It is the love of God for the Christian which causes them to fear Him while for the pagan it is their hate of God which drives them to fear Him. Undoubtedly, both these fears are formed from the awareness of His Sovereignty. Yet because each of the fears are born of a different origin there is a cataclysmic difference between them.
The first, the fear born of love, is the understanding of His Sovereignty and His Awesomeness. It is a fear that finds its beginning in reverence and awe causing the Christian to praise God daily for His loving-kindness and mercy. Pouring out into every aspect of life, this fear through the working of the Holy Spirit is a key part of sanctification.
The second, the fear twisted, tortured and spawned by hatred, for fear is a godly passion. Is the fear of punishment and the recognization of the eternal damnation to come. This hate driven fear is what causes a man to fall farther and farther into the path of darkness. Constantly bringing death and mayhem wherever it goes, this fear can only be conquered through Christ and the anointing of the Holy Spirit.
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
Thoughts on Previous Post
Monday, October 4, 2010
Men are qualified for civil liberty in exact proportion to their
disposition to put moral chains on their own appetites ... Society
cannot exist unless a controlling power upon will and appetite be placed somewhere, and the less there is within, the more there is without. It is ordained in the eternal constitution of things that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters. ~ E. Burke
Culture: The outward manifestation of man's inward belief. Society is built around the culture. All pagan cultures are built around passions. Therefore all society that are not Christian will not have any civil liberty.
Without Christ men must look somewhere. Why? Men are built to glorify God so when they refuse to turn to God and instead immerse themselves in their sin there are two byproducts. The first is guilt, pagans are not doing the work that has been set before them, to glorify God, and therefore are afflicted with this sense of guilt. The second is fear, with this guilt comes the inborn sense of punishment and because the reprobate refuses to accept God he knows not where it will come from.
This guilt and fear so afflicts a man that he is left with two options. Surrendering his pride and looking toward God, is the first and comes from the Holy Spirit. The second and far more common one today is to bury the truth in unrighteousness. What this means is to escape from this constant sense of guilt and fear a reprobate will bury himself in his passions. This is why the farther a man goes from Christ and his saving grace the more beast, which are ruled by passion, like he will become.
Undoubtedly, this fear and guilt lead to a stronger government in two ways. Among beasts a smarter and more vicious one will arise and be called leader, this is the same for culture of God denying men, however, with humans it might be a gathering of men or only one. Whatever the case these men or man rule the culture by playing off the fear and guilt and insinuating that they are the solution, this is the first. The second is more of a domino effect of the culture being ruled by passion.
The second is quite simplistic. Men are ruled by passion. The thing that stops passion is fear. So when men with more violent passions began to prey upon the weaker, the ones in power claim that they must be able to monitor these men at all times. Of course the problem then is who are these men? Being an unknown factor, the insinuator in power says all must be watched. This ends up being a domino effect because as more closely monitored the more 'problems' are found and therefore people must be more closely watched.
In conclusion, a hilarious in one sense but sorrowful in another, case arises. Where men who tried to escape fear by indulging in their passions end up being always fearful of the power that was chosen to rule over them. Where men who tried to escape guilt find that all they do is because of guilt. Where men who tried to escape a just and merciful God create a god-government which is neither just or merciful but is ruled by passion. In the end these men who have lived in fear and with guilt their whole life die are dammed eternally to a lake of fire.
The One and Only,
Anthony J McAtee
Saturday, October 2, 2010
Facebook Discussion
The New Testament pages are covered with Jews howling about the inclusion of the Gentiles into the covenant and yet there is not a peep in the NT from those same Jews that their children are to be excluded from the covenant. This is a argument from silence that is so loud it deafens.
James Lee took up an argument against this statement and adhering to credo-baptism. While others were defending the statement itself, I attacked from a different angle.
O Anthony McAtee
“He that is not with me is against me... (Matthew 12:30)”
So the children are...neutral ground?
O James Lee
No in the New Covenant children are dealt with differently but not left out.
1 Corinthians 7:14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified in the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified in the husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but now are they holy.
