Do You Know what ANWR is?

July 2, 2008 – 4:48 pm

 
 

 

 

THIS IS WHAT THE DEMOCRATS, LIBERALS AND "GREENS" SHOW YOU WHEN THEY TALK ABOUT ANWR

 

 

 

 

Posted in Oil and Gas "Crisis", Economics | 2 Comments »

Early Christian America: A Reply to the “Sincere Skeptic” IV

June 20, 2008 – 3:55 pm

The Sincere Skeptic wrote:  As to the ‘efficiency’ of capitalism, a separate question to its morality, we could calculate the amount of gold extracted from South America it’s value now and see if the West could afford to buy it. A famous example is if the Native Americans had invested what Manhattan was sold for they could now buy it and much more. It does not occur to people that this is a huge criticism of capitalism.

Wealthy business cliques controlling government is hardly confined to capitalism. In Australia the industries are property developers, coal, cars. In America (from what I hear) there is big oil.

I think bureaucratic forms are inevitably inflexible and inappropriate to emergency situations. Their impersonal nature is at base incompatible with a christian commitment to love in my view. The question of scale in governance is one that we in the West are yet to solve in my view. Sociocracy is one possibility I think.

Early Christian America and “Capitalism” is Influenced by the Background of the Church in Western Civilization.

At the risk of being perceived as “patronizing”, I want to say that this description does get to the heart of the issue of “Capitalism”. Understand that “capitalism” is a pejorative term, invented by “apologists” (defenders of their worldview) who were socialistic, economic and/or sociological philosophers.

In other words, like the word “Christian”, “capitalism” was a term invented by its enemies.

You are quite correct as seeing the powerfully detrimental influence of “Wealthy business cliques controlling government”, whether they preside over real estate, oil, coal, or cars. Capitalism, when criticized has invariably drawn the charge of “immoral” by its linkage to such interests, as you have correctly done here.

But understand. “Socialism” is Monopolistic Capitalism. Government controlled and utilized by comparatively few who use the judge, police badge (and gun), and legislation to pulverize opposition (competition) and gain market advantage through POWER politics and corruptions.

However, Christianity – in Scripture – is called by God to another Standard of ethic. That is the reason God demands of civil magistrates that they be individuals not known for “covetousness” (desiring their constituency’s assets, persons and wealth through “legal plunder” tactics of high taxation, crippling regulations, and wasteful spending sprees).

To get a taste of where I’m going, you can read the words of Isaiah the prophet:

“…for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of Lord from Jerusalem.” This historic process began at Pentecost, as the Word of the Lord reached out from Jerusalem. Note what follows: “He shall judge among the nations and rebuke many peoples: and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks….”

The Christian faith will warn the nations of God’s righteous judgments. But it will also TEACH the nations a new ethic:

 

The nations will learn to move from weapons to tools to get gain.

The propensity of human nature is toward control of others (including deceit) and plunder. God will make war too expensive (cost of judgments among nations He judges) to fight. So the nations will look to “other means” to get gain.

 

Early Christian America and “Capitalism” is Influenced by the Background of the Church in Western Civilization.

If the nations would learn from His Word, they would prosper much more than through the plunder ethic. Many nations have begun the process over the last 2 millennia, but have turned back to plunder. America is one of them. Your Australia is another, though less consistently and less self-consciously, due to the early influence of State Church confusion in the politics of the Commonwealth (earlier the Empire). That, perhaps, for another time.

As much as I do not like Constantine the Great of Roman history (c. 312 A.D.), he took advantage of this propensity of Christian people away from war (for profiteering) toward productive and cultural carrier enterprises (arts, literature, science, business, family life, law, education, church, charity, medicine, justice, media, mathematics, philosophy, patronage, constitutionalism, trades, etc.) and he used it to unite the Roman Empire under himself.

