An American Tory

I wore my London T-shirt on Independence Day because I am a Tory.  Don’t get me wrong.  I am not a Tory because I am an Anglophile, although I am an Anglophile.  I am not a Tory because I hate America.  I am grateful for my country and am as patriotic as anyone.  I am fully aware of how lucky I am to live in this country.  But if I am honest with myself, I have to admit that, if I had lived in the late 1700’s, I would not have been able to support the revolution.  I believe that political and social change is best effected by working within the system by peaceable means, not by violence and rebellion against government authority.  It may take a lot longer to effect change within the established system of government, but it can and it does work.  I also can’t justify violent revolution with the Scriptures.  It just won’t jive with the verses that command us to live at peace with our neighbor (Romans12;18), to honor the king and obey all secular government officials (I Peter 2:13-17), to “render unto Caesar” (This verse is found in three of the four Gospels.  Repeating something three times, to a Jew, is tantamount to highlighting it, underlining it, and putting several exclamation points after it.)

I am not a pacifist, by any means.  I believe we have the right to defend ourselves against an enemy who attacks and tries to take us over by force.  I even believe we have the responsibility to wade into the fray in defending our neighbors against unlawful attack.  I would have been right there in World War II, fighting against Hitler any way I could.  But to attack my own government and countrymen–I just don’t think I could in all good conscience.

Jesus never advocated revolution against the Romans, even though it was a tyrannical and oppressive regime.  He made a point of being non-political by taking as His disciples both Matthew, a minor official of the Roman Government, and Simon the Zealot, a member of a political party that used terrorist tactics and guerrilla warfare in their struggle against the Roman oppressors.  There is no record of Jesus admonishing or correcting either of these two men, or addressing politics with them in any form.  But Matthew left his post as a Roman tax collector, and Simon never went back to his Zealotry.  They had more important things to do.

I have been thinking a lot about what would have happened if our forefathers had been more patient and had waited out King George.  Yes, he was a tyrannical madman.  Yes, something needed to be done about him.  But it needed to be done by  lawful means.  The rule of law was long established in England, land of the great Magna Carta.  And the king would not live forever.  I’m not saying that living with the insulting taxes and laws levied against the colonies would have been easy.  But perhaps it would have been preferable, and not just to avoid the bloodshed of war.  If we had remained colonies of England, slavery in this land would have ended when it was abolished by British Parliament, half a century earlier than we managed to do it on our own.  It would have ended peacefully, without a drop of bloodshed.  It would have ended without rancor or bitterness on the part of either side.  There would have been no need for a Civil Rights Movement in the 1960’s, because integration would have occurred as naturally and easily as it was in England.  For that matter, our great statesmen and political thinkers might have helped England along in their extrication from their other far-flung colonies by more peaceable means.  Who can say how different the world might be today if our forefathers had all been Tories?

But be that as it may, this world is not our home.  We are citizens of a better place, and we should act in accordance with the Laws of that glorious land!  Ephesians 3:20!



Filed under Uncategorized

22 responses to “An American Tory

  1. Jared Rowling

    Very thought-provoking, and well written. For the past several years, I’ve been very interested in learning about the Revolutionary War. But as a Christian, I’m not so sure about it. It certainly does seem miraculous that we won, and in that I can see the hand of God. But I also have a difficult time reconciling it with Romans 13. I like your insights about the possible avoidance of the Civil War if our independence had been won peacefully.


  2. Thanks, Jared! I meant to include Romans 13 in my essay and forgot! I’m not trying to convert anyone, just throwing ideas out there!


  3. Jim Fredrickson

    I sat in a business meeting today with someone who complained about how it use to be or where things have gone wrong, or should have been, and could be. After much complaining, gloom and doom, it was my turn to have some imput. I suggested he stop complaining and get up and take some action or simply shut up. Words without action are a waste.
    My suggestion ML, is to do the same. If you hate what America has become because of actions of its past, then do something to change her future, please. But to say you hate America and then go back in History to state why your hatred is there, what are you going to do about it? Wear a shirt?! Wow, can you hear the applause? If you can, it is not from me.
    I personally wore red and blue. In honor of those who defend/ed our freedom to state our opinion. I am glad you have not run for a public office. As for the Bible verses, what about a soveiergn God, who guides the hearts of men, even one of your blood releatives helped the founding of this country. What if? What if what? What if American never became a nation, what if cotton candy was black, what if cats were dogs, and dogs were cats… Who flippin cares! you can’t change the past, but you can change the future. Write your plans to help make a real change that is founded on God’s living Word, but please do not pull verses to justify how it should have been, we don’t have that right. God made that call, I trust He made what was in His best interest, His Glory.


