Would You Support A Christian Theocracy?

[Trish1947]

Yes I believe this to be so.
Also many want to rush in and do the job that jesus promised he would and the human in us would create utter chaos.
We just have to be patient and keep Jesus promise close to and in our heart.

I agree with you Evee. I believe it is still "Not by might, nor by power, but by my Spirit saith the Lord..Zech. 4:6

If the early church thought that the way to establish the Kingdom of God in Rome was to run the government, we would have seen it. This is the same question they were asking, and many turned away from Jesus when He told them that the kingdom of God is not of this world. He was saying it doens't operate the same way the world establishes laws. It had to do with it being established in the hearts of men. Rome fell anyway, but what the Saints of God did was pray, and continue to preach the Gospel. Yes they died for it, that's a risk that every Christian might have to take, who knows, but in the end Rome's power was ended.

 

[Mark2010]

It's a nice idea in theory that won't work in the real world. One of the driving reasons the founders of both the U.S. and Canada established clear separation of church and state was that they had come from Europrean states where the church had too much power in government. Show me one government, anywhere in the world, Christian, Islamic, Jewish, etc., that is controlled by religious factions that isn't a disaster.

It's not God's fault. People are fatally flawed and selfish/sinful, so the ideas that sound good on paper don't work in reality. Faith is a matter of the heart and conscious and government is a matter of laws and institutions. Many Christian principles --- "thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not steal, etc." are already encoded in current laws. To go beyond that would lead down a slippery slope.

 

[New_Wineskin]

It's a nice idea in theory that won't work in the real world. One of the driving reasons the founders of both the U.S. and Canada established clear separation of church and state was that they had come from Europrean states where the church had too much power in government. Show me one government, anywhere in the world, Christian, Islamic, Jewish, etc., that is controlled by religious factions that isn't a disaster.

It's not God's fault. People are fatally flawed and selfish/sinful, so the ideas that sound good on paper don't work in reality. Faith is a matter of the heart and conscious and government is a matter of laws and institutions. Many Christian principles --- "thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not steal, etc." are already encoded in current laws. To go beyond that would lead down a slippery slope.

Great post .

Europe was "christian" ruled for a long time . What was the result ? I won't get into it . Then , when religious freedom began , the rulers used that to seperate themselves from the central power . Wars and death . In the USA , even with what people called a "christian" nation , there was limited freedom to all but white males . Finally , there is a greater equality ( not there yet but getting there ) because of secular influence reacting to how the "christian" majority has been doing things . I would rather have a mix of secular and christian people in power . I don't trust christians in power by themselves .

 

[psalms 91]

Great post .

Europe was "christian" ruled for a long time . What was the result ? I won't get into it . Then , when religious freedom began , the rulers used that to seperate themselves from the central power . Wars and death . In the USA , even with what people called a "christian" nation , there was limited freedom to all but white males . Finally , there is a greater equality ( not there yet but getting there ) because of secular influence reacting to how the "christian" majority has been doing things . I would rather have a mix of secular and christian people in power . I don't trust christians in power by themselves .

We made many mistakes as a nation but we were a shining example to the world for a long time, why? Because we held to Christian values in this country and by the way we are a Republic. You can see theslide of this nation in all areas when we stopped trusting God and started to trust the government.

 

[habeas]

As I was pondering forms of government a while back, it occurred to that it did not matter WHAT form of government existed if the hearts of men are evil. Whether socialistic, communistic, democracy, republic, Christian theocracy, other dictatorship...all that matters is the hearts of the governed and the hearts of those governing. If all men and women acted as Jesus did when he was on this earth, any of these systems would work perfectly. Think about it.

Conversely, if the hearts of men (the governed and those governing) is corrupted, and evil, none of these systems will work very well. Some systems, however, will work better than others (if we assume the worst about man's character and put in place rewards/incentives, checks and balances). Yet they will be corrupted to some degree.

 

[Hadron]

The term "Christian" has such a loose definition. Mormons and JW's call themselves Christian, for example.

 

[New_Wineskin]

We made many mistakes as a nation but we were a shining example to the world for a long time, why? Because we held to Christian values in this country and by the way we are a Republic. You can see theslide of this nation in all areas when we stopped trusting God and started to trust the government.

Looking at history , I see the nation holding to more Christian values now than ever . But , not as a result of Christians persuing them . I am not interested in mistakes - I am interested in outright , intentional atrocities . I don't like the government involved in everything . But , given that the "churches" were silent for so long on issues , the government has gained ground . Now , there is an overbalance . Yet , I see why much of it has happened .

 

[GAPCanadianChristian]

Given the times be it crime, violence, lack of love and compassion the lack of morals and values as well as the looming presence of secularism, huminism and athiesm....
Do you think that a goverment based on the christian beleif system would be the way to go?
A goverment who supports freedom but at the same time uses the scripture as it's guide?
i am not taling about a Denomination specific theocracy I am speaking of a gospel.scripture based theocracy.

what do you think?

It wouldn't work, because every denomination has its own interpretation of what the gospel/scripture means.

 

[KingZzub]

There is a core of Christian values that all Christians can agree on:

Sex is for marriage, marriage is one man one woman for life, stealing is wrong, abortion is an abomination, euthanasia is wrong, etc, etc, etc.

Cheers,
|ZZ|

 

[lismore]

There is a core of Christian values that all Christians can agree on:

Sex is for marriage, marriage is one man one woman for life, stealing is wrong, abortion is an abomination, euthanasia is wrong, etc, etc, etc.

