So I have officially created my own website. Currently on the Writings tab and Photography tab are the only pages up right now, but I wanted to go ahead and put my site out there because I will be posting to my writings page form now on. I am saying goodbye to tumblr, so if you wish to continue reading my post, just click the link mentioned here, and go to “see more” under the writings pic on my site!
For a school presentation, I have chosen to act as leader of Iran for one class session to help fellow students realize the mindset of Iranian leaders and how they view their Nuclear program. In researching to present such information, I decided to peruse the site of the “Most High Leader of Iran” the Ayatollah Khamenei (remember Iran is a Theocracy, so he represents the religious leader, somewhat comparable to a mix between a Prime Minister and a royal monarch). I ran across two speeches made recently by the Ayatollah: one regarding the Palestinian people, and one showing his appreciation for the Nuclear scientists of Iran. Now he states in his speech of thanks to the scientists that building a nuclear weapon is not on their agenda, and is even “against their Islamic law”, but I would like to point out a few flaws with this statement. From a speculative point of view, we must consider that Iran has repeatedly rejected the inspection of IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) officials in their Nuclear program. This has raised suspicion, to say the least. Secondly, from a logical perspective, in considering how he says that producing nuclear weapons is against their ideology, we must ask ourselves, “if nuclear weapons are against their ‘theology’, are not bombs, missiles, terrorist acts and biological weapons against their theology?”. I refer to the following portion of his speech, in which he denounces the proliferation of nuclear weapons:
The purpose of the uproar they cause is to stop us. They know that we are not after nuclear weapons. They already know this. I do not have any doubts that in the countries that are opposed to us, the organizations in charge of decision-making are fully aware that we are not after nuclear weapons. Nuclear weapons are not at all beneficial to us. Moreover, from an ideological and fiqhi perspective, we consider developing nuclear weapons as unlawful. We consider using such weapons as a big sin. We also believe that keeping such weapons is futile and dangerous, and we will never go after them. They know this, but they stress the issue in order to stop our movement.
But I think this is inconsistent with his vengeful speech towards America and their “Zionist sympathies”:
In the meantime, it is appropriate for western countries to evaluate the situation from a realistic perspective. Today the west is at a crossroads. It should either stop bullying and acknowledge the right of the Palestinian nation and refuse to follow the plan of the bullying and anti-human Zionists, or they should wait for stronger blows in the not so distant future. These crippling blows are not limited to the continual collapse of their puppet governments in the Islamic region. Rather the day when European and American peoples realize that the majority of their economic, social and ethical problems result from the octopus-like hegemony of international Zionism over their governments and that their statesmen give in to the bullying of parasitic Zionists who own companies in America and Europe for the sake of their personal and partisan interests, they will create a such hell for them in which no salvation will be imaginable.
What frustrates me so much is the cowering down President Obama does to the Islamic leaders of the Middle East. Surely you heard about last week when he apologized to Hamid Karzai (leader of Afghanistan) for the “disrespectful burning of the Korans”,saying we were so sorry and did not meant to do such a thing. But had you heard that not a few days later Afghani soldiers killed two of our soldiers? And they do NOT apologize- I assure you they do not. Finally, as if this is not backwards enough for you, the UN delegation in Afghanistan called for the “Koran burners” to be punished.
With that in mind, read the continuing of his speech as Khamenei says this about our President:
The US President says that Israel’s security is his red line. What factor has determined this red line? Is it the interests of the American nation or Obama’s personal need for the money and support of Zionist companies to ensure his second term as US President? How long do you think you will be able to deceive your own nation? What will the American people do with you the day they realize you have agreed to give in to humiliation and obedience to wealthy Zionists for the sake of remaining in power for a few more days? What will they do with you when they realize that you have sacrificed the interests of a great nation at the feet of the Zionists?
Dear brothers and sisters, know that this red line drawn by Obama and people like him will be crossed by Muslim nations that have risen up. What is threatening the Zionist regime is not the missiles of Iran or resistance groups, so they can build a missile shield here and there in order to confront it. The real and inescapable threat is the firm determination of men, women and youth in Islamic countries who do not want America, Europe and their puppets rulers, to dominate and humiliate them any longer.
Of course those missiles will fulfill their duty whenever the enemy poses a threat.
So what do you make of this? Do you think Iran is harboring nuclear weapons, or do you think they are of “no significant threat” as President Obama and Ron Paul say. “Oh that tiny country of Iran.”
“Awake, O north wind; and come, thou south; blow upon my garden, that the spices thereof may flow out.”