  4. My dear brother, I am afraid you didn’t read my blog very carefully, if at all. I started out by saying that I do NOT hate America; that I am in fact grateful for my country and am as patriotic as the next person, even if the next person is you! And where did I complain about anything? What did I say I wanted to change today? Yes, I was writing about history, which cannot be changed. But don’t you ever just enjoy throwing around “what ifs” for the sheer joy of it? You have written a rant pertaining to nothing that I actually wrote.

    My comments were meant to stimulate thought, nothing more. And yes, God is sovereign and guides men’s hearts. But He also grants us free will. Which means we have the free will to mess up. And, praise God, He takes our messes and creates wonderful things out of them!

    Lighten up, Jay! Ideas are interesting, and thinking about history and theology and philosophy is an enjoyable and rewarding exercise. Even imagining black cotton candy can bring joy if that’s the kind of thing you like to think about.


  5. Nicholaus Ross

    Uncle Jim, While I agree that words without action are useless, words are necessary to promote action. However, I disagree with both your’s and my mother’s ideas of what actions we as followers of Christ should be taking. One of the problems of the Church in in America is its preoccupation with the false belief that America is God ordained. You said that God made the calls to free this country, but that is simply not true. From the beginning of creation God has always let us make our own calls. i don’t believe God is all that concerned with countries or fighting for political freedom. He is more interested in freeing individuals souls so that they can help bring His kingdom to earth. Border lines and economic and political systems are all man-made, and therefore do not apply to God or to us as his followers. I am no more a citizen of the American empire than Jesus was of the Roman empire. Yes, he said “render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s” but he went on to say ” render unto God that which is God’s.” This includes our lives and our loyalties, and I cannot be loyal to both the corrupt american empire and to God.
    All this to say, I don’t believe we should be preoccupied with changing America as a country, but rather to be changing the world by bringing God’s kingdom to earth as it is in heaven. This can never be achieved through politics, or any war, or any kind of system. It can only be achieved by loving and extending radical grace to everyone. So all of those other things are a destructive waist of time.


  6. Thanks, Nick, for a well-reasoned response. I totally agree with you, which is why I ended my essay as I did. We are citizens of heaven and our loyalties lie with God alone. I also agree that we should not be preoccupied with politics but should be about our Father’s business of spreading His Word and doing His work in this world.

    However, sometimes God does call His people to accomplish His work through the political system. He definitely brought freedom and autonomy to the slaves of British Empire through the political efforts of William Wilberforce. And while earthly slavery is but that, and the freedom of the soul is paramount; still, when our brothers suffer, we must do what we can to bring that suffering to an end.

    Romans 13 states: “Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgement on themselves. . . . It is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment, but because of conscience. This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God’s servants, who give their full time to governing.” Which brings me back to be original thesis: If rebelling against governing authorities is rebelling against what God Himself has instituted, I cannot in good conscience do so. I would not have rebelled against England in 1776, and will not rebel against the American government in 2010. Not because England is so great, or because America is so great, but because God commands it., and HE is so great!


  7. Richard Ross

    Jim, The kneejerk response and vitriol with which you responded to ML’s essay tends to confirm my fear that Christians’ patriotism often borders on idolatry. ML clearly stated that she does NOT hate America. She is merely doing what every Christian should be doing on a regular basis. She is challenging the presumptions of her culture (and herself), and lining them up against the Word of God to see how they compare. You never even address the scriptures that she cites, but seem to just dismiss them out of hand. I certainly acknowledge the sovereignty of God; in fact, I think that is a strong argument supporting ML’s position: “Let every person be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God and those which exist are established by God.” (Romans 13:1) If I trust that God knows what He is doing, how can I rebel against the authority He has ordained? Obviously, this is not to say that all government is righteous. But God has an incredible way of turning around that which is intended by man for evil and using it as that which He intends for good. The ultimate example, of course, is the cross. But it does not stand alone. Christ’s humble submission is the example we are to follow when dealing with unjust government. I Peter 2 says: “Submit yourselves for the Lord’s sake to every human institution” (13) “Act as free men, and do not use your freedom as a covering for evil, but as bondslaves of God.” (16) “Honor all men; love the brotherhood; fear God; honor the king.” (17) I confess this blows my mind. It insults my pride and offends my American sense of duty to defend my rights. The king that Peter says to honor is Nero. The same Nero who was instigating the most widespread and brutal persecution of Christians the world had yet seen. He enjoyed watching them being fed to wild animals in his circus. He had them covered with tar, tied to poles, and burned alive as illumination for his garden parties.