O Anthony McAtee
“He that is not with me is against me... (Matthew 12:30)”
Your saying that they can't receive the covenant sign which leaves me only two option they are not of the covenant or the bible is contradicting itself.
You cannot be Holy apart from Christ and if you are Holy then you are a part of Christ and of the covenant which means you should receive the covenant sign.
O James Lee
Anthony the temporary basis is different than the permanent basis. Only the permanent basis get the sign connected. Repentance is a factor in the permanent.
O Anthony McAtee
Hmm....God cannot take care of his own? Are you saying that a person repenting and confirming God's covenant is more assurance then God's word.
1 Corinthians 7:14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified in the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified in the husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but now are they holy.
What I understand you are saying is that we a can accept a fallible human beings word over God's.
O James Lee
Anthony, Where did you get the idea that I was saying a humans words are less fallible than God's word? Could you explain?
O Anthony McAtee
From what I understand you will not baptize somebody until they profess Christ and confirm that Christ has made them holy. Once this happens they receive the sign of the covenant baptism, however, God says the children are holy but yet you say that it is not permanent but temporary. In other terms you apply to the children, who are declared holy by God, the temporary status but you give permanent status to the fallible human who claims that Christ has made them holy.
O James Lee
Where does the bible teach that Children that are descendants of Adam are all holy?
O Misty Richards
James...I beg of you to read what is actually being said. Anthony is speaking of children born to regenerate parents.
O Anthony McAtee
I was referring to this verse
1 Corinthians 7:14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified in the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified in the husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but now are they holy.
not to all children in general
Sunday, April 25, 2010
Discussion With Student
“Anthony, you seem to be very negative and antogonistic with our government and for whatever reason, I don't blame you. Afterall, that's your prerogative. Let me respond however with your questions.”
I am only antagonistic to this government because it has overstepped its bounds set by the constitution and therefore it is in error and must be corrected. Unfortunately, most people refuse to see this and so the government continually oversteps its bounds. However that is okay because it is their prerogative to ignore that fact.
“Of course, the entrepreneur has all the rights to hire the workers he needs whether effective or not in his business and he has the right to fire them too. No doubt about it. But these rights have corresponding responsibility.”
I agree totally to keep his contract with his employees. What would you say these corresponding responsibilities are?
“ When this employer abuses, discriminates, and is irresponsible to his employees, and disputes arise, who is being asked to give justice and demand payment for damages done?”
Abuses, I agree totally that would be criminal law. Discriminates, the employee can leave and find a different work atmosphere it is the employers business. Irresponsible to his employees, if he is not keeping his contract with them I agree it would fall to the state to enforce the agreement. Disputes arises, well the employer has every right to fire the employee if the employee does not like this he may start his own business.
“With the next question, yes he owns it. But remember, a lawful business needs to be licensed and be registered with the government, otherwise, he cannot operate his business.”
I definitely do not agree with this there is no reason for the government to involved in this matter.
“This is a first step of knowing if the business to be established is legal and good for the economy.”
If it is illegal the industry should not exist and if it is not good for the economy then the business will fail.
“ Again, if something is not right in running his business, like selling hard drinks and cigars to minors,”
I do not agree with the laws preventing selling hard drinks and cigars to minors that is the family sphere of authority.
“ where does one go to complain this malpractice and correct the situation?”
If it is criminal law then they go to the government. Otherwise all they can do is stop supporting the business financially.
“I believe that when a businessman is swayed in the wrong direction,”
What exactly is the wrong direction?
“ the government is necessary to give him the right way.”
Who corrects the government when it sways in the wrong direction?
“Nobody is perfect so businesses either private or public is subject to error.”
Yes however if it is not criminal then all it will hurt is themselves. Also the government is just as much subject error as the business.
“ Hence, in a civil society, a guiding principles, laws, and policies are essential to guide its people and minimize the errors or crimes”
I believe that people are perfectly capable of knowing what is good or bad for them, if they do not they will fall under criminal law.
“If our government is very ineffective at running business, what do you think should be done?”
The government should not run business.
What can we do?”
We can elect people who will keep government out of business.