It was his father, Constantius (“Caesar” of the provinces of Gaul and Britain), who taught him that understanding. He pointed out to his son, Constantine, that … Since the Roman Empire was torn apart by multiple warring factions – each with their own Roman armies – the only way to unite the Empire under him was to appeal to the one people who were…

• NOT prone to revolt (you will TODAY find among Christians, with rare exceptions, a universal repulsion/disgust toward riot and rebellion, and mercenary activity, though they will fight for what they are convinced is upright – whether it is so or not depends upon their level of discernment). Constantius pointed his son to this constant of behavior in Christians.
• honored their elderly
• cared for the distressed,
• loved their families,
• helped their neighbors
• prayed for the Emperors and governors who abused and maligned them.

…and worked for their living.

Constantius showed his young son that, in all of his years as Caesar of Gaul (modern France), he had never known any man calling himself “Christian” who would join his army as a mercenary (at that time, part of your “pay” was plundering and raping your defeated enemies after battle).

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Sincere Skeptic, Response, Calling, Calling & Christian Stewardship, Christianity & America’s Foundations | 1 Comment »

“Christian America” & Theocracy: Deuteronomy 1 and 10 Principles of Government, Liberty and Rights

June 19, 2008 – 8:22 pm

Creating a Christian America, One Piece at a Time

When the Rev. Thomas Hooker preached his famous sermon on Deuteronomy 1:13-17 (1636), that message so moved the people who heard it, they proceeded to write the colonial government of Connecticut, embedding those principles from Scripture.

Historians note the fact that their constitution, the Fundamental Order of Connecticut, became one of the major documents influencing the text of both the Declaration of Independence and the later Constitution of the United States.

 

Toward a “Christian America”: 10 Christian Principles of Government

Thus, he set in motion at least 10 major principles of good governance.

1) Christian America and Elected Magistrates: In that passage he cited the fact that the individuals chosen as civil magistrates (rulers in positions of civil authority) were to be elected by the free citizens of the nation: “Take for yourselves wise men…”, meaning, “Elect for yourselves wise men…” and Moses would go on to install them in the new offices, setting in motion their new governing bodies. 

2) Christian America - A Call to Upright Character: He called for individuals who were upright in character. They must be lovers of justice (equitable, impartial and discerning applications of the laws of the realm). Such character implies a seasoned individual whose maturity in virtue enables him to apply the rule of law well throughout the jurisdiction.

3) Christian America – Statesmen Needed: But, to be upright and just God established the fact that the individuals chosen should be those “known” and “wise” - tried and tested in their discernments over time. Two important keys to good governance built into this system are these:

 

a) Virtue is a skill of the soul. It matures through trial and the discernments necessary for life. Wisdom is needed to rightfully apply those skills we call virtue. The men chosen for office must be individuals who compel respect of character, needed so the office which he occupies also commands the honor needed to rule a people “righteously” (justice) -verse 16. b)Virtue, biblically, is NOT first and foremost designed “to make a better you.” It will certainly do that. But, it is designed to serve others (the true essence of “Love thy neighbor”)- the Lord and your neighbor.

 

Witness the “Patience” of Job, designed for us to learn to wait upon the Lord through trial. Witness the Love of our Lord, designed for His ministry toward His people. Witness the sufferings of Paul and the “grace sufficient for thee” so that he could better serve Christ’s Church.  “Grace teaches the heart to love. Love asks “How then shall I serve?” Only then will the Lord hand such an individual God’s statutes and laws to apply to others.

Note: These individuals of character must be able to THEN “decide” between competing claims of citizens (vs. 16). The virtues exercised are skills of application/discernment utilized for others. An early Christian America depended upon virtue as skills of discernment and equity, not religious sentiment and emotive pulpits.

4) Christian America and a Vertical Division of Powers: There would be a “vertical division of power”. It is specified as officers of “thousands”, “hundreds”, “fifties” and “tens.” Such a vertical division of power corresponds to our federal, state, and local governments but with this provision: Like our original Constitutional framework, the federal, state and local governments each had their own jurisdictions. The federal had specifically delegated authority and was not to override the state.

