BY THIS STANDARD-Greg L. Bahnsen

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Amanah

Thank you everyone for your comments on this thread.
It helped me understand the topic.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Aquila

No. I believe the right-wing interpretation of the Law of God will be just as oppressive in a Reconstructionist civil government.

I'm sure you'd not accept my interpretation of God's Law, if I were to head the Reconstruction. What makes you think I'd accept yours? What makes you think you're interpretation is superior? Because it's Reformed Theology, or Presbyterian? Become Presbyterian or Reformed. These Reconstructionists have no love for Apostolic truth, you, EB, or anyone who doesn't embrace their radical orthodoxy. They'd burn you, me, EB, Amanah, and every Apostolic alive without a second thought. They lump us in with JWs, Unitarians,zero Wiccans, and other "heretical" cults and false religious. You're thinking this radical idea will benefit you, but it only signs your own death warrant.

Once again, you prove beyond any shadow of a doubt that you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

Which is fine, because you aren't influencing anything and won't be in the future.

[Esaias]

Aquila apparently supports this type of lawlessness:

WE RESIST GRAND JURIES
An anarchist/antifascist statement
Monday, September 10, 2018

A group of Washington DC anarchists and antifascists issues the following statement:

We will not be intimidated by the state. We will not comply with grand juries.

On Wednesday, September 5, 2018, a subpoena to a grand jury was issued to one of our comrades. Our comrade was asked to report to a DC courthouse on Tuesday, September 11, 2018. That subpoena asked for footage taken by a camera held by the comrade in the streets of Washington DC on August 12, 2018, a day when the streets were full of thousands of antifascist and anti-racist activists opposing a small white supremacist group. This trusted comrade is an independent journalist who often films protests in the city, and was doing so on August 12, 2018.

Local anarchists and antifascists will convene to make a statement against grand juries at 8:30 AM, Tuesday, September 11, 2018, at the courthouse at 500 Indiana Ave NW, Washington DC. All are invited to join us to resist state repression.

https://itsgoingdown.org/we-will-not...washington-dc/

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Aquila apparently supports this type of lawlessness:

WE RESIST GRAND JURIES
An anarchist/antifascist statement
Monday, September 10, 2018

A group of Washington DC anarchists and antifascists issues the following statement:

We will not be intimidated by the state. We will not comply with grand juries.

On Wednesday, September 5, 2018, a subpoena to a grand jury was issued to one of our comrades. Our comrade was asked to report to a DC courthouse on Tuesday, September 11, 2018. That subpoena asked for footage taken by a camera held by the comrade in the streets of Washington DC on August 12, 2018, a day when the streets were full of thousands of antifascist and anti-racist activists opposing a small white supremacist group. This trusted comrade is an independent journalist who often films protests in the city, and was doing so on August 12, 2018.

Local anarchists and antifascists will convene to make a statement against grand juries at 8:30 AM, Tuesday, September 11, 2018, at the courthouse at 500 Indiana Ave NW, Washington DC. All are invited to join us to resist state repression.

https://itsgoingdown.org/we-will-not...washington-dc/

I'm talking about "Christian anarchists".

[Wilsonwas]

I was gonna let this dog lie, as I tbink the original poster wanted to end it but...

Taliban V. Ultra-con oneness groups.


From the BBC...
predominantly Pashtun movement, the Taliban came to prominence in Afghanistan in the autumn of 1994.

It is commonly believed that they first appeared in religious seminaries - mostly paid for by money from Saudi Arabia - which preached a hard line form of Sunni Islam.

The Taliban's promise - in Pashtun areas straddling Pakistan and Afghanistan - was to restore peace and security and enforce their own austere version of Sharia, or Islamic law, once in power.


I would expect that an emboldened UPCI articles of faith post the 70s and WPF perhaps, would behave in much the same way. I.E enforce an austere version of Christianity based on the conformist values of the US in the mid 1900s.

Note the BBC article has the Taliban enforcing beards, and dress and behavior codes for women - destroying the historical places of other faiths and forcing peace based on power backed by the infallibility clause of being like the blues brothers "on a mission from god".

There are already pastors, and higher placed individuals in charge of churches or organizational units, generally not the heads of the movements themselves at this time, that endorse austere non-biblical principles as doctrine.
I would imagine a thocracy of these folks, could arise from the process currently en vogue with our government to never waste a good crises to tighten up the screws of justice, even if it is the twisted SJW version now. Like now one still has the option to move to another location. An option not so available in other locations and regimes, that might suit the Bernie Bots better.

I am saying that no government not headed by Christ himself will move toward tyranny, if religious toward fundamentalist- to crazy. If godless from idiocracy to Soviet style Orwellian overreach.

The powerful will seek to inflate and secure that power in the name of good, but in the manner of evil. Not that they would set out to lie, cheat, and murder, but rather they would twist scriptures to support its eventual outcome.

Though very isolated abuse of power has happened in churches, just like it does in the secular.

As well as you guys think we are nuts for not seeing how "wonderful" your reconstructionist utopia would be, I find it nuts that you think it would be any less prone to corruption than any other human endevor.

[Wilsonwas]

...and to borrow from Western movies....I'll cut you off at the pass....

