WHAT IS THIS “OCCUPY WALL STREET” MOVEMENT?

Those that read my post know that I write on spiritual subjects: usually on the understanding of Scripture. Sometimes what is happening in the world is made clearer by what is written in the Bible. This occupy movement is such an event, or events that seem to make Scripture more clear for me.

The more one learns about Scripture the more one can learn. That may seem an odd statement, so consider this.

We are told from birth that the United States is a “Christian Country”, but when you become old enough to study the Bible on your own, without any so called help from others, one can see plainly that this Country is not Christian. It was formed in rebellion to God (Romans 13:1&2) by those that did not want the king that God had appointed over this land. The people decided to appoint their own king (President). They would no longer trust God to appoint a king. Verse four says the governing authority are “God’s servant”, but we believe those that serve are “Our servants”. How foolish we are to give power to men, to make laws that control our lives, and then expect them to only consider us! Now, you must already understand this before you can see the next step of events of this country.

God is not going to protect a county, or people, that do not have faith in His ability to appoint a king. Think about it, can you say that you believe God appointed a spiritual king for you, but He isn’t qualified to appoint a human king? Don’t bother trying to say that you prayed to God to guide you to vote for the right man. If you vote you are declaring God can not choose without the help of man.

At some point those who are in charge, because the people placed them in charge, will realize they are about to be voted out of office. They have put in place a plan for such an event. The president can declare a national emergency and halt the elections. It may not be this election, but is a possibility.

Someone is paying the expenses of those that occupy. I am old enough to know that no one spends money without expecting a return on their money. Those that are occupying are not in agreement about just what they believe: except the rich are their enemies. I believe those who are supporting the occupiers know exactly what they expect to get for their money.

If I were in power and did not want to loose that power and I did not really care about the people, or cared for myself more than the people, I might devise a plan to hire thugs, to cause large riots just before an election, so that I could declare a national emergency. Actually because the news media can be trusted to over emphasize their reports, I wouldn’t even have to cause large riots.

The news media is already over emphasizing the importance of a bunch of nuts dumping in the parks. Yes, I said dumping and you know what I mean.

Hitler had his Brown Shirts: this government has its Occupiers: puppets on a string!

What I said about this country is true and accurate. My prophecy is speculation. However, it is based on the actions and desires of men.

I say this to Christians so that if and when it happens they will not loose any of their faith. It should strengthen ones faith. Joseph Lule pointed out in his last comment, that it is God that has control of those that oppose Him and even though it may seem as if the world is going to defeat God’s children He will reveal Himself and save us.

Think about it.

14 Responses to WHAT IS THIS “OCCUPY WALL STREET” MOVEMENT?

  1. PAGAU says:

    astudent said:
    WHAT IS THIS “OCCUPY WALL STREET” MOVEMENT?

    PAGAU says:
    You never really answered your own question. This I think is a good thing. OWS is a mixed bag. It cannot be characterized.

    It is interesting you would begin with a lot of background on your views on authority and rebellion and the founding of the republic–as if OWS must be understood in this context. I don’t agree with your views on authority and rebellion–but I DO agree OWS could be characterized as a rebellion–that much is a given–but rebellion against God as you suggest? No, I don’t think so. They are rebelling against their oppressors. Many are misguided and do not understand who their oppressor is–but they know oppression when they are under it. The fact they are at Wall Street was a planned tactical diversion from the start. Some recognized this and planned other more appropriate “occupations” like Occupy the Fed.

    No one I see within the OWS movement claims it is a “Christian” movement. But among the founding fathers, who were also a mixed bag, there were many who did. In fact, the more vocal among them did in fact claim to be Christian–at least when addressing an overwhelming Christian public. But like OWS. they were not rebelling against God, but against their oppressors. In their own words: “Rebellion against tyrants is obedience to God!”

    astudent said:
    “God is not going to protect a county, or people, that do not have faith in His ability to appoint a king. Think about it, can you say that you believe God appointed a spiritual king for you, but He isn’t qualified to appoint a human king? ”

    PAGAU says:
    This small sample of your views on authority and rebellion does reflect a misunderstanding of Scripture–that kings are extensions of God’s authority on this earth. This misunderstanding is shared by all the great tyrants of history. It was once called the divine right of kings. The favorite Scripture of tyrants is Romans 13. Hitler used to play Romans 13 over loudspeakers in the streets as a tool of propaganda to control the population. You also seem to be caught up in this error and tend to judge Scripture as a whole on the basis of this one reading in Romans 13. But I say Romans 13 should be understood within the whole Council of God.

