Posted on 11/10/2015 9:24:15 PM PST by Isara
I've got better words for you: "Law Enforcement." In this country, as Constituted, THE PEOPLE were law enforcement. Now, think of the Trumpsters and "conservatives" who think that "the government" shall "protect them from invasion" without the militias of the Several States? Or that "the government" should enforce an unconstitutional POWER like e-verify with which to control who can and cannot work in a private contract? What if that power was exercised against the people? That's why the Constitution limits "powers." These clowns don't get it.
Law enforcement was up to the people for the first 100 years of this nation's history. The courts made it so complex that we abrogated that job to "professionals" INSTEAD OF ELECTING NEW REPRESENTATIVES who would rewrite those laws and limit the courts as is their constitutional prerogative. Hence, unless and until I hear one of these candidates state flatly that the first action they intend as border enforcement is to drive for a bill eliminating the jurisdiction of the Federal courts over aliens I won't believe that they are serious, because the courts will shut down whatever they do.
Sorry to get off topic, but I wanted to show you what constitutional law enforcement looks like because so few here have any clue as to how it was supposed to work.
Got it now?
So, yes, the comment was more for real than you could reasonably have imagined.
While I agree that the EPA/BLM need to be seriously reined in, they are not the sort of programs that can be totally discontinued (changed to make sense instead of being used as a hammer on the People, but not done away with)I'd wager that God doesn't care much about our economy.
I'd also wager that Cruz is totally aware of it but doesn't want to have idiots claiming he wants us to dirty the air, pollute the waters, and other such nonsense if he makes this a big campaign issue.
God's instructions (instructions, not commandments) were to ensure that folks didn't abuse the land by over planting and rendering it non-arable. He also told folks how to wash their hands and even instructed men who had night time emissions to separate themselves from the general populace. When we claim that every instruction to help His people stay healthy is a commandment, we get away from the New Covenant (which He gave us as a new set of rules/standards) and instead of carrying the Good News of the Gospels, we use the Bible as a hammer even though it wasn't designed as such. Don't get the Old Covenant mixed up with the New and don't worry about how we treat the earth - He has spoken how it will go and what He will do to set things straight - that's why I cringe when Popes get into the global warming insanity and worry about whether or not we will destroy the Earth from under us - if that was His concern, He would have brought it forward.
I understand your concern but don't throw the baby out with the bath water while the water is still running. Expect too much and end up with another Obama.
Now for a short public service announcement to all on FR:
I prefer Cruz and my money goes to his campaign, hence the Cruz link. If you like someone else, donate to him/her (find your own link to do it) and if you use FR and don't donate, then please don't complain about the welfare leeches or those who have Obama Phones because, functionally, you are no different than any other FReeloader
PS - If you are one of those who cannot afford even a small donation to FR or a candidate, God Bless and happy FReeping!.....
GO CRUZ!! Keep it up Trump!!
You didn't hear me say EPA. They administer treaty law among other things, as does the FWS. That is a lot to undo in one term. The good news is that the bulk of them are wildly unconstitutional.
I'd also wager that Cruz is totally aware of it but doesn't want to have idiots claiming he wants us to dirty the air, pollute the waters, and other such nonsense if he makes this a big campaign issue.
The media attention it would generate is a perfect opportunity to show how the socialist program FAILS the environment, primarily because stewardship is not what it is about, it's purpose being to enrich and empower it's wealthy sponsors. So, if Cruz knew what he was about here, he would not only not fear the confrontation, he would relish it, particularly when armed with a Constitutional and effective counter-proposal that presents opportunity to an under-employed nation to make things better for native habitat.
God's instructions (instructions, not commandments) were to ensure that folks didn't abuse the land by over planting and rendering it non-arable.
False. You need to spend a bit more time with the Hebrew in Genesis 1:28.
Don't get the Old Covenant mixed up with the New and don't worry about how we treat the earth -
Don't try to sell me replacement theology. Mkay? You would be hard pressed to find a better-versed philosopher of the antediluvian Torah on earth today, especially insofar as its pastoral origins are concerned. I'm dead serious about that.
