Messages

Yes, the poor, oppressed Upper Class.  Won't somebody please think of the wealthy for once!

: Sheesh.  If only I had the same set of problems a member of the Upper Class had.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ht_W5_Ogh0U

If the upper class (depending on the metrics, between 1% and 6% of America) pull off some kind of revolution it will be because they bamboozle millions of misinformed middle and lower class members who trust the people whose opinions and whinings receive far more than a representative portion of the media coverage.

Step 1: Get all the money
Step 2: Whip the crazies into a frenzy
Step 3: Revolt
Result: Get all the money.  Wait...

I'm not saying that the upper class have it bad I'm saying that policy changes are primarily effecting the upper class in a negative way. The money to help the lower class has to come from somewhere and the easiest solution is simply take it from the rich.  Sure the rich get more money than they deserve and I'm not saying they would be justified in a revolt but it seems the most likely.  Besides as it is looking right now the right wing extremists would be the 'leaders' of this movement.  With the amount of money the upper class controls a few of them could easily fund this rebellion. 

Rebellion is an uprising or deliberate resistance of authority , typically by lower classes, who fight to overthrow their leader/government. Also, rebellion doesn't nessecarily mean violence is involved.

And yet how can a rebellion achieve anything except with violence.  I'm not saying it would be a good thing to use violence but I don't see any other way that it will happen. 

Something that I find interesting about a possible future American rebellion is that contrary to the normal lower class uprising it would be the upper class and the middle class.  There is very little reason for the lower class to revolt at what is going on but considering that realistically speaking the upper class is becoming more and more oppressed they would be the one to strike.  The troubling thing about this is that they would have the money to finance a full scale rebellion, contrary to other rebellions which rely on sheer number of people. 

While it is true that Bush pushed us back a little bit the fact is that most social programs remained enacted and this is because in order to stay elected he has to leave them alone or he would be impeached.  So programs keep getting added with few getting taken away. 

How then can the rebellion begin?  If talk is always just talk then how would any rebellion begin.  It seems to me that the tension just continues to build and build and build and build up until the point where one man breaks it and let's hell rain down.  Except for the case of the French Revolution. 

And how do you draw lines for a conflict like this.  Would it be a rebellion or a civil war?  I distinguish the two with the idea that a rebellion is relatively quick whereas a civil war is prolonged. (I don't know if that is the actual definition)  If it's a civil war how are sides drawn?  I really don't know how this would work at all...

Fair enough. What reason would you give to an unattached observer for believing in your faith? I see Bush saying that god told him to go to Iraq, while Al Quaeda members are being instructed by god to kill as many americans as possible. Palestinian suicide bombers sure seem extremely convinced of their god's presence and will, perhaps even more so than christians. Should I take this as proof that Islam may be the way to go?

There was a speaker who came to my church named Daniel Shayesteh who was a committed member to the group Hezbollah in Iran.  By age nine he could recite the entire Quran.  I won't go into that detail here but after many years of be committed to destroying any nonbelievers he became a christian.  I don't know how to put it other than that.  I don't remember his whole story but I do know that he spent years researching the different religions and found that Christianity was the only one that made actual sense.  If there is anyone who can answer this question it would be him and you might want to look up some information about him but I'll try my best.

Bush never said that he was told by God that he should invade Iraq.  As far as I remember at least, he said he believed God wanted him to go there, maybe he did, maybe he didn't.

I guess the reasons that I have for believing would as I said fall under anecdotal evidence but this is enough for me.  I have been countless times helped by God.  For instance when I first moved to where I live now in fourth grade I was extremely upset and every week I had a new set of questions.  Every single Sunday all of my questions would be answered. 

When I was in 10th grade I was under a lot of pressure from a friend going through a rough time and several projects coming up and I was extremely worried about something going wrong.  I took my ipod and I went for a walk,  I used the shuffle song function and the first thing that came up was Matthew Chapter six.  One of the main themes of this chapter is that there is no need to worry about tommorrow because God will take care of you.  I had a little over 1,000 songs on my Ipod at the time.  So I stopped worrying and I trusted in God.  Sadly later the same thing happened, and I was worried again.  I went for a walk and incredibly the same thing happened, and as hard as it is to believe it has happened one more time since.  I wish that I could say that I never worry and I always trust in God but I'm not perfect.  I'm not a mathematician but What are the chances of getting a particular song out of 1000 on three specific occasions when it is needed?

