Originally Posted by NateR
Are you intentionally misunderstanding this? It sure seems that way. You seem to be interpreting every single comment I make to mean exactly the opposite of what I intend it to mean. Are you trying to be irrational?
I dont believe in GOD-Given Rights.
I believe in Rights given by Laws of the Land...but I do not pretend they are an absolute...Nor that they are GODS LAW.
I Believe the "Right" to bear arms, is a Right only under constitutional law, an ammendment, by the will of a Federal Government in the 1780s
I see that the Bible only really gives precedence for a Government capable of creating Law as stemming from a Monarch, or an Emporar...because they are supposed to be the reflection of Christ (even if they fail as sinners)
I note that the Federal Government of the 1780s is not only based on a contrary system, but actually denies the above entirely, is several key ways.
*They deliberatley use Monarchy as the basis for "The Tyrant"
*They claim all men are born equal, and thus refute Ordination, or Annointing, for that would imply the Monarchic Branch as in some way superior
*The set an absolute basis for eternal rule, which would deny any Monarch the ability to change rules, add rules, subtract rules, or modify rules
In order that the above be underwritten by something more powerful then a Government, they appeal to a higher source, thus freeing themselves from the responsibility of having made the Rules...for they say that these are not their laws...but the GOD-Given Rules...therefore they also, presumably, believe this law not only suitable to themselves...but suitable for the entireity of man.
I may find those Rules Just, I may even like some of them. I may believe they are founded on Christian principles..but I will NOT pretend that their source is anything other then a Government of men.
Therefore...when the Citizens start also appealing to GOD...I find there presumption as false, as the presumption of the people who created it. That I can not deny...or else the Constitution of the Federal Republic of the United States of America...being GOD-Given...is on a par with The Old Testament Law...since I know that to be GOD-Given.
In that Law their are Rights...but those rights are unobtainable...and therefore account to the same as not being in existance. Therefore if I believe the US Constitution and its Bill of Rights to be legitmately of GOD, and filled with obtainable Rights...I can not believe them both.
I choose to believe the Old Testament.
What is Illogical about that?