    God very reluctantly gave the nation of Israel an earthly king, and did so against his better judgement, at their demands. God’s perfect will in this regard was clear, He wanted to be their King–directly and on an individual basis–not by extension through an earthly king. He gave a warning that an earthly king would oppress them. He was of course right as always. He understood human nature–that psychopaths are naturally attracted to positions of power and injustice would reign under such a regime. Our founding fathers shared God’s distrust for human governments and so constructed a government that, as best as humanly possible, protected the people from this natural human tendency. If after this, the great American experiment fails, it only proves God’s warning given to the nation of Israel was right–that until we give up the desire for an earthly king and accept his lordship over us–each one directly and individually–we will never know justice in this world.

    The whole story of the Church and it’s martyrs throughout the ages in one of rebellion. This also includes Paul, the author of Romans 13. This is a core American value we should cherish and that we abandon at our own peril; Rebellion against evil is a virtue to be honored among the righteous.

    Based on these universal facts, which are clear in Scripture, rebellion against oppressive rulers does not constitute rebellion against God. Paul’s words in Romans 13 needs to be understood in this context.

    PAGAU

  2. According to right-wing morality, the successful are by definition the moral; the one percent are taken to be the most moral. The country and the world should be ruled by such a “moral” hierarchy. Except for national security, the Public should disappear through lack of funding. The nation and the world should be ruled for private profit alone – and by force.

  3. astudent says:

    PAGAU,

    You do right to doubt what I say, but consider what God says about authorities.

    (Dan 4:17 NIV) “‘The decision is announced by messengers, the holy ones declare the verdict, so that the living may know that THE MOST HIGH IS SOVEREIGN OVER THE KINGDOMS OF MEN AND GIVES THEM TO ANYONE HE WISHES AND SETS OVER THEM THE LOWLIEST OF MEN.”

    If one rebels against the one whom God has chosen to receive a kingdom of men, then he rebels against God. If God wanted Hitler to lead Germany, then who am I to say He is wrong? I do not know the future or what God has planned. I am not justifying anything that Hitler did, any more than I would try to justify my own sins.

    I have realized or grasp a great piece of insight just recently. It probably isn’t a revelation to many, because it is so simple, but to me it is a revelation. Faith defies logic. As a matter of fact it demands that one reject logic. Logic only proves God right after the fact. Because we do not know the future it seems to me that logic can not be applied to understand it. We look at the past and try to apply it to the future, but the past may or may not be like the future and it is not logical to apply a rule, which may or may not be a rule.

    I have thought about the Church a lot lately and I see a Church that believes in God, but it doesn’t believe God. There is a great chasm between the two beliefs. Even the Devil believes in God! The leaders of the Church say it was right for the Founding Fathers to rebel, but that is not what God said. They do not believe God! It is the last Church in Revelation: lukewarm and in great danger.

    I don’t know that I suggested that the Occupiers were rebelling against God, but they are. They seem more like dupes to me. They are right when they say the rich are taking advantage of us and the rich that have the power is the government. We gave and give power to those who want it. How stupid are we to give power to rich men, who never have enough money, and then think that we can solve the problem, that we created, by living and giving speeches in a park?

    This is a place where one can apply logic to a problem, to see how we got here, but I see no logic in what the Occupiers are doing that would change our plight. God is laughing at us (I hope), because we chose men to rule over us and they are doing what men always do. They are doing the very same thing that God warned Israel that a man would do if He gave them a king.

    (1 Sam 8:9-18 NIV) Now listen to them; but warn them solemnly and let them know what the king who will reign over them will do.” Samuel told all the words of the LORD to the people who were asking him for a king. He said, “This is what the king who will reign over you will do: He will take your sons and make them serve with his chariots and horses, and they will run in front of his chariots. Some he will assign to be commanders of thousands and commanders of fifties, and others to plow his ground and reap his harvest, and still others to make weapons of war and equipment for his chariots. He will take your daughters to be perfumers and cooks and bakers. He will take the best of your fields and vineyards and olive groves and give them to his attendants. He will take a tenth of your grain and of your vintage and give it to his officials and attendants. Your menservants and maidservants and the best of your cattle and donkeys he will take for his own use. He will take a tenth of your flocks, and you yourselves will become his slaves. When that day comes, you will cry out for relief from the king you have chosen, and the LORD will not answer you in that day.”

    O, wait a minuet, this government takes a lot more than a tenth of what we own, make, or even what is given to us. The Occupiers are correct; it is the rich that are taking everything that they can from the people. How would it change anything to take over? Would not men be put in charge and would not everything begin again? Has man changed?