Going back to Daniel Shayesteh, when he spoke at my church he showed us some of the quran's that the extremist Muslims use and they are changed quite a bit from the original ones.  The fact is that the extremists (the ones who are killing people) are knowingly altering their 'holy' text.  So they probably don't even believe in what they are teaching they just manipulate people with their religion in a messed up society.

Sorry if I didn't address anything I'm getting a bit tired.

But just because God demanding murder isn't mentioned in the new testament means nothing, right? God didn't say "Alright, I'm done asking people to kill for me!" and he didn't say "I'm done killing children to prove a point!" he only said he'd never flood the world again. God can do whatever he wants whenever he wants and just because there's no record of him asking people to kill for him in the new testament doesn't mean he isn't doing it right now, right?

In the old testament there were many people that were commanded to be killed but these were people that came against God's chosen people Israel.  However, Israel refused to keep it's covenant and the new covenant was established between God and believers in Christ.  Since all people are invited to be God's chosen people there is no reason that God would command someone to kill. 

Some would say that Muslims are coming against God's chosen people but they really persecute any country that allows Christianity.  To clarify: I am talking about radical Muslims.

If someone I knew told me they killed someone because God told them to I would assume they were mistaken, and very badly at that.  If I heard voices that were telling me to kill someone then I would seek psychiatric help immediately because it doesn't make sense with the image of God in the bible as far as the new testament goes.

So again, to clarify, should the Pope be arrested for killing people and saying that God told him to do it?

Yes. BTW I am not catholic.

And could you tell me too why people shouldn't have sex before marriage? I know it's a common issue in christianity but one of the most senseless ones too. What exactly does marriage do that you can finally follow your feelings and desires??

Ah, right, Gods wants that stuff! I forgot! Don't use your brains.. just follow the commandments.

God doesn't give the commandments for no reason, they are there for us.  I can't explain for sure why it's a bad thing but here are some statistics.

http://www.davidmacd.com/catholic/chastity.htm

Ok then, let me maybe sum up what I've learned so far... God does things, only he knows why, humans can NOT know his plan. If God does it it is Good. God can not do bad. The devil can interfere with humans but ONLY IF God allows him to. If the devil does it it is Bad. HOWEVER because God allowed it to be done then it is Good because God can not do Bad. So the devil's actions are Good.

Did God allow the snake to tempt Adam and Eve?

Humans can know God's plan if he chooses to reveal it to them.  As far as I can tell the devil cannot do good because he doesn't want to.  Even though the actions that the devil took were evil, (killing, stealing etc.,) it does not mean that the end that it brought was evil.  So while the devil did do evil in the end it brought about good.  So God caused that good to come about by allowing the devil to do his work which was evil. 

What really matters is where your heart is in everything that you do.

I hope that makes sense.

Yes, God did allow the devil to tempt Adam and Eve, as I said earlier the Devil was created for a reason, as near as I can tell it is for the exact purpose of tempting people.  If people have no choice but to follow God then they aren't really following him they are just doing the only thing they can, but with the devil in the picture everybody gets a choice.  So while Adam and Eves choice had a much greater affect than others choices it was essentially the same.

Stay with God, or go.  You make the decision.

Ok, so there is a possibility that God wants North Korea to have a nuclear weapons program, there is also a possibility that the devil wants North Korea to have nuclear weapons but if that's the case it is only because God allows the devil to want that. There is also the possibility that North Korea wanting nuclear weapons has nothing to do with God's plan and is just people making decisions. HOWEVER from North Korea's perspective, having nuclear weapons is a good thing so therefore they would see it as part of God's plan to have nuclear weapons. Sheesh!

Exactly, we can't know.

Has God ever been directly responsible for the deaths of humans? Now sure, because he did it it was a Good thing but I'm curious, in the Bible has God ever told anyone "Kill these people" or "You will win this war by my blessing but you owe me a sacrifice afterwards!" or where he just kills babies by himself? It's hard to understand that commandment when He can reverse it at His whim. Especially when you can't know God's plan and someone kills someone else and says God told them to do it. You can't know if they're telling the truth, right? There is no way to test for God influence but there is precedence in the Bible that God has asked people to kill. So how do you commit someone on Earth of a crime they claim was demanded by God? And if God is asking it, it is Good so what is the crime? There has to be more to this than "Well they weren't a true believer" because how do you test for that? If the Pope single handedly murdered 6 people tomorrow and then said "God told me to do it." Are you totally fine with that or do you demand he is arrested?

