| Author | Topic | AXEMAN2415
Guitar Weenie
USA
740 Posts |  Posted - 02 Jul 2007 : 20:34:54  
| Jesus Joshua 24:15 Newsletter - June 2007
www.jesusjoshua2415.com
The Band:
Bobby Shepherd: Drums
Steve Pettit: Lead Vocals
Jay Woody: Bass
Will Rauser: Guitars
The Crew:
Mark Bussell: Webmaster, Computer Tech
Jim Bishop: Promotion, PR
Tammy Woody: Video Production, Wardrobe
Juli Rauser: Booking
George Sparks: Roadie
Editor's Lead
Comfort With Tyranny
Welcome to the July installment of the Jesus Joshua 24:15 Newsletter.And since it is July, and those of our readers that reside in the United States (including myself) will be celebrating Independence Day on the 4th of July. And, as our thoughts are in that direction, I would like to offer some thoughts on this, the most hallowed of Holidays in the United States.
As as I have mentioned in previous Newsletters, I like to listen to a lot of radio talk shows. On one particular installment, of one particular talk show, the issue of the War in Iraq was on deck. Now before I proceed any further, I must attempt to clarify something: I am not trying to sway anyone's opinion pro or con on the Iraq War. I am not trying to be an apologist for any particular Administration. I am an apologist, but that is not my intent for this article. So, please do not feel threatened or put upon by my opinions. This article is an editorial, and thus, I will probably veer into political ideology and opinion. But the intent of this article, ideology notwithstanding, is to make a spiritual point regarding what I perceive to be a deep spiritual problem with human beings in general. So if you can wade through my obvious partisanship, you will be able to understand my main point.
As the discussion about the reasons for why the Iraqi Conflict is appearing to not quite go as planned progressed, the Radio Host made the comment that, "The Iraqis have not stepped up to the plate. They were under the brutal tyranny of Saddam Hussein, and we (the US) liberated those people, gave them an opportunity to live free, and they have now chosen to live with another kind of tyranny. The tyranny of the Muslim Clerics, and the leaders of Al-Queda. I guess the Iraqi's are comfortable with tyranny."
A slight change of gears is in order.
Just recently, I had a dear friend stay with me at my house, who had just come back from a month leave in his home state. He had been home from the battlefields of Iraq, where he literally suffered the wounds of war. He stayed with me for about 4 days, on his way to his new duty station. During his stay with me, I asked him some very deep questions about the conflict in which he had been personally engaged. Now I must tell you that I have known this young man for about 13 years, and I saw a changed man. Battle will do that. But, change not withsatnding, I still saw the man of deep conviction and integrity that I have always known.
At any rate, he was very frank with me in his answers. I asked my friend, since he had first hand knowledge and experience of the events going on in that country, "Did the US do the right thing there in Iraq?" His answer only confirmed my suspicions. My friend told me, "Will, I do believe that we did the just and noble thing. But the Iraqi people, who first welcomed and congratulated us, are now the same people trying to kill us. The Iraqi people celebrate their freedom, then the Muslim Clerics preach hate, and turn these same people into our enemies, by threatening to kill their families, and torture the men. They face just as much tyranny as they did under Saddam." And then my friend said this: "They seem to be comfortable with tyranny."
I must underscore that my friend had never heard the comment made by the talk show host. However, I found that quite ironic that my friend would choose the very phrase that our famed radio host used.
Now, again, allow me to remind you that this article is not meant to stir up a debate over the nobility or the lack of nobility of the War in Iraq. I am trying to get you to see an interesting pattern. As such, my next few paragraphs are somewhat of a delineation of the current subject. However, I shall try to connect the thoughts together.
I have a dear friend (one who reads this newsletter) who wrote me with an interesting question, some months back.
This was long before I heard the comments made by the Radio Jock, or the return of my friend from Iraq. But at any rate, the question he posed to me was:
quote:
"I think it was CS Lewis that told a story about watching kids play with mud pies. He said they were completely happy playing with the mud, because they'd never known a real pie. What I don't understand is, if someone tells them about the real pie, or better still, they see someone eating a real pie, how can they still be happy with what they have?"
(And, Editor's note: The one who wrote me that question did so in private, so I am using some unrequested discretion. My friend knows who he is and he can email me if he thinks I stepped out of line. Ordinarily, I would never take such measures as privacy is paramount with me, but I think he will understand).
I have pondered that question deeply since my friend posed it to me. And I believe my answer to him falls within the parameters of this article. I believe that people are comfortable with tyranny. Whether it is the tyranny of a dictator, or the tyranny of sin, there comes a point in everyone's lives where we have to decide whether or not we are willing to live with tyranny. The people who want to keep the "mud pie" are simply comfortable with the mud pie. The mud pie is what they've always had, and they are afraid that they will either like the "real pie", or have to give up what they've always known. Thus, they are comfortable with the "tyranny" of the "mud pie." The mud pie has no nutritional value, it cannot satisfy, nor does it taste particularly good. It may even make you sick. But you're comfortable with it, and thus you won't give it up.
The birth of the United States was consummated by the reaction to tyranny. Believe me, there were those in that age who said that it was better to live with tyranny, than to face the discomfort and sacrifice for freedom.
But, if the Founders of this great Republic had listened to the naysayers, to those comfortable living with tyranny, this nation would have never been born.
