Liberty's Light

A Christian forum dedicated to the discussion of how a nation based entirely off of biblical principles ought to be like. We believe that Righteousness Exalteth a Nation, and that God's righteous hand is necessary for the blessing of any nation.
 
HomeHome  FAQFAQ  SearchSearch  MemberlistMemberlist  RegisterRegister  Log inLog in  

Share | 
 

 Legislature

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
AuthorMessage
Sir Emeth Mimetes
Admin
Admin


Male Number of posts : 446
Age : 26
Location : Cork, co. Cork, Ireland
Registration date : 07/01/2009

PostSubject: Re: Legislature   Wed Apr 15, 2009 8:36 am

von wrote:
Sir Emeth Mimetes wrote:

So legislature defined as a group of men who make laws not already made is wrong. Laws may only be applied to individual cases, deriving case laws as needed which do not contradict any other fundamental laws. Right?

Ok, this is cheating. You're forcing me to give away my case against Hannah Smile

Smile Sorry. But do you agree?

_________________
I am Sir Emeth Mimetes (knighted to the warfare of truth by the calling of Christ, the Master of my order), and thus, though poorly is it ever met by my feeble abilities, is my mission: to combat those ideas that are rooted in mindsets that are contrary to my Master.
May I never forsake abiding in Him, and may His ways never cease to thrive within my heart, for He only is my strength and hope.
note: emeth is Hebrew for truth, right, faithful;
mimetes is Greek for an imitator or follower.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://siremethmimetes.wordpress.com
caleb
Moderator
Moderator


Male Number of posts : 231
Age : 23
Location : Central Indiana
Registration date : 14/03/2009

PostSubject: Re: Legislature   Wed Apr 15, 2009 10:21 am

Dr. HipopĆ³tamo wrote:
I agree. Just one question. If our motto is "Semper Reformonde," how exactly would that play out in the future, when the nation is sliding into heathenism? How could we reform? Are you talking about reform through legislature?

What I mean by this is exactly what we are doing now. In the founding of America, our forefathers used many biblical principles in deciding how to form our government. America was considered a Christian nation, though it was very flawed. It has since slipped far from its original foundation. Now, we as Christians here on this forum, are calling for reform. We are going back to the Bible for answers on how to run a nation. Perhaps we can change our nation by using the current system of government, (as the Colonists tried to do. [see Declaration of Independance.]) But, more than likely, this will not happen. In which case, we may try to found a new nation (as our forefathers did.) Just like America, it will not be perfect and, if the Lord delays His return, it will eventually be in the same situation we are in now. That is when Christians must rise up again and reform the government we established. They should try to start by doing so through the present form of government, and if unsuccessful, should start, yet another nation.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
caleb
Moderator
Moderator


Male Number of posts : 231
Age : 23
Location : Central Indiana
Registration date : 14/03/2009

PostSubject: Re: Legislature   Wed Apr 15, 2009 10:37 am

By "case laws" I hope you don't mean that when a court makes a decision, that decision now becomes law. This is one of the huge blunders of our nation today. Take two examples.

Roe vs. Wade: Because of this one case, abortion became legal according to law. This law wasn't made by the usual method used in making laws, yet now it is concrete law.

Proposition 8: I don't know if you all know it, but California brought Proposition 8 (a proposition defining marriage as between one man and one woman, thus outlawing homosexuality) to the people to vote into law. The people, thankfully, passed it. This angered the homosexuals in California, but they were reassured by the governor, not to worry, but that the courts would fix it. In other words, even though the people lawfully passed Biblical marriage as the law of California, the State Supreme Court, in one case, has the power to override this and change the law completely to allow homosexuality.

I'm not saying that there should be any law makers after a Constitution is drawn up, or that that the status quo of making laws is good. My point here, is that if you allow court decisions to become law, you will quickly usurp the Constitution and have laws made that go against the purpose of our founding a nation. Even if you have a number of checks and balances, eventually, this will be the case. Judges should always make decisions according to the law. They too are under the law. There decisions should only effect that specific case. They do not become law.

