Government relate to the war in Heaven?

[Mullenite]

How does the proper role of government relate to the war in Heaven? Some here argue that socialism is good and is actually Christlike. How? To me it makes no sense at all. Certainly one must define socialism first. So what is socialism? Is it forcing others to give to the greater good? But the socialist says "force" is a strong word. They want to redefine it with such soft phrases as "the people voted for it" and "it helps everyone". But is that the plan that was set up? Is that what I fought for in the war in heaven? To be forced to help the general welfare? To me helping is good, force is bad.

The Bible dictionary defines the war in heaven as such:

"This term arises out of Rev. 12:17 and refers to the conflict that took place in the premortal existence among the spirit children of God. The war was primarily over how and in what manner the plan of salvation would be administered to the forthcoming human family upon the earth. The issues involved such things as AGENCY, how to gain salvation, and who should be the redeemer. The war broke out because one-third of the spirit children refused to accept the appointment of Jesus Christ as the savior. Such a refusal was a rebellion against the Fathers plan of redemption. It was evident THAT IF GIVEN AGENCY, SOME PERSONS WOULD FALL SHORT OF COMPLETE SALVATION; Lucifer and his followers wanted salvation to come AUTOMATICALLY to all who passed through mortality, WITHOUT REGARD TO INDIVIDUAL PREFERENCE, AGENCY, OR VOLUNTARY DEDICATION (sounds a lot like socialism). The spirits who rebelled and persisted were thrust out of Heaven and cast down to earth without mortal bodies, "and thus came the devil and his angels".

The warfare is CONTINUED in mortality in the conflict between right and wrong; BETWEEN THE GOSPEL AND FALSE PRINCIPLES, ETC. THE SAME CONTESTENTS AND THE SAME ISSUES ARE DOING BATTLE, AND THE SAME SALVATION IS AT STAKE."

So Lucifer and his 1/3 wanted everyone to be saved. No choice. Is that bad? I fear a few here believe it to be good. Lets not forget their fall. They wanted everyone to be saved without a choice. Or shall I say they wanted everyone to have health care, to have a full stomach, to live in a nice house, to be equals with everyone else. God's plan was that "some persons would fall short of complete salvation". Why would they? Because they CHOSE to, not that God didn't want them to.

Fortunately God sent a savior, and it isn't government. "The same issues are doing battle". Where lies your faith? Who's on the Lord's side, who?

[Justice]

I, for one, can't wait for a theocracy. :)

[Flyonthewall]

What kind of government would you say the church employs today? I'm not sure that it can be called a "theocracy".

There is no law enforcement, and following the rules are voluntary. I think when Christ reigns it will be much the same. No one will be forced to follow the standards, but all will want to. Only those that can live by the law of that particular realm will be there, whether it be Celestial, Terrestial, or Telestial.

[NeuroTypical]

Hi Mullenite,

Could you take a moment and answer the questions I've asked you on this thread?

Thanks,

LM

[rameumptom]

I think that we need to use caution on what we determine to be a good or bad form of government. While I am no socialist, I also have problems with a Libertarian view, as well. Freedom in a society is only as useful as the people's righteousness allows it to be. Our (USA) Constitutional Republic is designed for a moral people, and will not do for any other. Instead of using freedom to promote good things, we now use freedom as a vice, beating up on other virtues. A wicked people can only be ruled with a strong arm, or they will fall into chaos and anarchy.

Why is our nation shifting towards socialism? Because the people have lost their desire for freedom in righteousness, and now want blessings in their wickedness. They seek after benefits they have not earned, thinking the world owes them a living. Suddenly, the masses have found that they can borrow entitlement money through their congressperson, and not have to worry about the personal cost. Or so they think. This lust for getting gain causes a loss of freedom and imposed expectations in exchange for those entitlements.

Freedom is given so that people can create and build a great society. But if the people are no longer creating and building, then they are using up resources on their own lusts. Hugh Nibley warns about the society that stops progressing because the people are no longer inventing and creating. He suggested that Rome collapsed, at least in part, due to the Romans no longer growing their empire and seeking to spend their time in riotous living, instead.

Something to definitely think about.

[Traveler]

I would like to ask some questions:

When is a government justified in using force?

Is the use of force - in essence socialistic?

Who decides what is best for the society and how that society is governed?

What is the meaning of the word govern and what is a government?

Who in any government is free? Who should be free?

