Would anyone here really want to live under a theocracy?

[Ebionite]

I have no clue what you said here.

It's about limitations on freedom that are not justifiable in terms of the greater public good. If those limitations are imposed based on religious dogma then you've got a theocracy.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

As you saw in the video, several elected representatives and the speaker of the house
(who is 3 in succession to the presidency and the most powerful member in the House of Representatives) along with over 50% of republicans are either adherent or sympathetic to Christian Nationalism.
So, apparently the “teaching found in the Bible” to which you allude doesn’t seem to be a factor in their reasoning.
Again, in the present time.
The very reason I submitted it for consideration for those that have expressed an unwillingness to live under a theocracy.
The title of this thread being:
“Would anyone here really want to live under a theocracy?”
For those living in the U.S. I thought it might be insightful.

Yes, insightful but I have found the U.S. people use the definition of theocracy as meaning: clergy rule or rule by clergy class.
I am speaking of a few years back so thinking could be different now.
I can't see how Christian Nationalism could be compatible with the Constitution.
In ancient Israel there would be No Hindu temples, No Muslim mosques, etc. allowed.
As the professed Christians meddle in politics that could be the ' straw that breaks the camel's back ', so to speak.
Something is going to cause the political to turn on the religious.
Who knows, a bad economy could cause the political to see the wealth religion has amassed and to look like easy taking even through the international banking system - just a thought.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

............................English common law describes the natural rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. English common law goes back to King Alfred the Great and his legal code which was drawn from the ten commandments of Exodus 20 but with some alterations to support Christianity. Christianity goes back to the official religion of Rome, which is where the union of state and church originated under Constantine.

Since Jesus is connected to Christianity's founding then 1st-century Christianity in Israel is its origin. - Acts chapter 2; Acts 11:26 B.
Constantine did Not live in the 1st century.
Constantine helped establish what is now often called as Christendom.
Constantine allowed non-Christians to become so-called Christians by letting them keep non-Christian practices and ideas to continue.
Thus, a few hundred years after Jesus we find this mixing of Christian with non-Christian being taught as Christian - Acts 20:29-30
There was No 'union of church and state' in ancient Israel - see 2nd Chronicles 26:16-21 - nor in the first century under Christ.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

The word "theocracy" is pretty well defined.

But defined by whom ?
* Men's theocracies mean: government by clergy or clergy class.
* Biblical theocracy is government by God with Jesus as King of God's Kingdom government - 1st Corinthians 15:24-26
Jesus is the figurative 'stone' that will topple all government against God's Kingdom - Daniel 2:44-45; 7:18

 

[Ebionite]

Since Jesus is connected to Christianity's founding

No, that was Paul.

And when he had found [Paul], he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people. And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch.
Acts 11:26

But defined by whom ?

Published defintions vary.

theocracy

1. a country that is ruled by religious leaders 2. government by religious…

dictionary.cambridge.org

Theocracy | Definition, Examples, & Facts

Theocracy, government by divine guidance or by officials who are regarded as divinely guided. In many theocracies, government leaders are members of the clergy, and the state’s legal system is based on religious law. The Enlightenment marked the end of theocracy in most Western countries.

www.britannica.com

* Biblical theocracy is government by God with Jesus as King of God's Kingdom government - 1st Corinthians 15:24-26

"God" is ambiguous, and Paul isn't a reliable source.

 

[Kenny]

My answer to this is an emphatic 'No.'
My idea for this thread came from a recent conversation I had with a gentleman who said he wants the United States to become a Christian theocracy. Personally I like our current model of a secular government that allows people to worship, or not worship, how they see fit.
Thoughts?

Definitely not, until Jesus comes back.

I prefer the Constitution that gives freedom of religion that was basically based on Christian values of allowing people to worship or not worship, how they see fit.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Actually it is theocracy with any kind of religious leader in control in my view. It doesn't matter if your priest is a prophet or a group of people to me.

Biblical theocracy has as its religious Leader Christ Jesus calling the shots, so to speak.
In other words, Jesus is Head of the Christian congregation No matter where located on Earth.
Also, unlike men, who are limited by human imperfection as to what they can do or accomplish whereas Jesus isn't.
Jesus' activities were done to show us on a small scale what he will accomplish on a global-international scale.
If we want to be part of his accomplishments then we now follow his teachings with keeping the future in view. - Rev. 22:2

 

[URAVIP2ME]

No, that was Paul.
And when he had found [Paul], he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people. And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch.
Acts 11:26.....................

