False Gods Among Us
Sin is a biblical definition which a God the deity of a religious sect, sees as wrong for his followers to participate in, or face the consequences of your sins as set in the Ten commandments (Exodus 20–23). Man, often rewrites that definition to mean something else when it suits them. The first part of the Ten commandments are religious that define the Hebrew Faith, the remaining are moral laws, governing Man’s behavior toward others. The Ten commandments where originally given to the Hebrews. The Christian faith regarded them as authoritative, and the Christian church has always accepted them. Since than we have moral laws based on those Ten commandments that all should follow regardless of your Hebrew or Christian affiliation or non-belief laws of the land. The Ten commandments extended into thousands of structural laws to put order to Societal behavior to maintain a peaceful habitation between people regardless of religious affiliation or non-believers. In essence Thou should not Kill, Thou shall not commit adultery, Thou shall not steal, Thou shall not bear false witness against thy neighbor, that shall not worship false gods, etc., evolved into volumes of laws governing the consequences of breaking those sins and legislative laws.
Many such laws of man today are intended to uphold moral principles of behavior, while others define the function of members of society to behave as a social community, such as speeding laws, laws that define justice and punishment for breaking the law. Revoking of unfair and unjust laws, upholding humanitarian laws, government functioning laws such as voting and elections laws. Government Constitutional laws, Medical laws, Insurance laws, Financial laws, Educational laws, and so forth all based on the Ten commandments or expanding the Ten commandments to meet modern day society needs. Once the Hebrew faith and the Christian faith recognized the Ten commandments they codified them into their belief system, as worthy and just, so have all other laws of the land since then been codified and accepted as right for the people regardless of religious belief.
Not all laws are seen as fair, not all rules and regulations are seen as fair. Not all laws are free of double standards. Not all forms of justice have stood the test of time and have been revoked or appealed for the good of the people. Even the Ten commandments have been abused or ignored and mistranslated to mean one thing by a few or a many. And when you consider the historical time frame of their deliverance to Moses as told in the Old testament, are they relevant today when todays societal laws are so diverse and many since Moses time. Can the bible having gone through so many translation be pure in its translation as an actuate description of events in the Old testament given much of those earlier books of the Old testament is based on oral history passed on from generation to generation. Then those oral history recorded in written form. Somewhere along that passage of time the accuracy may be suspect. So must the earlier translations of the written word of God in the old and new testament when you consider the translation from Hebrew to Greek, to Latin and English translations and the authors of those translations. In many cases they where the Roman Catholic church as it expanded into new lands and new priest were anointed from those lands. New priest who had to learn Latin. Today the authors of history in general would and should admit that a historical oral story is not aways an actual depiction of fact when the historical author choose to omit or base his facts on personal views or political views, or mistranslation from one language to another. To error is to be human.
Even today, in our technological era of communicational tools we see misinformation becoming an art form to deliberately confuse and mislead the people, to play on the gullibility of young minds and old minds alike and everyone in between. We have come to believe fiction is fact, and fact is fiction. That a media personality is unable to lie or is unable to leave their personal opinions home and report an unbiased story to the public. When we have political figures doing the same and embellishing fact with fiction. When it is more fiction then fact to get elected, we demoralize the public views of such officials use of misinformation, confusing the minds of our youth and voters alike as to what is right and what is wrong. When wrong becomes right, and right is seen as wrong, we create an instability in our society to be able to understand the difference when misinformation is deliberately intended to gain someone financially, politically, and create a sense that the person or organization is a righteous person or honest organization. Both being a false god, when they want you to see them as a righteous God. Do as I say, not as the written codified law says.
