What's wrong with theocracy?

I didn't say that they were in force or effect today. I said I liked them, because they provided for the poor, the widow, and the stranger. The poor were able to work to glean fields, for example. Land was returned after 50 years. Since these and other aspects came from God, how can they be wrong? Did He change His mind? Even those aspects of that time that have been replaced under the N.T. show the mind of God.

I'm not naive enough to believe we can return to those days, but I must admire them.

 

"Ideal"? I'd really rather live under the Constitution and the Bill of Rights than under Old Testament Law. I'd say, "So stone me!", but since we're not in the OT, you can't.

It's not possible to have a valid theocracy unless God himself is speaking through a figurehead. Otherwise you just have an oligarchy or dictatorship ruling according to their opinion of God's point of view.

 

Theocracies have always been subject to wicked politics just like any other form of gov't.

A constitutional republic isn't perfect... but one that respects the sovereign rights of the individual is as close as man has come to "righteous" gov't... as it leaves man to answer to God rather than man.

 

A theocracy is ultimately a pure democracy.

I say that because, ultimately, the god (or God) of the majority will be the "presiding deity" of the system.

Pure democracy scares me. Most of our forefathers in the USA's infancy shuddered at the thought of it.

The pitfall of pure democracy? Mob rule. (See Hamas, and the Palestinian state for a perfect example).

Joseph & Scott make good points, I think.

But then again, last time I played "Risk," I lost...

RB

 

I also base my preference on scripture (Daniel 2:32-33 and following), where the great kingdoms of the world are detailed chronologically, from an absolute monarchy of gold (Babylon) to silver (Media-Persia) to brass (Graeco-Macedonia) to iron (Rome), followed last of all by clay (revived Rome). In verse 39, we are explicitly told that each form is less desirous than the previous. The value of the substances also deteriorate. Seems pretty clear to me which form of government God likes.

 

That's exactly why theocracy is a bad idea. The majority decide for the minority. I don't like the idea of the government deciding my religious beliefs. That's completely against the concept of religious liberty.

No thanks. I'll stick to the Holy Spirit doing that, thank you, and will permit others to decide for themselves likewise.

 

Absolutely not. I adhere strongly to the concept of religious liberty. Religious liberty is dead where theocracy is present. No thanks. </font>[/QUOTE]I certainly agree with Johnv on this one.

There is no such thing as religious liberty in a theocracy.

 

Q: What's wrong with theocracy?

A: Fallen man!

 

I would like a monarchy, if I were king .

All Hail King Stefan I!

 

&gt;Land was returned after 50 years.

Then all the USofA should be returned to the Indian People?

 

I'm all for states rights. Let 'em all succeed (sp?)!

With our country founded on Christian principles, a theocracy sounds appealing. I mean if I lived in Iraq I wouldn't expect them to support my religion, but I could still pray and read my Bible in my home.

The same in this country. A Christian nation but others who worship a false god would have that right.

Would a theocracy force foreigners to become Christians?

 

I was in Germany, Switzerland, and Czechoslovakia during the fall of the Berlin wall and the onset of democratic reform.

I had the privilege of meeting three pastors who had suffered immense persecution at the hands of the Stasi (E. German Police) and Czech officials under Communistic rule.

ALL THREE they said they wouldn't change a thing. Their suffering had made their faith rock-solid. One told me he was worried that under friendly circumstances, his church might grow complacent.

History seems to have shown that Christianity strengthened during times of duress.

The question is, would a theocracy cause intense persecution (Muslim states toward Christians) or open acceptance and promotion?

Depends on who the majority is.

God will be my God no matter the system, but if He lets me have a say, I'm running far away from a theocracy.

I'm kind of partial to a limited constitutional republic. We used to have one of those here...

 

Except it wasn't. The is no "Golden Rule" in the Constitution and more half the Ten Commandments are unenforceable and unconstitutional. I don't recall anything about tariffs and a bicameral legislature in the Bible, Old or New.

Which denomination?

Christians and Jews were fairly well tolerated in old Iraq, but the new leaders are all dressed in religious garb now instead of Western clothes. They resemble Mullahs more & more. We may have brought them a theocracy, but, again, there is a big problem over which denomination shall rule there.

