57 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Kevin Yoakum
Kevin Yoakum
11 years ago

Last night while reading Ralph Moody’s Little Britches “Father and I were Ranchers” I got to a very good quote.“There are only two kinds of men in this world: Honest men and dishonest men. …Any man who says the world owes him a living is dishonest. The same God that made you and me made this earth. And He planned it so that it would yield every single thing that the people on it need. But He was careful to plan it so that it would only yield up its wealth in exchange for the labor of man. Any man who tries to share in that wealth without contributing the work of his brain or his hands is dishonest.”
? Ralph Moody
I really like the series of books for the kids, great for character building plus plenty of prepping.

The New Mike
The New Mike
11 years ago

OH MY GOD FACTIONAL IS COMING!
AWESOME.

Erigorn
Erigorn
11 years ago

Can’t wait to see them. I haven’t heard the episode yet but I hope they are all availible in bullion not proof so i can afford to get a few of each.

John
John
11 years ago

Hi Jack:
Interesting choice of virtues. I’m wondering if any of these other traditional ones were considered for the list, and if so why they were not included:

Kindness – Regard for those who are within an individuals ability to help.
Generosity – Giving to those in need.
Forgiveness – Willingness to overlook transgressions made against you.
Compassion – Empathy and understanding for the suffering of others.
Fair-mindedness – concern that all get their due (including oneself) in cooperative arrangements of mutual benefit.
Tolerance – willingness to allow others to lead a life based on a certain set of beliefs differing from ones own.
Honesty – telling someone what you believe to be true in the context of a direct inquiry.
Temperance – self-control regarding pleasure
Good temper – self-control regarding anger
Ambition – self-control regarding one’s goals
Curiosity – self-control regarding knowledge
Frugality (also Thrift) – self-control regarding the material lifestyle
Industry – self-control regarding play, recreation and entertainment
Contentment – self-control regarding one’s possessions and the possessions of others; acknowledgement and satisfaction of reaching capacity.

Duncan MacDuff
Duncan MacDuff
11 years ago
Reply to  John

I once delved into the Virtues and found that there are several lists that cover them. As you can see there are six groups of seven. Now with Jack’s list there are seven groups, but Jack’s list has only six in it. Is there a seventh that has not been thought of?

Best, Duncan

Seven Virtues
—————————————
The Seven Heavenly Virtues:
The Heavenly Virtues combine the four Cardinal Virtues: prudence, temperance, fortitude — or courage, and justice, with a variation of the theological virtues: faith, hope, and charity.
– Faith – Benevolence, Simplicity, Continence, Virginity, Purity, Moral cleanness, Chastity
– Hope – Discipline, Joy, Patience, Contemplation, Contrition, Confession, Penitence
– Charity – Concord, Pleasantness, Indulgence, Peace, Forgiveness, Piety, Clemency, Compassion, Mercy
– Fortitude – Perserverence, Stability, Tolerance, Repose, Patience, Silence, Fidelity
– Justice – Observance of the Law, Correction, Law, Truth, Judgment, Severity, Rectitude
– Temperance – Morality, Observance of religion, Fasting, Discretion, Tractability, Contempt of the world, Sobriety
– Prudence – Memory, Reason, Providence, Fear of God, Intelligence, Discretion, Diligence
—————————————
The Seven Contrary Virtues:
The Contrary Virtues were derived from the Psychomachia (“Battle for the Soul”), an epic poem written by Prudentius (c. 410). Practicing these virtues is alledged to protect one against temptation toward the Seven Deadly Sins:
– Humility against Pride
– Kindness against Envy
– Abstinence against Gluttony
– Chastity against Lust
– Patience against Anger
– Generosity against Greed
– Diligence against Sloth.
—————————————
The Seven Corporal Works of Mercy:
Continuing the numerological mysticism of Seven, the Christian Church assembled a list of seven good works that was included in medieval catechisms. They are:
– Feed the hungry
– Give drink to the thirsty
– Give shelter to strangers
– Clothe the naked
– Visit the sick
– Minister to prisoners
– Bury the dead.
—————————————
The Seven Spiritual Works of Mercy:
– Counsel the Doubtful
– Instruct the Ignorant
– Admonish the Sinner
– Comfort the Sorrowful
– Forgive Injuries
– Bear Wrongs Patiently
– Pray for the Living and Dead.
—————————————
Gandhi’s Seven Deadly Sins:
Mohandas Karamachand Gandhi, one of the most influential figures in modern social and political activism, considered these traits to be the most spiritually perilous to humanity.
– Wealth without Work
– Pleasure without Conscience
– Science without Humanity
– Knowledge without Character
– Politics without Principle
– Commerce without Morality
– Worship without Sacrifice.
—————————————
Seven Virtues of Bushido:
– “Gi” The Right Decision, Rectitude.
– “Yu” Valor.
– “Jin” Benevolence.
– “Rei” Respect.
– “Makoto” Honesty.
– “Meiyo” Honor.
– “Chugi” Loyalty

Ronnie in Iowa
Ronnie in Iowa
11 years ago

Good show!

