Foreign interference in our government?


Traveler
 Share

Recommended Posts

@Gruntand @anatess2  What is the best form of government?  Is heaven a Kingdom or democracy or something else?   Is G-d so elected to be G-d by popular vote?  If the majority chose to follow Lucifer - would G-d have been overthrown and replaced by the majority choice?  Another way to ask this same question - Can someone choose (by popular demand, majority or any circumstance) to eliminate someone else's agency?

Is the economy of the Celestial Kingdom - more socialistic or capitalistic or something else?   How difficult is it for a rich person to get into heaven?  According to scripture who will likely be the most prepared for the second coming of Christ - the very rich or the very poor?  How would you classify who is "rich"?  Could the poor (those on welfare) in the USA according to the standard of poverty and wealth at the time of Christ - qualify for the category  of rich?  Are we - according to that standard - rich or poor?

 

The Traveler

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest MormonGator
11 hours ago, Traveler said:

Can someone choose (by popular demand, majority or any circumstance) to eliminate someone else's agency?

Ironically that is what socialism tries to do. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Traveler said:

@Gruntand @anatess2  What is the best form of government?  Is heaven a Kingdom or democracy or something else?   Is G-d so elected to be G-d by popular vote?  If the majority chose to follow Lucifer - would G-d have been overthrown and replaced by the majority choice?  Another way to ask this same question - Can someone choose (by popular demand, majority or any circumstance) to eliminate someone else's agency?

Is the economy of the Celestial Kingdom - more socialistic or capitalistic or something else?   How difficult is it for a rich person to get into heaven?  According to scripture who will likely be the most prepared for the second coming of Christ - the very rich or the very poor?  How would you classify who is "rich"?  Could the poor (those on welfare) in the USA according to the standard of poverty and wealth at the time of Christ - qualify for the category  of rich?  Are we - according to that standard - rich or poor?

 

The Traveler

 

I'm not quite sure what your point is.   Are you trying to compare those in the Celestial Kingdom with the natural man?  Are you trying to compare a Celestial society with an earthly society?   To what end?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, MormonGator said:

Ironically that is what socialism tries to do. 

Thank you. Spot on.

Now for my socialism rant…there is no reason to think that God has a specific amount of blessings or material possessions that He will doll out equally 100% to everyone someday. You will not find any implication in scripture that any form of socialism will ever take place now or in the eternities. Any blessing we realize must be gained through obedience to laws. Saying at any point that everyone gets a participation prize was part of the adversary’s plan. One cannot abide a Celestial glory without being able to abide a Celestial law, and being forced to fall in line like socialism dictates prevents personal growth, and actually nullifies those promised blessings because we are unable grow the capacity to obtain them.

Many people in the church today seem to think that when the church tried to implement the law of Consecration in the 1830’s, that it was socialism. And they think even now, that when spoken of in the temple, it refers to socialism…that we all need to be 100% equal in all things. Consecration is in fact much different. One of the main differences is that the right of private ownership is retained; neither the city nor the church nor the Prophet own anyone’s property. With socialism you have no say because you own nothing; you have no right to anything, and when you have no say you are unable to elect future leaders as well. You give them all the power at one point in time and then hope for the best from there on out…at least until an ugly revolution takes place. Say goodbye to free and fair elections with socialism. Monarchy is completely different from socialism as well, and although I prefer our current style of government, if I had to choose between the two, I would choose a king over socialism.

Ultimately, the best form of government for us is the one that God has given to us for the time. In the past he has used both Kings and Judges. For us today, God had a hand in and revealed the Constitution of the United States. End of discussion really.

Edited by scottyg
spelling
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Grunt said:

I'm not quite sure what your point is.   Are you trying to compare those in the Celestial Kingdom with the natural man?  Are you trying to compare a Celestial society with an earthly society?   To what end?

I am saying the laws to which we devote ourselves now and that society that we associate ourselves to now - will eventually define us and those we associate with in eternity.  