Here is a complex issue.  I would have to respond by saying that yes God has told people to kill and yes it was for the overall good. I don't pretend to know what the world would be like if anything that has happened wouldn't have happened.  Considering that God would know however I would say that it is good.  If the pope killed six people tomorrow then he should go to prison.  Killing is something that God allows followers of his to do only in the old testament it is never mentioned as being allowed in the new testament. 

I am here to serve, simple as that.

Sorry to apologize so often, but if anything doesn't make sense keep asking.

That's not any better. What else should homosexual persons do? Have sex with someone of the opposite sex, which isn't possible? Really, that's like you'd say that all Africans should be banned from Africa, although there isn't any other place where thy can get or live.

Some people have been dealt a very hard hand, but there is also the choice of not having sex at all.  Many have renounced marriage and sex for God (monks and nuns for instance) so it is not impossible.  It is in the end the same as choosing to sin or choosing not to sin just at an intensified level.  But through God all things are possible.

No sin is greater than any other? So "murder" is on the same level as "wearing clothes woven of two different fabrics", "shaving" and "eating stuff from the sea other than fish" (all banned by book Leviticus)? Well, drat, guess that pizza frutti di mare means I get to share eternity with Hitler.

First of all yes all sins are equal in the fact that it causes you to fall short of perfection.  Once you are not perfect, you can't go to heaven.  But God has always given people a way to atone for their sins.  In the old testament it was through sacrificing animals and now it is through believing in Jesus Christ.  I have not read the book of Leviticus closely but most of those things do not apply anymore due to the fact that the old covenant between Abraham and God was replaced by the new one made by Jesus giving his life.

While I think insults are inappropriate, and everyone in a debate deserves respect as a person, unfounded speculation, no matter how dear to someone's heart, doesn't deserve any.

I do not consider my beliefs to be speculation in any way.  I have had many experiences that affirm my belief in Christ.  It is not unfounded for me to believe what has been confirmed through my experiences.  Although I admit it would be unfounded for you, once again though, this is anecdotal evidence which seems like it isn't wanted here.  So all I can say is that I believe and have faith.

It's been a while since I read the bible, but I don't ever recall there being any arguments, just commandments. And why should there be; god demands that we follow instructions blindly, as a sign of true faith, and not go around asking for reasons.

The commandments were given in the old testament first to Israel and they were to be followed out of faith.  But in the gospels particularly Matthew Jesus explains why to follow all of the commandments.

So, uhm, being gay is a sin?

Let's suppose for a moment that being gay isn't genetic but a choice. How come there are gay animals?
Alright, so it isn't a choice. Why is being born gay a sin then? Or rather, how do you explain a just god deeming someone as sinful who hasn't done anything yet?

Let's suppose that being gay is genetics, it is still a sin, BUT only if it is acted on, being attracted to someone of the same sex is not a sin acting on it is.  For instance being attracted to someone of the opposite sex is also not a sin but having sex before marriage is a sin. Let me explain this though, all people have a sinful nature and all people give in at some point or another.  So if someone is gay it does not mean they are going to hell even if they act on it as long as they have faith in Jesus and at least try to repent of their sins they will go to heaven.

I'm sure that God does not deem someone as sinful unless they sin, but considering that it is very easy to sin I doubt very much if there is someone who has not fallen short of God's glory.  

It's a completely different matter, however, to claim to know the personal beliefs and wishes of this being. If you think god hates gays, or that we should stone adulterers, and demand that we conform our laws accordingly, then kindly show some proof that your particular god exist and has this wish, or get out of the debate.

God does not hate gays, and adulterers should not be stoned.  Being gay is the same as any other sin, no sin is greater than any other one because all cause you to fall short.  God loves all.  That is a fact. 

I don't know the personal wishes of God all I know is what he has told me and everyone else through the bible.

I faintly recall Jesus saying something along the lines of: "Prepared to be mocked for your beliefs" to his disciples. While it feels insulting to say so, there's still a point in that advice, because religious people need to realize just how extremely outlandish all these claims are outside their community, particularly when you have another equally convinced religious guy next to you claiming that he knows that his god, The True God, thinks something else.