I will be using those six virtues in an upcoming sermon for church. People need strength from the pulpit like they USED to get in this country. Our pastors used to fight for what is right, now they fight for what is popular. Pastors used to teach godly morals and principles but now they sway to and fro with the winds of public opinion. Ephesians 4:14 That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;. The pastors of America must not lose zeal for the things of God. We are allowing the government to tell us what we can and cannot do. This is a sign of a church with no backbone. My pastor told me that the pulpit is not the place for “politics” and I told him I’m glad no one told Martin Luther King Jr. that.

I hope to own the coins with the six virtues on them!! What a treasure they would be.

GrizzlyAdams
GrizzlyAdams
11 years ago

I see there is a “Religion and Parenting” section on the forum. What about a “Religion and Liberty” section of the forum? Seems like a topic with a lot of passion.

GA

Scott
Scott
11 years ago
Reply to  Ronnie in Iowa

I think it would be wise to use such a list, but speaking to an audience of believers, it would be best to frame it from Christ’s sermon on the mount. The issue I see with Jack’s take on what “virtues” are is that they start at a variable that effectively is dividing by zero. Sovereignty is a false god, and is merely a house built on sand.

If you identify yourself as Christian then you are not sovereign. Many of the letters of the apostles in the New Testament talked many times about being bond-servants of Christ. In doing so, your life is not carte blanche. It is not your own. You have been given a higher calling than any man could dream of. In my opinion that means ALL men are not sovereign because Christ came to save ALL men, it just appears that many just don’t care about having a life after getting off this marble.

It isn’t the fact that the virtues are baseless. Quite the opposite, they do have worth (not as much as love as Paul told us), but where they originate from and how they are given their worth come from God not a single ‘sovereign’ man. To have these virtues without a grounding in Christ is basically just a game of monopoly.

Insidious
Insidious
11 years ago
Reply to  Scott

Hmm.

I think your taking this in the wrong direction.

Jack’s talking about the relationship between the individual human being and the state.

The ‘state’ is a creation of men, therefore men are ‘sovereign’ over the state.

If you believe that the state is your creator.. then it would logically follow that it was sovereign over the individual.

Summary: A creation is subject to its creator. Therefore, the state is subject to its citizenry (the citizenry is ‘sovereign’ over the state).

I’m sure if you want to take this into metaphysics, you’ll see that its in alignment with your beliefs.

Scott
Scott
11 years ago
Reply to  Insidious

Actually, the state is not created by men, that is my point. FYI, Romans 13:1

“Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God.”

The believe that there is some separation between church and state is a flat-out lie.

BTW, because you are a slave to Christ, you are ALWAYS on the hook for your choices, judgements, actions, etc. More so than the non-believer.

InBox485
11 years ago
Reply to  Scott

Honestly I couldn’t disagree more with your assessment of sovereignty. Sovereignty has numerous context definitions, but in this context it is sovereign in relation to any other man or group of men. Your divine interactions are internal to you and hence irrelevant to discussing how men interact (or at least should be).

Additionally, even from a Christian perspective, to suggest that man would not have sovereignty in this life would reject personal responsibility and nullify any just judgement. You HAVE to be sovereign to make choices, and if you can’t make choices, then what do you believe you will be judged by? JMO, but I think you are conflating sovereignty with pride (again in the biblical sense since that has numerous definitions as well).

InBox485
11 years ago
Reply to  Scott

@ Insidious,

Which is why when the state claims to be the “ultimate parent” I say FOAD. Let that bounce around in your noodle a bit.

Insidious
Insidious
11 years ago
Reply to  InBox485

@ InBox485 –
When you practice Zen Meditation.. there is a practice where you watch your mind, and notice that: you think something, then there is a slight pause, then your ego rises up and claims ownership for the thought.

(the goal is to show you that you’re not your ego)

The state is exactly the same. Constantly showing up to claim credit/ownership of things it had nothing to do with.

Crime falls? Its government action. Crime rises? Not their fault (drugs, poverty, terrorists..)

Economy booming, its the government! Economy crashes? Evil speculators and irresponsible people!

Government is a giant spoiled narcissistic child, and its time it got a spanking.

