Posted on 05/30/2005 7:56:54 PM PDT by Remember_Salamis
It's sharia with a cross. The parts about "who could possibly object? It's God's law!" might as well be taken directly from Mullah Omar's screeds.
Isn't this what they call recontructionists,dominionists,
and kingdom now
I don't know if I could trust the United States government
in the hands of a bunch of people who believe "we just
got to clean em up Lord before you can come back"
but I could see where it could take off as a movement
taking over the United States is heady stuff , I guess
the first people on the chopping block will be Premillienalists.
Why do you say the premilennialists would be the first to go?
Mel
And since earlier it's specific that the only punishments are death and restitution, and since there are no recoupable damages in violating the 1st Commandment, I guess you just kill everyone who worships the wrong god? No thanks. This is Islam under a new banner.
What do you think of the pre-constitutional (under the Articles of Confederation and back to Colonial times)practice of mandating that officeholders swear belief in the Holy Trinity? Every state except for Rhode Island had such a law for its politicans.
What about the pre-constitutional (under the Articles of Confederation and back to Colonial times)practice of mandating that officeholders swear belief in the Holy Trinity? Every state except for Rhode Island had such a law for its politicans.
theonomy
theologus : theologian.
http://cawley.archives.nd.edu/cgi-bin/lookit.pl?latin=Theonomy%3F
Leviticus demands that we refrain from touching a pigs. All football players must wear gloves!
Our colonial period consisted of various areas established by dissenters and those leaving areas of established religion.
Some colonies, of course, had established religion, but the toleration of dissenters was a part of the colonies as a whole from their early days.
Hence, when the federal government was prohibited from establishing a national religion it was seen to foster and promote denominational variety and to be part of our culture.
The great book on the history on this that came out recently is On Two Wings by M. Novak. The two wings were "humble faith" and "common sense" and the common sense portion of the founding sensibilities showed them the formulas of the old world wouldn't work here.
We already have a form of self government where legislators' religious and moral foundations can be made into the mirror images needed in law. The usage of rationalistic goals wasn't good for the leftists forming the French Revolution and wouldn't be good for establishing a rationalistic Theocracy with higher goals than self government of the limited nature.
Sorry, conservatives won't buy grand schemes like this stuff.
The authors claim that all the whacked out dietary and ritualistic laws are null and void since the Resurrection.
Do you think there's anywhere in the Constitution prohibiting a State Government establishing a Church (i.e. the Church of South Carolina, etc.)? I don't think there is, at least pre-14th amendment.
The Framers deliberately set up our government to thwart theonomists and other tyrannical mentalities. Our Constitution stands in their way - thank God.
Those who want to be under Old Testament commandments are usually ignorant of the New Testament commandment. Yet even they fail to keep them. Yes, I know, Jesus repeated many OT commands, but he did so to those who were under the law, to convict them of their sins, and bring to them to faith in Him.
"And THIS is His commandment: that we should believe on the name of His Son Jesus Christ and love one another, as He gave £us commandment. 1 John 3:23
"If anyone thinks himself to be a prophet or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things which I write to you are the commandments of the Lord." 1 Cor 14:37
Galatians 3: (NIV)
10 All who rely on observing the law are under a curse, for it is written: "Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law."
11 Clearly no one is justified before God by the law, because, "The righteous will live by faith."
12 The law is not based on faith; on the contrary, "The man who does these things will live by them."
13 Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: "Cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree."
14 He redeemed us in order that the blessing given to Abraham might come to the Gentiles through Christ Jesus, so that by faith we might receive the promise of the Spirit.
Do you see anything wrong with what I posted in post #8?
We actually have the remnent of state establishment. State school systems.
The main finacial burden that the churches' had was their typical (but not universal) responsibilty for the local schools. As establishment withered, the same taxes were used to pay for schools in many cases.
Unfortuantly, we see the school apparatus and functionaries a hundred years later buying into the John Dewey secular humanism and ergo -- established religion (because that is how Dewey looked upon Secular Humanism-- as a religion).
The 10 Commandments don't come close to really describing true morality. They tell us not to commit adultery or to kill. The truth as Jesus explained it is that if we even lust after another or get angry at another without cause we have broken the law.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.