Such a vertical division of authority institutes the principle of “Interposition of the Lesser Magistrate”, an historic “doctrine” (called by many names) which was used by our forebears.

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Law of God, Theocracy, American Law, Declaration of Independence, Habeas Corpus, Restoring American Foundations, Christianity & America’s Foundations | No Comments »

Christian America? A Reply to the “Sincere Skeptic” Part III

June 19, 2008 – 3:41 pm

The previous inquiry addresses the "mixed" nature of Christianity as a cultural phenomenon in early "Christian America". The issues raised in that brief article were numerous and… I believe crucial to a proper understanding of the "cultural impact" of Christianity. Here is the second citation from the article to which I wish to reply:

Christianity in group terms (as a cultural phenomenon was mixed). There were ‘chrisitan’ apologists for slavery (more recently, up to the present day in South Africa) and it was the origin of the opposition to slavery also.

As to the ‘communism’ in Acts. It seems to me that it was rather different to any modern form of economics because it was both generous and free from constraint. In 2Cor. Paul endorses international equality among Christians.

Having been a missionary to South Africa and witnessed the nature of the social (including racial) strife there, I can reply to that point, perhaps, later. But, first, for today, let’s take the second statement concerning the alleged "communism" of Acts 4 and 5. We will handle American Christianity’s "mixed nature" tomorrow.

Christian America: New England and Virginia

The people of New England experimented disastrously with socialistic systems of economy when they utilized the "common storehouse". The experiment was a miserable failure, as Gov. Bradford, their governor, records. If you read the archives of New England public records (courts, deeds, wills, etc.) you find it took them over a century to get over the Medieval hangover of having "common lands and pastures", which caused actual strife and lawsuits.

Bradford stated that they had done despite the clear tenets of Scripture. The socialistic results…

    -common lands and pastures
    -common woods and forests (wood use)
    -wage and price fixing
    -Sumptuary legislation
    -guild regulation (just so many carpenters allowed in a district, etc.)
    -common schools (government "public" schools) - a habit we still haven’t broken
    -controls on alleged  "greed" (profit regulation): the profitability was defined as greed. Such punishment of risk taking     -punished investments and led to stagnation in the creation of jobs - again, a habit we still haven’t broken.

These all failed and harmed the communities who indulged them. Bradford lamented, "…as if we were wiser than God." Note: There is always a hard lesson to learn when we violate the laws of the Lord, in this case, the economic and political laws found throughout the Bible (which are extensive, and are almost NEVER preached upon. See upcoming pages to www.SolomonsToolbox.com).

The Puritan governments of New England also indulged in price and wage fixing (more Medieval socialistic traditions of the scholastic theologians of Rome) which our own government is AGAIN toying with (due to food price escalation and inflation in general). Such measures ALWAYS lead to marked scarcity of the goods or services (allegedly) "protected" by government. We will reap that whirlwind soon, if we go that way.

The first settlers in Virginia also attempted the same kinds of economy (as endorsed by Medievel thinking). That was their background (in part). It failed in Jamestown miserably and led to several "starving times". IT ALSO LED TO SLAVERY.

NOTE: Governments often create famine conditions, despite a ready access to an abundance of factors of production. When that occurs, control of human beings follows, as so many are being harmed they attempt to circumvent the decrees of government. Sanctions follow. Increased punitive controls follow that, until REGULATION TURNS TO SLAVERY.

Jamestown first enslaved its own citizens and forced them to work as ordered by their superiors. They went through several different administrations in this condition. The Dutch socialistic mercantilism which specialized in African slave trading, saw  "opportunity" in Virginia and sold slaves to the people in Jamestown who could now relieve themselves of their own servitude by utilizing the productive labors and talents of others under their control.

That is ALWAYS the way socialism - in any form - works (Nazi "National Socialism", Fascist  "Corporate/Contract Statism", Marxist "Communism", etc.). Slavery, shortages and war are always the results.

Reason? There are laws of human action. The Bible deals realistically with the fact that human nature is hardwired and behavior, though complex, is predictable, especially concerning economic laws of human action and society.

