The Kingdom is not Theocratic

The more that I think about it, the clearer it becomes that theocracy is not a good word for describing the Kingdom of God.

God’s kingdom is his will being done on earth as it is in heaven. To understand what this means, we have to think about how his will is done in heaven. The citizens of heaven do not do his will because the fear him or because they are forced to obey. The do God’s will because they respect him. They understand that his wisdom and his will are perfect, so doing his will is the natural thing to do.

God’s kingdom comes on earth in the same way. His will will be done, but that does not mean that people will be forced to do his will. It will not be done because people are afraid of him. God’s will will be done, because people with new hearts choose to love him. As those who love him begin to understand his will, they will realise that his ways are perfect. They will freely choose to do his will out of respect for him.

Just as there is no fear or force in heaven, there is no room for fear or force in his Kingdom. This means that any word that ends with “ocracy” does not fit with the kingdom of God.

There is only one situation where God will permit humans to use force against other humans in his Kingdom. He allows the punishment of theft, assault and murder to be enforced by human judges. That is the limit on the use of force. And even when punishing these sins, human force must be tempered by mercy.

Almost all humans would accept that force is justified for dealing with theft, assault and murder. Therefore, even the most ardent anti-theocrat would be hard pressed to find anything objectionable about the Kingdom of God.

The other “ocracies” involve far more force being used for a wider range of purposes. For example, democracy allows the majority to force a minority to bow to the will of the majority. Those who fear being forced to do things against their will should fear democracy far more than they fear the Kingdom of God.

Against Theocracy

Ed Brayton at Talk to Action makes a very reasoned plea for critics to be more careful in their use of the word theocracy.

I also don't think we should use the term theocrat to describe all conservative Christians, evangelicals or fundamentalists; that is simply painting with too broad a brush. A theocrat is someone who wants the country to be ruled by the rules of a particular religion, in this country nearly always Christian of course.

I appreciate reasoned approach and his concern about the correct use of words. However, I cannot support his definition of theocracy. Theocracy is the "rule of God", not the rule of any old religion. Ed makes theocracy sound like the rule of Pat Robertson or James Dobson. What is feared bymost of those who fear theocracy is actually FocusontheFamilocracy, MoralMajorocracy or 700Clubocracy. These do sound scary. They scare me. They probably even scare God (actually nothing scares him, but he is horrified by some things said and done in his name).

We must be clear about one thing. God does not want to rule the world through the church. He does not want to rule the world through Focus on the Family, or through Pat Robertson. He is no interested in forcing his will one the people of the world. He created us to be free responsible and wants us to freely choose to love him. If we love, him we will probably choose to obey him, and that will change things on earth, particularly in the political scene.

God is not interested in is any "ocracy" where one group of people attempt to force their will on the rest. He is not interested in forcing people to become Christians. He is not interested in using the law to force people to live like Christians. More here.

Ed Brayton goes on his comments to say that "accomodationists" are okay. These are "people who support non-coercive public propping up of religious belief in general". He includes George Washington and John Adams in this group. Brayton is very generous in allowing accomodationism, but I have to disagree with him on this one too. The truth is that God does not need anyone to prop him up. He does not the support of the state. Whenever, the church has sought the support of the state it has been on the verge of becoming dangerous, or becoming useless. If the church needs the support of the state, it has probably lost the support of God. We do not need the state propping up a church that is "over the hill".

God and Force

The church must not attempt to control the state. Christians must never use the coercive power of the state to advance its cause or to enforce Christian standards on the world. This has been a strong temptation for the church in every century. For many years, the church used the power of the state to force people to become Christians. During the crusades, "the heathen Moslems" were killed to advance the gospel.

The use of force to advance the gospel did terrible damage and for most the last 400 years, the world has been trying to throw off the control of the church. Hatred of church control has often led to an unnecessary rejection of the gospel, as most people cannot tell the difference.

We are now living in a season where the influence of the church is disappearing and the gospel is at a low ebb. Despite this rejection, we do not seem to have learned our lesson and the impulse to use the state to advance our cause is still strong. The prohibition movement is a recent example, and Christian support for the war in Iraq springs from the same well.

God’s greatest gifts to mankind is freedom, so we must not force our faith on an unwilling world. Our Father will never force sinners to live righteously, if they are unwilling. He will allow them to experience the consequences of their choices, but he will not stop them choosing. God wants people to obey him, because they love him, not because they have to. The most that he will do to make them obey him, is the Holy Spirit’s stirring in their conscience.

Following God’s example, we should never use political power to enforce Christian standards on a non-Christian world. The state is the only institution in society that has the power to force people to do things against their will. This coercive power of the state is very dangerous, so it should be used sparingly. Christians should never use it to force people to live by their standards. (This is one of the features that distinguish Islam and Christianity. Islam has always used force win converts and force and submission come from its heart. While Christianity has sometimes used force to win converts, this has always been a denial of the gospel that weakened the Church.)