😉

Insidious
Insidious
11 years ago
Reply to  Scott

Since I’m in an apologist mood.. 🙂

Also, Jack’s list is a list of virtue’s for a ‘citizen wanting to preserve liberty’.. not a ‘list of all virtues’ or a summary of ‘virtues as practiced within x religion’.

There is no one all encompassing list or precedence of virtues.. as different virtues are valued more or less based on the person/profession.

Example: In a soldier, bravery would be highly valued.. while in a mother, compassion would be higher on the list. Obedience would be a soldierly virtue, but a vice to a societal reformer.

Virtue – A positive trait or quality deemed to be morally good.. thus valued as a foundational principle of a good moral being.. [of] promoting collective and individual greatness.

Insidious
Insidious
11 years ago
Reply to  Scott

@Scott – (wrong level of reply.. sorry)

IMO Your mixing your own doctrine up. ‘Render unto Ceaser the things that are Ceaser, and unto God the things that are God’s’. I don’t think Paul trumps Christ on separation of Church and State.. 😉

And as this is the internet.. I’m going to pull the Nazi card. So.. what you’re arguing is that the Third Reich was established by God, and therefore the appropriate response to it was to obey it? (I am not saying this sarcastically).

Assuming that you know the ‘end’ to which God has created something is a bit egotistical.

Did he create it to endure and to be obeyed? Or to test and perfect men in the struggle to overcome it?

Is meekly allowing yourself and others to be tortured and murdered by the ‘authorities established by God’ a Christian ‘virtue’?

If such is your belief, then live your belief. I believe differently.

Again, not meant to be inflammatory. Just food for thought.

Scott
Scott
11 years ago
Reply to  Insidious

@Insidious & Jack

For some reason I can’t reply directly to Jack’s tirade above, so I will do my best here.

Paul never contradicts Jesus when he spoke of all men falling under government rule. You have to keep everything in context. Jesus was merely talking about money and taxes which are things created by men. The rule of law and governance is what God created. It is very much His to have a say in what he expects of his followers.

Keep in mind, the book of Romans was considered to be the ‘5th gospel’ by Martin Luther. That is how important that book is when you talk about rubber meeting the road for Christians. I would highly suggest that you sit, read it, and let it sink in before arguing against it. I am not saying that YOU are a christian; quite the opposite, to quote the Godfather: Keep your friends close and your enemies closer. If you have an ax to grind against christians, then I think it wise that you know the material much better than them.

My only question is when was the last time you truly sat down to read something such as the sermon on the mount? With all your well honed critical thinking skills, logic, experiences in life, etc., and then asking yourself the questions about something such as ‘what is cheap vs. costly grace?’ I feel many hate what they think christianity is because of what others have told them over the years, or the way people acted, etc. But they never took the time to clear their mind, read this stuff for themselves, and realize the problem was never Christ, it was the minions doing a very poor job doing what the boss wants of us (love and grace), and He would love to have some us start over with humility and selflessness.

I am not going to give you a Bible study because I think you are more than capable if you are willing to take the time to understand what you are reading. There are plenty of instances were God has slapped-down His people to get them back on track. It isn’t obvious, many of things that you mention Jack are short-sighted minutia. God had to get a tyrannical pharaoh in Egypt to create the environment for His people to even want to leave (up until that point they were doing quite well there; why leave for some other promised land?). I would go so far to say that God allowed Germany to do what it did knowing that the new state of Israel would be the outcome. To our feeble and short-timeline lives, it is tragic and looks like the Leviathan, the best we ever do is hindsight; but to the devine, it is all understood and known.

To answer your childish tirade, you need only look to Matthew 6:24 “No one can serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and money.” Money, as I see it, is Jesus referring to the world-of-man. If you answer to God, when men begin to ask you to do things that are against God’s laws (keep in mind Jesus distilled these laws to the huge number of 2), you don’t do what you are being asked to do.

In the end, you might be the person getting your head separated from your body as you mentioned, but last time I checked nobody is getting out of here alive.

Insidious
Insidious
11 years ago
Reply to  Insidious

@Scott (reply to @Insidious & Jack) –
First off, I apologize for foolishly referring to your book.

Here’s a more succinct way of saying this:

Scott – I believe no matter what the state does you should submit to it.
Me – Well, the state has a history of doing bad things, so that might not be such a good idea
Jack – F* NO!! You gotta be kidding me. Look at x, y, z.. holy crap!!! 😉

Scott – I don’t care, my book says you should do it

The End

As a liberty minded person, if you want to march you and your family into the gas chamber to fulfill your religious beliefs.. that’s your own business.