    Kings, presidents, dictators, or any ruler of any name are only men and they prove God right. Why can no one see that?

  4. astudent says:

    Christopher Callihan,

    The left have been in charge for quite a while and things have only gotten worse. This is not a matter of thought, but of action and they controlled the action.

    Both democrats and republicans look at the opponents and see the wrongs committed, but neither look at their own party and condemn themselves with the same enthusiasm.

    The nation and the world “IS” being ruled for private profit alone. Open your eyes and see; or wait until they use force to throw you out of the park, because they will: unless they are using you and I believe they are.

    You are not in charge, the rich are, and they will use what ever is at their disposal to stay in charge. Unless God comes to your rescue, you do not stand a chance; and why would He?

  5. PAGAU says:

    Occupy Wall Street (OWS) is today quite different from its beginnings. Likewise, it is quite different from the spin the media puts on it. It cannot be understood within the confines of this false left/right paradigm that we have become accustomed to. There is an element within OWS that seeks to spin the issues into class warfare–the rich -vs- the poor– the haves -vs- the have nots. Don’t fall for it. They are attempting to soften the people to accept new taxes on the basis the new taxes only apply to the rich. That is the same trick we fell for when our current income tax came to be–only the top 1% will ever see the tax. It is a game of incrementalism. There are some really bad ideas coming out of OWS and this is one of them.

    But there are some good ideas coming out of OWS also. There are even some new taxes I would actually be agreeable to. But the best idea I have heard is a return of Glass-Steagall http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass-Steagall_Act
    Glass-Steagall is a depression era law that imposed limitations on the banks to prevent another depression from ever happening again. The most important feature of Glass-Steagall was repealed late in 1999. It protected the people’s savings, pensions, etc from the Wall Street gamblers by erecting a firewall between commercial and investment banking–thereby preventing the intermingling of funds between the two. Wall Street likes to gamble with OPM (Other People’s Money).

    I prefer to focus on the more sensible people in OWS. These would be the ones who find no fault with the rich so long as the riches come from honest productive enterprise but they DO find fault with rich untouchable criminals. The more sensible ones want the criminals to be prosecuted. New revelations of graft, theft and insider trading come out every day but they continue to get away with it. So I say new taxes that target the money racket invented by these criminals would be a good thing.

    The problem with our current tax system is that it punishes productive enterprise while rewarding theft and reckless gambling in the markets. Putting an indiscriminate tax on the rich [just because they are rich] would just be more of the same. There is a saying that if you want less of something, tax it. So taxing productive enterprise results is less productive enterprise. But we want MORE productive enterprise, not less. Think for a moment what we want less of–and then tax that. Tax cigarettes? Liquor? Prostitution? NO! THINK! What is really killing us? More specifically, what is Wall Street doing that is picking your pocket and causing all the turmoil in the financial markets? Well, for one thing, they are blaming the people for it. Few people really understand these things. But there are some among OWS that do understand, as evidenced by their proposals.

    One good idea is a financial transaction tax that is tuned and targeted at High Frequency Trading (HFT).
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-frequency_trading
    A very small fraction of a percent tax on a single transaction would be practically zero for virtually everyone. But for those privileged few who engage in HFT, it could cause some real pain. HFT generates a lot of money for the parasites in Wall Street while taking money from the productive sector. If the people understood what it was it would be illegal–yet is remains legal. We want less HFT. Less HFT would benefit more than 99% of the people–more like 99.999% because only the most privileged few among Wall Street engage in HFT.

    Another good idea is a capital gains tax that is tuned and targeted at gains produced specifically through debt such as:
    1) The currency carry trade:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carry_(investment)

    and
    2) Derivatives trading:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Credit_derivative
    Like HFT, If the people understood what derivatives trading was, it would be illegal. Also like HFT, no one among the general population engages in the practice and would not be adversely affected by such a tax.

    These three ideas for a new tax do not target the “rich”. Instead, they target the racket that the parasites and the criminals on Wall Street have set up. They would have one of two effects;
    1) They would bring in so much revenue the general income tax could be ccompletely eliminated
    2) HFT and other reckless parasitic trading would come to a screeching halt.
    Either outcome would be a good thing for the people.

    Our present problems arise from the fact that we have confused debts with assets. We do not know the difference. We have allowed debt to function in our economy as an asset–as if debts WERE assets. We use debts instead of real assets because bankers and Wall Street want it that way. They prefer a debt based economy because debt can be created where real assets do not exist. If the people understood this it would be illegal. Until such time it is illegal, tax it.

