NationStates Jolt Archive

Have you yet heard of Christian Reconstructionism?

http://www.religioustolerance.org/reconstr.htm
http://www.apologeticsindex.org/r10.html
http://www.publiceye.org/magazine/v08n1/chrisre1.html
http://religiousmovements.lib.virginia.edu/nrms/ChRecon.html

I think that this movement is a great threat to freedom. With absolutely ludicrous amounts of trigger-happines with the death penalty:
Epitomizing the Reconstructionist idea of Biblical "warfare" is the centrality of capital punishment under Biblical Law. Doctrinal leaders (notably Rushdoony, North, and Bahnsen) call for the death penalty for a wide range of crimes in addition to such contemporary capital crimes as rape, kidnapping, and murder. Death is also the punishment for apostasy (abandonment of the faith), heresy, blasphemy, witchcraft, astrology, adultery, "sodomy or homosexuality," incest, striking a parent, incorrigible juvenile delinquency, and, in the case of women, "unchastity before marriage."

According to Gary North, women who have abortions should be publicly executed, "along with those who advised them to abort their children." Rushdoony concludes: "God's government prevails, and His alternatives are clear-cut: either men and nations obey His laws, or God invokes the death penalty against them." Reconstructionists insist that "the death penalty is the maximum, not necessarily the mandatory penalty." However, such judgments may depend less on Biblical Principles than on which faction gains power in the theocratic republic. The potential for bloodthirsty episodes on the order of the Salem witchcraft trials or the Spanish Inquisition is inadvertently revealed by Reconstructionist theologian Rev. Ray Sutton, who claims that the Reconstructed Biblical theocracies would be "happy" places, to which people would flock because "capital punishment is one of the best evangelistic tools of a society."

The Biblically approved methods of execution include burning (at the stake for example), stoning, hanging, and "the sword." Gary North, the self-described economist of Reconstructionism, prefers stoning because, among other things, stones are cheap, plentiful, and convenient. Punishments for non-capital crimes generally involve whipping, restitution in the form of indentured servitude, or slavery. Prisons would likely be only temporary holding tanks, prior to imposition of the actual sentence.
I find it quite reprehensible that anyone would advocate stoning children to death.

I am shocked. Shocked, and dismayed.

What the fuck?

This is without a doubt the foulest scum to crawl out of the religous fanatics' swamp since the Inquisition.

Apparently, people deserve to suffer for being different, and torture is A-OK. Slavery is Ok, so subjecting people to undeserved suffering is also acceptable, as are beatings and impossibly foul methods of torture.

These are those "Good Christian Values" at work, eh?

What the fuck?

This is without a doubt the foulest scum to crawl out of the religous fanatics' swamp since the Inquisition.

Apparently, people deserve to suffer for being different, and torture is A-OK. Slavery is Ok, so subjecting people to undeserved suffering is also acceptable, as are beatings and impossibly foul methods of torture.

These are those "Good Christian Values" at work, eh?
Right. You seem to have it. Wanna join?

As a Christian, I have to say that this is crap.

Well holy crap. Now they're generally insane.

Right. You seem to have it. Wanna join?

I can't. I'm a freethinking person who believes in equal rights regardless of sexual orientation and secular government, so I can already see the piles of stones!

Call [NS]Commando for this one!

As a Christian, I have to say that this is crap.

I figured it wasn't mainstream. Good to hear it.

I seriously doubt that these chumps will ever gain any sort of political influence, as most people don't want to deal with people hardline, not even the neocons.

If they ever do succeed, they can look forward to me instigating more than a few riots.

I seriously doubt that these chumps will ever gain any sort of political influence, as most people don't want to deal with people hardline, not even the neocons.

If they ever do succeed, they can look forward to me instigating more than a few riots.

To say the least, it's Civil War 2 for me.

Idiots.

Everyone knows a good cult needs to be less visible until AFTER the slaughter!:)

To say the least, it's Civil War 2 for me.
I'll join you.

I'll join you.

That's two. We probably outnumber the Reconstructionists now.

That's really... really sad. If they ever got to the stage where they could actually influence my (and by my I mean anyone who disagrees with them) life, I'd do something about it. At the moment, it's just their opinion, and aside from giving mine right back to them, I'd choose not to escalate things.

