BY THIS STANDARD-Greg L. Bahnsen

[Wilsonwas]

Originally Posted by Esaias

So, because men are wicked and corrupt, we should seek that form of society devised by men, instead of that devised by God?

No, because humanity is fallen and corruption is in its nature, gooberment is a necessary evil, and shoild be limited as much as possible. Unless God himself is in charge- failure and tyranny will result.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Wilsonwas

No, because humanity is fallen and corruption is in its nature, gooberment is a necessary evil, and shoild be limited as much as possible. Unless God himself is in charge- failure and tyranny will result.

What "necessary" purpose does government serve? Who instituted it, and why?

[Wilsonwas]

Originally Posted by Esaias

You do realize that God's law provides no penalty for facial hair decisions, and some other issues we debate here, right? Debate, discussion, etc are necessary and good. Political debates over interpretation and application of law occur all the time anyway.

Just about every charge against theonomy can be also levied against practically every other system of law and ethics. And that way lies Nietzsche and Ragnar Redbeard and Thrasymachus.

Every charge against any government will eventually be proven correct, unless of course God has absolute control of it.

Whose theology do you choose to enforce, lets assume you are actually a nice guy, with a great attitude guided by Christ, when you die, who will replace you, do you honestly trust he has your kids best interest in mind - not his own. "We will use only biblical constructs"- awesome....but one says the scripture says nay, where another says yea, evident even within our existing church governments which unevenly, and in classic human fail mode eventually end up with a church split, worship war, or.....whateva

I can see how some of the more pastor pedestal-ing folk round here would be fine with their idea of a fire-brand, "women outta keep their place, dadburn alcahol drinkers, and people that like anything other than 4/4 time in the key of C, cause it dont use them evil black keys on th pianny, kinda music, why they is splittin hell wide open along with anyone that disagrees with us 4 and no more on anything from suits ta playin spoons on th poach" - cause that is what some of them love, evidenced by the responses here......

You really want them in charge of guys trained to follow orders, with guns, in charge of your life.

Batguano crazy - but hey. Sure why not, .....in any case it will still result in eventual civil/open war, a breif period of actual freedom, before the decent into some form of human madness, possible genocide, and wackery of epic proportion-

rinse/repeat.

No government of man is worthy of respect, for long.
No manmade construct of organization will remain free of corruption, for long.

Only God is perfect, thus only a govenment guided by himself will remain even good for any length of time.

[Wilsonwas]

Originally Posted by Esaias

What "necessary" purpose does government serve? Who instituted it, and why?

Generally common defense for a community, arbitration of disputes, and policing for safety. There is no need for the first, except the hunan tendancy to clique up in groups. And then to agress against those that are either weaker or in possession of more. A tendancy used by politicians, that play class warfare games, to gain power.
A christian would assume that God instituted government, as God is a god of order. Anarchy implies a lack of order, and would thus be at odds with godly ideals.

That God instituted a thing for humans to do, in no way implies they will do it right. Hence why limits should be broad and far reaching on whatever one is in charge.

It strikes me as completely inane to celebrate the three hebrew guys tossed in a furnace, and at the same time demand allegiance to scaps of cloth, and songs sung in adoration of state.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Wilsonwas

Generally common defense for a community, arbitration of disputes, and policing for safety. ...
A christian would assume that God instituted government, as God is a god of order.

If God instituted government, then government ought to be organized according to His Word.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Wilsonwas

Every charge against any government will eventually be proven correct, unless of course God has absolute control of it.

Whose theology do you choose to enforce, lets assume you are actually a nice guy, with a great attitude guided by Christ, when you die, who will replace you, do you honestly trust he has your kids best interest in mind - not his own. "We will use only biblical constructs"- awesome....but one says the scripture says nay, where another says yea, evident even within our existing church governments which unevenly, and in classic human fail mode eventually end up with a church split, worship war, or.....whateva

I can see how some of the more pastor pedestal-ing folk round here would be fine with their idea of a fire-brand, "women outta keep their place, dadburn alcahol drinkers, and people that like anything other than 4/4 time in the key of C, cause it dont use them evil black keys on th pianny, kinda music, why they is splittin hell wide open along with anyone that disagrees with us 4 and no more on anything from suits ta playin spoons on th poach" - cause that is what some of them love, evidenced by the responses here......