Cheers,
|ZZ|

I could take you up on a couple of these. Just as Rahab lied to save the spies, so I would steal if I saw someone starving to death and had not the means to help without stealing.

Two young people in love but forbidden to marry through legalism are the same as the two young lovers in Song of Soloman! Marriage exists for man not man for marriage and God's acceptance of marriage is different from ours. Some people in a paper marriage today are living a sham in God's sight and some people have been forbidden to have a paper marraige but are married in God's sight. Marriage is when the two are joined to become an inseparable one, not when you have a paper from a vicar

The only core value you will ever agree on with me is that Jesus is King and saviour- you and me could not run a raffle without him . Each situation deserves the counsel of the Spirit and of the word. That is why a Christian theocracy is not possible without the physcial presence of the Christ himself, which thankfully we will have imminently.

 

[Sabertooth]

...Two young people in love but forbidden to marry through legalism are the same as the two young lovers in Song of Soloman! Marriage exists for man not man for marriage and God's acceptance of marriage is different from ours. Some people in a paper marriage today are living a sham in God's sight and some people have been forbidden to have a paper marraige but are married in God's sight. Marriage is when the two are joined to become an inseparable one, not when you have a paper from a vicar...

I did not see THAT one coming...

Any further comment would highjack the thread.

 

[lismore]

I did not see THAT one coming...

Any further comment would highjack the thread.

There are different streams in Christianity: some people take forms of Godliness, some people take the reality and some people take a combination of the two.

In a theocracy some people would be punished for doing God's will in law breaking because the people running the theocracy would not be able to tell the difference.

Some people like Jesus would be persecuted for doing things on a sunday, if sunday observance floats your legalistic boat.
Some people like David would steal bread, even consecrated bread and be justified by God but be censured by the law crowd.
Some people might be like Rahab and do God's will by telling a lie.

In fact whatever bee you get in your bonnet you would persecute people for it. If its wine drinkers you are after you will not be at the wedding feast at Cana.

If one group of Christians is in power they may not understand why another group is doing things- those who are led by the spirit do strange things in the eyes of those whom the spirit has not moved in this direction- Paul and Peter taking the gospel to the gentiles got a lot of flack, Jesus healing on the sabbath caused resentment, the list is large.

No Believer has authority over another because Yeshua is the King. He has authority over all. A Christian theocracy cannot even be defined, never mind put into practice.

 

[Sabertooth]

There are different streams in Christianity: some people take forms of Godliness, some people take the reality and some people take a combination of the two.

In a theocracy some people would be punished for doing God's will in law breaking because the people running the theocracy would not be able to tell the difference.

Some people like Jesus would be persecuted for doing things on a sunday, if sunday observance floats your legalistic boat.
Some people like David would steal bread, even consecrated bread and be justified by God but be censured by the law crowd.
Some people might be like Rahab and do God's will by telling a lie.

In fact whatever bee you get in your bonnet you would persecute people for it. If its wine drinkers you are after you will not be at the wedding feast at Cana.

If one group of Christians is in power they may not understand why another group is doing things- those who are led by the spirit do strange things in the eyes of those whom the spirit has not moved in this direction- Paul and Peter taking the gospel to the gentiles got a lot of flack, Jesus healing on the sabbath caused resentment, the list is large.

No Believer has authority over another because Yeshua is the King. He has authority over all. A Christian theocracy cannot even be defined, never mind put into practice.

I've argued many of the same points, but I don't see the same situational latitude offered for sexual ethics. Most exceptions, above, apply to an enemy [killing, lying] or limited liberty [shewbread, drinking], meaning they are conditional or have extenuating circumstances. The victim of sexual misconduct is always the same, therefore, the circumstances NEVER change in THAT regard.

"Flee from sexual immorality. All other sins a man commits are outside his body, but he who sins sexually sins against his own body. [1Cor. 6:18]"

 

[lismore]

I've argued many of the same points, but I don't the same situational latitude offered for sexual ethics.
"Flee from sexual immorality. All other sins a man commits are outside his body, but he who sins sexually sins against his own body. [1Cor. 6:18]"

You are right .

My point was not about sexual ethics - my point is about what God recognises as valid.

Man can do things God does not recognise: gay people can be married now but God does not recognise this. A heterosexual couple (in particular circumstances) can be married in mans view in a church with the biggest cleric in the world and God does not recognise it. What does God say in the situation?

The Roman Emperor Caligula made his horse a senator, but this was not valid. Man can appoint his horses, but what does the Lord say?

A leader in church can be appointed by man, but not anointed by God and God anoints people that man rejects.

We need to see everything the way God sees them.

We can bring in a theocracy and paper over particular difficulties with yesterday's manna, but what does the Lord say in that situation?
What if God speaks through an Amos and no-one listens to him because he is not important enough in their eyes?

 

[psalms 91]

I've argued many of the same points, but I don't see the same situational latitude offered for sexual ethics. Most exceptions, above, apply to an enemy [killing, lying] or limited liberty [shewbread, drinking], meaning they are conditional or have extenuating circumstances. The victim of sexual misconduct is always the same, therefore, the circumstances NEVER change in THAT regard.

"Flee from sexual immorality. All other sins a man commits are outside his body, but he who sins sexually sins against his own body. [1Cor. 6:18]"

Amen I fully agree