    Peter doesn’t stop there; he goes on to say: “Slaves, be submissive to your masters with all respect, not only to those who are good and gentle, but also to those who are unreasonable.” (18) If anyone should have the right to rebel, it should be a slave. But God has a very different answer: “For this finds favor, if for the sake of conscience toward God a man bears up under sorrows when suffering unjustly.” (19) No mention of our unalienable rights to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. Rather, He expects us to lay down our God-given rights and follow the example of our Lord: “For you have been called to this purpose, since Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example for you to follow in His steps.” (21) Rather than rebellion against injustice, God calls us to redemptive suffering. Rather than political revolution, He intends spiritual revolution; a total change in the very nature of man.

    This is more than a dusty historical debate. It speaks to the difficult questions of how the Heavenly Kingdom is to relate to the earthly kingdom. The church has wrestled with this in every generation. By God’s grace, for us it’s mostly been hypothetical. But that is not the norm for the Body of Christ and sone day He may call us to a deeper fellowship with Christ in His suffererings. We may have to choose whether to trust iin our own strength or God’s, sooner than we think. “Beloved, do not be surprised at the firey ordeal among you, which comes upon you for your testing, as though some strange thing were happening to you, but to the degree that you share the sufferings of Christ, keep on rejoicing; so that also at the revelation of His glory, you may rejoice with exultation. If you are reviled for the name of Christ, you are blessed, because the Spirit of glory and of God rests upon you. Therefore, let those also who suffer according to the will of God entrust their souls to a faithful Creator in doing what is right.” (I Peter 4:12-14, 19)

    This is the testamony of the martyrs. As the Romans jeered at them, many were amazed by their victorious deaths, and came to join them as they bore witness to a greater kingdom. This is His glory. “And after you have suffered for a little while, the God of all grace, Who called you to His eternal glory in Christ, will Himself perfect, conform, strengthen, and establish you. To Him be dominion forever and ever, Amen.” (I Peter 5:10, 11) That is the kingdom to which we belong. America will be crushed along with every kingdom that man has made an idol of. The stone cut out of the mountain without hands will crush it and will fill the whole earth. (Daniel 2) “His kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and His dominion is from generation to generation.” (Daniel 4:3)


  8. Julie Fredrickson

    At the behest of my sister for lightening up….

    Would black cotton candy taste like licorice? Cause if so – YUCKY!

    It is a thought provoking idea of “waiting it out” rather than the Revolutionary War. I am probably the biggest Anglophile in the family to the point of pursuing employment there; however, approaching this historically, sometimes God does command His people into war. I am thinking specifically of the conquering of the Promised Land by the Israelites. (Please don’t press me for specific scriptures since I am currently encamped behind stage at the Microsoft show.) Yes, all those tribes were godless and yes, it was before the grace of the cross. But God is unchanged from that time to this. God commanded Joshua to attack and leave none alive many times.

    I believe our founding fathers were lead by God in their steps, including revolution, in the creation of our country. I believe God’s hand was on our country for many years because of their obedience. Their ideals of freedom and equality shook the world and changed the future for the generations across the planet. Their choice of not stepping into the fulness of God by truly creating a land of liberty for all was their chief failure in my opinion. The Civil War, the Reconstruction, the Jim Crow years, the Civil Rights period – all consequences from their lack of doing the hard thing.

    So am I Tory or Whig? I have strong convictions in both. I believe in governmental authority and law, but I cannot completely support the “land gentry” running roughshod over the masses for little more than greed. Perhaps this is exactly why I revere Martin Luther King, Jr. He was able to walkout a balanced Tory/Whig approach during some of America’s darkest days lead by God.

    And finally –

    Dr. Peter Venkman: This city is headed for a disaster of biblical proportions.
    Mayor: What do you mean, “biblical”?
    Dr Ray Stantz: What he means is Old Testament, Mr. Mayor, real wrath of God type stuff.
    Dr. Peter Venkman: Exactly.
    Dr Ray Stantz: Fire and brimstone coming down from the skies! Rivers and seas boiling!
    Dr. Egon Spengler: Forty years of darkness! Earthquakes, volcanoes…
    Winston Zeddemore: The dead rising from the grave!
    Dr. Peter Venkman: Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together… mass hysteria!

    Light enough for ya, ML? =)


  9. Hurray for thoughtful, well-reasoned comments! The only fun of having a forum like this is to provoke interesting conversation. Thanks, Rich, for having my back! And thanks, Julie, for respecting my opinion. I never expected everyone to agree with me, just take me seriously! And the best way to show me that you take me seriously is to reply using quotes from authoritative works, like Monty Python. 🙂 And the Bible, too!