Song of Solomon 4:16
Anything is better than the dead calm of indifference. Our souls may wisely desire the north wind of trouble if that alone can be sanctified to the drawing forth of the perfume of our graces. So long as it cannot be said, “The Lord was not in the wind,” we will not shrink from the most wintry blast that ever blew upon plants of grace. Did not the spouse in this verse humbly submit herself to the reproofs of her Beloved; only entreating him to send forth his grace in some form, and making no stipulation as to the peculiar manner in which it should come? Did she not, like ourselves, become so utterly weary of deadness and unholy calm that she sighed for any visitation which would brace her to action? Yet she desires the warm south wind of comfort, too, the smiles of divine love, the joy of the Redeemer’s presence; these are often mightily effectual to arouse our sluggish life. She desires either one or the other, or both; so that she may but be able to delight her Beloved with the spices of her garden. She cannot endure to be unprofitable, nor can we. How cheering a thought that Jesus can find comfort in our poor feeble graces. Can it be? It seems far too good to be true. Well may we court trial or even death itself if we shall thereby be aided to make glad Immanuel’s heart. O that our heart were crushed to atoms if only by such bruising our sweet Lord Jesus could be glorified. Graces unexercised are as sweet perfumes slumbering in the cups of the flowers: the wisdom of the great Husbandman overrules diverse and opposite causes to produce the one desired result, and makes both affliction and consolation draw forth the grateful odours of faith, love, patience, hope, resignation, joy, and the other fair flowers of the garden. May we know by sweet experience, what this means.
Matthew 5:27-30 “I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart” (v. 28).
Note that the antitheses found in the Sermon on the Mount do not say that all sins are equal in degree. For example, ungodly anger and the act of murder both violate the intent of Exodus 20:13 (Matt. 5:21-22), but the hot-head and the murderer do not get the same punishment (Num. 35:9-29 ). Both sins make men guilty before our Creator and bring eternal death if there is no repentance (Rom. 3:23). Nevertheless, God punishes sinners in hell in proportion to the gravity of their sin and what has been revealed to them (Matt. 11:20-24).
Furthermore, Christ’s teaching on anger also shows us that we must not only refrain from forbidden acts, we must do all we can to encourage their opposite. It is not enough to keep from being angry unjustly with a Christian brother or sister; we must do all we can to ensure that they have no cause to be angry with us. We must pursue reconciliation and loving relationships as far as we are able (5:23-26). Thus we can see why the Westminster Larger Catechism says that “where a duty is commanded, the contrary sin is forbidden; and, where a sin is forbidden, the contrary duty is commanded” (Q. 99).
According to this principle, a thorough exegesis (interpretation) of today’s passage tells us we must also encourage chastity in the church and the world in addition to refraining from lustful intent in the heart (Matt. 5:27-28). In fact, the apostles elsewhere give us this precise command (1 Tim. 2:8-10; Heb. 13:4). Male and female alike, we violate the command against adultery and do not love our brothers and sisters in Christ if we act and dress in a manner that might provoke another to stumble into lust (Rom. 14:13-23; 1 John 4:21).
Jesus is teaching us the end to which the command against adultery points. Since, as the church father Jerome said, “what we conceive in the mind we might complete with an act” (Commentary on Matthew,1.5.29), it is not enough to refrain from the physical act of fornication (Matt. 5:27-28). God’s law, our Savior shows us, has a pure heart as its final goal. The pursuit of this purity is to be among our most urgent tasks, and we must do whatever it takes to keep our minds free from lust’s pollution ( vv. 29-30).
Last night I went to see Act of Valor. It has been about two years since I last stepped into a movie theatre, and as soon as the previews started rolling I remembered why I never go. I sat for thirty minutes before the movie started in a sense of disgust and anger. The sex they throw at viewers, though unsurprising, is repulsive. But isn’t that what is the saddest part? That it isn’t surprising? Why are we no longer disturbed, even as Christians, when scantily dressed (I had a different name for it at the time) women slide across the screen and beg you to take closer look. Frankly, it makes me ashamed to be a woman, when such acts of desperation are paraded as entertainment. Isn’t that what it is? Women who long for men to lust after them, as if all they had to offer was physical? Obviously, I risk sounding old fashioned- but I don’t apologize. It is hard for me not to loathe women like them, who make me feel so vile sitting in a theatre full of men As they watch these women make very appealing fools of themselves. I have yet to figure out what to do about this anger that boils inside of me. But I digress. I am writing this blog about the movie that came after the previews. A movie about the honor and sacrifice of men who give all for the land they call home. Act of Valor is a movie, though not based on a particular story, loosely based on the typical mission of a Navy SEAL Team. It was gripping. Not in a theatrical way, this movie was far from award winning acting. But that was the beauty of the story. Raw, real warfare. It was not as violent as I had expected, as I had said, not even to be categorized as a war movie, in it’s natural sense. SEALs are famous for going in, getting the job done, and getting out. I had previously read Lone Survivor by Marcus Luttrell over the summer, which prepped me to already know the background of what it takes to become a SEAL.