    On another level, if we were to practice the jubilee as the Israelites were supposed to do, a debt-based economy like this could never develop into such a monster.
    Debt is the problem!
    End of OWS rant.

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    astudent said:
    “THE MOST HIGH IS SOVEREIGN OVER THE KINGDOMS OF MEN AND GIVES THEM TO ANYONE HE WISHES AND SETS OVER THEM THE LOWLIEST OF MEN” – Dan 4:17

    PAGAU says:
    This Scripture, when read in isolation, does seem to lend support to these notions you have–that kings are extensions of God’s authority on this earth and rebellion against the rulers is rebellion against God. But this is too easy. In the context of the whole story of Daniel and the whole Council of God, this Scripture proves my case, not yours. Kids who grow up with Bible Stories in Sunday school come to understand at an early age that we honor Daniel as a hero of the faith because he [more than once] faced death by obeying God while defying a king. Stories like this from the Bible inspired the British Colonists in their rebellion against the unjust king of the British Empire. Stories like this help men of faith secure the moral high ground when challenging authority. Stories like this help men of faith take a stand against evil.

    As for the specific Scripture you mentioned, there are some things to consider;
    1) This was Nebuchadnezzar’s account of a dream he had about a tree.
    2) The tree was cut down
    3) Daniel interpreted the dream. And in the dream, the tree was Nebuchadnezzar himself
    4) Nebuchadnezzar was cut down
    5) Nebuchadnezzar was restored after he acknowledged God and his sovereignty.

    God’s sovereignty is the core theme in this Scripture. The specific Scripture you mentioned should be understood in this context. It is the stated purpose for the events [as announced by messengers in the dream] and why they are to take place. The purpose was: Nebuchadnezzar is to be brought low until he, the great king, acknowledges God’s sovereignty over him.

    There is nothing here in Daniel to support these notions you have–that kings are extensions of God’s authority on this earth and rebellion against the rulers is rebellion against God. What it actually says is simply this: “The Most High is sovereign over the kingdoms of men and gives them to anyone he wishes and sets over them the lowliest of men.” It doesn’t really say any more that . You may logically deduce that there is some other nugget of truth in there. Many times a nugget can be found in this way. But if it does not explicitly say it, then there is an element of human reasoning involved in the interpretation. Be careful to not build a doctrine on such a foundation and always test Scripture with Scripture.

    astudent said:
    “If one rebels against the one whom God has chosen to receive a kingdom of men, then he rebels against God. If God wanted Hitler to lead Germany, then who am I to say He is wrong?”

    PAGAU says:
    No one can say God is wrong, but it is fair to say the leap of logic that brings you to this conclusion IS quite wrong.

    PAGAU-

  6. liferestored says:

    astudent; I have just started following your blog and your biblical perspective is refreshing. As I grow in the Spirit, I am finding what I have been taught and taught in this church age by the leaders of organizations is not what God intended. It seems time and time again when the orthodox message is questioned due to lack of biblical support it is like you are attacking the gates of a fortress…anyway, thanks…really enjoying the blog.

  7. astudent says:

    PAGAU,

    I am not saying that kings or authorities are extensions of God’s authority at all! It seems to me that they only prove God right.

    They are only men and as men, they are not qualified to govern. They like all men are full of sin, do not know the future, and care for themselves more than those that they lead. Only God is qualified to be in charge.

    However, we are told to submit to those who are in charge for the Lord’s sake. It is from faith in God that we should submit to those who are unfit to lead. You may say ‘That doesn’t make any earthly sense’ and you would be right. However, it makes spiritual sense, because God told us too and faith in God is tested by such situations.

    1Peter 2:13-17 (NIV) Submit yourselves for the Lord’s sake to every authority instituted among men: whether to the king, as the supreme authority, or to governors, who are sent by him to punish those who do wrong and to commend those who do right. For it is God’s will that by doing good you should silence the ignorant talk of foolish men. Live as free men, but do not use your freedom as a cover-up for evil; live as servants of God. Show proper respect to everyone: Love the brotherhood of believers, fear God, honor the king.

    This world is not supposed to be rosy. It is a place where we learn just how important God really is. A place where we learn about God or a place where we refuse to learn about God: the choice belongs to the individual, because God gave it to each person.

    As for some way to right the wrongs of government, think it out to a conclusion. If we replaced every one in the government with different people, wouldn’t we just be starting everything over again? Because all men sin and fall short of the glory of God, wouldn’t we just be subjecting the new leaders to the same temptations as the old leaders faced? Would they fair any better under the same pressures? Do you really want to subject others to the same pressures that would lead them to the same fate? Wouldn’t it be better for everyone if we just waited on the Lord? Didn’t God say He would make things right?