You referenced the "mixed nature" of Christianity in early America. Usually, the problems stemmed from such areas as economic thinking and the Puritans found they had to disgorge the Medieval traditions  and "plow new ground." The result was the massive productivity which, in time, became the Protestant Work Ethic and American Entrepreneurial production (the "capitalism" originally referenced last week in this journal).

 

Christian America: Where did the Puritans (and early Virginia) get their economic ideals?

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Sincere Skeptic, Christianity & Early American Culture, Christianity & the Culture Carriers, Restoring American Foundations, Christianity & America’s Foundations | No Comments »

Response to the Issue: What Constitutes a “Christian Nation”?

June 18, 2008 – 2:46 pm

It is necessary to take the first 2 points only from your post today (numbered below), to give a fair answer to the inquiry and, I trust, a measured response to your positions. But this  post here of several posts is, by its necessity, longer than the others to follow.

I beg your patience in the matter "up front", so a "worthy" answer to your inquiry, point by point, may be studied. Such issues, as I believe you already know, must go beyond mere formality or superficial reply.

It is clear to me your avowed "skepticism" has a depth - a depth demonstrated by the order (though not the length) of your point by point response.

Your first observation is to the point:

You stated,

1. "The question at base is what qualifies a group (such as a country) rather than individual’s as Christian."

In answering the issue, I would first observe that to declare a nation "Christian" something "other than" a single person’s faith must define that "Christianity." [That is what is so dangerous in making a President the definition of a country’s "religion", for example. Our President today - or the ones of yesteryear - no more defines Christianity than did his predecessor in that office. His good or bad decisions, whatever they may be, cannot be construed as "defining" faith for anyone other than himself.].

Actually, it is God who objectively "marks" people as "Christian"- not governments nor churches.

He marks what a Christian is. There are 3 such determining marks of a true Christian. (Unfortunately, sinless is NOT one of them.)

As an interesting side note, the Roman Empire actually attempted to make use of those marks to identify the "true Christian" as a possible way to "rounding them up" for the arena. Rome failed however, to defeat Christianity, as God is not so foolish as to make it that simple to find His people. (See the agnostic, Edward Gibbon’s famous Chapter 15 in the historic standard and classic "The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire", Milman edition.)

God also marks "culture carriers" such as "church". "What constitutes a church?"… as opposed to just a group gathering together is a legitimate question.

Other issues crucial to the life of any society are defined: "marriage", "ownership", "good", "evil", "righteousness", "contract", "inheritance", "money", "justice", "magistrate", and "nation" (let alone a "Christian nation"). For example, Alfred the Great recognized the necessity of a Standard and adopted definitions of many of these issues (contracts, agency, magistrate, due process, etc.) using Exodus 20 -23. In so doing, he created the Witan, a Council he designed to be representative of his people. That body set precedent for the later (over 3 centuries later) claims of Magna Charta and became the basis for creating a more representative Council known to history as Parliament.

However, ultimately, even "God" must be defined up front. (See below).

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Response, Restoring American Foundations, Christianity & America’s Foundations | 1 Comment »

Gas Prices, Oil Crisis and Socialism: Ask the “Good Senator”

June 17, 2008 – 12:57 pm

Anyone who knows anything about the oil/gas crisis we face, must simply be appalled with the answer Sen. Herb Kohl has given in recent letters to his constituents. This inept, nondescript Senator has always distinguished himself by apparently siding against his constituency in support of the power elite controlling the oil and gas prices as well as the environmentalist lobbies.

Note the following points:

He says,

“…there simply is not enough oil within our borders….”