 

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Grunt said:

Could you provide doctrinal evidence of this?

2Nephi

Quote

30 For behold, thus saith the Lord God: I will give unto the children of men line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little and there a little; and blessed are those who hearken unto my precepts, and lend an ear unto my counsel, for they shall learn wisdom; for unto him that receiveth I will give more; and from them that shall say, We have enough, from them shall be taken away even that which they have.

I can provide many more if you like of think necessary.

 

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Traveler said:

2Nephi

I can provide many more if you like of think necessary.

 

The Traveler

Ahhh.  I misunderstood your original post.  I absolutely agree that the experiences we have and the decisions we make as a natural man will define who we are and into which kingdom we'll fall.  I don't see how that translates into doctrinal evidence that we're supposed to trust our elected officials, which is what initiated this discussion,.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/27/2019 at 4:50 AM, Traveler said:

Is heaven a Kingdom or democracy or something else? 

Perhaps by man's limited definitions, it's closest to a benevolent dictatorship:

Benevolent dictatorship (or, often in more moderate form, enlightened absolutism) centers on a Monarch, who, once given absolute power, turns that power towards the benefit of their citizens, not their own personal betterment. 

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Benevolent_dictatorship

 

Edited by Scott
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/27/2019 at 11:48 AM, Grunt said:

Ahhh.  I misunderstood your original post.  I absolutely agree that the experiences we have and the decisions we make as a natural man will define who we are and into which kingdom we'll fall.  I don't see how that translates into doctrinal evidence that we're supposed to trust our elected officials, which is what initiated this discussion,.

Then we agree that our mortal experience is a type and shadow of what will come after this life.  Now let us consider that we will be part of a "kingdom" in eternity.  Will not the "elect" of G-d will have positions of responsibility in that kingdom?  If we cannot trust any government - what possible "kingdom" can we be governed by?

I am concerned with those that default to distrust those that have responsibility in government.  I am concerned because I have great difficulty myself.  How can I elect or assist to elect someone that I do not trust?  In short how can I sustain my leaders.  How could I fulfill my responsibility while I was in the army - without trust in my commanding officer.  How could I fight in war and kill those that oppose my government - if I do not trust my government? - why do I not fight with them?  How can a lawyer argue in a court or set up legal documents for a citizenship that does not trust their government?  How can I even accept money issued by the treasury of a government I do not trust?

I have learned that what a person does echos so loudly I cannot hear what they are saying.  So my question is - if you do not trust your government or those that oversee department in our government - why do you rely on any of it?

 

The Traveler

 

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/26/2019 at 10:50 PM, Traveler said:

@Gruntand @anatess2  What is the best form of government? 

In Mortal Existence?  The US Constitution.  Unless you don't believe what Joseph Smith said - that it's divinely inspired.

 

On 12/26/2019 at 10:50 PM, Traveler said:

Is heaven a Kingdom or democracy or something else?   Is G-d so elected to be G-d by popular vote?  If the majority chose to follow Lucifer - would G-d have been overthrown and replaced by the majority choice?  Another way to ask this same question - Can someone choose (by popular demand, majority or any circumstance) to eliminate someone else's agency?

Is the economy of the Celestial Kingdom - more socialistic or capitalistic or something else?   How difficult is it for a rich person to get into heaven?  According to scripture who will likely be the most prepared for the second coming of Christ - the very rich or the very poor?  How would you classify who is "rich"?  Could the poor (those on welfare) in the USA according to the standard of poverty and wealth at the time of Christ - qualify for the category  of rich?  Are we - according to that standard - rich or poor?

 

The Traveler

 

The Kingdom of Heaven is Free Agency with VERY STRONG BORDERS.  The only way to get in is by Merit and there's no illegal entry.  The Merit is that all people who enter FREELY CHOOSES THE EXACT SAME THING.  There's no evil, no unclean as God cannot dwell among these things.  Rich or poor has no meaning when the Kingdom of Heaven is for all who enter to inherit.