    As for the Bible verses that you seem to think only demonstrate that God will save those who recognize that He is God, they do not. God doesn’t want people that recognize, or believe He is God. He wants those who believe Him. There is a great chasm that separates the two. Even Satan believes in God; he just doesn’t believe God.

    You didn’t quote the whole verse (Dan 4:17 NIV) “‘The decision is announced by messengers, the holy ones declare the verdict, so that the living may know that the Most High is sovereign over the kingdoms of men and gives them to anyone he wishes and sets over them the lowliest of men.’

    Just view me as a messenger. I declare, so that you may know “that the Most High is sovereign over the kingdoms of men and gives them to anyone he wishes and sets over them the lowliest of men.'”

    Surly, you can see that those who are the authorities are of the lowliest of men.

  8. astudent says:

    liferestored,

    Thanks for the comment and I am encouraged that you enjoy the blog. I certainly agree that when the orthodox message is questioned due to lack of biblical support it is like you are attacking the gates of a fortress.

    Organized religion has become the Church of the end times: lukewarm. A church that believes in man and money. When you question the leaders of the church, it angers them, because they want to believe what they preach. They preach to those who have itching ears, because they have the same problem. When you ask them questions that they do not want to hear, you are not scratching ears.

    It certainly makes it hard to attend a church that doesn’t teach the Word, but twists it to seem to say what the congregation wants to hear. I suppose it is a test of faith to attend. Hebrews 10:25 says that we should not give up meeting together. It use to be an enjoyable experience, but the more God teaches me, the less fun it becomes.

  9. PAGAU says:

    @astudent:
    You quoted 1Peter 2:13-17. Good job! This Scripture does indeed directly address the issue of submission to rulers. That was clearly not the case with the Scripture you quoted from Daniel in the last post. Missed by a mile on the last one. This one… Kudos!

    This Scripture I accept at face value in the spirit is was given. The spirit it was given can be found in the context of the rest of the letter. The trouble we may have here is that I also accept at face value the controversial Scripture that follows; 1Peter 3:1-7:

    “Wives, in the same way be submissive to your husbands so that, if any of them do not believe the word, they may be won over without words by the behavior of their wives, 2 when they see the purity and reverence of your lives. 3 Your beauty should not come from outward adornment, such as braided hair and the wearing of gold jewelry and fine clothes. 4 Instead, it should be that of your inner self, the unfading beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is of great worth in God’s sight. 5 For this is the way the holy women of the past who put their hope in God used to make themselves beautiful. They were submissive to their own husbands, 6 like Sarah, who obeyed Abraham and called him her master. You are her daughters if you do what is right and do not give way to fear. 7 Husbands, in the same way be considerate as you live with your wives, and treat them with respect as the weaker partner and as heirs with you of the gracious gift of life, so that nothing will hinder your prayers.”

    I think in the culture we live today, 1Peter 3:1-7 is hard to accept literally–but I do. I also accept 1Peter 2:13-17 literally. The two scriptures are given in the same spirit and are part of the same thread. The two deserve the same treatment. In fact, this is a good test of Scripture. Can we apply the same tests to each of these two scriptures? I say yes.

    For example; If you were to infer from 1Peter 2:13-17 that to disobey a ruler is to disobey God, then the same should apply to 1Peter 3:1-7, that for a wife to disobey a husband is to disobey God. This is the test; the scriptures put equal weight on the two–while our present culture does not. The references to “submission” and the “weaker partner” in 1Peter 3:1-7 are particularly offensive in our culture. Get on your soapbox about 1Peter 3:1-7 in this culture and you will be pressured to dismiss the Scripture as culturally irrelevant for our time. In the case of 1Peter 3:1-7, most everyone who claims to accept Scripture as the word of God would [at a minimum, and at varying degrees] be inclined to grant exceptions to the rule. I personally believe both of these two to be equally true and the culture itself irrelevant. Grant exceptions to one and you must grant exceptions to the other. Accept one as absolute and you must accept the other as absolute.

    I think it would help to bring clarity to this question if we were to return to Daniel. Like I said, Daniel does more to prove my case–not yours.
    I have a question…
    When Daniel defied the king the king, did he…
    1) disobey the king?
    2) disobey God?
    3) disobey both God and the king?