Why do I feel like a better christian than them, even when I don't acknowledge the existence of God?

must be something they said.

That's two. We probably outnumber the Reconstructionists now.

I'm in...if it ever comes to that, which I hope it doesn't.

If it does...

(grabs shovel)

And in the words of Ed..."Yeaahh boyee!"

I'm in for the uberriots, and I'll bring my Cult of the Darned (Necromancer high council STILL won't approve me for official Damned status!) with me - that makes me, and one acolyte. Hey, I still just doubled our numbers!

Edit: Well, ok, so it doesn't double any more... /Edit

I'm in...if it ever comes to that, which I hope it doesn't.
If it does...
(grabs shovel)
And in the words of Ed..."Yeaahh boyee!"


Alright, now I can create my general staff!

Alright, now I can create my general staff!
Can I apply for state Necromancer? I can't raise undead yet, but I can make dead frogs twitch!

Alright, now I can create my general staff!
What about a Grand Secular Council?

As a Christian and a patriot, this isn't just crap; it's treasonous and blasphemous at the same time.

I can honestly assure you that this is a small group of Christians.

If these people even believe in the New Testament (if they are 'Christians'), they should realize that there was a new covenant set up in the New Testament, thus giving mercy to those unable to keep the law (which is everyone). Basically, this is blatantly hypocritical if they truly believe in the punishments contained in the Torah and that the keeping of the Mosaic law is imperative for redemption.

According to Galations 2:21, in context:
I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.
Basically, according to Paul, the law (which does not necessarily have to mean just the Mosaic law, but any type of moral code) is not what justifies a person, because if it is, then there was no point in Jesus' death.

So, essentially, these people, have neglected this, which is a fundamental principle to evangelical Christianity (no, we're not all annoying assholes). If they consider the death of Christ to mean anything for the sake of mankind, then they are being hypocritical.

What about a Grand Secular Council?
Secular doesn't work too well with me - I had to renounce my agnosticism to several dark, evil gods, so that would make State Necromancer a dissalowed position...

The Council of Uber-Thinkers?

I can honestly assure you that this is a small group of Christians.

If these people even believe in the New Testament (if they are 'Christians'), they should realize that there was a new covenant set up in the New Testament, thus giving mercy to those unable to keep the law (which is everyone). Basically, this is blatantly hypocritical if they truly believe in the punishments contained in the Torah and that the keeping of the Mosaic law is imperative for redemption.

According to Galations 2:21, in context:

Basically, according to Paul, the law (which does not necessarily have to mean just the Mosaic law, but any type of moral code) is not what justifies a person, because if it is, then there was no point in Jesus' death.

So, essentially, these people, have neglected this, which is a fundamental principle to evangelical Christianity (no, we're not all annoying assholes). If they consider the death of Christ to mean anything for the sake of mankind, then they are being hypocritical.

Thank you for clearing that up, comrade. People need to understand that sects like Reconstuctionism are fanatics, not true religion.

If killing people whose ideas you find objectionable is alright by these folks, I suggest we start with them.

The Council of Uber-Thinkers?
Sounds good to me, and keeps my undead minions from usurping me - they don't do too well in the thinking department, or at least they wouldn't, if they existed...

I also am a Christian and agree that Mr. North's ideas are absurd and unfounded.

I don't particularly have the time to discuss everything relating to this right now. It is not that I cannot, but that I am inhumanly busy with finals coming up. I will make a comment, though.

Think on the following things:

The Points made by North and Rushdoonie are valid ones. I agree with them. It is based on the Biblical commandments from the Old Testament. These people deserve the death penalty as it is mandated by God the Father of all. As it was said, death is not the mandatory penalty, but the maximum one.

However, from my understanding of it, these laws applied to the Nation of Israel of Old, God's State which was run the way he demanded it be run. Is there any state on earth today which can claim (validly) that it is running its affairs the way God mandated and has the guardianship of God? Nay, especially not the Nation of Israel today, and especially not the Vatican which denies true Christianity entirely. Therefore, there is no one valid to administer the punishment, though it is justly deserved. Death is deserved, but it cannot be administered because there is no State that can give valid authority to administer it.