To God be the glory,
-Caleb
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Sir Emeth Mimetes
Admin
Admin


Male Number of posts : 446
Age : 26
Location : Cork, co. Cork, Ireland
Registration date : 07/01/2009

PostSubject: Re: Legislature   Wed Apr 15, 2009 12:48 pm

caleb wrote:
By "case laws" I hope you don't mean that when a court makes a decision, that decision now becomes law. This is one of the huge blunders of our nation today. Take two examples.

...

I'm not saying that there should be any law makers after a Constitution is drawn up, or that that the status quo of making laws is good. My point here, is that if you allow court decisions to become law, you will quickly usurp the Constitution and have laws made that go against the purpose of our founding a nation. Even if you have a number of checks and balances, eventually, this will be the case. Judges should always make decisions according to the law. They too are under the law. There decisions should only effect that specific case. They do not become law.

To God be the glory,
-Caleb

Caleb,

By case law we mean an application of a certain foundational law to a certain situation that does not contradict any existing foundational law. Foundational laws are general and so are applicable to all crimes in all technology situations. So foundational laws cannot be made, altered, or retracted by anybody. But case law can be. Meaning that a judge sees a law and applies its principle to a certain case, setting that precedent for future similar cases. Case law cannot overturn a foundational law. See what I mean? What do you think?

With joy and peace in Christ,
Jay Lauser

_________________
I am Sir Emeth Mimetes (knighted to the warfare of truth by the calling of Christ, the Master of my order), and thus, though poorly is it ever met by my feeble abilities, is my mission: to combat those ideas that are rooted in mindsets that are contrary to my Master.
May I never forsake abiding in Him, and may His ways never cease to thrive within my heart, for He only is my strength and hope.
note: emeth is Hebrew for truth, right, faithful;
mimetes is Greek for an imitator or follower.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://siremethmimetes.wordpress.com
von



Male Number of posts : 166
Age : 55
Location : Texas
Registration date : 16/02/2009

PostSubject: Re: Legislature   Wed Apr 15, 2009 1:18 pm

Sir Emeth Mimetes wrote:
caleb wrote:
By "case laws" I hope you don't mean that when a court makes a decision, that decision now becomes law. This is one of the huge blunders of our nation today. Take two examples.

...

I'm not saying that there should be any law makers after a Constitution is drawn up, or that that the status quo of making laws is good. My point here, is that if you allow court decisions to become law, you will quickly usurp the Constitution and have laws made that go against the purpose of our founding a nation. Even if you have a number of checks and balances, eventually, this will be the case. Judges should always make decisions according to the law. They too are under the law. There decisions should only effect that specific case. They do not become law.

To God be the glory,
-Caleb

Caleb,

By case law we mean an application of a certain foundational law to a certain situation that does not contradict any existing foundational law. Foundational laws are general and so are applicable to all crimes in all technology situations. So foundational laws cannot be made, altered, or retracted by anybody. But case law can be. Meaning that a judge sees a law and applies its principle to a certain case, setting that precedent for future similar cases. Case law cannot overturn a foundational law. See what I mean? What do you think?

With joy and peace in Christ,
Jay Lauser

Almost. Case law applies foundational law. Take, for example, speeding. Someone dangerously speeding, and who damages or kills someone, would fall afoul of the 'dangerous ox' law.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://vonstakes.blogspot.com
von



Male Number of posts : 166
Age : 55
Location : Texas
Registration date : 16/02/2009

PostSubject: Re: Legislature   Wed Apr 15, 2009 1:24 pm

caleb wrote:
By "case laws" I hope you don't mean that when a court makes a decision, that decision now becomes law. This is one of the huge blunders of our nation today. Take two examples.

Roe vs. Wade: Because of this one case, abortion became legal according to law. This law wasn't made by the usual method used in making laws, yet now it is concrete law.