But to use your own reference.. yes, I believe the ‘golden rule’ (love thy neighbor as thyself) REQUIRES me to stand against tyranny. But of course your book says I shouldn’t.

Anyway. I do appreciate you making me think about Jesus statements regarding ‘render unto Ceaser’.. because it made me realize something..

The context was that the Roman government wanted the Jews to pay a tax, and they were looking for a way to say, that for religious reasons, they shouldn’t pay it. Jesus said they should.

Which means, according to the Bible, all of you churches out there need to immediately surrender your tax exempt status. If not, you’re violating God’s word.

Insidious
Insidious
11 years ago
Reply to  Insidious

By the way.. anytime a debate goes to ‘the bible says x therefore x is true’ the ‘debate’ is over.

You’ve exited a logical discussion, and entered the realm of logical fallacy. You’re either into circular reasoning, or you’re begging the question.

So, I will try and remember this and not enter into discussions that begin with ‘The Bible says..’ unless its clear that the intent is to determine the truth of said statement.

Scott
Scott
11 years ago
Reply to  Insidious

This is cryptic that the replies can’t be nested where you would expect…

Guys, this is a complete head scratcher to me. My initial reply was to a pastor saying he was about to talk about virtues to a congregation of Christians. My advice to him was to make sure he talked to those virtues from God’s point-of-view (sermon on the mount), and not someone that I would call at best an agnostic from what he has spoken to in his podcast (Jack).

This entire conversation has broken down to two sides that will never meet. I understand that. Our beliefs have foundations that start in completely different places. For Christians, they believe God is the only absolute sovereign. Everything falls under His rule from nations to virtues. He is Omnipotent, Omnipresent, and Omniscient. And to try to create some type of sovereignty outside of God is a false god. It is an article of faith.

Again, article of faith, being a slave to Christ. Neither of you have addressed that issue, but I don’t think you need to. Because, your starting point is entirely different. A term that you will hear in many christian circles is ‘to be truly free is to be obedient.’ It is paradoxical and cryptic looking from the outside in.

It amazes me how people do not see how much Jesus is a libertarian. The vast majority of the time he is always telling people ‘don’t worry about what your neighbor is doing (the splitter in their eye); because you need to focus on getting your own house in order (the log in your eye).’ None of us are going to getting all of this life right, so do it all with humility and a mindset to serve (just as Jesus washed the feet of the disciples). I am not trying to convert anyone, that is bad practice, Jesus wants people to come to Him voluntarily (very libertarian), trying to ‘convert’ others almosts sounds like brainwashing. I merely make points to help clean what appears to be colored lens you see christianity with. It is all based on love.

And no, my words do not contradict each other. Again, looking from the outside, I guess it is possible to be seen as an enigma, but realizing you are subject to the rule of law and government because all of this falls under Him does not mean that you follow the laws of men blindly. All laws have to pass the litmus test of the only two commandments Jesus said you need to remember. If it doesn’t pass, it is against God’s will, you don’t have to do it. You don’t apply these commandments to only people you like or with the same secret decoder ring, you apply them to EVERYONE. This seems really obvious to me; Jesus is not asking everybody to understand all the partial stress terms in the boundary layer of fluid flow.

There are many methods to fight what you speak of (from bullets to jury nullification). Tatics vary.

InBox485
11 years ago
Reply to  Scott

Scott, I really don’t mean to come off as a dick, but I probably will. You are completely failing to reconcile conflicting arguments. Either all men should be subject to all governments and all governments stem from God and you worship a Nazi loving psychopath and those that failed to subject themselves to Nazi authority are going to hell or their is an issue with that passage.

First assumption that is a patent fallacy is that words in the bible were spoken or written by the person whose name the words are attributed to. From Genesis through Revelations, this is frequently not the case. Much of it is third and fourth hand writings. All of it spent centuries in the care of gatekeepers with vested interests in making convenient alterations, and all of it involves second or third hand translations with conflicting versions, many of which came to be under supervision of powers not to be crossed under pain of death, then finally they all got slapped together in various forms under one cover and called a holy library that many seem to think is a single book.

Second assumption is that even if every word of the bible you have in your possession just happened to be correct as intended, the letters included in the library are being assumed to be 100% gospel declarations. Do you do that “holy kiss” thing too? Paul “commanded” you to according to some… Do you even realize that the decisions to include or exclude LETTERS from the library were made by votes centuries after they were written, and proof that the individual writings are authentic didn’t even exist back then let alone now? Just to be clear these EXACT SAME MEN put things like if women and animals have souls (women won by one vote and animals lost by one vote). Why on earth would you accept such matters that were generated in such a haphazard manner as if they came from the mouth of God to you in your bedroom? The only way any of that could make sense is if you have accepted for your God the version of the bible you read.

