Tea Party or God Party?

[Sola_Fide]

As AquaBuddha2010 has said, this is a moral battle we're in.

I would add it's a war of worldviews, ultimately, the Kingdom of God versus the kingdom of man.

I can tell you and I both have read a lot of Rushdoony

 

[AutoDas]

It is that sentiment which leads me to believe that libertarians are short-changing themselves in this entire movement. Human beings are not exclusively economic agents. We're much more complex than that. This movement represents more than just economic reforms and liberties, and the problems we critique go much deeper than many libertarians are willing to admit. As AquaBuddha2010 has said, this is a moral battle we're in.

I would add it's a war of worldviews, ultimately, the Kingdom of God versus the kingdom of man. So, in that sense, the Tea Party Movement needs to get back to the elementary principles which our Founders pointed to. It all begins with the sovereign God Who created us and endowed us with our rights. Any movement that takes God out as the foundation of its projection is a movement walking closer to a sepulcher. Sadly, most libertarians treat God as an insignificant Being, and to that, their ruin.

First you have to prove that morality exists.

 

[nate895]

I can tell you and I both have read a lot of Rushdoony

We should all start a club.

 

[nate895]

First you have to prove that morality exists.

I suppose you wouldn't mind me heading by your house and permanently borrowing stuff, would you?

 

[Bman]

I think they should stick to economic issues.

I agree the tea party has never been about god. There's no reason for it to start. I think when a group starts standing for too many things it gets nothing done.

 

[cindy25]

the problem is that by making the tea party God's party they are making it a zionist party

 

[Jodi's mom]

Let's think about this logically. For the purposes of this argument, I am not going to argue the premises, because I am just showing the logic behind the idea.

(1) God is the omnipotent, omniscient ruler of the whole universe and all that is in it.
(2) The civil government is part of the universe.
(3) Therefore, God rules over the civil government.

This is a very simple, elementary logical syllogism. If you believe God is the omnipotent, omniscient ruler of the whole universe, you must believe He rules over the civil government as well. There simply is no other option if you want to even pretend you are logical.

I agree wholeheartedly!! and will go further by saying unless we turn back to our Creator, we will perish! Read Jeremiah chapters 1-5. Maybe further. That's where I am now. I believe those scriptures refer to the U.S. as I believe we are the descendants of ancient Israelites.

 

[nate895]

I agree wholeheartedly!! and will go further by saying unless we turn back to our Creator, we will perish! Read Jeremiah chapters 1-5. Maybe further. That's where I am now. I believe those scriptures refer to the U.S. as I believe we are the descendants of ancient Israelites.

On what grounds do you believe we are the blood descendants of the ancient Israelites?

 

[Sola_Fide]

We should all start a club.

You too huh?

 

[nate895]

You too huh?

Oh, yes. My first exposure to Rushdoony at the C4L Regional Conference in Seattle was a contributing factor to my eventually becoming Reformed, a Young Earth Creationist, and wanting to become a full-time Apologist eventually. My teachers went from somewhat enjoying the presence and debate with a real libertarian to absolutely hating my guts.

 

[Sola_Fide]

On what grounds do you believe we are the blood descendants of the ancient Israelites?

Yeah...

Christians are spiritual descendants of Israel, not physical. And the US is definitely not descended from Israel.

 

[nate895]

Yeah...

Christians are spiritual descendants of Israel, not physical. And the US is definitely not descended from Israel.

I am not sure if you are familiar with the belief, but there is a group that claims that the people British Isles are the descendants of the so-called "lost tribes of Israel" (which isn't even a Biblical idea to begin with). The belief is called British Israelism or Anglo-Israelism. I consider it a dangerous belief (maybe heretical, but I'm not sure), and I have had a few people who espouse the idea contact me recently, and I am wondering how to deal with it since I have never actually met someone who supports it.

