What I Believe
By TNSr5r@unseen.is
Introduction
This document exists because I wanted to write these things down, and for no other reason. I am not attempting to claim, or even suggest, that those with opposing views are wrong. I truly do not care if you are wrong, and I truly do not care if you believe I am wrong. I go through this exercise only because some have suggested it would be a benefit TO ME.
And please, don’t misunderstand me. I am not being arrogant. Arrogance would claim that I am right and everyone else is wrong. And arrogance would probably demand that everyone else agree with me. This is not at all what I am doing here. In fact, just the opposite. I don’t require anyone to agree with me, nor do I require myself to agree with anyone else. And that makes me free, perhaps more free than you.
I hesitate compiling this document at all, not because I don’t want to go through the potentially excruciating process of delineating my beliefs and views, but because it will make it at least somewhat easier for people to place me in a box and give me a label rather than deal with me as an individual. And most people are far more comfortable dealing with those whom they can put in a box with a label and trust that most of the time that individual will stay within that box and act and react as expected. Any box and label that can more easily be applied to me as a result of this document would be repugnant to me. After all, anyone who would take the time to write down their beliefs certainly must be inflexible and judgmental, right?
Yet, I really conduct this possibly frustrating exercise more because of those who pride themselves on being open-minded and accepting of others. There is a large segment of America who is usually liberal in political views and who is committed to the philosophy that there is very little (and maybe nothing) that is “right” and “wrong” and a whole lot of things (and maybe all things) that are gray. Opinions may vary between individuals, they believe, but no one has the right to tell another that his/her opinion is wrong. It is often claimed by this large group that all opinions are equally correct, equally valid, and equally important.
I find that almost every individual within this group that I have met over the years falls into one of two categories.
The first category, or segment, is composed of very caring people and they just don’t want to hurt anyone’s feelings. So facts and objectivity are far less important, and quite easily discarded, when engaged in any discussions about anything deemed important. They tend to believe that it is far more important to communicate acceptance and approval and avoid communicating rejection than it is to resolve what is true. These are some of the most caring people I have ever known. These people are more motivated by heart issues than they are by facts.
The other, and perhaps far larger, segment of this group takes the position that all things are gray because there are no absolutes. There is nothing, they believe, that can be established as universally true or universally false. As a result, there is nothing that can be established as more or less accurate and, therefore, all opinions are equally accurate (or inaccurate) guesses about indiscernible and unverifiable “facts.” These people are more motivated by philosophical issues than they are by facts.
These two groups have totally different purposes behind taking the exact same stance. But regardless of the purpose, both groups believe themselves to be more open-minded and accepting of others than people who claim that two disparate views cannot be equally correct and equally valid. In other words, they think they are open-minded because they tell no one they are wrong.
But are they really open-minded and accepting?
I contend not.
Why do I say that? Because if all opinions are equal and all opinions must be accepted without correction or judgment or condemnation, then they could never claim that my opinion is wrong. Specifically, if I were to claim my view is right in front of one of these open-minded and accepting individuals, they always, and I mean always, get upset and tell me I am wrong to claim that I am right. Yet, one wonders, if they claim that all opinions are equally correct and all opinions are equally valid, then what business do they have in telling me I am wrong?
In other words, they view my opinion as equally correct and equally valid as long as I embrace the belief that every opinion is equally correct and equally valid. But as soon as I claim that any specific belief is correct (or incorrect), especially any belief that can be construed as conservative, then they make the claim that the conservative belief is wrong.
Why is it that being open-minded and inclusive ALWAYS requires me to accept as valid your view but it never requires you to accept as valid my view?
So, for those who are caring and open-minded and accepting and understanding, I ask that you extend to me the same grace you would demand of me – leave me to my own view without trying to tell me that I cannot have that view. Only then can you benefit from reviewing this document. If you cannot extend to me the same grace that you demand of me, then it would probably be best if you did not read this document at all. Not because I will in any way be telling you that you are wrong or cannot have your own view, but because in reading this you will violate your own belief about every opinion being equally valid and equally important.
And I don’t want you to have any trouble sleeping tonight because you have just become disillusioned by discovering that you are a hypocrite.
