Posted on 07/16/2005 4:07:51 AM PDT by Lindykim
The Forbidden Book Steve Farrell
When your business is communizing America, it is vital that access to the truth about America's founding be denied to every student of American history, cultural and law.
And the best way to do that is to eliminate all references to God and morality in public dialogue under a 'high and holy' appeal to religious freedom. High and holy, is it? Why don't we ask the martyred dead? Or have we forgotten that only a few centuries ago hundreds and hundreds of thousands of individuals in Europe were burned at the stake simply for reading the Bible or for calling sin "sin"? And ditto under modern communism, except the number would be tens and tens of millions.
Just what were these tyrants, ancient and modern, hiding from the people?
I can think of a few things, beginning with Moses' charge to "proclaim liberty throughout the land, and unto ALL the inhabitants thereof" and Christ's teaching that "ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free."
What are the truths that shall make us free in that nasty 'forbidden book'? Here are a few:
The Bible clearly indicts and provides endless examples of not just the common man but also kings and priests held accountable before the moral and civil law – the mighty more so, for "where much is given, much is required," reads the forbidden book.
Thus David falls, Saul falls, Solomon falls, Sampson falls, Eli falls (literally), Judas falls – even the entire nation of Israel falls. There is the Law of the Harvest, and it applies to all, rich and poor, men and nations, infidels and the elect of God.
The forbidden book makes a strong case against kings generally, and any system that exalts man or the state as a god over man. On the other hand, it favors a representative, mixed system of government called the Law of the Judges, which includes democratic elections, mixed forms of representation, local government, family rule, a fixed law, and impassioned pleas to "choose ye this day," not simply 'obey or else.'
For man, the forbidden book teaches, was a moral being from the beginning, endowed with the godlike ability to choose between good and evil. This would be his lot throughout mortality. And the sum of those choices would be the measure of who he is in eternity.
It praised some of the greatest contributions for good in the history of the world as the "widow's mite," or common men laying down their lives for the truth or for a friend. The beggar Lazarus would be in heaven, the selfish rich man who never aided him would be begging a glass of water from him to cool his lips in hell.
Thus, the tables of injustice would be ultimately turned; for man is eternal, and God, who knows and sees all, is both a just and merciful being. Are we beginning to see why kings and comrades trembled at this book?
Witness such courageous characters as Daniel refusing to obey the King of Babylon's command not to pray in public – and that same king later softening his heart as a result of Daniel's courage (and the enlightening influence of the Spirit of God), declaring true religious liberty in the land – a liberty which did not prohibit (as many would today) men from worshipping as they pleased in public, as well as in private, nor from sharing their faith with others in both of those settings.
Then there is the account of a young man who was a slave, a prisoner, a member of a despised race, named Joseph, who interpreted Pharaoh's dream and thus ascended out of a fixed class of unfavorables to the position of virtual ruler over all of Egypt. And why? Not merely because he interpreted a dream, but because he was true in all things, including strict obedience to the law of chastity. And this too: because, in the Providence of God, Joseph's actions would save the world alive (the entire world, Israelites and non-Israelites) but prior to that punish the House of Israel first for its many sins.
Yes, the "chosen" people, the book often teaches, are the worst of the lot, and are outshined by Syrians and Samaritans and Romans in faith, obedience and charity. "Never have I seen such faith, no not in all of Israel," said Christ regarding an "outsider," and it wasn't the first and only time he said that. The long-haul prediction for the world, "the first will be last and the last first," for some men outside of the faith had "the law written in their hearts" all along.
Stunning reversals that provide scary lessons, scary concepts.
The forbidden book also introduces the idea of Higher Law. "Whom shall I fear, God or Man?" Peter asks before a court bent on destroying him. And "My ways are not your ways, neither are your ways mine, saith the Lord."
It teaches that the greatest among us "is a servant to all," not our master. In fact, it says, "call no man master," but God only.
It introduces the concept of private property, commands that the idler shall not eat the bread of the laborer, forbids theft and covetousness, and yet invites the more prosperous among us to reach out to the poor, not through the coercion of taxation, but through wise and inspired acts of love, charity and family solidarity.
