Logic is good. Rationality is excellent! Rationalism? no! No! Hello? Is there a 'rationalist' in the house?
David:Do you know what 'rationalism' is? Can you begin to understand why someone might (mis)apply this term to you? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill Taylor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: December 02, 2004 13:23 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Trapped in the Flag > My the lengths to which we'll go to justify an action -- Newton would be > proud! > > ". . . the outcome of the establishment of this nation as independent from > the other indicates God approved and sanctioned it." > > This sounds very deterministic, not to mention definitive, David. Did Allah > give you these words Himself? :>) In your reading of history have you > distinguished the intent of the Virginians over against that of the New > Englanders (themselves for the most part being staunch Federal Calvinists, > just a short step removed from both deism -- and Allah)? It seems to me that > those "men who truly understood submission AND the need for government" > (emphasis added) may have blinked at just about the most inopportune times. > But I guess you probably gathered that from my very simplistic presentation. > > Bill > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2004 10:14 AM > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Trapped in the Flag > > > > Lance wrote: > > > I look forward to responses by both David > > > and Linda on this fine distinction. > > > > While I agree with Bill's distinction of submission and obedience (and > have > > taught this identical teaching many times myself), I do not agree with his > > historical analysis concerning our founding fathers. > > > > The problem here is building an axiom of reasoning at too high a level. > For > > example, the axiom being focused upon here is the one that says men must > > submit to authority. This holds true much of the time, but not in all > > cases. I consider this situation not too much unlike Newton's laws of > > gravity. For much of the world, Newtonian theory works just fine, but > when > > we start dealing with subatomic particles at high speed, it stops working. > > It took the theories and math of Einstein to refine our understanding to > > include both aspects of the world. > > > > Exactly what principles lead us to the axiom of "submit unto the authority > > of government"? We can see it in Romans 13 very readily: > > > > Romans 13:1 > > (1) Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no > power > > but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. > > > > Where did Paul derive this understanding, that the powers that be are > > ordained of God? Probably from the book of Daniel. The point is that God > > has ordained that powers that be. Therefore, generally speaking, to > resist > > the powers that be would be resisting God. Yet we know that the powers > that > > be eventually will be destroyed by God. This too is taught in the book of > > Daniel. So while the governments we know are ordained of God, they are > > faulty and in need of replacement. Generally speaking, we do not rise up > > against them in rebellion because they are faulty, but rather we testify > of > > their faults, and we continue in patience to await their overthrow by God. > > > > There are times, however, when God himself moves upon nations and kings to > > change the powers that are currently in place. When that happens, we > cannot > > say that those who rose up in opposition to the power were in disobedience > > to God. One might arrive at that conclusion by considering only the > higher > > level axiom of "submit unto authority," but when we recognize that this > > axiom is derived from the idea that the powers that be are ordained of > God, > > we have to admit that the successful overthrow of a power indicates that > God > > had ordained such an overthrow. Therefore, when the government here rose > up > > for independence from Great Britain, and such was resisted with force, the > > outcome of the establishment of this nation as independent from the other > > indicates God approved and sanctioned it. The more base axiom of "the > > powers that be are ordained of God" must be given greater relevance than > the > > idea that "every soul must be subject unto the higher powers" because this > > second axiom is derived from the first. > > > > Bill Taylor wrote: > > > Our founding fathers did neither: they did not obey > > > God, neither did they submit to their governing authorities. > > > > I disagree with this historical perspective. One only needs to read our > > Declaration of Independence to see that our founding fathers were not > > rebels, but men of submission and obedience who had the public welfare at > > heart. The situation was one whereby the government here was unable to > > function properly because of the greed and tyranny of their king residing > in > > a distant land. I do not see our founding fathers as any more rebellious > > than Moses leading the Israelites out of Egypt. > > > > Bill Taylor wrote: > > > Instead they rebelled under the weight of "tyranny" from England, > > > by taking up arms and overthrowing their governing authorities. > > > In so doing, they disobeyed God in their refusal to submit > > > (sighting [sic], to the contrary, in their cry of taxation without > > > representation, a political justification for their rebellion). > > > > Taxation without representation was only one of the many governmental > crimes > > outlined in our Declaration of Independence. My reading of history gives > me > > the perspective of men who truly understood submission and the need for > > government. If the relationship could have been worked out, I believe > they > > would have found a way to do it. If taxation without representation was > the > > only problem, there would have been no revolutionary war. The bottom line > > is that the existing king could not govern us properly from overseas. God > > saw the misery and hurt they were causing and removed that distant > > government from power over the colonies here. > > > > Peace be with you. > > David Miller. > > > > > > ---------- > > "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may > know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) > http://www.InnGlory.org > > > > If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a > friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed. > > > > > ---------- > "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org > > If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed. ---------- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