    The obvious answer is choice number one. The obvious implication is there is a time for everything under the sun. There is a time to disobey a king.

    astudent said:
    “I am not saying that kings or authorities are extensions of God’s authority at all!”

    PAGAU says:
    True I suppose — you did not say that directly. So tell me then; how do you arrive at your conclusion [that rebellion against an earthly ruler constitutes rebellion against God] without saying this? How do you make the connection?

    astudent said:
    “As for the Bible verses that you seem to think only demonstrate that God will save those who recognize that He is God, they do not.”

    PAGAU says:
    I looked back and tried to find what I might have said that this would apply to and I can’t find it. Perhaps you should pull a relevant quote from what I said and I may be able to make the connection.

    astudent said:
    “You didn’t quote the whole verse (Dan 4:17 NIV)”

    PAGAU says:
    Correct. But I DID quote the entire portion which you emphasized in ALL CAPS. I believe there is a reason why you didn’t put the entire Scripture in all caps, no? Did you think that portion was not relevant enough? You seem to be saying (indirectly, of course) I am taking the verse out of context. But it was you who took it out of context. I put it back into its proper context and showed how it relates with that portion you chose not to emphasize.

    To quote myself:
    “God’s sovereignty is the core theme in this Scripture. The specific Scripture you mentioned should be understood in this context. It is the stated purpose for the events [as announced by messengers in the dream] and why they are to take place. The purpose was: Nebuchadnezzar is to be brought low until he, the great king, acknowledges God’s sovereignty over him.”

    In other words, the portion you chose not to emphasize happens to be key in understanding the proper context for that portion you DID emphasize. You seemed to think that portion you emphasize in ALL CAPS stood on its own and supported your case. It does not. Nothing in Daniel supports your case. Daniel did not share your pacifist views.

    Sorry. I seem to be playing the role of heckler in your blog. That is not my intention. It may be time for me to go.

    PAGAU says:
    Don’t be a pacifist when tyranny arrives… and by the way, in case you haven’t noticed, it has arrived and it is Godless as hell.

    PAGAU

  10. liferestored says:

    I see im no match to engage in discussions with either one of you…however, I would like to make an observation. I dont think astudent is saying it is against God to buck tyranny; I think he is just pointing out the fact that the problem with our political system began when we decided not to allow God to put our rulers in place and asked him for the right to elect Kings…It really has not paid off well.
    As for marching on the white house lawn..or camping out in the park having open sex, doing drugs and calling it a protest…Well, I dont get it. Thats not bucking tyranny, thats just being morons. Yes the rich rule. I dont think that will ever change.
    I have served this country in the military and have seen alot of the world and much of it is ugly and evil…Makes you appriciate what we have here..even though its far from perfect. But as we all know in this blog, that will not be the case here until the millinium. Praise God!
    Pagau, I love your passion and insight and knowlage of the word!! Go easy on your brothers. One thing ive come to understand, when I have thought my view was Gospel, I often missed what the Spirit of God wanted to show me. Love you both.

  11. liferestored says:

    i also thought of something else i think is worth mention…Daniel and Meshak, Shadrak, and Abendigo (sp is wrong im sure)…Did they protest against the King? I do not think so. You cannot compare what is happening with the “park party protest” with what they did. They were not trying to change the ruling king they served or there government; they were only not compromising their relationship whith their God. I dont think the same thing can be said about the Wall street movment. Just my thought s today.

  12. PAGAU says:

    I hear you liferestored — like, give the guy a break — OK, I think I will.

    liferestored said:
    “…I think he is just pointing out the fact that the problem with our political system began when we decided not to allow God to put our rulers in place and asked him for the right to elect Kings”

    PAGAU says:
    You are right. That is exactly what he was saying. I just simply don’t agree. It is wrong on so many levels, it is hard to know where to start.

    1) Kings are an invention of man — not of God — and God takes a dim view of them. See 1 Samuel 8
    2) Our republic is based on the rule of law — not of kings. We do not elect kings — we take a dim view of them.
    3) The problem with our political system began, not when we decided not to allow God to put our rulers in place, but when we turned away from God himself.

    A proper reading of 1 Samuel 8 reveals that God wants to be our King — directly. Israel rejected God and demanded a king. Today, we in America are making a similar mistake. We are rejecting God and demanding a dictator. This will lead to certain tyranny as God warned in 1 Samuel 8. …and speaking of tyranny…

    liferestored said:
    I dont think astudent is saying it is against God to buck tyranny…

    PAGAU says:
    You are right — at least in this case. It may help to know this is not the first lap around these subjects for astudent and me. See this topic:
    WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO THE CHURCH?
    https://astudent.wordpress.com/2010/12/08/what-has-happened-to-the-church

    And another topic which is more relevant to this OWS topic:
    IS MONEY THE ROOT OF ALL EVIL?
    https://astudent.wordpress.com/2009/06/09/is-money-the-root-of-all-evil

    liferestored said:
    You cannot compare what is happening with the “park party protest” with what they did.