I would like to interject what Scripture has to say about freedom. Jesus says, in John 8:31-32:
quote:
To the Jews who had believed Him, Jesus said, "If you hold to My teaching, you are really My disciples. Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free."
By itself, that is a powerful verse. But I believe the following verses is where the power of this quote becomes so effective. John 8:33-36 says:
quote:
They (the Jews---Ed) answered Him, "We are Abraham's descendants and have never been slaves of anyone. How can you say that we shall be set free?"
Jesus replied, "I tell you the truth, everyone who sins is a slave to sin. Now a slave has no permanent place in the family, but a son belongs to it forever. So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed."
To tie all of this together, I submit that people can become comfortable with tyranny. Personally, whether we're speaking of the politics of warfare or the issues of the human spirit, this kind of comfort is incredibly dangerous. Jesus is essentially asking if the people are comfortable with the tyranny of sin.
I find it ironic that the Jews who believed Jesus stated flatly that as descendants of Abraham, they have never been slaves of anyone. I guess they forgot that little 430 year ordeal in Egypt; or that the Jewish state was under the thumb of the Romans during this particular event. I guess they had forgotten exile to Babylon, and Persia.
And it is to that forgetfulness that I really address this issue. Many of us have become so comfortable with tyranny, when the dictator (i.e. "Satan") comes around, even when he abuses us, tortures us, maligns us, accuses us, and eventually leaves us for dead, we humans continue to be comfortable in his tyrannical grip. When Jesus comes along to free us we are happy for a time until the "dictator" comes around and tells us all of these things that aren't true, and we listen to him because we're comfortable with the tyranny of sin.
Are we like the Jewish believers, so comfortable with tyranny that we will even deny that we were ever really slaves? Are we so comfortable with the tyranny of sin that we don't catch Jesus' words in John 8:32: "If you hold to My teaching..."?
Are we holding to the teachings of Christ, or are we allowing the ultimate tyrannical dictator to convince us to be comfortable with his regime? Just like in Iraq, real freedom eludes those who would rather live comfortably with tyranny.
News and Events
- This month we celebrate the birth of our esteemed and talented Bass player, C. Jay Woody! He will be turning a spry 34 years old on July 5th! Happy Birthday, Jayster!
- Jesus Joshua 24:15 will be playing in Massilon, Ohio, on July 14th. The band will be opening for Broken 3418, at the "Light CBAM". This show is listed on the front page of the Jesus Joshua 24:15 website, so you can check that out for specific location and times.
- Speaking of shows, Jesus Joshua 24:15, as announced last month, played a show at Fayetteville Christian Church, located, naturally, in Fayetteville, NC. We played after the wonderful group "Behind The Stone" warmed up the audience with their unique brand of Praise and Worship. A great time was had by all, and we look forward to playing with them again, and playing at FFC again!
- Don't forget, July 4th is Independence Day! Please enjoy yourselves, don't drink and drive, and remember why we celebrate!
Guitar Points from Will
Again, More Rhythm Guitar
Some of you may be asking yourselves why I am spending a lot of time on this subject. Well, to quote Jake E. Lee (former Ozzy Osbourne guitarist) "Rhythm guitar is about 95% of your set." I mean, if you're going to spend that much time playing rhythm guitar, you should at least learn how to make it exciting.
Many guitar articles stress the value of lead playing. And lead playing is important. However, without rhythm there is no song! Lead playing without a good song is just useless.
However, there are two myths that I would like to dispose of. First, "Rhythm is boring." I am afraid that you would have to consult the mighty James Hetfield from Metallica, or Edward Van Halen, and I am reasonably sure they would disagree. Surely, Edward is a magnificent soloist, but many of his rhythms are tight, creative, interesting, and very difficult to play. Spending time with the rhythm playing of either of those players would surely increase your rhythm chops AND your songwriting chops.
The second myth, which is tied to the first is, "All you really need to play rhythm is to know just a couple of chords." Baloney! It's knowing what to do with those chords. Much rock and even metal music utilizes very simple chord structures (i.e. the famous "I-IV-V" progression). But even when the same key and chord progressions are used by two different artists, you will have two totally different results.
I know I keep referring to Mr. EVH, but he was responsible for grabbing my interest in the guitar in the first place. Edward's music is mainly based on just a few chords (rarely more than 4 or 5). However, unless you analyze it, you really cannot tell that there are only 4 or 5 chords in the song, because Edward plays around with the voicings, the way the chords progress into each other, and how he plays them dynamically.
Let's take a typical "I-IV-V", progression, in the Key of "A", and "Van Halenize" it;
Ex.1a
(I) (IV)(V)
A5 D5 E5
E|------------------|
B|-----3------------|
G|-2---2------------|
D|-2---0---2--------|
A|-0-------2--------|
E|---------0--------|
Okay, now that's pretty straight forward. We are just going to use power chords right now, because we haven't dived into more theory. Now, mind you, power chords are not necessarily boring.
But I am reasonably sure that in lesser hands, these three chords will soon run out of gas. Now, let's look at a Van Halen-like take on these chords to produce an interesting rhythm part. Let's add some interesting dynamic twists:
Ex. 1b
A5 A5(7) D5 (E5)
x x x |-H-| P.H.
