Okay, I'll put you in the "Don't Like It" column when it comes to religious freedom. You prefer a Christian Nation.
As I said before, tough. The country was founded because of religious freedom.
Okay, I'll put you in the "Don't Like It" column when it comes to religious freedom. You prefer a Christian Nation. As I said before, tough. The country was founded because of religious freedom.Or maybe there is no inherent distinction between a "Christian Nation" and "Religious Freedom".
“It cannot be emphasized too often or too strongly that this nation was founded not by religionists but by Christians, not on religion but the Gospel of Jesus Christ. It is for this very reason that people of other faiths have been afforded prosperity, asylum, and freedom of worship.” -- Patrick Henry, Calvinist Episcopalian (although the Calvinist Baptists love him best, for saying it's an un-neighborly thing to jail Baptists just for being Baptists)
Remember the teaching of the (distinctly Messianic Christian) Pharisee Rabban, the Apostle Saint Paul of Tarsus:
- Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour. (Romans 13:7)
- Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law. (Romans 13:8)
- For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. (Romans 13:9)
- Love worketh no ill to his neighbour: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law. (Romans 13:10)
Now, what is the teaching comprised herein?
- Render to your Rulers that which is their Rightful Due. (Ro. 13:7)
- And what is your Rightful Due to any Man? The Law of Neighborly Love (Ro. 13:8)
- And what is the Law of Neighborly Love? (Ro 13:9)
- To oppose Adultery
- To oppose Murder
- To oppose Theft
- To oppose Fraud
- To oppose the Coercion or Abuse of that which is your neighbor's
- And if there is any other Law, it is comprised in this: you shall not commit Aggression against your neighbor (Ro. 13:10)
And this, therefore, is the entire sphere of that which you Owe to every Man in neighborly Love, including Rulers; and therefore represents the entire Sphere of that which is the State's to Enforce: To oppose Adultery, To oppose Murder, To oppose Theft, To oppose Fraud, and To oppose the Coercion or Abuse of that which belongs to another Man, and And if there is any other Law, it this -- you shall not commit Aggression against your neighbor.
I submit that a Nation founded upon such Pauline (that is to say, Christian) principles is better than any other Principles which may be offered; for even the Orthodox Jews (whom an unbiased Observer must regard as the most Intellectually-Consistent of the Judaic Religion) have no such provision for dividing the Ten Commandments between State and Church; their model (to which they are entirely consistent) is the Theocracy of Israel.
But Rav Sha'ul (Apostle Paul) offers Christian Jews and Gentiles a new Theonomy, the division of the Law between the duties of the Church (worship of God, hatred for Idolatry, honor of True Religion, respect for the Sabbath, obedience to Parents) and the duties of the State (punishment of Murder, punishment of Adultery, punishment of Theft, punishment of Fraud, punishment of Coercion and Abuse).
Thus a Christian Nation is, if constituted according to the Maxims of Christian Paul, a Free Republic in a way which no Judaic or Muslim or Pagan Nation can ever be:
The State must attend only to the following Duties:- To oppose Adultery
- To oppose Murder
- To oppose Theft
- To oppose Fraud
- To oppose the Coercion or Abuse of that which is your neighbor's
- And if there is any other Law, it is comprised in this: you shall not commit Aggression against your neighbor.
And THAT'S IT. That is ALL that the State is Ordained to Do. Period. Nothing Else.
And now I submit that this creates a dilemma for both Lazamataz and F16Fighter:
- LAZAMATAZ has to approach the fact that a "Christian Rabbi", Saint Paul, came up with a better idea of the State than any Orthodox Jew of which I am immediately aware. Where did these nutty Messianics get these great ideas? There is nothing that is Good, save that which is truly of God. What does he think of that??
- and F16FIGHTER, meanwhile, has to approach the fact that a True Christian Republic, organized according to the Maxims of Saint Paul, is a good deal more "libertarian" than Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell care to admit. What does he think of that??
Posted to tex-oma, A.J.Armitage, LSJohn for old times' sake; once upon a time, I used to post on the Political Forum