This in no way disagrees with Godly law, the ten commandments, or holiness. Rather- one can disagree with the extension of a thing to a government function, but not hate the thing itself. One can have a position that persons should submit to and love God themselves, and that this is the best for all mankind. But to allow them power to compel others by the force of government of man so to do as they beleive God has instricted, is the same as doing the same in godless humanist communism, or Islamic kabal.

Certainly- for some time such a God seving place would be better than anything we have here. But as long as the enemy can find one person in power to corrupt with no check from the ultimate arbitor of good. It will creep as has every government known to man in history, into tryamny.

[Aquila]

Christian anarchism:

Christian anarchism is a movement in political theology that claims anarchism is inherent in Christianity and the Gospels. It is grounded in the belief that there is only one source of authority to which Christians are ultimately answerable—the authority of God as embodied in the teachings of Jesus. It therefore rejects the idea that human governments have ultimate authority over human societies. Christian anarchists denounce the state, believing it is violent, deceitful and, when glorified, idolatrous. Christian anarchists hold that the "Reign of God" is the proper expression of the relationship between God and humanity. Under the "Reign of God", human relationships would be characterized by divided authority, servant leadership, and universal compassion—not by the hierarchical, authoritarian structures that are normally attributed to religious social order.Most Christian anarchists are pacifists—they reject war and the use of violence.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_anarchism

There's no legitimate King but Jesus.

All statists, including theocrats, can suck an egg. Lol

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Wilsonwas

I was gonna let this dog lie, as I tbink the original poster wanted to end it but...

Taliban V. Ultra-con oneness groups.


From the BBC...
predominantly Pashtun movement, the Taliban came to prominence in Afghanistan in the autumn of 1994.

It is commonly believed that they first appeared in religious seminaries - mostly paid for by money from Saudi Arabia - which preached a hard line form of Sunni Islam.

The Taliban's promise - in Pashtun areas straddling Pakistan and Afghanistan - was to restore peace and security and enforce their own austere version of Sharia, or Islamic law, once in power.


I would expect that an emboldened UPCI articles of faith post the 70s and WPF perhaps, would behave in much the same way. I.E enforce an austere version of Christianity based on the conformist values of the US in the mid 1900s.

Note the BBC article has the Taliban enforcing beards, and dress and behavior codes for women - destroying the historical places of other faiths and forcing peace based on power backed by the infallibility clause of being like the blues brothers "on a mission from god".

There are already pastors, and higher placed individuals in charge of churches or organizational units, generally not the heads of the movements themselves at this time, that endorse austere non-biblical principles as doctrine.
I would imagine a thocracy of these folks, could arise from the process currently en vogue with our government to never waste a good crises to tighten up the screws of justice, even if it is the twisted SJW version now. Like now one still has the option to move to another location. An option not so available in other locations and regimes, that might suit the Bernie Bots better.

I am saying that no government not headed by Christ himself will move toward tyranny, if religious toward fundamentalist- to crazy. If godless from idiocracy to Soviet style Orwellian overreach.

The powerful will seek to inflate and secure that power in the name of good, but in the manner of evil. Not that they would set out to lie, cheat, and murder, but rather they would twist scriptures to support its eventual outcome.

Though very isolated abuse of power has happened in churches, just like it does in the secular.

As well as you guys think we are nuts for not seeing how "wonderful" your reconstructionist utopia would be, I find it nuts that you think it would be any less prone to corruption than any other human endevor.

So you oppose all government, then, since it is all liable to abuse? Do you oppose marriage, because it is liabe to abuse? Do you oppose any and all forms of church government because they are liable to abuse?

Or do you just oppose society looking to the Bible for solutions?

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Aquila

Christian anarchism:

Christian anarchism is a movement in political theology that claims anarchism is inherent in Christianity and the Gospels. It is grounded in the belief that there is only one source of authority to which Christians are ultimately answerable—the authority of God as embodied in the teachings of Jesus. It therefore rejects the idea that human governments have ultimate authority over human societies. Christian anarchists denounce the state, believing it is violent, deceitful and, when glorified, idolatrous. Christian anarchists hold that the "Reign of God" is the proper expression of the relationship between God and humanity. Under the "Reign of God", human relationships would be characterized by divided authority, servant leadership, and universal compassion—not by the hierarchical, authoritarian structures that are normally attributed to religious social order.Most Christian anarchists are pacifists—they reject war and the use of violence.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_anarchism

There's no legitimate King but Jesus.

All statists, including theocrats, can suck an egg. Lol

If there is no legitimate king but Jesus, there is no legitimate law but His.

Do you like your eggs scrambled, or sunny side up?

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Wilsonwas

...and to borrow from Western movies....I'll cut you off at the pass....

This in no way disagrees with Godly law, the ten commandments, or holiness. Rather- one can disagree with the extension of a thing to a government function, but not hate the thing itself. One can have a position that persons should submit to and love God themselves, and that this is the best for all mankind. But to allow them power to compel others by the force of government of man so to do as they beleive God has instricted, is the same as doing the same in godless humanist communism, or Islamic kabal.

Certainly- for some time such a God seving place would be better than anything we have here. But as long as the enemy can find one person in power to corrupt with no check from the ultimate arbitor of good. It will creep as has every government known to man in history, into tryamny.

So you don't believe God would bless the nation that sought His ways, to follow Him in a national repentance and revival? God always fails?