RationalHusker
RationalHusker
11 years ago
Reply to  Scott

@ Scott: I appreciate what you’re trying to articulate here. Perhaps the point you were making is that confessing Christians believe that even bad/poor/flawed leaders received their authority by the will of God. Same holds true for parents. The “office” of king, president, father, etc. is to be respected, despite the failings (or even evils) of the person that holds it. See Jesus’ comments to Pontius Pilate for Biblical evidence of that. That doesn’t mean to turn a blind eye to evil. I may find some of the policies of the president to be abhorrent. That doesn’t mean it would be appropriate for me to grab my crotch and wave the bird as his motorcade passes by.

At the same time, “We are to obey God, rather than men.” (Acts 5:29). If and when a government makes laws or does things that are evil (or for the Christian, sinful), then we must reject and condemn such actions and not obey. On the other hand, if there are certain laws we find annoying or inconvenient, it doesn’t give us license for outright revolt. Further, there are many secular issues that Christ didn’t speak to. His central mission wasn’t to create heaven on earth. It was to rescue sinful men and women from the devil, the world, and our own sinful nature.

What the dialogue here indicates is that there are limits to the discussion that can be had between those who confess Scripture to be the inerrant Word of God, and those who confess that scripture might contain some of God’s Word or some eternal truths. Those that believe that the Word that has been handed down is inerrant (and I am among them, minor problems with transcription notwithstanding) will be called simpletons and their faith will be labeled as “blind.” While orthodox Christians “..walk by faith, not by sight,” we don’t set aside reason. Rather, reason is used to read Scripture and make sense of context. Reason is ministerial to the Gospel, not magisterial over it. Also, viewing Scripture as “inerrant” should not be confused with taking every verse “literally.” Jesus himself uses pictoral language frequently, and it’s almost aways clear when he is doing so (parables, etc.). What I find is ironic is how often verse are taken out of context, isolated, and used as “proof texts” against “blind believers” that are foolish enough to believe that God has protected and handed down his Word using means…the means of the church. Christ must be a fool as well, because he said of the Old Testament that “these are the scriptures that testify of me.”

I think you’re struggling with folks in this thread for two main rasons. First, message board evangelism is not effective. But also because your statements indicate that you believe that Jesus is the Son of God, and that His Word was preserved for the church (despite the place of sinful people in the church), and that Jesus’ central “mission” was the eternal salvation of souls, not chicken soup for the soul. Such a bold proclamation as that will always be met with “you hypocrites.” And yet, many would extol the virtues of Jesus as teacher, or Jesus as philospher, but ignore his own claims that he was the Son of God. Few are consistent enough to say that Jesus must have been a liar or completely insane.

Everybody has a god (or gods). Being a slave to Christ requires, among other things, not making ourselves to be God, but submitting to God as the thing we fear, love, and trust above all things (rather than ourselves, or skills, or even secular liberty). I hestitate to type each word and hit “Post Comment.” I firmly believe that these kinds of discussions aren’t appropriate for places like this. I also understand that quoting Scripture doesn’t mean a whole lot to somebody that has a suspect view of its inerrancy.

But Jack said he posted out of concern for people that read this thread that “are where he was” some years ago. I guess I posted, Scott, because I wanted to tell you that I understand your sentiment, though we may or may not agree on exactly what it means to “submit to the governing authorities.” But I also posted because I didn’t appreciate the way that Scripture-confessing Christians were portrayed (and frankly, insulted) in the insuing discussion.

–Charles (aka, Rational Husker)

Insidious
Insidious
11 years ago
Reply to  RationalHusker

@RationalHusker –
Thanks for bringing in another perspective.

If any insult was taken, please know that none was intended.

My frustration/concern is when someone states ‘The Bible says..’ as a conversation ender. The ‘Final’ argument. This might work with other believers, but obviously is ineffective with non-believers.. who at best come away insulted that you’re claiming to know capital T truth.

IMO it needs to be the BEGINNING of a discussion, not the end.

🙂

(my personal favorite biblical ‘taking things out of context’ misrepresentation.. is quoting the arguments made by Job’s friends as proof of the biblical support of prosperity doctrine)

RationalHusker
RationalHusker
11 years ago
Reply to  RationalHusker

@ Insidious: I tried to measure my response carefully. And like I said, I do understand that the Christian world view will refer to God’s Word (if it indeed has anything to say on the matter at hand), but that it cannot be the gavel in conversation and debate with somebody that does not hold the same view of the Bible.