    Seriously, I agree with you, Julie, that the kind of civil disobedience exemplified by Dr. King is a scriptural way to effect change within the system of government without damaging our testamony as Christians. I am all for trying to change a corrupt government, but we have to keep it scriptural. Yes, God commanded Joshua to wipe out whole tribes in Canaan. But those tribes had no governmental authority over the Israelites. When God brought His people out of Egypt, He did not allow them to disobey the Pharaoh. He expected them to trust Him to do the work Himself. I think that’s where the difference lies; the difference between rebellion against the legal authority over you and fighting a just war against a separate nation of people. The definition of “just war” is a whole other discussion and I really, really don’t want to get involved in that one!

    Yes, God has blessed America and I’m glad I’m an American. I have a theory that the blessings upon America are an extension of the blessings He had already bestowed upon England and that we would have been just as blessed had we remained colonies. I have more research to do before I can formulate a coherent argument for this stance, however. Stay tuned! I’ll work on it and get back to you!


  10. Julie Fredrickson

    Actually, it was Ghostbuster’s….


  11. Jim Fredrickson

    Awesome! I am laughing so hard! That was fun, I love you all. And yes I do think of the “what if’s” ML. Like what if I had not off the cuff thrown a monkey wrench into the mix and responded like I did, more for the fun of it. Sorry, to have tossed the salad a bit!
    I even agree with you all, just had fun throwing in a twist. I will keep it up. I will have a blog in a couple of weeks, but it will bore you to death(work related). So I won’t even send you a link.
    Love you all, and ML, thanks so much for being there with Mom and Dad today. When I heard you were going, it was a big relief. I have a full work week, but would have gone, if need be. So thanks.

    now where did I put that cotton candy machine…


  12. Obey the Scriptures argument:

    How do you know what God’s Word is? Is God’s Word anything that he tells anybody, or is it only what you have in your bible? Could it be that it is just safe to call the bible God’s Word because everybody (most Christians anyway) call it that because they have heard the two things as synonymous. If God tells someone to but a band on their arm to remember something, it is God’s Word or “just language?” The Old Testament tells a person how to remember things, so would any other way to remember things be unscriptural? It might be unscriptural but it might be God’s Word also.

    Telling God what He meant by something He said in the past:

    The Israelites (of Jesus’ day) tried telling God (in Jesus) what God meant by the law that the Israelites received back at the Mountain. I don’t think they quite got all the information they needed when they rejected God back then (you only get enough info to keep you alive in the place you will be sent as punishment for rejecting God). Be assured, when you live in the generations after someone rejected God, you don’t need to use the information that they received to tell “the God of the information” how He must do things in the future. The information was only to keep you alive until God shows up again. God calls it the down payment or the earnest until he shows up again with the full payment.

    God can have a people overthrow a government if he chooses that method. Nothing He said in the past is violated, as far a He is concerned. He might have been talking to that people at that time because God was not ready for a new Government to rise up. God always uses some length of time as punishment when a group rejects Him. Remember that God is the ruler of Nations and their leaders. You can’t tell God, “You meant this when you said “fill in the blank ____________” Well, I guess you can but it might not get you very far to tell God what he meant by what he said in the past. Remember that you don’t have all the information. What God has given to the people who rejected him, was only enough to keep them alive until God comes back to offer Himself to a latter generation again. God doesn’t quite care if you accept your idea of God because He will offer His whole self to you and then you can make an informed choice.

    The Israelites wanted their idea of God but when God offered His whole self to them on the mountain, they decided “No, we want Moses instead.”

    Again the Israelites wanted their idea of God, but when God offered Himself to them in Jesus, they decided “No, we want the criminal named Barabbas.” We now live in latter generations of the Barabbas choice. Most Christian and most Jewish people live like criminals under evil governments. Wow, people get what they choose. In the history of man the way God is working it so far, if God had not set up America, all Christians and Jews would be dead or slaves under evil governments.

    Maybe the “Declaration of -in- dependence on God” is similar to the first day in the seven days of creation. God was firing His first of seven proverbial shots across the bow until he restores His rule (again, I don’t mean until He restores American, but until He restores His rule). For some reason, it takes God seven cycles of things to get to what he wants. It took 7 days to get the world, and it will take 7 judgements to end it.

    Maybe, just maybe, the Declaration was God’s First Judgement on Kings. The document was written 2,800 years after Israel asked for a King. (100 + 200 + 300 + 400 + 500 + 600 + 700 = 2,800)
    Just coincident or one of God’s cycles. Only time will tell. Did you every notice, long spans of time mean nothing to God? We think, why do we have to pay for someone else’s transgressions? The fact is, we are them.

