Yes, More On NEWS VII
Historically, Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau produced the most famous social contract theories. (click) Hobbes proposed monarchy. Locke proposed natural rights. Natural rights are determined by 'Laws of Nature' and 'Laws of Nature's God.' And, Rousseau proposed a maximum level of freedom.
Since Locke's theory was accepted widely by the colonists, Locke's theory was included in the Declaration of Independence (DOI) by the founders with the phrase 'Laws of Nature and Nature's God.' My work proves that God exists and is active. So, Locke's social contract theory is very important to the USA.
In response to an early letter from me, Senator Rockefeller said that U.S. lawyers say that the DOI is only an authority to go to war against England. So, a group of lawyers must have changed the DOI by reinterpreting it and destroying Locke's social contract. Here is the cause of today's ugly debates between President Obama, Republicans and Tea Party.
The DOI must have been reinterpreted some time after the assassination of Abe Lincoln because Lincoln used the DOI to start the Civil War and stop slavery. So, after 1865, a group of lawyers must have reinterpreted the DOI and changed the USA from a nation under an active God to a godless nation.
Since socialism is being rejected by Republicans and the Tea Party, the current political debate will continue.
posted by George Shollenberger @ 11:48 AM
13 Comments:
At 12:29 PM,
David S. Wilkinson said…
I would hope they oppose it. We've had two and a half years of Obama's policies and Keynsian economics and they have been a dismal failures. Socialism has failed everywhere it has been tried because it collapses under it's own weight. As Margaret Thatcher said, "the problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money)
At 1:44 PM,
George Shollenberger said…
Response to David S. Wilkinson,
Keynesian economics has never failed. It was used by FDR to replace the mechanical and failing economics of Herbert Hoover.It was also used by Clinton with success. Who has proven that it has failed? I want to study this proof.
The social contract also never failed. A group of lawyers destroyed the social contract by destroying the Declaration of Independence.
A nation under God never runs out of money. Thatcher had a King, which limits money.
You have lost God.
George
At 8:11 AM,
David S. Wilkinson said…
Oh George you do amuse me. In theory socialism works fine but then it runs up against a little thing called reality.
Your dream of an equal society definitely fails under socialism. If youy want to see true income disparity look at socialist countries of the past and present.
At 8:27 AM,
David S. Wilkinson said…
I recommend reading "the Road to Serfdom" by Hayek. It's very illuminating on economic principle and practice.
At 9:46 AM,
George Shollenberger said…
Response to David S. Wilkinson,
Like most republicans and democrats, you are defining socialism as one who raads history books that describe social science, social experiments, and communism.
My socialism is different. It hss a God who provides people with natural rights. These rights are shard with a government who secures the people. Thi socialism was defined by our founders in the Declaration of Independence and the phrase 'Lar of Nature and Nature's God.
So, you are ignorant of my work.
George
At 10:05 AM,
David S. Wilkinson said…
George,
I've read your work and it's all conjecture so you can adjust it on a whim.very convenient I must say.
You describe a socialist utopia which cannot exist because man will always seek power and will not allow for true equality to ever exist.Many of the founders held this position and sought a very limited federal government. As Jefferson said' a government that tries to give everything to it's citizens will in time be forced to take everything from it's citizens.
At 10:19 AM,
George Shollenberger said…
Response to David S. Wilkinson,
"The Road to Serfdom" by Hayek does not consider God and natural rightsn in the Declaration of Independence. The agreeing reviewers of Hayer seem to be atheists because they do not talk about the natural rights of the USA.
I suggest the you read the recent review of Hayak by Sajar Jethani.
If you accept Hayer, you seem to reject the natural rights that are defined by our founders.
George
At 10:42 AM,
George Shollenberger said…
Response to Dvid S. Wilkinson,
I don't belive that you have ever read my material. If you had read it, you would know that none of my conjectures can be adjusted because they all stand on the foundation of God.
All of your comments are focused on capitalism and the writings of capitalists. Thus, your commenta are never on God, never on the he contents of the founding documents, and never deals with Ch. 24 of Matthew, where Jesus says that the sun will darkens. What will capitalism do when the sun darkens? My socialism considers the darkening of the sun.
George
At 7:56 AM,
David S. Wilkinson said…
George it's hard to have a rational discussion about socialism when your socialism only exists in your head.
I do read your work George but it's become tedious because you don't accept any dialogue unless it fits your theory.
At 9:32 AM,
George Shollenberger said…
Response to David S. Wilkinson,
My socialism will be difficult for anyone to capturre. I was going to make second book. But but dcided against a book because my eyesight is getting bad and because the atheists will jump all over it.
So, I decided to teach on my website. The problem on my wbsite is that the blogs cannot be too long.
But I believe that study groups in the USA, Europe, Asia, Canada, and Australia are beginning to study my blogs.
I suggest that you read the blog on "The Rwo World's Of Panentheism at 9/4/10. Jesus also teaches thes complex world.
George
At 8:05 AM,
David S. Wilkinson said…
I'm still trying to grasp how you study the teachings of Christ yet do not accept his divinity all because that would be admitting that something doesn't match your theory. That's the nature of Jesus, that he was sent to confound the world and illustrate the wonder of God. Galatians is a good study of this.
At 12:38 PM,
George Shollenberger said…
Response to David S. Wilkinson,
I could not accept the idea of ae Son of God after I proved scientifically tha all finite things have their origin in an infinite thing. This means that the thing is God and has in infinite number of attributes. Stating God scientifically I say that God is not-not-infinite. All this mens is tht science cannot know God.
In the New Testament, Jesus never says that he is the Son o God. Only the disciples seem to identify Jesus as the Son of God.
I was impressd with Jesus because he spoke of the kingdom of heaven at Matt. 5:19 and used the variabie --- 'leas' and 'great.' His thoughts were highly advanced compared to te writings in the Old Teatament. Variables and modern science dd not appear until Galileo worked on the motion of the pendulum. Jesus changed my thoughts on the New Testament.
George
At 1:42 PM,
David S. Wilkinson said…
I think (and you probably don't want to hear this) that Jesus is making inroads into your heart as you study his teachings. Trust me I've met people whose hearts were hardened towards Jesus far more than yours, yet today they have a relationship with him and through that relationship have a much better understanding of God
Post a Comment
<< Home