It defends the sanctity of life and forbids murder – and yet it recognizes intent and specific circumstances in the commission of a crime, thus introducing the concepts of first-, second- and third-degree murder, as well as manslaughter, and the right to kill in self-defense, which is no crime at all.
Capital punishment is introduced for the first-degree murderer, with restitution being impossible; whereas simple crimes of theft, for instance, are not accompanied by imprisonment, but by a demand for restitution, and then some: restoring honor, dignity and freedom to the individual for paying back his debt with interest.
It introduces as trial rights such things as trial by a jury of peers, the right not to be tried twice for the same offense, the right to have witnesses in our defense, the right not to be forced to incriminate ourselves, and all the other great rights we now possess.
It warns a free and religious people against security alliances and entanglements with foreign nations, inviting them to trust in the Lord for their security.
It dares to teach such concepts as "If ANY of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to ALL men liberally, and not upbraideth." In the same vein, its Ten Commandments teaches us that "the stranger within our gates" possesses the same rights to worship that the citizen does. Making the right unalienable, not granted by the state. Wildernesses are to be tamed and cultivated and put to good use in this dangerous book, and man is to preside over the animal kingdom, not the other way around.
Wars are generally wicked, yet sometimes necessary and even miraculously won with the aid of forces beyond the veil.
It commands men and women to marry, to have children, to raise their children in righteousness. It forbids fornication, adultery, homosexuality and bestiality. Likewise, it warns of plagues that have swept and will sweep the land because of sexual impurity.
It teaches that husbands are to serve their wives as Christ served the Church. That children ought to honor their parents, and that parents ought to provide for, bless and teach their children.
Interestingly, as if anticipating such ridiculous socialist-inspired arguments as evolutionary theory – that would deny the Heritage of Man as a child of God – the forbidden book teaches the commonsense law that that every species reproduces "after his own kind." Heck, the book even commanded the people to wash their hands and clean their sheets before and after handling the sick, preceding the lifesaving advice that came with the discovery of germs by thousands of years.
Tell me, just what were the ancient kings, the modern Communists and their Bible-banning counterparts in the ACLU, the NEA et al. afraid of? The answer: the truth. For 'the truth shall make us free,' and there are always a few numbskulls out there who don't like that. At least that's how I see it.
Visit Steve's Daily Blog at LibertyLetters.blogspot.com.
Interested in hearing Steve speak? He will be the God & Country speaker at the annual meeting of the 'Organization of Competitive Markets' in Omaha, Nebraska on August 12, 2005. For more information, or to pre-register visit competitivemarkets.com, or call 402-346-7600. NewsMax pundit Steve Farrell is associate professor of political economy at George Wythe College, press agent for Defend Marriage (a project of United Families International), and the author of the highly praised, inspirational novel, "Dark Rose" (available at amazon.com).
Copyright 2005 The Sierra Times Permission to reprint/republish granted, as long as you include the name of our site, the author, and our URL. www.SierraTimes.com All Sierra Times news reports, and all editorials are © 2003 SierraTimes.com (unless otherwise noted) SierraTimes.com™ A Subsidiary of J.J. Johnson Enterprises, Inc. http://www.sierratimes.com/05/07/15/207_200_116_11_68931.htm
ping
Excuse me, but what the heck is this senseless drivel supposed to mean?
>>Excuse me, but what the heck is this senseless drivel supposed to mean?<<
I think it means to make Americans communists. Like redestributing wealth, banning religion etc.
(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
What are the truths that shall make us free in that nasty 'forbidden book'? Here are a few:
Just to add to this: The Truth is Jesus. This is who sets everyone "Free" from sin. Remember and never forget, Jesus called himself, "The Truth."
This is vitally important that people know this and take it to heart.
Um... I read the Bible a couple of times in its entirety. Better than quoting fragments or doing it the Google way. These were interesting experiences. The Bible was written by humans, and other humans made a selection of books that should be bundled and go under that name. A certain number of books is still the topic of debate (the Apocryphs), and other books were left out while some claim they are authentic.
