Here’s two articles, two guys with diverging opinions about the notion of theocracy.
One is Russell Moore, Why Theocracy Is Terrible.
Than we have Pastor Wilson’s response, “A Primer on Theocracies”
Both of them make some good points. While I often appreciate a good Baptist joke too, Russell Moore is far more aligned with my thoughts and beliefs on the matter. I found his article encouraging and I appreciated this point, “Theocracies are awful and abusive, not only because they oppress human beings but because they also blaspheme God.”
Of particular concern to me in Pastor Wilson’s response was this sentence, “The commission was not to “carry the gospel to” all the nations. Moore changes the wording of the Great Commission here. The command was to disciple the nations, baptizing them and teaching them obedience.”
That doesn’t sound like evangelism to me at all, that sounds like nation building. Totally secular communists could do the very same, go forth, disciple (discipline) the nations, baptizing them with firing squads, and teaching them obedience.
There’s a cute fishing analogy I really like when it comes to being fishers of men, “we catch ’em, He cleans them.” It’s simple, but a vitally important distinction to understand. We introduce people to Jesus Christ, we speak of His love for them, but we do not try to force a consummation of that marriage. A bit humorous, but that would actually be an invasion of privacy and not unlike a meddlesome Mother in law. If we trust in the Lord, then we must trust in His ability to nurture and lead in those relationships. Our job is to make the introduction and to love people.
Myself I would not even live in a housing development run by a Homeowners Society that fancied itself a “Christian theocracy.” I’m already shuddering and defiantly painting my house different shades of pink and purple. It’s not the “Christian” part that creates the problem, it’s the “people” part. “Absolute power corrupts absolutely.”
The beauty of America is that we have that separation of church and state, that tension that leads to creation, not unlike the tension between men and women often leads to love. We don’t want the harmony of sameness, we want the beauty of tension. President Madison once made a very good point too, when you open the door between church and state, remember it is a two-way door. The government soon walks right back through it and starts running the church.
That said however, to have a thriving civilization of the sort I would prefer to live in, we need to be heavily infused with Christian values. A good chunk of your population must share the same ideals. Your courthouses must be run by people who at least endorse the ideals held in the ten commandments.
As George Carlin once said, “The real reason that we can’t have the Ten Commandments in a courthouse: You cannot post “Thou shalt not steal,” “Thou shalt not commit adultery,” and “Thou shalt not lie” in a building full of lawyers, judges, and politicians. It creates a hostile work environment.”
Indeed. As crazy as things can get sometimes, as deeply flawed as our leaders can be, at least we all recognize there is a standard they can fall short of. Take away that standard and we’ve even relinquished our right to complain about them.
The creation of culture, of civilization, is a natural flowing response to who we all are as individuals. It is a community response and it stems from the inside out. Now, there are always some outliers in the community who must have their values impressed upon them from the outside in. Two yr olds for example, and convicted felons. Invaders. Barbarians. Homeowner’s Societies.
A big chunk of us however, are actually motivated by the Lord’s grace, and His grace being reflected by the people around us. This how you teach obedience, that is how you make “the law,” something people love rather than fear.
“Perfect love cast out fear,” every single time.
Mel Wild said:
“Myself I would not even live in a housing development run by a Homeowners Society that fancied itself a “Christian theocracy.” I’m already shuddering and defiantly painting my house different shades of pink and purple. It’s not the “Christian” part that creates the problem, it’s the “people” part. “Absolute power corrupts absolutely.”
Amen! That is exactly the problem! Christians! People in general. Unless Jesus Christ Himself is literally running the show, I wouldn’t want any part of it. That’s why the US constitution works, even with bad leadership. It’s built on a total distrust of human nature, mitigating “us” with all kinds of checks and balances.
Or, as Groucho Marx once said, “I would never be part of any organization that would have me as a member.” 🙂
LikeLike
insanitybytes22 said:
“It’s built on a total distrust of human nature, mitigating “us” with all kinds of checks and balances.”