We have entered into an era were long standing Laws once seen as right, fair and codified, suddenly become a wrong and the effort of a few overturn that law to benefit them personally. Is that right? When new laws are passed to correct an injustice seen my many as wrong, then a few in later years what that new law seen as wrong or want that voting law revoked to benefit them personally as individuals or group when the law is fair to all. Is that right when the highest court in the land approved that law as right. When the political climate changes, should the laws of the land change like winter to spring, spring to summer, summer to fall to suit that political climate, every four or eight years, even 50 years later reversing women’s rights to abortion or reversing more recent rights for LGBQT and same couple marriages. It might be understandable that the nations churches as a whole desire that these changes reflect the Ten commandments are obeyed or what the old and new testament quotes. Remember, there are no living person from the time of Adam and Eve except what men of God in many centuries later tell us. Just like men and women today have their own translation of the bibles text and what it means to them. However, when the churches today are divided as to what is right or wrong, is that translation right or wrong. Where within their own organization they have difference of opinion and split away from their national affiliation to the parent church in support of LGBQT rights. Even the two major political parties are at disarray over these issues within their own ranks. The same parties years earlier members were in favor of such rights, now with new leadership and members, like members who lied to get into office, or have no political experience, or lack mental stability to serve in the best interest of the people who voted for them. We are in an era of flip flopping on passed laws or Supreme court decisions on Translation of laws.
By U.S. constitutional law, in essence the church is separate from the state in regards that the state shall not define laws that govern the freedom of religion in such way’s it controls religion, or the church define laws that govern the state. Laws of the state govern all citizens of the state regardless of religious affiliations. Therefore, if a church see’s its moral laws conflict with the states moral laws, then that church shouldn’t be forced to recognize same sex marriage or the rights of LGBQT as it pertain to its membership directly, not those outside the church. Whereas a church group who does recognize same sex marriage and the rights of LGBQT and accepts them into their membership they should have the right to do so, even it they must split from the parent church to do so. The parent church has the right to ban them from the organization, nor does the state have the right to support the church decision. That does not mean the banned church or church group that splits from the parent organization isn’t a religious order anymore. Just a new independent Christian denomination exercising their freedom of free speech and the right to reform under codified law as a new church. The church and state remains separate still. As for the supreme court making decisions for the church on those rights, their purpose is to uphold existing laws, and give legal interpretation of those laws, and when needed revoke or adapt those laws to be fair and just to all regardless of political climate or religion. They do not make laws for the state or the church. Yet, when they fall pressure to the current political climate to change or revoke current law, based on that political climate are they wrong to do so when they should and have historically been a bench of unbiased judges.
Have we entered an era where even the supreme court, will be pressured into changing, or revoking parts or all of our constitution and bill of rights because one political party in control demands it. It would be akin to saying you had the right to breath since the time of Genesis and when earth was first created in six days. Now on the seventh day thousands of years later, the few say you no longer have that right where a regime of political bullies says you can’t breath anymore, and hands out a new list of rights for you. Top of the list says you have no rights only we do to change your rights and we own all the oxygen masks/tanks in the world. Then 20 years later a new political regime changes everything again, and again and again. You wake up not sure if you can even open your eyes, or breath. Yet alone having rights that make it possible to feel human, love someone regardless of theirs or your sexual orientation, vote for the candidate that best serves and protect your rights, and know those rights won’t change from day to day because a few thinks they should. Once you lose your right to vote, you lose your right to have any rights inherit, past, present or future. You lose your voice, and the breath you need to speak out against the few or the many, or the one. Who is right, who is wrong, the many or the few. When the many are mislead by misinformation, the few gain. When long standing codified Law and Constitutional law are no longer relevant today, the many suffer the loss of their rights, while the few gain. When the few rebel against sound law they in the end will lose their rights when the many regain their voice and say enough is enough at the voting poles. Whose voices are the loudest, the few or the many. And when the many say leave that which is not broken alone, fix that which is broken. Who decides what is broken false Gods. Once written in clear meaningful language and codified by the highest court in the land, it shall not be revoked because a few desire it to be so. So, they can hold power over the many for personal gain of wealth while the many suffer under that power. This nation is doomed when we, bear false witness against thy neighbor, covet thy neighbors freedom of rights, property, dignity, prosperity, even thy neighbors right to breath a sigh of relief that my children’s children and their children have the same rights our forefathers wanted for this nation and the rights I have gained since then and the rights they shall gain, not lose them to the few who think they are Gods, they are false Gods not worthy of our worship and respect.