Okay, tell me - which system of government in Mortal Existence do you think comes closest to it?  Why would God tell us to trust our government when he can't even trust them to enter and rule his Kingdom?

Edited by anatess2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, anatess2 said:

In Mortal Existence?  The US Constitution.  Unless you don't believe what Joseph Smith said - that it's divinely inspired.

Joseph Smith said the best type of government in our mortal existence is a theodemocracy which combines some of the principles of the US constitution, but with a theocratic government that is without a separation of Church and State.  These are Joseph's words, not mine.

Since the only sources on the internet I know of are in PDF form, I can't link them, but they are in the Times and Seasons volume 5, which can easily be found using a Google search.

Theodemocracy was also the platform for Joseph Smith's presidential campaign.

Edited by Scott
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, anatess2 said:

In Mortal Existence?  The US Constitution.  Unless you don't believe what Joseph Smith said - that it's divinely inspired.

I like the constitution but I believe that the Constitution is more the product of good inspired men than that a government produces good men - I believe good government comes from good people.  The flaws of government comes from the flaws of the society from which from which the government has sprang.

Quote

The Kingdom of Heaven is Free Agency with VERY STRONG BORDERS.  The only way to get in is by Merit and there's no illegal entry.  The Merit is that all people who enter FREELY CHOOSES THE EXACT SAME THING.  There's no evil, no unclean as God cannot dwell among these things.  Rich or poor has no meaning when the Kingdom of Heaven is for all who enter to inherit.

I am not so sure - the concept that heaven is a gated community seems to be a pagan concept.

Quote

Okay, tell me - which system of government in Mortal Existence do you think comes closest to it?  Why would God tell us to trust our government when he can't even trust them to enter and rule his Kingdom?

The City of Enoch, Salem under Melchizedek and for a couple of hundred years the Nephit nation.  All of which I believe to be superior to the USA and I believe their laws were more inspired than our constitution.   I believe that the great lesson of history is that no country or nation is greater than the citizens of that nation.  I am not of the mind that G-d allows unrighteous leaders to govern righteous people.  I believe the only way for evil men to take over a government and people is for such people to choose evil.  And I believe evil men can take over whenever people choose not to serve G-d - regardless of how inspired their constitution may be.  BTW - we are told that in the days of Enoch no one evil person would come near the land of Enoch - not because of any invisible borders but in fear of priesthood.

My point is that if someone (anyone or any people) cannot trust their government - then there is no sane reason to have one.

 

The Traveler

 

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Traveler said:

I like the constitution but I believe that the Constitution is more the product of good inspired men than that a government produces good men - I believe good government comes from good people.  The flaws of government comes from the flaws of the society from which from which the government has sprang.  

No government "produces good men".  That's not its function.  Good government comes from good people, yes.  That's why you don't trust government and it needs to be kept as small as possible.  Because, unless Jesus presides over the government, you're guaranteed a flawed one.

 

Quote

I am not so sure - the concept that heaven is a gated community seems to be a pagan concept.

Really?  It's not a gated community.  It's a different kingdom all together - Celestial, Terrestrial, Telestial, and Outer Darkness.  You can't just have people from other kingdoms "enter the pearly gates of Celestial glory" as they please.

 

Quote

The City of Enoch, Salem under Melchizedek and for a couple of hundred years the Nephit nation.  All of which I believe to be superior to the USA and I believe their laws were more inspired than our constitution.   I believe that the great lesson of history is that no country or nation is greater than the citizens of that nation.  I am not of the mind that G-d allows unrighteous leaders to govern righteous people.  I believe the only way for evil men to take over a government and people is for such people to choose evil.  And I believe evil men can take over whenever people choose not to serve G-d - regardless of how inspired their constitution may be.  BTW - we are told that in the days of Enoch no one evil person would come near the land of Enoch - not because of any invisible borders but in fear of priesthood.