We should only attempt to implement Christian laws when the majority of people are Christian, or if the majority of people accept Christian standards. That means that the battle in the marketplace of ideas must be won before we can achieve victory in the political area. We are currently a long way from that goal. While most people accept the wisdom of Jesus, they are very hostile to the idea of Christians imposing their standards on the rest of society. (I suspect that God agrees with them, as he has never forced people to obey him).

Technorati Tags: theocracy force

Making Theocracy Work.

The best method of government is theocracy. Theocracy is the rule of God (theos kratos = god rule). Theocracy is the same as the Kingdom of God. Kings rule over kingdoms. God is king of the Kingdom of God, so he rules in the Kingdom of God. The Kingdom of God is the same as the rule of God. Christians believe in the Kingdom of God, so we should be supporters of theocracy and not democracy.

For the LORD is our judge,
the LORD is our lawgiver,
the LORD is our king;
it is he who will save us.
Isaiah 33:22

The rule of God is the best, because it is the only way to blessing.

The difficulty with theocracy is in making it work. Because God is spirit and in heaven, we have to find a practical way for him to rule on earth. People with political and judicial power have to find a way to do God's will.

God is not silent, so they can not his will. He has revealed his will to mankind, so it is hard, but not impossible, for rulers to know his will. If God’s will can be known, rulers can choose to obey God and do his will when exercising political power.

The civil authorities can hear God by studying the scriptures and listening to his Spirit. They can also listen to those who speak on behalf of God. Having heard God's will, they can obey God in their political jurisdictions. When political powers obey God’s will, he rules through them and theocracy comes into being. The Kingdom of god becomes a reality as the rulers of a nation freely submit to God.

Every ruler who has chosen to serve God, should be part of a church (a body of believers, not an organisation). The ruler will be under the oversight of the elders of their church and will be receiving teaching from them about the Christian life, just like other Christians. These elders will have a responsibility to teach their disciples how to serve God in the political life. They can help the the ruler listen to the Spirit.

However, the role of these elders is limited. They can persuade and warn, but they must never control. Political rulers are not accountable to God through the church. They are directly accountable to God for their political activities. The church can only teach them to do right and challenge them when they do wrong. Civil leaders are free to serve God directly. They must not go under the authority of the Church.

Theocracy and Democracy

The modern view is that democracy is the best way to appoint a government. However, enough democracies are doing evil to prove this is wrong. How a ruler gets into power is not the most important question. The critical question is "Do the rulers obey God?"

If a king is ruling according to the will of God, he is part of the Kingdom of God. If a parliament is not applying the will of God, it is part of the kingdom of darkness. Democracy tends to produce leaders who pander to the desires of the people, so it cannot be counted on to raise up leaders who will serve God.

A theocratic dictator could be better for a nation than a democratic parliament that ignores God.

The scriptures say very little about the correct form of government, but they say plenty about how governments should rule. Our focus should be on getting governments to rule according to God’s will.

God's Rule

Most people assume that democracy is a superior form of government, but democracy is rule by the people (demos kratos = people rule). The problem is that sin and the fall means that people can make terrible mistakes so democracy is dangerous. Many of the worst political dictators were voted into power by large majorities. Democracy generally results in the majority group in a society ruling over minority group that loses their freedom.

Winston Churchill’s statement is often quoted, as if it were true. He said,

Democracy is the worst form of government except for all those others that have been tried.

This statement is incorrect, because the best form of government has never been tried. The best method of government is theocracy. Theocracy is the rule of God (theos kratos = god rule). Theocracy is the same as the Kingdom of God. Kings rule over kingdoms.

God is king of the Kingdom of God, so he rules in the Kingdom of God. This means that the Kingdom of God is the same as the rule of God. Christians believe in the Kingdom of God, so we should be supporters of theocracy and not democracy. The rule of God is the best, because it is the only way to blessing.

Ecclesiocracy is not Theocracy

I read of a pastor who is going to preach a sermon against theocracy on Easter Sunday. I hope that he does not say the Lord's prayer, because the third line of that prayer sounds a bit like theocracy to me. The problem is that theocracy is misunderstood.

It has a bad name in the modern world, because it confused with ecclesiocracy, the rule of the church (ecclesia kratos = church rule). The rule of the Islamic clergy in Iran is often incorrectly described as a theocracy, because the clergy have control over the government.

Theocracy is not God ruling through the church or the clergy. Ecclesiocracy is not the same as theocracy. The church must never rule the state. It becomes dangerous when it rules in the political sphere.

Theocracy is God's will being done on earth as it is in heaven.