Now, it has been said that the Nation of Israel was God's Church in the Old Testament...in that many of the commandments that applied to the nation of Israel should mandate the running of the Church and there is a textual parallel between the universal Church as spoken of in the Bible and the nation of Israel. However, certain laws...such as these...cannot apply in that sense simply due to impracticability. Which Church has the authority to execute such a penalty if the state does not? There is a universal Church...but it is not united in the sense that it is under one administration...it hasn't been (legitimately) since the time of the Apostles.

The Roman Catholic Church claims that it is the True Church...but it is obviously un-Christian as its doctrines are un-Biblical. There are Pentecostals and Arminians galore who deny the saving truths of the Gospel. Just as Churches in differant cities during the days of the Apostles were administered internally, and not by an overarching body or authority (Other than the Apostles), there are differant Churches today...only instead of by Locality...they have organized themselves around doctrine. Because a Bible Believing Baptist may deny the doctrine of Total Depravity...is he outside the Church? No. Just as the Churches at Corinth and Ephesus were part of the Universal Church though managed separately, the Bible Believing (emphasis on Bible Believing) denominations are part of the universal Church but managed separately.

It is logistically impossible to get the ok from the Bible Baptist Church and Faith Free Pres and everyone else whenever we need to conduct an execution.

In summary. The penalties are valid...but cannot be administered with any theological interal consistency.

Those are my two cents.

:headbang:

My god, every time I say to myself, "christians and right wing wackos can't possibly get any more idiotic/evil/wrong/stupid" something like this happens. Seriously, I've said some variation of the same phrase like four or five times now, and everytime something like this happens. I am so amazed. Though this is probably the worst, but I'm gonna hold off on saying that the wackos can't get any worse, otherwise... IT WILL HAPPEN AGAIN!

I myself am a Christian, and none of this could be considered acceptable on any circumstances according to the Christian Faith.

This is bullshit, to be blunt.

Originally posted by Jordaxia
Why do I feel like a better christian than them, even when I don't acknowledge the existence of God?

must be something they said.
Why do I, an evangelical preacher, think you are a better Christian than them, even when you don't acknowledge the existence of God?

Eh, I don't know you well enough to make that assertion, but I would say that the fact that you find this appauling is cause for me to believe that you are more Christ-like than they are.

This sickens me.

Originally posted by Vetalia
Originally Posted by Arribastan
Right. You seem to have it. Wanna join?



I can't. I'm a freethinking person who believes in equal rights regardless of sexual orientation and secular government, so I can already see the piles of stones!

I am a freethinking person who also believes in equal rights regardless of sexual orientation and secular government. Makes you wonder if they would stone a pastor . . . I might just be willing to chance it.

Ignorance in the church like this makes me stop asking why we aren't taken seriously.

Originally posted by Bolol
Thank you for clearing that up, comrade. People need to understand that sects like Reconstuctionism are fanatics, not true religion.
Actually, the roots of the word "religion" (Gr. "religio," I believe) literally mean "to bring into bondage" or "to enslave," so this is actually "religion" in its original form.

Though, in fact, following the "law" is to be a voluntary act of love for the God who created it, and not an oppressive, dictatorial fear of the spiritual reprocussions.

I understand what you meant, though. Most don't know the original intent of the word "religion." Christian beliefs speak against this crap.

Period.

Ok... lets get the record straight. I am a Christian. However, I think this Bible Government stuff is crap. I do not think it is in our hands to punish people and/or kill people for crimes like adultery and whatnot. I think that if it is a sin, let God take care of it. It is not in our position to play God or do Him a favor by killing people for Him.

*Sigh* Why can't people just try loving each other like they where told too...

I'm a Christian who fully supports these right-minded notions. I just don't think they go far enough.

Obviously people think about killing, abortions, homosexuality, and being incorrigible much more than they actually do. These thoughts alone are extremely dangerous. So everyone is a horrible sinner. The key then is to "kill them all and let God sort them out." I volunteer to join LUCIFER (Light-bound Usurpers Concerned Idealistically For Everpresent Rending) to help my brothers and sisters wipe out all the unbelievers (everyone but us). Then we are obviously susceptible to sin as well. So suicide is the only solution. To prevent other sins amongst animals and blasphemously evolved creatures that may follow we need to cleanse the earth of life. I'm for destroying the sun, I vote Monty Burns for President.

