Democracy a gift from the Xian God?

Watching Bush explain his plans for the MidEast yesterday, he reasserted his position as official crusader for democracy across that region.According to him all problems stem from a lack of democracy, asserting that democratic nations never attack other democratic nations, and none have secret police or mass arrests or torture. Indeed, he seemed to suggest that the only problem the Palestinians have is that they aren't really a democracy.As bizarre and counterfactual as that is, it reminded me of his often repeated claim that freedom and democracy are the gifts of God and he is carrying out God's work in spreading it through the MidEastl. While such words are reminiscent of the crusading kings of old, Hitler, and most especially Napolean, they seem equally counterfactual to his claims of how democratic nations operate.Don't get me wrong. I think democracy (when it is actually being carried out by fair voting practices and a rational majority) is one of the fairer forms of government. I am not against seeing it catch on in other nations.What I don't understand is how it ever became attached to the Xian God, and seen as a gift from him. Democracy existed well before Xianity. And it is pretty well documented in Xianity's own texts that God and even Jesus were not for democracy in any fashion.For example, those ten commandments were not voted on. Moses formed a secret army that slaughtered men women and children who indicated they may not like all of them.Once in power, Xians systematically removed democracies as they were pagan, with power emanating from man and not from a single God dictated source.It was only after centuries of Xian empire building that people eventually began to yearn for freedom and empirical knowledge and the enlightenment was on. During this time people discovered the old methods of governance, a pagan form of governance, and thought this could free them from God sacrosanct whims of royalty.While our founding fathers were Xian, they were deist and not tied to the Kingly nature of Jesus and God. They took what they found in pagan roots and established it here as a way for men to find power in themselves.So where is there any idea that the Xian god is for democracy and it is his gift? Any scripture will do. And how does democracy fit in with the evangelical concept of Jesus at all? When jesus returns does everyone get a vote as to whether he rules the planet and Jesus will accept the results one way or the other?From what I understand the entire point of CHRISTIANITY is that CHRIST will return to form a KINGDOM on earth, and anyone that doesn't like it dies. Does this mean God's gift has an expiration date?This message has been edited by holmes, 11-13-2004 04:40 AM

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

I believe you intended to type:"While our founding fathers were NOT Xian"?I think this is a well stated question. My first thought is that Xian's co-opted the Deist references to God and took it to refer to the Christian religion. Would this follow along with the taking Winter Soltice and assigning it to the birthday of their saviour?Anyway I'll watch this thread as it could get interesting.lfen

democracy is a greek (pagan) idea. for christian ideas of government, see feudalism.

I don't necessarily disagree with your argument, but I want to keep the thread from getting sidetracked into a debate on deism vs "true" Xianity.For the sake of argument I want to assume that deism, particularly our founding fathers' version of deism, was able to be called Xian. That is they certainly thought the moral teachings of Jesus were important, and so considered themselves christian in philosophy, even if they wholly disregarded the mythical and antidemocratic portions of the religion.So let's say that they were Xian, even if not in the original and more currently popular evangelical version of Xianity.That still did not make them believe that democracy came from Jesus or any Creator God. Indeed they seemed to point out clearly in the Declaration that it was man that had to build governments to protect their freedom, as well as protecting themselves from the governments they create.Reason was supposed to help man identify the best forms of government to achieve and protect the most freedom to do with their lives what they felt was their nature.None of this can be found in the Bible, or the history of Xianity. It was wholly pre and post Xian domination.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

This is one of the more annoying claims thrown out by the Religious Right here in America, that this is a Christian nation and our democracy is born out of Christian ideals. Yeah right.

quote:

---

Indeed they seemed to point out clearly in the Declaration

---

In some ways, we shouldn't even involve the Declaration in this conversation. It is a useful and interesting historical document, but has nothing to do with what the courts, the legislature, and the president should consider when making laws. The laws of this country and government are to operate within the framework provided by the Constitution. Still, if we are going to mention the Declaration, it does not state an explicitkt Christian God, or Jehovah, it uses the term Creator, nature's God, so forth. This is in sharp contrast to what had been the prevailing style of political documents in Christian nations. Secondly, the Declaration was used to declare rebellion away from King George, which doesn't seem to be following that Christian principle of "Render unto Ceasar...".The most distinguishing feature of the American Constitution, as seen within the context of its time, perhaps even our own time, is the absence of God. It begins with "We, the people, in order to form a more perfect union..." and does nothing to acknowledge God. It doesn't say "In order to realize God's intent more perfectly", it says, "We, the people". That is significant. The Constitution is written to draw up a contract between men (and later women). It is a secular document, it gives no acknowledgement to God except to say that belief in a god would not be a political test.Now I'm going to provide a link to transcribed debate and a quote from Ed Buckner, who argued the secular side, and just plain po\/\/ned his Christian opponent:mars-hill-forum.com - mars hill forum Resources and Information.

quote:

---

But it was not until September of 1787 that we agreed on, and it took a year or two to get it all ratified, the Constitution of the United States. That was the first significant governing charter in the history of mankind that did not invoke any gods. It didn't say, "in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ." It didn't say, "in the name of God Almighty." It begins and gives clear authority for the establishment of government to "We the people." In the body of the Constitution there is no reference to religion, except a negative one. In Article Six it says, "No religious test shall be required to hold office under these United States. It didn't say, "Only these religious tests." It said, "No religious test." It did say that people could swear or affirm, which gave freedom to those who did not want to swear to an Almighty God that they were telling the truth, to do that when they testified or took oaths of office, affirmations of office.

---

Given that incredible break from political tradition, I believe a much stronger case can be made the democracy is a gift from people back to themselves.

Okay so the choir is agreeing with me. Is there anyone out there, particularly Xians, that feel democracy is a gift from the Xian God and it is his desire for us to spread it around the world?

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)