Originally posted by Ex Nihilo
Originally posted by Robin
Well, in relation to the King James comment...I was pointing to an awareness that each and every time in history where (any) government got the notion that it was imbued by God, things eventually went awry. (Why don't we want to learn from mistakes in history?)
You know, this is a cheap shot, but I have to ask.
By what standard was King James a tyrant?
And what criterion are you using to state that these governments of the past "went awry"?
And I know you know this, Robin, but theonomy doesn't just mean that the government is imbued by God. It also (and far more importantly) means that the government is morally bound to submit to certain standards of justice. You seem to believe this, too, or else you would have no basis for saying that a government is "awry." I'm just curious as to what standards you're using to measure whether a government is doing what it ought to do or not.
Cheap-shot? No, way....it's a great question, Evie!!
James did things in the name of Christ that were not Christian. My standard is a simple one. Whenever the government assumes the authority of God and imposes laws upon the people to live life and worship God contrary to the dictates of conscious....this is what I mean by "awry." Those governments that act in "the name of Christ" especially. (I think of Rome/Vatican; the Crusades....amd of course, there are governments that act in the name of Islam, etc.)
This question necessarily leads to the understanding of what the Bible means by "the Beast" in the book of Revelation...but, that's another thread.
r.
[Edited on 8-15-2005 by Robin]