I wouldn't say that it is insulting in the least.  I have been mocked many times for my beliefs but that's what I've signed up for and I will not hold a grudge against anybody who insults me, I'll just keep trying. 

Because people of true faith, like some gents in this thread have explained nicely, don't look for or arguments in their holy scriptures. Something is right because god says so, not because of argument X, Y and Z found in verse A, B, C, which makes a debate pointless, and strapping on some explosives all too easy.

I'm confused by what your saying here.  Sorry.  Are you saying that people aren't using scripture to back up their arguments because I'm trying to use scripture as well as reason.

I  think the problem with the argument that has been happening is on one side their is a person who has seen faith healing work, and on the other side there are people who want to disprove that it works, you cannot stop someone from saying it works if they have seen it work and certainly you cannot disprove someone over the internet, so whether you believe it works or not it doesn't matter because neither side will except the other sides evidence.

If any of my answers don't seem complete enough please ask me to elaborate

Shouldn't you be very interested in what the devil is trying to do because not everyone will resist him?

I would say that it isn't important to worry about what the devil is trying to do, it is important to do good things.
There is very little I can do to stop what the devil is attempting to do, I can only pray  and try to lead by an example of doing good things because once again it is ultimately up to people what they will do.

Can the devil interfere with humans?

As I have said, it is up to the individual.  If you mean can he interfere with them on a physical level then let me site the book of Job, sorry it's a bit long to get the full idea:

Job (1:6-12)
 One day the angels  came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan also came with them.  The LORD said to Satan, "Where have you come from?"
     Satan answered the LORD, "From roaming through the earth and going back and forth in it."

 Then the LORD said to Satan, "Have you considered my servant Job? There is no one on earth like him; he is blameless and upright, a man who fears God and shuns evil."

 "Does Job fear God for nothing?" Satan replied.  "Have you not put a hedge around him and his household and everything he has? You have blessed the work of his hands, so that his flocks and herds are spread throughout the land.  But stretch out your hand and strike everything he has, and he will surely curse you to your face."

 The LORD said to Satan, "Very well, then, everything he has is in your hands, but on the man himself do not lay a finger."
     Then Satan went out from the presence of the LORD."
(Job  1:6-12)


Satan then went on to take away everything that Job had all very very very very quickly.  After all this Job bowed down and worshiped God saying


(Job 1: 20)
     "Naked I came from my mother's womb,
      and naked I will depart. [c]
      The LORD gave and the LORD has taken away;
      may the name of the LORD be praised."

Once again sorry this answer is so long, but from that I would say that the devil is not able to interfere directly with people not because he lacks the ability, as he did all the things he did very quickly but because he does not have permission to do anything.

Can the devil talk to humans?

I would definitely say yes he can.  From what I have read in the bible I think that what God has given permission for the devil to do is to tempt people, because people have to be able to make the choice to do what God wants or not.  Otherwise there would be no free will, and therefore no meaningful obedience to God.

For instance:  In the garden of eden the devil came to Eve and told her that she should eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.  At first she said no but then the devil lied to her and eventually she gave in and ate the fruit.  

But as the common saying goes "The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist."
So it seems he doesn't use methods like this very often, but it seems he does possess not only the capability but the permission.

Can the devil start a forest fire by making lightning strike a tree? Can the devil give someone cancer? Can the devil start a forest fire which happens to burn down a house but turns out the owner had a huge insurance policy on the house and now they get millions of dollars?

Once again, if he has permission and ONLY if he has permission.  I don't know why God would allow the devil to do these things and most likely he wouldn't but if he did, I am sure there would be a reason.

What if it's in God's plan to give North Korea nuclear weapons but the devil has tricked the leaders of other countries into thinking it's a bad idea? If God does it it isn't bad so you can't say North Korea getting nuclear weapons is a bad thing.

I have to say here that while there is a plan that God has it does not mean that people don't have free will, people can make horrible decisions and do horrible things.  Ultimately I would have to say that I don't what god's plan is or even how he decides what it is.

You can't say anything is a bad thing because you don't know if it's part of god's plan or not, right?

Matthew(22: 36-40)
"Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?" Jesus replied: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.'  This is the first and greatest commandment.  And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.'  All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments."

If you love God and you love your neighbors as you love yourself then you will do good things.  