The Traveler

[Moksha]

What kind of government would you say the church employs today? I'm not sure that it can be called a "theocracy".

Theocratic Gerontocracy

[skalenfehl]

Freedom in a society is only as useful as the people's righteousness allows it to be. Our (USA) Constitutional Republic is designed for a moral people, and will not do for any other.

I couldn't have said it any better. And that is what's wrong with our country and it starts at the top with our very own government. Great post, Rameumpton. Very well said, my friend.

[Finrock]

I would like to ask some questions:

When is a government justified in using force?

Is the use of force - in essence socialistic?

Who decides what is best for the society and how that society is governed?

What is the meaning of the word govern and what is a government?

Who in any government is free? Who should be free?

The Traveler

Greetings Traveler! I have quick answers because I have little time, so I hope you excuse this reply if it is sloppy in it's presentation.

Q: When is a government justified in using force?

A: If an individual is justified in using force, then a government is justified in using force. (I know, it begs the question, but I can elaborate later...)

Q:Is the use of force - in essence socialistic?

A: I don't see the connection.

Q: Who decides what is best for the society and how that society is governed?

A: The people to be governed, limited by the inalienable rights of the individual.

Q: What is the meaning of the word govern and what is a government?

A: I would say to govern is to execute the will of the people governed and to protect the inalienable rights of such. A government is any person or persons who have been delegated by the governed to protect the people's inalienable rights.

Q: Who in any government is free? Who should be free?

A: What is freedom? What does it mean to be free? This needs to be defined first.

Regards,

Finrock

[Guest HEthePrimate]

I couldn't have said it any better. And that is what's wrong with our country and it starts at the top with our very own government. Great post, Rameumpton. Very well said, my friend.

Actually, it starts at the bottom--we get the leaders we vote for. We, the American people, are not exactly paragons of virtue. I suppose that could explain why the Constitution is being undermined, huh?

[Guest HEthePrimate]

How does the proper role of government relate to the war in Heaven? Some here argue that socialism is good and is actually Christlike. How? To me it makes no sense at all. Certainly one must define socialism first. So what is socialism? Is it forcing others to give to the greater good?

But the socialist says "force" is a strong word. They want to redefine it with such soft phrases as "the people voted for it" and "it helps everyone". But is that the plan that was set up? Is that what I fought for in the war in heaven? To be forced to help the general welfare? To me helping is good, force is bad.

The same questions could be asked about taxation in general. In our decidedly capitalistic American society the government "forces" people to give to the greater good by taxing them. And so we end up with police forces, city streets, schools, etc., all of which are important to the greater good. Or should I boycott my local public library because it's a "socialist" institution supported by monies the government "forcibly" took from the people? Nah, I won't--I save much more money using the library than I would save if the government didn't tax me for libraries and I was "forced" to buy my own books.

If you don't want to help the poor, then don't. If you don't want government to help the poor, then vote against it. Just be aware that in a democracy majority rules, and if the majority of people want the government to help the poor, then you'll have to deal with it. The Church doesn't seem to have a problem with government offering welfare benefits--Church leaders encourage people to seek government benefits before coming to the Church for help.

So Lucifer and his 1/3 wanted everyone to be saved. No choice. Is that bad? I fear a few here believe it to be good. Lets not forget their fall. They wanted everyone to be saved without a choice. Or shall I say they wanted everyone to have health care, to have a full stomach, to live in a nice house, to be equals with everyone else. God's plan was that "some persons would fall short of complete salvation". Why would they? Because they CHOSE to, not that God didn't want them to.

I am not a socialist in that I don't want the government owning everything and running the whole show. But what if, hypothetically speaking, universal health care (and/or seeing that everybody has food, shelter, etc.) is the right thing to do if we have the resources? The war in heaven was fought, as you point out, over the issue of agency, over whether or not we'd be forced to do the right things. What's to stop us from collectively deciding to do the right thing and telling our leaders we are willing to pay a tax to help the poor? As long as we have representative government (as in "no taxation without representation") and the people maintain control over the government, wouldn't that merely be using our agency to do the right thing? We could later rescind the tax if we so choose, right?

Anyway, what does salvation, in the religious sense, have to do with socialism? Are people who live under socialism incapable of not being saved?

Fortunately God sent a savior, and it isn't government.

I agree. But that doesn't mean government, or using government to accomplish good ends, is bad.