E|------------------------|
B|-------------3----------|
G|-2-----0-----2------0---|
D|-2-----2-----0----2-----|
A|-0-0-0-0---3---0-2------|
E|----------------------3-|
[Just for clarity, an "x" means to Palm mute the note (a chunk-sound), an "H" means to "Hammer" (play a note without picking it) and a "P.H." means "Pinch Harmonic" (using the side of the thumb, to graze the string, after you pick it, to produce an artificial harmonic).]
Now, in the above example, I still use the same 3 chords (A5, D5,& E5), but now I am adding some filler in between the chords - kind of like a piano player might do (In fact, Van Halen started his musical training as a piano player ... go figure).
Notice in the above example that I included a chord that kind of deviates from the initial pattern. I used an "A5(7)", which is only there to clarify the harmony, because when I go to the open "G" string, while playing the low A and E notes, you create an implied "A7' or an implied "Am7" chord. The fact that there is no 3rd interval present in that chord keeps the chord a little ambiguous. But understanding the theory behind it is not really necessary for you to play the examples. Use your ear, and if it doesn't sound good, try playing a different note. The important thing is that you're trying to make your rhythm playing sound alive and grooving.
Let's try a different approach. Let's use the same 3 chords, but let's start on a different chord in the series.
Ex. 2a
E5 A5 D5 E5 D5
|--sl.--|
E|-----------------------|
B|--------------3--5--3--|
G|---------2----2--4--2--|
D|-2-------2----0--------|
A|-2-------0-------------|
E|-0-0-0-3---3-0---------|
(Note: "Sl." means to "slide".)
Ex. 2b
E5 E5 D5 A5 D5 E5
x x x
E|----------------------|
B|----------------------|
G|-9---9-------------9--|
D|-9---7---7--7--7---9--|
A|-7---7---5--7--5---7--|
E|---0---0---------0----|
Bear in mind, I am not trying to make my examples rhythmically accurate. My results may differ from yours. But that is entirely the point. I am trying to get you to spawn your own creativity.
Fingerings, precise licks, and dynamics are subjective, as I am making these examples up as I go. Put your personal mark on these examples, and force them to conform to your personal sound, and you will have developed something unique.
Let's look at one final example, and let's "Metallica-ize" it a little.
E5 x x x x x x x x
E|----------------------|
B|----------------------|
G|----------------------|
D|-2--------------------|
A|-2--------------------|
E|-0---0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0--|
Bb5 Bb5 D5 A5
E5 x x x Bb5 x x x
E|-------------------------|
B|-------------------------|
G|-3---3-------7-3-2-------|
D|-3-2-3-------7-3-2-------|
A|-1-2-1-------5-1-0-------|
E|---0---0-0-0-------0-0-0-|
I have added an extra chord in this mix (one that is favored by thrash, heavy metal, and various other metal styles); The chord? The Bb5, or the "Flat 5th interval" Make sure to use some seriously heavy palm muting throughout. These kinds of dynamics add to the heaviness of these 4 chords. Definitely creates a different vibe.
Try these ideas with other 3-chord combinations. You might find your voice within the simplicity of 3 chords.
Lead Techniques from Will
Last month, we looked at the easy to remember E minor Pentatonic "box" shape. But we looked at the "box" shape down at the lowest part of the neck of the guitar.
This month, we need to look at the same "box" pattern, but an octave above. It is the same shape, but we perform it starting on the 12th fret, rather than the open strings.
Ex.1
E|-------------------------|
B|-------------------------|
G|-------------------12-14-|
D|-------------12-14-------|
A|-------12-14-------------|
E|-12-15-------------------|
E|-------12-15-12----------|
B|-12-15----------15-12----|
G|----------------------14-|
D|-------------------------|
A|-------------------------|
E|-------------------------|
E|-----------------------|
B|-----------------------|
G|-12--------------------|
D|----14-12--------------|
A|----------14-12--------|
E|----------------15-12--|
Now, let's make it a little more musical by playing these patterns a little less "scalar".
Ex.2
E|-12-15-12----------------|
B|----------15-12----12-15-|
G|----------------14-------|
D|-------------------------|
A|-------------------------|
E|-------------------------|
E|-------------------------|
B|-------------------------|
G|-------------------------|
D|----------12-------14-12-|
A|-14-12-------14-12-------|
E|-------15----------------|
E|-------------------------|
B|-------------------------|
G|-12-14-12----12-14-12----|
D|----------14-------------|
A|----------------------14-|
E|-------------------------|
I have not set up any fingerings or any type of picking patterns, because I think lead is largely a personal expression. We will be looking at different types of picking patterns and stylistic ornaments, but for right now try getting these patterns under your fingers. Remember, this is to be played over any E-minor chord (Em, Em7, Em9) or, for a bluesier flavor, try the scale over any E dominant harmony (E7,E9,E13, or even E7sus4).
A Final Thought
A I was driving to run an errand, I passed by a church with this on their front sign: "The hanging flag represents your freedom."
I am sure that this particular congregation was trying to draw a point about the symbols of freedom. Well, I could add to that; "The hanging Savior represents your freedom."
Obviously, Jesus is no longer in the grave; He is risen. But, just as the flag of the United States represents those who have gone before us to ensure our freedom and posterity, the Cross represents what Christ went before us to do - to pay a price that we could not pay.