To clarify:  If you love God then you will do what he wants and will be devoted to him.  You will follow his commandments or at least try to, and you will try to help other people.

If you love your neighbor as you love yourself then you will try to do good for people.  

As long as you are following these two commandments you will be doing good, not to say that it is impossible to do good without  these two commandments.  But anything that results from loving another person (putting themselves before you) is something good.  

Sorry for the long post.  Hope it helped.

I just want to say that I have ALWAYS wanted to ask someone questions like these and I thank you a lot for taking time to answering them!

I am happy to help, ask as many questions as you like!

Simply put I don't know, I also don't know what God is doing.  Sorry I can't answer your question.

I find it interesting however that people talk about the Devil like he is some sort of super powerful thing when really he is weak compared to God.  A person sinning does not come from the devil but from our natural sinful tendencies which I suppose indirectly came from the devil but resulted as a direct action of a person.  It doesn't matter what the devil does if people resist him.

What if I told you modern medicine was a direct contributing factor into me not believing in God? That's pretty bad right? What a great trick the devil pulled to draw people away from god.

Is all modern medicine good and from god? What about Embryonic Stem Cell research? What about things that are bad but we thought were good? Did god give us full frontal lobotomies? Doctors really thought they were doing good with those but oh man...

I didn't say that the devil could have no part in modern medicine I said that he could not have produced something that is good.  Sure there are parts of medicine that are bad, but the point I'm making is that if there is a medicine that is going to save someone's life I don't see how it could be seen as a bad thing.  

But wouldn't you say that there are plenty of people who have come to faith after nearly dieing and being save by medicine?  I'm sure there are plenty of good things that have caused people to continue or perhaps switch to not believing.  For instance someone evangelizing could make someone feel uncomfortable and therefore push them away but that doesn't mean that what was done is a bad thing, it really is the decision of the other person how to react to a good thing.

Does modern medicine contribute to you not believing in God?  

Oh if only life were so black and white as that tree thing!  Life would be so much easier!  What's with all the gray, world? Huh?

The fact is that there are very many things that are completely a neither a completely good tree or bad tree.  Every person in existence for example.  People are capable of doing evil things and good things. 

Here is a verse that seems to apply to this:

Matthew 19:17
"Why do you ask me about what is good?" Jesus replied. "There is only One who is good. If you want to enter life, obey the commandments."

Since we are talking about whether something like medicine could come from the devil the answer would be no because he is one of the few completely bad trees, and therefore is incapable of doing good things.

What if modern medicine was given to us by the devil? How do you know it wasn't? How do you know it's God's solution?

"Every good and perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of the heavenly lights, who does not change like shifting shadows." (James 1:17)

I don't see any way that saving someone's life can be seen as a bad gift, it is a good gift.  To expand more on this point

Matthew ( 16-18 )
" By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles?  Likewise every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit.  A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit."

Jesus says directly here that a bad tree cannot bear good fruit, therefore the devil which by definition is an entity that works for evil cannot bear good fruit so it is impossible that any sort of innovation that causes good things can come from the devil.

(I don't read the bible very much).

Why?

I personally think that if someone decides to not offer their child medicine and opts for faith healing it's not really faith it's just a desire to see a miracle.  It's like a story I heard once.

A man was on a boat and the boat began to sink, he prayed and prayed and prayed and after a while of floating in the water, a man in a small boat came up and told the man to get into the boat.  The man said "No, my God will save me."  the man left after trying to get him to get into the boat.  This then happened with a larger boat and with a helicopter."  Same result.  When he got to heaven he asked God "Why didn't you save me?" "I believed!"  and God said "I sent two boats and a helicopter but you wouldn't take them!"

I think if you refuse to take a solution that God has given for and instead ask him to give you things. (Like refusing medicine) Then he will not give it to you because it is not really faith.  You can give a child medicine and still pray.

Those are the rules given to me personally, meaning that they apply to me only. Other people may have other rules or even the same ones.

Who gave you those rules?  Didn't Jesus say in regards to sending out his disciples  "Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse those who have leprosy, drive out demons. Freely you have received, freely give."   (Matthew 10:8 )

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the Bible only states that mankind and the animals were created without evolution, not that those animals couldn't have evolved since they were created. And that's what (I think) Nathan was saying about the many different animals around these days being bred up from one or two on the Ark.