"Since the dawn of time, mankind has yearned to destroy the sun." -Monty Burns, Righteous Servant of LUCIFER.

Well, why not give a small island in the South Pacific to the hardliners of Christianity, Judaism, and Islam, and nuke them if any of them try to escape; they can have their society, we can get on with reality.

I'm a Christian who fully supports these right-minded notions. I just don't think they go far enough.

Obviously people think about killing, abortions, homosexuality, and being incorrigible much more than they actually do. These thoughts alone are extremely dangerous. So everyone is a horrible sinner. The key then is to "kill them all and let God sort them out." I volunteer to join LUCIFER (Light-bound Usurpers Concerned Idealistically For Everpresent Rending) to help my brothers and sisters wipe out all the unbelievers (everyone but us). Then we are obviously susceptible to sin as well. So suicide is the only solution. To prevent other sins amongst animals and blasphemously evolved creatures that may follow we need to cleanse the earth of life. I'm for destroying the sun, I vote Monty Burns for President.

"Since the dawn of time, mankind has yearned to destroy the sun." -Monty Burns, Righteous Servant of LUCIFER.

All Hail LUCIFER!!

:D

And isn't Gary North the same nutcake who declared Spongebob Squarepants an icon of homosexuality?

I'm a Christian who fully supports these right-minded notions. I just don't think they go far enough.

Obviously people think about killing, abortions, homosexuality, and being incorrigible much more than they actually do. These thoughts alone are extremely dangerous. So everyone is a horrible sinner. The key then is to "kill them all and let God sort them out." I volunteer to join LUCIFER (Light-bound Usurpers Concerned Idealistically For Everpresent Rending) to help my brothers and sisters wipe out all the unbelievers (everyone but us). Then we are obviously susceptible to sin as well. So suicide is the only solution. To prevent other sins amongst animals and blasphemously evolved creatures that may follow we need to cleanse the earth of life. I'm for destroying the sun, I vote Monty Burns for President.

"Since the dawn of time, mankind has yearned to destroy the sun." -Monty Burns, Righteous Servant of LUCIFER.

Lucifer, eh? Brilliant!

*a bit of a gravedig*
To clear things up, I quite certainly alread knew that this was not anything nar a mainstream belief. I posted it as more of an example of how distorted a doctrine can be.
This was not a jab at Christianity.

I decided to bump this because I have a related question some people might know about. I have heard that the US Constitution party has a few Reconstructionists in it. I am not sure if this is truth or just a ruour, since I didn't remember the names. I haven't been able to find any information on it myself.

Does anybody here know more than I do and might said person be willing to deny/confirm this rumour?

*a bit of a gravedig*
To clear things up, I quite certainly alread knew that this was not anything nar a mainstream belief. I posted it as more of an example of how distorted a doctrine can be.
This was not a jab at Christianity.

I decided to bump this because I have a related question some people might know about. I have heard that the US Constitution party has a few Reconstructionists in it. I am not sure if this is truth or just a ruour, since I didn't remember the names. I haven't been able to find any information on it myself.

Does anybody here know more than I do and might said person be willing to deny/confirm this rumour?

I cannot confirm or deny. But if that's the case then there is a wee chance that they may gain power.

*Sigh* Why can't people just try loving each other like they where told too...

Cuz that would make too much sense. And we can't have that in Christianity.

As a Christian and a patriot, this isn't just crap; it's treasonous and blasphemous at the same time.

What is the purpose of throwing in you claiming to be a patriot. Christianty and supporting Christianity taking over the government has nothing to do with patriotism. In fact it's the opposite because you're changing what was once a democracy, granted it was founded on Christian values, it was never meant to be a theocracy.