    The question becomes, was Thomas Jefferson the next God’s Word writer? How would you decide?

    We could wait on some council to tell us like we have done with the bible.

    Do you think there is a way to tell if something is God’s Word without a council telling you?


    • Rich Ross

      Ray, your argument against simply obeying scripture and assuming it still means what it says, has made a real impact on me. So I thought I’d run an idea by you: since we can’t trust that what is written still applies to us, and since the Holy Spirit is a thief (and how can you trust a thief?), I thought I might propose that when the elders are seeking guidance we consult a Ouija board. I realize this may be controversial. Someone may bring up a verse like 1 Sam. 15:23- “For rebellion is like the sin of divination, and arrogance like the evil of idolatry. Because you have rejected the word of the LORD, He has rejected you as king.” But, as you have proven that God has changed His stance on rebellion, it only stands to reason that He’s changed His opinion of divination as well. Actually, I think it may be more difficult to overcome the objections if anyone should start to reference the many passages that seem to insist that the scripture is applicable to all the ages (even when heaven and earth have passed away). Verses such as Rom. 15:4- “For everything that was written in the past was written to teach us, so that through endurance and the encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope.” And of course someone is bound to bring up 2 Tim. 3:16- “All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness.” But the section that really makes me nervous is 2 Peter. In chapter one, after testifying that he was an eyewitness of the majesty of Christ, and in fact heard the very voice of God the Father, he makes the claim in verse 19 that these experiences reinforce the “words of the prophets made MORE certain, and you will do well to pay attention to it…”. After this assertion of the relevancy of scripture, the next two verses emphasize the authority of scripture above and beyond the writer’s own time and circumstance: “Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation. For prophecy never had it’s origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.” And, if someone is so rude as to go on to what chapter two says about false prophets who “bring the way of truth into disrepute”; well, it could get really uncomfortable. I always tended to associate the condemnation mentioned here with gross sexual sins and such. But someone might suggest that some of this passage may apply to our situation. Particularly where it says the Lord knows how to “hold the unrighteous for the day of judgment, while continuing their punishment.” (I don’t much like the sound of that). “This is especially true of those who follow the corrupt desire of the sinful nature and despise authority.” If someone were to view our position as despising the authority of God, they may very well interpret our approach as a “corrupt desire” to make the Bible say (or not say) anything we choose. They might even say that we are mouthing “empty boastful words” and enticing people to “promise them freedom while they themselves are slaves of depravity…” (vs. 19) The end of that chapter is not very pleasant: “It would be better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, then to have known it and then turn their backs on the sacred commandment that was passed on to them.” I won’t even mention the dog and pig proverbs; that’s just disgusting. Well, I truly hope it doesn’t come to all that. But if it does, I think ML is right; if you can just get people to understand that God didn’t really mean what He said, or God meant it then, but it’s no longer true, then it renders any objection from scripture meaningless. And then people will be ready to believe anything.


  13. Did you know that the “Declaration of Independence” is not really the title of the document that we call the Declaration of Independence?

    Thomas Jefferson (or God) called it the:

    The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America.

    A better title of it could have been the “Declaration of -in- dependence on God”
    The word “Independent” appears only once in the document and it is sandwiched in-between these to phases:

    appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions


    And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.


    If you read the declaration closely, God is inditing any Government that oppresses people. I am not saying that “America” is God’s Kingdom, lest anyone should read it that way. I am simply saying, the document indites any governments that will not respect the man God created.


  14. Dear Ray,

    If you read my blog carefully, you will notice that I never mentioned the Declaration of Independence. I have absolutely nothing against the writing of documents. My essay was about violent revolution and warmongering. Yes, King George was an insane tyrant, but really, was he the worst tyrant ever? Hardly. When Peter was writing about honoring the king and obeying every authority God has put over us, he was referring to Nero. While George’s most odious action was to levy taxes without representation, Nero burnt Christians alive for his own enjoyment. Talk about denying a man his God-given rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of not being slaughtered by a disrespectful government!

    In addition, I also did not anywhere in my essay offer to “tell God” what he meant by anything He wrote. Quite the contrary, I was allowing God to tell ME what He meant by what He wrote.

    As for Thomas Jefferson: he was an excellent writer and many of the things he wrote in the Declaration were true. However, could I consider the Declaration to be the Word of God? Well, if you check, you will find that Jefferson did indeed pen his own version of God’s Word. He carefully excised all references to miracles and to the deity of Christ. I hardly think God would choose to use a man who denied the deity of His Son to write His sacred Word. And I hardly think a man who denied the existence of the supernatural would allow himself to be dictated to by the Holy Spirit.

