"Some of us who are tranquil as still water about biblical doctrine and ecclesial mission are red-faced about ...how scary national health care will be."
Jack and Job,
I agree there is some hysteria. But I am not sure it is comepletely baseless. I grew up in MI so I lived near Canada. There were always people with money coming to the states to get treatment. I havent lived there in over 10 years but I know slow and rationed care is still happening. A month ago a I was told of a man that has been waiting for a heart cath for about 3 months. Just last last week a friend of mine told me of her brother who lives in Canada and unter their systerm has been waiting for months to hear back about a carpo tunnel problem (sp?). So the free system that we are about to get could (unintentionally) lead to worse care than we get. We very well could end up with a far worse have vs have not system than we do now. IMHO, that is what will happen. Either way, God is in control and I am choosing not to fret about it.
I agree there is some hysteria. But I am not sure it is comepletely baseless. I grew up in MI so I lived near Canada. There were always people with money coming to the states to get treatment. I havent lived there in over 10 years but I know slow and rationed care is still happening. A month ago a I was told of a man that has been waiting for a heart cath for about 3 months. Just last last week a friend of mine told me of her brother who lives in Canada and unter their systerm has been waiting for months to hear back about a carpo tunnel problem (sp?). So the free system that we are about to get could (unintentionally) lead to worse care than we get. We very well could end up with a far worse have vs have not system than we do now. IMHO, that is what will happen. Either way, God is in control and I am choosing not to fret about it.
Roger Carlson, Pastor Berean Baptist Church
My premiums will be dropping!
http://coldfusion-guy.blogspot.com/2010/03/20-promises-for-2500-all-ame…
http://coldfusion-guy.blogspot.com/2010/03/20-promises-for-2500-all-ame…
Roger,
I appreciate your recognition of God’s sovereignty. I agree that we could end up with a worse system as a result of this legislation. I’m not well enough acquainted with the complexities of either our current system or the new legislation to conclude whether that is likely.
I have heard that the two problems with our current system are access and cost. If the result is that I get a little less access so someone with no access can have some, I’m absolutely fine with that. If the costs are better spread because everyone has health insurance, I’m fine with that. If the costs go up because demand increases while supply remains static - well, I wouldn’t be real happy with that, but it wouldn’t be the collapse of civilization.
The alarmism I was specifically referring to is the idea that this legislation confirms that we are in the “end times.” As far as I can tell, we’ve been in the end times since Christ ascended into heaven to sit on the right hand of God the Father. No law passed down the street from me in Congress or ordered down the street the other direction from the desk of the President speeds up, slows down, or informs us as to God’s timing for Christ’s return.
I appreciate your recognition of God’s sovereignty. I agree that we could end up with a worse system as a result of this legislation. I’m not well enough acquainted with the complexities of either our current system or the new legislation to conclude whether that is likely.
I have heard that the two problems with our current system are access and cost. If the result is that I get a little less access so someone with no access can have some, I’m absolutely fine with that. If the costs are better spread because everyone has health insurance, I’m fine with that. If the costs go up because demand increases while supply remains static - well, I wouldn’t be real happy with that, but it wouldn’t be the collapse of civilization.
The alarmism I was specifically referring to is the idea that this legislation confirms that we are in the “end times.” As far as I can tell, we’ve been in the end times since Christ ascended into heaven to sit on the right hand of God the Father. No law passed down the street from me in Congress or ordered down the street the other direction from the desk of the President speeds up, slows down, or informs us as to God’s timing for Christ’s return.
Jack,
If you are referring to my posts, you are misreading my statements. I did not say it confirms we are in the “end times,” though it certainly appears that we are.
Also, rather than accusing people of spreading alarmism, please show where anything I or others have said is incorrect. Have you read anything about this bill? Are you aware of all the corruption that was involved in its passage and that much of the bill has nothing to do wtih healthcare?
Regarding your analysis of health care reform in post #18: Where does a Biblical worldview fit in all of this? Does the Bible say nothing about healthcare, to say nothing of economic principles, personal responsibility, principles for government, etc.?
I would expect that some of those ideas would be a given on this fundamentalist Web site. Perhaps I am assuming too much.
Also, please do not assume anything about my trust in God’s sovereignty — in the end times or otherwise — because I comment on this development. I do not believe that a belief in God’s sovereignty means I need to sit in a rocking chair and watch the world go by thinking everything will be fine.
If you are referring to my posts, you are misreading my statements. I did not say it confirms we are in the “end times,” though it certainly appears that we are.
Also, rather than accusing people of spreading alarmism, please show where anything I or others have said is incorrect. Have you read anything about this bill? Are you aware of all the corruption that was involved in its passage and that much of the bill has nothing to do wtih healthcare?