One more thing.
The fact that I state my views does not mean that all other views in disagreement with mine are wrong. It could mean that, but I cannot possibly know that. My view on any given issue may be the result of many hours of thought, prayer, study, more prayer, more study, and more thought, but that doesn’t necessarily mean it is the only correct view. Unless I claim omniscience, I must always admit my limitations.
I cannot know all things, so it is always possible that there are facts outside my understanding or even awareness that, if I knew and understood them, would change my view.
This is why there can be no atheist. [Think about it…] My view will almost certainly be a considered position because of my very character and nature, but I must always be aware of and even admit that I may learn something today that would render my view inaccurate. So, no matter what you think you are hearing when reading this document, one thing you are not hearing is the claim that all who disagree with me are wrong. It is not in my heart and will never be in my words.
That having been said, I will never shy away from taking the responsibility of having a view. For any who look to me for input, I am constrained to offer only researched and well-thought input. I will never offer a “lite beer” opinion. If it is only opinion, I will always label it as such and seldom offer it. If I offer a view, I strive to give chapter and verse as to how I came to that conclusion and why.
To offer an opinion that is not researched and well-considered does no service to anyone other than the one expressing it. It is a selfish act. Its only value in this world is how it makes you feel when you tell it, or how it makes you feel when others express appreciation to you for sharing it. But it accomplishes absolutely nothing. Since the listener cannot learn anything of substance from the unresearched and undocumented opinion, that very opinion cannot enhance the listener at all. It offers the listener absolutely nothing of value. If there is no fact behind it, but only claims that are made in shades of gray, then it has value only to the one holding the opinion. If, on the other hand, you have research and fact and thought behind your view, then it just might have value to others. At least, that is my opinion…
Take sides! Have a view! The one who takes sides and has a view might sometimes be wrong. But the one who never takes sides and never has a view will always be wrong.
Issues
Absolutes
There ARE absolutes.
There IS a right and wrong. These terms apply to moral and spiritual issues. For me, moral issues are resolved by the Bible and by my application to my life of the principles I learn in the Bible. I cannot believe the Bible is Truth and at the same time accept differing religious views as right. This has absolutely nothing to do with me and everything to do with the Bible. If I take a specific moral or religious stance, it is because the Bible takes that particular moral or religious stance – it is not at all because I am close-minded and judgmental. The Bible claims it is, by itself and all alone, TRUTH. If you don’t like that, you have a problem with the Bible, not with me. So don’t ever ask me, “Who are you to judge?” when we are discussing right and wrong. If you ask me that question, I will almost certainly inform you that I am not judging anyone or anything – I am merely passing along how God has already judged you. When it comes to issues explained in the Bible, I don’t have to judge. It is God who has already done the judging, and I am merely repeating his proclamations.
And please note that no one who holds their religious views strongly can allow for any other religious views to be right. Only those who have shallow beliefs (or no religious beliefs at all) can allow for other religious views to be equally right.
On the other hand, most subjective choices fall into the category of individual taste or personal preference. These subjective choices usually do not fall under any moral, or right versus wrong, criteria. There is no right about blue versus red; there is no wrong about blonde versus brunette. There is no exclusive and universal claim to “BEST TRUCK” for Ford or Chevrolet or GMC.
And subjective choices are often irreconcilable. You might like New York City and I might not. No amount of fact concerning New York City is likely to change either your view or mine. But there is something inherently wrong about either one of us concluding that all New Yorkers are rude and belligerent with the personality of an angry pit bull (or some other equally generalized claim), and then treating them all in a manner consistent with that conclusion.
But there IS an accurate and inaccurate. These terms usually apply to non-moral issues. It is probable that no one can learn and understand everything there is to learn and understand about a particular concept or theory or fact, thereby making each and every other view incomplete and somewhat inaccurate. But if there is an absolutely true and accurate item or concept that we can look at, then your view and my view can be judged. Almost always, your description of New York City will be different from my description. But we can know which description is more accurate because we can see and touch and visit the REAL New York City. Your description of gravity may be more researched and mathematical than mine, and we can know which view of gravity is more accurate simply by observing and measuring gravity itself. Your view of American history may be more accurate than mine because there are original documents and books to review and you have studied them more than I have. So don’t ever ask me, “Who are you to judge?” when we are discussing reality and fact. When it comes to issues that can be observed in reality, this is a question usually based in ignorance, and usually serves to prove my point.