Proposition 8: I don't know if you all know it, but California brought Proposition 8 (a proposition defining marriage as between one man and one woman, thus outlawing homosexuality) to the people to vote into law. The people, thankfully, passed it. This angered the homosexuals in California, but they were reassured by the governor, not to worry, but that the courts would fix it. In other words, even though the people lawfully passed Biblical marriage as the law of California, the State Supreme Court, in one case, has the power to override this and change the law completely to allow homosexuality.

I'm not saying that there should be any law makers after a Constitution is drawn up, or that that the status quo of making laws is good. My point here, is that if you allow court decisions to become law, you will quickly usurp the Constitution and have laws made that go against the purpose of our founding a nation. Even if you have a number of checks and balances, eventually, this will be the case. Judges should always make decisions according to the law. They too are under the law. There decisions should only effect that specific case. They do not become law.

To God be the glory,
-Caleb

Caleb, I can see why you might have a certain jaundiced eye toward case law. However the fact that a certain procedure has been abused does not mean that it is not a valid procedure. Judges, juries, kings, even fathers have abused their jurisdcitions. that does not invalidate their jurisdictions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_law
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://vonstakes.blogspot.com
caleb
Moderator
Moderator


Male Number of posts : 231
Age : 23
Location : Central Indiana
Registration date : 14/03/2009

PostSubject: Re: Legislature   Wed Apr 15, 2009 2:07 pm

Quote :
Caleb,

By case law we mean an application of a certain foundational law to a certain situation that does not contradict any existing foundational law. Foundational laws are general and so are applicable to all crimes in all technology situations. So foundational laws cannot be made, altered, or retracted by anybody. But case law can be. Meaning that a judge sees a law and applies its principle to a certain case, setting that precedent for future similar cases. Case law cannot overturn a foundational law. See what I mean? What do you think?

With joy and peace in Christ,
Jay Lauser

I have no problem with this except for the part that the judges decision sets "that precedent for future similar cases." I think it is better that this not occur, as it can eventually drift from the original law. It is similar to translating Scripture. A true translation always goes back to the original Aramaic, Hebrew, or Greek text and translates those words into the modern language. Paraphrases are no longer inspired Scripture because they reword from translations instead of going back to the original text. Or maybe a better illustration is the telephone game. The first person represents the law. Their message is the real message. The next person may pass a message that is very close to the first message, but has a slight change to it. By the end of the line the message is many times drastically different than the original. This would not happen if the first person gave the message to all of the players.

In the same way, I think it is better if all decisions made by judges come directly from the law and are not influenced by other rulings, even if the case may be similar. This not only better defends against the current slippery slope of our courts today, but it makes for stronger rulings. The decision is made strictly by the law and not by the law through several other men.

To God be the glory,
-Caleb
Back to top Go down
View user profile
von



Male Number of posts : 166
Age : 55
Location : Texas
Registration date : 16/02/2009

PostSubject: Re: Legislature   Wed Apr 15, 2009 2:17 pm

caleb wrote:
Quote :
Caleb,

By case law we mean an application of a certain foundational law to a certain situation that does not contradict any existing foundational law. Foundational laws are general and so are applicable to all crimes in all technology situations. So foundational laws cannot be made, altered, or retracted by anybody. But case law can be. Meaning that a judge sees a law and applies its principle to a certain case, setting that precedent for future similar cases. Case law cannot overturn a foundational law. See what I mean? What do you think?

With joy and peace in Christ,
Jay Lauser

I have no problem with this except for the part that the judges decision sets "that precedent for future similar cases." I think it is better that this not occur, as it can eventually drift from the original law. It is similar to translating Scripture. A true translation always goes back to the original Aramaic, Hebrew, or Greek text and translates those words into the modern language. Paraphrases are no longer inspired Scripture because they reword from translations instead of going back to the original text. Or maybe a better illustration is the telephone game. The first person represents the law. Their message is the real message. The next person may pass a message that is very close to the first message, but has a slight change to it. By the end of the line the message is many times drastically different than the original. This would not happen if the first person gave the message to all of the players.