And I like your prosperity doctrine example. A very American “heresy” if I dare say 🙂 Glad you didn’t find my comments terribly abrasive or arrogant. I hope others will take them in a similar way.

–Charles

RationalHusker
RationalHusker
11 years ago
Reply to  RationalHusker

@Jack,
I read the whole thread again, and you’re right. You didn’t insult. You have a very direct, blunt, and forceful debating style that often isn’t well received by our politically correct culture. I like to think of myself as being immune to that “let’s all be nice” mentality, but honest reflection suggests that sometimes (as in this case) I’m not. Intensely personal issues such as family, faith, etc. “raises the stakes” and makes offense more likely, I suppose.

I do disagree with your statements re: the inerrancy (again, not to be confused with absolute literalism) of God’s Word and “…centuries of literary alteration…” I’m well aware of issues regarding apostolic authorship, designation of canonical books, etc. Anyway, even if you wanted full on theological debate on TSP (which I’m certain you don’t), the internet doesn’t lend itself well to that. And though it might surprise you, I share your disdain for Christians that misuse God’s Word for personal gain or personal doctrine. Prosperity doctrine, as Insidious pointed out, is a wonderful (bad) example. So is liberation theology.

I just felt compelled to try and articulate the view of somebody that does hold the Bible to be inerrant, that positions (not the bad actions) of authority are to be respected (Biblically speaking), and that evil is to be condemned and rejected. Lots of gray area here, too, simply because Christ’s teachings were not meant to be a how-to obtain Utopia on earth.

Hope we can shake hands on this one. Maybe even in person if I catch you in Des Moines.

InBox485
11 years ago
Reply to  RationalHusker

Completely putting aside the faith aspects and just applying some ration to the contents of the book or specifically that passage that was cited. Not sure what you mean by inerrant. Either it is 100% the literal words of God, or it is less than 100%.

Treating more narrowly, here is the list of assumptions you have to make to accept that Paul claimed that it is God’s gospel that all government is divine:

– That Paul actually wrote it.
– That nobody altered it during the 300 years the letters floated around, were copied, sold as novelties, etc.
– That Paul actually meant it.
– That Paul intended to infer that statement as a matter of gospel and not just part of a letter.

You can be Christian and think rationally about the individual contents of a library of writings that were put into the same binding for the first time by the votes of men hundreds of years after the apostles were dead.

Scott
Scott
11 years ago
Reply to  RationalHusker

RationalHusker, you are much more articulate than myself. My concern was towards a pastor about to relay this to a congregation, and the foundation of virtues and sovereignty being wrong. Online evangelism was never my intent.

Jack, you are absolutely right, and I apologize for calling you an agnostic. In my brain, I just assume deist would give a god/creator the same level of sovereignty as a christian if they truly believe that god is powerful enough to actually create the universe. I guess that isn’t necessarily the case.

As far as everybody always referring back to levitical law when they want to bash Christians, why do they bother? This is the part I don’t understand. Again, Romans, Paul said ‘For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from observing the law.’ That was the break, by our faith in Him and his grace through his blood. All those Old Testament rules do not apply in your salvation anymore, so no need to worry about killing the kids anymore when they get out-of-line. Same with Peter in Acts seeing all the non-kosher food falling from the sky.

To end, and I know everyone is complaining about ending on Bible text. If I end with something of that nature, it is to add to the conversation, thoughts, and discussion as time continues. It isn’t my intention for it to act as some type of gavel or finality.

InBox485
11 years ago

I guess where I come from on this is that

a) I am Christian. I believe in both the old and new testaments.

b) I also know how they came to be and that whatever core truths are in them, it is physically impossible to rely on each individual word or sentence in the book, and why if there is any truth to be learned, it is required to know the histories of the individual writings, who the speakers are and what claims and inferences are being made. For example, even if it is taken at face value that Paul did indeed write that all governments are divine, where is it written or even implied that Paul was claiming to relay God’s words on that detail? Do you put the same stock in things like the claim that Paul “commanded” all to give holy kisses to fellow Christians?

c) In many years of study I have never seen legitimate reasoning to equate service or worship to slavery. If you really are a “slave” without sovereignty then how exactly will you “choose you this day who you will serve” if that option has been taken from you? The closest I’ve seen is a patently wrong claim to “slave” being the proper word translation. Last I checked I get to choose, and my choice is my own as are the consequences of those choices. Since when could a slave say that?

I also know the differences and nuance of the words destroy and fulfill as they were used and relate to the law of Moses (which for those keeping track didn’t exist from Adam up until Moses).

