What would a Christian government look like? Would it succeed in this world?

[SantoSubito]

Im not sure, and I dont have any numbers to hand, but I would doubt that such a state exists. To have 95% agreement on anything in a group that is not held in some in compelled to. That is to say I doubt 95% of ppl prefer something as superficial as coke, so to think that some thing as fundemental as spiritual belief without enforcement by a ruling body seem incredible to me.

I was going to mention earlier,something akin to tis point, when talking of the protocols, that america is the only country that allows all ethnicitys and religions. But I didnt wanna jump in and say thats flat out wrong, the UK, in fact thewhole of europe guarentees freedom of religion, and freedom from discrimination under te articles of human rights. This is not of course to say that this is unvivrsally adhered to with due dillegence. We have racism and religious intolerance, just as the united states and everywhere else has.

On Medieval europe, a christian goverment did not if you'll excuse me work well. The papacies where rife with flaws and divisions, there were many purges and blood letting of heretical believers and non believers, even when they could be said to working well they turned there perscutions outwards to the Jew or the islamic, or the whatnot the Inquistion is a period of great stabilty for the church. The flaw in the system almost inevitably leading to the reformation, the scars of which still weep bile into europe to this day.

The centuries of blood shed I reffered to that we struggled and payed an immense cost to free ourselves, from and the americans made sure never established itself.

I'll wait for rebuttal, there, but enfatically no.

I don't really intend to offer a rebuttal. I understand that such a system can only work under a specific set of ideal circumstances. I approached the question as a theoretical exercise not as something that can easily be translated into reality.

In regards to Medieval Europe, It was a violent age, and a tumultuous one in practically every political aspect. If you ask me most of the violence during the Medieval period was not caused by religious strife, but by the many land and power grabs of the princes and kings of Europe during that time. Had those princes and kings been better men I think instead of the Medieval period being the violent age we now think of, it would be regarded as one of the golden ages of Europe.

 

[kayem77]

I have wondered the same question sometimes... I dont think a Christian government could work here being in a "wordly" earth.. maybe wordly acts need wordly punishments( in this world) like life imprisonment or else, because those who do those acts are certainly not christianns( not trying to judge) or they just dont even care making damagee, so imaginee serial killers, rapists, thiefs,etc all around the world and nobody to stop them? They can repent of course...but till that the world would be a DISASTER. I think this happens because like there is Good, there is Evil, so this world needs that government until we reach the Perfect Government or Kingdom : Heaven. So basically, a perfect government CANT exist here.

A christian government would have God as his image and Bible would be the law (literally) but this world would have to agree with that( and thats the problem).Christian laws fitting mayority would be a constant problem.Well, thats what I think, this is an interesting matter to think about.

 

[_Centurion_]

I don't really intend to offer a rebuttal. I understand that such a system can only work under a specific set of ideal circumstances. I approached the question as a theoretical exercise not as something that can easily be translated into reality.

In regards to Medieval Europe, It was a violent age, and a tumultuous one in practically every political aspect. If you ask me most of the violence during the Medieval period was not caused by religious strife, but by the many land and power grabs of the princes and kings of Europe during that time. Had those princes and kings been better men I think instead of the Medieval period being the violent age we now think of, it would be regarded as one of the golden ages of Europe.

, I meant rebuttal, more as a turn of phrase than a legal term. Surely, that "ideal" circumstance is then the second coming. As nothing else can by defintion be ideal, in a christian context. So the answers are read revaltions, and yes it would.

In regards, to the medieval perriod being a violent age yes it was, but that does not detract from the fact that the church was very violent, other may have been to, but I acept I did not address those other contributing factors, and your perfectly right to highlight them. But, that niether, lessens or condones there participation in it. Again, Im more than happy to concede that not all, land and power grabs where religiously motivated, but again that does detract from the fact that a lot were. The crusades, would be the sledgehammer example, but the increasing landing holding and power base of numerous holy order cant be overlooked. Monestries where large land holder and became more powerfinacial intitutin as time progressed, the militant orders of the church again were large land holders and there dispensations against usury allowed them to set up the first international banks, or at least the apparatus of such, if not a completly accurate comparision. This gave them immense wealth and power.

Im not sure we would all think of that time as a golden age for europe, if you wish to say that the actions of only kings and princes are to be altered, the crusades would still have happened as that was all popes doing. But, I think its fair to say, all men were and indeed are products of there time. If I had to deinativly pick a golden age I think I would choose between the Pax Romana and the enlightenment, and I think I would come down on the side of the enlightnment.

 

[_Centurion_]

Please, disregard, the above, I ran into a time limit on the edit.

My corrected and expanded upon a little reply is below. Sorry, I'll be careful in future to avoid that happening again, now I know its an issue.

I don't really intend to offer a rebuttal. I understand that such a system can only work under a specific set of ideal circumstances. I approached the question as a theoretical exercise not as something that can easily be translated into reality.

In regards to Medieval Europe, It was a violent age, and a tumultuous one in practically every political aspect. If you ask me most of the violence during the Medieval period was not caused by religious strife, but by the many land and power grabs of the princes and kings of Europe during that time. Had those princes and kings been better men I think instead of the Medieval period being the violent age we now think of, it would be regarded as one of the golden ages of Europe.

, I meant rebuttal, more as a turn of phrase than a legal term. Surely, that "ideal" circumstance is then the second coming. As nothing else can by defintion be ideal, in a christian context. So the answers are read revaltions, and yes it would.

In regards, to the medieval period being a violent age yes it was, but that does not detract from the fact that the church was very violent, others may have been to, but I accept I did not address those other contributing factors, and your perfectly right to highlight them now. But, that niether, lessens or condones the participation of the church, or religious goverment, as referred to in the topics focus, in it. Again, Im more than happy to concede that not all, land and power grabs where religiously motivated, but again that does detract from the fact that a lot were. The crusades, would be the sledgehammer example, but the increasing landing holding and power base of numerous holy orders cant be overlooked. Monestries where large land holders and became more powerful finacial intitutions as time progressed, the militant orders of the church again were large land holders and there dispensations against usury allowed them to set up the first international banks, or at least the apparatus of such, if not a completly accurate comparision. This gave them immense wealth and power. And at the same time time, removed the nessicity of medieval persons of power to use the Jews as moneylenders, the increase in there persecution thereafter I think is less than coinidental. This again is more a result of the relious side of the equation than the secular, the religious side gave the dispensations, the religious side took there role, that sheltered them somewhat persecution. They were robbd and persecuted by both secular and non secular a like, but the large scale well organised, institutionalised perscutions were in the mainstay, but not exclusivly instigated by the church.

And the reason that they were seen to be fair game, is that they were the killers of christ, again, not a secular issue.

Im not sure we would all think of that time as a golden age for europe, if you wish to say that the actions of only kings and princes are to be altered, the crusades would still have happened as that was all popes doing. But, I think its fair to say, all men were and indeed are products of there time. If I had to deinativly pick a golden age I think I would choose between the Pax Romana and the enlightenment, and I think I would come down on the side of the enlightnment.

 

[stone]

I JUST want to know what type of government would a Christian government be? and what would it look like/act like? and if it could succeed in a 'worldly' earth.

For example take "when your brother strikes you on one cheek turn to him the other" or "you shall not lie" or "whenever you look at a girl lustfully you have already commited adultry with her in your heart." What would a government look like that took these commands seriously? Would adultry be dealt with jail time? Should it? How about sex outside of marriage, et cetera.

I also want taken into consideration next that they wanted to make Jesus king by force and He retreated from this...does this mean that trying to make a Christian government/Christian oriented laws does not promote or increase the likely-hood that people will live godly lives?

Just wondering and thought it could make a good discussion with all the people that think that governments should base their standards on Christian principles, which I also believe to a large extant--but am just unsure what that will look like.

For me, I often think the principle to love even your enemies often leads to a secular state like we have here in the Unites States. I believe only if you hate or somehow disadvantage other people/religions, that you may get a purely religious state. Take the muslim states for example.

While secular living can spell disaster within a church, within a government it seems that secular culture promotes and allows for true Christian growth.

This ironically can also be seen in Kierkegards complaint against a state that claims to be Christian--he believes that it is almost impossible to be a Christian in a Christian state--because then the Bible seems twisted and people seem to become proud and get somewhat famous by falling the Bible instead of being persecuted as the Bible suggests. Also, many nations that claim Christianity are tending towards the secular.

I also believe that a monarchy seems to be better supported in scripture than a democracy...is this going against the Bible because it tells me to be submissive to my government?

Now its your turn. I have more thoughts but will wait a little while.

God bless
tony

ps. TS Eliot's "Religion and Culture" also has important points on what a person truly believes in and what his culture truly believes in. It may also be worthwhile to ask if you can truly be a Christian in a nation that thrives on unChristian values.

IT WOULD LOOK LIKE THE WHORE CHURCH, RCC

 

[Gentile]

IT WOULD LOOK LIKE THE WHORE CHURCH, RCC

lol, Then she would have daughters.

 

[_Centurion_]

Oh, is sectarianism allowed here, can I be anti semitic? or is that not kosher, how about racist. Or is it discriminatory to be hateful to those outside the faith. Just wondering what the ground rules are.

Would'nt want to offend.

But well, if the RCC is a whore, arent the other denominations her illegitamate children.

Making you what, think its a well know phrase that I wont reproduce here.

Really, try and show a modicum of respect - even if you cant muster the strength to love.

 

[VRJ]

I JUST want to know what type of government would a Christian government be? and what would it look like/act like? and if it could succeed in a 'worldly' earth.

In our relationship with the Lord we have no rights only responsibilities.l
He doesn't owe us anything.

In our relationship with the government we should have rights.
We should be free to worship God, not to be murdered by the state or ripped off.

The ten commandments say...thou shalt not steal..kill ........the golden rule...to do unto others....rules apply to individual as well as civil authority.

So a christian government would be to not steal, murder, and that a person should have the right to not be murdered or ripped off.
By other people, or civil authority.........right to life (unborn)..........right to property..(not ripped off)....to have the right to liberty..to have the right to be armed that would allow one to seccure the rights to life/property.

Life, liberty, property and to bear arms. These cannot be demanded from God or that God owes this to us........our spiritual formation will require us to answer to a higher law than these rights...that as a christian I have the right to question the ethics of my government. That is what is my right to understand what the govt can do or impose upon us.........we have the right to dignity as a being created in the image of God.

 

[_Centurion_]

I JUST want to know what type of government would a Christian government be? and what would it look like/act like? and if it could succeed in a 'worldly' earth.

In our relationship with the Lord we have no rights only responsibilities.l
He doesn't owe us anything.

In our relationship with the government we should have rights.
We should be free to worship God, not to be murdered by the state or ripped off.

The ten commandments say...thou shalt not steal..kill ........the golden rule...to do unto others....rules apply to individual as well as civil authority.

So a christian government would be to not steal, murder, and that a person should have the right to not be murdered or ripped off.
By other people, or civil authority.........right to life (unborn)..........right to property..(not ripped off)....to have the right to liberty..to have the right to be armed that would allow one to seccure the rights to life/property.

Life, liberty, property and to bear arms. These cannot be demanded from God or that God owes this to us........our spiritual formation will require us to answer to a higher law than these rights...that as a christian I have the right to question the ethics of my government. That is what is my right to understand what the govt can do or impose upon us.........we have the right to dignity as a being created in the image of God.

I hear what your saying, but Im not sure I agree.

Does God not owe us anything, does a loving father owe nohting to his children, is he not responsable for his actions did he not create us. Given you have been gifted with freewill, you have the right to deal with your goverment and God how you see fit. Proscriptions on behaviour, chastise and punish after the fact because no matter how oppresive a system, rebellion is always open to the oppressed.

The next section is a little all over the place and jingoistic, but point by point. Rights arent inate things, they are consession. Rights have to be gained and then protected. Havig said that, now Ive qualified it, I'll answer in your terms.

The right to protection under law, (not being ripped off and murdered)

The right to life, of the unborn thats not even a right by your terms, if it was abortion wouldnt or couldnt be legal. But given that it is legal and theyre Ceaser's laws what you gonna do, I think your left with finding a new Ceaser to give to, I think abortion is still illegal in Southern Ieland, you are free to move and become a citizen there, you do have that "right".

The right to property, in general yes but again Ceasar can compulsary purchase your property to put a road through, so in that case its rights to reasonable compensation. And again Ceaser can proscribe what you may own - so in that case you have no rights.

The right to liberty, mess with Ceasers laws and you'll find your self without liberty and your other rights seriously curtailed.

The right to bear arms, again not a universal right even in your country ex felons for example(despite the fact that your justice system is meant to rehabilative in nature, and once your term is served your debt to society is meant to be paided). But, in my country you have absolutly no right to bear arms, although you can take up the responsability of bearing them.

Again given the nature of freewill I think you have the right, maybe even the responsabilty to question the ehics of goverment even Gods, you have the right even to act in accordance with your beliefs. What you have absolutly no right to is escaping the consequences of your actions, weather that be the loss of liberty to worldy powers or the loss of inclusion in Gods kingdom if you transgress his laws.

And as for the right to dignity, thats yours, no one can take that from you. Although depending on your reading of scripure you should be prepared to surrender that to God.

 

[VRJ]

Sir:
The question was................what type of government would a christian government be".

So..............give us your answer ............what would a christian government be?

 

[_Centurion_]

Sir,

If you had done me the courtesy of reading my earlier posts in this thread, you would have read that I had already definitivly answered both points. (I refer you my good man, to my openening statement in post #24 of this thread). As your your questions below are different from the questions that the thread ask and your manner is less than polte, I will simply restate the answers I have already furnished, which you lack the due dillegence to have found.

So the answers are read revaltions, and yes it would.

I can not fail to also notice, while demanding I answer to you, you yourself do not attempt to give us a complete answer yourself. I of course, only note this and demand nothing from you, although I'd apprieciate being spoken to or at in a civil tone.

and with that I hope you Sir are satisfied, and I shall bid you a good day.

Sir:
The question was................what type of government would a christian government be".

So..............give us your answer ............what would a christian government be?