He is ignorant of - or willingly compliant with - the untapped oil controlled by the monopolistic interests who control the cartels worldwide. Perhaps, the following facts show us how we could offset our oil crisis and the escalating gas prices:

• There is 1.8 TRILLION barrels of oil in the north shelf in Alaska. That is far more than the combined reserves of several OPEC nations including the Suadis. The people of Alaska WANT to drill it, but environmentalists have powerful lobbies whose work defaults to keeping gas prices high and under the control of a few capitalistic power mongers (monopolistic capitalists = socialism). They do so by hindering our capacity to drill and provide greater supply. The environmental lobbies KNOW they are, at least by default, protecting such American, OPEC, and South American oil magnates (Chevez). Why does our Senator not know this? He does. Enough studies on this have been provided to all our Senators and Representatives.

 

Of course, every time our government finds a wealth of oil (or gold, or other value), it declares a Wildlife Refuge and National Park for protecting all those potential zoo critters we all enjoy watching.

Note the Senator’s self-proclaimed heroics in a letter to his constituents:

Most recently on May 13, 2008 [right in the middle of this current gas price increase hurting all of us - my note], Senator Mitch McConnell (R-KY) introduced an amendment to S. 2284, the Flood Insurance Reform and Modernization Act of 2007, which would have allowed for drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) and off the costs of the United States. I voted against this proposal and the amendment failed by a vote of 42 to 56.

Question: Did he, or the environmentalists, raise an objection - pass a bill - or do anything at all, to stop the Chinese from drilling for oil off the coast of Florida right now? Yes, and where is our media in all of this? Frankly, I’ve heard much more about the polar bears than I have about the Chinese drilling in past months.

• Interesting side note: The environmentalists have gotten their devastating legislation passed which saddled the truckers with crippling “clean air” initiatives this past year. That crippling will be INCREASED next year.
That fact, PLUS the sudden speculative gas prices, is destroying the trucking industry as we speak. Truckers face cost increases that further exacerbate food prices, hurting all of us.

The good Senator supported all of these environmentalist initiatives. Look at his record. He is proud of it.

“…which would have allowed for drilling… off the costs of the United States. I voted against this proposal and the amendment failed by a vote of 42 to 56.”

• Why doesn’t our Senator write to his constituents about the fact that there are several places just off our Eastern and West Coasts containing at least 200 billion barrels (some are 300 billion barrels). There are several places in the U.S.A. (continental) where at least those amounts remain untapped.

• Why doesn’t the good Senator raise the issue about the fact that the Chinese are preparing right now to drill one oil field right off the Florida coast? I don’t hear any environmentalists sounding their alarms either. Why? Why is it only the American people cannot have access to their own oil fields?

• It isn’t as if the good Senator agrees that foreign nations are a different authority over which we have no legal control. Senator Kohl is the one who has consistently advocated that our country sue the OPEC nations (thus agreeing to subject our court system’s standing and jurisdiction to foreign court interference - the World Court).

• Note further our good Senator’s language:

“The way to ease the impact of high oil prices on consumers is to give consumers tools to reduce their demand for oil.”

There you go folks, our $11 million a year (2007 income) Senator wants us to “tighten our belts”, “suck it up”, “cut our quality of living”, “lose our savings to increasing inflation (due to gas fixing and controlled speculation)” while waiting for an alternative solution which could take years. It appears those zoo animals in Alaska he is concerned about, have more effective representation in the Senate than the people of Wisconsin.

Ah, maybe he will offer us a break on tickets to the Bucks games.

D’ya think?

Socialistically inclined “thought peddlers” (granted, “thought” may be too rich a term to describe this Senator of Wisconsin) always cry “tighten your belts” because socialism invariably cannot provide production increases or solutions. The good Senator is no different. YOU tighten YOUR belt. HE will continue to represent us in this nondescript, inept posturing.

Enjoy the zoo.