In the same way, I think it is better if all decisions made by judges come directly from the law and are not influenced by other rulings, even if the case may be similar. This not only better defends against the current slippery slope of our courts today, but it makes for stronger rulings. The decision is made strictly by the law and not by the law through several other men.

To God be the glory,
-Caleb

While I agree with much of your points, your conclusion misses an important point. People have to be able to know what the law is. If, for example, one judge makes the ruling that going over 70 mph down a certain road is dangerous (and I leave it to you to find the law that is underlying) and then the next judge says that 60 is dangerous... how are the citizens to know how to drive?

Obviously a bad interpretation is a bad interpretation, and that needs to be able to be fix. We need always 'semper refermada'. But at the same time we cannot leave the citizens hanging.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://vonstakes.blogspot.com
caleb
Moderator
Moderator


Male Number of posts : 231
Age : 23
Location : Central Indiana
Registration date : 14/03/2009

PostSubject: Re: Legislature   Thu Apr 16, 2009 11:04 am

From a quick study of the Hebrew text, I think it is safe to say that the seventy elders or leaders appointed by Moses to rule the people or be chiefs over them, is right along the lines of them acting as a jury. Therefore, I think a legislature is a body of elected or appointed men who are to deem suspects of crimes innocent or guilty. The judge must then decide the punishment or release of the suspect based on the legislature's decision. In a sense then, the legislature holds the supreme power of the state, as suggested by Webster, and rules the people, as suggested by Scripture.

To God be the glory,
-Caleb
Back to top Go down
View user profile
caleb
Moderator
Moderator


Male Number of posts : 231
Age : 23
Location : Central Indiana
Registration date : 14/03/2009

PostSubject: Re: Legislature   Thu Apr 16, 2009 11:13 am

Quote :
While I agree with much of your points, your conclusion misses an important point. People have to be able to know what the law is. If, for example, one judge makes the ruling that going over 70 mph down a certain road is dangerous (and I leave it to you to find the law that is underlying) and then the next judge says that 60 is dangerous... how are the citizens to know how to drive?

Obviously a bad interpretation is a bad interpretation, and that needs to be able to be fix. We need always 'semper refermada'. But at the same time we cannot leave the citizens hanging.

All I'm saying is that judges should not look to other judges decisions as any basis or influence in their decision of a case. They should always go back to the law. In your example above, the judge's decision which was the result of bad interpretation can be fixed. However, his decision, or any other judges decision must not be based off of the first judge's ruling, but only from the law. This specific example is a little touchy, because it falls under the category of the Utilities discussion. We have not determined if the government even has a right to restrict speed limits. I hope this makes sense. I may have to try to clarify again when I have more time.

To God be the glory,
-Caleb
Back to top Go down
View user profile
von



Male Number of posts : 166
Age : 55
Location : Texas
Registration date : 16/02/2009

PostSubject: Re: Legislature   Thu Apr 16, 2009 12:59 pm

caleb wrote:
From a quick study of the Hebrew text, I think it is safe to say that the seventy elders or leaders appointed by Moses to rule the people or be chiefs over them, is right along the lines of them acting as a jury. Therefore, I think a legislature is a body of elected or appointed men who are to deem suspects of crimes innocent or guilty. The judge must then decide the punishment or release of the suspect based on the legislature's decision. In a sense then, the legislature holds the supreme power of the state, as suggested by Webster, and rules the people, as suggested by Scripture.

To God be the glory,
-Caleb


I hate to keep us busy discussing a non-Scriptural word:
1) Legislature is not a word used in Scripture
2) It means a body of lawmakers.

Caleb brings up (and ignores, worse luck) the appropriate word: elders. Perhaps 'civil elders' if you wish.

(sigh, Hannah's cheating again Smile )
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://vonstakes.blogspot.com
von



Male Number of posts : 166
Age : 55
Location : Texas
Registration date : 16/02/2009

PostSubject: Re: Legislature   Thu Apr 16, 2009 1:00 pm

caleb wrote:
Quote :
While I agree with much of your points, your conclusion misses an important point. People have to be able to know what the law is. If, for example, one judge makes the ruling that going over 70 mph down a certain road is dangerous (and I leave it to you to find the law that is underlying) and then the next judge says that 60 is dangerous... how are the citizens to know how to drive?

