Have Americans tired of Democracy?

[Reneep]

I hear voices as well! I think it might be the neighbours though.

The problem with telepathic and the shape shifting part of " creation" is that they sound like you to you. UNTIL IT COMES OUT OF SOMEONE ELSES MOUTH! IDENTIFING THE Holy from the profane in our own heads is the hardest part.

JESUS PROMISES TO HELP THOSE WHO TRULY WISH TO"KNOW HIS VOICE ", SEEMS THEY ARE THE ONES TO KEEP KNOCKING ON HIS DOOR. AND KEEP SEEKING HIM and seeking in his Word AND DO NOT SEE/ seek MANS IDEAS. ONLY THEN CAN WE FIND HIM.

AND HE IS A SHAPE SHIFTER AND IS TELEPATHIC ALSO. THAT IS WHY HE IS THE "SMALL QUIET VOICE " THAT SOUNDS LIKE ME TO ME, and sounds like you to you also.. So knowing his voice and his word (and not his face ) is best for his salvation.

 

[Bradskii]

The problem with telepathic and the shape shifting part of " creation" is that they sound like you to you. UNTIL IT COMES OUT OF SOMEONE ELSES MOUTH! IDENTIFING THE Holy from the profane in our own heads is the hardest part.

JESUS PROMISES TO HELP THOSE WHO TRULY WISH TO"KNOW HIS VOICE ", SEEMS THEY ARE THE ONES TO KEEP KNOCKING ON HIS DOOR. AND KEEP SEEKING HIM and seeking in his Word AND DO NOT SEE/ seek MANS IDEAS. ONLY THEN CAN WE FIND HIM.

AND HE IS A SHAPE SHIFTER AND IS TELEPATHIC ALSO. THAT IS WHY HE IS THE "SMALL QUIET VOICE " THAT SOUNDS LIKE ME TO ME, and sounds like you to you also.. So knowing his voice and his word (and not his face ) is best for his salvation.

Could you please stop SHOUTING. Thanks very much.

 

[Reneep]

Could you please stop SHOUTING. Thanks very much.

Gal 6 :11

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

I wouldn't say those are the modern meanings of the terms. Various countries have people vote for who they want to despite having a monarch. And one can't say a democracy is a country where all the people vote for someone, because in no country does every single person have the ability to vote.

I would say I agree with this definition of democracy from the New Oxford American Dictionary was being a good one:

"a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives"

Its definition of republic, incidentally, is:

"a state in which supreme power is held by the people and their elected representatives, and which has an elected or nominated president rather than a monarch."

One may notice there is considerable overlap between these.

When people try to insist on the whole "the US isn't a democracy, it's a republic!" they are insisting on using old definitions for these terms. It is true that in the past, the term "democracy" had a more restrictive meaning, and a republic was seen as in opposition to democracy. Here's the definition of democracy offered in Samuel Webster's 1828 dictionary, which I believe is the first major American dictionary:

DEMOCRACY, noun [Gr. People, and to possess, to govern.] Government by the people; a form of government, in which the supreme power is lodged in the hands of the people collectively, or in which the people exercise the powers of legislation. Such was the government of Athens.

Now compare the same dictionary's definition of republic

REPUB'LIC, noun [Latin respublica; res and publica; public affairs.]
1. A commonwealth; a state in which the exercise of the sovereign power is lodged in representatives elected by the people. In modern usage, it differs from a democracy or democratic state, in which the people exercise the powers of sovereignty in person. Yet the democracies of Greece are often called republics.
2. Common interest; the public. [Not in use.]
Republic of letters, the collective body of learned men.

This explicitly draws a distinction between a republic and a democracy. A republic has ruling representatives elected by the people who rule (indirect rule by the people); a democracy has the people rule themselves (direct rule by the people). The example it gives of a democracy is ancient Athens, in which everyone eligible (namely, anyone who was white, free, adult, and not foreign) could speak in the assembly and vote on legislation. Basically, the government was essentially run by referendum. That was what a democracy was viewed as, in comparison to a republic where people elected representatives who did all of that.

So this attempt to draw a distinction between democracy and republic isn't out of nowhere. The problem is that when I look at the calendar, I see 2025, not 1828. The fact people distinguished between those terms 200 years ago in this way does not mean that is the meanings of them now. Since then, the term "democracy" has expanded considerably in meaning to include systems with elected representatives, and thus now rather than democracy and republics being different things, a republic is a kind of democracy.

