Do you want America to be a Christian nation?

[FreeinChrist]

@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.

 

[ExodusMe]

Well you are already taking away the right to hold public office from non-Christians if you are saying that all leaders must be Christian.

Alright, I don't see that as a major consequence though. If you are a Christian, wouldn't it be prudent to have Christian leaders also? Do you vote for Christians? I just don't see how that is a strong objection to not having a Theocracy rather than a Democracy.

If you are a Christian it is necessarily true that you believe the moral teachings of the bible are superior to their contradictions. Why would it be a bad thing if non-Christian's were not allowed to be in leadership?

 

[ExodusMe]

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.

I am not asking whether it is possible. I am just exploring why Christian's don't desire this. I am not arguing that having a theocracy would mean converting all of the citizens.

I am arguing that if you are a Christian, then you also believe that Christianity is true and other religions are false. If this is the case, then why would you want non-christian's to be in government leadership?

 

[Archivist]

Alright, I don't see that as a major consequence though. If you are a Christian, wouldn't it be prudent to have Christian leaders also? Do you vote for Christians? I just don't see how that is a strong objection to not having a Theocracy rather than a Democracy.

If you are a Christian it is necessarily true that you believe the moral teachings of the bible are superior to their contradictions. Why would it be a bad thing if non-Christian's were not allowed to be in leadership?

No I do not necessarily vote for Christians. I vote for the most competent person.

 

[FreeinChrist]

I am an old fashioned Baptist like those Danbury Baptists who were from folks who came to America to escape religious persecution....and totally believe in the separation of church and state.
And sadly, just because they say they are Christian does not mean they behave as a Christian or really are. We have seen theocracies over the centuries turn into repressive governments. I do not believe a theocracy will stay true.


Ideally, the whole world would be Christian. But it is not. I believe that when Jesus said this, "Do unto others as would have them do unto you", that it was in regards to all people and not limited to good Christians, or Jews in those days. So we need to govern in a way that treats all people fairly, and justly, and with mercy (think Micah 7:8) regardless of what faith they are. A theocracy will have a thumb pressing down on non-Christians - and will hinder that aim.

 

[ExodusMe]

No I do not necessarily vote for Christians. I vote for the most competent person.

Alright, so you don't really care if the leader is ethical or moral or believes in God - you just want a good 'politician'.

I think that is the folly of our democracy. We have leaders with no ethics or morals and no faith in God.

I guess this is just the watershed difference between you and me. It is necessarily true that any elected person will attempt to enforce what they believe the world should be like on everyone else within the authority they have afforded. It is folly to think that a person who is secular is going to do what is best to advance the gospel.

 

[ExodusMe]

I am an old fashioned Baptist like those Danbury Baptists who were from folks who came to America to escape religious persecution....and totally believe in the separation of church and state.
And sadly, just because they say they are Christian does not mean they behave as a Christian or really are. We have seen theocracies over the centuries turn into repressive governments. I do not believe a theocracy will stay true.


Ideally, the whole world would be Christian. But it is not. I believe that when Jesus said this, "Do unto others as would have them do unto you", that it was in regards to all people and not limited to good Christians, or Jews in those days. So we need to govern in a way that treats all people fairly, and justly, and with mercy (think Micah 7:8) regardless of what faith they are. A theocracy will have a thumb pressing down on non-Christians - and will hinder that aim.

Naw, you are just taking the theocracies of history and assuming that any future theocracy would act as such. I believe that there could be a theocracy that would be fair and just to all citizens and it would function better than our democracy although I am not sure if it would ever be possible.

 

[Archivist]

Alright, so you don't really care if the leader is ethical or moral or believes in God - you just want a good 'politician'.

I think that is the folly of our democracy. We have leaders with no ethics or morals and no faith in God.

I guess this is just the watershed difference between you and me. It is necessarily true that any elected person will attempt to enforce what they believe the world should be like on everyone else within the authority they have afforded. It is folly to think that a person who is secular is going to do what is best to advance the gospel.

