A Secular Liberal Misrepresentation of Christian TheonomyBY JIMMY LI It is always interesting sometimes to read and discover how Christianity and sometimes Christians themselves can be misrepresented by critics wishing to turn them into a pretzel. Lately, the writer of this article have been doing a lot of readings and contemplating on the Biblical Blueprint of Christian involvement in politics and the philosophical standard that Christian must operate from. Motivated by the desires to honor God, want of doing what is right and to as best informed as possible, the author have been reading works of those he agree with and even of those he disagree with. Instead of making a law unto one’s own self (Autonomy), one ought to want God-centered with the principles by which they operate from (Theonomy). Those who are Anti-Christian can have the habit of being very sloppy in their research and even downright wrong at times when it comes to their interaction with the Faith. An example of this is a certain journalist name John F. Sugg, in his news article that focused upon Christian Theonomy for a Tampa, Florida Newspaper called “The Weekly Planet? It was also discovered that Sugg had the same article modified and published with the leftist “Mother Jones?publication in the December/January 2006 edition. For anyone who had read his article or desire to do so, it must be warned that one ought to be cautious and discerning; the reason being that he is conspiracy driven, seeing hidden agendas that might not necessarily be there, hyping up figures and numbers to paint some form of danger, quoting people’s belief without a proper context and last but not least, of how Sugg goes on unrelated rabbit trail or slamming guys not even related to Theonomy. Taken as a whole, it comes to it as being nothing more than an emotionally charged, sensational scare tactics that might be fit for “Yellow Journalism? For instance he states:
Upon reading this, you would have pictured some lunatics who would be a menace to society. That and with what Sugg explicitly said elsewhere in the article that these guys are “prone to violence? it would make everyone want to avoid these men. Let us however, critique his statement. First off, Sugg’s ignorance can be seen immediately in how he though Mark is R. J. Rushdoony’s brother when Mark is his son. Simple mistake, yet when we couple with what follows, it reveals the poor research and misunderstanding prevalent in Sugg’s article. Secondly, Sugg attributed to Gary North (one of the Christians he mentioned above) that he teaches that (this is Sugg’s word) “Violence isn't shunned?(Endnote 2) He might be surprised that in a book North has Co-Authored in, the two Co-Authors explicitly quoted R.J Rushdoony (another Christian Sugg referred to above) saying something that is radically different than Sugg’s allegation:
The gospel and the regeneration that follows from it, is the key remedy and not, as Rushdoony have already stated, revolution or violent resistance. Thirdly, there is nothing “secretive?about any of these guys; rather, taking into account all their writings combined there are perhaps tens of thousands of pages, explaining and articulating the goals, philosophies and method of Theonomy. It is no “secret? as Sugg wrongly stated. If anyone still have any doubt that is so, let it be known that Gary North (who was mentioned) even runs http://freebooks.com and their works are not just only available to a select few on their mailing list, like some midnight Alley Way Communists in the 50s but to all, even for Sugg himself to read! Despite his obsession with Gary DeMar of American Vision in Sugg’s article and other essays Sugg have written, perhaps if he has read DeMar’s book, “What is Christian Reconstruction??he would have found that comparing him and other similar Christians to Iran’s tyrannical Mullahs is simply inaccurate. The Mullahs of Iran top-down, political enforcement of religious laws are contrary to that of Christians associated with Theonomy. As Christians, changes first occur in the individual level, then the family, the Church, society and then the government. DeMar’s in his own words conflict with Sugg’s misrepresentation of Theonomy of the top-down method as its primary aim:
The last few years, there have been news about Iranian power-based Mullahs going against the people. Whether or not that is true, is beyond the scope of the purpose of my writing. It is sufficient to point out that this appears to be the caricature which Sugg associates with those in Christian Theonomic Circle, one that is inherently false. We find DeMar’s own writing about the importance of “Consent?
What’s fascinating is that though Theonomy and those involved in it are clouded in secrecy, Sugg also goes on to describe the “secret agenda?(that somehow he knows) of these Christians saying,
Yet for Christians, this is not their aim. Biblically, as those involved in theononmy who agree, there is a distinction between the Church and the Government; God has ordained the Church to be the one to spread the Gospel (Matt. 28:19-20) and the government to carry out justice (Romans 13), not Vice Versa. God’s Ordain roles can not be reversed or neglected.
And these are just some samplings of Sugg’s errors. Yet, one has to wonder, how Sugg, in writing for such a wide general audience could be so off in his description of Christians and Theonomy and ignorance of basic, fundamental beliefs on Christian Reconstructionism. John F. Sugg ought to apologize for his mistakes and misrepresentation. Endnotes
|
|
Last Edited October 20, 2007 0:43
|