Religion
I believe that all religions, Catholic or Protestant or Muslim or Jew or anything else, are nothing more than mankind’s attempt to get to God or to please God or maybe just to describe God. The bigger the religion, the more requirements and restrictions are placed on our opportunities to get to God and to please God, and almost all these requirements and restrictions are placed on people NOT by God but by spiritual leaders.
On the other hand, I believe that Jesus is God’s attempt to reach mankind.
I believe that the God of the Bible is the One True God, and that He has described Himself in the Bible. All other views of God in other religious writings and by other religious leaders are interpretations or incomplete representations or even pollutions of the One True God. If you have a problem with this, your problem is NOT with me – your problem is with the Bible.
And ALWAYS beware of spiritual leaders who claim that God has given them a new truth!
I believe that the Bible (both the Old and New Testaments) interprets itself. The Bible leaves nothing unexplained that is expressed in that Book as being important for us to know. (The Bible never addresses how many angels can fit on the head of a pin, so that is not an issue that is important to God or that God expects us to know.) If you believe that there are many interpretations of these important views or issues, then I believe you have not studied the Bible enough, or at all. And without exception, I have challenged each and every person who has made this claim to me to study the Bible with me and point out several of the many interpretations to me. Without exception, each and every person who told me that has declined to spend any time with me looking at the Bible itself. If you have a problem with this, your problem is NOT with me – your problem is with your own laziness.
I believe that the central message of the Bible is not a religion, with structures and belief systems and philosophical implications, but a relationship between the Creator of the Universe, the One True God, on the one hand, and on the other hand, His prized creation, mankind. His prized creation is not the planet, not all things, not all living things, not all animals, but mankind. Those who have responded to Him in the manner of His choosing have that relationship, and those who have responded in any other manner, or have not responded at all, do not have that relationship. If you have a problem with this, your problem is NOT with me – your problem is with the Bible.
I believe there are only two ways to get to Heaven. One way is to be perfect, and 2,000 years ago we nailed to a cross the last one who was perfect. The other is to be forgiven. God does not grade on a curve. He has little concern as to whether or not you are better or worse than your neighbor or any other individual. He is concerned with your heart attitude toward him. God has one condition as to his forgiveness, and that is a repentant heart. If you have a problem with this, your problem is NOT with me – your problem is with the God of the Bible.
God is not in all things, nor is he in all people, nor is he in all experiences, nor is he in all beliefs. Mankind was created in the image of God, and that image was quickly polluted and deformed by rejecting God. But the “image” of God has little to do with the “dwelling” of God. God dwells in those who have received him in the manner of HIS choosing and does not dwell in those who have not received him in the manner of HIS choosing. This is the central message, the “gospel”, of the New Testament. If you have a problem with this, your problem is NOT with me – your problem is with God.
I do not believe that individuals are predestined for heaven or for hell. But I believe the process or mechanism by which individuals make it to heaven is predestined from the foundations of this world. The life, death and resurrection of Jesus is the predestined path to heaven, and those who accept this path and follow this path are predestined to be like Jesus – more and more so as time passes.
I do not believe that the Bible, Old or New Testament, teaches tithing as most preachers present it. I believe the Old Testament teaches “tithes and offerings” which, if added up, can equal as much as 40% of our assets, and not 10% of our paychecks. I believe the New Testament teaches “giving until it hurts” as the minimum, with examples including but not limited to Jesus giving his life, and the widow who gave everything she had. Most people use “tithe” to mean they get to keep 90% of their net paychecks, which is a selfish and ungodly interpretation, and not based on anything in the Bible.
Those who have responded to Him in the manner of His choosing have received special gifts and abilities with which to accomplish His purposes in their lives. One of my gifts is teaching. Why else would I take the time to write all these things down?