There's a saying that "Freedom isn't free." Freedom is bought by the blood and sacrifice of others. You know what? Your freedom from sin was not free. It is a gift to you and me precisely because we do not have the resources to pay the price of it.
However, Jesus could and did. And just as we honor Old Glory, a symbol of national freedom, and personal liberty, we must honor and remember that Jesus went before us, to pay a price, so that you and I could live free from the tyranny of sin.
Freedom is not without it's costs. Neither was the process of liberating us from our sins. Our liberation cost God everything. Perhaps we would do well to remember that.
|
| Captain Blasto
Cappuccino Junkie
USA
212 Posts | Posted - 02 Jul 2007 : 21:06:07   
| Biblically speaking one could ask if the Founding Fathers were in error for revolting against the established authorities that God had over them. Which (of course) resulted in "politically incorrect" bloodshed and death. The answer to this valid question must be addressed in the context of the "Freedom of Religion" aspect of their plight and not the economic taxation issues etc. It was this infringement of proper worship that allowed their seemingly disobedient actions to be "imputed" under the Blood. These are the theistic words that gave our founders license to write and establish a Constitution in the first place.
"WHEN, in the Course of human Events, it becomes necessary for one People to dissolve the Political Bands, which have connected them with another, and to assume, among the Powers of the Earth, the separate and equal Station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's GOD entitle them, a decent Respect to the Opinions of Mankind requires that they should declare the Causes which impel them to the Separation.
We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed, by their CREATOR, with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its Foundation on such Principles, and organizing its Powers in such Form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate, that Governments long established, should not be changed for light and transient Causes; and accordingly all Experience hath shewn, that Mankind are more disposed to suffer, while Evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the Forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long Train of Abuses and Usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object, evinces a Design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their Right, it is their Duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future Security. Such has been the patient Sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the Necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The History of the present King of Great-Britain is a History of repeated Injuries and Usurpations, all having in direct Object the Establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid World."
|
President of the
Juan Valdez fanclub
Kirk Out |  |
| AXEMAN2415
Guitar Weenie
USA
740 Posts | Posted - 02 Jul 2007 : 22:41:22
| quote:
Biblically speaking one could ask if the Founding Fathers were in error for revolting against the established authorities that God had over them.
It is worth noting that one of the finest theologians of the time, John Wesley, opposed the Colonial Rebellion, for just such reasons. As much as I am a Wesleyan in theological background, Wesley was wrong. And for the very reasons Captian Blasto has cited. |
"C'mon Dave, Gimme a break!" | |
| Shredhead
Junior Member
Australia
322 Posts | Posted - 03 Jul 2007 : 01:46:08
| quote:
the most hallowed of Holidays in the United States.
Even more hallowed than Sept 4 ??...lol
I'm of the belief that we , as believers , can only break the law when it asks us to contravene Gods' , as all authority , civil included , is appointed by God .
quote:
That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed,
That's why this doesn't make sense to me .
I definately need a lesson in American history ok , so forgive my ignorance , the reason for the revolution was the same as Daniel not bowing ? The Monarchy was not allowing you to fulfil your responsibility to worship & serve the one true God ?
Now , before you go pelting me with apple pie , can I just add , the questions I've asked are honest ones , not loaded with hidden agenda's or anti-American sentiment .... my earthly ancestors were Scots so , " FREEDOM !!" .
|
but some of you need to be awakened and slapped silly - William D Rauser | |
| michael322006
New Member
USA
97 Posts | Posted - 03 Jul 2007 : 08:58:20
| | very thought provoking newsletter. I think it is very interesting how at the beginning of the war they was alot of support now that support for the troops has died down a lot. It seems to me that these people who oppose the the war are comfortable living with tyranny as well. We as Christians need to wake up and start fighting this fight. There are too many casualties due to friendly fire. Too many people are worried about getting their toes stepped on or not wanting to get out of their comfort zone. Being a Christian isn't about being warm and fuzzy. Its about being in the Marine Corp. When you accept Jesus in your heart war has been declared by Satan. Christians have declared their freedom against Satan's tyranny. We have to claim it not just say it and then continue living the way before. |
And when all is said and done I can go home :D | |
| Captain Blasto
Cappuccino Junkie
USA
212 Posts | Posted - 03 Jul 2007 : 15:54:51
| While some have preferred tyranny others have opted for freedom...
There are many reasons listed for the breaking of bonds with England in the Declaration of Independence... but I believe that it was the recognition and invokation of God's ultimate authority through recognition of the individual rights of people and the violation of those rights that really allowed the government of this country the "Protection of Devine Providence" mentioned: "We therefore, the Representatives of the United States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by the authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, We mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor."
The full text of the Declaration can be viewed at http://www.birdsnest.com/declaration_of_independance.htm
Only leaders who truly consider themselves servants would choose to do what is best for the people regardless of it's effect on their own goals. Which IS the framework establishing our current system while recognizing rights endowed from on high. Yet... theres still that ever-present greed of men that corrupts our system too...
It is ironic that while our government arose in a manner similar to that which Marx described in his Manifesto it was wrought of theistic beliefs... not the atheistic ones seen so often in communism...