    I enjoy debating, but please stick to the points I addressed in my essay! Veering off-topic invites me to chide! And you scare me, Ray! You scare me a lot! If you can’t accept the Bible as God’s Word, you can’t really debate any scriptural topics at all. The very ability to say, “God didn’t really mean what He said,” or “God meant it then, but it’s no longer true,” prevents any intelligent discussion of scriptures and renders any comments on scripture completely meaningless.


  15. I believe the bible and God at the same time. The question becomes how to understanding both of them correctly.

    I was trying to make the point that God can say something in the bible and then ask you to do the “apparent” opposite — IF IF IF IF— it is part of His cycle of things that must happen to get back to the beginning again. That may sound strange to you where God is concerned, but you do it every day and don’t even think about it. Let me explain.

    Since Jesus always used earthly examples to explain heavenly things, let’s use a parable:

    What if, Sunday evening after you did the wash, you asked your daughter to put her dress “back” in the closet. Can you imagine your little girl saying to you, “I’m not putting this dress back in the closet, you told me to get it out and wear it to church this morning. You must be the anti-mother because my mother told me to take this out of the closet.” This is almost laughable, you see, the next time the real authority shows up, the child must do what mother says, not tell the mother what she said in the past and how it would be wrong to do something else now. This is part of learning “cycles,” not learning instructions. Most children start to understand very early that every instruction is part of a cycle, not instructions for instruction sake. If only Christian understood that God does the same thing.

    Should the child say to the mother:
    You scare me a lot! If I can’t accept the morning instruction as Mother’s Word, I can’t really listen to any instructions at all. The very ability to say, “Mother didn’t really mean what Mother said,” or “Mother meant it then, but it’s no longer true,” prevents any intelligent discussion of Mother’s Word and renders any comments on Mother’s Words completely meaningless.

    I say, to the contrary, the mother is teaching the child about real life. The mother is not giving the morning instruction that is meant to be done every minute of every day. It will carry on in the future, but only after the dress gets back in the closet and another seven-day period goes by. So which statement is more true, get it out, or put it back? Both are true, just at different times. Next Sunday the sequence will repeat with each one being true at the correct time. The Mother is truth if you know what I mean. The mother is teaching the daughter about a cycle that must take place each Sunday. The daughter can’t know tshe is learning about cycles the first time through, she can only think she is dealing with a scary person that would ask you to do opposite things. No scary anything if you know the whole story.

    From the natural standpoint, “the act of putting the dress back into the closet” is opposite of “the act of getting the dress out of the closet.” The “apparent” opposite (or contradicting) actions are really the beginning and ending of a cycle in real life. If your purpose was to see if you child could follow instructions, you could have just asked them to stand on one foot for three seconds. I would contend, you were teaching your child about a cycle in their life, but you are only giving them one instruction at a time. Does God do the same thing? Is God allowed to do the same thing we so everyday? Could God be as simple as that? He only tells “you” what “you” need to know until he tells “you” something else when you need to know it.

    Humans do this every day and think nothing of it. I would venture to say you have been doing this all your life. This “way of thinking” is so much a part of your life that you don’t even know you do it, you just do it. Why is this inherent in man’s nature? Could it be because it came right out of God’s Nature? You are in His image you know! I guess the alternative is that man got this perfectly normal way of conveying information from Ziglona on the planet Fredsonopa. We all know that God always tell rebellious man the whole story so he will understand everything in every detail from the beginning (ha ha). The whole bible is one piece of info stacked up upon another piece of info. It is all still not there because Daniel and John were told to seal parts up until the end.

    You see, when you know the whole story, there is never a contradiction in instructions, just a cycle that must be completed to get back to the beginning. Mari Lynn, are you the anti-ML when you come back to your house after leaving it? Are your neighbors scared of you because they see you apparently doing the opposite thing? Have you ever called the police when Rich returns home from a night at work? Have you ever walked in your house backwards because you were facing that way when you left the house? You see, cycles, and doing the opposite at a certain time is just part of your nature. I just wonder if God is the same way? He said as in the days of Noah, so shall it be in the end. The bible starts with man in a Garden and ends with man in a Garden. That sounds like a cycle to me.

    God came peacefully in Jesus day. If I held to your way of thinking, the anti-God wrote the book of Revelation because it says that God is sending some firepower next time he comes. Jesus was such a peaceful guy when he was here. Your way of reasoning wouldn’t accept the book of Revelation as the Word of God because it is opposite of Jesus-man on earth. So, if God tells you, in advance, that it is OK if the opposite happens, is that the only time he can do the opposite?