Or many gods or no god? What does it mean to be a Christian Nation?

Depends, but probably not unless it were as extreme as the Taliban (whom we supported until they attacked us).

 

Except it wasn't. The is no "Golden Rule" in the Constitution and more half the Ten Commandments are unenforceable and unconstitutional. I don't recall anything about tariffs and a bicameral legislature in the Bible, Old or New.</font>[/QUOTE] The ideal is that man is sovereign before God. This is the NT rule and applied to government... you get a Constitution that greatly restricts the central gov't and promotes individual rights and liberties.

We had this once. Now... we only have vestiges.

Christians and Jews were fairly well tolerated in old Iraq,</font>[/QUOTE] Except they weren't . At least not if they attempted to practice the biblical mandate of evangelism/proselytizing commanded in both the NT and OT.

It remains to be seen if Shites can stand a open and democratic society.

I would say for the time being they are looking to make no more additional enemies than necessary. The Kurds who make up a significant minority have a secular history... bringing a nice offset to any notion of applying a sharia in Iraq even if the majority were so disposed.

That is partly why I think a confederate rather than united Iraq would have been better.

Or many gods or no god? What does it mean to be a Christian Nation?</font>[/QUOTE] We aren't a Christian nation in the historical sense. In fact, we are the antithesis of it.

We are a nation established on the biblical principle that individuals are sovereign and receive their true RIGHTS from the God of nature... and not popular convention, other people (ie. kings), and not government.

Governments do one of two things. They either protect genuine individual rights or they confiscate them... and it matters not if they justify that confiscation with claims of social or economic justice.

Depends, but probably not unless it were as extreme as the Taliban (whom we supported until they attacked us). </font>[/QUOTE]Theocracies gave us the inquisitions so yes and no. They would eventually force conformance... but not to genuine Christianity.

 

...On a far away planet there is a particularly nasty volcano. Well ok, the volcano probably doesn't have any sort of consciousness itself, or if it does it might not be nasty and deliberately cause the results it generates...nevertheless it's effects are extremely nasty here.

This volcano is perhaps the most powerful ever discovered. However instead of lava it shoots a strange fungus when it erupts. This might not be much of a problem in itself, but it erupts daily, and due to a rather unfortunate cosmic alignment the volcano's extravasations always hit Earth.

KA-BOOM! The volcano blasts another load of fungus towards Earth (ok ok, with gravitational assistance from some other poorly placed stars, planets, and the deus ex machina gene in the fungus...fussy people) ...So anyway when the fungus arrives here it is 6000 years old (or 27 billion zillion years for those into THAT)..and it sets about it's devastating behaviour. You see, left to itself the fungus is mostly harmless, however as soon as it hits paper on Earth it reacts violently and congeals into random black patterns...

...Earthmen call this black congealed outer-space volcano fungus on paper: "LAWS"

Awwwww gimme a break, it's wayyyyy past my bed-time and had too much sugar and caffeine ok


That's just a long boring sleep-deprivation & slight caffeine-buzz induced intro to a short main point "Humans make laws. Humans have worldviews. A law made by a human will reflect the worldview of that human. Now call me weird (it's been done (probably will be more so after that volcano stuff in this post )) but I'ld rather see a bunch of Christians cutting back the number of abortions, restricting availability of pornography (...and a few other things that I can't think of at the moment that make me Uncle Joe Stalin the 2nd...) than the mysterious random volcano fungus patches running things...

But come to think of it even the aforementioned random fungus splotches would be an improvement on the clowns that run things now

This is getting silly..... time.

 

OK Pete,

we get it...

you're a fungi after all...

 

DOH! I walked right into that....I knew I should have said mould

.....Now I'm walking right off to

Honest...

Cross my heart and hope to sleep for a year...

 

Then all the USofA should be returned to the Indian People?

Since they didn't own any land, how could we return the land to them? Did Israel return their land to the Caananites?

I'm idealizing about a social structure in the OT -- we are not setup that way.

 

But the important question to ask is did you stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night?