Exactly, Mel! I remain baffled as to why so many people insist on believing they are just innately good. I laugh sometimes, I’m relatively harmless, somewhat good, peaceful, but give me a super power, like the power to make annoying people vaporize, and the whole story could quickly change. Poof! See, I’m attracted to the idea already. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
The V Pub said:
“It’s built on a total distrust of human nature, mitigating “us” with all kinds of checks and balances.”
The problem occurs when people interpret it as a living document. As long as we all adhere to the belief that we are a nation of laws and not men. But I digress. I agree with you that the creation comes from the tensions between dissimilar parties.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Julie (aka Cookie) said:
first—this Pastor Wilson you often reference, maybe like fishing, you need to cut him from the line—I think he’s not a keeper 🙂
Secondly—George Carlin—raunchy and crude…yet at times, spot on—-that was great about the 10 Commandments—I thought you were going to say you couldn’t post all of those things in order not to offend the offenders 🙂
LikeLiked by 2 people
insanitybytes22 said:
LOL, well I cannot cut Pastor Wilson from the line on account of the fact that he is busy church planting and building an empire. He’s a bit like Russell Moore, one of those movers and shakers within the faith culture at large. All I can do is pray and keep asking God to raise the cream to the top. Also, I can fire off a few sternly worded letters. That’s the extent of my abilities, but the praying part, there is real power there. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Julie (aka Cookie) said:
Then as we like to say down here in the south— ‘preach it sista’ 😘
LikeLiked by 1 person
ColorStorm said:
Too funny J; throw him back.
Crackin me up. But you do know the good lady here has a long and strong fishing line……….. of grace.
Something about al-lure………….. lol
LikeLiked by 2 people
Julie (aka Cookie) said:
There you go again 🤣
LikeLiked by 2 people
Elihu said:
I agree. I don’t really want the government involved in the church. Look at how the postal service, Amtrak, and all those other entities are doing. I only want Jesus in charge—he’s incorruptible.
Furthermore, I think there is value to be had in opposing sides in our constitutional republic because it forces honest people to examine their beliefs more closely. It could be debated as to whether there are any honest people left to debate, but I believe there are. My faith was strengthened in the antagonistic environment of California because I had to search out my faith in order to defend it. I had to learn to listen closely to the other side and at times I found that my views were wrong on certain points.
There is a balance though, as you point out. We still need God-fearing people and the values upon which our nation was valued or this whole experiment fails. (Your George Carlin reference cracked me up. 😉)
LikeLiked by 1 person
insanitybytes22 said:
“My faith was strengthened in the antagonistic environment of California because I had to search out my faith in order to defend it.”
Amen! I really like that concept. Everybody serves a purpose in God’s Kingdom. Some people apparently serve the purpose of strengthening my own resolve. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Heather Davis said:
Gotta agree about the homeowners societies, though I’d suggest three-year-olds are in greater need than the twos. Haha! No pink or purple houses, but my former neighbors did once have alpacas – right at the beginning of our darling HOA. Oh, did we ever have some fun. I miss those guys. The neighbors, too.
LikeLiked by 1 person
claire said:
The only way to have a theocracy? God as the head and no middle man lol!
LikeLiked by 1 person
insanitybytes22 said:
Ahh, I like that! “God as the head and no middle man.” I think that’s exactly how it’s supposed to work. Lots of servants and encouragers that help us along, but no middle man. I’ll vote for that kind for theocracy!
Doesn’t “theo” mean God? The God part is awesome, it’s the “cracy” that is not of Him, that begins to worry me.
LikeLiked by 1 person
claire said:
Yes, that cracy is the problem! lol!
LikeLike
Citizen Tom said:
I agree with your thoughts about the matter, but I don’t think Wilson actually said anything wrong. Oddly, I don’t think Moore did either. I just think Wilson took a position that was too contrary and expressed himself poorly.
As it is commonly understood, Wilson abused the term theocracy. Here is the definition from => https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/theocracy.
The Bible is fairly clear about the fact that our leaders do God’s will. So Wilson went with a bit too far with that first definition. I don’t think Wilson proposes to violate the First Amendment, but he obviously thinks we should select Christian leaders and that we should encourage those leaders to promote Christian values.
