A Christian Libertarian View Of The Tea Parties

Sola_Fide

Banned
Joined
Aug 20, 2010
Messages
31,482
By American Vision's Joel McDurmon...


If there is a legitimate hope within the TEA parties, it will come from the contingent of young people who have followed Ron Paul’s message on money. He has taught them genuine fiscal conservatism, and he has taught them the source of government fiscal sin: the Fed. This group of energetic, bright, and motivated young people are not easily fooled by socialistic schemes because they start at the right point: the government’s resource to create money and thereby increase its budget without limit, and thereby buy votes with promises of social programs. The anti-Fed youth are disgusted with socialism but they are first disgusted with the theft inherent in monetary policy. And anyone disgusted with theft will be disgusted with socialism. And they understand that the future of Social Security is highly dubious, so they don’t see themselves as beneficiaries of that system. These things being so, they have learned both in principle and in practice to detest and reject socialism. Would that all Christians and all TEA-partiers had such knowledge and personal integrity.

Christians should fully support smaller government, decentralized government, lower taxes (toward no taxes), free markets, individual liberty, individual responsibility, and sound money. These are all biblical social values. God’s Word tells us that big government results from wickedness in society (Prov. 28:2), centralized government is de facto a national rejection of God which results in high taxes, confiscation of property, and compulsory national services (1 Sam 8).

More at...http://americanvision.org/2362/tea-party-hypocrisy-how-much-socialism-is-acceptable/
 
Last edited:
Proverbs 28:2 doesn't seem to say that in the KJV, but the Hebrew looks like it could surely be read that way by default. Most Christians use KJV or similar, so it would be a hard case to make even if the Hebrew does actually support it.
 
Proverbs 28:2 doesn't seem to say that in the KJV, but the Hebrew looks like it could surely be read that way by default. Most Christians use KJV or similar, so it would be a hard case to make even if the Hebrew does actually support it.

The most popular selling Bibles are the ESV, NIV, and NASB. You actually have to hunt to find churches that use the KJV anymore, and most of them will say that it is appropriate to use modern translations for personal Bible study.

Edit: NKJV and NLT are pretty popular as well in some circles.
 
I truly love this:

No, Mr. Social Security, Mrs. Medicare, and Mr. Public Schooler: YOU are the socialist, the Nazi, the Commie, the tyrant. Mr. TEA Party: YOU are the socialist. Prove me wrong. When you organize to protest the major welfare schemes, I may begin to change my mind. When you pull your kids from public schools and organize to end property taxes and to privatize education, I will have a change of heart. Until then, you’re a socialist; and as a socialist protesting other people’s socialism, you’re a hypocrite.
 
Proverbs 28:2 doesn't seem to say that in the KJV, but the Hebrew looks like it could surely be read that way by default. Most Christians use KJV or similar, so it would be a hard case to make even if the Hebrew does actually support it.

It actually does. But I think it's more a matter of interpreting the English of the KJV than how they translated it.
For the transgression of a land many are the princes thereof: but by a man of understanding and knowledge the state thereof shall be prolonged.

The first word "for" means "because of." And of course the word "state" means "condition" and not state as in nation-state.
 
As for the article, I think one of the problems with Joel McDurmon is particular is an abrasive attitude that I sense in many of his writings and when he is on American Vision's Youtube vids. I just don't think that is a good idea to win converts.



http://www.aomin.org/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=53_54&products_id=44



I think you are right. I think a lot of Reconstructionists like him and Gary North have a really abrasive attitude.


EDIT: Oh I see you threw in a "KJV-only debate" book! You are sneaky:):):) I am a Reformed Baptist and I am very familiar with James White's books and debates. His debates with Muslim scholars are some of the best Christian/Muslim debates out there today.
 
Last edited:
I think you are right. I think a lot of Reconstructionists like him and Gary North have a really abrasive attitude.


EDIT: Oh I see you threw in a "KJV-only debate" book! You are sneaky:):):) I am a Reformed Baptist and I am very familiar with James White's books and debates. His debates with Muslim scholars are some of the best Christian/Muslim debates out there today.

I listen to him every DL. Tell me: Are you my long lost twin?

As for Christian Reconstructionists, I think Rushdoony seemed like a gentle old man-type (he had other problems, however), and Bahnsen was only ever abrasive when discussing atheism with Christians. It is very difficult not to be, so I can't get on someone for that. As I'm sure you've heard White mention, atheism is a particularly nasty form of rebellion against God, more so than the other religious people he deals with.
 
I truly love this:

No, Mr. Social Security, Mrs. Medicare, and Mr. Public Schooler: YOU are the socialist, the Nazi, the Commie, the tyrant. Mr. TEA Party: YOU are the socialist. Prove me wrong. When you organize to protest the major welfare schemes, I may begin to change my mind. When you pull your kids from public schools and organize to end property taxes and to privatize education, I will have a change of heart. Until then, you’re a socialist; and as a socialist protesting other people’s socialism, you’re a hypocrite.

+1
Good luck proving this to an "anti-socialist" conservative who's eyes glaze over and fear panics their heart at the thought of pulling their child(ren) from public school and figuring out a way to pay at least $4000 each to send them to private school, or worse, one of the parents stay home and teach them. They come up with VERY liberal excuses to prove they aren't socialist. Like how they pay a whole $1200 a year in property taxes. That amount doesn't cover unlocking the school doors in the morning for some of these school districts that feed off of the NCLB teat.
I have 3 children and have never owned a house(pay $250 in car taxes/yr), what would I look like using the public school system, then coming down on my single- mother neighbors that collect checks and $600 food stamp cards?
I have often wondered though, what if we got rid of NCLB and de-nationalized(is that a word) the education system. Make it a district-wide responsibility, and let districts decide if they want tax based free education or volunteerism. I'm just looking at a compromise where parents that have no choice but to use free ed, could...
 
Nice to see another one around here.

I'm Reformed Baptist also and I'd like to believe we are making a comeback in the Baptist circles.

You'd better believe you guys are. The leadership of the SBC is scared that there so many of those dang Calvinists in the ranks.
 
You'd better believe you guys are. The leadership of the SBC is scared that there so many of those dang Calvinists in the ranks.

You're right. The leadership of the SBC has tried to convince us for a while now why we should be 3 or 4 point Calvinists:)
 
You're right. The leadership of the SBC has tried to convince us for a while now why we should be 3 or 4 point Calvinists:)

My mom sits under an SBC Pastor who calls himself a 3-point Calvinst. I'm sorry, but that just sounds like pure nonsense to me.

Actually, Elmer Towns, in the intro to his Systematic Theology (Theology for Today), says that he is a Calvinist, but that he doesn't subscribe to the five major points of Calvinism. I immediately "Hello, I'm a Communist, I just don't believe in the 10 planks of the Communist Manifesto."
 
Back
Top