Who is realistically the higher power, Government or God?

Jump to Last Post 1-1 of 1 discussions (13 posts)
  1. Castlepaloma profile image76
    Castlepalomaposted 2 years ago

    If you created the higher power "government " which is imaginary and followed its orders OR

    You created the higher power "god" and followed its orders,

    Are you any less delusional than those you criticize Religion?

    1. tsmog profile image76
      tsmogposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      A higher power is any that is a step above your position in a hierarchy, is it not?

      1. Castlepaloma profile image76
        Castlepalomaposted 2 years agoin reply to this

        In that case 98% are religious in US congress . The delusion is centroism,  I'm better off with consciousness,  individualism and integrity.


        If there is a God to most people, it would be called Government. Reasons?

        What group has the most dissatisfied jobs than a public servant for the Government.
        What group has 80% of the People disliking them.
        Who takes a third or half your money, with exception of the wealthy, who are another level of puppets masters.
        After the Government bosses you around all day. Then you have to beg or pray for them to give you privileges.
        Government often acts against the constitution like God of hypocrites. At lease Religion has rules, still both combined are far too much like Gods. It's why half of the world's poorest people of the total world's population. Drives not more than a bicycle and the 1% pollutes most of the world, like they have a super hiway to heaven anyway..

        1. tsmog profile image76
          tsmogposted 2 years agoin reply to this

          You will have to enlighten me on what the hell centrosim is Castlepaloma. I searched the web finding it only as an online name that posts on Twitter, Twitch, and Tik Tok trying to make a buck and some business in Italy.

          Yes, 98% is pretty close to how many are religiously affiliated in the U.S. 117th Congress, today. To be specific it is the following:

          468 are of the Christian faith
          33 are of the Jewish faith
          2 are Buddhist, which in essence is an atheist stance
          3 are Muslim
          2 are Hindu
          3 are Unitarian Universalist
          1 is unaffiliated
          19 are Other/Don't know

          Interesting you equate government as being a god. In other words, the top of the hierarchy while at the same time excluding God from that hierarchy for most people. I can respect your position while disagreeing with it. I don't think that is the case for most people at least here in the U.S. There is a good chance worldwide too. From a peek 84% of the world's population is religious.

          Yet, I don't have the capacity to look into everyone's minds and hearts. So, I rely on credible sources for statistics. I won't go into those because I think you are adept at using Google University to find out for yourself.

          I would note that the Christian faith followers place some reliance on the scriptures of the Bible. There is a boatload of verses about following/obeying government authority. One of many is; "Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God." (Romans 13:1) See link below if interested for more.
          https://www.openbible.info/topics/obeyi … _authority

          I peeked for the Islamic faith out of curiosity seeing similar verses. One is; "O ye who believe! obey Allah, and obey His Messenger and those who are in authority over you (Ch.4: V.60)." More can be found at the following link:
          https://www.alislam.org/question/islam- … w-of-land/

          So, going back to the OP statement/question: Who is realistically the higher power, Government or God? for Christians it is God. Seems for Muslims as well. Of course, that is dependent on each unique individual wherein one will discover hypocrites in the mix. Aha! Alas, the human condition pokes its silly head into the equation.

          Now, the above is only meant to explore your OP statement/question. Take it as you will. The intent is to answer objectively while not inputting my personal beliefs at this time.

          1. Nathanville profile image86
            Nathanvilleposted 2 years agoin reply to this

            Wow, you can list the religious affiliation of members of Congress.

            That’ something we can’t do in the UK because Britain is a secular society, so such data is not viewed as important enough to be diligently gathered and published.

            In the UK Parliament MPs have to either ‘swear’ on the religious book of their choice, or ‘affirm’ if they prefer e.g. because they are not religious.

            At the last swearing in ceremony of Parliament in 2019 of the current 650 MPs in Parliament 150 (23%) affirmed. 

            Rishi Sunak (our current Prime Minister) is first UK Hindu Prime Minister, and Keir Starmer, the leader of the official Opposition Party, along with many other MPs chose a secular oath to the King, when MPs recently pledged their allegiance to Kings Charles.

            A couple of articles about the above, which makes interesting reading are:-

            •    A UK Christian article:  https://www.premierchristianity.com/opi … 21.article

            •    A UK Secular article:  https://www.secularism.org.uk/opinion/2 … ry-prayers

            1. tsmog profile image76
              tsmogposted 2 years agoin reply to this

              Yes, they both were interesting but I think it is probably more significant since from what I understand it was originally based on the UK's length of history and the relationship with the Church of England. Yet, it did change as you shared with more emphasis on becoming secular and diverse.

              Here, some may use a religious text to complete their swearing-in by taking an oath, yet it is a choice and not a requirement. Matter of fact they need only raise their right hand. And, as there choose to affirm instead.

              There was a big whoop-de-do when a newly elected senator took his oath on the Quran. John Quincy Adams when taking the oath of office for president did so on a book of law back in 1825.

              Also, backing up a bit, government oaths of office cover a wide spectrum from the president to elected officers to soldiers to civil servants such as you were. It is specific to the Constitution. And, it is prescribed by the Constitution as well.

              Article VI, Clause 3, states:
              The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

              The following not-so-long article gives great information on it.
              https://federalnewsnetwork.com/commenta … -it-means/

              Briefly, from the article, it comes down to; "The Oaths are relatively straightforward, but what do they mean? I see the oath as having 3 important aspects. First, the employee swears to support and defend the Constitution against enemies. Second, s/he swears allegiance to the Constitution. Finally, the employee promises to do his/her job well." As far as I am concerned anyone working directly for the government is an employee including the president.

              1. Nathanville profile image86
                Nathanvilleposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                Thanks for the comprehensive feedback.

                From what you say, and the link you provided, the only real differences in the UK that I can see is that:-

                1.    The oath of allegiance in the UK isn’t to support the constitution; the British Constitution, which stems back to the Magna Carta in 1215 is unwritten, and thus not set in stone – therefore unlike Americans, we Brits are not passionate about our Constitution. 

                In the UK the oath of allegiance is to the King or Queen.

                2.    Unlike the USA, in the UK the civil service is apolitical, therefore when I joined the civil service there was no oath for me to affirm; the only requirement I had was to sign the ‘Official Secrets Act’.

                The only times I’ve had to affirm is when I was on jury service, and when as Executor to a Will I had to get ‘Probate’.

                1. Castlepaloma profile image76
                  Castlepalomaposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                  If I had a gun to my head and force to choose between US political constitution or king Charles. I rather be my boss away from both of them yet constitution is more fair. .  Both are too corrupted to be my boss. Even though we are force to sign our name in capitals, Then told we volunteered the agreement by signing, even though its not our real name.  Then our lives are at the mercy to their authority.  At least religion dose not force you to join their God with more forgivable guidelines and donations. With some exceptions of Muslims of mind control.  The Goverment gods do use police brutality or violence coercion.  Sometime use state terrorism to their compliance  theory. 
                  The state will cause human rights abuses, replacing them with privileges.

          2. Castlepaloma profile image76
            Castlepalomaposted 2 years agoin reply to this

            US do not list any atheist in the Government powers. Yet they do register atheist as a religion. That's like calling virginity a sexual position. White Christians of US administration are above par of it's US Christian citizens per capita in numbers of power.

            A Prince Charles as a King is going backward, not advancing humanity forward. Who wants to go back before the time of the US in 1776. Where the whole world was rule by kings or extreme dictatorship worldwide.

            Centroism or centrist in first wind from my personal  experience was like a monopoly.take over power. That took away my US green card for refusing GW Bush a war sculpture. Because killing is the worst crime of any kind of crIme possible. The new world order proclaimed by George Bush was the promise of 1945 fulfilled, a world in which international institutions, led by the United Nations, guaranteed international peace and security with the active support of the world's major powers. That world order is a chimera. Even as a liberal internationalist ideal, it is infeasible at best and dangerous at worst. It requires a centralized rule-making authority, a hierarchy of institutions, and universal membership. Equally to the point, efforts to create such an order have failed. The United Nations cannot function effectively independent.

            Recently billionairs is another form of centroism. It's a movement of taking over millionaires like myself with great success. Some call us the dinosaur of the middle class. Far from any example of equality for all.

    2. Nathanville profile image86
      Nathanvilleposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      If you're an atheist like me, then it's a meaningless question!

      1. Castlepaloma profile image76
        Castlepalomaposted 2 years agoin reply to this

        I'm a lot of things, yet not as extreme as an atheist. These are all theories as much as God, both fairytails,  until proven. An agnostic or anachartist would be closer to the middle ground truth of the both extremes, if God exist or not. I chosen individualism, love, work with aims of spiritual sidedness and a learning life process,  Until spiritual unknowns to can be manifest and mastered into the ego self. As we all come from the stand point of greater ignorance and chaos. When one chosen hierarchy and centroism, they require slaves in order to exist. Being an unbalanced of human equality.  I can exist without anyone owning me, can't even own myself. . Closest thing to godlike is our imagination, where everything we have ever achieved in life was all once imagined, even money.

        1. Nathanville profile image86
          Nathanvilleposted 2 years agoin reply to this

          That's where anarchism fails miserably; as a society we need hierarchy and structure.

          1. Castlepaloma profile image76
            Castlepalomaposted 2 years agoin reply to this

            I didn't say anarchism, that would another kind of Centroism. People who are spiritual sided, anarchist who are more agnostic and  millions of other groups are parts of a whole. Hierarchy or Centroism is just extremely selfish greed and onesidedness. It won't happen because every one has the selfish gene in them. What is working is the darkside of temporary compliance theory to record profiteering. Yet to be fully greatly abused and balanced out by individualism being a stronger force and improvement of personal growth.

 
working

This website uses cookies

As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://corp.maven.io/privacy-policy

Show Details
Necessary
HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
Features
Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
Marketing
Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
Statistics
Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
ClickscoThis is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)