You will not leave the movie feeling entertained- good. Because this movie, I believe, is not made for enjoyment, but for realization. To open your eyes to just a minute glimmer of the hell these men go through to protect our country, and even those around us. America is often ridiculed for playing the big brother, for coming to our neighbors rescue when they are caught in the crosshairs of war. But this is what sets us apart- a willingness to protect and love those who are not ours. I do not believe in us playing caretaker of the world, or providing at the expense of our debt, but I am proud of what America stands for, in Freedom and in Faith. But it is all at stake. We are at war with ideology that hates our Liberty, our Life and Freedom. No matter what people tell you, they are a threat. An imminent, ever growing, looming and terrorizing threat that lies in wait until the right moment to kill. Because they plan, they save, they lie in hiding wait until the time is right. Then they kill- torturing and exalting at the plight of the mericans. The radical Islamists hate us, and all we stand behind. This is what the movie portrayed, for the missions these men so valiantly fought were ones against terrorists near and far. Ones breeding in our own country, and those abroad.
I have been reading so much lately about the Epicenter of the world- Israel and the Middle Eastern nations that hate them. My heart is wrenched at the state of things happening there. You must read the books of Joel Rosenberg. He has an in depth profound understanding of the Biblical basis for all the turmoil beseeching the Epicenter. But the thing that grips me most, in the midst of the last lines of the movie, a long list of fallen Navy SEALs since September 11th- my eyes stinging and heart heaving at the thought of all lost at the behest of these wretched people- that through Rosenberg’s books he calls for us to pray for the people of the Middle East. Wow. In the midst of the anger entressed within me over these acts of terror, that God calls us to love our enemies. To pray for those who persecute us. What if we prayed for those committing these heinous acts. “it’s no use” you may say, ” they are raised to kill”. It is true, they are. But read the words of Joel Rosenberg closely, as he tells us that thousands upon thousands of Islamic men and women are coming to the name of Christ in the Middle East.
In Iran, Pakistan, Iraq, and Turkey, old men are having visions, young men are dreaming dreams. His will is happening, and people are waiting to hear the good news. The people at the Joshua Fund are bringing the love of Christ to those who also suffer at the hands of the radicals. So through these books, this movie, and the news whirling all around us, things are piecing together. We must be attuned. We must pay attention and pray. Because these Are the times our God has placed us here for. What would he have us do? Thank you to the men and women who wear the colors of our nation camouflaged in a uniform stained with blood and valor. Thank you to the few. We are ever praying for you and supporting the efforts of faith and freedom.
From “Morning and Evening” by Charles H. Spurgeon
“He hath said.”
Hebrews 13:5
If we can only grasp these words by faith, we have an all-conquering weapon in our hand. What doubt will not be slain by this two-edged sword? What fear is there which shall not fall smitten with a deadly wound before this arrow from the bow of God’s covenant? Will not the distresses of life and the pangs of death; will not the corruptions within, and the snares without; will not the trials from above, and the temptations from beneath, all seem but light afflictions, when we can hide ourselves beneath the bulwark of “He hath said”? Yes; whether for delight in our quietude, or for strength in our conflict, “He hath said” must be our daily resort. And this may teach us the extreme value of searching the Scriptures. There may be a promise in the Word which would exactly fit your case, but you may not know of it, and therefore you miss its comfort. You are like prisoners in a dungeon, and there may be one key in the bunch which would unlock the door, and you might be free; but if you will not look for it, you may remain a prisoner still, though liberty is so near at hand. There may be a potent medicine in the great pharmacopoeia of Scripture, and you may yet continue sick unless you will examine and search the Scriptures to discover what “He hath said.” Should you not, besides reading the Bible, store your memories richly with the promises of God? You can recollect the sayings of great men; you treasure up the verses of renowned poets; ought you not to be profound in your knowledge of the words of God, so that you may be able to quote them readily when you would solve a difficulty, or overthrow a doubt? Since “He hath said” is the source of all wisdom, and the fountain of all comfort, let it dwell in you richly, as “A well of water, springing up unto everlasting life.” So shall you grow healthy, strong, and happy in the divine life.
