Posted on 01/15/2008 12:24:02 PM PST by greyfoxx39
Because most on FR would not repeal all taxes and have Government completely ignore it's responsibilities. There is a difference between conservative and anarchist.
Amos 4:1 Hear this word, ye kine of Bashan, that are in the mountain of Samaria, which oppress the poor, which crush the needy, which say to their masters, Bring, and let us drink. 2 The Lord GOD hath sworn by his holiness, that, lo, the days shall come upon you, that he will take you away with hooks, and your posterity with fishhooks.
Daniel 4:27 Wherefore, O king, let my counsel be acceptable unto thee, and break off thy sins by righteousness, and thine iniquities by shewing mercy to the poor; if it may be a lengthening of thy tranquillity. 28 All this came upon the king Nebuchadnezzar.
See my two recent posts they both have blue ink.
Thanks for answering my question about the pagans kings of old.
How about His dealings under the New Covenant? He commands His children under the New Covenant to care for the poor (Read James), but not governments. Those are told to punish evil doers and reward those who do good (Romans 13).
Jesus didn't tell governments "not to", He just didn't address it. But that's not surprising, because Jesus didn't say much about governments except to pay taxes.
Jesus' commands to individuals to care for the poor are similar to Old Testament commands to individuals on that matter. That Jesus didn't specifically address the responsbility of Government with regard to the poor, shouldn't imply that things had changed in that regard from the Old Testament. After all, the new covenant was more about God's relationship with individuals and not government. And that God held pagan kings responsible indicates that this governmental responsibility exists outside of both the old and new covenants.
See the discussion that has ensued on Jesus and the role of government. We’re not imposing religious belief or anything near it. But we do impose through government certain values and many of those are beliefs in rights that are rooted in Judeo Christian faith. That includes the “inalienable rights endowed by our Creator”. They include the sanctity of human life, as in thou shall not murder. They include property rights, as in, thou shall not steal. They include marriage, etc. It also includes care of orphans and indigents.
An occultist who beliefs in human sacrifice cannot freely express his religion in this country because such expression interferes with other individual’s rights. Is that imposing Christianity? Too bad.
Those Davy Crockett's writings were frauds, written by the Whig party some 50 years after Davy Crockett's death.
“not imposing religious belief or anything near it. But we do impose through government certain values and many of those are beliefs in rights that are rooted in Judeo Christian faith. “
Enforcing societal norms rooted in values on society is one thing. I’m not sure if you know this, but many other religions command their followers not to murder or steal. They also command their followers to marry etc.. This is not unique to Christianity. Notice how the founders always said “our Creator”. They left it up to the individual to “fill in the blank” on who they believe their creator is.
The first amendment provides for the separation of church and state. That does not mean what the ACLU says it means. It does not mean that you can’t put a manger scene in front of the local government building or have the ten commandments etched in the courthouse. What it does mean is that you cannot use the force of government to impose a specific religious viewpoint on everyone else. The founders were specifically thinking of the Church of England when they wrote this.
Jesus commanded his followers to do charity and good works. Paul instructs the Churches all throughout the known world to do good works. As for the old testament, does Paul not talk about not being bound by the law, about taking off the law? Does he not talk about living in Christ? In the old testament, the Children of Israel were God’s chosen people so of course God would command them to do good works. In the new testament, who is God’s chosen people? The Church, thats who should be doing the charity. To say otherwise is abdicating your responsibilities.
Anyone can be generous with other people’s money and that is what you do when you talk about the government doing charity work.
Strawman.
God told kings that they should be generous with what god had given them, and that they should be merciful with those that are less fortunate.
Our president isn't a king. The government's treasury doesn't belong to the President, it does to a king. It isn't generous to give away other people's money.
Whoever is president obviously makes a good deal of money and has resources available to them within their authority, and they should show generosity with those.
However, the Constitution, which the President swears on the Bible to uphold does not grant the President the authority to give away the people's money generously. Nor does it grant Congress that authority. The role of the federal government is explicitly spelled out, and all other areas of authority are left to the states or the people.
Will God punish the United States if it's people are greedy and turn their backs on the needs of others? Quite possibly. We all have a responsibly to wisely use what God has given us.
The President not having the authority to use the treasury in that fashion does not break faith with God. It means that we the people have chosen not to give that authority to our government, therefore the authority and the responsibility remains with us.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.