The bible does not say anything against the possibility of natural selection and therefore of evolution, it only says that they were created so yes I would definitely say that they could evolve from the time they were created.  Considering that there would be a very large area for animals to move into with vegetation after the flood the rate at which they could reproduce and therefore experience natural selection would be unprecedented.

Have there been any very small fossils found?  Or is it mainly large fossils?

I looked it up and there definitely have been small fossils found... Once again though, this subject is way over my head.  Although fossils seem to be the strongest evidence against literalism so I'm going to have to start researching it.

Wow, yeah, that's exactly my definition of literalist.

Alright, just curious:
1) Why do men have nipples?
2) How come we never find fossils of current animals like rabbits or lions?

I don't know for the first one, but does it really matter?  I'm not going to question why god made people a certain way.  But if your looking at it from an evolutionary standpoint it makes as little sense.  I would say it makes more sense that we were created that way because it's an aesthetic similarity between men and women, while it serves no purpose on men, why would evolution allow such a pointless thing?  Sorry if I misunderstand what you mean.

Because they decay to quickly to even have the chance of forming into fossils (I don't really know how fossils are made this is just a guess) I'm a bit confused about the second question. Could you clarify what you mean by it?

For a while I a have been toying around with the idea that nearly everything works as if it is a pendulum as far as social trends go.  For instance if you look at environmentalism you will see that right now it is declining.  In my opinion it is near the top of what it will be and it will decline for a while.  My evidence for this is that looking back about 30-40 years ago you will see that there was a lot of environmentalism. and at a point it started declining only to rise again later.  I think a much more important pendulum to look at however is democracy.  Let me first say that this pendulum moves much much slower than the environmental one.  This pendulum also is made of two smaller pendulums that of government action in the economy, and in social issues.

Look at the beginning of America, there is very little involvement of the government in the economy and we are very conservative as far social issues go, these are two parallel pendulums. Looking at the issue of government involvement in the economy this policy of no involvement worked for a while. But then later you get people like Carnegie and Rockefeller who take advantage of the system and end up causing serious problems. (Workers dying weekly, terrible working conditions, low pay, and high prices for their products.)
While they would be making tons of money the workers would be getting paid less than a dollar a week.  Here you have motivation to push for governmental action, which after a time works and now in America trusts and tycoons are illegal.  This pattern continues, the workers feel oppressed by something that their bosses do and eventually get government action on it.  You can see it even today with all the many many many many many requirements that the government has on businesses.  For instance, minimum wage is ALWAYS increasing even though the long and short term effect of this is that jobs will be cut. 

Moving over now to the pendulum relating to governmental action on social issues.  Once again at the start of America you see that there is very little action, people are free to do what they choose and this causes little problem.  The problem comes from no governmental action in regards to the poor.  Of course this relates closely back to the economic issues such as minimum wage.  However the main cause of increases in programs to help the needy is the need for a politician to get elected. 

In George Orwell's book 1984, he details how every single rebellion in all of history involves the middle class using the lower class to overthrow the upper class and then pushing down the lower class.  In America and any democratic society we have a different situation.  The upper class (usually) has to appeal to the lower class for help to gain power over all of the classes usually in the form of promising tax cuts, reforms that benefit them and more programs to help the lower class.  Once this happens however the lower class still maintains the majority of power because there are always more people in the lower class than any other class otherwise society would collapse.  So instead of the lower class being pushed down as they normally would they maintain control.  Now the politician has to enact or at least appear to try to enact some of his policies.  No politician can cancel any of the policies made by his predecessors because it will cause the lower class to become upset and they won't be elected or stay in office.

So this problem builds upon itself continually, the overall effect of the two pendulums working together in this case is that the government gains more and more control.  The problem with a pendulum however is that the force that comes from its release at the top of its arc carries it straight through the point of equilibrium.  So while at one point I'm sure we were at a good point as far as government action in the economy and in social issues we swung right past it and will continue to swing in that direction until the force of gravity pulls us right back down and to the other direction.

Conclusion:  The pendulum of democracy, made up of government involvement in society and economy swings from totally free no involvement to inevitable socialism.

So here is the question.  At what point is there too much governmental action and is it even possible for it to reverse without some type of actual revolt, as opposed to the civilized revolts we have in the form of election?'

Sorry this is so wordy, but I had to pack in a lot of information.