- Jul 2, 2003
- 145,041
- 17,407
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Democrat
@FreeinChrist response to you also
Why do you have to assume that their rights would be taken away? A theocracy does not necessarily mean everyone that doesn't agree with the government is persecuted.
The definition of a Christian theocracy (to me) is a government that seeks God's wisdom in all of their governing. If we start with a simple teaching of Jesus like "do unto others as you would have them do unto you" or "love your neighbor as yourself" wouldn't the better assumption be that all of the 'Christian' theocracies throughout history haven't really been 'Christian' at all? Isn't this what every Christian wants? Sure, we might disagree on the conclusions wrought by the authority, but it is the same stance we have with our democracy. In no way can we determine whether our elected officials will 100% enact the policies we desire even if they present them that way when they are up for election. In the same manner, the theocratic leader would be trusted to do God's will. Imagine the most Godly man (or woman for you egalitarians) that you know and trust. You would also hold faith in God that he has chosen this person to lead our country under a theocracy.
We can put limitations on this power by determining a type of constitution on whether they can execute non-believers or whatever types of limitations we desire.
It, first of all, is in conflict with our current constitution. After a war, if the those in favor of a theocracy win, it will devolve into forcing people to go along with the group in power, and it will cause the loss of rights and persecution.
You can't force Christianity on people. It is meaningless unless people choose Christ for themselves.
Upvote
0