The early Church in Acts seemed to have a communal twist to it's fiscal workings while a Biblical authority structure handled administratively.
...Of course The authority structure that we see mirrored over and over again in scriptures alludes to Jesus' Holy Kingship... where I am certain the voice of the people is in unison with His will anyway... since we are united in marriage.
|
President of the
Juan Valdez fanclub
Kirk Out | |
| AXEMAN2415
Guitar Weenie
USA
740 Posts | Posted - 03 Jul 2007 : 16:15:49
| quote:
quote:That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed,
That's why this doesn't make sense to me .
Fair question, given that you are not a citizen of the United States, my friend. "The consent of the governed" is what is supposed to make the US a representative republic, which is different from a democracy. Essentially, the citizenry choose by ballot who is going to represent them in government. We do not choose our "kings" (as some Christians have ascribed). The leaders of this nation are supposed to work for the citizenry: in other words, we're the boss. Well, that is the way it is supposed to work. That is why there are term limits on the President, and there needs to be on the Congress (currently, there is no term limits for Senators and House members, as much as there ought to be).
At any rate (although I did not intend for this article to be a political debate), there needed to be a clean break from the monarchy, in that the King set himself as governing all facets of life; Political, Judicial, and Religious. Unfortunately, when kings try to keep people in line, Policy and Judiciary are not where the people's hearts are. It is the influence of the Church, as it represents a block to a monarch's will over the people. Think about it, people's loyalties are split is the King demands all from the people, and God owns the people's hearts. The Church is the singular threat to an imposition of secular will. So, the kings saw fit to accumulate power by worming their way into the Church body politic. This becomes a stumbling block to real liberty, because if the King wants you to be Catholic, because he is, then you will be Catholic. If he wants you to be Anglican, then you will be. And a harsh penalty befalls you if you question the authority of the king, since he is now considered justified by the Church. This then becomes justification for murder, seizing private property, unjust and stiff taxation, and other things, including, the hinderance of the freedom to worship as God leads. |
"C'mon Dave, Gimme a break!" | |
| Captain Blasto
Cappuccino Junkie
USA
212 Posts | Posted - 03 Jul 2007 : 17:55:31
| | Actually Axe... I disagree just a bit... even though we are electing a president he is to be a leader and he should do what is best for the nation. Not necessarily follow every fleeting popular opinion... this is why it's called leadership... hopefully guided by The Holy Spirit... We have representatives who should be the ones doing the direct will of their constituents to the best of their abilities... |
President of the
Juan Valdez fanclub
Kirk Out | |
| AXEMAN2415
Guitar Weenie
USA
740 Posts | Posted - 03 Jul 2007 : 22:23:35
| I don't think we disagree, even though it's perfectly okay if we do. Your point is correct, we are electing a leader. However, my point is that while we are electing a leader, that leader is not a monarch nor a dictator. As such, that leader ( the Executive Branch, President) is subject to accountability of the citizenry, by way of the Legislative branch (Congress) and the Judicial Branch (Supreme Court).
Granted, our Republic is not based on the Majority vote (a common misperception) which leads to Mob rule. However, when the leadership fails to do the will of the people, then we have a dangerous prospect ahead.
Now, I wish to note that my thesis in the Editor's Lead was not to arouse the discussion about politics, per se. That discussion is quite fine with me. However, I must point out that I was using the current political climate to illustrate a point about a spiritual issue. When I speak of freedom here, I am referring to the freedom that Christ gives, and I am attempting to offer an analysis as to why people behave the way they do toward that which really oppresses them. Let's be careful not to get sidetracked down a rabbit trail. |
"C'mon Dave, Gimme a break!" | |
| Shredhead
Junior Member
Australia
322 Posts | Posted - 04 Jul 2007 : 06:36:28
| quote:
Now, I wish to note that my thesis in the Editor's Lead was not to arouse the discussion about politics, per se. That discussion is quite fine with me. However, I must point out that I was using the current political climate to illustrate a point about a spiritual issue. When I speak of freedom here, I am referring to the freedom that Christ gives, and I am attempting to offer an analysis as to why people behave the way they do toward that which really oppresses them. Let's be careful not to get sidetracked down a rabbit trail.
Duly noted & understood ..... an excellent analysis it is too !
quote:
Fair question, given that you are not a citizen of the United States, my friend. "The consent of the governed" is what is supposed to make the US a representative republic, which is different from a democracy.
I was referring to " deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed ". If all authority comes from from God , then it is from Him , their just powers come , not the governed . Therefore , if we baulk at that authority , aren't we in effect , following our own will , not Gods' ?
quote:
Biblically speaking one could ask if the Founding Fathers were in error for revolting against the established authorities that God had over them. Which (of course) resulted in "politically incorrect" bloodshed and death. The answer to this valid question must be addressed in the context of the "Freedom of Religion" aspect of their plight and not the economic taxation issues etc. It was this infringement of proper worship that allowed their seemingly disobedient actions to be "imputed" under the Blood.
As CB has explained .
I'm a firm believer that tyranny takes on many different disguises , not everything that promises freedom , produces it . As Eve exercised her freedom , we all discovered what tyranny is .
The Israelites , unbelievably , after being set free from tyranny , still desired it's " comforts " . Maybe we could say the journey to freedom can take 2 weeks , or 40 years , the key is understanding what true freedom is .