Okay then.  Describe the laws governing the City of Enoch and Milchezedek and how they prevented unrighteous leaders from governing righteous people.  And how do you then transform your American country to it?

 

Quote

My point is that if someone (anyone or any people) cannot trust their government - then there is no sane reason to have one.

 

The Traveler

 

The Traveler

You have 2 choices - have a government with very limited powers or have none.  You get to choose.  Of course, you can opt for the 3rd option of trusting your government and give it all kinds of power and be like... North Korea.

Edited by anatess2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Scott said:

Joseph Smith said the best type of government in our mortal existence is a theodemocracy which combines some of the principles of the US constitution, but with a theocratic government that is without a separation of Church and State.  These are Joseph's words, not mine.

Since the only sources on the internet I know of are in PDF form, I can't link them, but they are in the Times and Seasons volume 5, which can easily be found using a Google search.

Theodemocracy was also the platform for Joseph Smith's presidential campaign.

Do you happen to have a reference for that?  I'd be interested.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Scott said:

Joseph Smith said the best type of government in our mortal existence is a theodemocracy which combines some of the principles of the US constitution, but with a theocratic government that is without a separation of Church and State.  These are Joseph's words, not mine.

Since the only sources on the internet I know of are in PDF form, I can't link them, but they are in the Times and Seasons volume 5, which can easily be found using a Google search.

Theodemocracy was also the platform for Joseph Smith's presidential campaign.

The reason that can't work is because there are only 15 million Latter-day Saints worldwide and even within just those LDS members you still get to bicker over stupid things like wearing pants, who gets the priesthood, and selling the latest MLM to friends, how to pay tithes, and even things like conceal-carry in certain places, etc, etc.  You got 2 prominent LDS politicians - Mitt Romney and Harry Reid.  You can barely get those 2 to agree on anything.  You can't even get Emma Smith and Brigham Young to agree on property rights.  Good luck with that Theodemocracy when you have free agency of unconverted people.

Edited by anatess2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, anatess2 said:

No government "produces good men".  That's not its function.  Good government comes from good people, yes.  That's why you don't trust government and it needs to be kept as small as possible.  Because, unless Jesus presides over the government, you're guaranteed a flawed one.

It appears to me that the single greatest factor of good men are families.  I submit that families are the beginning and the core of an enduring government and the core of trust.  It may be that families are corrupt - G-d knows that there is likely some flaw in every family - but I do not believe that starting out not trusting family (family government) is wise.

Quote

Really?  It's not a gated community.  It's a different kingdom all together - Celestial, Terrestrial, Telestial, and Outer Darkness.  You can't just have people from other kingdoms "enter the pearly gates of Celestial glory" as they please.

Why?  Are you worried that one may take your precious gold whatever?  I would be most interested why you think a Celestial family could not be good neighbors to a Telestial individual? 

Quote

Okay then.  Describe the laws governing the City of Enoch and Milchezedek and how they prevented unrighteous leaders from governing righteous people.  And how do you then transform your American country to it?

The first law is to love G-d with all your heart, might, mind and strength.  The second law is to love your neighbor as yourself - I would submit that if you do not understand that Terrestrial and Telestial individuals are you neighbor - you are likely not a good Celestial candidate. 

Quote

You have 2 choices - have a government with very limited powers or have none.  You get to choose.  Of course, you can opt for the 3rd option of trusting your government and give it all kinds of power and be like... North Korea.

I believe you can chose to obey the law and be of service to your fellow man.  Though I may not be able to prove it to you - I believe that there are people abiding the law and serving their fellow men in North Korea that will be Celestial in the resurrection.   I wonder if likewise there are those in the USA and other countries that do not respect their laws, refuse to trust anything to do with governments - that are most likely to be happy with a Telestial glory.