    PAGAU says:
    My comments in this regard were in response to astudent’s comments. To quote myself:
    “It is interesting you would begin with a lot of background on your views on authority and rebellion and the founding of the republic–as if OWS must be understood in this context…”

    OWS aside, astudent’s views on authority and rebellion and the founding of the republic demand a response. We went round and round with that in “WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO THE CHURCH?” If you read that exchange you may conclude, as I did, that astudent does indeed believe it is against God to buck tyranny. Now when a guy like this starts a new topic critical of those who DO buck tyranny, it gets my attention. Add to this his mischaracterization of those who DO buck tyranny and you can’t hold me back–I have to speak up–and speak up, I did.

    Speaking of mischaracterizations, it looks to me like you have done the same with this statement:
    liferestored said:
    “As for marching on the white house lawn..or camping out in the park having open sex, doing drugs and calling it a protest…Well, I dont get it. Thats not bucking tyranny, thats just being morons.”

    PAGAU says:
    Like I said to astudent, “OWS is a mixed bag. It cannot be characterized” I get a sense from your characterization of OWS (nothing legit here, move on) that you are being misinformed about what is going on with the movement. OWS does have some legitimate elements in spite of the fact that it began as an invention of Wall Street and funded by various leftist organizations (MoveOn.org, Tides Center) as an attempt by the establishment to co-opt the movement in its infancy. The attempt to corral the many competing factions failed. There are socialists, conservatives, constitutionalist, anarcho-capitalist, libertarians. and maybe a few tea-party’ers — but one thing you won’t find there is a neo-con or a fascist.

    In the beginning Obama expressed sympathy and support for OWS and police were told to stand down and mainstream media presented it as legitimate peaceful protest. But that was when the establishment felt like they had control of the narrative. Thanks to the internet, the narrative could not be controlled and all that changed. Now we have reports of banker funded riot police abusing peaceful protesters while mainstream media works overtime to discredit the entire movement. The ridiculous things you mentioned, having open sex, doing drugs and calling it a protest, this I have not seen — but then, I don’t rely on mainstream media for news and information. One thing I HAVE seen is an attempt to find out exactly haw many socialists were there advocating socialist solutions–turns out it was a minority while Fox News was reporting the whole movement was socialist.

    As for the complete morons, they are everywhere, not just OWS. But you are right, what you have described is of course not genuine legitimate protest and it is not bucking tyranny. On the other hand, I would say this youtube video IS an example of bucking tyranny and genuine legitimate protest:

    When this video went viral it seemed to mark the time the establishment lost control of the narrative. Then came the attack dogs. Glen Beck made fun of the guy. Glen Beck lost a lot of points with me for that stunt. I was beginning to like Glen Beck. Glen Beck had a couple of really good guests on his show like G. Edward Griffin. My opinion is this is why Glen Beck lost his spot on Fox — by having guests like G. Edward Griffin on his show, he was blowing the cover on the money scam. That can’t happen. He does not touch the subject anymore today. BTW, the money scam I am referring to is the same money scam I described in astudent’s topic: IS MONEY THE ROOT OF ALL EVIL?

    As an aside, this [thing with Glen beck] reminds me of similar thing that happened to Rush Limbaugh. Back in the 90’s Rush was on the TV and I was really enjoying his show. His message was more conservative in those days and his audience consisted of more patriots like me. Then he boasted one day about getting a call from Alan Greenspan. (then chairman of the Federal Reserve) Soon after that time Rush came out with his “Kook Test”. It was a list of about ten bullet points on things that “Kooks” believed. You could summarize the whole thing in one theme: If you believe there is some secret “money power” conspiracy behind the Federal Reserve (the central bank that is not “federal” nor does it have any “reserves”), then you are a Kook. Well, I shot out a farewell email to Rush and quit listening to him and the next thing I know he has lost his spot on the TV. Apparently I was not the only patriot that he alienated with that stunt.