I understand your concern but don't throw the baby out with the bath water while the water is still running. Expect too much and end up with another Obama.
I'm not. I'm exhorting him to pay attention and get an education I'd be happy to supply. I think it would help him win, both the election and over the long run.
It's not that hard.
Bookmarking...
Cruz or lose!
Maybe in his second term.
Didn’t know you were such a zealot - I think I’ll just leave you be. BTW - God did replace the Old Covenant with the New Covenant.
False. First, and to put it simply, not all was fulfilled. Second, Paul's letters are wildly misunderstood. Finally, even Messiah made it unmistakable and critical:
The final word in verse 23 (anomian), is commonly translated as "iniquity." It actually means "lawlessness." Hence, "will of my Father," would denote the Mosaic Law.
Replacement theology rests on some very bad scholarship.
..the Bundy Ranch incident tells us all we need to know about what to do with Agent Love and the BLM...
I guess some folks don’t understand that when Jesus walked the Earth, he was under the Old Covenant (when and why did God give the commandments?) and had to talk/follow the Old while He was here. Folks that think like you discount the full importance of His sacrifice.
So you say with no evidence. I understand the theory perfectly. I also know that it is false.
As to your snide charge of "zealotry" (hardly in keeping with Messiah's teaching), for you to decide that what the Father with whom He said He was one doesn't matter after his execution, or that an eternal G_d just changes His mind as to what works is simply bizarre. Worse, your philosophy is selective, as if some of the Law matters (such as the Decalogue) and some does not (those nasty dietary rules), showing no understanding whatever of the practical value of the latter. Some even believe that Law morphs pursuant to the will of men.
Yours is a goofy body of belief. This distinction is about scholarly rigor, truth, more than zeal. I suggest you investigate the sources I offered you. Messiah's work is not done. All is not fulfilled. Matthew 5:18 is still in force.
Fellow FReepers, our very own Carrie_Okie actually did raise unique and original perspectives on the ecological/historical/theological aspects of the Jewish concept of “Shemittah”.
The Orthodox Rabbi in Miami, whom I asked for his opinion on Carrie_Okie’s “Shemitta: For The Land Is Mine” opined it was probably correct, but was above his expertise. It was he who suggested one of the leading authorities on Shemitta, Rav Moore, and supplied a phone number in Israel for Carrie_Okie.
Rav Moore’s response may best be described by his frequent response of the word ‘fascinating’.
The best part of FR is that one can tap into the cutting edge of human intellectual effort on many subjects.
Hmmmn — donated to FR lately? Also, Carrie_Okie funds his own work, but any contribution would be appreciated, I would guess.
Best pabut was beyond his expertise. He Recommended Rav Moore, and the abov asked to review Carrie_Okie’s work said he thought it was accurate,
See post 32 for verification.
LOL! Get a few positive reviews for "cutting edge" work (how cutting edge can one get with Scripture?) and it's proof that you are correct even though you need to discount some other data to keep the Old Covenant viable - perhaps God didn't add His "Supersedes the Previous Covenant" on it.
You neglected to answer my question of when God gave out the Commandments and what His purpose was. Once you figure that out, please take a gander in the New Covenant and interpret why many were chastised for "having fallen from Grace (hint - it was for trying to keep the old Law alive and adhere to it in order to prove they could be worthy - but I digress).
Should we be good stewards of the Earth He gave us - absolutely. Are His Old Covenant instructions on how to do so a Commandment - not hardly (else we really have a few hundred commandments and His death and Resurrection were a waste if His Blood didn't wash away all of them for those who claim Him as their Lord and Savior).
IOW - nice work but don't claim He is going all Old Testament on us for not being good with the land - He has a new way of taking care of us and it's been awhile since He sent specific plagues or smote anyone - He really did give us free will with the caveat that if we ask for it He may tell us, "If you insist".
You don't even know enough about Torah to understand what Messiah was saying. Really. I don't need your condescending tripe, as it is but evidence of your ignorance.
My apologies.
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.