My idea for economy.

[Andy T.]

LB, I don't have the power of the sword, the gov't does (per Romans 13). Therefore, I don't condone vigilantism against abortion doctors. But I do support our gov't in protecting innocent life by making laws to protect that life. Thus, I vote pro-life. Meanwhile, I support other means to decrease abortions, such as PDC's. Of course, all this probably falls on deaf ears to you, since you have a low view of the unborn.

Romans 13 gives the power of the sword to the gov't, but I don't see anywhere in the Bible where it mandates or even encourages gov't to help the poor. Every admonishment I see in Scripture to help the poor is to individual believers, or to bodies of believers. Thus, I try to help the poor in that context, and so does my church.

Thus, we see the contrast of a biblical worldview vs. a non-biblical worldview when it comes to these matters.

 

[LeBuick]

LB, I don't have the power of the sword, the gov't does (per Romans 13).

We are the government by proxy of our vote. Your use of Rom 13 would be right if were not a democracy.

But I do support our gov't in protecting innocent life by making laws to protect that life. Thus, I vote pro-life.

Excatly my point, if you can suppport pro-life with a vote then other good Christian causes can be supported with that same vote. You do have the power, it is in your vote.

Meanwhile, I support other means to decrease abortions, such as PDC's. Of course, all this probably falls on deaf ears to you, since you have a low view of the unborn.

Not on deaf ears here, I hear you loud and clear but want to make sure you don't excuse tunnel vision as a complete effort.

Romans 13 gives the power of the sword to the gov't, but I don't see anywhere in the Bible where it mandates or even encourages gov't to help the poor. Every admonishment I see in Scripture to help the poor is to individual believers, or to bodies of believers. Thus, I try to help the poor in that context, and so does my church.

In a democracy, the people are the government. You agreed to this with your pro-life position but seem to look the other way when it comes to other Christian obligations. You can support our government in all Christian principles and not just one.

Mt 25:41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:
42 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink:
43 I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.
44 Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?
45 Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me.
46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

 

[Andy T.]

Matthew 25 was written to individuals, not to governments. Romans 13 makes it clear that governments are put in place by God in order to punish wrongdoers, not to provide charity.

 

[LeBuick]

Matthew 25 was written to individuals, not to governments. Romans 13 makes it clear that governments are put in place by God in order to punish wrongdoers, not to provide charity.

And individuals make the government in a democracy.

You vote is part of your individual voice to Mat 25.

 

[Andy T.]

You vote is part of your individual voice to Mat 25.

No, it is not. Otherwise, you blur the line between church and state, and worse, you butcher the Word of God. Do you really want to use this reasoning? Think about it for a minute. Do you really want to say that the goverment should be doing everything that God has commanded his people do? Just a few chapters later, Matthew 28 has the Great Commission, so according to your reasoning, we need to vote people in the government who will use governmental force (the sword) to make sure we are obeying the G.C. What an absolute mockery you make of God's Word.

I will be judged via Matthew 25 based on what I do as an individual, not what I try to make others do by taking their money (taxation) and funneling it through the goverment. What absolute nonsense.

You actually preach/teach the Word of God? Lord, help us.

 

[LeBuick]

No, it is not. Otherwise, you blur the line between church and state, and worse, you butcher the Word of God. Do you really want to use this reasoning? Think about it for a minute. Do you really want to say that the goverment should be doing everything that God has commanded his people do?

You are twisting words, I am saying the voices from Gods people should represent biblical principles where they can. We are not 100% of the citizens so there is no way the voices of God's people can be the singular voice or view of the Government. We are citizens and should participate in government like any other citizen. We should render Caesar that which is Caesar's and God that which is God's. But when we render unto Caesar, our world view should be that of God's.

Just a few chapters later, Matthew 28 has the Great Commission, so according to your reasoning, we need to vote people in the government who will use governmental force (the sword) to make sure we are obeying the G.C. What an absolute mockery you make of God's Word.

I never said that, but being in Government doesn't eliminate your duties to the great commission. I wouldn't suggest using the oval office to win souls but I see no harm in exemplifying Christian values and demonstrating a life that comes from Grace through Faith. Something wrong with that? Our best witness is through how we live. Do you agree?

I will be judged via Matthew 25 based on what I do as an individual, not what I try to make others do by taking their money (taxation) and funneling it through the goverment. What absolute nonsense.

You actually preach/teach the Word of God? Lord, help us.

And voting is part of your individual actions. It is not about making anyone do anything. It's about in all things, doing what you can to show love for your fellowman. I am also not questioning your salvation, I am highlighting the values Christ wants to see in His people.

Yes, I teach/preach to do unto others as you would have them do unto you. I do teach and preach to have love for your fellowman. With all the undeserved kindness and Love God has given to me, I can't help but do likewise to others. I teach and preach for others to appreciate this gift and want to share it also.

I could use my Archie comic books but I don't see them as benefiting the kingdom.

 

[Andy T.]

You are back-tracking now, since you see the folly and logical end of your wild interpretation of Scripture. In post #22, last paragraph, you suggested that we should vote in people and laws that help fulfill Matt. 25. I then pushed you to the logical end of such intepretation and pulled in Matt. 28. You then realized that your intepretation of Matt. 25 is wrong. It's either that, or you will continue to abuse the Word of God to justify your support of certain candidates and/or certain beliefs of what the government should be doing. Your posts are becoming more incoherent as you try to justify your [unfounded] positions by cherry-picking from Scripture.

 

[Dragoon68]

Here is my idea for the economy, please help me improve it. What are your thoughts?

...

Lets see how we can improve this outline...

Here's my simplification: Lenders and borrowers assume the risk of their deals. Lenders and borrowers use the judicial process to resolve any differences. The courts enforce all legally binding contracts including mortgage loans. Failed borrowers suffer foreclosure. Failed lenders suffer bankruptcy. Options to settle for more favorable results remain available to borrowers and lenders in the free market.

 

[LeBuick]

You are back-tracking now, since you see the folly and logical end of your wild interpretation of Scripture. In post #22, last paragraph, you suggested that we should vote in people and laws that help fulfill Matt. 25. I then pushed you to the logical end of such intepretation and pulled in Matt. 28. You then realized that your intepretation of Matt. 25 is wrong. It's either that, or you will continue to abuse the Word of God to justify your support of certain candidates and/or certain beliefs of what the government should be doing. Your posts are becoming more incoherent as you try to justify your [unfounded] positions by cherry-picking from Scripture.

Sorry sir but you are wrong again. By voting in people with Christian values you hope it will translate into their position on issues. This adds to my response toward Mat 28 and is not in conflict,

I wouldn't suggest using the oval office to win souls but I see no harm in exemplifying Christian values and demonstrating a life that comes from Grace through Faith. Something wrong with that? Our best witness is through how we live. Do you agree?

So I will add, I see no problem with a Christian on office voting their Christian conscious to pass biblical approving legislation thereby doing what they can to safeguard this country from total sinful evaporation like in Sodom. Is that better...

 

[LeBuick]

Here's my simplification: Lenders and borrowers assume the risk of their deals. Lenders and borrowers use the judicial process to resolve any differences. The courts enforce all legally binding contracts including mortgage loans. Failed borrowers suffer foreclosure. Failed lenders suffer bankruptcy. Options to settle for more favorable results remain available to borrowers and lenders in the free market.

Good thought and good suggestion...

What do you think about the suggestion to let judges alter loan terms?