    You don’t act that way in any part of your life. You pick and choose how much of every cycle you convey to the person you are talking to.

    I only ask two questions of you so please think about them and answer the questions without bringing Ray into to the answer:

    1. Is God allowed to tell mankind only one instruction (or one part of the cycle) at a time?
    2. The next time He comes to mankind is He is allowed to tell mankind the “apparent” opposite (the next part of the cycle)?

    If you answered yes to the above questions, then you are saying that it is OK for God to use man to overthrow a government anyway He see fit. And yes I mean even if, 1st whatever, Chapter whatever, Verse whatever, says to submit to the King.

    Only certain people will be able to read this coded ESP message from Ziglona on the planet Fredsonopa:
    Beep Beep Beeeeeepppp BBeeeppp Think Abraham if you answered no to either of the above questions. BBBBBeeeeeppppppp Beep Beep over and out.

    Opposite instructions are almost always part of the same cycle. By the way, have you ever yelled to your kids as they left the house with the door wide open, “Close the door!!!!!” Does that mean that then can’t ever open it again?


    • Dear Ziglona,

      What the heck? You make less sense than usual tonight. Your refutation has nothing to do with my reasoning. You never address any of my points. You are, in fact, arguing with someone else altogether, because I never said anything at all about God not being able to do anything the opposite. However. . . .

      How on earth do you surmise that EVERY command of God has an opposite command in the offing? So, God says, “Thou shalt not commit adultery,” and then at the end of the day He says, “Okay, it’s time to commit adultery now.” I’d like to hear you explain this one to Laurie. How about this one: “Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. Wait, never mind, I meant that at the time, but now I mean the opposite. Hate the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.” I’m waiting for the lightning to strike, now. Okay, so how do you choose which verses in the Bible are for keeps and which are subject to change at any time? Wait, I know. You ask Ziglona.

      Or how about this one: “I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.” Matthew 5:17-18. Last I looked, heaven and earth hadn’t disappeared yet. And “Law” refers to the Old Testament, not the Declaration of Independence! Hmm. Not one penstroke. Sounds kind of like He meant what He was saying.

      I’ve said this before, and I’ll say it again, Ray. You are not alone. Think about it. Who is with you, up there on the planet Fredsonopa? And, hey, are you suggesting that Thomas Jefferson was Daniel or John reincarnated, revealing at last the scrolls they were supposed to keep sealed? Wow. I never, ever said that God scared me, Ray. But you do. I love you and Laurie with all my heart, but, Lord help me, you scare me.

      You still avoid refuting my original premise, which was: could we have avoided the Civil War if we had not rebelled against England in 1776? This is actually what my essay was about. Come on, stick to the subject!


  16. Don’t miss Rich’s modest proposal, tacked on as a reply to a comment Ray made earlier. Just scroll up through the comments to find it. Wish I knew how to move things around in this forum, but I don’t have the technology!


  17. Marri Lyn/Rich:

    What if “Thou shalt not commit adultery” is already the opposite to “replenish the earth,” since the “replenish” comment came first. Did you ever think about that, or were you just trying to prove me wrong with your own thoughts of what “opposite” means?

    Maybe this is like the “destroy this temple” comment, you just use the word “opposite” in the wrong context.

    I hate you use the bible to show you what I mean, but I guess I will try again:

    Deuteronomy 22:22

    If a man be found lying with a woman married to an husband, then they shall both of them die, both the man that lay with the woman, and the woman: so shalt thou put away evil from Israel.

    Read that verse again. On a scale of 1 to 7 {1 being the easiest}, how easy is it to understand what needs to happen here? ____ (fill in the blank in you mind)

    “And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery…”
    Please tell me why Jesus didn’t tell them to go get the man so we can have a multiple stoning party. If Jesus was really God, then wouldn’t he have just done what the verse (Deuteronomy 22:22) said to do because God wrote the old testament? Surely God can read His own instructions. If the Jews could understand the sentence, surely God could also. God is at least as smart as man, right?

    Where would I get the idea that when God shows up, God just might do the “opposite” (His way of the “opposite”, not the stupid ones that you make up. I presume that you meant to make up stupid ones though.) Instead of making up stupid ones, see if you can find any other examples in the bible.

    I have given you two examples of God/Jesus doing the exact opposite of something that was written or said.