There is something to be said for what Wilson advocates. However, as you suggest we can take this obedience thing too far. What is too far? That is when we use the government to force other people to be obedient to our own religious beliefs instead of their own. Unless, a citizen is violating the rights of another citizen, government has no good reason to bother him. Respecting religious freedom is in fact a Christian value.
Did Wilson propose to use government to impose his beliefs on others? It is not clear that he does. Nevertheless, to some extent government must do that. To operate a government the people must have some kind of shared belief system. Otherwise, it becomes very difficult to make any laws. No laws. No government.
Therefore, we want America to be theocratic in the sense that our shared value system is predominantly Christian. In addition, we want Christian leaders who strive to understand God’s will and lead our nation in accordance with God’s will. So it is I think Wilson agrees with you more than you may realize.
Wilson did not advocate a formal theocracy led by the clergy. He argued that any government is theocratic. Even the Communists and Nazis were theocracies. These had personality cults and a religious belief in their isms as manifested by the actions of their rulers.
Even secularism is an ism. Even secularism suggest a view about God, that He does not matter. Christians can only accommodate secular practices to serve God’s purposes, to permit religious freedom. We cannot accommodate secularism as a belief which allows its proponents to secularize our society. My guess is that that is the concern Wilson was trying to express.
LikeLiked by 2 people
insanitybytes22 said:
Interesting,Tom.
I think this is where part of the problem arises, “The Bible is fairly clear about the fact that our leaders do God’s will.”
That’s based on Romans, right? “Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.” I think we misunderstand that, miss the message being conveyed. Clearly our leaders frequently do not do “God’s will.” Hitler for example, was not doing God’s will. However, he did not operate in a vaccum, he was doing the will of many of his people.
King Herod was clearly not doing God’s will when he ordered the slaughter of the innocents. But if you think about it, there would have been no Christmas story without him,no census, no born in a stable,no fulfillment of prophecy and being born in Bethlehem. So in a more abstract way you could say, King Herod served God’s purpose.
I think that is what Romans is getting at, the much bigger picture. Romans 12:20 just prior is telling us “Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head.”
So rather than unquestioning obedience to our leaders, we’re being called to try to see the bigger picture, how God plans to use them, even the bad ones. Do not repay evil with evil. “Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good.” This is a passage telling us to be encouraged in the face of injustice, to take heart, to not respond with armed resurrection. What did the early church and many of the disciples do? Promptly disobey the authorities and preach the gospel, which often cost them their lives.
So Romans is not telling us our leaders are doing God’s will in a literal sense, nor is it really demanding unquestioning obedience to leadership. Romans 12:18 tell us, “If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men.”
Another of way of saying that is don’t incur their wrath, try to stay alive as long as you can,you have a job to do.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Citizen Tom said:
@insanitybytes22
I think we are in agreement, and I tend to think those in agreement include Moore and Wilson. Perhaps Wilson is just one of those people who has trouble accepting “yes” for an answer. I fear most of us have been one of those people.
Much of the Bible is about history and what various rulers have done. Consider the story of Joseph in Genesis, how his brothers sold him into slavery and how Joseph rose up to become second only to Pharoh. When he met his brothers again, what did Joseph tell his brothers? Was it not that what they had intended for evil, God intended for good.
How did God use Hitler and Stalin? I don’t know for certain. Romans 8:28 is something God does, but what He does is more than I can understand. Yet consider this exchange.
God had determined that Jesus would be crucified, and Pilate would be weak enough to order His Son’s crucifixion. Therefore, He appointed Pilate to rule.
For the most part, rulers do more good than harm (as Romans 13 suggests). Yet even when they do harm they do God’s will. Ask the Jews. God used the Assyrians and Chaldeans to take Isreal into captivity. Later, in 70 A.D., the Romans tore down Jerusalem and Herod’s Temple.
How did God use Hitler and Stalin? We can only see what happened. After WWI, England and France vindictively punished Germany. After WWII, they dared not do that again. In addition, there is once again a nation named Israel whose capital is Jerusalem.
LikeLiked by 1 person
insanitybytes22 said:
Well said, Tom. I think you understand the point I was driving at.