Regarding your analysis of health care reform in post #18: Where does a Biblical worldview fit in all of this? Does the Bible say nothing about healthcare, to say nothing of economic principles, personal responsibility, principles for government, etc.?
I would expect that some of those ideas would be a given on this fundamentalist Web site. Perhaps I am assuming too much.
Also, please do not assume anything about my trust in God’s sovereignty — in the end times or otherwise — because I comment on this development. I do not believe that a belief in God’s sovereignty means I need to sit in a rocking chair and watch the world go by thinking everything will be fine.
Church Ministries Representative, serving in the Midwest, for The Friends of Israel Gospel Ministry
NEWS RELEASE
Liberty University Files Lawsuit Against the Government Takeover of Healthcare
www.LC.org
Lynchburg, VA – Prior to midnight yesterday, Liberty Counsel filed a federal lawsuit against the newly signed healthcare law on behalf of Liberty University. The suit names as defendants the U.S. Secretary of the Treasury, Timothy Geithner, the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Kathleen Sebelius, the Secretary of Labor, Hilda Solis, and the U.S. Attorney General, Eric Holder, in their official capacities overseeing the enormous government expansion in health care regulations.
Jerry Falwell Jr. is Chancellor and CEO of Liberty University (LU), the largest Christian university in the world, with more than 58,000 students in its residence and online programs. LU employs over 5,100 people and is self-insured, offering quality health insurance and health savings accounts to its employees. Since it is self-insured, LU will be forced to pay a fee for each covered “life” (employees, spouses and dependents), and face many other burdensome, costly, and unnecessary regulations. LU is also concerned that the government takeover of the student loan industry, included in the reconciliation bill, will negatively impact its students. The lawsuit also includes a physician, and individuals who manage their own healthcare privately and do not want forced health insurance coverage. Also joining as a plaintiff is Kathy Byron, Delegate for the Commonwealth of Virginia, who voted in favor of a Virginia law that opposes the federal government takeover, and Lynchburg City Council Member Jeff Helgeson.
Congress lacks authority to force individuals and private employers to buy or provide health insurance. The law also violates the Free Exercise Clause and Religious Freedom Restoration Act by forcing the plaintiffs to subsidize abortion, the Free Speech and Association Clause by forcing plaintiffs to support and associate with private companies that cover abortion, the Establishment and Equal Protection Clauses by preferring only “recognized” religions for opt out purposes, the prohibition on unapportioned capitation or direct tax because the tax penalty on uninsured persons is not apportioned among the states according to census data and is directed to private third parties, and finally that Congress is prohibited by the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 from using reconciliation to affect Social Security benefits.
Mathew Staver, Founder of Liberty Counsel and Dean of Liberty University School of Law, said: “Forcing health insurance on every person and employer is a stunning example of arbitrary power the Constitution does not give to federal bureaucrats. In passing this law, President Obama and the Democratic Congress acted like the Constitution does not exist. But one day, the Supreme Court Justices will have their own captive audience and this brazen illegal power grab will come to an end.”
Jerry Falwell Jr. said: “We view the government’s actions this week as a frontal attack on the liberties and freedoms guaranteed to individuals by the Constitution. Liberty University is determined to defend its students, faculty and staff against this massive expansion of government that is arrogantly being imposed on the nation against the will of the people in violation of Constitutional principles.”
Liberty University Files Lawsuit Against the Government Takeover of Healthcare
www.LC.org
Lynchburg, VA – Prior to midnight yesterday, Liberty Counsel filed a federal lawsuit against the newly signed healthcare law on behalf of Liberty University. The suit names as defendants the U.S. Secretary of the Treasury, Timothy Geithner, the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Kathleen Sebelius, the Secretary of Labor, Hilda Solis, and the U.S. Attorney General, Eric Holder, in their official capacities overseeing the enormous government expansion in health care regulations.
Jerry Falwell Jr. is Chancellor and CEO of Liberty University (LU), the largest Christian university in the world, with more than 58,000 students in its residence and online programs. LU employs over 5,100 people and is self-insured, offering quality health insurance and health savings accounts to its employees. Since it is self-insured, LU will be forced to pay a fee for each covered “life” (employees, spouses and dependents), and face many other burdensome, costly, and unnecessary regulations. LU is also concerned that the government takeover of the student loan industry, included in the reconciliation bill, will negatively impact its students. The lawsuit also includes a physician, and individuals who manage their own healthcare privately and do not want forced health insurance coverage. Also joining as a plaintiff is Kathy Byron, Delegate for the Commonwealth of Virginia, who voted in favor of a Virginia law that opposes the federal government takeover, and Lynchburg City Council Member Jeff Helgeson.