You really want them in charge of guys trained to follow orders, with guns, in charge of your life.

Batguano crazy - but hey. Sure why not, .....in any case it will still result in eventual civil/open war, a breif period of actual freedom, before the decent into some form of human madness, possible genocide, and wackery of epic proportion-

rinse/repeat.

No government of man is worthy of respect, for long.
No manmade construct of organization will remain free of corruption, for long.

Only God is perfect, thus only a govenment guided by himself will remain even good for any length of time.

So, again, it seems like you are saying because men are imperfect, society should be guided by manmade philosophy without regard to the Bible.

Can you at least see how absurd that sounds?

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Aquila

I've never been one to blindly follow the crowd. I've told you that liberals think I'm too conservative, and conservatives think I'm too liberal. I'm a free thinker. And if you review the link to the book I suggested on the topic, the author covers that since Christian anarchists are not beholden to any specific statist agenda, party, or platform, if compelled by deep conviction, the Christian anarchist is free to "jump into" the political fray if they see a cause for the greater good. However, it is admonished that the Christian anarchist who does so jump out of the fray as soon as possible, else they risk becoming corrupted by political power.

If you had Jesus as a pastor, David as worship leader, and Paul taking up the offering. You still would place them on the pay no mind list. Face it, you couldn't give a care about submission to God's rules and regulations. You like being the interpreter of what you deem to be godly and correct. You make it up as you go along, and Jesus has to submit to you, not the other way around.

[Esaias]

Men are corrupt. Families usually end up in divorce (50%) and are usually dysfunctional, abusive, even dangerous for the children.

Numerous cases exist of wrecked families run by authoritarian psychotic religious Bible thumping nutcases.

Therefore, people ought to avoid using the Bible as any kind of guidebook on how to function as a family. Dr. Phil's ideas seem to have succeeded in producing the least amount of ongoing dysfunctional families, although all those who took his advice are now either divorced or falling apart. Yet, they had the longest run in recent memory of keeping it together, compared to all the other ideas and systems out there.

But a Bible-based family is a guaranteed ticket to hell on earth for all concerned.

Now, is this not essentially the exact same argument used against theonomy? How can a Christian even contemplate such a ridiculous collection of non sequiturs and near-idolatries as remotely valid?

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Men are corrupt. Families usually end up in divorce (50%) and are usually dysfunctional, abusive, even dangerous for the children.

Numerous cases exist of wrecked families run by authoritarian psychotic religious Bible thumping nutcases.

Therefore, people ought to avoid using the Bible as any kind of guidebook on how to function as a family. Dr. Phil's ideas seem to have succeeded in producing the least amount of ongoing dysfunctional families, although all those who took his advice are now either divorced or falling apart. Yet, they had the longest run in recent memory of keeping it together, compared to all the other ideas and systems out there.

But a Bible-based family is a guaranteed ticket to hell on earth for all concerned.

Now, is this not essentially the exact same argument used against theonomy? How can a Christian even contemplate such a ridiculous collection of non sequiturs and near-idolatries as remotely valid?

It is the same argument for the use of Marijuana and psychotropics. What if God doesn't do XYZ. Seriously? Really? How do they expect to fight the devil with that sort of faithless attitude.

[Wilsonwas]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Men are corrupt. Families usually end up in divorce (50%) and are usually dysfunctional, abusive, even dangerous for the children.
yep
Numerous cases exist of wrecked families run by authoritarian psychotic religious Bible thumping nutcases.
yep
Therefore, people ought to avoid using the Bible as any kind of guidebook on how to function as a family. Dr. Phil's ideas seem to have succeeded in producing the least amount of ongoing dysfunctional families, although all those who took his advice are now either divorced or falling apart. Yet, they had the longest run in recent memory of keeping it together, compared to all the other ideas and systems out there. You are the first person to mention Dr. Phil, I dont even like the guy. This is not an arguement point, it is an attempt to color what I said.

But a Bible-based family is a guaranteed ticket to hell on earth for all concerned.
nope, not even sure what that means.
Now, is this not essentially the exact same argument used against theonomy? How can a Christian even contemplate such a ridiculous collection of non sequiturs and near-idolatries as remotely valid?

nope again, but your love of power over people shows quite nicely.