LikeLiked by 1 person
lynnabbottstudios said:
I like the way Josh McDowell says it: “Rules without relationship equal rebellion.” Or as the Apostle Paul said it is the kindness of God that leads us to repentance. God doesn’t force anyone to believe. He invites us to pursue a relationship with Him. You’ve expressed excellent thoughts once again, IB. I always love to read what you have to write! 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
pamelaparizo said:
Actually, the separation of church and state is very much misunderstood. The purpose of our Founding Fathers was not to prevent religion from participation in the public forum, in government. Washington and Adams very much understood that securing liberty was a blessing from God. They understood the need to invoke God on our nation’s side and regularly spoke of God and involved Him in his administration of the Army and as President.
The purpose of the 1st amendment was to prevent a state church such as the Church of England, which tended to strangle men’s conscience. The FF wanted men to be able to chose based on their conscience, but most chose some form of Christianity, which was largely true up until the 1960s. The Jewish people as well had a large portion in the forming of this country, but Christians assume that Judaism worships the same God, i.e. Jehovah. I can assure you that contrary to Obama, Islam had very little participation nor any other sect or creed that I am aware of.
America has however been extremely defensive of the 1st amendment, and it’s only been within the Obama administration that it was tested while most Christians felt Obama was a secret Muslim, which I personally believe myself.
The problem is, that since the 1960s, and increasingly so over the last decade, it’s become politically correct to try to exclude religious expression from participation in government and that is detrimental to our nation. I wouldn’t ever advocate for a theocracy–I believe that will happen when Jesus reigns. But I do believe our country was built on a heritage of Christianity that God blessed and as we get away from that, our country has fallen into decadence.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Pingback: WHAT DOES A CHRISTIAN THEOCRACY LOOK LIKE? – Citizen Tom
Mike Ridenour said:
When it is time for a Christian Theocracy, Christ will return and run it personally.
LikeLiked by 2 people
insanitybytes22 said:
Amen, Mike! That’s the kind of theocracy I’m all for. 🙂
LikeLiked by 2 people
Jim Lantern said:
I agree.
LikeLiked by 2 people
jackfussellacrosstheland said:
George Carlin’s quote made me chuckle.
LikeLike
Jim Lantern said:
First to note, I like your new header picture of cat under blanket. I’m currently caring for a number of cats abandoned by former tenants who moved out and left them behind. So I built a cat sanctuary for shelter, sleep, warmth, food and water, free to come and go as they please and eat when they want to dry kind, special servings of west kind. I’ll poll the cats, find out their opinion on theocracies, get back to you on that. Meantime…
Remember Bill Moyers, who did several specials on PBS. I remember a cross-over to 60 Minutes on CBS about Rushdoony and Christian Reconstruction, caused me some concern way back when, 1987 [do Internet search for that]. Not to be confused with Bill Myers [billmyers.com] also interesting for religion and spiritual.
About 2 years before Robert A. Heinlein died in May 1988, I wrote my first editorial article published in the Wichita Kansas newspaper. I was born in Wichita 5 March 1956. There was a religious conflict in Wichita between a local extremist church and 7-Eleven. I was on the side of the business because of how that church went too far, forcing 7-Eleven to leave Wichita, left the door open for Quick Trips to take over that market, the next target but Quick Trip won against the church. It came down to a First Amendment issue in my opinion, and censorship. In my editorial/opinion published letter I referred to Heinlein’s Revolt in 2100 book and the story therein If This Goes On. Sales of his book skyrocketed in Wichita because of what I wrote, picked up by Kansas City newspapers, and then nationwide. A bookstore sent a copy of the editorial to Baen Books, to explain the surge, and Baen sent it to Robert at his home 6000 Bonny Doon Rd, Santa Cruz, CA 95060. His wife Virginia Heinlein wrote a thank you letter signed by Robert and mailed it to me. Through her, as Robert was too ill to write but could dictate to her, we corresponded exchanging several letters until his death – or rather his return to his home planet! After all, the souls of science fiction authors are alien souls from other planets, born into human life after engaging in soul travel to Earth. Where else would such ideas come from? As a science fiction author, I too will be going home, perhaps sooner than later. There is no conflict between my science fiction perspectives and my belief in Christ Jesus as a Son of God. Anyway., concern for the US becoming a theocracy in place of our democracy. Who would have guessed the exact opposite would become the threat in 2018 from a businessman turned politician. This might be a good time for Jesus to return and fix that problem, and a few others. So the right kind of theocracy might not be such a bad thing now.
