On the surface, Bonner seemingly makes many good points on the challenge to keep everything "Win-Win". Unfortunately, this excerpt from his book is a succession of "floating abstractions" not tied down to the facts of reality; or from another perspective, they are incomplete thoughts. For example, he states that “'pacifist' nations become easy targets for warlike people." Why would a nation be pacifist if it were situated among warlike nations? If pacifist means that they don't start wars but also don't take measures for their defense, then that is suicidal. They may think others will defend them, but isn't that wishful thinking?
His comments about trust are spot on, but then he goes on to write that the more common Win-Win deals are in a particular society, the more complacent the people become which results in them be susceptible to scams and fraud. And he implies that there will always be scammers. That's certainly true. But then wouldn't people become more cautious and less susceptible to scams if this is true? It's self-limiting, not to mention that if you live in a country that protects individual rights, the scammers are the criminals and run the risk of being caught, prosecuted, and jailed. He never mentions that.
Of course, there is the argument that our (USA) government is the biggest scam as Bonner implies at the end of the excerpt. Unfortunately, he offers no solution. To be fair, he does imply a solution in that all these regulations should not exist. True, but he never goes into any depth about the solutions, only about the problems. So, my main point is that Bonner always seems to be, in his political writings, focused on problems, not solutions. The problems are easy to see and Bill writes about them eloquently. The solutions, on the other hand, are more complicated and require an understanding of individual rights and by what methods rights need to be protected.
Yes, I know. Definitely incessantly, but thanks. I sound like a broken record even to myself. At times, Bonner comes close to the truth (fundamental principles) but never quite gets there. Other times, he is just flailing in the wind. Yet, some commenters on these pages praise him. I hope that maybe I can convince one or two to look a little deeper. That is, identify the fundamental issues. Rather than constantly complaining, maybe look for solutions. On the other hand, I know there are others that understand what is going on, and for that, I am grateful that there are fellow travelers here. The challenge is to get more fellow travelers to effect a seismic change.
The fundamental, bounded, nature of the human animal is the headwaters from which issues Bonner's flow, isn't it? And the commentary is enjoyable, isn't it?
The leopard's spotributes are not a problem to be solved. Including, most definitely, notions of vegetarian conversion.
Or, better visual, the Grizzly bears do not suffer Timothy Treadwell ironies, despite his do-gooder savior extraordinaire, esquire status-indentification.
Goldbrick Oz is what it is. And every would-be wizard there ever was, or will be, is just another draped snake oiler. (Husbandryman, domesticators, & that TV Yellowstone ranching clan, & all its adversaries, can't stop, help themselves, either.)
Toto tried, but humanimal is typically-mostly Quixote incorrigible.
I encourage all to watch/download the free documentary and pdf of "The Great Taking" by David Webb (not the radio host/conservative pundit). If I had any skill at all, I would have included the link...if true, it will dwarf any and all means by which the "rich get richer" and gives new meaning to "you will own nothing and be happy." In fact, this potential phenomenon saves the rich for last, "as dessert." Scary as hell. I hope someone with far greater financial acumen than I have reviews it and reports back here. Thanks in advance.
I've read it as well. Its simply a must read for anyone with money in the markets. I went in to it thinking my BS filter would explode. Unfortunately, it didn't and I was impressed with the authors understanding of the workings and history of our financial system. This comment is coming from someone who has spend the last 40 years in the same line of business as the author. I have shared this book with colleagues and family members hoping they will find an error in David Rogers Webb's thought process. So far, crickets. Armed with this information, I don't know how any advisor could ever perform their fiduciary role. I'm sure they're lots of folks, myself included, trying to come up with a strategy to hedge this risk. I shared this with Dan Denning so hopefully he'll read it as well. Its only a little over 130 pages so you can get through it relatively quickly. I would love to see this get debunked, but I'm not holding my breath.
You can see Webb knows his stuff, he even shows the documents. The mystery is why the elite think they will get away with it. To be fair, they have a good track record thus far.
Webb has done an excellent job connecting the dots and identifying the problem for everyone to see. On the other hand, his proposed solution is completely nonsensical. A government run central bank that returns all profits to the ‘public’ (government) for the support of the same government. This is a Statist monetary plan based upon pure fantasy. The State should be kept away as far as humanly possible from money creation period, end of story. Abolish the Fed and set money free :-)
He has the right idea. Currently, the banks are using the credit of the people for themselves. (Most don't know that when a loan is created, YOU are the one that creates the money, 'out of thin air.' The interest payments go to the bank, NOT YOU.) In any case, this is all moot, since there is no real solution.