Indeed, even in Webster's time the term democracy was being used to refer to republics like the United States, even if it was not as common as it would be later. For example, consider this remark by John Quincy Adams in his inaugural address from 1825, a few years before Webster's dictionary was published:

"If there have been those who doubted whether a confederated representative democracy were a government competent to the wise and orderly management of the common concerns of a mighty nation, those doubts have been dispelled"

As another example of word shift, consider the following definition from Webster's 1828 dictionary:

AWFUL, adjective [awe and full.]
1. That strikes with awe; that fills with profound reverence; as the awful majesty of Jehovah.
2. That fills with terror and dread; as the awful approach of death.
3. Struck with awe; scrupulous.
A weak and awful reverence for antiquity.
Shakespeare uses it for worshipful, inspiring respect by authority or dignity.
Our common people use this word in the sense of frightful, ugly, detestable.

This indeed shows us a shift that was already in progress, with its note of how while Shakespeare used it for worshipful (fitting with definition #1), "our common people" use it in the sense of being frightful (#2). The word awful comes from "awe" and "full" to mean full of awe, from which we see definitions #1 and #3. It at some later point developed definition #2, meaning frightening. But none of these fit to its most common modern usage, which is to mean unpleasant or very bad, which probably derives from #2 but is still rather different.

Thus this argument I think is generally irrelevant. The one point in which the republic/democracy distinction might matter is if someone is arguing "we're a democracy, so the majority opinion should rule" then the republic/democracy distinction might be relevant, but even there it would be more accurate to say the United States is a democracy, but not a pure democracy, which means majority doesn't automatically win everything. However, I don't think that was at any point an issue of discussion here; whether the United States is technically a democracy or a constitutional republic appears to be irrelevant for the purpose of the question that was presented in the topic.

Unfortunately, a misguided, misinformed public can basically undo their own "res".
Faithfull citizenship takes work as well as self challenge. Are we tired of it? Or have we ever really done it?
Wouldn't we rather watch short news clips and postings affirming what we already think?
And then have the excuse to hand over far more control and authority than our founding fathers imagined.

This was chilling for today.

Julius Caesar: The Making of a Dictator

Nearly 5 centuries of ancient Roman democracy was overthrown in just 16 years by one man.

www.pbs.org

 

[Landon Caeli]

What has jarred me, and this has been rather recent (embarrassingly so), has been my discover of how thoroughly--but so surreptitiously--Marxism has been insinuated into the Democratic Party and the traditional halls of classical liberalism. No, they haven't been using the blunt-instrument populism of the Right...but they have provided the opening into which the Right has plunged that blunt instrument.

I appreciate the graphic language. I like it!.

 

[eclipsenow]

New York Times: The first signs of tyranny, from people who missed them.

"You'll want to think it's not happening, because otherwise you might have to do something."

He's also purged a lot of the top top brass from the military.

Friday night purge as Trump fires top general and five senior military staff

The sweeping and extraordinary intervention is expected to shock the Pentagon and upend the tradition of the joint chiefs chair serving a new administration.

www.smh.com.au

Comment from a friend I respect:

I’ve seen a number of posts recently crying out for the impeachment of Trump or Musk. Folks, that tactic has already been tried and failed—twice.

Since then the DOGE blitzkrieg has plowed on in defiance of the legislative and judicial branches of government, making a mockery of constitutional separation of powers.

To solidify this hold he has purged the watchdog agencies, purged the FBI, purged the military leadership and even purged JAG, the folks responsible for pulling up military leaders when they are breaking the law.

Very soon there be no legal breaks left on the executive whatsoever. No effective ones anyway. Indeed we may have already reached this point. So, let’s forget this silliness of crying impeachment. US Democracy just rolled a critical fail. Nothing short of a general strike is going to stop him at this point.

(This last image is a reference to D&D dice. A "Critical Roll" is your last attempt to save vs Dragon's Breath or some other threat. If you're into sports - it's a bit like a "Hail Mary" pass - only in this case it went to the other team and gave them a score! I'm not that into sports - but because I'm a Geek I watched Stargate Atlantis where they explained the concept. )

 

[eclipsenow]

What Bible verses support “freedom of religion”?

That is a big topic, and quite nuanced and difficult to legislate for. Concepts for the freedom of religion and separation of church and state (though probably not in the modern, American sense) come from the New Testament.

Historical quirk: It's ironic that in England which has a 'State church' (The Church of England) they had PM Rishi Sunak - a man of Hindu faith - and that in the USA (which supposedly has separation of the church and state) you cannot seem to become President unless you at least pretend to be a Christian.

Anyway - to answer your question some verses that come to mind:

SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE

John 18:36 Jesus said, “My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jewish leaders. But now my kingdom is from another place.​

Faith isn’t enforced through political or military means. Advocates for religious freedom use this to argue that Christianity shouldn’t rely on state coercion—its domain is the heart, not the sword.