IF THIS GOES ON—
Excerpts from Wikipedia article…
“If This Goes On—” is a science fiction short novel by Robert A. Heinlein, first serialized in 1940 in Astounding Science-Fiction and revised and expanded for inclusion in the 1953 collection Revolt in 2100. The novel shows what might happen to Christianity in the United States given mass communications, applied psychology, and a hysterical populace. The novel is part of Heinlein’s Future History series.
The story is set in a future theocratic American society, ruled by the latest in a series of fundamentalist Christian “Prophets.” The First Prophet was Nehemiah Scudder, a backwoods preacher turned President (elected in 2012), then dictator (no elections were held in 2016 or later).
The following paragraphs have been excerpted from the 1986 Baen Book printing of Robert A. Heinlein’s novel titled “Revolt in 2100” –from the story titled “If This Goes On—”:
Successful revolution is big business – make no mistake about that. In a modern, complex, and highly industrialized state, revolution is not accomplished by a handful of conspirators whispering around a guttering candle in a deserted ruin. It requires countless personnel, supplies, modern machinery and modern weapons. And to handle these factors successfully there must be loyalty, secrecy, and superlative organization.
I was kept busy but my work was fill-in work, since I was awaiting assignment. I had time to dig into the library and I looked up Tom Paine, which led me to Patrick Henry and Thomas Jefferson and others – a whole new world was opened up to me. I had trouble at first in admitting the possibility of what I read; I think perhaps of all things a police state can do to its citizens, distorting history is possibly the most pernicious. For example, I learned for the first time that the United States had not been ruled by a bloodthirsty emissary of Satan before the First Prophet arose in his wrath and cast him out – but had been a community of free men deciding their own affairs by peaceful consent. I don’t mean that the first republic had been a scriptural paradise, but it hadn’t been anything like what I had learned in school.
For the first time in my life I was reading things which had not been approved by the Prophet’s censors, and the impact on my mind was devastating. Sometimes I would glance over my shoulder to see who was watching me, frightened in spit of myself. I began to sense faintly that secrecy is the keystone of all tyranny. Not force, but secrecy . . . censorship. When any government, or any church for that matter, undertakes to say to its subjects, “This you may not read, this you must not see, this you are forbidden to know,” the end result is tyranny and oppression, no matter how holy the motives. Mighty little force is needed to control a man whose mind has been hoodwinked; contrariwise, no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything—you can’t conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him.
My thoughts did not then fall into syllogisms; my head was filled with an inchoate spate of new ideas, each more exciting than the last. I discovered that travel between the planets, almost a myth in my world, had not stopped because the First Prophet had forbidden it as a sin against the omnipotence of God; it had ceased because it had gone into the red financially and the Prophet’s government would not subsidize it. There was even an implied statement that the “infidels” (I still used that word in my mind) still sent out an occasional research ship and that there were human beings even now on Mars and Venus.
Maybe someday the United States would have space ships again.
“In a time of universal deceit — telling the truth is a revolutionary act.” ~ George Orwell.
“It’s no wonder that truth is stranger than fiction. Fiction has to make sense.” ~ Mark Twain.
Politics of Anakin Skywalker:
Star Wars Episode II: Attack of the Clones. Scene 5…
Anakin Skywalker: I don’t think the system works.
Padmé: How would you have it work?
Anakin Skywalker: We need a system where the politicians sit down
and discuss the problem… agree what’s in the best interest of all people… and then do it.
Padmé: That’s exactly what we do. The trouble is that people don’t always agree.
Anakin Skywalker: Well, then they should be made to.
Padmé: By whom? Who’s going to make them?
Anakin Skywalker: I don’t know. Someone.
Padmé: You?
Anakin Skywalker: Of course not me.