The financial system's plumbing is boring, but avoid it at your own peril. The most important takeaway from the book is the subversion of property rights with respect to securities. You don't own them, you only have an entitlement right to them. If your intermediary becomes insolvent (Broker-Dealer and/or Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation) you're an unsecured creditor. It's right there in the UCC, its the law. The moral of the story is this: you can do everything right and still lose it all. The game is most definitely rigged. The Banksters derivatives bets are in the Quadrillions. There's not enough collateral on the planet to cover those bets. Hence, that's why they've watered down the property rights so they can use your securities as their collateral. If they crash the system, we're all going down with it. I'm sure they rationalize this as just since they own and operate the casinos. They've essentially locked the doors and welded them shut. This is a very real problem, we're just early to the party. Word's already sweeping the globe like a wildfire. No need to worry, you won't be boring for long :-)
I spent the some time researching this over the weekend. Webb's 100% correct regarding the lack of property rights with respect to securities. I went straight to the UCC and verified it. All you have is a security entitlement which is a weak position. In the U.S. if your intermediary fails (Broker-Dealer and/or Depository Trust Clearing Corporation) you are an unsecured creditor. You're in the back of the bus behind the secured creditors. I've been at this for decades and never knew this. This is extremely dark. Basically every exit has been welded shut. Now I understand why this is sweeping the planet like a wild fire. With harmonization, essentially every country has adopted this treatment. I used to root for a financial meltdown, not anymore.
"The trouble is, there is always a temptation to cheat... to defect... to gain wealth, power, and status in the fastest, surest way: by taking it from someone else. That is how the win-losers benefit from periods of stability, too, burrowing into the rotten wood of government and building their nests in its nooks and crannies."
Unless this is a self-reference, that's a bit rich, considering recent (2020, 2021) FTC action against Agora & Co.
A case of one moralist index finger pointing at others, with four other fingers pointing right back at yourself?
Trust in government on a deeper level was fostered by the Christian religion. Render to Caesar that which is Caesar's. There's no chance a Jewish carpenter spoke those words in the first century CE, especially in the light of the Roman's benefiting from the tax.
You can bet the Roman Church put those words in the mouth of Jesus with a well placed copyedit.
The founder of Christianity Paul of Tarsus was very proud of his Roman citizenship, it only follows he'd brown nose government: Romans 13:1-7 Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God's wrath on the wrongdoer. Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God's wrath but also for the sake of conscience. ...
If we are to believe Paul, the Romans who killed Jesus, looted the temple, murdered Jews by the tens of thousands and enslaved the rest were ordained of God. King James probably thought this was a proper teaching from Paul. It's good to be the king but sucks to be his slave.
You are so foolish. Like most, you read, but don't understand. Paul was not talking about corrupt governments, as God would not, COULD NOT, ordain those. And, of course, as you know, the Romans did not murder Jesus, it was His own people. Pilate erred in allowing them to use the Roman power to kill their Savior - but he did it anyways. As for the jews "murdered" in 70 AD...well, they did ask for it, didn't they? Matthew 27:24.
I suggest you read Paul's letter to the Romans again. Then compare what you read to the exchange between God and Samuel concerning Israel's want of a king of their choice. Note, God not only warned the people against instituting a king and being ruled by a government, but Samuel felt he failed Yahowah when the people ignored the warning and chose Shmauwl to be their king. Yahowah corrected Samuel by stating Israel failed their God.
Christians have almost no understanding of Towrah and the covenant it enables. The Towrah is described by Yahowah has the only means to be used to settle all disputes. Judges like Samuel did not settle disputes judicially based on case law or their by their human understanding but by looking to what Towrah of Yahowah advised.
As such there was no need of any government, no prisons, no police, jury, or lawyers.
Dowd was the king over Israel but not in the sense of an all powerful dictator. Dowd speaks of religious and evil men attacking and attempting to denigrate his person in many of his Psalms. Try that with a European king of the past or a emperor of Rome.
Pilate lol the early Christian history was concocted by Eusebius 300 years after the events.
He did so at the direction of Constantine. I get a chuckle every time I read the account.
First of all, there is no Greek manuscript dating before the Roman church which includes Matt 27:24 the entire of Matt 27 was added by the Roman church. All of the verses that paint the Jewish religious leaders as fools and blood thirsty monsters were added by the Roman church.
Ask your pastor or priest he'll tell you this is a fact, if he says not then I direct you to two Christian scholars on the subject Phillip Comfort and David Barrett and their acclaimed book 'The Test of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts' if the verse does not appear in their list it did not exist before the 3rd or 4th century.
I added Lol, only because it does not take much effort to understand it would be impossible for Eusebius or any one else at the time to know the private conversation between Pilate and Jesus or that Pilates wife had a dream about Jesus. Think man how would any one know this exchange happened? Moreover, there is no Roman historical record where the people were offered to release anyone from prison in a sort of prisoner exchange. Rome ruled the world, they did not make deals with people they had conquered. I suggest you read some Roman history, they were really terrible people. Rome trampled the whole world under foot massacring people with no thought or care. Slavery was common and killing or causing anyone but a Roman citizen to die was perfectly normal. The idea Jesus was the only person whipped to cause their flesh torn off or to be nailed to an upright pole (Starous not a cross)
is laughable, all crucifixions where carried out in this manner. The Assyrians invented crucifixion but tied victims to an upright pole, where Romans nailed the hands and feet. The Roman church morphed out of the Roman Empire, not much changed until the Renaissance, and even 150 years ago discussing this subject on the level I do would earn me jail time in some European nations in the early formation of American colonies I'd be burnt at the stake. All for the glory of God mind you. Universal Romanism only came to be accepted by the world because people would rather go along instead of being tortured or put to the sword. It all became part of the greater society, supported by government to aid in ruling over the people. Christians in America claim to be the hunted group and yet their churches enjoy tax free status, and all manner or accommodation. Hitler famously met the pope a deal was struck. The Vatican would be granted nation status, and the church would endorse the efforts of the Third Reich. The bodies of Germans would be granted Hitler, but the souls would be the popes. Aka Hilter would be given the right to divine right to rule over Europe.
I suggest when reading the NT to ponder what you read similar to not believing everything in the newspaper. Some of the parables of Jesus are particularly silly. Matt 21:33-46 also added to the NT by the Roman church.
There was a certain landowner who planted a vineyard and set a hedge around it, dug a winepress in it and built a tower. And he leased it to vinedressers and went into a far country. 34 Now when vintage-time drew near, he sent his servants to the vinedressers, that they might receive its fruit. 35 And the vinedressers took his servants, beat one, killed one, and stoned another. 36 Again he sent other servants, more than the first, and they did likewise to them.
37 Then last of all he sent his son to them, saying, ‘They will respect my son.’ 38 But when the vinedressers saw the son, they said among themselves, ‘This is the heir. Come, let us kill him and seize his inheritance.’ 39 So they took him and cast him out of the vineyard and killed him.
Hold on there, in what world would someone collect the inheritance of a murder victim? Understand Jesus is supposed to be conversing with learned Jewish leaders.
Jesus asks 40 “Therefore, when the owner of the vineyard comes, what will he do to those vinedressers?” We are suppose to believe these learned Jewish men are so dimwitted they didn't figure out Jesus was talking about them, so of course they answered: 41 They said to Him, “He will destroy those wicked men miserably, and lease his vineyard to other vinedressers who will [a]render to him the fruits in their seasons.”
42 Jesus said to them, “Have you never read in the Scriptures: (in fact Jews of the time were very well acquainted with Towrah, prophets and psalms.)
‘The stone which the builders rejected
Has become the chief cornerstone.
This was the Lord’s doing,
And it is marvelous in our eyes’?
43 “Therefore I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken from you and given to a nation bearing the fruits of it. 44 And whoever falls on this stone will be broken; but on whomever it falls, it will grind him to powder.”
45 Now when the chief priests and Pharisees heard His parables, they perceived that He was speaking of them. (But they figured might as well act the fool and convict ourselves in front of all the people)
46 But when they sought to lay hands on Him, they feared the multitudes, because they took Him for a prophet. (The multitudes took him for a prophet even though he'd not made a single prophecy at this time).
Bam! Jesus has his opening to take away all the promises made to the Jews by Yahowah and transfer these to the Roman church today knows as Replacement Theology. Which in turn the Roman church (and its bastard step child Protestantism) has used to harass Jews all over the world for the last 1500 years.
Christians for some reason are clueless; The Roman empire was falling apart at the seems, it needed a major shake up. A new religion enforced at the point of a sword with all sorts of new rules and decrees, one that incorporated the fun pagan rites of the birth of the son of the sun on December 25, and just 9 months before the pagan day dedicated to the impregnation of Asherah/Ishtar the mother of god, the queen of the universe. Christmas, Easter, and the story of Mary the mother of god and baby Jesus the son to be worshiped on Sun god Day. The Edict of Milan one religion to rule them all.
Lol, now you're grasping at straws. Using the term Christian scholars provides a reliable source for you to follow, providing a source of confirmation to my assertions regarding addition of many NT verses by the Roman church.
It might behove a Christian to understand what their pastor is teaching is false based on the very source material they claim is the inspired words of God. All pastors, priests, and clerics know their doctrines stand in opposition to the God they claim as inspiration. At least Paul was forthright in claiming his inspiration came from Satan. 2 Cor 12:7 but this does not seem to bother Christians.
There are about 3,000 plus 'christian' denominations. Obviously, they can't all be right, and, in fact, all are wrong, to one degree or another. So no, a 'christian scholar,' by definition would be unreliable. And your assertion that Paul claimed his inspiration came from satan is also false, no matter how many times you state it. No one, even an unreliable 'christian scholar,' would make such a claim. That all came from you, and/or the false teachers you follow. I wish you the best - happy new year.
Lol, in referencing the title 'Christian scholars' the name of two men were clearly mentioned, as such I was not referencing every scholar from every flavor of Christianity, but you known this to be true. You're religious and as such cannot be found to be in error.
I'll state my irrefutable proof once again; Philip Comfort and David Barrett are considered by the entire of the Christian academic world to have written what is considered to be most accurate, detailed and comprehensive collection of 3rd and 4th century CE Greek manuscripts. If a verse found is found in the NT that does not exist within the pages of their book it was added by the Roman church after the 5th century CE. The entirety of Matthew 27 does not appear in the collection of Greek manuscripts. I did a study subsequent study of this same university text book comparing the KJB translation listing all verses that were added by the Roman church. I'll post that, I think even you would be surprised. Literally every instance of Jews being portrayed as evil was added by the RC. Moreover, all verses where Jesus is preaching against the prescriptions found in Towrah were added in a effort to make Jesus appear more Roman catholic. The entirety of John 8 was added.
The system is rigged, and for a good reason. We can't have poor folks logging into Crypto Defi and trading Perpetual Futures, possibly turning $50 into thousands or a steady daily paycheck. All USA based IP addresses are blocked on Defi exchanges for Derivative Trading. There's always a work around, wiith use of a VPN creating an IP address from a Nation that is not so restrictive.
Previously I said Crypto is mostly a scam, and that is true, but there's people willing to invest (gamble) so I'm aiding market making. Crypto is a scam on the level of the Stock Market's Dotcom bubble, not all Dot Coms tanked some are household names today. Not all cryptos are a scam, just most of the alt coins, accept those that hung on because some have millions invested and won't let them go to zero.
The hard wiring is full of shorts & 'the enemy of my enemy is my friend' fuses.
Electrical/synaptical fires are always burning down the House, M.D. ("Everybody lies..." ~ the good TV doctors credo ~ along the path of least resistance).
And the yogis chant ohhhmmmm @432Hz while stealing every Jellystone pic-a-nic basket they can lay/lie their paws on.
The kiters with the keys to the electrical panel have always loved telegraphing their threats: "A Republic, if you can keep it."
Who is this "we" you speak of? And why so dismissive? Unless you are completely unhooked from society, and it sounds like you are because of your ill manners towards fellow readers, you too will be impacted. Ignore at your peril.
On the surface, Bonner seemingly makes many good points on the challenge to keep everything "Win-Win". Unfortunately, this excerpt from his book is a succession of "floating abstractions" not tied down to the facts of reality; or from another perspective, they are incomplete thoughts. For example, he states that “'pacifist' nations become easy targets for warlike people." Why would a nation be pacifist if it were situated among warlike nations? If pacifist means that they don't start wars but also don't take measures for their defense, then that is suicidal. They may think others will defend them, but isn't that wishful thinking?
His comments about trust are spot on, but then he goes on to write that the more common Win-Win deals are in a particular society, the more complacent the people become which results in them be susceptible to scams and fraud. And he implies that there will always be scammers. That's certainly true. But then wouldn't people become more cautious and less susceptible to scams if this is true? It's self-limiting, not to mention that if you live in a country that protects individual rights, the scammers are the criminals and run the risk of being caught, prosecuted, and jailed. He never mentions that.
Of course, there is the argument that our (USA) government is the biggest scam as Bonner implies at the end of the excerpt. Unfortunately, he offers no solution. To be fair, he does imply a solution in that all these regulations should not exist. True, but he never goes into any depth about the solutions, only about the problems. So, my main point is that Bonner always seems to be, in his political writings, focused on problems, not solutions. The problems are easy to see and Bill writes about them eloquently. The solutions, on the other hand, are more complicated and require an understanding of individual rights and by what methods rights need to be protected.
Eloquently and Incessantly...
Yes, I know. Definitely incessantly, but thanks. I sound like a broken record even to myself. At times, Bonner comes close to the truth (fundamental principles) but never quite gets there. Other times, he is just flailing in the wind. Yet, some commenters on these pages praise him. I hope that maybe I can convince one or two to look a little deeper. That is, identify the fundamental issues. Rather than constantly complaining, maybe look for solutions. On the other hand, I know there are others that understand what is going on, and for that, I am grateful that there are fellow travelers here. The challenge is to get more fellow travelers to effect a seismic change.
The fundamental, bounded, nature of the human animal is the headwaters from which issues Bonner's flow, isn't it? And the commentary is enjoyable, isn't it?
The leopard's spotributes are not a problem to be solved. Including, most definitely, notions of vegetarian conversion.
Or, better visual, the Grizzly bears do not suffer Timothy Treadwell ironies, despite his do-gooder savior extraordinaire, esquire status-indentification.
Goldbrick Oz is what it is. And every would-be wizard there ever was, or will be, is just another draped snake oiler. (Husbandryman, domesticators, & that TV Yellowstone ranching clan, & all its adversaries, can't stop, help themselves, either.)
Toto tried, but humanimal is typically-mostly Quixote incorrigible.
Well, no and no. Unless a blue rock mates with the tin man.
Tilting as exercise is one, fine, thing. But that was never Q's, compulsive, thing.
Well, it only takes a pinch of yeast...
LOL!
and of course "Trump and his Cronies" is stuck in the chapter while the Bushies, Clintoons, Obamaites and Biden$$$ aren't mentioned.
what's Your Angle?, Billy Bob Clintoon flights on Epistein airlines??? Who knows? I only "Trust" my Family and my Colt to function as advertised.
I encourage all to watch/download the free documentary and pdf of "The Great Taking" by David Webb (not the radio host/conservative pundit). If I had any skill at all, I would have included the link...if true, it will dwarf any and all means by which the "rich get richer" and gives new meaning to "you will own nothing and be happy." In fact, this potential phenomenon saves the rich for last, "as dessert." Scary as hell. I hope someone with far greater financial acumen than I have reviews it and reports back here. Thanks in advance.
I've read it as well. Its simply a must read for anyone with money in the markets. I went in to it thinking my BS filter would explode. Unfortunately, it didn't and I was impressed with the authors understanding of the workings and history of our financial system. This comment is coming from someone who has spend the last 40 years in the same line of business as the author. I have shared this book with colleagues and family members hoping they will find an error in David Rogers Webb's thought process. So far, crickets. Armed with this information, I don't know how any advisor could ever perform their fiduciary role. I'm sure they're lots of folks, myself included, trying to come up with a strategy to hedge this risk. I shared this with Dan Denning so hopefully he'll read it as well. Its only a little over 130 pages so you can get through it relatively quickly. I would love to see this get debunked, but I'm not holding my breath.
You can see Webb knows his stuff, he even shows the documents. The mystery is why the elite think they will get away with it. To be fair, they have a good track record thus far.
Webb has done an excellent job connecting the dots and identifying the problem for everyone to see. On the other hand, his proposed solution is completely nonsensical. A government run central bank that returns all profits to the ‘public’ (government) for the support of the same government. This is a Statist monetary plan based upon pure fantasy. The State should be kept away as far as humanly possible from money creation period, end of story. Abolish the Fed and set money free :-)
He has the right idea. Currently, the banks are using the credit of the people for themselves. (Most don't know that when a loan is created, YOU are the one that creates the money, 'out of thin air.' The interest payments go to the bank, NOT YOU.) In any case, this is all moot, since there is no real solution.
The Great Taking is on YouTube. Just search the name.
Yes, thanks, that's where I watched it
I thought this quote was apropos:
The banker's dilemma:
With private property rights you cannot own the world.
Without private property rights the world is not worth owning.
Thanks Craig--when I try to talk about this, people's eyes glaze (I know, I'm boring). Like you, I do not want to be right.
The financial system's plumbing is boring, but avoid it at your own peril. The most important takeaway from the book is the subversion of property rights with respect to securities. You don't own them, you only have an entitlement right to them. If your intermediary becomes insolvent (Broker-Dealer and/or Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation) you're an unsecured creditor. It's right there in the UCC, its the law. The moral of the story is this: you can do everything right and still lose it all. The game is most definitely rigged. The Banksters derivatives bets are in the Quadrillions. There's not enough collateral on the planet to cover those bets. Hence, that's why they've watered down the property rights so they can use your securities as their collateral. If they crash the system, we're all going down with it. I'm sure they rationalize this as just since they own and operate the casinos. They've essentially locked the doors and welded them shut. This is a very real problem, we're just early to the party. Word's already sweeping the globe like a wildfire. No need to worry, you won't be boring for long :-)
I spent the some time researching this over the weekend. Webb's 100% correct regarding the lack of property rights with respect to securities. I went straight to the UCC and verified it. All you have is a security entitlement which is a weak position. In the U.S. if your intermediary fails (Broker-Dealer and/or Depository Trust Clearing Corporation) you are an unsecured creditor. You're in the back of the bus behind the secured creditors. I've been at this for decades and never knew this. This is extremely dark. Basically every exit has been welded shut. Now I understand why this is sweeping the planet like a wild fire. With harmonization, essentially every country has adopted this treatment. I used to root for a financial meltdown, not anymore.
I'm just Reading it. Rarely watch videos.
"The trouble is, there is always a temptation to cheat... to defect... to gain wealth, power, and status in the fastest, surest way: by taking it from someone else. That is how the win-losers benefit from periods of stability, too, burrowing into the rotten wood of government and building their nests in its nooks and crannies."
Unless this is a self-reference, that's a bit rich, considering recent (2020, 2021) FTC action against Agora & Co.
A case of one moralist index finger pointing at others, with four other fingers pointing right back at yourself?
Trust in government on a deeper level was fostered by the Christian religion. Render to Caesar that which is Caesar's. There's no chance a Jewish carpenter spoke those words in the first century CE, especially in the light of the Roman's benefiting from the tax.
You can bet the Roman Church put those words in the mouth of Jesus with a well placed copyedit.
The founder of Christianity Paul of Tarsus was very proud of his Roman citizenship, it only follows he'd brown nose government: Romans 13:1-7 Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God's wrath on the wrongdoer. Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God's wrath but also for the sake of conscience. ...
If we are to believe Paul, the Romans who killed Jesus, looted the temple, murdered Jews by the tens of thousands and enslaved the rest were ordained of God. King James probably thought this was a proper teaching from Paul. It's good to be the king but sucks to be his slave.
You are so foolish. Like most, you read, but don't understand. Paul was not talking about corrupt governments, as God would not, COULD NOT, ordain those. And, of course, as you know, the Romans did not murder Jesus, it was His own people. Pilate erred in allowing them to use the Roman power to kill their Savior - but he did it anyways. As for the jews "murdered" in 70 AD...well, they did ask for it, didn't they? Matthew 27:24.
I suggest you read Paul's letter to the Romans again. Then compare what you read to the exchange between God and Samuel concerning Israel's want of a king of their choice. Note, God not only warned the people against instituting a king and being ruled by a government, but Samuel felt he failed Yahowah when the people ignored the warning and chose Shmauwl to be their king. Yahowah corrected Samuel by stating Israel failed their God.
Christians have almost no understanding of Towrah and the covenant it enables. The Towrah is described by Yahowah has the only means to be used to settle all disputes. Judges like Samuel did not settle disputes judicially based on case law or their by their human understanding but by looking to what Towrah of Yahowah advised.
As such there was no need of any government, no prisons, no police, jury, or lawyers.
Dowd was the king over Israel but not in the sense of an all powerful dictator. Dowd speaks of religious and evil men attacking and attempting to denigrate his person in many of his Psalms. Try that with a European king of the past or a emperor of Rome.
Pilate lol the early Christian history was concocted by Eusebius 300 years after the events.
He did so at the direction of Constantine. I get a chuckle every time I read the account.
First of all, there is no Greek manuscript dating before the Roman church which includes Matt 27:24 the entire of Matt 27 was added by the Roman church. All of the verses that paint the Jewish religious leaders as fools and blood thirsty monsters were added by the Roman church.
Ask your pastor or priest he'll tell you this is a fact, if he says not then I direct you to two Christian scholars on the subject Phillip Comfort and David Barrett and their acclaimed book 'The Test of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts' if the verse does not appear in their list it did not exist before the 3rd or 4th century.
I added Lol, only because it does not take much effort to understand it would be impossible for Eusebius or any one else at the time to know the private conversation between Pilate and Jesus or that Pilates wife had a dream about Jesus. Think man how would any one know this exchange happened? Moreover, there is no Roman historical record where the people were offered to release anyone from prison in a sort of prisoner exchange. Rome ruled the world, they did not make deals with people they had conquered. I suggest you read some Roman history, they were really terrible people. Rome trampled the whole world under foot massacring people with no thought or care. Slavery was common and killing or causing anyone but a Roman citizen to die was perfectly normal. The idea Jesus was the only person whipped to cause their flesh torn off or to be nailed to an upright pole (Starous not a cross)
is laughable, all crucifixions where carried out in this manner. The Assyrians invented crucifixion but tied victims to an upright pole, where Romans nailed the hands and feet. The Roman church morphed out of the Roman Empire, not much changed until the Renaissance, and even 150 years ago discussing this subject on the level I do would earn me jail time in some European nations in the early formation of American colonies I'd be burnt at the stake. All for the glory of God mind you. Universal Romanism only came to be accepted by the world because people would rather go along instead of being tortured or put to the sword. It all became part of the greater society, supported by government to aid in ruling over the people. Christians in America claim to be the hunted group and yet their churches enjoy tax free status, and all manner or accommodation. Hitler famously met the pope a deal was struck. The Vatican would be granted nation status, and the church would endorse the efforts of the Third Reich. The bodies of Germans would be granted Hitler, but the souls would be the popes. Aka Hilter would be given the right to divine right to rule over Europe.
I suggest when reading the NT to ponder what you read similar to not believing everything in the newspaper. Some of the parables of Jesus are particularly silly. Matt 21:33-46 also added to the NT by the Roman church.
There was a certain landowner who planted a vineyard and set a hedge around it, dug a winepress in it and built a tower. And he leased it to vinedressers and went into a far country. 34 Now when vintage-time drew near, he sent his servants to the vinedressers, that they might receive its fruit. 35 And the vinedressers took his servants, beat one, killed one, and stoned another. 36 Again he sent other servants, more than the first, and they did likewise to them.
37 Then last of all he sent his son to them, saying, ‘They will respect my son.’ 38 But when the vinedressers saw the son, they said among themselves, ‘This is the heir. Come, let us kill him and seize his inheritance.’ 39 So they took him and cast him out of the vineyard and killed him.
Hold on there, in what world would someone collect the inheritance of a murder victim? Understand Jesus is supposed to be conversing with learned Jewish leaders.
Jesus asks 40 “Therefore, when the owner of the vineyard comes, what will he do to those vinedressers?” We are suppose to believe these learned Jewish men are so dimwitted they didn't figure out Jesus was talking about them, so of course they answered: 41 They said to Him, “He will destroy those wicked men miserably, and lease his vineyard to other vinedressers who will [a]render to him the fruits in their seasons.”
42 Jesus said to them, “Have you never read in the Scriptures: (in fact Jews of the time were very well acquainted with Towrah, prophets and psalms.)
‘The stone which the builders rejected
Has become the chief cornerstone.
This was the Lord’s doing,
And it is marvelous in our eyes’?
43 “Therefore I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken from you and given to a nation bearing the fruits of it. 44 And whoever falls on this stone will be broken; but on whomever it falls, it will grind him to powder.”
45 Now when the chief priests and Pharisees heard His parables, they perceived that He was speaking of them. (But they figured might as well act the fool and convict ourselves in front of all the people)
46 But when they sought to lay hands on Him, they feared the multitudes, because they took Him for a prophet. (The multitudes took him for a prophet even though he'd not made a single prophecy at this time).