 

BTW - it is my opinion that there is one G-d and one Kingdom but different levels of Glory.  That when we speak of such things that there are not so much separate kingdoms as there are separate glories - that all (except those of outer darkness) will have G-d as their King.  Also note that usually when I post it is not so much to disagree as it is to bring to attention things (ideas) that appear to have been overlooked.

 

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Traveler said:

It appears to me that the single greatest factor of good men are families.  I submit that families are the beginning and the core of an enduring government and the core of trust.  It may be that families are corrupt - G-d knows that there is likely some flaw in every family - but I do not believe that starting out not trusting family (family government) is wise. 

Goal post status:  Moved.

6 minutes ago, Traveler said:

Why?  Are you worried that one may take your precious gold whatever?  I would be most interested why you think a Celestial family could not be good neighbors to a Telestial individual?  

The first law is to love G-d with all your heart, might, mind and strength.  The second law is to love your neighbor as yourself - I would submit that if you do not understand that Terrestrial and Telestial individuals are you neighbor - you are likely not a good Celestial candidate. 

Really?  You think God separating people into Kingdoms is what... a pagan concept?

Post-mortal versus Mortal.  Try to keep concepts within its context in discussion.  You can't just mix and match words and then try to attack the straw people you built out of it.

 

6 minutes ago, Traveler said:

I believe you can chose to obey the law and be of service to your fellow man.  Though I may not be able to prove it to you - I believe that there are people abiding the law and serving their fellow men in North Korea that will be Celestial in the resurrection.   I wonder if likewise there are those in the USA and other countries that do not respect their laws, refuse to trust anything to do with governments - that are most likely to be happy with a Telestial glory.

Obeying the law is not what we're talking about.  Just because you abide by the law doesn't mean you have to trust your government.  Final Judgment is Christ and Christ's alone.  Both of us could be roasting in hell.  That doesn't change the fact that limiting the power of a secular government is wise.

 

6 minutes ago, Traveler said:

BTW - it is my opinion that there is one G-d and one Kingdom but different levels of Glory.  That when we speak of such things that there are not so much separate kingdoms as there are separate glories - that all (except those of outer darkness) will have G-d as their King.  Also note that usually when I post it is not so much to disagree as it is to bring to attention things (ideas) that appear to have been overlooked.

 

The Traveler

It would be nice if you can stick to a point of discussion instead of twisting my words just so you can make a point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Mores said:

Do you happen to have a reference for that?  I'd be interested.

I do, but I don't know how to link an online PDF.  Can it be done?  You can google it and find the PDF.

I'd recommend that source since it comes from the church. 

There are other non-church sources, but they are only a summary.  Here's one.  It's accurate, but brief:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theatlantic.com/amp/article/222833/

Here's a source from a speaker on our Church website, but it too is fairly brief.  It still has some good info and background:

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/church/news/nauvoo-council-of-fifty-championed-religious-liberty-speaker-says?lang=eng 

To quote from the article:

But Joseph Smith and other council members believed that theocracy could be fused with the best elements of democracy, a system that Joseph Smith publicly described during his campaign as ‘theodemocracy.’

“They believed that such a system would protect minority rights against the majority; that it would allow for dissent, free discussion; that it would involve Latter-day Saints and others; and that it would increase righteousness.”

Such a form would serve as the government of the kingdom of God, “perhaps before, but certainly after the Second Coming of Jesus Christ,” he said. In the view of Joseph and other council members, “not all good men and women before the Second Coming or during the initial stages of the Millennium would be Church members. They emphasized that everyone would enjoy religious liberty in the kingdom of God. In fact, Joseph invited three men who were not members of the Church to join the council to demonstrate that in the Kingdom of God a man’s religious sentiments would not come into play in politics and that there would be equal rights for all

If you want to read the whole detailed synopsis of what Joseph Smith said, read the PDF by googling "Times and Seasons Volume 5".   The parts about theodemocracy are in the 500's.