Politics
The united States of America (not a typo) is a unique political experiment in all of history. The men who put together certain views and principles and wrote them into our Founding Documents all believed that God played a serious and important role in the founding of this Great Nation. They may have had some minor differences in their opinions of who and what God really is, but they all believed God played a serious and important role in the founding of this Great Nation. Therefore, what God created must be preserved. Yes, I believe it is our moral and spiritual duty to God to preserve the United States of America as God helped to create it, and not as liberal socialists today want it to be!
The Founding Fathers did not create a democracy. Our Constitution did not create a democracy. America was never intended to be a democracy. Those around you, friends or teachers or media talking heads or politicians, who refer to America as a democracy are either deceived themselves or are intentionally deceiving you. The Founding Fathers expressly rejected a democracy in their discussions and in their writings. The Constitution itself requires that America be a republic form of government. Any other structure or form of government is a violation of the Constitution, and I believe that those currently in our government who are committed to creating a socialistic democracy are guilty of treason; and at the very least are guilty of fomenting revolution. And those in the government and in the media and in our educational institutions who are seemingly committed to moving America into a socialist democracy are traitors to the Constitution and enemies of the State. You cannot claim to believe in our Constitution while, at the same time, be engaged in speech or actions or legislation designed to violate or overturn that Constitution.
I believe that there is no such thing as “separation of church and State” as most people perceive or define it. When Benjamin Franklin spoke of the “wall of separation between church and state, he meant nothing like what political pontiffs mean today. The federal government has absolutely no authority or jurisdiction to tell any State or any individual what they can and cannot do in the arena of religious expression, especially outside the federal territories and within the several States. The ONLY restrictions in the Constitution on religious issues or religious expression are directed at the federal government and NOT at the several States or We The People. The Constitution states that “Congress shall pass no law respecting the establishment of religion, nor prohibiting the free exercise thereof…” First, that restriction applies ONLY TO CONGRESS and NOT to the several States or We The People. Second, no religious view present in America or in this world can possibly be an establishment of religion because it already exists. Third, Congress (and possibly that includes the entire federal government) has absolutely no authority or jurisdiction to interfere with or deny my religious views and expressions. Or anyone else’s religious views or expressions. Or any State or local government’s views or expressions. The restriction here, according to all the Founding Fathers who wrote on the issue, is creating a federal religion – a State-endorsed church – the restriction is not disallowing States the option of having a religious expression on public property. Fourth, virtually every law passed by Congress involving religion in America restricts or prohibits religious expression within the several States, in DIRECT VIOLATION of the Constitution. These laws should be declared as unconstitutional and overthrown by We The People. And by “overthrown” I mean to be ignored and not obeyed until the federal government formally rescinds these traitorous laws which are violative of our Constitution and far beyond the powers granted to the government by it.
The Constitution For the united States of America (not a typo) is the one document that all Americans, especially our politicians and judges, must accept as the sole authority behind America. It is not the President nor the Congress nor the Courts that is the authority. The President and the Congress and the Courts were all CREATED by the Constitution and therefore can have no authority over it. It is ONLY We The People who have any authority over the Constitution, and all we can do is obey it, modify it by the process dictated in the Constitution, or abolish it and write a whole new one, as stated by our Declaration of Independence. No one has the authority or the option to ignore the Constitution, as our Congress and our Presidents have demanded and expected and done for so many years.
All “officers” in all branches of our government (elected or appointed) are required to take an oath of office. All are sworn to uphold and protect our Constitution. Those who attempt to pass laws (Congress) or attempt to create Executive Orders (Presidents) or attempt to twist the Constitution (judges) into their own opinions of what they believe it should say are in violation of their Oaths of Office, and should be immediately dismissed without any benefits. Direct words or actions in violation of the principles in our Constitution by our paid public servants are nothing more than acts of insurrection or treason. I believe that public trials and public flogging and public hangings are the best manner for dealing with treasonous public officials, federal or State.
I believe that at least half of federal spending and federal programs are totally outside of the limits on placed government by our Constitution and, therefore, these programs and expenditures have no business existing on a federal level. I believe that the federal government loses all its authority and powers when it exceeds and violates the clear and explicit limitations written in the Constitution. I believe we have had an unconstitutional federal government since at least 1933, and possibly since Abraham Lincoln threw out the Constitution and declared war on the American people.
