Theocracy In America--Who wants this?

[AllieBaba]

Bullshit. You and your spaz little friends run around to every thread bashing Christians and Christianity at every opportunity.

Nobody in the US wants a Theocracy. This is typical hysterical BS posted by those who want to see Christians drummed out of society, out of politics, and out of life.

 

[sky dancer]

I think theocracy, dominionism and Christian reconstructionism are interesting topics.

"For the past several decades the political Left has focused attention on the Christian Right’s political activism in America. Particularly, the Left has been highly critical of a select group of dominionists called Reconstructionists, whose aggressive verbiage, extreme Calvinist theologies, and religious political agendas have made it an ideal target for outrage. But, as Leftist researcher Sara Diamond has astutely observed, “the Reconstructionists’ religion of Calvinism. . . makes them unlikely to appeal to most evangelicals.” Indeed, few Reconstructionists would consider themselves to be evangelicals. Nevertheless, their influence has been considerable over the much larger group of patriotic evangelicals.

There are two other dominionist sects within evangelicalism that have escaped in-depth scrutiny from the Left. These dominionists have been able to function virtually incognito for several reasons: 1) They have been deeply embedded within the evangelical subculture; 2) They cloaked their dominionism with new terminologies and doctrines over a period of thirty years; and 3) They figured out how to package dominionism using sophisticated mass marketing techniques. Also noteworthy: these two other dominionist camps have been operating in a dialectical fashion – while one group appealed to the TBN charismatics with all of its emotional excesses, the other group carefully managed its more intellectual public image to conform to traditional evangelical standards.

This paper is a brief overview of the three main dominionist movements operating inside evangelicaldom and examines how all three of these sects are now converging around a global “kingdom” agenda.
http://www.discernment-ministries.org/ChristianImperialism.htm

 

[sky dancer]

"Here’s a further description of dominionism in laymen’s terms:

Broadly, it’s used to describe Christian conservatives who seek Biblical influence or control over secular government. There are obviously variations on the degree to which they want to influence government. But the fundamental principles are:1. We were founded as a Christan Nation.

2. Christianity is superior to other religions (not all seek convert all people though that varies as well.)

3. Our laws should be based on Biblical law.

This attempt to replace democratic ethics with religion is truly disturbing to citizens who believe that the Constitution should be the rule of the land.
Dominionism, Sarah Palin & the Christian Taliban | Orange Juice! Politics For The Rest Of Us.

 

[sky dancer]

No matter what the belief system or religion," wrote Lawrence Butt, February 20, 2005 "theocracies all have similar characteristics."

1. The society and its leaders believe they have a divine right.
2. The divine mandate is interpreted in specific political contexts.
3. Civil rights and a code of conduct are dictated by religious dogma.
4. Individual aspirations are subordinate to the priorities of the state/religion.
5. Domestic and foreign policy is guided by a religious ideology.
6. Leaders are part of a theologically trained elite.
7. Leadership is limited by religious dogma and is rarely skilled in economics. [1]
The Bush Theocracy - SourceWatch

 

[ABikerSailor]

Bullshit. You and your spaz little friends run around to every thread bashing Christians and Christianity at every opportunity.

Nobody in the US wants a Theocracy. This is typical hysterical BS posted by those who want to see Christians drummed out of society, out of politics, and out of life.

Really? What about George Bush Jr. and the Christian Coalition?

 

[Southpaw]

I think non-Christians should worry about these types of Christians about as much as Christians should worry about Michael Swift's piece of satire.

 

[Southpaw]

Really? What about George Bush Jr. and the Christian Coalition?

As a die-hard fundie Christian, I'll be the first to say that I do NOT want an American theocracy.

I guarantee you we would screw it up.

 

[KittenKoder]

If America (specifically the US) ever became theocracy, even if it was my own religion that was in charge or one that I agree with enough to switch, I would leave in a heartbeat. Of course I wouldn't be missed, but think about this, thousands would leave. Most likely go to Canada, or even Mexico. If I had the money on hand .... Germany here I come! We know for a fact that theocracy style governments fail, and always create violent rebellions (can anyone remember why terrorism became so common in ME). No, it's be bad no matter what religious ideal is placed in charge.

 

[sky dancer]

I have been providing some resources of articles about theocracy to further the discussion. Here is another:

"Since one of the key words the authoritarian Christian nationalists have grossly distorted is “Christianity” itself, it will be necessary to clarify my own terms before I proceed with my critique of the so-called “Christian worldview.”

It is rather misleading to refer to America’s politicized theocratic movement as Christian (their preferred term), because the word has so many different referents, many of which bear no resemblance to this movement. To allow this network of politically active social conservatives to monopolize the term Christian is grossly misleading. I prefer theocrats because it more accurately describes the values this movement represents. It seems the proper question is not whether it is ‘Christian’ to be homophobic, feminist, or “anti-contraception and anti-abortion”.[2] Rather, the question is whether the word ‘Christianity’ refers to any single thing. Mainline moderate Christians concede too much to their theocratic rivals by taking for granted the unity and coherence of the New Testament (i.e. the Christian Bible).

There has simply never been a coherent Christian moral philosophy capable of reconciling the inherent tension between the Synoptic Gospels and Paul’s letters. The latter are commentaries on the significance of Jesus’ life, death and resurrection for human salvation. Paul demonstrates astonishingly little knowledge of, or interest in, the traditions about Jesus. This, according to Dr. John Ziesler, is “one of the strangest and most puzzling areas of early Christianity.”[3] The West has no single, coherent basis for ‘Christian’ ethics because the New Testament contains two conflicting ethical systems. One can be traced to the traditions of the followers of the historical and fully human Jesus of Nazareth (i.e. the ‘Q’ source), and the other takes its authority from the salvation-by-atonement interpretation of Jesus’ death found in Paul’s epistles.