Padmé: But someone.
Anakin Skywalker: Someone wise.
Padmé: Sounds an awful lot like a dictatorship to me.
Anakin Skywalker: Well, if it works.
Star Wars: Episode III – Revenge of the Sith…
Padmé: What if the democracy we thought we were serving no longer exists, and the Republic has become the very evil we have been fighting to destroy?
A final note. Today’s news. Trump’s vulgar remark about immigrants from certain countries including those in Africa. One of the senators opposed to Trump who heard it remarked with a famous quote: “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” – Edmund Burke. Take it an interesting coincidental step further for perspective back into my favorite realm of science fiction. Look up the movie trailer at YouTube for the movie District 9, trailers 1 and 2. Kinda fits, taking place in South Africa. Also, Trump preferred immigrants from Norway. Careful what you wish for Mister President. See trailers for VIKINGS on The History Channel, a clash between them and Christians during the first season and more so since then – excellent drama.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Jim Lantern said:
Oops. Sorry. I forgot to serve a tasty dessert after that long main course, to bring it full circle back to the subject of cats. You don’t have to believe it – I do hope you are entertained and enjoy it…
We live in a time of rumors of wars, end of world predictions. I believe some of us alive today will not know physical death, and will be transformed when Christ Jesus returns. Each generation has had cause to believe Jesus would return in their time. Yet, not so. Perhaps soon. Hope. Pray. Have faith.
There is a different story, once upon another timeline, for how our world began – not with a bang but with an ice cold whimper – weather much colder than what we are experiencing this winter here in the US. Well of course I remember, I was there – my soul was there. General Patton believed in reincarnation [such reflections my favorite scene in the movie], having fought and died in many battles throughout history. The first was between Cro-Magnons and Neanderthals for food and survival. Perhaps the ancient soul of Patton led the Cro-Magnons to victory, 40 thousand years ago, to eventually become us today. Cro-Magnons, like homeless cats, were in need of food and shelter, not just to defeat the Neanderthals. If we can save homeless cats, should we not also save homeless humans? Of course. So we did, my wife and I, and others of our kind during our first visit to Earth, bringing those humans in need to . . . the garden at the base of the stars.
Aliens on Earth today? Probably not many. “The Truth is Out There!” An interstellar map with an ancient space mariner warning written on it to frighten them away – pointing to planet Earth: THERE BE MONSTERS!
LikeLiked by 1 person
insanitybytes22 said:
LOL! You wrote a whole post in that comment! I’m glad to hear you got a cat sanctuary going on.Cats are great fun. I have a pack of strays myself. People ask me if I have any cats and I don’t know what to say. No?Yes? I have no cats, I just often feed those who show up.
How exciting to hear about you and Heinlein! What a tale that is! He was always a favorite of mine. I’m delighted to hear of your connection to him.
“Aliens on Earth today? Probably not many. “The Truth is Out There!” An interstellar map with an ancient space mariner warning written on it to frighten them away – pointing to planet Earth: THERE BE MONSTERS!”
You made me laugh. It’s a space buoy! It flashes red and says, “avoid this place, not enough intelligent life down there.” Or maybe it says, “beware, penal colony ahead.” 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Jim Lantern said:
They came here to save the cats, discovered less intelligent humans – decided to save them too.
I sometimes use cats for the nonfiction serious homeless issue. A kind of freedom both should have, with or without a home. After 30 years of employment my health failed, could not get effective health care, could no longer work, lost everything, briefly became homeless until qualifying for disability. When homeless, accepting help – I did not have the freedom to eat what I want and when I want and how much, no freedom to come and go from homeless shelters and sleep when I want. Most homeless suffer loss of most freedoms – all kinds of homeless, including loss of homes in natural disasters like hurricanes and tornadoes. At the mercy of those who help, and some who help treat victims as if they are criminals or prisoners of war. The “District 9” movie is an interesting example, well acted – made me care.
By the way, I grew up on mostly American science fiction. British science fiction and actors have a unique way of making a bizarre story believable, like space vampires in LIFEFORCE turning humans into zombies – but that’s just the backstory like zombies in THE WALKING DEAD – the real story being the drama of survival during a different kind of disaster and homelessness. Australian and South African science fiction is just as interesting. But I’m not a fan of Japanese science fiction.