Lindsey Williams - The Energy Non-Crisis - Part 1 of 8

 

Posted in Current News | 2 Comments »

Where 2 or 3 are Gathered in My Name, there is JUDGMENT

June 16, 2008 – 4:58 pm

Posted in Sermons | No Comments »

Interesting Video Comparing Ronald Reagan and Ron Paul

June 14, 2008 – 4:10 pm

Ronald Reagan and Ron Paul: A Comparison

Posted in Restoring American Foundations, Constitutional Crisis | No Comments »

Christian America – Reply to a Sincere Skeptic Part II

June 13, 2008 – 9:34 pm

Christian America : Early Colonial and State Compacts (till 1820)

 

 

It should be noted that, in contrast to current State constitutions and laws, every state in the Union up to 1820, as well as every colony prior to our formation as a country, had constitutions which…

•  cited the Bible as the dominant authority of law
•  protected the right of churches to assemble freely without interference
•  referenced the Triune God of Scripture
•  protected the Lord’s Day legally and in the economy of the colony or state
•  utilized Christian language to describe its legal structure, including such items and issues as “Acts of God”, laws of consanguinity, recognition of Sunday worship, Christian marriage ceremonies and ministerial witness to them, divorce laws, wills, covenants, prenuptial compacts, and family laws reflecting Scriptural mandates [See also “Marriage Plague” on some of the horrors of misplaced Christian influence with respect to divorce laws of that era.], “calling”, “Protestant Ethic”, “head of household”, public fast days, public days of prayer, Chaplaincy… and many others.

Our Supreme Court consistently identified this nation as “a Christian nation”. It cited the “organic utterances” of our culture as proof numerous times.

Christian America – “To be” or “Not to be” (Christian)…

I do give the our Sincere Skeptic  credit though. Usually, the argument “This was once a Christian nation” meets with a thoroughly inconsistent reply. It usually goes something like this:

1) Anything truly evil in America’s past (slavery, for instance) is used to bludgeon the “Christian” ethic and morality, churches and laws, that “allowed” such evils to be perpetrated.

2) On the other hand… when simply addressing the prosperity, high view of “rights”, “freedoms”, issues like “democracy”… suddenly, no Christianity is in sight and we were “never a Christian people.” Arguments flowing from this “logic” inconsistently apply differing standards to evaluate contemporaneous issues then and now.
The post above at least doesn’t do that. It unabashedly makes its offense clear in one direction.

3) Many of the institutions, rights, forms of governance (Constitution, Bill of Rights), holidays, customs, and culture carriers, had direct Christian foundations in their formative thinking and creation. I have often spoken publicly to the fact that … “Our generation is like a generation peering at the ruins of a once great civilization attempting to discover what made the civilization great.”

The Christianity found in many churches today, bears little resemblance to that which produced the culture carrying capacity of early America.

Why?     In a word, “apostasy”.

Christian America: Organic Utterances

 

Christianity in this country has lost it compelling message and has a hard time discerning the cultural significance of the Bible which is designed to address culture and society at large with something more than just “getting saved” (obviously, necessary but there’s much more to the Christian worldview).

However, many of those same institutions, rights, forms of governance, holidays, customs, and culture carriers have long since lost their original meaning and significance, (including immigration and its overwhelming complexities and injustices).

The comment we are considering is consistent with this observation. Note the statement our Sincere Skeptic gives us: “Where ever you’re getting your history, it’s not the history I’ve studied from many sources over many years.”

That’s hitting the nail on the head. our Skeptic is correct. The history I am citing throughout these posts, is taken from source material referencing people, events, and issues cited in “organic utterances” – original sources, such as the people who lived the events, wrote the laws, books and pamphlets, or undertook to defend the Christian position at that time in history.

Such “Organic utterances” are LEGALLY (read politically) banned from our schools and institutions by Supreme Court decree…Hence, the statements of the Supreme Court through 1950 that stated categorically, “We are a Christian people…” over and over again.

“Where ever you’re getting your history, it’s not the history I’ve studied from many sources over many years.”

So, the only way in which an historically denuded American history can be engineered to continue to “argue” against a Christian position is to exclude “embarrassing” Christian worldview opinions of individuals as Patrick Henry, George Mason, George Washington, George Whitefield, Ben Franklin, Ethan Allan and Thomas Paine (both of whom recognized and expressed a determined resentment towards the then current Christian consensus in America.) and many others. (See the archived documents of the colonial and early American culture carriers demonstrating the organic utterances of our early Christian heritage in America, collected and preserved since 1864, HERE.)

