The Flight 93 Election

[Esaias]

Very good article:

http://www.claremont.org/crb/basicpa...t-93-election/

Of course, Diebold was unavailable for comment...

[shazeep]

ya

"One of the paradoxes—there are so many—of conservative thought over the last decade at least is the unwillingness even to entertain the possibility that America and the West are on a trajectory toward something very bad."

Esaias, you seem to be like half anarchist, half voter? Not to derail your thread, but it seems a pointed enough question to ask if you pledge allegiance, to the flag, of the United States of etc. or believe that Gov is anathema to a believer, or which? Ty

[Esaias]

I don't pledge allegiance to a flag. I'm no anarchist, I'm a Christian theonomist.

[shazeep]

ah, maybe i should have picked a less charged word than Anarchist, i see that this is conflated with Chaos now by...pretty much everyone. So, ok, is this a good definition for "Theonomist?"

"Christian Reconstructionism is also known as Dominionism or Theonomy and is characterized by the desire to bring all areas of life under the lordship of Christ."

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by shazeep

ah, maybe i should have picked a less charged word than Anarchist, i see that this is conflated with Chaos now by...pretty much everyone. So, ok, is this a good definition for "Theonomist?"

"Christian Reconstructionism is also known as Dominionism or Theonomy and is characterized by the desire to bring all areas of life under the lordship of Christ."

Theonomy is the belief that God's Word is authoritative for all areas of life, personally and corporately, individually and societally. Reconstruction, while based on theonomy, is a bit more politically oriented, emphasizing the "reconstruction" of society along biblical lines using a primarily political approach.

Dominionism seems to be popular among charismatic Word-Faith types, and is NOT as far as I can tell, theonomic. Instead it seems to be a code word for Republican neo-con policy.

Anarchy literally means "no ruler". It is a myth, does not work, and besides all that is opposed to God's Kingdom - which, as a KINGDOM - is a sole monarchical theocratic despotism, to be technical.

[shazeep]

hmm, i think anarchy works great, been doing it for years now. Of course "no ruler" means no earthly ruler, but you have had it conflated with chaos since forever, even though it also does not mean "no rules." Not sure how else one could pursue a Theonomy, actually, or how you are going to avoid politicizing it, like the definition--which was the first one i could find--seems to indicate? But i am convinced this mostly arises due to the demonization of the concept Anarchy. Which btw has never failed, that i am aware of.

Do you have an example of it not working? Because i think we could both agree pretty quick that when all else fails, anarchy is exactly what you are going to do, even if you might prefer to call it something else. Seems to work well for the Amish, Quakers, Mennonites etc.

[shazeep]

anyway, that was an insightful article, even if it is about politics. I'd say watch out that your Theonomy does not become UD, again wondering how it could become anything else sans anarchy. If you listed the attributes of Theonomy and Anarchy together on a page, what would be the difference?

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by shazeep

hmm, i think anarchy works great, been doing it for years now. Of course "no ruler" means no earthly ruler, but you have had it conflated with chaos since forever, even though it also does not mean "no rules." Not sure how else one could pursue a Theonomy, actually, or how you are going to avoid politicizing it, like the definition--which was the first one i could find--seems to indicate? But i am convinced this mostly arises due to the demonization of the concept Anarchy. Which btw has never failed, that i am aware of.

Do you have an example of it not working? Because i think we could both agree pretty quick that when all else fails, anarchy is exactly what you are going to do, even if you might prefer to call it something else. Seems to work well for the Amish, Quakers, Mennonites etc.

Do you drive a car? Have a driver license? Legally mandated insurance? Follow traffic laws? Do you stop for the police when they tell you to?

You do not live in anarchy unless you live on a deserted island. You do not understand what the political theory called "anarchy" actually is.

Try actually living AS IF there is no earthly government having any jurisdiction over you. You will be in jail within a week, tops.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by shazeep

anyway, that was an insightful article, even if it is about politics. I'd say watch out that your Theonomy does not become UD, again wondering how it could become anything else sans anarchy. If you listed the attributes of Theonomy and Anarchy together on a page, what would be the difference?

UD? No idea what that means.

Theonomy IS political, the Bible is 75% political, or thereabouts.

Caesar doesn't care where you go when you die, he cares about something more practical. Wonder why the early Christians were persecuted? It wasn't cause they sang "I'll Fly Away"...

[n david]

Great response by Shapiro.

http://www.dailywire.com/news/8985/w...tterbenshapiro