RationalHusker
RationalHusker
11 years ago
Reply to  RationalHusker

This is why this just doesn’t work. These conversations tend to spiral and spiral in this type of media. But I do want to clarify just a few things, and then I’m done. I’m sorry for my part in turning this into a theological debate.

1. Re: inerrancy vs. literalism. They are not the same. There are portions of scripture that are clearly pictorial. Frequently, Jesus spoke in parables. He’d say something like: “There was a vineyard owner…” I don’t necessarily believe that this owner was a real person. Perhaps better examples are in the Book of Revelation, where numbers and symbols are used. I don’t believe there are errors in the Bible, but I also do not believe that every reference to 1,000 years means a literal 1,000 years, etc.

2. Re: the likelihood of errors creeping into the manuscripts before or as they were assembled: Sure, there were likely minor transcription errors by scribes. Mostly grammatical or missing a word here or there, but nothing that hinders what God means when he says ____. How could Paul write everything down without his bias? How could the church possible make correct determinations of what letters were inspired vs. which ones were personal rants? I believe God’s hand was active in that. Christ himself continually refers to the Old Testament books. He never mentions errors.

3. Re: blind faith. In the end, perhaps it is blind to some extent. Again, we walk by faith, not by sight. That doesn’t divorce us from reason, but we do recognize the limits of human reason. Were it not so, it would simply be called knowledge, not faith. And I’ll finish with this. What is “easier” to believe or accept? (1) The resurrection, or (2) that God protected his word as it was handed down to us?

Insidious
Insidious
11 years ago

Question for Rob (or Jack) –

Is there a way to ‘elevate’ a customer service issue via e-mail? (supervisor e-mail or something..)

I couldn’t find anything on the Mulligan Mint or the partner sites.

Thanks.

Shannon
Shannon
11 years ago

Jack:

Hey brother have you looked into the Amazon FBA program?
all you have to do is drop ship your stuff to their warehouse and they do everything else, I just have a small store on Amazon so it’s free but on the stuff I sell they charge 10% plus $1 per sale, if you buy the merchant account for $40 a month the fees a smaller and since it’s in the Amazon warehouse it qualifies for free shipping…just a thought, this is also a great program for preppers, in case you didn’t know everything sold on Amazon is sold by private sellers or retailers, the price you see on a particular item is the Highest price they have on that item in their warehouse….tons of money to be made on Amazon!!!

InBox485
11 years ago

Just some thoughts on stuff that I’d hope MM is learning from SBSS but I’m not sure they are (and no I’m not even going to mention any names):

– Strongly consider not releasing anything as proof only. There are some cool proof only coins in the set, but at some point all but the most die hard collectors get tired of everything proof. I’m 50x more likely to buy 5-10 BUs than 1-5 proofs. Not withstanding the die hard collectors, people get proofed out after a while.

– Related to above, if you are selling something like “Your Highness” which very closely mimics the Canadian maple leaf, there are a whole lot of people that would probably stock up on it instead of something like a maple leaf if it wasn’t proof only.

– Strongly consider not releasing anything premium (proof, LE, etc) by itself. It is a lot easier to be sold on buying 5-10 of the latest BU and snag a proof to go along with it than to buy a proof by itself. MM says small orders are a killer, but a number of releases seem to have encouraged just that.

– I’m not sure who’s idea the 5 oz D&D round was, and to each his own but the premium on that is just insane. I know “if you don’t like it don’t buy it”, but really? Rock on with what you feel is best, but that would have made a cool stack as a barter round rather than an ultra premium round.

JMO

InBox485
11 years ago
Reply to  InBox485

You are right, there wasn’t a full design that never was in BU. I was referring to things like the free reign and your highness as being proof only. With the obvious caveat that I don’t know all or even very many of the inside details, I would have released them in BU version as well so that a proof wasn’t being released solo. In particular I was hoping your highness would be in BU since it is a perfect mock parody of the maple leaf.

FWIW, I agree that the ant back sentinel was something different.

On the other bit, I seem to recall releases where the proof was released then the BU a short time later. If minimizing small orders is to the mints benefit, I would think doing releases that way would have the opposite effect.

Just thoughts – sorry if they weren’t articulated well.

George
George
11 years ago
Reply to  InBox485

@ InBox485,

As to your point about “Your Highness”, if you really like the pot leaf/maple leaf, buy the “Cannabis” round in BU. But buy soon, as MM is closing SBSS in about a week. “Your Highness” is exactly like the Ant/Sentinel in that they took two different coins and made them one coin, hence the proof only.