Then there is when the Pharisees tried to trap Jesus. They were asking him whether or not to pay taxes to Caesar. If Jesus said YES - he was pro-Roman and might lose the crowd. If he said NO - he could be dobbed in as a rebel and the Romans would do the Pharisees dirty work and take Jesus away. There's drama in the air!

Matthew 22:18 But Jesus, knowing their evil intent, said, “You hypocrites, why are you trying to trap me? 19 Show me the coin used for paying the tax.” They brought him a denarius, 20 and he asked them, “Whose image is this? And whose inscription?”​

21 “Caesar’s,” they replied.​

Then he said to them, “So give back to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s.”​

22 When they heard this, they were amazed. So they left him and went away.​

Jesus is saying there's a distinction between civil and spiritual obligations. The two are not always bound together. Where in Islam you must pay a special tax if you are not a Muslim but follow some other faith.

CHRISTIAN RESPECT FOR UN-CHURCHED GOVERNMENT

In Romans 13 Paul advises all Christians to obey the law as they are "God's servants to do you good." He's speaking of the pagan Roman government who would often take their hard earned tax money and build a temple to Jupiter or a statue for the glory of the Emperor! But anything is better than chaos. "They do not bear the sword for nothing." The government is there to avoid chaos - whether Christian or pagan. There's a similar vibe in 1 Peter 2:16-17, and also 1 Timothy 2 where Paul writes:

2 I urge, then, first of all, that petitions, prayers, intercession and thanksgiving be made for all people— 2 for kings and all those in authority, that we may live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness. 3 This is good, and pleases God our Savior, 4 who wants all people to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth.​

In other words - don't take a quite life for granted. Pray for peace! Declare the gospel - but there's nothing here about overtaking the government.

THE CHURCH JUDGES ITSELF - NOT THE OUTSIDE WORLD

In 1 Cor 5 Paul is rebuking the Corinthian church for some really sad sexual stuff that had been going on - and talking about excommunicating certain people. But he's clear he is talking about church discipline - and in an almost throw away line gives some more clarity on separation of church and state.

2 What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? 13 God will judge those outside. “Expel the wicked person from among you.”​

VOLUNTARY FAITH

Then there's the famous verse that Billy Graham and others have used at the conclusion of their talks.

Revelation 3:20 - "Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and eat with him, and he with me."​

Why is this relevant? It shows that Christians should not assume that we can force Jesus on people! It's an invitation. They can open the door or refuse to open it. Along these lines we also see:

1 Peter 3:15-16 instructs believers to "always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect."

2 Timothy 2:24-26, which speaks of those who oppose the gospel, needing to be gently instructed.

Read - there's to be no forcing anyone to convert. The Spanish Inquisition? NOT a thing backed by the bible.

CONSTANTINE - THE FIRST ROMAN EMPEROR TO BECOME A CHRISTIAN - UNDERSTOOD SOMETHING OF THIS...
“Freedom and full liberty has been granted in accordance with the peace of our times to exercise free choice in worshipping as each one has seen fit. This has been done by us so that nothing may seem to be taken away from anyone’s honour or from any religion whatsoever.”

For more have a listen to my favourite Christian podcast "Undeceptions". The host has been a client of ours. John Dickson is a cheeky Aussie theologian and historian - and asks his guest experts some questions on behalf of the sceptics he knows listen to this show.

Religious Freedom

Undeceptions Episode 40: Freedom of religion is often attributed to a secular cry. However there are religious origins to religious freedom.

undeceptions.com

John Dickson (the host) often says Christians have 4 tools at their disposal for influencing the state - and it basically seems to be by influencing enough people to then eventually force a grassroots impact on societal opinion. That's it!

Those 4 tools are Persuasion, Prayer, Service, and Suffering for the gospel.
That's it! I just don't get "Christian Nationalism".

But on the other, darker side of things we call "Christian Nationalism" - have you listened to this Pulitzer Prize winning podcast by NPR? It's not a Christian podcast - but covers the gun movement in America. But as it unfolds, like so many of NPR's best podcast series - the picture just gets darker and scarier and more cult-like. Check it out! I am of course totally against this sort of thing!

https://www.npr.org/podcasts/510356/no-compromise

 

[Pommer]

Nothing, the Church Age is ending and the Kingdom Age is beginning. There are hundreds of names for both.

So it’s not the dawning of the age of Aquarius?