I feel convicted to write a follow-up to my previous post. I suppose I didn’t expect God to speak to me so clearly out of the blue about something I thought I was just writing a paper about. A friend of mine texted me about an hour ago, telling me he had felt gripped by the fact that he has forgotten how much he is blessed. When I asked him what he meant, he explained that he had seen someone he once knew, now homeless, on the street. We continued to talk about how we try to pretend such problems don’t exist, until we find out someone we know is struggling. Wow. I felt horrible. I still stand by my previous post and thoughts, that government should not be a welfare state and provide for the less fortunate, but I became convicted about why government feels like it should be: because the church is not.
The absolute sad truth is that we can’t possibly provide for every poor, destitute, homeless, or struggling person(s) in the world; perhaps if every country pulled together all of their resources and money and distributed where needed, but that would require time-and a perfect world. Poverty and other such situations are a result of a fallen world, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t even try. I believe we would significantly decrease the amount of poverty in America (and the world) if the church would rediscover the responsibility God has given them to provide for their fellow man.
You may scoff at such a statement, but it is true. Now, this is not to point fingers or accuse the church of completely dropping the ball. Most churches I know serve their community, have Manna closets, and provide for their communities. But on a large scale, in the big picture, are we doing enough? We may think we are, and I am not one to guilt people to emit a feeling or emotion from them. But this thought does often occur to me when I am at the coffee shop- $4, or the grocery store $25, or the tech store $300. What if instead of buying that coffee, or that software , or that food for me, if I took that money and provided for someone who needed food, clothes, shelter? Again, this is not guilting you for the money you spend on essentials for your family: food, clothing, and your home expenses. What it is convicting us of is money spent on personal pursuits, extras, pleasures; things we could really do without. Trust me, I could really do without that cookie, or that latte, or that dress. Why? Because I am caffeine-addicted, sugar-addicted, and ME ADDICTED. No, I don’t like to admit it, I’d like to think that I think of others more often than I do myself. And alot of times I do, and you do, and God blesses that. But I will not be satisfied until there is none of me in my eyes. Until I am pouring out my best to Him, and to helping those who are precious in His sight. Because that is what I am here for. I love to learn, but I am not just here for school; I love politics, but I am not just here to have a career; I love my family, but I am not just here for them. I am here to show God’s love to people who need His redeeming grace. Because if I leave this world without having shared the greatest gift I have received, true life, then I have reached the ultimate level of selfishness.
Because Hell is real. But Heaven is real too. And I want the people I love and hate to know they are loved by my Maker; because my Make is their Maker too. No one deserves Heaven, but if I have found the truth, why should I withhold it from others?
34 Then (A)the King will say to (B)those on his right, ‘Come, you (C)who are blessed by my Father, (D)inherit (E)the kingdom (F)prepared for you (G)from the foundation of the world. 35 For (H)I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you (I)gave me drink, (J)I was a stranger and you welcomed me, 36(K)I was naked and you clothed me, (L)I was sick and you (M)visited me, (N)I was in prison and you came to me.’ 37 Then the righteous will answer him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink? 38 And when did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you? 39 And when did we see you sick or in prison and visit you?’ 40 And (O)the King will answer them, (P)‘Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these (Q)my brothers,[a] you did it to me.’Matthew 25:34-46
English Standard Version (ESV)
41 “Then he will say to those on his left, (R)‘Depart from me, you (S)cursed, into (T)the eternal fire prepared for (U)the devil and his angels. 42 For (V)I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink, 43 I was a stranger and you did not welcome me, naked and you did not clothe me, sick and in prison and you did not visit me.’ 44 Then they also will answer, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to you?’ 45 Then he will answer them, saying, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did not do it to one of the least of these, (W)you did not do it to me.’ 46 And these will go away (X)into eternal punishment, but the righteous (Y)into (Z)eternal life.”
For my Constitutional Law class I was asked to write an opinion on the view of Social Justice that many religious take- using the Old Testament to justify social welfare. I warn you, this will be a long post, but it is my opinion on what is really meant by the Old Testament verses that many use to promote social welfare, and what the New Testament has to say on the matter. I would love to hear your opinions on this issue. This is a top issue in political platform that conforms to the typical Conservative/Liberal view, but as with everything, there are exceptions.