For further proof of Christians planning to take over the U.S. Gov't (http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/_/id/7235393?pageid=rs.Politics&pageregion=single1)

also, Project For New American Century (http://www.newamericancentury.org/), which when I first discovered it frightened me to say the least. I haven't ranted about it yet in these forums, but now would be a good time. If you don't believe the so called "Christian right" is trying to take over American politics, I suggest you read the mission statement for the PNAC with an open mind. It's hard for you, I know, but try. In short, these neo-conservatives are certain that their policy is justified. These people want to force democracy on other nations, even if it's not asked for, such as Iraq. And you heard Mr. Bush, Iraq is just the beginning on the "war on terror," which is really what they're dubbing the PNAC's goals. Don't believe me? The prominent members of PNAC include some of the top executives and advisors for the Bush administration. One Mr. Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, Jeb Bush and more. These people are running America, not Bush.

These neo-conservatives are changing America for the worst--for anyone who isn't white and evangelical. In order to understand my views, you have to know why we are overtly backing Israel and not pushing for peace. It may seem to be the opposite, but who gave Israel all its F-16s? You also have to understand why there are "insurgents" fighting us in Iraq. And who is really winning that war?

Us or Them? (http://www.costofwar.com)

Also, please give support for your argument that this is "crap," "treasonous" and "blasphemous." I could say that your views are "retarded," "close-minded," and "full of f*cking christian sh*t." But I couldn't do that, cuz I'm not Republican.

--Later,
with Peace, Love and Understanding

Please tell me this is a joke.....

This is crazy in a bad way.

I don't particularly have the time to discuss everything relating to this right now. It is not that I cannot, but that I am inhumanly busy with finals coming up. I will make a comment, though.

Think on the following things:

The Points made by North and Rushdoonie are valid ones. I agree with them. It is based on the Biblical commandments from the Old Testament. These people deserve the death penalty as it is mandated by God the Father of all. As it was said, death is not the mandatory penalty, but the maximum one.

However, from my understanding of it, these laws applied to the Nation of Israel of Old, God's State which was run the way he demanded it be run. Is there any state on earth today which can claim (validly) that it is running its affairs the way God mandated and has the guardianship of God? Nay, especially not the Nation of Israel today, and especially not the Vatican which denies true Christianity entirely. Therefore, there is no one valid to administer the punishment, though it is justly deserved. Death is deserved, but it cannot be administered because there is no State that can give valid authority to administer it.

Now, it has been said that the Nation of Israel was God's Church in the Old Testament...in that many of the commandments that applied to the nation of Israel should mandate the running of the Church and there is a textual parallel between the universal Church as spoken of in the Bible and the nation of Israel. However, certain laws...such as these...cannot apply in that sense simply due to impracticability. Which Church has the authority to execute such a penalty if the state does not? There is a universal Church...but it is not united in the sense that it is under one administration...it hasn't been (legitimately) since the time of the Apostles.

The Roman Catholic Church claims that it is the True Church...but it is obviously un-Christian as its doctrines are un-Biblical. There are Pentecostals and Arminians galore who deny the saving truths of the Gospel. Just as Churches in differant cities during the days of the Apostles were administered internally, and not by an overarching body or authority (Other than the Apostles), there are differant Churches today...only instead of by Locality...they have organized themselves around doctrine. Because a Bible Believing Baptist may deny the doctrine of Total Depravity...is he outside the Church? No. Just as the Churches at Corinth and Ephesus were part of the Universal Church though managed separately, the Bible Believing (emphasis on Bible Believing) denominations are part of the universal Church but managed separately.

It is logistically impossible to get the ok from the Bible Baptist Church and Faith Free Pres and everyone else whenever we need to conduct an execution.

In summary. The penalties are valid...but cannot be administered with any theological interal consistency.

Those are my two cents.



Well, I was going to say "gee, I thought it was obvious that these were extremists." Until I read your post, Reichskamphen. Your point of view is just as extreme, nay moreso than that of these Reconstructionists. Not only do you support the murder of people who don't follow your moral standards, but you say no place in today's society is holy enough to deliver such punishment.


Geez, and I thought most Christians were somewhat sensible. Well, I guess I shouldn't let one bad apple spoil the bunch.


Now that I've calmed down a bit, I realize that this is just another of the minority of insane Christian fanatics. These people basically form a cult, and mainstream Christian culture (luckily) is not this extreme.