 

Christian America: What to say about slavery in our past?

Reply: Since the issue of “Slavery” was referenced in the original post with these words (in part): Tell it to the Native Americans, slaves, and displaced New Orleanians of Hurricane Katrina, whose ancestors were slaves. We can take care of other countries, but not our own citizens after a disaster.

 

Here’s a reply.

Often, the slave issue arises among those who are only regurgitating what they learned in high school or college classes. However, the legacy of the Christian faith is one which is contrary to the servitude imposed in America. (If there is interest in the so-called “slave laws” of the Old Testament, comments and questions to that effect can be raised by your posts, and responses will be forthcoming through the ICHR (Institute for Christian Heritage Research).

It was Christianity which led the fight for freedom for the poor, the slaves and the helpless (exposure in the old Roman Empire era) as well as a determined stand for the rights of all mankind against the power of Imperial Rome in the first 5 centuries of the Christian era. That legacy has continued throughout the history of the last 2000 years.
It was the Christian faith which utilized the culture carriers of England to do away with slavery legally in that Empire. Christian activist and humanitarian William Wilberforce led that life-long crusade against slavery.

Wilberforce knew that the problem confronting English, Dutch, and American slave trade and institutions was the presence of a system of governance which keeps rearing its ugly head to control ECONOMIC life and values, and is, in its principles (presuppositionally) condemned in the Bible. It was known to our forefathers as “mercantilism”, as in “mercantilist socialism.”

Socialism is about as nondescript a term as can be found anywhere, so it usually “flies under the radar” of most people’s offense threshold. The term conveys nothing. However, in essence, socialism, is a “Hate-Thy-Neighbor” theology/philosophy and is, in all of its formats, invariably “monopolistic capitalism” - a practice thoroughly condemned in the Laws of God (Any takers on the false assertion that there was a practice of “communism” in Acts 4 and 5? Great material to respond to in a future post. If interested, go to the link on the top right and get the newsletter subscription (it is free). In the comment section ask for the newsletter on “Alleged Communism (?) in Acts 4 and 5”.).

Remembering that the term “capitalism” was invented by socialistic writers, it should be no surprise to find that the essence of Socialism is Monopoly. “Monopolistic capitalism” simply means that government falls into the hands of a wealthy business clique (cartels, oligarchies) who use “law” (Think “police”) to …

•  bludgeon competition,
•  seize assets (of others),
•  diminish productive enterprise (control of factors of production for themselves),
•  control the fruits of labor (slavery) and …
•  institute varying forms of servitude, through legal enactment (force) and/or debt formation.

Mercantilism (and all socialisms – Nazism, fascism, communism, institutional/corporate socialism, monarchic socialism, Fabian socialism, communal variants, globalism) invariably hinder production and seize the fruits of individual labor and profitability so as to create or simply utilize already established “slave trading channels” for their own profitability.
That is what happened in American slavery and, in part, in the case of the Native American tragedy. Incidentally, FEMA is a socialistic accretion which cannot possibly do its job in disasters such as Katrina.

(Reference here is a reply to a previously posted comment which said: Tell it to the Native Americans, slaves, and displaced New Orleanians of Hurricane Katrina, whose ancestors were slaves. We can take care of other countries, but not our own citizens after a disaster.

Why were Americans surprised that ANOTHER bureaucratic nightmare was created and lacked the know-how to handle a catastrophe on such a scale as what Katrina brought to New Orleans? (Ask if anyone wants to know why socialistic accretions such as Fema WILL ALWAYS fail – no matter what party is in power. More great material to respond to in a future post. Again, if interested, go to the VisionViewpoint.com site and get the newsletter subscription (it is free).)

More later.

 Submitted Wayne Sedlak, ICHR
 EarlyChristianAmerica.com

 

Posted in Sincere Skeptic, Restoring American Foundations | 1 Comment »

The Christian History of America: The Laws of God

June 13, 2008 – 7:51 pm