In his book Generous Justice, Timothy Keller highlights the common debate about whether or not the Bible promotes social justice as a means to provide welfare through the state. Many sects hold to these beliefs, such as Social Justice Theorists and Catholics. There are many Bible verses thrown around as support for the idea that the State has some responsibility to provide for its people; but how much is too much? Even those who hold to the opinion that the State should support its citizens through social welfare efforts have difficulty answering the question of “but how much?”
In the chapter Justice and the Old Testament, Keller references an application problem stated by Kevin DeYoung: “Does a passage like Isaiah 58 support state-sponsored redistribution efforts?” Upon reading the article Seven Passages on Social Justice from which Keller quotes DeYoung, I find Deyoung to advocate the idea that Christians should share with the less fortunate: “The implications of Isaiah 58 are straightforward: God’s people should hate oppression and love to help the poor.” But later on in the article DeYoung takes a more radical view on the fare of the poor when he indicates the people have a right to equality:
Social justice in its historical origins suggests a certain view of the world where disparity in wealth is considered de facto injustice. Therefore helping the poor is not a matter of kindness or mercy but a matter of justice. Everyone deserves their “fair share” of the society’s resources. Anything less is oppression”.
I would argue that morally every person has a right to equality-in God’s eyes all of his children are equal; but in the sense of society and state not everyone is equal, and it is not the government’s duty to ensure this right.
Furthermore we must look at the context of Isaiah 58. Cross-referencing it with Deuteronomy 15 (as later brought up by Keller as an affirmation to DeYoung’s question) is taking scripture out of context; the time and place in which these verses reference are the people of Israel before they had an earthly king. Keller states that according to his survey of Mosaic legislation Israel “redistributed money, assets, and even land from the well-off to the poor, with the help of state-sponsored laws and institutions”. This statement in itself shows lack of context. Israel was a Theocracy, directly governed by God. No government today can relate to the source of rule had by Israel. Afghanistan and many other Arab nations are Theocratic states today, but even in their systems an earthly ruler takes precedence as rule maker and lawgiver, and a governmental system manages the affairs of the state. Ever since the people of Israel complained and asked God for a man to be their ruler, government has never been the same. The rule of God was perfect, and thus the entire nation of Israel could be treated like the Church. God clearly states in the Bible that it is the role of the church to help those less fortunate, like the widows and orphans (James 1:27).
The verses referenced above (Isaiah 58 & Deuteronomy 15) illustrate that command as well. But Israel ruled by carnal man, and the pagan nations of that time who were already ruled by man, could not be expected to act collectively as the Church under the name of the State. The Church became a division of the society and was required to carry out its role as philanthropists on their accord as a decree given by their God. The pagans could not be expected to be submitted to the rule of giving of their gain to the less fortunate. The Bible states that non-believers cannot be held accountable to be judged in the same way as believers, for the believers know what it is God would have them do, and yet they still do not do it.
Keller later cites gleaning laws from the Old Testament, and elaborates that while our government is not necessitated to enact such laws by this verse (because to each time has its own proper laws), it does encompass values that our nation could grasp. He says,
God did not want them (landowners) to squeeze every percent of profit out of their land, and then think that by giving to charity they were doing all they could for the general community welfare. The gleaning laws enabled the poor to be self-sufficient, not through getting a handout, but through their own work in the field.
Stop right there. He is now saying that help to the poor should be distributed not as taking from the wealthy and giving to the poor, but rather affording the poor an opportunity to work for their share. Perhaps the poor are poor because they cannot find work, and thus here is where capitalism thrives: a society in which landowners (business owners) can give the less fortunate an opportunity to work for wages. “But”, some may say, “what of the poor who cannot work?” This, I believe is where the church steps in. If one cannot provide for himself, and the free market is no longer applicable to them through invalidity or some other burden, the Christian community thus should share what they reap. I would contend that this in no way provides for the interference of the state to provide for someone.