As far as MM proof coins, I will support Jack and buy one of each design that he comes out with, but I am not happy with the quality of the proofs. Four of my five Ant/Sentinels have very easy to see scratches and dings on them. My SBSS coins were similar (I thought that MM was supposed to have fixed that issue due to the early SBSS days). Meanwhile, my BU coins from MM come in beautiful most of the time. As a matter of fact, I ordered 16 ounces from TSP Mint last night, all BU’s. I MOSTLY buy silver for silver, not because it is a fancy proof coin that may be valuable someday. When I got my Debt and Deaths, the first thing I did was put one in my pocket with the other couple of ounces that I had in there. It is all dinged and scratched now. But I don’t do that with the proof coins. It makes no sense to put a scratched coin in a protective case, so I will not be spending the premium on proofs anymore than necessary to ensure that I get one of each of Jack’s designs.

But I refuse to pay the premium on the graded coins (How can you grade the first 1,500 coins at 69 or 70 for one design but not get a limited production of 1,000 coins right on another design?). So Jack, if you are reading this, please don’t bother with making graded coins.

I have no desire to return my coins for “good” ones. I will just wait until MM starts making good ones consistently before I buy five proofs again. Hopefully my five proof Sentinels will be worthy of the proof classification. If not, at least I get a kick ass looking poster to hang up with my order!! 🙂

InBox485
11 years ago
Reply to  George

Yes I know that the cannabis coin and the slave queen were just put back to back to make the your highness. It just made sense that if you are releasing a coin that mocks a coin that is normally stacked in bulk, doing a BU version would be part of it.

My proof ant sentinels were decent (I didin’t have huge scratches or anything), but I know what you are talking about. The sentinel BUs I got look like they got chewed up when the round was rimmed. You literally can’t drop them from a cotton glove they have so many burs on the rims. That said, I got my non graded free reign coins in and they really are flawless. I also got the second run freedom girl and slave queen rounds in, and they had none of the flaws the earlier rounds had (at a glance I could tell you which was which). I think the whole point of the “graded” proofs is to be able to say “look, we got it sorted, and an independent grading company is willing to sign off on our work”. More importantly, I think it is a really good sign that I’m seeing rounds that more often than not don’t have the flaws of a garage operation.

George
George
11 years ago
Reply to  InBox485

On, Your Highness. Okay. Now I get it. I feel a little stupid for not getting it earlier. What you said makes perfect sense. I agree that they should’ve made them in BU as well. I remember that the Slave Queen was being touted as a spoof of the Maple Leaf when they first came out with it. If they are going to throw the spoof of the other side of the Maple Leaf out there, and then put them together on one coin for a total spoof, it makes sense to make them in BU for people to stack.

On the quality, I am glad to hear that some of the newer coins are better. I was soured by the whole SBSS debacle, left the SSG and therefore didn’t buy any of the new ones except a handful of BU AG-47, and my brother wanted a Cannabis.

Jerry Ward
11 years ago

Hey Rob,

When are you going to fix the marketplace on AOCS web site. I would love to advertise some products from my homestead and look for things to buy for silver. In my mind that is one of the critical things to getting silver circulating as currency is the ability to find people that will take it. Right now I cant find a way to do that.

Also really looking forward to the 1/10 oz silver coins and being able to buy other AOCS products from one place.

InBox485
11 years ago

Also just curious if there is a bit more back story to the whole crow thing. I seemed to recall the crow being old enemies of the lakota, and I wouldn’t have thought Custer’s last stand would be a crow celebration. Wasn’t exactly a crow victory.

Kenzal
Kenzal
11 years ago

I must say, this podcast and the announcement of the 1/10 ozt silver helped make my birthday (26 June) an awesome one.

Chezrad
Chezrad
11 years ago

Do these changes end or complicate the MSB discount for your silver items?

Erigorn
Erigorn
11 years ago

I listened to the episode but missed some inf or didn’t sort it out.
The new 1/10 oz are coming out on July 1?
What is the status ofresellers (TSPmint, SBSS, providentmetals)? (IE willTSP minte be shutting down or what?

Bob
Bob
11 years ago

I have been looking for more info. on the “para-dimes” (is that how they are spelling it?) Are there any links?

Thanks!

TOM CAT
TOM CAT
11 years ago

guess you where wrong about Rob Gray thanks for stealing my 900$

erigorn
erigorn
11 years ago

Jack, thanks for checking unto this. I have a small order in at sbss and am a little anxious about it. Would be pretty sad to miss the silver.

At the same time I would like to hear any updates on the 6 coin virtue series as well as the fractionals. A quick post here or a short segment in an upcoming episode would be great. Thanks