Related to the heresy of democracy is the problem of freedom. In a Righteous Republic, there is freedom to worship, but in a democracy there is the worship of freedom. In the one, there is freedom to worship God according to the Bible, and unbiblical and pagan religions are suppressed. In the other, freedom itself is worshipped, and eventually the true worship of God is suppressed.
There is a sense in which ”freedom” is a good thing. The Bible says so. But it never advocates freedom merely as freedom, or freedom for freedom’s sake. The freedom God approves of is freedom from sin and freedom to worship and obey Him. God freed Israel from Egypt, not so the Jews could sin all they wanted to, but so they could worship and obey God rather than Pharaoh. The same is true in personal salvation: God saves us and frees us, not so that we can serve sin (which is slavery) but so that we can serve Christ (which is true freedom). See how it works?
“Freedom” in a democracy, however, has a different meaning altogether from freedom in a Righteous Republic. Democratic freedom is what is shown in Judges 21:25, “Everyone did what was right in his eyes.” Such freedom means freedom to “do your own thing,” regardless of what God or the Bible says. Democratic freedom means freedom to sin, not freedom to worship God in God’s way.
Most of us would agree that tyranny, such as Marxism, is against the idea of freedom of worship. That is only partly true. Human tyranny believes in a sort of freedom of worship – the freedom to worship Man, be he the Caesar, the Pharaoh, the Furher or the State, which is Man collectivized. Human tyranny does not recognize the freedom to worship God, for such is a false religion which must be suppressed.
Most see that in tyranny. Bur I suggest that the same is true in democracy, at least as it differs from the Righteous Republic. Granted, Christians may enjoy the freedom to worship God for awhile; many do. But in principle, democracy is antithetical to true worship of God. It is schizophrenic – it is pressed between righteousness and unrighteousness, between God and Man. And it always gives in to Man and unrighteousness. Eventually, democracy becomes an opponent of the Righteous Republic, and opens the door to one of two things.
Author Unknown, The Failure of Democracy 78 Comments
[9/25/2010 1:48:18 PM]
Fundie Index: 93
1 2 3 4
The freedom God approves of is...freedom to worship and obey Him.
You can tell him from me to fuck off. I'm no one's slave.
9/25/2010 6:39:39 PM
There is no freedom in a theocracy and, make no mistake, theocracy is what this deluded freak seeks.
9/25/2010 6:47:45 PM
More tidbits from this particular article...
"Now, as soon as you speak of “the heresy of democracy,’ you will be totally misunderstood. Those who believe in democracy will go paranoid and jump to the erroneous conclusion that you are advocating tyranny and totalitarianism. Nothing could be further from the truth; the reverse is more accurate. Democracy rejects human totalitarianism as the ideal, and in that it is right. But democracy necessarily also rejects divine totalitarianism, and in that it is wrong. It simply cannot tolerate the notion of “One nation under the one God,” ruled according to God’s Laws."
(But...you just said it DOESN'T champion tyranny and totalitarianism. Or were you thinking of the conjunction, and championing an allegedly non-tyrannical totalitarianism?)
9/25/2010 7:05:34 PM
"Take America. We have two sets of “Founding Fathers.” The first Founding Fathers were the Pilgrims, who were Puritans. They believed in the Righteous Republic. Their theological cousins back in England helped set up the Puritan Commonwealth, which was directly patterned after the Righteous Republic in the Bible.[...]
Here is where I disagree with the two leading theories of our history. One theory says that this second group of Founding Fathers were all Evangelical Christians who advocated the Righteous Republic. I disagree. Franklin and Jefferson, among others, were Deists (the grandfathers of Liberalism) and were no friends of either Evangelicalism or the Righteous Republic. On the other hand, I disagree with the theory that all these men were Deists. Witherspoon and others certainly were not Deists. Moreover, many of these second Founding Fathers believed in the Righteous Republic.
The result? A compromise. The new nation would be a republic all right, but not quite so righteous as the Puritans once had. This was the fatal flaw. It has taken us some 200 years, but that crack has become a Grand Canyon. The flaw was that the republic allowed for religious pluralism and did not stress that it would be “one nation under God” as the original Puritan Pilgrims had envisaged."
(So at least he knows that deism had a notable representation among the Founders...Calvinist that he is, it's not much of a surprise that he has such high esteem for the Congregationalists.)
9/25/2010 7:06:34 PM
A dictionary would cure this deficiency of comprehension. Look up the word 'freedom' and read its definition. You'll learn something you don't seem to know now.
Also, RELIGION IS NOT ONE-SIZE-FITS-ALL.
9/25/2010 8:38:48 PM
Because requiring people to believe something always works, huh?
9/25/2010 9:04:50 PM
Your God is imaginary and your Bible is bullshit, therefore your argument is baseless.
Go ahead and prove me wrong.
9/25/2010 9:08:15 PM
So...not really freedom, then.
9/25/2010 9:21:02 PM
This deserves a word salad award.
9/25/2010 9:29:58 PM
The funny thing about freedom is that it often works only as an all-or-nothing deal. You have to be pretty darn sure that the limits you put in don't hurt anyone.
"Freedom needs limits."________________GWBush
9/25/2010 9:36:25 PM
Hmmm. So freedom for others is not acceptable, but freedom for 'Christians' is?
9/25/2010 9:39:09 PM
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
9/25/2010 9:49:46 PM
Freedom to obey... that's a good one.
9/25/2010 11:07:02 PM
If I spouted this much crap I'd be unwilling to admit authorship too.
9/26/2010 12:33:20 AM
@Skynight: your analysis is outstanding. The codswallop that "everyone worships something" seems to be a very common trope among the extreme right, either because of an extremely loose and vague definition of what constitutes a "religion," or because of a constitutional inability to comprehend a lack of religious faith in other people. Or more likely both.
It seems to me to be a variation of Maslow's Hammer. When all they have is a hammer, everything around them looks like a nail...
9/26/2010 1:06:19 AM
@Tempus : in other words, they find our lack of faith disturbing ?
9/26/2010 1:11:15 AM
Where in the bible does it advocate a republic, anyway? And what does he mean by republic? How are the leaders of this republic to be chosen (yes, yes, I know, by god. And I bet god chooses the son of the Dear Leader to be the next one).
9/26/2010 1:26:00 AM
Can I also add a quote from a great defender of democracy:
In a speech in the House of Commons on 11 November 1947, Winston Churchill said:
No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.
9/26/2010 1:28:09 AM
I was once told by a policeman that " You only have one right, the right to do as you're told!"
This kinda reminds me of that.
9/26/2010 2:03:16 AM
@Murdin: the ability of a fundie to destroy his own credibility is insignificant next to the power of of the Dark Side. Or something.
9/26/2010 3:52:59 AM
Also looked like boring shit.
9/26/2010 6:10:25 AM
Love the name..... Read the Left Behind Series much?
9/26/2010 6:25:21 AM
What moronic crap.
9/26/2010 6:28:42 AM
Ooh, just thought of another one!
Righteous "Republic", right?
Sort of like the Democratic People's Republic of the Congo, right?
9/26/2010 6:50:59 AM
In the one, there is freedom to worship God according to the Bible, and unbiblical and pagan religions are suppressed.
And you wonder why people don't like your kind.
You don't deserve to live you fascist prick.
9/26/2010 6:55:48 AM
1 2 3 4