Again , excellent points Will . |
but some of you need to be awakened and slapped silly - William D Rauser | |
| AXEMAN2415
Guitar Weenie
USA
740 Posts | Posted - 04 Jul 2007 : 15:37:37
| quote:
I was referring to " deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed ". If all authority comes from from God , then it is from Him , their just powers come , not the governed . Therefore , if we baulk at that authority , aren't we in effect , following our own will , not Gods' ?
We must have a little perspective here. Yes, all authority does come from God. However, with regard to the US Constitution, and the delegation of powers, that Godly authority is bestowed on the Citizenry first, and then to the leaders in government. Just as any leader has his governing authority given them by God (such as any monarch, emporor, shiek, king...or whatever), so too has that authority been given to the citizens of this country. In other words, in the United States, the [ipeople are the authority, not the politicians. The politicians are supposed to be held to account to the people of this nation. Hence the large printed words, "We the People..." opening the Constitution of the United States.
Now, this presents a serious conundrum for the United States, and also for many Christians who are citizens of this nation, and refuse to vote, or get involved in the national arena of ideas. On the one hand, Christians cite the oft used mantra from Romans 13 (which has been referred to benignly in the last few posts) that "Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authorityexcept that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do sowill bring judgement on themselves."
Notice that the Scripture uses the words "authorities" (plural), and authority (singular). Not once does the Scripture use the term king, at least in this particular passage. Now, it is true that Jesus said "Render unto Ceasar" and the majority of the time when Scripture refers to leadership, it references some kind of kingly authority, most often a type of monarch. Truth be told, if we wanted to include some kind of pagan cannabal tribal chief, then we could use this Scripture to justify that type of "authority"...for the Scripture plainly states that no authority exists outside of what God has established.
However, the authority that is established here in the United States is the people, not a monarchy. The Scripture never implies that the only type of authority established is a monarchal type.
Where this poses a grave potential for the US citizenry is that, while leaders such as Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Kim Jong Il, Mao tze-Tung, Caesar, Pharoah, Saddam Hussein, etc., etc., will be held to very harsh accountibility for their crimes and for how they led, do you not think that we, the US citizen, will be held in much more higher accountibility for not leading this nation properly? Christians (I am speaking to US citizens here, many who are Christian), do you not realize that by not participating in the process, you are shirking your responsibilities as leaders? Does not the Scripture tell us that we must "govern diligently" (Romans 12:8)? Are not leaders held to a higher standard?
Titus 3:1 tells us, "Remind the people to be subject to rulers and authorities, to be obedient, to be ready to do whatever is good,". Here in the United States, we have authorities (and we need to obey them), but the rulers are the citezenry. If we fail to operate as the rulers we are, we will be held responsible by God accordingly, because He has granted us that authority.
It is quite unfortunate that many well meaning people still operate under the assumption of a monarchy, and that is not necessarily what the Scripture intended. I once read a chapter out of a book, written by a Christian author, that said that the form of government that is established in the United States, and democracies around the world, is not the template that God intended, stating that the Scripture always refers to the term kingdom when referring to the governing style of God. With all due respect to that author...Poppycock! Let us remember that it was never God's intention for Israel to have a king, but God relented to the people's wishes to be ruled by a king, just like the surrounding nations. The term kingdom[/i] and all terms related to it (Throne, Prince, rule, etc) were for conventional points of reference. For human understanding. yes, yes, I know, Jesus IS King, and He IS the Prince of Peace, and yes, God is still on the Throne, yada, yada....None of that I disagree with. However, we have to see it from God's perspective, not ours.
I realize that there may be those who will disagree with my analysis and opinions here, and that is quite okay. This forum is for your thoughts. I encourage reasoned debate. I am not asking anyone to agree with me (although, wisdom says you should...lol). However, I ask that you consider your words and your arguments rationally. Utilize your Scriptural resources. Give reasoned thoughts. I would like to think that I have. |
"C'mon Dave, Gimme a break!" |
Edited by - AXEMAN2415 on 04 Jul 2007 15:48:49 | |
| Captain Blasto
Cappuccino Junkie
USA
212 Posts | Posted - 05 Jul 2007 : 01:26:17
| First of all I would just like to say that all I was trying to do was to imply why God would have recognized legitimacy within and has kept His hand upon this nation up to this point. Which was in the spirit of the holiday and the newsletter although I fully understood the "spiritual" connotations being pushed forward.
It seems that we have one example of a people throwing off chains of oppression and instituting a self-governing body under the authority of their (commonly understood for the time period) Judeo-Christian Creator. Not wiccan, buddhist, atheist, muslim etc. and we have another shall we say externally liberated people instituting a self-governing body under ???? what ????
To the degree that I agree that the american people are ultimately accountable for their representative leadership I must also submit that the Church is a seperate entity from the american public "at-large" and that whether we like to face it or not we (Christians) of our own doing may not necessarily carry the majority. We are however still accountable for our individual votes of course. It may also be asked why after 200+ years of "Freedom" of religion in what some would arguably say was basically a Christian nation (seemingly by majority at least at it's inception based on that time period) that the salt appears to be losing it's savor rather than the reverse. We (Christians) need to become more relavent to our society, it's perception of this nation and the perception of our image abroad for the nation's sake (Not as a government but as a people). This of course would lead to further attacks from some elements of Islam.