Congress lacks authority to force individuals and private employers to buy or provide health insurance. The law also violates the Free Exercise Clause and Religious Freedom Restoration Act by forcing the plaintiffs to subsidize abortion, the Free Speech and Association Clause by forcing plaintiffs to support and associate with private companies that cover abortion, the Establishment and Equal Protection Clauses by preferring only “recognized” religions for opt out purposes, the prohibition on unapportioned capitation or direct tax because the tax penalty on uninsured persons is not apportioned among the states according to census data and is directed to private third parties, and finally that Congress is prohibited by the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 from using reconciliation to affect Social Security benefits.
Mathew Staver, Founder of Liberty Counsel and Dean of Liberty University School of Law, said: “Forcing health insurance on every person and employer is a stunning example of arbitrary power the Constitution does not give to federal bureaucrats. In passing this law, President Obama and the Democratic Congress acted like the Constitution does not exist. But one day, the Supreme Court Justices will have their own captive audience and this brazen illegal power grab will come to an end.”
Jerry Falwell Jr. said: “We view the government’s actions this week as a frontal attack on the liberties and freedoms guaranteed to individuals by the Constitution. Liberty University is determined to defend its students, faculty and staff against this massive expansion of government that is arrogantly being imposed on the nation against the will of the people in violation of Constitutional principles.”
Church Ministries Representative, serving in the Midwest, for The Friends of Israel Gospel Ministry
[Aaron Blumer] Some who are downplaying the scariness right now may have a very different opinion in about ten years. We’ll see.In the interests of balance Aaron, some who are hyping up the scariness may have a very different opinion in a shorter time than 10 years.
Richard Pajak
As a citizen and resident of one of those nations, just be aware that the chickens have not yet come home to roost on this question. All is not peaches and cream up here in the True North with respect to health care. Yes, we are all covered, and I personally have received far more than I have put in in taxes and premiums, but the whole system isn’t sustainable. Our government is trying to control costs by rationing care. It is just a fact of life. Our budgets are significantly impacted by health care and it is getting worse. Eventually the whole mess will collapse, but it takes a long time to bankrupt a modern nation.
Those who want private care can still have it if they can afford it. If you are worried that the system will collapse you can help by not making use of it and going private.
Richard Pajak
[Paul J. Scharf] Jack,
Are you aware of all the corruption that was involved in its passage and that much of the bill has nothing to do wtih healthcare?
Since when has corruption been a monopoly of the left?
I
Richard Pajak
Richard,
Frankly, your last three posts make very little sense. Did I say that corruption is a monopoly of the left?
Between these and the words of Job and Jack, this thread takes some strange turns.
Are you a fundamentalist? Are you a conservative? Have you been trained in Biblical worldview? Have you read anything about this bill?
SI, one would think, is not a place where we would debate whether a Biblical view of someting like economics is right or wrong, or whether we are conservatives or liberals. I can get that on MoveON.org or the network news. I challenge you guys to consider your words, and if you are not impostors on SI, you need to step it up a notch H:)
Frankly, your last three posts make very little sense. Did I say that corruption is a monopoly of the left?
Between these and the words of Job and Jack, this thread takes some strange turns.
Are you a fundamentalist? Are you a conservative? Have you been trained in Biblical worldview? Have you read anything about this bill?
SI, one would think, is not a place where we would debate whether a Biblical view of someting like economics is right or wrong, or whether we are conservatives or liberals. I can get that on MoveON.org or the network news. I challenge you guys to consider your words, and if you are not impostors on SI, you need to step it up a notch H:)
Church Ministries Representative, serving in the Midwest, for The Friends of Israel Gospel Ministry
[Paul J. Scharf] Are you a fundamentalist? Are you a conservative? Have you been trained in Biblical worldview? Have you read anything about this bill?last i checked, the http://sharperiron.org/doctrinal-statement] doctrinal statement didn’t require republican party loyalty.
SI, one would think, is not a place where we would debate whether a Biblical view of someting like economics is right or wrong, or whether we are conservatives or liberals.
Yes, but I would think that one would reasonably infer that it prohibits promoting socialism and communism.
And please do not accuse me of alarmism, extremism or end-times hyperbole. If you have something of substance to say, say it. :cry:
And please do not accuse me of alarmism, extremism or end-times hyperbole. If you have something of substance to say, say it. :cry:
Church Ministries Representative, serving in the Midwest, for The Friends of Israel Gospel Ministry
@Paul
I wasn’t referring specifically to your posts.
Why do I bear that burden? Characterizations such as scary legislation, disastrous consequences, not to mention your accusations against those who worked on this bill are all nothing more than assertions. I did attempt to cast my post as opinion and nothing more.
Yes, I’ve read quite a lot about this bill. This bill was passed in the same fashion, and is as broad in content, as almost any other major and contentious legislation passed in this country in the past several decades. This is the way it now works and, as much as the parties like to throw mud, no one in this town is at all surprised. In four or eight years, we’ll see some other legislation being passed in the same fashion and the method and content decried by the Democrats.