    Looking back I wonder… that was about the same time people were reading G. Edward Griffin’s [then] new book; The Creature from Jekyll Island The book blew the lid off the fed and the secret “money power” conspiracy behind it. That was at least 15 years ago. People are still talking about that book today–but today things have changed considerably. Yesterdays “conspiracy theory” is todays “conspiracy fact”. Speaking out against the fed was taboo–that is no longer the case. The money power has come out of the closet–largely thanks to the influence of Ron Paul. Thanks to Ron Paul and G. Edward Griffin’s book, we just recently got the first ever [partial] audit of the federal reserve. The level of fraud and corruption that was revealed in that audit is beyond outrageous! Ron Paul has been influential in persuading at least three other candidates to take a hard look at the menace that is our central bank. Times, they are a changin’.

    The gig is up for the fed and their friends on Wall Street. Now they are preparing for war–war against the people! BTW, in case you haven’t figured it out yet, DHS is not busy looking for terrorists, they are looking for patriots. If you believe in the US Constitution and the bill of rights, you are a target of DHS. If you are a Ron Paul supporter, you are a target. If you are a returning veteran, you are a target. If you are seeking to buy guns, gold or bulk food, you are a BIG target. But if you are Al-Qaeda, they will give you Libya on a silver platter. The “war on terror” is a war on you! They are not specifically targeting Christians–yet. The Christians have been rocked to sleep. Those who are awake will be targeted first–then the Christians. The concentration camps are ready for you now.

    This guy in the youtube video has obviously had some exposure to Ron Paul and some of the information in the book, The Creature from Jekyll Island. This is the truth that you are not getting about OWS. Young people are beginning to wake up and understand who the real criminals are. These young people are the energy behind Ron Paul’s campaign. When the presidential candidates arrive at a debate, they see Ron Paul supporters everywhere rather than their own. The irony is, this is all happening now, at a time when it appears the “secret money power” is making their move. It appears unlikely the US dollar will survive long enough to see a president who understand what a real dollar is. Unless the people resist, we are watching the destruction of the entire world economy in order to bring about the consolidation of all wealth and power into new world order This is ultimate goal of the secret money power. Along with this comes the mark of the beast. Considering what we know from Scripture about this end game and the mark of the beast, so-called “Christians” will be reluctant to “bucking tyranny” all the way to the end–and will accept the mark. To escape their fate, you must be among those who are “bucking tyranny”. Those who do so will find encouragement in those stories of Daniel.

    Look up!
    PAGAU

  13. astudent says:

    PAGAU,

    I was thinking about what you said and I thought I was beginning to understand why we could not agree.

    I thought it was because we used different definitions for the words “rebel” and “disobey”

    The word rebel means to “refuse allegiance to and oppose by force an established government or ruling authority” and the word disobey means “to refuse or fail to follow an order or a rule”. (American Heritage Dictionary)

    You seem to think that to disobey is to rebel. However, after reading your answer to liferestored I see clearly, what the difference is.

    I put my faith in God and I believe what God says. I do not put my faith in man or money. God told me not to in Psalms 118:8&9 (NIV) It is better to take refuge in the LORD than to trust in man. It is better to take refuge in the LORD than to trust in princes. He also said in Matthew 6:24, “No one can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and Money.”

    The young man in the video clip spoke “only” of money and what man should do. That does not agree with Scripture. Money and man are the cause of the problems, not the cure! One cannot cure cancer with cancer!

    It should be clear to those that study the Bible that we are in the end time season. It seems to me that God has the hooks in the jaws of Gog, the antichrist, and it is He that is bringing the antichrist and all of the rest of the antichrists to power and no one can stop him.

    The entire world has placed their faith in man and money to rescue us, but what is man and money?

    You don’t have to give me a break, I don’t need one. If you want to do something for me, then study the Bible and believe what it says. I kind of like you and because of that I would like you to believe God. Relax, calm down, Satan, and the world will seem to win, but God is in charge.

    It is something like a football game. We are down ten touchdowns with seconds left. The other team is on the one-yard line and they have a first down. However, the referee is about to throw a flag. He is about to award the game to us because the other team has been cheating all through the game. We are about to be declared the winners. The only problem that we could have is to start playing the game the same way the other teem is playing. How could the referee penalize the other teem for cheating if we also cheat?

    Do not worship money and men. That is what the other teem is doing.

  14. astudent says:

    liferestored,

    It is not a contest to comment here. Anyone is welcome. I don’t see you as anything less than any of us. What you said makes sense to me and I agree with you.

    Actually, we learn more if we disagree, so if you think I am wrong on anything, please tell me. I am only a man, so I guarantee that I am wrong part of the time. 1Co 8:2 The man who thinks he knows something does not yet know as he ought to know.

    Thanks for commenting.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: