Christian Theocracy

[Ovedya]

I've seen the same claims about secularism surface again and again on these forums. The point of my post is that these claims are rhetorical but not rational. Under scrutiny they collapse.

Really? So you deny that these person's secular or atheistic views had anything to do with their wholesale slaughter of millions of people?

[Ovedya]

Conjecture.

Fact.

[Candi770]

With sin, that would never happen. But one day, Christians will live in that perfect society, only not in this present world.

[Apoptosis]

Really? So you deny that these person's secular or atheistic views had anything to do with their wholesale slaughter of millions of people?

I can't remember who said this, but they certainly made a good point: secular totalitarian states like the USSR and China generally replaced God with their leader.

I think that was me, but it was shared among most atheists and especially Sam Harris.

[tdrehfal]

I've come across a few people on Worthy who wish that their country was a Christian theocracy, and would in some cases be prepared to fight to make it one. I would argue that it is impossible to have any kind of theocracy which is not also despotic in some sense, because those who don't believe would be forced to live under a Biblical moral law to which, if they objected, they would have no recourse to alter or protest, unlike in a democracy.

When discussions crop up here about the Middle East and Islam, a common argument used against those who are percieved to have any kind of sympathy whatsoever for the Palestinians is, 'How would you like to live under shar'ia law? How would that affect your family, your values, your daughters in particular; how would that affect your rights?' But at the same time, the proponents of this defence would seemingly have no problem with enforcing the Biblically equivalent laws pertaining to marriage, sexuality, lifestyle and freedom of speech on those who believe differently. So the objection to the idea of an Islamic or non-Christian theocracy cannot be founded on the idea that such a system is undemocratic or unjust, because that would be hypocriticl: it must be exclusively because Islam is not Christianity, and is therefore wrong (any other reasonable objections to Islamic practises aside).

In the Middle East at the moment, a kind of experiment with a democratic theocracy is being conducted - but personally, I don't believe that such a thing can work in the long term, because a key tenent of democracy is freedom of religion and freedom from religion; and if this is not the case at the level of the constitution, then the system is fundamentally flawed from the get-go. To me, it would seem that the only way a theocracy in any sense of the world could ever be implemented was by a kind of despotism against any non-believing citizens, be it in the form of forced conformity/assimilation, deportation, imprisonment or military/police force.

From what I've learned of Christianity, the question of free will - why God allows his creation to effectively reject salvation and choose hell - is because he wants human beings to be able to think and choose for themselves. In principle, this idea seems incopatable with the idea of a theocracy, because such an institution could not help but forcibly and effectively deny that choice to certain individuals. If we are forced to choose, then there is no choice. And in fact, the Bible seems to recognise that a theocracy might not be the ideal situtation - why else are Christians commanded to obey the laws of man at all, rather than endeavouring to move away, live in or create a purely Christian society?

So, the purpose of this thread is to ask whether or not you, as Christians, would prefer to live in a Christian theocracy or not and why; and any problems you might percieve with such a system, assuming for a moment that implementation in your lifetimes through whatever means - be they violent or non-violent - was possible.

Since only God knows who a true Christian is, a theocracy like this would be tough and probably fall apart. You'd have professing believers

who have their own agenda paying lipservice worming their way into the government system. As for being forced to live under some things

or values which you object to, well, that's just tough. Some things simply are wrong wether people feel it's 'personally wrong under my own

train of thought' and you'd have to live under it. Salvation is a personal matter, however. Living under a christian theocracy could no more

produce salvation than infant baptism in a catholic church. Christianity isn't like Islam so we wouldn't require forced conversions to Christ

but we would require that people obey the laws instituted by the theocracy. Right now america seems to be under an 'atheistic' anti-theocracy.

And in Canada you can be thrown into prison for saying that homosexuality is wrong because that's 'hate speech' ! People have no recourse

when the majority says 'we don't want gay marriage' because even though they voted for it in their state, federal judges overturn the ruling.

We can't vote for prayer in public schools, even if 100% of the american people want it, if the federal judges dont, we don't get it. We have

no recourse here, either. We can't overturn Roe V. Wade, even if everyone wanted to, because we know the judges wouldn't do that, either.

America has almost turned into a Monarchy of supreme court justices who can't be kicked off the bench no matter what.

[SaturnV]

Since only God knows who a true Christian is, a theocracy like this would be tough and probably fall apart. You'd have professing believers

who have their own agenda paying lipservice worming their way into the government system. As for being forced to live under some things

or values which you object to, well, that's just tough. Some things simply are wrong wether people feel it's 'personally wrong under my own

train of thought' and you'd have to live under it. Salvation is a personal matter, however. Living under a christian theocracy could no more

produce salvation than infant baptism in a catholic church. Christianity isn't like Islam so we wouldn't require forced conversions to Christ

but we would require that people obey the laws instituted by the theocracy. Right now america seems to be under an 'atheistic' anti-theocracy.