Obviously a bad interpretation is a bad interpretation, and that needs to be able to be fix. We need always 'semper refermada'. But at the same time we cannot leave the citizens hanging.

All I'm saying is that judges should not look to other judges decisions as any basis or influence in their decision of a case. They should always go back to the law. In your example above, the judge's decision which was the result of bad interpretation can be fixed. However, his decision, or any other judges decision must not be based off of the first judge's ruling, but only from the law. This specific example is a little touchy, because it falls under the category of the Utilities discussion. We have not determined if the government even has a right to restrict speed limits. I hope this makes sense. I may have to try to clarify again when I have more time.

To God be the glory,
-Caleb

As I said, there is an underlying, Biblical, law. And you don't address the point I bought up.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://vonstakes.blogspot.com
caleb
Moderator
Moderator


Male Number of posts : 231
Age : 23
Location : Central Indiana
Registration date : 14/03/2009

PostSubject: Re: Legislature   Thu Apr 16, 2009 2:10 pm

You're right, the Bible doesn't use the word legislature. It also doesn't use the words Christian, Bible, or missionary. Yet we find these concepts in Scripture. So it's OK to use a word that the Bible doesn't as long as we properly define it. You're defining legislature how modern culture defines it. We are using the biblical concept of elders, rulers, or chiefs, along with the second part of Webster's original definition to define legislature. We use the word legislature because it is more familiar to modern people than elder, ruler, or chief. But we are trying to reclaim the meaning and role of a legislator. Elder, ruler, and chief also carry connotations that may be misleading to their originally intended definition. So there is no advantage to calling them elder, ruler, or chief as these labels would have to be redefined as well. Hope that helps.

Another interesting point. Should legislators be appointed or voted into office? Should they serve a term or their lifetime (or at least till they retire)? Should there be a set number of legislators or a ratio based off of population?
To God be the glory,
-Caleb
Back to top Go down
View user profile
von



Male Number of posts : 166
Age : 55
Location : Texas
Registration date : 16/02/2009

PostSubject: Re: Legislature   Thu Apr 16, 2009 2:19 pm

caleb wrote:
You're right, the Bible doesn't use the word legislature. It also doesn't use the words Christian, Bible, or missionary. Yet we find these concepts in Scripture. So it's OK to use a word that the Bible doesn't as long as we properly define it. You're defining legislature how modern culture defines it. We are using the biblical concept of elders, rulers, or chiefs, along with the second part of Webster's original definition to define legislature. We use the word legislature because it is more familiar to modern people than elder, ruler, or chief. But we are trying to reclaim the meaning and role of a legislator. Elder, ruler, and chief also carry connotations that may be misleading to their originally intended definition. So there is no advantage to calling them elder, ruler, or chief as these labels would have to be redefined as well. Hope that helps.

Another interesting point. Should legislators be appointed or voted into office? Should they serve a term or their lifetime (or at least till they retire)? Should there be a set number of legislators or a ratio based off of population?
To God be the glory,
-Caleb

No, it doesn't help. You insist on using a non-Biblical word, to fit a non-Biblical concept.

The term, and the concept, of 'elder' are in Scripture. The term is not familiar to modern Americans, because the concept isn't. In fact, it flies in the face of modern American sensibilities.

I stand on Scripture, and against the term, or the concept, of a legislature.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://vonstakes.blogspot.com
von



Male Number of posts : 166
Age : 55
Location : Texas
Registration date : 16/02/2009

PostSubject: Re: Legislature   Thu Apr 16, 2009 2:20 pm

Oh, and by the way:

Quote :
Act 26:28 AV Then Agrippa said unto Paul, Almost thou persuadest me to be a Christian.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://vonstakes.blogspot.com
von



Male Number of posts : 166
Age : 55
Location : Texas
Registration date : 16/02/2009

PostSubject: Re: Legislature   Thu Apr 16, 2009 2:26 pm

Oh, and the word Bible is merely an English translation of the word 'Scripture'. However if it bothers you, I will use 'Scripture' instead. I usually do.