How long shall we give and give, with no return? Not to mention the many who are on welfare simply because they are slothful. Paul condemns this sort of behavior in one of his letters to the church in Thessalonica:
“7For you yourselves know how it is necessary to imitate our example, for we were not disorderly or shirking of duty when we were with you [we were not idle]. 8Nor did we eat anyone’s bread without paying for it, but with toil and struggle we worked night and day, that we might not be a burden or impose on any of you [for our support]. 9[It was] not because we do not have a right [to such support], but [we wished] to make ourselves an example for you to follow. 10For while we were yet with you, we gave you this rule and charge: If anyone will not work, neither let him eat.” (2 Thessalonians 3:7-10)
In Matthew 25:14-30, Jesus tells the parable of the talents. In this story a master gives three of his workers a set of wages-to the first he gives one talent (the measurement of currency in that day, some Bible translations such as the NIV refer to it as a “bag of gold”), to the second he gives two talents, and to the third five talents. When he returns, the latter two tell their master they have invested and thus doubled their money, but the first buried his share and did nothing to further his master’s lot. The master scolds this man for being lazy and unwise, and gives his one talent to the man who multiplied his five to ten talents. How then, does this story fit in with social justice? I believe it indicates that God rewards those who are faithful with the resources He gives them. And, if they choose (as according to His word) to be benevolent to those less fortunate (whether by poor choices, or not) then He will further bless them to do so. To the slothful He commands them to work if they wish to eat.
Our God is a God of justice; this is where the idea of social justice stems from. But the way in which many apply it is faulty when dealing with government. As human beings made in His image it is our duty to provide for the downtrodden. But, in the eyes of the American government, their duty is to let the free market system work for itself. There will be highs and lows, but capitalism allows man to fulfill God’s command to provide for himself and his family economically. Adam Smith, the Father of Economics accordingly named our system Laissez Faire-“Hands Off”. When too many hands begin to take from one and give to another (because the money given by the government does not grow on trees in the backyard of the Capitol) inequality thus becomes redistributed inequality, and the cycle continues-but with foolhardy dealing.
In conclusion, we must consult the Constitution, and what the Founders had to say about state-sponsored welfare:
We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
Called the “welfare clause”, the preamble to the Constitution has been distorted by many to accommodate their ideas about Federal spending and welfare programs such as Medicare, Medicaid, Food stamps, etc. What is most important to note, is that Franklin Delano Roosevelt, in the face of the worst depression America had ever (and has yet ever) to face, severely extended his powers by interpreting the Constitution himself-mistake number one. Roosevelt believed the Constitution was a living document amenable to provide in times of hardship. But what he did not grasp was that the Constitution is not amenable to our whims unless is it amendable- he never proposed to amend it-mistake number two. His third strike came when he tried to pack the courts to approve of his unconstitutional ways of handling our government. When we look at the words of James Madison, we quickly gain our answer on the topic at hand:
With respect to the words general welfare, I have always regarded them as qualified by the details of powers (enumerated in the Constitution) connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proof was not contemplated by its creators.
Madison knew that the words in the preamble verified the new government’s priority to ensure justice, in the true meaning of the word justice (at least according to the Legal dictionary)- Fairness, moral rightness, The proper administration of the law; the fair and equitable treatment of all individuals under the law. Not equality, justice; giving one his deserved due. For the man who violates the law, what is his deserved due? A fine or sentence. For the man who abides by the law as an upstanding citizen, what is his due? Freedom and access to rights as a moral citizen. For the man who does not work, what is his deserved due? No money. What is the deserved due of the hardworking citizen? His retribution; his money.
On the contrary, Larry Elder points out in his article how irreverently Roosevelt regarded our governing document,
Following his second inauguration, Roosevelt remarked to one of his speechwriters, “When the Chief Justice read me the oath and came to the words ‘support the Constitution of the United States,’ I felt like saying: ‘Yes, but it’s the Constitution as I understand it, flexible enough to meet any new problem of democracy – not the kind of Constitution your court has raised up as a barrier to progress and democracy.’” (Larry Elder, http://www.wnd.com/2001/07/9913/)
And finally, one last warning by Founding Father James Madison in regards to the Welfare State: “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.”
We thus see that through the Biblical lens, through the Constitutional lens, and through the eyes of the Framers, a welfare state was never intended to be. Is it heart-wrenching that so many suffer, many undeservedly? Indeed it is, and Christians (the Church) must answer their Lord’s call and provide for those who cannot provide for themselves. But as for the greedy and the idle, the impertinent and the impenitent; they must learn that if they do not work, they do not eat.
What if it is true? What if God has given us in the Scriptures a sneak preview of the terrible things to come? None of us want these things to happen, I sure don’t, but for those of us who believe the Bible is actually the Word of God, and therefore have no doubt that these events are actually going to happen (perhaps in our lifetime) should we be silent? Should we keep such information to ourselves?
I don’t see how. I would rather be criticized or even ridiculed than to be asked after the fact how I could have known such traumas were coming and given people no warning. Are you going to heed the Bible’s warnings and protect yourself and your loved ones, or are you going to try to ride out the coming storm, and suffer the unthinkable consequences?