    Quote from Rich:

    “Ray, your argument against simply obeying scripture and assuming it still means what it says, has made a real impact on me…

    I AM NOT TELLING ANY PERSON to do the opposite of what God says or what God has written. My point is, in God’s whole cycle or in any continuous story, GOD HIMSELF might SHOW UP AT YOUR DOOR and tell you something that will cause you to do the EXACT OPPOSITE of what GOD HAS ALREADY WRITTEN or THAT GOD HAS ALREADY SPOKEN. This is only true if:

    God is the same yesterday, today and forever.

    Here is one more question. Would you agree that the Abraham offering and the adulterous woman stories would be examples of what I call “opposite” actions to what was said or written?

    The old question
    1. Is God allowed to tell mankind only one instruction (or one part of the cycle) at a time?
    2. The next time He comes to mankind is He is allowed to tell mankind the “apparent” opposite (the next part of the cycle)?

    These questions go to the root of the whole question about the violent overthrow of the King. Maybe it was God telling them to fight. What if God told them to fight and they didn’t fight for 300 days? We might have around 70 years left of walking around Death Valley (if you get my sand drift). Do you know what you would be saying right now? “Didn’t our Great Great Great Grandparents know that when God comes down and tells you to do something, you don’t quote the bible to Him, you do what he says. Only 70 years left of this wandering out here. We’re going to make this a National Park when this is all over.”


  18. Dear Ziglona,

    Your tone is growing increasingly hostile. I must ask you to refrain from shouting in my blog, please. You are frustrated because I am not answering your questions. Therefore you must understand my own frustration, as the author of this blog, that you are not responding to the actual subject matter of my essay and are using my blog as a mouthpiece for your own speculations. I will not, in fact, answer your questions, any more than I will answer the question, “Can God make a rock so big He can’t lift it?” Give me a break! However, I will stoop so far into the ridiculous to submit Genesis 18:17: “Shall I hide from Abraham what I am about to do?” Since He goes on to tell Abraham exactly what He intended to do, beginning to end, the answer was “no”, He would not hide anything. God explained through His prophets everything He was planning to do well ahead of time. There was nothing left secret or held back as a surprise. Studying the prophets and the fulfillments of the prophecies shows this clearly.


  19. No hostility or shouting intended. You must be misinterpreting the selective boldness, quotes, or phases. I am just emphasizing selected words so Rich would know the difference between me suggesting that someone should do the opposite vs. God telling someone to do the opposite. I have never suggested that a person should just decide on his own to do the opposite of what the bible says to do. No bold or quotes this time.

    I am trying to speak to your point about the founders not doing what the Scriptures say. You brought up Scriptures that they did not follow. I am only pointing out Scriptures that show when God shows up for his next major dealing with man, man should not quote our understanding of the Scriptures back to Him (like the Jews did in Jesus’ day). The Jews did exactly that and we have been graphed into them. Are we them in this respect? They were destroyed and scattered for around 1870 years.

    I see your point that they did not obey the Scriptures. That is a truth that can’t be refuted. But Jesus did not obey the Scriptures when it came to the woman caught in adultery. So maybe God is trying to get us to obey Him when He shows up more than seeing how well we can read verses and try to obey them. It looks like there is a time and season for both cases (reading and obeying vs. obeying God when He shows up). When God is away, you do the Scriptures, but when He shows up again for His next major dealing with mankind, you do what He says. What He tells man will fulfill the Scriptures, even if it looks like it is not obeying the Scriptures.

    Sometimes I think God (not me) wants to teach us a bigger lesson than just seeing if we can read and obey.

    The people who brought the woman sure did learn a greater lesson by Jesus not obeying the Scriptures. Verse: And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more. Maybe God and His individual lessons are greater than verses. I might be wrong though.

    I don’t have time to search it right now, but does the bible say that Jesus fulfilled the law and/or that He obeyed all the laws? I will do some searching later when time permits. I never really thought about this question before so thanks for this blog.

    Again, I look at all things as a learning experience, not as a chance to be hostile. If you ever take something that I write as hostile, just rebuke it from your mind because it is a lie from the evil one. To me, bold and quotes are ways to emphasize words so they are not misunderstood. I didn’t know that the Internet world considers that hostility and shouting. I not very Internet worldly I guess.

    I will end my conversation in here but I will search the “fulfill vs. obey” question for my own education into the last time God came to man by way of Jesus. The answer might be helpful in recognizing Jesus/God when He/They return that next time. Dan Midgett always ask the question, “Will we miss God/Jesus just like the Jews did?” If we think like the Jews, we will really miss Him. Think about it, it seems like the Jews quoted the Scriptures to Jesus and measured their “correct understanding” to His “misguided understanding.” At least that is how they saw it.

    Over and out. Thanks for the conversation and the thought-provoking topic .


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s