Here are some quotes from an e-mail I recently received:
"Is there no virtue among us? If there be not, we are in a wretched situation. No theoretical checks -- no form of government can render us secure. To suppose liberty or happiness without any virtue in the people, is a chimerical idea. If there be sufficient virtue and intelligence in the community, it will be exercised in the selection of these men. So that we do not depend on their virtue, or put confidence in our rulers, but in the people who are to choose them.
-- James Madison, Speech in the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 20, 1788
Has any of you ever seen one of the telephone book sized voluminous "bills" that are peddled through Congress these days?
Check out this next quote...
"It will be of little avail to the people that the laws are made by men of their own choice, if the laws be so voluminous that they cannot be read, or so incoherent that they cannot be understood; if they be repealed or revised before they are promulgated, or undergo such incessant changes that no man who knows what the law is today can guess what is will be tomorrow."
-- James Madison, Federalist no. 62, February 27, 1788
"There are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations."
-- James Madison, speech to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 16, 1788
"I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents."
-- James Madison, 4 Annals of congress 179 (1794)
(Welfare was meant to be handled by the Church)
"That no free government, or the blessing of liberty, can be preserved to any people but by a firm adherence to justice, moderation, temperance, frugality, and virtue, and by frequent recurrence to fundamental principles."
-- George Mason, the Virginia Declaration of Rights, 1776
"He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself."
-- Thomas Paine
"If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, and will promote the general welfare, the government is no longer a limited one possessing enumerated powers, but an indefinite one subject to particular exceptions." James Madison, "Letter to Edmund Pendleton,"
-- James Madison, January 21, 1792, in The Papers of James Madison, vol. 14, Robert A Rutland et. al., ed (Charlottesvile: University Press of Virginia,1984).
"It is sufficiently obvious, that persons and property are the two great subjects on which Governments are to act; and that the rights of persons, and the rights of property, are the objects, for the protection of which Government was instituted. These rights cannot be separated."
-- James Madison, Speech at the Virginia Convention, December 2, 1829
? Eminent domain ?
and finally... I hope I am not boring you but I am not sure of the author of this one or how well researched it is...
"A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always vote for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship."
|
President of the
Juan Valdez fanclub
Kirk Out | |
| Captain Blasto
Cappuccino Junkie
USA
212 Posts | Posted - 05 Jul 2007 : 02:10:00
| quote:
Are we holding to the teachings of Christ, or are we allowing the ultimate tyrannical dictator to convince us to be comfortable with his regime? Just like in Iraq, real freedom eludes those who would rather live comfortably with tyranny.
While I understand your point here, I submit that the malignment etc.. that you graphically discuss is actually a later reaped harvest of present indulgence. Many Christians may continue in sins not just because they are comfortable with tyranny but because they don't even think enough to put the sowing and reaping together... When they should (for eternity's sake) have become long-term thinkers they are still blinded by percieved temporal benefits and then later suffer the consequenses. The same way that people (Christians and non-Christians alike) end up in financial bondage by looking at the short-term "indulgence" rather than the long-term "cost". If we observe we might see short-term "sacrifice" as long-term "rewards". Just preaching to myself here... |
President of the
Juan Valdez fanclub
Kirk Out | |
| AnonJr
Absent-minded Webmaster
USA
621 Posts | Posted - 05 Jul 2007 : 06:24:29
| quote:
Originally posted by Captain Blasto
... I hope I am not boring you but...
No you are not boring at all. I think its good that there are still people out there that realize just how many Christian principles and references were actually placed in the original Federal documents, speeches, and policies.
I knew somebody who followed the current myth that many seem to hold to (in an almost willing ignorance) that the founding fathers weren't really Christians ... until they saw a documentary designed to bust that myth. All of a sudden there was a big change in that individual's political outlook. |
There's no trick to being a humorist when you have the whole government working for you.
- Will Rogers | |
| Captain Blasto
Cappuccino Junkie
USA
212 Posts | Posted - 05 Jul 2007 : 14:01:19
| It is interesting that fused into our governing system you see (at least the likeness of) three different governing styles represented...
As an "elected" monarch... the President, as the people governing themselves Representatives and then of course Judges... all can be seen at least in similitude within the Scriptures. |
President of the
Juan Valdez fanclub
Kirk Out | |
| AXEMAN2415
Guitar Weenie
USA
740 Posts | Posted - 05 Jul 2007 : 16:52:15
| quote:
"He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself."
-- Thomas Paine
Truly, I am glad you posted this one, in particular, as this quote may contain some pertinent answers to even some of your thoughts, CB (even though they were all good). But before I continue, I would like to, without pulling out of entire context (lol...okay give me just a little latitude), something that you posted just a few short posts ago;
quote:
It may also be asked why after 200+ years of "Freedom" of religion in what some would arguably say was basically a Christian nation (seemingly by majority at least at it's inception based on that time period) that the salt appears to be losing it's savor rather than the reverse.