And in Canada you can be thrown into prison for saying that homosexuality is wrong because that's 'hate speech' ! People have no recourse

when the majority says 'we don't want gay marriage' because even though they voted for it in their state, federal judges overturn the ruling.

We can't vote for prayer in public schools, even if 100% of the american people want it, if the federal judges dont, we don't get it. We have

no recourse here, either. We can't overturn Roe V. Wade, even if everyone wanted to, because we know the judges wouldn't do that, either.

America has almost turned into a Monarchy of supreme court justices who can't be kicked off the bench no matter what.

Just a quick reply-

I agree wholehartedly that theocracies of any shape or persuasion are doomed to become totalitarian or brutal. One needs only to look at the Book of Judges to see examples of what a Christian theocracy could end up being.

I disagree with your assertion that America is an "atheist anti-theocracy," though, at least under George W. America was indeed founded as a secular nation, with the constitution specifically saying that the State has no business in the affairs of religion. Bush, however, has sought to allow the evangelical lobby greater say in American Policy, set up the "Office of Faith-based Initiatives," and follows the evangelical line on most of today's issues. Pastor Ted Haggart even claimed that he had a weekly phone conference with Bush. Most Americans are also Christians of one persuasion or another. So although the government is, in principle, supposed to be areligious (not atheistic) in its policies, America can hardly be called an atheist nation.

About Canada's "Hate Crimes" laws- They are only used against people who advocate discrimination or violence against any visible group. For example, simply saying that homosexuality is wrong will not get you in trouble, especially if that is a religious belief. Several Christian groups here are, in fact, protesting same-sex marriage. However, if some of them were to say, for example, that all gays should be deported, they would probably invite a lawsuit. Telling people to firebomb all all the gay bars in Vancouver's West Side, on the other hand, would definitely earn them jail time.

Edited February 1, 2007 by SaturnV

[Guest Chaplain]

I'm a Pastor and Chaplain in the central Idaho region. I'm writing a series of articles concerning the Christian Society. As a matter of

[apothanein kerdos]

I'm a Pastor and Chaplain in the central Idaho region. I'm writing a series of articles concerning the Christian Society. As a matter of

[Fraught]

I've come across a few people on Worthy who wish that their country was a Christian theocracy, and would in some cases be prepared to fight to make it one. I would argue that it is impossible to have any kind of theocracy which is not also despotic in some sense, because those who don't believe would be forced to live under a Biblical moral law to which, if they objected, they would have no recourse to alter or protest, unlike in a democracy.

When discussions crop up here about the Middle East and Islam, a common argument used against those who are percieved to have any kind of sympathy whatsoever for the Palestinians is, 'How would you like to live under shar'ia law? How would that affect your family, your values, your daughters in particular; how would that affect your rights?' But at the same time, the proponents of this defence would seemingly have no problem with enforcing the Biblically equivalent laws pertaining to marriage, sexuality, lifestyle and freedom of speech on those who believe differently. So the objection to the idea of an Islamic or non-Christian theocracy cannot be founded on the idea that such a system is undemocratic or unjust, because that would be hypocriticl: it must be exclusively because Islam is not Christianity, and is therefore wrong (any other reasonable objections to Islamic practises aside).

In the Middle East at the moment, a kind of experiment with a democratic theocracy is being conducted - but personally, I don't believe that such a thing can work in the long term, because a key tenent of democracy is freedom of religion and freedom from religion; and if this is not the case at the level of the constitution, then the system is fundamentally flawed from the get-go. To me, it would seem that the only way a theocracy in any sense of the world could ever be implemented was by a kind of despotism against any non-believing citizens, be it in the form of forced conformity/assimilation, deportation, imprisonment or military/police force.

From what I've learned of Christianity, the question of free will - why God allows his creation to effectively reject salvation and choose hell - is because he wants human beings to be able to think and choose for themselves. In principle, this idea seems incopatable with the idea of a theocracy, because such an institution could not help but forcibly and effectively deny that choice to certain individuals. If we are forced to choose, then there is no choice. And in fact, the Bible seems to recognise that a theocracy might not be the ideal situtation - why else are Christians commanded to obey the laws of man at all, rather than endeavouring to move away, live in or create a purely Christian society?

So, the purpose of this thread is to ask whether or not you, as Christians, would prefer to live in a Christian theocracy or not and why; and any problems you might percieve with such a system, assuming for a moment that implementation in your lifetimes through whatever means - be they violent or non-violent - was possible.

Yes we followers of Christ will eventually be living under a monarchy. We will know the ultimate safety and security under our just and merciful leader, King Jesus. There we will administer his government in all boldness and fearlessness.

[Fraught]

Likewise, I would love to see America completely free from all religion.

However,

Would I vote for anyone who would try to do such a thing? No.

Would I do such a thing were I in a position to do so? No.

Freedom of religion is more important than my desire to be around people like me.

[/quot

If you still visit this forum, i would like to express my appreciation for your comments. Since we have to live under a world government, i'm glad it's a free one, even with all the conflict it may sometimes cause.