I believe that when America again has a Constitutional federal government, the trillions of federal dollars and the thousands of federal programs that would be cancelled can be, if deemed important enough, taken up by the various States, assuming the States and the people in those States WANT to continue them, just as the 10th Amendment to the federal Constitution calls for. The problem is not the program or the expenditures, nor those receiving the benefits of those programs or expenditures, but the fact that the federal government is restricted by the Constitution from being engaged in those programs or expenditures at all. Those rights and responsibilities lawfully belong ONLY to the several States and to We The People, according to the Constitution.
I believe the traditional views of American politics, separated into liberal and conservative, miss the point entirely. I believe that there is a third category which is almost always labeled “extreme” by both liberals and conservatives – that of being Constitutional. As clarification of what I mean, let us take issue of healthcare. A Liberal would create a large federal bureaucracy to oversee the activities and programs, allowing the States to perform some functions, but pretty much run things from Washington, DC, much like Hillary Clinton tried about 15 years ago, and Barack Obama has recently accomplished. A Conservative would create a small federal bureaucracy to monitor things and allow the States to perform the majority of functions and fill the majority of responsibilities. And a Constitutionalist would say, “The Constitution gives the federal government absolutely no authority or jurisdiction over healthcare at all. Why are they even debating the issue?” BOTH Liberals and Conservatives can be unconstitutional in their perspectives, and usually are.
I believe the “general welfare” clause of our federal Constitution has been treasonously polluted into a socialistic belief never intended, in fact specifically disallowed, by our Founding Fathers. The “general welfare” clause of Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution is NOT a grant of power but a restriction placed on the use or expenditure of federal tax revenues. The grant of power in that clause is the power to tax, with the restriction being the expenditure of those tax revenues. The grants of power to the government, being specific and limited, are clearly stated in the Constitution. Any legislation based on a power not explicitly granted the federal government in the Constitution is an attempt to overthrow the government created by that Constitution, and an act of treason.
I believe that huge omnibus legislative bills three and four and five inches thick, especially those passed without extensive public examination and debate BEFORE a vote, is a violation of the Oaths of Office sworn to by our elected representatives, and demands the immediate removal from office of those who voted to pass that legislation. And those removed from office by this violation of their Oaths of Office should result in the immediate termination of ALL federal benefits. It is an embarrassment for members of Congress to vote for a bill they have not read, and then complain they were misled when people or groups point out the obvious egregious portions of the bill. Any member of Congress who discovers unacceptable portions of a bill AFTER he/she has voted for that bill and then complains about it should be impeached. Congress approves these huge “omnibus” bills for the specific purpose of allowing plausible deniability when an individual or group points out unacceptable portions of the bill after it is approved. We The People should NEVER participate in this intentional deception.
I believe that any elected representative who votes on any legislative act, yea or nay, without first reading it personally, is in violation of his or her Oath of Office, and that “uninformed” vote should result in his or her immediate removal from office with immediate termination of all federal benefits.
I believe that all benefits of any federal office should never exceed the benefits available to the typical American. I believe that Congress should NOT have a separate health program but should have to purchase commercially available health insurance policies. I believe that Congress should NOT have a separate retirement program, but should be subject to Social Security like all Americans. The current Congressional retirement program is a travesty, and should be terminated immediately.
I believe that Congress should immediately limit itself to ONLY those powers expressly delegated to it by the federal Constitution, and should eliminate in a timely manner all benefits and programs not expressly delegated to Congress by the federal Constitution. I believe that Congress and the President should obey the Ninth and Tenth Amendments to the Constitution in any and all legislative and executive activities. I believe that any and all elected federal representatives who attempts to draft, put forth, vote for, or support any legislative or executive efforts not consistent with ALL of the Constitution, and in particular the Ninth and Tenth Amendments of the federal Constitution, should be immediately put out to pasture, removed from office with immediate termination of all federal benefits.
Conclusion
And I believe that about does it. If you have a problem with this document, or any part of it, please feel free to contact me and express your problem. And I will be happy to tell you what you can do about it.
You must be logged in to post a comment.