May 10
23
What does theocracy REALLY mean?
OK, when Christians decide to get into the attack game with the same superficial rhetoric that non-Christians are using against Biblically faithful Christians, then it’s time to provide some clarity to the discussion.
Prof. John Stackhouse is one of no doubt several Christians providing commentary and analysis on Marci McDonald’s anti-Christian conspiratorial book, The Armageddon Factor. Prof. Stackhouse, while tearing apart Ms. McDonald’s credibility over the many factual errors in her book, concurs with her that there are Christians about whom even other Christians should be wary, especially those who talk about things like theocracy and Christian government.
For some reason, almost everyone who thinks Christian theocracy also thinks stoning of homosexuals as though the two are synonymous. Ms. McDonald pulled this stunt in her book with an unnecessary reference to the late Reconstructionist/theonomic/theocratic leader, Roussas J. Rushdoony. She’s hardly alone in doing so.
Talk about a great way to shut down legitimate debate on Christian theocracy! That’s what sophisticated, 21st Century intellectuals do, I guess. It must make them feel important.
Let’s put some perspective on the childish antics people use when they don’t have an argument.
The Bible bans murder, says it should even be a criminal offence. And historically, our laws came from a Judeo-Christian context. I guess we need to repeal Canada’s ban on murder in order to keep Canada from returning to a Christian theocratic form of government.
Stealing is also against the law, well, unless the government is doing it. It’s also against God’s law. Thou shalt not steal. We have to eliminate that vestige of theocracy by repealing all laws against stealing.
And God’s law operates on a foundation of equality before the law, something which today’s humanists claim to do, but really don’t. The Bible often applies this principle to call the governors to submit to the same law that they enforce on the governed. In other words it’s also wrong for politicians to steal. This applies to various forms of taxation as well as confiscation of property, including firearms (let alone without appropriate compensation). But these applications have been pre-determined by the left-wing Establishment as characteristics of the Religious Right, and that trumps the principle of not stealing. You see, messianic state-ism (or humanism/socialism) doesn’t take seriously the principle of equality before the law.
But most Canadians do, even if it is a principle of God’s law and, therefore, Christian theocratic governance.
And what about the constitutional principle of the “rule of law”? Even Canada’s leftists know that Canadians hold this Christian principle in very high regard. Former Liberal Justice Minister Irwin Cotler, grossly misrepresenting this principle, kept appealing to it to justify the Liberal push to change the definition of marriage. The intellectual dishonesty of that position is mind-boggling, but Mr. Cotler knew how important this principle is to Canadians so he kept using it. The very language of “rule of law” implies something solid and unchanging. It means nothing coherent within a relativistic moral framework. Moral relativism is the ethical framework of Humanism. The rule of law historically and logically finds its best expression in the moral absolutism of Christianity. It reflects the spirit of Christian theocracy because it’s fundamental to the Biblical concept of law – God’s law. And, guess what… it’s part of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
As a matter of principle, should a crime be seen primarily as an offence against the victim, or primarily as an offence against the state? Today’s justice system operates on the latter foundation. If we saw crime as primarily against the victim, and we were logical, we would put much more emphasis on restitution in place of imprisonment. I thought lefties liked restitution? So they should like this principle of Christian theocracy. The problem is that they use approaches to restitution that aren’t Biblical so true justice is not done. For example, the Bible repeatedly reveals that God requires an offender to return to a person more than the value they stole, presumably in recognition of other costs related to the loss such as the cost involved in pursuing restitution.
In today’s judicial environment, a person seeking a remedy in small claims court can spend more money in pursuit of his initial loss instead of gaining back what was stolen. Where’s the justice in this system of status quo humanistic “justice”? But Biblical restitution is part of a Christian theocratic vision, and we can’t have that, so we’ll just stick with the injustice that we’re familiar with. Now that’s forward looking thinking for people who claim to be champions of social justice! That’s an intellectual brain trust that I want to be part of!
Yes, the Bible also exposes the fraud of today’s most cherished myth, that sexual sin is victimless behaviour and, yes, the Bible bans many sexual behaviours, declaring some offences to be criminal in nature. (You shall not commit adultery!) Canada only abandoned this vestige of Christian theocracy a few decades ago. And as a result, 10s of thousands of innocent unborn babies are being murdered, hundreds and thousands of our youth are being emotionally scarred and diseased, including with infertility, by STDs because today’s influential adults insist on teaching amoral sex ed. And we have a huge portion of broken homes because no fault divorce laws don’t encourage troubled couples to show some character and work at their relationship a little harder. It’s shocking to see the fear among Christians of confronting the sex cult mentality that drives so much of our public ethics as well as our child-related public policy. But that would be Christian theocracy, and we can’t have that!
Here’s another one for the messianic state-ists… They keep looking for limits to free speech. How about the Ninth Commandment? You shall not bear false witness against your neighbour.
OK. I know. That principle doesn’t add any limits to speech beyond what Canada has had for decades as a result of our Judeo-Christian tradition.
You need a foundation of humanistic fascism if you want to build a new legislative structure to further restrict speech. That’s what today’s “human rights” model is based on, with its human rights commissions and other oppressive tools.
If you want to preserve free speech, including a robust freedom of dissent and freedom of inquiry, you need to turn to God’s law, which is Christian theocracy.
The Bible, or God’s Law-Word, as it has been known throughout history, provides the most rational basis for private property rights, for non-oppressive taxation, for the limited lawful jurisdiction of the state to keep the civil magistrate from becoming an idol and a tyrant. The list could go on.
Laws against incest reflect a Christian theocratic spirit because God condemned incest. So do laws against pedophilia and polygamy. We’d better repeal those laws as fast as we can…
Hmmm… I guess Christian theocracy isn’t so bad after all.
“But that’s not theocracy,” wail the critics?
Oh really? What is theocracy then? Maybe it’s just a fuzzy notion out there in the ether. Maybe it’s just a word.
Maybe adults who oppose something with such passion should actually demonstrate the intellectual responsibility of defining what they oppose. Maybe it’s easier to grovel at the feet of humanists with the empty words that they think are expected of them. That’s hardly a dignified posture, however, and it’s completely unnecessary.
Biblical theocracy is the rule of God’s law, including all the aforementioned laws that have wide support in Canada beyond just Christians, laws of general equity that benefit all Canadians, not just Christians. If Christians would intelligently read the Bible more often and if we would quit being such cowards, we might actually be able to have some intelligent discussion about such things among ourselves as well as among non-Christian Canadians.
The scariest Christians are not those who advocate theocracy. The scariest Christians are those who deny Christ (including His Lordship over all of life, over time and space, over human society) because their compromise substantially weakens the reputation and influence of the Church in society.