especially as it concerns Yahweh's moral law), that puts us back in the 2 Corinthians 10:4-6 stage - that is, in the 1st-century infant church stage. We are no where close to actually taking dominion and setting up His laws as society's standard. But that doesn't relieve from our responsibility of doing whatever we can do toward that end.
I address this in more detail in the book "Ecclesia vs. Church: Why Understanding the Difference is Critical to Our Future" at repentorperish@protonmail.com
Also, in "The Romans 13 Template for Biblical Dominion: Ten Reasons Why Romans 13 is Not About Secular Government" at https://missiontoisrael.org/Romans13/Romans13-contents.html
There are a plethora of passages (Exodus 1, Judges 6, Acts 4 & 5, 17:6-7, etc.) that dictate Christians reject any government mandate requiring them to disobey their Lord and King. Romans 13 is not one of them.
Romans 13:1-7 has absolutely nothing to do with secular civil government. Rather everything therein depicts a biblical civil government, making it our commission for dominion over government and society.
The one word "continually" or "devoted" (depending upon your Bible version) in Verse 6 (amplifying Verses 3 & 4) alone proves the point. And it's just one of ten contextual reasons proving the same thing.
Unless someone's prepared to claim the Roman Empire (one of the most notorious for murdering Christians) was a government that *continually* blessed Christians and terrorized/punished the wicked, they best rethink their theology regarding this extremely important passage of Scripture.
A union is not a country, a union which is unelected, a union which is not Compliant with a Countries, " Fundamental Freedoms ," a union which works on a depopulation agenda, a union which bans production, a union which is not compliant with the Rule of Law, a union which does not work on Peace and Production in all countries, a union which uses net zero to enslave people, a union which is not Compliant with The Magna Carta 1215, The Doctrine Bill of Rights 1688/89 and 1776, The Nuremberg Code 1947 and the Geneva Protocol, which countries would want to be part of such a union, which has taken tax payers money, to wreak havoc on the tax payer ? Pray tell me, do countries comply with war , death and destruction or do countries cut the gordian knot and work on peace and production ? Oh yes, we must be prepared for war, but not to fight for a union, which has no country, which takes away our Fundamental Freedoms, which is in control of elections ?
Lots of good valid points.
You deserve a larger audience. Keep at it.
These words apply to our day as much as when they were spoken. One of the truly great men of wisdom.
Wow! I had never read the whole thing.
Incredible, beautiful and, if we too do judge the future by the past, quite relevant for us today.
Great change is afoot and 'they' know it... 'they' are loosing control and control is their life blood, probably because they had no control whatsoever as young children, which situation does tend to create damaged personalities.
In this day and age, as a result of the society we have all helped to build, there is a great deal of damage. I see children on the bus with their mummies... "Mummy, Mummy, look at that bird/dog/man," whatever... Mum doesn't look up from her phone, hands the child something sweet to quiet it, pays the child no more attention. This was already going on thirty years ago or probably even longer as women have been distracted from proper parenting and engagement with their kids by modern life, be it lack of money, makeup or fashion, having to work outside the home to bring in more money, whatever the distraction may have been and continues to be.
There has been and is sexual and psychological abuse by parents and other adults. There is coercion, violence (in private) and many other forms of nastiness applied to twist poor young souls into not knowing who they are, who to trust, how to enjoy life without continuous oral or other gratification, or total control... Look at the obesity, which comes not only from eating highly processed junk food, but also from psychological deprivation... Have you seen how immensely overweight the head of the Bank of International Settlement is? And he has said... words to the affect, that CBDCs are desired, as it would allow banks to both control and know exactly how monies are spent and where the stuff goes. Psychological deprivation and physical abuse has also long existed in the lives of those called 'the elite', those who so badly fear loosing control.
Were we to bring more compassion into being, and a goodly dose of intelligence, by trying to not repeat that which constantly gives the same awful results (history does repeat itself, doesn't it?), we might well be able to create a life worth living for all, but until we decide to do so, life as it is will go on, but I think many are already realising this fact, and taking action. Even though things appear to be getting worse, which is, I believe, because the 'old' is in its dying throes, lashing about in its agony, and doing quite a lot of damage in its desperation, but die pretty soon it will, because times 'they are a' changin', and fast, if enough people soon decide that enough IS enough!
yah right