Edited by Scott
Add more links
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, anatess2 said:

Good luck with that Theodemocracy when you have free agency of unconverted people.

That's why I said they were Joseph's words on not mine.  Personally, I believe in a separation of Church and State, at least until after the second coming.

Anyway, Joseph did believe that the Constitution was divinely inspired, but he also believed it to be incomplete and not without flaws.  As far as I know though, he had few criticisms of it.  Brigham Young had a lot more.

Edited by Scott
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, anatess2 said:

Goal post status:  Moved.

You are saying you do not trust any government???  I am asking about how your family is governed?  What is government anyway?  Federal, State, your local police?  You say you want the minimum?  Are you a minimum parent - I do not think so.  Not moving any goal post - just pointing out that whatever governs is government.  I am wondering if and why principles of government change with scale.  The entire concept of regulation is interesting.  Is driving on the right side of the road and intrusion of over regulation?  What is too much or what is not enough?   I would be interested what and why you default to non trust?  If a police (or other government service vehicle) has siren and light running?  Since you do not "TRUST" government - what do you do?  Ignore it, try to get in the way to prevent whatever it is you do not trust?  

Quote

Really?  You think God separating people into Kingdoms is what... a pagan concept?

I am not convinced that a G-d of love, compassion and mercy is into separating people into classes.  Granted there are classes.  In classic scripture there are always 3 classes - we see this in the pre-existence (Nobel and great, the rebellious and the rest) on earth (Shem or the covenant, Japheth or Gentiles and Ham or infidels) in the resurrection (Celestial, Terrestrial and Telestial).

One thing for certain - the concept of heaven as a gated community is defiantly pagan.

Quote

Post-mortal versus Mortal.  Try to keep concepts within its context in discussion.  You can't just mix and match words and then try to attack the straw people you built out of it.

What true and valid mortal concept is made void in post mortality?  How do we decide what applies to mortality that will not apply to post-mortality?

Quote

Obeying the law is not what we're talking about.  Just because you abide by the law doesn't mean you have to trust your government.  Final Judgment is Christ and Christ's alone.  Both of us could be roasting in hell.  That doesn't change the fact that limiting the power of a secular government is wise.

What do you do when you do not trust your government?  what do you do when you trust your government - what is the difference?  What do you mean that the "Final Judgment is Christ and Christ's alone."?  That everything is predetermined by Christ and no one else has any choice or input?  And is not "limiting the power of secular government" a power in and of itself - Who other than government (the voice of the people) should decide when government is doing too much or not enough?  Again - if secular governments are not to be trusted - why have elections?

Quote

It would be nice if you can stick to a point of discussion instead of twisting my words just so you can make a point.

My dear friend @anatess2 I already agree mostly with just about everything you say.  But like testing software - it is at the limits (where things are not so well defined) that things are interesting and where "things" mostly do not work out quite so well.

 

BTW - did you take note that the gunman in Texas that attracted a church congregation had sought charity help and was most upset when he was not given cash Charity?

 

The Traveler

Edited by Traveler
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Scott said:

That's why I said they were Joseph's words on not mine.  Personally, I believe in a separation of Church and State, at least until after the second coming.

Anyway, Joseph did believe that the Constitution was divinely inspired, but he also believed it to be incomplete and not without flaws.  As far as I know though, he had few criticisms of it.  Brigham Young had a lot more.

What were their criticisms of it?  The only thing I'm aware of as "an actual flaw" was that he thought that those who did not hold up their oat to protect and defend the Constitution should be subject to capital punishment.  He supported an Constitutional amendment to that effect, as well as other items.  But this one issue is the only one which I read him literally call, "a flaw".  Other items are incomplete, of course.  That's why we have the amendment process.  But a "flaw"?  This one thing is the only one I've read specifically labelled as such (by him).

I'd also be interested in hearing what Brigham had to say about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share