And it is actually rather problematic to say that the concept of 'missionary' is found in Scripture (see, I used it). The term, as it is used today (and I say this having been a missionary) may well represent a non-Scriptural concept.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://vonstakes.blogspot.com
Hannah Marie
Moderator
Moderator


Female Number of posts : 99
Age : 24
Registration date : 15/01/2009

PostSubject: Re: Legislature   Thu Apr 16, 2009 4:02 pm

Von,

I am not cheating.... okay, maybe a little... your fault though, you are the one revealing your hand ahead of time. Smile

caleb wrote:
Another interesting point. Should legislators be appointed or voted into office? Should they serve a term or their lifetime (or at least till they retire)? Should there be a set number of legislators or a ratio based off of population?
To God be the glory,
-Caleb

Caleb,

The examples I used in the Bible were all appointed, by Moses or the King. The only hesitation I have in saying that they should all be appointed is what leader would be wise enough to appoint them? But, I also believe appointing them is better than voting them in for the simple fact that the leaders are not most likely not (depending on the one doing the appointing) going to be put into the office based on bribes and popularity.

They should be appointed for life or until they retire. That way we have consistent and hopefully wiser representation in the legislature. Also, I don't believe the ones appointed in the Bible were for terms but for their life time or until retired.

As far as numbers go, if we draw our reference from the Bible, there would be two legislatures, one based on population and one a set number. (This is one thing I believe the US got right in their organization of government) You have the 70 elders appointed by Moses and then the leaders appointed over groups of tens, hundreds, thousands, and ten thousands. For numbers, there should be two legislatures, one with each system for balance.

In Christ,
Hannah

_________________
If you accept my words and store up my commands within you, turning your ear to wisdom and applying your heart to understanding, and if you call out for insight and cry aloud for understanding; and if you look for it as for silver and search for it as hidden treasure, then you will understand the fear of the Lord and find the knowledge of God. Proverbs 2:1-5
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Hannah Marie
Moderator
Moderator


Female Number of posts : 99
Age : 24
Registration date : 15/01/2009

PostSubject: Re: Legislature   Thu Apr 16, 2009 4:04 pm

caleb wrote:
In the same way, I think it is better if all decisions made by judges come directly from the law and are not influenced by other rulings, even if the case may be similar. This not only better defends against the current slippery slope of our courts today, but it makes for stronger rulings. The decision is made strictly by the law and not by the law through several other men.

To God be the glory,
-Caleb

Yes, I agree with this statement, Caleb.

_________________
If you accept my words and store up my commands within you, turning your ear to wisdom and applying your heart to understanding, and if you call out for insight and cry aloud for understanding; and if you look for it as for silver and search for it as hidden treasure, then you will understand the fear of the Lord and find the knowledge of God. Proverbs 2:1-5
Back to top Go down
View user profile
von



Male Number of posts : 166
Age : 55
Location : Texas
Registration date : 16/02/2009

PostSubject: Re: Legislature   Thu Apr 16, 2009 4:42 pm

Hannah Marie wrote:
caleb wrote:
In the same way, I think it is better if all decisions made by judges come directly from the law and are not influenced by other rulings, even if the case may be similar. This not only better defends against the current slippery slope of our courts today, but it makes for stronger rulings. The decision is made strictly by the law and not by the law through several other men.

To God be the glory,
-Caleb

Yes, I agree with this statement, Caleb.

