Posted on 09/04/2006 7:37:23 AM PDT by Alex Murphy
No one ever argues that the Bible commands us to be righteous in general. This article series makes the argument that the Bible gets more specific than that. Some Presbyterians follow the Regulative Principle of Worship - theonomy sounds like the same idea, but applied to the rest of life.
Ping for later.
Theonomy -- not something I, nor any rational person, would want to live under.
I'll stick with Torah, thanks.
hoooo boy!
Sounds like nothing more or less than a Christian-flavored Sharia Law.
This position has caused concern among many Christians, because theonomists advocate that many of the capital crimes of the Old Covenant are to be punished by execution, as they were in the Old Covenant. For instance, Deuteronomy 21 prescribes the execution for an unrepentant, incorrigible child.
Coming soon to a stadium near you:
Such as students continually interrupting class in order to inject peculiar religious dogma into science.
Unlucky you.
Some may object: Isn't this harsh? Isn't this barbaric? No, in fact it will lead to greater liberty for the godly. We want the ungodly punished according to God's Law-Word because it is what God prescribes. We have been conditioned according to a humanistic worldview to reject Old Testament law as "barbaric" or "outdated." God's law is not harsh, barbaric nor antiquated, because God is neither harsh, barbaric nor antiquated!
Chr*stianity that has to fall back on "old testament law" is no longer chr*stianity, at least of any genuine historical kind. Such chr*stians are to be congratulated for seeing the weakness in their religion and encouraged to continue thinking along those lines.
One of life's greatest ironies is that the "old testament" is more associated with chr*stianity than with Judaism, which has been relegated to the "enlightenment's" "canary in the mine shaft." In fact "old testament law" (ie, the Torah) IS Judaism, not chr*stianity. It's amazing that people can look at the Jewish People living in the Land of Israel and not make the connection. But then, "enlightenment" types feel more comfortable attacking chr*stianity than Judaism (which they look on as some sort of pluralist religion), so branding Judaism "chr*stian" makes it safe to attack it.
I am extremely uncomfortable with attacks on islam based simply on the idea that there is a true religion which all are bound to acknowledge. Only a person who denies the possibility of objective religious certainty would object to the idea of the True Religion winning out in the end, but a lot of so-called "religious people" are so permeated with enlightenment thought that they haven't even noticed that they have drifted into the "nobody knows for sure" school of religion, ie, that all religion is based on human subjective speculation and G-d has never spoken to man.
In an earlier thread today I quoted a Noachide web site (http://www.noahide.com/newsletter/news76.htm) against the notion that there is no objectively knowable religious truth, and specifically against the notion that Judaism is opposed to religious certainty. I will repeat that quote here for the benefit of those reading this thread:
Since the word "evangelism" specifically refers to Christian missionizing, the proper term for recruitment of gentiles to Torah religion would be "proselytizing." And proselytize Judaism does, even though the vast majority of Jews today absolutely don't know that.
The Hebrew Scriptures (Deut. 20) refer to the Torah rules regarding conquest of gentile lands and cities by Jewish armies. In verses 10-11, the chapter commands Jews to negotiate the gentile city's surrender; if the gentiles accept, they are to be reduced to permanently subjugated status. As explained in the oral traditions that accompany the text, such surrender must include acceptance of the Noahide Laws as their new religion.
Then, in verses 12-15, the passage tells Jews what to do if the gentiles don't accept the terms of surrender (including dropping their religion for the Noahide Laws). It commands the Jews to conquer the city, kill all males, seize the women and children as perpetual slaves, and plunder the city's material possessions. And verse 15 explicitly declares this applies to gentile cities anywhere in the world, not just near Israel's borders. In other words, the Bible potentially applies this to Rome, London, New York, and Los Angeles.
That's proselytizing by the sword, quite literally. And it's a primary Scriptural basis for the rules of Jewish Law regarding forced proselytizing of gentiles (to be Hasidic Gentiles, not Jews) as stated in the comprehensive work of Jewish Law written by Maimonides, the Mishneh Torah:
* In the next chapter (9:2), Maimonides continues by stating that we are commanded actively to prevent gentiles even from carrying out certain non-punishable actions connected with idolatry — such as erecting a pagan ritual tree. This would include any Christmas tree, in public or private. * Maimonides also states (10:9) that gentiles are forbidden to observe the Sabbath or to establish non-Torah religious holidays. "We do not allow them to innovate religious practice or to invent commandments for themselves from their own opinions; rather, either [the gentile] should be a convert to Judaism and accept all the commandments, or he should stand in his own Torah [of the Noahide Laws] and neither add to nor subtract from it. And if he delved into [forbidden parts of] Torah, or rested on a 'Sabbath,' or innovated any religious matter, we beat him and we punish him…" This is the action required to prevent gentiles from celebrating Christmas or Easter, for example, or from establishing Sunday (or Saturday) as a day of rest, or from inventing and practicing such ceremonies as baptism or communion.* In the volume entitled "Laws of Kings and their Wars," Maimonides states (8:10): "But [a gentile] who does not wish [to become a Jew and accept the more complex Jewish Law], we do not force him to accept [the full] Torah and commandments. Thus was Moses our Teacher commanded from the Mouth of the Al-mighty to force all inhabitants of the world to accept [instead] the commandments commanded to the children of Noah; and anyone who will not accept is executed."
But how are Jews to carry out these rules in a place like the United States, where government authorities prevent us from shutting down Christian or Muslim practices? That answer was provided by the Tosafos Yom Tov in his commentary on the section of the Talmud (or Mishnah, to be precise) known as "Pirkei Avos" ("Chapters of the Forefathers"). There (3:14) he quotes the teachings of Rabbi Akiva on this issue, who showed that the Torah commands Jews to proselytize gentiles by force of persuasion, especially when proselytizing by the sword is not physically possible. We are commanded to teach gentiles the Noahide Laws and their implications — including not to erect Christmas trees or crosses, not to celebrate such holidays, etc. — and to use aggressive verbal persuasion and pressure to convert gentiles away from Buddhism, Christianity, or Islam to becoming Hasidic Gentiles.
In our own times, the Lubavitcher Rebbe, one of the great scholars of Torah of our generation, argued vociferously and constantly (from about 1980 until his stroke in 1992) for Jews to make this proselytizing of gentiles our top priority, literally.
And there's no question that such verbal persuasion is likewise a duty of Hasidic Gentiles, who must also go forth and pull other gentiles out of false religions.
Read it and weep. Oh, and "but that sounds like the muzzies!" is not a valid criticism.
Oh brother.But how are Jews to carry out these rules in a place like the United States, where government authorities prevent us from shutting down Christian or Muslim practices? That answer was provided ... the Torah commands Jews to proselytize gentiles by force of persuasion, especially when proselytizing by the sword is not physically possible. We are commanded to teach gentiles the Noahide Laws and their implications — including not to erect Christmas trees or crosses, not to celebrate such holidays, etc. — and to use aggressive verbal persuasion and pressure to convert gentiles away from Buddhism, Christianity, or Islam to becoming Hasidic Gentiles.
In our own times, the Lubavitcher Rebbe, one of the great scholars of Torah of our generation, argued vociferously and constantly (from about 1980 until his stroke in 1992) for Jews to make this proselytizing of gentiles our top priority, literally.
And there's no question that such verbal persuasion is likewise a duty of Hasidic Gentiles, who must also go forth and pull other gentiles out of false religions.
Read it and weep. Oh, and "but that sounds like the muzzies!" is not a valid criticism.
44:42 - I have tasted the darkness and ignorance of unbelief, and disobedience to my Creator... as well as the light and perception afforded by true faith in God, and obedience to him. And I assure you that there is no comparison. And that despite - or rather because of - the atmosphere of battle in which we live, and the continuing conflict with the forces of the crusaders and their hired hands, I thank God every day for guiding me to Islam. And guiding me to join its victorious army. Inshallah. For were it not for His grace, I could very easily have been one of those unfortunate souls, fighting the losing battle for the other side. Or blindly leading de life of debt, debauchery and doubt they call "the American dream." Ahendneiallahacumadindinadaadialoulaahahdannanoallah. All praise is due to God who guided us to this, and had God not guided us we would not have been guided.I have discovered that true happiness is to be found in obedience to God's orders and prohibitions, and in the following of His prophet, peace be upon him. And not in western-style hedonism and immorality or amorality. Nor in eastern-style monasticism or cultist-like withdrawal from the world.
And I can state with a confidence born out of experience, and observation, that as long as a person persists in unbelief and atheism, his or her pursuit of happiness will be exactly that: a pursuit. A never-ending search which is guaranteed to bring him misery. If not in this life, then in the next.
By that, I mean to say that even if he does happen upon some degree of happiness today, it is guaranteed to be short-lived, ending at his death. And you don't have to be a rocket scientist to figure out that eternal happiness is better than the fleeting delights of this world.
- Adam Gadahn, latest video
Yep. Sounds like just another totalitarian scheme for running other people's lives. Or should I say "ruining"?
Is it okay to call THESE people theocrats?
-snip-
This position has caused concern among many Christians, because theonomists advocate that many of the capital crimes of the Old Covenant are to be punished by execution, as they were in the Old Covenant. For instance, Deuteronomy 21 prescribes the execution for an unrepentant, incorrigible child.
So much for a Free Republic.
Jim, how is this more acceptable than advocating socialism, which would get a poster banned? Is this what you want from your website?
"With liberty and justice for some."
If I have a say, no one will ever be forced to live under this Christian version of Sharia law.
No, absolutely not. This is the domain of the church. 3. Would theological "orthodoxy" be an area enforced by civil government?
Egads. Living by the word of God. What an affront to our humanism.
not on weekends.
Some have objected that this would lead to the mass stoning of homosexuals and incorrigible children. Reconstructionists must emphasize that what we want is not strong rule by the federal government in determining these matters, but the freedom for individual Christians, families, churches, and local community governments to rule without interference from a centralized state. We believe that Reconstruction is from the ground up. Mass regeneration must precede Reconstruction. As more are converted to Christ, more individuals become self-governing. This leads to stronger families and churches and the ability of local communities to govern their own affairs. Thus the total numbers of cases of sodomy or of uncontrollable children would grow less and less. The state would rule in fewer and fewer cases.Nice way of sidestepping the question. The answer to "wouldn't this lead to mass stonings of homosexuals & incorrigible children?" is, "Um, er, well, there would be less and less of that as time went on."
Halleluiah!
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.