So, cats. I try to give homeless cats all possible freedoms, treating them as I would want to be treated. You see, the ideal human homeless shelter would be self service. Kind of like a coin-operated sandwich shop with MW oven, but free access. Same for a place to sleep, take showers, wash clothes. No control freak rules and threats. The last day shelter I used in Wichita required users to be photographed and fingerprinted, as well as blood and urine tests for TB and drugs use.
The science fiction and biblical crossover. Logical to conclude in history at one time there was only one Son of God. Always be limited to one? Why? Only one inhabited planet at one time, but always only one? A line in Jurassic Park impressed me, approximately: “Life finds a way . . . breaks free, expands to new territories and crashes through barriers,..” Freedom. Spiritual and physical. One Son becomes many. One inhabited world becomes many. Always a first, then many from progress and passing of time. As there is a Father, a Mother. As there is a Son, a Daughter. Other Sons and Daughters of God sent to other worlds like Jesus was sent to Earth. Now the Kingdom of Heaven in the physical universe may span millions of inhabited worlds, and when Christ Jesus returns Earth could become an accepted member for interstellar travel and peaceful trade – means of instantly crossing such vast distances made possible by God with guidance and navigation by angelic beings.
LikeLike
Jim Lantern said:
Here’s a question for you and your readers. I might post it over at Timeglass Journal, too, later today. [Perhaps it would be better for you to raise this questions in a separate posting if you want to and continue this there if likely to stimulate a lot of debate and response?]
CAN A THEOCRACY COEXIST WITH ANOTHER KIND OF GOVERNMENT? IF SO, WHICH KIND/KINDS? AND HOW WOULD THEY COEXIST?
LikeLiked by 1 person
insanitybytes22 said:
Good question!
I think I’m going with “no.” President Madison once wrote that both government and the church exist in greater purity the more they are apart. He was speaking of the idea of how good walls make for good neighbors. We can coexist just fine if there are some boundaries in place.
LikeLike
Jim Lantern said:
Knowing I’m a Centrist, you can probably guess my answer. It comes down to levels of government and divisions of power. A limited form of a theocracy might exist at the highest level – concerning itself only with religious and spiritual issues, perhaps expanding into moral and social issues . . . while allowing citizens to decide for themselves all other nonreligious issues impacting their day-to-day living with freedom of choice via voting or electing qualified representatives to make those decisions that impact our lives. For example, a theocracy need not concern itself with the construction of a new highway from one city to another. Then it comes down to that part of the government taking your money and doing it whether you like it or not, as well as engaging in eminent domain . . . or you get to vote for if it is to be done or not . . . and a yes then puts it in the hands of qualified representatives elected or appointed or hired to act in the best interest of the majority while protecting the rights of minorities along the path of impact. By such division a democracy at the lowest level of individuals and representative government just above that can exist under or within a limited theocracy. An absolute theocracy would make those decisions for you, not allowing you to vote or have any say about it. Going sideways from the vertical theocracy down to democracy level with representatives between the two, the highway or road or street may be associated with socialism for everyone to use it, while the businesses and their customers and other individuals making use of the highway or road or street are associated with capitalism. Nonprofit government gets you there. Then you are free to benefit to profit from it.
In a so-called kingdom, the king need not concern himself with the day-to-day basic living of individuals who still maintain basic freedom of choice. Kingdom of Heaven? Perhaps Realm of Heaven would be more accurate. Jesus Christ or Christ Jesus? Christ is not a surname, it is a title like king. After all, we do not refer to King James as James King. Jesus, returning to this world to rule it might not establish an absolute theocracy as a form of government in which a deity is the source from which all authority derives. Without some freedom, a theocracy would be a dictatorship. God made us to be Will Creatures, giving us freedom of choice, but with certain guidelines. There may be consequences if you make the wrong choices – God does not put you in jeopardy – you put yourself in danger. Build that highway, but let its path do no harm.
LikeLiked by 1 person