If I may be so bold, I think Thomas Paine's quote puts this into somewhat of a perspective. Paine writes that, ""He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression", and that also means that we Christians must give liberty to those who do not accept Jesus as the Lord and Savior of the world, as the Word of Truth. We cannot make people accept Christ, and I don't think we should trample the rights of anyone who does not believe as we do.While I agree that many have lost their saltiness, even salt that remains flavored cannot prevent corruption, it can only delay it. Salt as a preservative (for that was it's function outside of flavor) can only preserve the meat for a finite amount of time. So, while I agree to a point, I am loathe to throw the baby out with the bathwater and say that because corruption has taken hold the "salt" has lost it's saltiness. The Scripture plainly tells us that there will come a time when mean will not put up with sound doctrine. It does not say that there will come a time when men will not put up with sound doctrine, unless the godly stay firm. Even if we do (and we certainly should) there will still come a time when corruption will overtake the preservative.
Now, please understand, I am not reacting, backlashing, or taking to task anyone. Or even disagreeing. I think Captain Blasto has made very cogent, passionate, and correct statements. However, I must conclude that we have to make sure that we understand all of the implications for which we make due claim.
quote:
While I understand your point here, I submit that the malignment etc.. that you graphically discuss is actually a later reaped harvest of present indulgence. Many Christians may continue in sins not just because they are comfortable with tyranny but because they don't even think enough to put the sowing and reaping together... When they should (for eternity's sake) have become long-term thinkers they are still blinded by percieved temporal benefits and then later suffer the consequenses. The same way that people (Christians and non-Christians alike) end up in financial bondage by looking at the short-term "indulgence" rather than the long-term "cost". If we observe we might see short-term "sacrifice" as long-term "rewards". Just preaching to myself here...
You'll get no argument from me. Well, except the preaching to yourself part, but hey I think it's good to be preached to (except about music...lol)
quote:
We (Christians) need to become more relavent to our society, it's perception of this nation and the perception of our image abroad for the nation's sake (Not as a government but as a people). This of course would lead to further attacks from some elements of Islam.
Agreed, however, I must point out that the Islamist hates the Homosexual and the Evangelical with equal rancor, and would kill both at the same time.
|
"C'mon Dave, Gimme a break!" |
Edited by - AXEMAN2415 on 05 Jul 2007 16:57:33 | |
| Captain Blasto
Cappuccino Junkie
USA
212 Posts | Posted - 05 Jul 2007 : 20:03:42
| quote:
It may also be asked why after 200+ years of "Freedom" of religion in what some would arguably say was basically a Christian nation (seemingly by majority at least at it's inception based on that time period) that the salt appears to be losing it's savor rather than the reverse.
quote:
However, I must conclude that we have to make sure that we understand all of the implications for which we make due claim.
Ahhh... yes, well... There are a couple of possibilities that could explain this apparent decreased salt effect... even salty things tend to taste less salty as we become accustomed to them... maybe as you have cited from scriptures people are simply refusing sound doctrine because of oversaturation... or possibly the salt has clumped together rather than being evenly disbursed and therefore is not achieving it's maximum potential... or maybe some of the salt has been "changed, tainted or diluted" through (physical/doctrinal) changes from it's original (chemical/spiritually discerned) composition
Maybe some combination of all of these?
Just a passing thought... |
President of the
Juan Valdez fanclub
Kirk Out | |
| Captain Blasto
Cappuccino Junkie
USA
212 Posts | Posted - 05 Jul 2007 : 20:25:10
| Then there's always hypocrisy...
quote:
Ro:2:21: Thou therefore which teachest another, teachest thou not thyself? thou that preachest a man should not steal, dost thou steal?
Ro:2:22: Thou that sayest a man should not commit adultery, dost thou commit adultery? thou that abhorrest idols, dost thou commit sacrilege?
Ro:2:23: Thou that makest thy boast of the law, through breaking the law dishonourest thou God?
Ro:2:24: For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you, as it is written.
Ro:2:25: For circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the law: but if thou be a breaker of the law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision.
Ro:2:26: Therefore if the uncircumcision keep the righteousness of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision?
Ro:2:27: And shall not uncircumcision which is by nature, if it fulfil the law, judge thee, who by the letter and circumcision dost transgress the law?
Ro:2:28: For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:
Ro:2:29: But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.
though this was directed at Jewish believers it may still apply... |
President of the
Juan Valdez fanclub
Kirk Out | |
| Captain Blasto
Cappuccino Junkie
USA
212 Posts | Posted - 05 Jul 2007 : 20:34:26
| | Please do not mistake my last post as legalism... I understand that if we say we have no sin that we lie and the Truth is not in us... but our (the Churh's) disobedience and therefore hypocrisy in the eyes of the world certainly makes us less effective for the kingdom. |
President of the
Juan Valdez fanclub
Kirk Out | |
| AXEMAN2415
Guitar Weenie
USA
740 Posts | Posted - 06 Jul 2007 : 14:24:06
| quote:
Please do not mistake my last post as legalism...
Nah....Too bad what you said is more true than many of us would wish to admit.
I would also offer that it is hard for salt to flavor or preserve anything while it is still in the shaker...
How's that one, Captain? |
"C'mon Dave, Gimme a break!" | |
| AXEMAN2415
Guitar Weenie
USA
740 Posts | Posted - 06 Jul 2007 : 14:28:41
| | Hey, maybe that would be a crime...Felonious ASalt...? |
"C'mon Dave, Gimme a break!" | |
| | Topic | |
|
Media