Bam! Jesus has his opening to take away all the promises made to the Jews by Yahowah and transfer these to the Roman church today knows as Replacement Theology. Which in turn the Roman church (and its bastard step child Protestantism) has used to harass Jews all over the world for the last 1500 years.
Christians for some reason are clueless; The Roman empire was falling apart at the seems, it needed a major shake up. A new religion enforced at the point of a sword with all sorts of new rules and decrees, one that incorporated the fun pagan rites of the birth of the son of the sun on December 25, and just 9 months before the pagan day dedicated to the impregnation of Asherah/Ishtar the mother of god, the queen of the universe. Christmas, Easter, and the story of Mary the mother of god and baby Jesus the son to be worshiped on Sun god Day. The Edict of Milan one religion to rule them all.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edict_of_Milan
That's why you always make foolish assertions - you make "Christian scholars" your god, as long as they agree with your foolish assertions. Good luck.
Lol, now you're grasping at straws. Using the term Christian scholars provides a reliable source for you to follow, providing a source of confirmation to my assertions regarding addition of many NT verses by the Roman church.
It might behove a Christian to understand what their pastor is teaching is false based on the very source material they claim is the inspired words of God. All pastors, priests, and clerics know their doctrines stand in opposition to the God they claim as inspiration. At least Paul was forthright in claiming his inspiration came from Satan. 2 Cor 12:7 but this does not seem to bother Christians.
There are about 3,000 plus 'christian' denominations. Obviously, they can't all be right, and, in fact, all are wrong, to one degree or another. So no, a 'christian scholar,' by definition would be unreliable. And your assertion that Paul claimed his inspiration came from satan is also false, no matter how many times you state it. No one, even an unreliable 'christian scholar,' would make such a claim. That all came from you, and/or the false teachers you follow. I wish you the best - happy new year.
Lol, in referencing the title 'Christian scholars' the name of two men were clearly mentioned, as such I was not referencing every scholar from every flavor of Christianity, but you known this to be true. You're religious and as such cannot be found to be in error.
I'll state my irrefutable proof once again; Philip Comfort and David Barrett are considered by the entire of the Christian academic world to have written what is considered to be most accurate, detailed and comprehensive collection of 3rd and 4th century CE Greek manuscripts. If a verse found is found in the NT that does not exist within the pages of their book it was added by the Roman church after the 5th century CE. The entirety of Matthew 27 does not appear in the collection of Greek manuscripts. I did a study subsequent study of this same university text book comparing the KJB translation listing all verses that were added by the Roman church. I'll post that, I think even you would be surprised. Literally every instance of Jews being portrayed as evil was added by the RC. Moreover, all verses where Jesus is preaching against the prescriptions found in Towrah were added in a effort to make Jesus appear more Roman catholic. The entirety of John 8 was added.
The system is rigged, and for a good reason. We can't have poor folks logging into Crypto Defi and trading Perpetual Futures, possibly turning $50 into thousands or a steady daily paycheck. All USA based IP addresses are blocked on Defi exchanges for Derivative Trading. There's always a work around, wiith use of a VPN creating an IP address from a Nation that is not so restrictive.
Previously I said Crypto is mostly a scam, and that is true, but there's people willing to invest (gamble) so I'm aiding market making. Crypto is a scam on the level of the Stock Market's Dotcom bubble, not all Dot Coms tanked some are household names today. Not all cryptos are a scam, just most of the alt coins, accept those that hung on because some have millions invested and won't let them go to zero.
The hard wiring is full of shorts & 'the enemy of my enemy is my friend' fuses.
Electrical/synaptical fires are always burning down the House, M.D. ("Everybody lies..." ~ the good TV doctors credo ~ along the path of least resistance).
And the yogis chant ohhhmmmm @432Hz while stealing every Jellystone pic-a-nic basket they can lay/lie their paws on.
The kiters with the keys to the electrical panel have always loved telegraphing their threats: "A Republic, if you can keep it."
There is no government in the future. At least 6000 entity will exist. Biological reasons.
Who is this "we" you speak of? And why so dismissive? Unless you are completely unhooked from society, and it sounds like you are because of your ill manners towards fellow readers, you too will be impacted. Ignore at your peril.
No worries my friend. You were very magnanimous to respond the way you did. I hope you, your family, and friends have a healthy and happy New Year.