Quite a number of stories defy moral analysis. Others really are too cruel for an enlightened world (the Hebrews traversing strange territory, killing the inhabitants, and sampling thousands of foreskins as symbol of triumph? No please). There is oppressive contradiction, all due to the abominable concept of a Chosen People. We get confronted with random killing sprees in the name of Yahweh.
It is frustrating that amidst all this general mayhem and carnage there are good moralities to be found. The Book Of Ruth. The story of John The Baptist and cruel Salome. Simson and Delilah. But on the other hand there is the indecipherable rambling of the Book of the Apocalypse.
I believe in Evolution Theory as a factual description of the birth of life, and the human race. (We don't even know where to place the exact delineation between 'dead' viral elements and bacteria). That said, the myth of Genesis is a beautiful and poetic metaphor of the first week of the Universe.
I believe in a decent tax system that helps protect the poor against starvation and homelessness. People always fall short of decent charity, no matter how many leftover carrots they throw at the underprivileged.
I hate the Eye For Eye, Tooth For Tooth routine. It leads to nothing except century-long feuds, Yugoslavia-style.
Yes, I am a conservative social-democrat. Sounds a bit broad, but that's what I am.
If it's true that God himself wrote the Biblical words, then he must have been mightily drunk while doing so. And Herman Melville is the far better writer anyway.
Books aren't true because they are old and beaten into schoolchildren's heads for two millennia or so.
I just wrote what I think. No offense intended against anyone. And I hope that this free place can stomach such harsh words. But the Bible and the Koran have more in common than Joe Public would like to believe.
I'll leave the Biblical stuff aside and just ask if you can point out the relevant article in the constitution that allows congress to enact such a tax system. Thanks.
[Excuse me, but what the heck is this senseless drivel supposed to mean?]
Psalms 1
1. Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor standeth in the way of sinners, nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful.
2. But his delight is in the law of the Lord; and in his law doth he meditate day and night.
3. And he shall be like a tree planted by the rivers of water, that bringeth forth his fruit in his season; his leaf also shall not wither; and whatsoever he doeth shall prosper.
4. The ungodly are not so: but are like the chaff which the wind driveth away.
5. Therefore the ungodly shall not stand in the judgment, nor sinners in the congregation of the righteous.
6. For the Lord knoweth the way of the righteous: but the way of the ungodly shall perish.
Great article.
Please avail yourself of the Word once again....
..and this time, ask the good Lord to guide you in your reading, and seek His face.
Do not blaspheme the Holy Scriptures.
The period of Judges was closer to anarchy than anything else. It certainly had nothing resembling our elections.
The author tries much too hard to get the Bible to prescribe his own preferences as being God's will.
James Madison the "Father of the Constitution" was not so convinced.
"I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on the objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents." -- James Madison
...and there is the awful problem of cultural supremacy and cultural values themselves. See: there is, philosophically, no objective higher standard, or slide rule, to determine which God is the True God, or the Best God. We claim that GWB is on the right side and that the Biblical God is the True Lord. Islamists (whose violent fundamentalism I abhor) claim that Allah is the true God, and, say, the Iranian Head Of State on the Right Side. Since both religious books contain much that is reprehensible, and also good, decent guidelines, it is factually impossible to decide which side is the right side. In other words: there is no proof, nor certainty. It is down to your most own inner sentiments and irrational feelings to make up your mind about such things. One can't prove that the Bible is the Word Of God, just because it says so in the book itself - that is a fallacious circular argument. Same applies to the Koran, and Allah. And, to repeat myself, I hate Gods Who need an awful lot of violent threats to subjugate their Children, make them fearful, et cetera. Not my style.
Not really. As enacted, the punishment for intentionally putting out someone else's eye was to have your own put out, by the state as a judicial punishment, not as a revenge thing by the family of the victim.
Even-Steven. No rationale for the family of the perpetrator to retaliate again against the original victim.
Perhaps you could explain to me why it is widely considered unjust or barbaric for a person to suffer the exact damage he intentionally inflicted on someone else. From a purely logical standpoint, it sounds like perfect justice.
If George chops off Andrew's foot, how is it unfair for the judicial system to chop off George's?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.