Please note it is Peter at Acts 11:2,4,7. When he found Paul ( Acts 11:25-26 ) and brought Paul to Antioch......
Peter came before Paul. Paul was a apostle to the nations - gentile people.
The keys to the kingdom was given to: Peter.
First key to open up the way for the Jews to become Christians
Second key to open up the way for the Samatarians
Third key to open up the way for the people of the gentile nations.
Peter, Not Paul, is the one who rose up starting at Acts 15:7

 

[Ebionite]

Please note it is Peter at Acts 11:2,4,7

So what? It was Barnabus who brought Saul/Paul to Antioch, and that's where the name of "Christian" came from.

 

[danieldemol]

I will prefer to live in a secular form of Government .

Regards

If that is the case you are best off hoping Ahmadiyya Muslims never come to power in my view.
From this MP3 by the leader of the Ahmadiyya community;

https://www.askislam.org/mp3/MEI_19850802_03.mp3

At 6:17 It states that Islam proposes restrictions
At 7:00 The restriction on dirty language to insult religions is imposed
At 11:00 It states the (alleged) non-religious rules of Islam are to apply for everyone
At 11:51 it states that rules apply in a "Muslim State"
Although the question of all the details of the rules to be applied to everyone in this non-Muslim state is conveniently postponed at 14:30 he does acknowledge that restrictions would be imposed on public drinking if Ahmadis became a majority.

My conclusion based on my opinion: A Muslim majority state will impose certain religious rules on everyone even if it is an Ahmadiyya state and thus it would not be having a secular government at least more than nominally as i see it.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

In the case of the U.S. it's implied the Declaration of Independence, which is essentially the preamble to the Constitution.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

The Declaration of Indpendence describes the severance of political bands, and these are distinct from the English common law that the settlers brought to North America.

English common law describes the natural rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. English common law goes back to King Alfred the Great and his legal code which was drawn from the ten commandments of Exodus 20 but with some alterations to support Christianity. Christianity goes back to the official religion of Rome, which is where the union of state and church originated under Constantine.

There's nothing in your quote referring to christianity.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

But defined by whom ?
* Men's theocracies mean: government by clergy or clergy class.
* Biblical theocracy is government by God with Jesus as King of God's Kingdom government - 1st Corinthians 15:24-26
Jesus is the figurative 'stone' that will topple all government against God's Kingdom - Daniel 2:44-45; 7:18

How about a dictionary

 

[Estro Felino]

The Vatican is a theocracy.
Iran is a theocracy.
Sudan is a theocracy.

 

[Ebionite]

There's nothing in your quote referring to christianity.

The reference to Christianity is via the natural rights that are mentioned in the Declaration of Independence and endorsed in the Ninth Amendment.
From those (of the common law) you get Christianity in the third verse. The common law of England originated with King Alfred the Great.

 

[Ebionite]

How about a dictionary

The definitions are not the same. England might or might not be a theocracy depending on which dictionary you like.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

The reference to Christianity is via the natural rights that are mentioned in the Declaration of Independence and endorsed in the Ninth Amendment.
From those (of the common law) you get Christianity in the third verse. The common law of England originated with King Alfred the Great.
View attachment 85378

That's called inheritance from judeo-christian culture.
Meanwhile, there is nothing specifically referring to christianity in what you quoted.

 

[Ebionite]

That's called inheritance from judeo-christian culture.

No, culture and law are different things. It's called English common law, not English common culture.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

No, culture and law are different things. It's called English common law, not English common culture.

Law is one element of a culture. Culture is basically everything about how humans do things that is learned rather than instinctual.

 

[blü 2]

My answer to this is an emphatic 'No.'
My idea for this thread came from a recent conversation I had with a gentleman who said he wants the United States to become a Christian theocracy. Personally I like our current model of a secular government that allows people to worship, or not worship, how they see fit.
Thoughts?

The First Amendment (1791) to the US Constitution provides, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."

And how did it come to be included? At the urging of Christian churchmen, out of terror that one or other state might legislate to establish a particular version of Christianity, and force the other Christians to live in that state of unimaginable horror and revulsion, SOMEONE ELSE's THEOCRACY instead of mine!

That makes excellent sense to me, though it took SCOTUS to clarify that this applies to all views regarding religion, not just those of believers,

 

[libre]

The state should not have a religion.
I think secularism or state atheism are paramount. I think in circumstances where powerful religious institutions exist the later is required in some circumstances, while the former is preferable.