Is It Too Late for Justice?

Which is what they are drumming up with not prosecuting criminals while at the same time prosecuting men like Daniel Perry for removing violent filth from the subway system in NY. BLM and antifa are their means along with Soros DA”S

My statements are backed up by human nature and history.

Z-la it’s easy to complain, how about some solutions as clearly you spend a great deal of time and research on your missives.

Sorry for the slow reply. Real life sometimes interrupts internet life.
Short version, critters found a fence escape. Had to get them back home and find-repair fence issues.
Good neighbors are a blessing. Like a fruitful garden, good neighbors are an ongoing process. Mistreat or ignore them then like weeds overtake a fruitful garden you lose good neighbors.

Maybe that inability to treat neighbors well and give thanks when they help you *MIGHT* be why folks complain they have nobody to be trusted with their backs in SHTF.

We are too busy to find time to help our neighbors, maybe?

Back to your complaints the Organized Church IS the Problem.

While it’s nice to blame something else for people’s behavior problems it’s not intellectually honest.

God didn’t create obedient robots, He created Free Will in us.
In Genesis 4:8 Able killed Kane with a rock over jealousy.
Did an Organized Church fail its job here? No, it was proof that God DID Give us free will and that man is responsible for our own behaviors.

In Genesis 19 24 God had to destroy Sodom and Gomorra for homosexual behaviors and violence. I note the God had his servants AKA Angels pull out the righteous family of Lot. I notice the Angels were quite forceful about that rescue. I also notice that Lot’s wife disobeyed about looking back towards that Sin filled city and was destroyed.

Again, free will, personal responsibility for one’s own actions and even mass punishment was shown.

Blaming Organized Churches for the bad behavior of humans is like blaming the weeds you didn’t destroy by weeding for overtaking your once fruitful garden.

Even in Bible times there are plenty of scriptures pointing out how it was BAD to be lazy, slothful, arrogant and so on.

Example:

Thessalonians #: Warning against Irresponsibility
…9Not that we lack this right, but we wanted to offer ourselves as an example for you to imitate. 10For even while we were with you, we gave you this command: “If anyone is unwilling to work, he shall not eat.” 11Yet we hear that some of you are leading undisciplined lives and accomplishing nothing but being busybodies.…

Even Communists know this basic truth:

Vladimir Lenin, “He who does not work shall not eat” is a necessary principle under socialism, the preliminary phase of the evolution towards communist society. The phrase appears in his 1917 work, The State and Revolution.

So BAD Behavior isn’t something that came about due to some failure of Organized Religion.

Organized Religion is a creation of a free willed people and thus is subject to the same errors of them.

Some very GOOD things come from Good People Organizing to do Good things. Some truly evil things come from Evil People Organizing to do EVIL Things.

Evil thrives in secrecy. Even in the early Church they had to address this:

Matthew 18:15-17
15 `If your brother does something wrong to you, go to him. Talk alone to him and tell him what he has done. If he listens to you, you have kept your brother as a friend.

16 But if he does not listen to you, take one or two others with you to talk to him. Then two or three people will hear every word and can prove what was said.

17 If he does not listen to them, tell the church. If he does not listen to the church, treat him as one who does not believe in God and as bad as a tax collector.’

Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

ANY Organization is subject to these very human behavior issues.

If you doubt that let us look at the Department of INJustice (spelling intentional). Or maybe the FBI and the recent revelations of their false attacks on a sitting President.

Faith in God isn’t a natural occurrence that a baby suddenly becomes aware of God and chooses to serve Him. Most of us learned our Faith from Organized Religion or home-schooled faith in action of our parents.

So, Z-La please ponder a different drum to beat upon, the Organized Church is filled with imperfect people, SOME serve a Perfect God.

When does personal responsibility become hyperindividualism? Getting some instruction as to one’s faith, but not having a physical expression of that as pertains to how money flows in this country and in relation to other countries, and how it can inform, shape, and transform many different environments from the personal to the workplace, maritally and in getting away from cultural backwardness then that defeats the need for an organized church system. How is this then different from other corporations that do social and ostensibly spiritual outreach?

This goes as to some of the points I was making. Also, in rethinking nationalism America has shown it doesn’t have the personal, social, political, religious, and economic responsibility to even moderately administer it, rendering it as a would-be dangerous and unstable prospect here. Whatever aspects of it that previously existed, they weren’t able to maintain. It seems like the church system would thereby be the coordinating organizer of society or would that be the government? This question has to do with who structures society.

“The Church has not yet in its apostolic character made the transition from an individualistic to a social period which historic movements require. When it does take its social responsibility seriously it all too often thinks of society as a physical and not a spiritual form of human existence and it tends, therefore, to confine its care of society to interest in the prosperity and peace of men in their communities.”

“This thought of pioneering or representational responsibility has been somewhat obscured during the long centuries of individualist overemphasis. Its expression in the legal terms of traditional theology is strange and often meaningless to modern ears. Yet with our understanding of the way that life is involved with life, of the manner in which self and society are bound together, of the way in which small groups within a nation act for the whole, it seems that we must move toward a conception similar to the Hebraic and medieval one.”

“In our time, with its dramatic revelations of the evils of nationalism, of racialism and of economic imperialism it is the evident responsibility of the Church to repudiate these attitudes within itself and to act as the pioneer of society in doing so. The apostolic proclamation of good and bad news to the colored races without a pioneering repudiation of racial discrimination in the Church contains a note of insincerity and unbelief. The prophetic denunciation of nationalism without a resolute rejection of nationalism in the Church is mostly rhetorical. As the representative and pioneer of mankind the Church meets its social responsibility when in its own thinking organization and action it functions as a world society, undivided by race, class and national interests.”

https://www.religion-online.org/article/the-responsibility-of-the-church-for-society/

The context was not per se in regards to ‘congress making no law respecting an establishment of religion’, if that’s what you’re referring to, but rather the types of institutions and their uses, financial organization, food availability and distribution and the things that regulate day-to-day lives. That should have been clear or at least implied with the social perspectives given. Who regulates these things, the government or church system, and who is supposed to?

Where does all of this leave religion today?

“The Constitution was reticent about religion for two reasons: first, many delegates were committed federalists, who believed that the power to legislate on religion, if it existed at all, lay within the domain of the state, not the national, governments; second, the delegates believed that it would be a tactical mistake to introduce such a politically controversial issue as religion into the Constitution. The only “religious clause” in the document--the proscription of religious tests as qualifications for federal office in Article Six--was intended to defuse controversy by disarming potential critics who might claim religious discrimination in eligibility for public office.”

“That religion was not otherwise addressed in the Constitution did not make it an “irreligious” document any more than the Articles of Confederation was an “irreligious” document. The Constitution dealt with the church precisely as the Articles had, thereby maintaining, at the national level, the religious status quo. In neither document did the people yield any explicit power to act in the field of religion. But the absence of expressed powers did not prevent either the Continental-Confederation Congress or the Congress under the Constitution from sponsoring a program to support general, nonsectarian religion.”

https://www.loc.gov/exhibits/religion/rel06.html