Exactly where did I say that I don't care whether our leaders are ethical or moral? I think I rather clearly said that I vote for the best qualified person. If you think that only Christians are ethical and moral and that non-Christians are not ethical or moral you are sadly mistaken.

Judges are elected officials in PA. A few years back it was learned that a Wilkes-Barre judge was sentencing juvenile offenders who had committed minor crimes like stealing candy bars to long sentences in a juvenile facility. It was a private facility and the judge was getting kickbacks for every sentence. He was arrested, tried, found guilty and sentenced to a long term. He claimed to be a good Christian and had advertised that in his campaign literature. The judge who sentenced him was Jewish. Oh and the Jewish judge also had the record of every one of the offenders whipped clean and ordered that those who were still serving time be released.

Which of those judges was ethical? Which one was moral?

 

[ExodusMe]

Exactly where did I say that I don't care whether our leaders are ethical or moral? I think I rather clearly said that I vote for the best qualified person. If you think that only Christians are ethical and moral and that non-Christians are not ethical or moral you are sadly mistaken.

Judges are elected officials in PA. A few years back it was learned that a Wilkes-Barre judge was sentencing juvenile offenders who had committed minor crimes like stealing candy bars to long sentences in a juvenile facility. It was a private facility and the judge was getting kickbacks for every sentence. He was arrested, tried, found guilty and sentenced to a long term. He claimed to be a good Christian and had advertised that in his campaign literature. The judge who sentenced him was Jewish. Oh and the Jewish judge also had the record of every one of the offenders whipped clean and ordered that those who were still serving time be released.

Which of those judges was ethical? Which one was moral?

Yeah, but that only shows that we need to have better scrutiny of persons who claim to be Christian. What does that look like? Not sure, but maybe we could get a 10 year history with testimony of their local pastor and wife, etc... or something.

In a theocracy the aim of an elected official will be the advance of the gospel through the government as an instrument. What that looks like I do not know, but I highly doubt a non-Christian would be that elected official.

Democracy & pluralism do not allow this. That is why we are constantly bickering over useless things like healthcare, etc... Not to say they are not important, but they are not as important as the advance of the Gospel.

 

[Hank77]

I will let you decide what is meant by 'Christian nation'.

This is the very reason it would not work. Different people would have a different opinion about what laws should be made, etc.
If a theocracy didn't work for Israel even though it was God who made the rules, what makes anyone think the men could make the rules and live by them.
The NT never said anything about the church establishing a theocracy.

 

[Archivist]

Yeah, but that only shows that we need to have better scrutiny of persons who claim to be Christian. What does that look like? Not sure, but maybe we could get a 10 year history with testimony of their local pastor and wife, etc... or something.

In a theocracy the aim of an elected official will be the advance of the gospel through the government as an instrument. What that looks like I do not know, but I highly doubt a non-Christian would be that elected official.

Democracy & pluralism do not allow this. That is why we are constantly bickering over useless things like healthcare, etc... Not to say they are not important, but they are not as important as the advance of the Gospel.

So now your going to have tests to see who the real Christians are before letting them run for office?

The country you want to have isn't a place where I want to live.

Oh, and my understanding is the the pastor of the judge in question would have only said good things about him. Dittos for his wife and daughter, although I understand that his daughter no longer speaks to him.

 

[Hank77]

I want Americans and the US government to act with Christian ideals.

Which Christian ideals? Christians cannot even agree on what healthcare should look like in this country.

 

[Hank77]

thank you. Quite frankly anyone who does has not studied history to know what has happened when that one has been tried.

Christians were burning other Christians at the stake, killing them as witches, etc. Men who translated the Bible were hunted down tortured and killed. ie Tyndale

 

[Shiloh Raven]

Alright, I don't see that as a major consequence though. If you are a Christian, wouldn't it be prudent to have Christian leaders also? Do you vote for Christians? I just don't see how that is a strong objection to not having a Theocracy rather than a Democracy.