And how do you deal with my objection?
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://vonstakes.blogspot.com
von



Male Number of posts : 166
Age : 55
Location : Texas
Registration date : 16/02/2009

PostSubject: Re: Legislature   Fri Apr 17, 2009 7:29 am

Comment posted at:

http://www.blogger.com/post-edit.g?blogID=19846543&postID=7159812494437470465

Quote :
(??) I could be really wrong, but all of the Biblical references to the 'seventy' elders seem to be not a separate group of people, but a group chosen out of the already recognized 'elders of Israel'. Try again Hannah Smile
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://vonstakes.blogspot.com
caleb
Moderator
Moderator


Male Number of posts : 231
Age : 23
Location : Central Indiana
Registration date : 14/03/2009

PostSubject: Re: Legislature   Fri Apr 17, 2009 12:54 pm

I like your ideas in part Hannah. I'll have to do some study on them to verify if I whole-heartedly agree with them. It brings up an interesting point as well. Do we need a head leader like a president, prime minister, or king? Or do we just need a head judge like Moses? Another problem. (I am anticipating the answer that we need a head judge like Moses.) How does he get into office. As far as Moses is concerned, he was appointed by God. That's not happening anymore, nor will it happen again. (I mean a direct appointment like what Moses experienced. Obviously we all agree that God sovereignly appoints kings and rulers in the eternal scheme of things.) Should the people vote this judge into office? Should he too be appointed? If so, by whom? Is he the one that appoints all of the "70 elders" or legislators and the "rulers [or legislators] over tens, hundreds, thousands, etc"? In regards to this last group of legislators, what should we do? Do we appoint one for ever ten people, another for every hundred, etc.? Or a different numbering system? Have fun answering!

To God be the glory,
-Caleb
Back to top Go down
View user profile
von



Male Number of posts : 166
Age : 55
Location : Texas
Registration date : 16/02/2009

PostSubject: Re: Legislature   Fri Apr 17, 2009 1:17 pm

I believe that the 'tens' might have meant something very different to the Israelites than they would for us.

I believe it stood for 'ten' male-head-of-house. As when Joshua said, 'as for me and my house'. That was the fashion they used.

thus 'ten' would stand for ten men, their wives, their unmarried children, their servants, their married sons, their sons wives/children/servants, etc.

So it is a few fewer than you might think Smile
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://vonstakes.blogspot.com
caleb
Moderator
Moderator


Male Number of posts : 231
Age : 23
Location : Central Indiana
Registration date : 14/03/2009

PostSubject: Re: Legislature   Fri Apr 17, 2009 2:12 pm

von wrote:
I believe that the 'tens' might have meant something very different to the Israelites than they would for us.

I believe it stood for 'ten' male-head-of-house. As when Joshua said, 'as for me and my house'. That was the fashion they used.

thus 'ten' would stand for ten men, their wives, their unmarried children, their servants, their married sons, their sons wives/children/servants, etc.

So it is a few fewer than you might think Smile

OK, so what is the number grid on the "legislation" or "elders" based off of population?

-Caleb
Back to top Go down
View user profile
caleb
Moderator
Moderator


Male Number of posts : 231
Age : 23
Location : Central Indiana
Registration date : 14/03/2009

PostSubject: Re: Legislature   Fri Apr 17, 2009 2:27 pm

I just had another thought. Can a legislator or judge be removed from office if they are clearly not ruling by the law? If so, how?

To God be the glory,
-Caleb
Back to top Go down
View user profile
von



Male Number of posts : 166
Age : 55
Location : Texas
Registration date : 16/02/2009

PostSubject: Re: Legislature   Fri Apr 17, 2009 2:39 pm

caleb wrote:
von wrote:
I believe that the 'tens' might have meant something very different to the Israelites than they would for us.

I believe it stood for 'ten' male-head-of-house. As when Joshua said, 'as for me and my house'. That was the fashion they used.

thus 'ten' would stand for ten men, their wives, their unmarried children, their servants, their married sons, their sons wives/children/servants, etc.

So it is a few fewer than you might think Smile

OK, so what is the number grid on the "legislation" or "elders" based off of population?

-Caleb

Based off heads of households... tens, hundreds, etc.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://vonstakes.blogspot.com
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: Legislature   Today at 4:36 pm

Back to top Go down
 
Legislature
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 2 of 5Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Liberty's Light :: Archives :: Definitions Archives-
Jump to: