Locke the Christian is not as Christian as Hobbes the Atheist in Proper Government?

[ABondSlaveofChristJesus]

God has told us to submit to authority. We are to submit to secular authority until it conflicts with issues involving the soul where their authority ends and only Gods remains.

John Locke, who significantly influenced the foundation of American government, claimed to be a Christian and asserted that every human has the God-given right of life, liberty, and property (which was Americanized by Jefferson to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.) When the government conflicts with this they conflict with God.

What is your take on this?

Was it Biblical for the colonizers to revolt against their King for harsh taxes?

Is it Biblically rooted that we are entitled to such rights? We don´t deserve anything but hell for our sins against God that is for sure.

Hobbes seemed to believe that we give up our Liberties for the sake of preserving life. Similar to the Christian government.... however a king is not usually wise.

[Edited on 3-2-2005 by ABondSlaveofChristJesus]

 

[JonathanHunt]

Originally posted by ABondSlaveofChristJesus

Was it Biblical for the colonizers to revolt against their King for harsh taxes?

No. But let me be the first to say that on behalf of mother England, I forgive you, and stand ready to recieve your tributes in non-sequential used dollar bills...

 

[VirginiaHuguenot]

Some thoughts:

1) John Locke was an Anglican and more orthodox than Jefferson by far, who was a Deist, but many have argued that Locke was a Deist himself, and I don't have a strong opinion either way. I would say he was somewhere between the historic Reformed and the Enlightenment views of civil government.

2) Yes, it was Biblical for the Americans to resist the tyranny of King George and Parliament, which was not just about taxes, but a whole unbroken pattern of abuse of authority and resistance to petitions for redress of grievances (I suggest that one review the Declaration of Independence itself to see the justifications given). The British referred to the war as the Presbyterian Rebellion because of the influence of the Scotch-Irish Presbyterian ministers who advocated resistance to tyranny based on Reformational principles. This issue has been debated many times on the PB (you can search for the word 'tyranny' and find several such threads). It usually boils down to those who advocate Rex Lex versus those who advocate Lex Rex.

Some of the major Reformed writings on resistance to tyranny which influenced our Founding Fathers (many of whom were not so Reformed, I fully grant, and were also influenced by Rousseau's Social Contract theory and other Enlightenment sources) include:

A Defense of Liberty Against Tyrants by Junius Brutus (Huguenot): http://www.constitution.org/vct/vind.htm

Lex Rex by Samuel Rutherford: http://www.constitution.org/sr/lexrex.htm

Concerning the Rights of Rulers Over Their Subjects and the Duty Of Subjects Towards Their Rulers by Theodore Beza: http://fly.hiwaay.net/~pspoole/Beza1.htm

How Superior Powers Ought to Be Obeyed by Christopher Goodman: http://www.constitution.org/cmt/goodman/obeyed.htm

And see: http://www.natreformassn.org/statesman/01/bibfreedm.html

3) I like the quote by the Deist Benjamin Franklin: They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.

I personally prefer the concept of Duty rather than Human Rights. I think it is more Biblical to conceive of duties that magistrates and citizens have before God as the building block of liberty -- than rights given by God or the state. That's my

P.S. There is a lot of good literature on political theory at http://www.constitution.org

[Edited on 3-2-2005 by VirginiaHuguenot]

 

[Mrs.SolaFide]

John Locke, who significantly influenced the foundation of American government, claimed to be a Christian and asserted that every human has the God-given right of life, liberty, and property (which was Americanized by Jefferson to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.)

Is it Biblically rooted that we are entitled to such rights? We don´t deserve anything but hell for our sins against God that is for sure.

[Edited on 3-2-2005 by ABondSlaveofChristJesus]

You're right - we don't deserve anything but hell in the sight of God. However, I believe that it is before MEN that we have the rights to life, liberty, and possessions. Obviously, it is a sin to murder. We protest abortion - why? It is against God's law & WE don't have the power to take life from another human being. We also have the right to make our own decisions and perform our own actions so long as they do not conflict with the law of God. Lastly, God gave men dominion over the earth & the task of subduing it. It is HIS creation given to us for OUR use. Each of the Commandments (concerning man's behavior to man) can be placed under one of these basic "rights". Those are my thoughts on the subject

 

[ABondSlaveofChristJesus]

What were Lockes view on human nature? Did he believe we were totally depraved?

Also is there any scripture that supports Locke's idea of natural law being the right to preserve life and property?

This is what he asserts in chapter 2 of his Second Treatise of Government

" All men are naturally in, and that is a state of perfect freedom to order their actions and dispose of their possessions and persons as they think fit, within the bounds of the law of nautre, without asking leave or depending upon the will of any other man."



[Edited on 3-16-2005 by ABondSlaveofChristJesus]

 

[Puritan Sailor]

Many of our "rights" are grounded in the Christian understanding of the moral law. "Thou shalt not steal" implies people have property belonging to them which can be taken unjustly, and also the positive aspect to protect and respect one anothers property. "Thou shalt not murder" means not only to prevent murdering but to uphold life. And these would apply to the civil magistrates just as much as the common man. So our "rights" in the Reformed view, are realy the right to be what God has created us to be and do. We have a divine and ialienable right to obey God, which no magistrate can interfere with. But the magistrate also has a divine right to rule justly and to punish the unjust and immoral, which no man has a right to interfere with.

[Edited on 3-16-2005 by puritansailor]