If you are a Christian it is necessarily true that you believe the moral teachings of the bible are superior to their contradictions. Why would it be a bad thing if non-Christian's were not allowed to be in leadership?

I would rather vote for atheists or another non-Christians to be leaders of America than vote for Christian radical zealots (who would attempt to spread Christianity by laws and deny non-Christians rights, such as running for public office). The United States of America has spent the majority of its history denying certain groups of people rights and equality. I don't want to see that pattern continue.

America is not today nor has it ever been a Christian nation, and it should never be one either. No specific religion should be designated as the dominant religion in this country, where people of other religions could be denied rights and equality, and/or persecuted for not being a part of the dominant religion. It would be a total disaster for America as a free nation if that were ever to happen again.

 

[Hank77]

Alright, so you don't really care if the leader is ethical or moral or believes in God - you just want a good 'politician'.

There are people who are not Christians that are ethical and moral people. When I vote those are the people I choose, along with their qualifications for the job, whether they are Christians or not.
Some Christians don't exhibit as much ethical and moral character as some who are not Christians.

 

[Hank77]

Naw, you are just taking the theocracies of history and assuming that any future theocracy would act as such. I believe that there could be a theocracy that would be fair and just to all citizens and it would function better than our democracy although I am not sure if it would ever be possible.

Only with Jesus completely and fully at the helm and people are made perfect instead of having weaknesses and temptations to overcome.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Those who desire America to be a "Christian nation" are the sort who I fear would have no problem rounding up people like me and others who don't share those particular moralistic, puritanical, dominionist, fundamentalist views.

So, no, count me out on the "Christian nation" business. If I wanted to live in a religious-based dictatorship I'd move to Iran.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Hank77]

It would be a total disaster for America as a free nation if that were ever to happen again.

It would be a disaster for many Christians just like it was in the past. The very reason the Founding Fathers deplored the mixing of church and state.

 

[DawnStar]

"My kingdom is not of this world" -Jesus

 

[SolomonVII]

That doesn't mean it isn't possible. This is what this thread is exploring. What would the theocracy look like that could offer a society well being to the believer & non-believer?

It would look like no theocracy that has every existed in human history, up to this point in time.

Nice, how do we do that? Shouldn't it start with some guys in a room who agree on a constitution and then they all sign it? What would be on it?

There is no need to reinvent the wheel. That constitution has already been signed.

A theocracy can solve a number of problems Christians face today to advance the gospel. Look at all the money that is wasted on politics and elected officials. What if we were able to spend it on reaching unreached persons?

That is what churches are for.

This is assuming you do not have corrupt officials who lead the government, but it is to show that your response is somewhat naive. There are many benefits of a Christian theocracy that would make it superior to democracy given it functions in the right manner (back to the original question of - what is the right manner?)

There is no point in human history where individuals have not been corruptible. There have also been times in human history where virtuous Christian leaders have carried their virtues to an excess where they had worse effect than the corresponding vices might have had. There is much more to effective governance that just being good.
Theocracy begins with the premise that godly leaders will act godly, and competently, and in those leaders, the flock can depend upon.
American government today assumes that all people are corruptible, and that individuals when taken as a whole have better judgment than an single expert, or even panel of experts.
Checks and balances are set in place in which the interests in society, for good or for ill, are set in competition against each other in order to keep the corrupting tendencies of fallen man in check. At the heart of the system is not just the population of the people, but the system works only if and when the people, who are the government, are highly morally formed and informed.

Christ-like morality is not an option for democracy, but
Christ, as he lives in the heart of individual Christians, is the essential cog in the machine. It is a population that has been formed in the way of Christ that brings the 'theocracy' into secular government. American secular government is not constitutionally bereft of God in the least, but depends on the maintenance of a Christian culture that expresses itself most fundamentally at the level of the individual. The form of American can be secular and morally neutral only because the people are neither.

The system breaks down when Christian culture breaks down, and when people assume that Christ is basically just an option or an add-on that some other icon may fulfill just as well.