I believe the Bible says little if anything about health care, per se, even less about national economic principles (which, as a Keynesian, I think are very different from personal economic principles). I think there’s more in Scripture about personal responsibility, though it’s not all implicated in this legislation, and some guidance about principles of government, but probably my conclusions about the content of that teaching are very different from yours.
Yes, I think you assume far too much. I make no assumptions about your trust in or view of God’s sovereignty.
I’m not trying to expand the scope of this thread and am not really looking to get into the details of our differences. I’m sure we’re both convinced of the conclusions we draw from Scripture and can be encouraged that, though we may now be poles apart, God will unify our understanding perfectly when we stand before Him.
I wasn’t referring specifically to your posts.
Why do I bear that burden? Characterizations such as scary legislation, disastrous consequences, not to mention your accusations against those who worked on this bill are all nothing more than assertions. I did attempt to cast my post as opinion and nothing more.
Yes, I’ve read quite a lot about this bill. This bill was passed in the same fashion, and is as broad in content, as almost any other major and contentious legislation passed in this country in the past several decades. This is the way it now works and, as much as the parties like to throw mud, no one in this town is at all surprised. In four or eight years, we’ll see some other legislation being passed in the same fashion and the method and content decried by the Democrats.
I believe the Bible says little if anything about health care, per se, even less about national economic principles (which, as a Keynesian, I think are very different from personal economic principles). I think there’s more in Scripture about personal responsibility, though it’s not all implicated in this legislation, and some guidance about principles of government, but probably my conclusions about the content of that teaching are very different from yours.
Yes, I think you assume far too much. I make no assumptions about your trust in or view of God’s sovereignty.
I’m not trying to expand the scope of this thread and am not really looking to get into the details of our differences. I’m sure we’re both convinced of the conclusions we draw from Scripture and can be encouraged that, though we may now be poles apart, God will unify our understanding perfectly when we stand before Him.
Jack,
We are indeed poles apart.
Keynesian economics is a complete violation of Scripture. I would challenge you to read “Seven Men Who Rule the World from the Grave” by the late Dr. Dave Breese.
http://www.amazon.com/Seven-Men-Rule-World-Grave/dp/0802484484
P.S. — The Pilgrims also struggled with socialism for a time. They later reflected that they thought themselves “wiser than God” during that experiment…
We are indeed poles apart.
Keynesian economics is a complete violation of Scripture. I would challenge you to read “Seven Men Who Rule the World from the Grave” by the late Dr. Dave Breese.
http://www.amazon.com/Seven-Men-Rule-World-Grave/dp/0802484484
P.S. — The Pilgrims also struggled with socialism for a time. They later reflected that they thought themselves “wiser than God” during that experiment…
Church Ministries Representative, serving in the Midwest, for The Friends of Israel Gospel Ministry
[Paul J. Scharf] Richard,It is a common tactic to belittle the opinions of others e.g.by saying my statements don’t make sense, simply because we see things differently.
Frankly, your last three posts make very little sense. Did I say that corruption is a monopoly of the left?
Between these and the words of Job and Jack, this thread takes some strange turns.
Are you a fundamentalist? Are you a conservative? Have you been trained in Biblical worldview? Have you read anything about this bill?
SI, one would think, is not a place where we would debate whether a Biblical view of someting like economics is right or wrong, or whether we are conservatives or liberals. I can get that on MoveON.org or the network news. I challenge you guys to consider your words, and if you are not impostors on SI, you need to step it up a notch H:)
Your attitude is unfortunate…it really comes over as quite aggressive whereas I was not seeking to get your gander up simply expressing my views.
Surely I don’t have to agree with you about health care or be called an imposter because of that disagreement?
I would class myself as fundamentalist but that is totally irrelevant to the issue and in fact as a continuationist I think my fundamentalist credentials ( for what it’s worth) are stronger than a cessationist’s (but that’s another kettle of fish). The conservatives ( in England where I am) are far too liberal for my tastes but I don’t see national healthcare as a political football rather to me it is the kind of compassionate policy I suspect the Lord would approve of. I have not read the bill details but not having established a national health care system is a shame to your country(in my opinion). And I am not anti American and my comments should not be read as such.
Richard Pajak
[Paul J. Scharf] Yes, but I would think that one would reasonably infer that it prohibits promoting socialism and communism.actually, i don’t see that inference, but i’d be interested in knowing which numbered items in either the doctrinal statement or the comment policy you think lead to that conclusion.
your leap to “socialism and communism” perfectly illustrates the devolution of republican dialog on this issue that i mentioned in #5. it attempts to poison the well by using a misplaced cold-war epithet that belies an abysmal awareness of world affairs and political developments.
Discussion