 

[Sola_Fide]

Oh, yes. My first exposure to Rushdoony at the C4L Regional Conference in Seattle was a contributing factor to my eventually becoming Reformed, a Young Earth Creationist, and wanting to become a full-time Apologist eventually. My teachers went from somewhat enjoying the presence and debate with a real libertarian to absolutely hating my guts.

That's awesome man! I am Reformed as well, though not as theonomic as the Reconstructionists. I think I would be maybe more along the lines of Luther in his view of the threefold purpose of the law.


I met Andrew Sandlin and Steve Schlissel in 99 at a Christian Reconstruction conference in Ohio. Andrew gave me Roots Of Reconstruction by Rushdoony. From there I read pretty much all of his books. My favorite is The One And The Many...it is a masterpiece of Christian political philosophy in my opinion.


Great to have some fellow Reformed brothers here!

 

[nate895]

That's awesome man! I am Reformed as well, though not as theonomic as the Reconstructionists. I think I would be maybe more along the lines of Luther in his view of the threefold purpose of the law.


I met Andrew Sandlin and Steve Schlissel in 99 at a Christian Reconstruction conference in Ohio. Andrew gave me Roots Of Reconstruction by Rushdoony. From there I read pretty much all of his books. My favorite is The One And The Many...it is a masterpiece of Christian political philosophy in my opinion.


Great to have some fellow Reformed brothers here!

I am less theonomic than the Reconstructionists as well, but I am still in the theonomist camp more so than the natural law camp. I am more in lines with Greg Bahnsen than RJ Rushdoony.

 

[Sola_Fide]

I am less theonomic than the Reconstructionists as well, but I am still in the theonomist camp more so than the natural law camp. I am more in lines with Greg Bahnsen than RJ Rushdoony.

You mentioned apologetics. Are you a presuppositionalist?

 

[nate895]

You mentioned apologetics. Are you a presuppositionalist?

Yes. I like using evidences a lot more than, say, Bahnsen, but I still make sure to setup any use of evidences with TAG if it is appropriate.

 

[Sola_Fide]

Yes. I like using evidences a lot more than, say, Bahnsen, but I still make sure to setup any use of evidences with TAG if it is appropriate.

Aw man thats great. I am very familiar with TAG. I read Always Ready by Bahnsen and pretty much memorized all Bahnsen's debates.


I am more of a Fideist nowadays though. I came across A Christian View Of Men And Things by Gordon Clark, and I read all of Vincent Cheung's books. His basic apologetic method is to simply disprove empricism. It is very effective.


Here is a debate that Vincent Cheung did. It is the most thourough destruction of atheism Ive seen in a debate: http://www.vincentcheung.com/files/html/sansone-cheung.htm

 

[nate895]

Aw man thats great. I am very familiar with TAG. I read Always Ready by Bahnsen and pretty much memorized all Bahnsen's debates.


I am more of a Fideist nowadays though. I came across A Christian View Of Men And Things by Gordon Clark, and I read all of Vincent Cheung's books. His basic apologetic method is to simply disprove empricism. It is very effective.


Here is a debate that Vincent Cheung did. It is the most thourough destruction of atheism Ive seen in a debate: http://www.vincentcheung.com/files/html/sansone-cheung.htm

Yeah, I think every individual apologist has their little nuances, even when they agree in general. For instance, Van Til wanted to synthesize BB Warfield and Abraham Kuyper, whereas I definitely lean more towards Kuyper's (who thought reasoning with unbelievers is totally fruitless) side (probably due to my internet experiences). I do not think reasoning with unbelievers is totally fruitless, but I will be faster to say "Don't cast your pearls before swine" than Warfield and Van Til.

 

[Theocrat]

My Beloved Brethren

I can tell you and I both have read a lot of Rushdoony

I have read a lot of Rushdoony's works, especially his Institutes of Biblical Law.

We should all start a club.

Indeed, all for the glory of the triune God.

 

[silus]

Tea party folks hate teh gays.