Susan,

I appreciate your dialogue here.

There are several things I would like to say in response.

First, I do not think that we could accomplish the completion of the model
Joel outlines without divine help and guidance, and so it is yet appropriate
(1) to expect that members of RSICC meet up to the definition of 'saint' as
we have described, so as to (a) acknowledge the need for the Lord's guidance
in attaining our objecting and (b) already be familiar with the voice of the
Lord, so as to be able to be thus guided; (2) to expect that God will
inspire us and guild our deliberations, and lead us to ideas and people and
explanations in accomplishing our task; (3) to anticipate that the end
result of our efforts, through the grace of God, will be the prophesied
kingdom/government spoken of in Daniel 2, built 'without hands,' meaning not
by the brawn of man but by the inspiration of God.

The point Joel makes, with which I concur, is that this government will not
require a person to believe in God in order to be a citizen and be protected
in their rights. It will be in that environment of freedom that the choice
to believe in God will be so meaningful. At the same time, I personally
believe that because of the dynamics of the events coming, that everyone
will willfully acknowledge God's hand in the development of this government
and of his deliverance of a remnant from the destructions they would have
faced had it not been for his intercession.

Yes, what Randy is proposing, and what Greg is proposing, are probably
better off as separate movements. They are certainly compatible with what
we are seeking to accomplish, in my opinion, but they are not identical.

The name "Remnant Saints Inter-Continental Congress," in my opinion, despite
Joel's reluctance regarding the inclusion of "remnant saints" in the title,
is a perfect description of this vision of producing a form of government
that will be to the 21st century what the Constitution was to the last two
centuries, but on a global scale, and in the context of all the diversity
that will yet exist on the earth, along with the anticipated reality that
people will be 'new creatures' in Christ because of the transforming events
that will have taken place on the earth.

Remnant Saints Inter-Continental Congress will be to that world government
under God, what the Continental Congress was to the United States of
America -- a precursor movement which gave rise to the glorious thing that
followed.

Perhaps the work Randy J. and Greg are doing will be congruent enough with
our purposes, that we may end up integrating various facets of their
proposals along the way, both individually and as a body -- kind of like
Patriot Saints is an effort 'on the side' that each of us has agreed to be a
part. Perhaps their work will be another 'on the side' recommendation for
each member of RSICC.

Sterling

----- Original Message -----
From: "Susan Carter" <crtrfam@...>
To: <rs_public@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, February 15, 2002 1:14 PM
Subject: Re: [rs_public] What We Need to Avoid; Untangling the Gordian Knot


Sterling wrote: (snipped for brevity)
As we mull over the various principles behind an ideal government to protect
the freedom of all mankind, I believe it is important for us to stay focused
on common sense -- what rings true to the soul.

Belaboring the current system and how to undo
that mess, is quite another, and in my opinion shouldn't be paid hardly any
attention in our deliberations, for it is really more a distraction than
anything for what we are seeking to accomplish.


Susan writes:

If you do not understand the lessons of history and how we got to the
convoluted place that we are, you will not be able to create something that
will not repeat the mistake. So for that reason I think the discussion is
an
important one. I can simplify the discussion for you and will do so in a
separate post.

Deciding that you want to concentrate on a more secular approach (through
Joel's paradigm) should be reflected though on the web site and any
references
to creating God's government taken out. The covenant society idea is a sub
set then and would entail a whole different approach (ie a different web
site). This is an important decision that needed to be made clear. It
would
seem to also affect the term Saints in the name and the idea of consecration
which is a covenant idea and not a secular one.

You cannot claim to be setting up God's government and not study how it is
done. This has been my point all week--that a decision as to which course
to
follow needed to be made. I thought that having people discuss God's
government would give the membership a way to decide which way they wanted
to
go as well as making it clear what the differences are. Joel, though a
personal believer in God, prefers to leave him out of the equation
altogether
in setting up a government.

The originating paradigm says this will be put in place when the current
govt
falls or fails in some way. Randy J is about setting up an alternative
TODAY
and living it. It cannot be done alone however, to be truly effective. It
takes a group. This may not be that group and that is what I wanted to
know.

Susan

PS As with any evolving entity what ends up may not be at all what was
first
envisioned. However it seems that such a drastic change in focus would
involve at the least a vote of the voting members of the organization.





=========================

Most recent messages:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rs_public/messages

REMNANT SAINTS INTER-CONTINENTAL CONGRESS
"For the government of God on Earth"

http://rsicc.org



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/