Jesus was never a Christian. He died a Jew. Christianity was founded by St. Paul and did not exist until approximately twenty years after Jesus’ death. As historian Paul Johnson has noted, it was Paul who insisted that Jesus was God. This insistence on the divinity of Jesus, says Johnson, is the only thing that really matters, otherwise the Pauline theology collapses, and with it Christianity. The divinity of Jesus is crucial to maintaining theocratic authority. If Jesus was a human being who set the supreme example of human virtue, then his followers could strive to imitate him. Many people who today call themselves “Christians” are followers of Jesus’ teachings, including the one that enjoins them to “pick up your crosses and follow me.” But Pauline Christianity rests upon the doctrine that this is impossible. By making Jesus into an instrument of God’s agency Paul was able to preserve the myth that human free will, unassisted by God’s saving grace, cannot bring about any good. This move preserved the mediating function of the theocratic authorities, and protected the theocratic form of government from the immanent threat of democracy and direct personal faith grounded in the individual’s relationship to God.
When Christianity Is UnAmerican

 

[KittenKoder]

I think non-Christians should worry about these types of Christians about as much as Christians should worry about Michael Swift's piece of satire.

Actually, I think the good christians should worry the most about those type of christians.

 

[Southpaw]

Actually, I think the good christians should worry the most about those type of christians.

Actually, that's a pretty accurate statement. I agree with you.

 

[sky dancer]

As a die-hard fundie Christian, I'll be the first to say that I do NOT want an American theocracy.

I guarantee you we would screw it up.

Theocracies tend to screw things up, that isn't a particularly Christian phenom. Buddhism screwed it up in Tibet and as a result they lost their country, and with it religious and cultural freedom.

Muslim theocracies are doing the same thing.

Welcome to the board, old friend.

 

[KittenKoder]

As a slightly forgotten note, I don't think it's the fundies that are pushing these concepts but the subversive christians (a type which I rarely speak about). Many will claim they don't want this and that they don't care but are often the first names on the petitions supporting such laws. The most common mention of them are as hypocrites, but I don't think that describes them better than subversives. Every religion has these types, even pagans, and I group them all as one group "Theo-subversives." No, this is not a conspiracy thing because thankfully they aren't organized enough to do much damage yet.

 

[KittenKoder]

Theocracies tend to screw things up, that isn't a particularly Christian phenom. Buddhism screwed it up in Tibet and as a result they lost their country, and with it religious and cultural freedom.

Muslim theocracies are doing the same thing.

Welcome to the board, old friend.

 

[sky dancer]

I think it's important to educate ourselves about theocracies--no matter whether we are identified with a particular faith or an atheist.

The theocracy, dominionism, Christian reconstructionist movement is a danger to our ideals as Americans. We have to know about it in order to recognize those elements within our own groups we belong to.

 

[Southpaw]

Jesus was never a Christian. He died a Jew. Christianity was founded by St. Paul and did not exist until approximately twenty years after Jesus’ death. As historian Paul Johnson has noted, it was Paul who insisted that Jesus was God. This insistence on the divinity of Jesus, says Johnson, is the only thing that really matters, otherwise the Pauline theology collapses, and with it Christianity. The divinity of Jesus is crucial to maintaining theocratic authority. If Jesus was a human being who set the supreme example of human virtue, then his followers could strive to imitate him. Many people who today call themselves “Christians” are followers of Jesus’ teachings, including the one that enjoins them to “pick up your crosses and follow me.” But Pauline Christianity rests upon the doctrine that this is impossible. By making Jesus into an instrument of God’s agency Paul was able to preserve the myth that human free will, unassisted by God’s saving grace, cannot bring about any good. This move preserved the mediating function of the theocratic authorities, and protected the theocratic form of government from the immanent threat of democracy and direct personal faith grounded in the individual’s relationship to God.
When Christianity Is UnAmerican

The statement that Jesus was not a Christian is correct.

The statement that Jesus did not claim to be the Messiah or God is completely incorrect. He did claim to be both God and the Savior.

 

[Missourian]

Come on. Don't try to snow me. The anti-Christians don't believe there is any real prospect of a theocracy in America.

What they really want is to stiffle any opposition to their agenda.

It's nothing but a scare tactic.

'Sure' they say 'we love freedom of religion and freedom of speech and the right to vote...just don't speak about your religion or vote based on your beliefs and we'll get along famously.'

 

[KittenKoder]

The statement that Jesus was not a Christian is correct.

The statement that Jesus did not claim to be the Messiah or God is completely incorrect. He did claim to be both God and the Savior.

It would be impossible for Jesus to be christian, since it is his teachings that define what a christian is. Christians are those who follow his teachings, the definition of the word I am too lazy this week to look up such links as I am only on to kill time between shopping, pizza, and movies (B-Day celebration for the next 8 days).

 

[ABikerSailor]

The statement that Jesus was not a Christian is correct.

The statement that Jesus did not claim to be the Messiah or God is completely incorrect. He did claim to be both God and the Savior.

Actually, that is another misnomer. Jesus did not claim to be God, as when he cast the demons out of a man and into pigs, He told the man, "Go forth and tell everyone what God has done for you through Me".

Then, there's also the statement that Jesus said when He was asked about the time of His return. He said "No one knoweth the hour or the day, not even Me, that is known only to the Father".

Nope.....when Jesus said that the Father and I are One, He was talking about his soul being a piece of God.

Amazing how many people get that confused.

 

[sky dancer]

The statement that Jesus was not a Christian is correct.

The statement that Jesus did not claim to be the Messiah or God is completely incorrect. He did claim to be both God and the Savior.

You may be right about that. Do you have a quote from Jesus? I was under the impression he referred to himself as God's son.