 

[Pommer]

The one that talks about choice and our feedom to choose. We choose if we want to "serve" God or not. We need to follow His plan and purpose for our life. Psalm 139 16 talks about how He writes the book of our life at or before our conception, before He forms us in the Womb.

Great what about the verses where God metes out punishment for worshipping other gods?

 

[eclipsenow]

They call this Anglican and they use the Book of Common Prayer. Episcopalians in America although the Methodist church has their roots in the Anglican. They follow Apostolic Succession. When you join the church the Bishop lays on hands to pass the anointing onto you.

And? Relevance?

 

[eclipsenow]

Great what about the verses where God metes out punishment for worshipping other gods?

That's when the kingdom of God was about Israel. Hundreds of years BC. The shock and scandal of Jesus is that he overturned the ethno- religious nationalistic expectations of the Jews and showed how he fulfilled all that in spiritual terms. There were Old Testament prophets that talked about a vision of a super temple - and Jesus said he was the temple. (Where God and man literally meet in the one incarnate being.) He was the ultimate sacrifice - one of the main functions of the temple. Etc. Then the greatest shock of all - his kingdom is not of this world.

So now all that other idols stuff? All the harsher sounding laws from the Old Testament that seem so scary to our ears? Judgement for all that is postponed till the end. But that's getting way off this topic - and quite theological.

That's my summary of what my more theologically trained mates seem to say. (But with all sorts of complicated theological terms even I don't get - and I was quite the lay reader on this stuff back in the day.)

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

New York Times: The first signs of tyranny, from people who missed them.

"You'll want to think it's not happening, because otherwise you might have to do something."

He's also purged a lot of the top top brass from the military.

Friday night purge as Trump fires top general and five senior military staff

The sweeping and extraordinary intervention is expected to shock the Pentagon and upend the tradition of the joint chiefs chair serving a new administration.

www.smh.com.au

Comment from a friend I respect:

I’ve seen a number of posts recently crying out for the impeachment of Trump or Musk. Folks, that tactic has already been tried and failed—twice.

Since then the DOGE blitzkrieg has plowed on in defiance of the legislative and judicial branches of government, making a mockery of constitutional separation of powers.

To solidify this hold he has purged the watchdog agencies, purged the FBI, purged the military leadership and even purged JAG, the folks responsible for pulling up military leaders when they are breaking the law.

Very soon there be no legal breaks left on the executive whatsoever. No effective ones anyway. Indeed we may have already reached this point. So, let’s forget this silliness of crying impeachment. US Democracy just rolled a critical fail. Nothing short of a general strike is going to stop him at this point.
View attachment 361617
(This last image is a reference to D&D dice. A "Critical Roll" is your last attempt to save vs Dragon's Breath or some other threat. If you're into sports - it's a bit like a "Hail Mary" pass - only in this case it went to the other team and gave them a score! I'm not that into sports - but because I'm a Geek I watched Stargate Atlantis where they explained the concept. )

It will come down to economics. And we have seen that actual data does not matter. Rather, it is the experience of each of us at the grocery store and gas station. It does not matter how popular he now is or what official power he has.

 

[DaisyDay]

The one that talks about choice and our feedom to choose.

And which one(s) is that?

 

[DaisyDay]

It will come down to economics. And we have seen that actual data does not matter. Rather, it is the experience of each of us at the grocery store and gas station. It does not matter how popular he now is or what official power he has.

He's giving us circuses galore, but the bread is even more important to the people.

 

[DaisyDay]

The question has to do with the freedom of religion. They were talking about the church of England which is the Anglo church which is the Episcopal church here in America.

Freedom of religion in the United States is a fundamental right guaranteed by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. This principle is based on two key clauses:

1. Establishment Clause: This clause prohibits the government from establishing an official religion or favoring one religion over others. It ensures that there is no state-sponsored religion and that the government remains neutral in matters of religion.
2. Free Exercise Clause: This clause protects individuals' rights to practice their religion freely without government interference. It allows people to hold and practice their religious beliefs, attend religious services, and express their faith openly.

AI doing your writing?

 

[eclipsenow]

It will come down to economics. And we have seen that actual data does not matter.

Yes - as America's economic growth was going well under Biden. People just don't like inflation - and won't even read something as basic as the global energy crisis wiki to understand just what an enormous confluence of world events it was. Blame Biden? That's just ignorant.

Rather, it is the experience of each of us at the grocery store and gas station. It does not matter how popular he now is or what official power he has.

It does matter if they so stack the other branches that they create some false flag pretext, abolish elections, declare martial law, and install JD Vance rather after Trump dies.

Democracy is a fragile thing.

Those of us watching from the outside world seems more concerned than American citizens.