The New Apostolic Reformation

[00columcille00]

Citing adversarial articles as evidence is a poor choice of support for your opinions. I would want to see primary evidence from the works of the people involved in the movement.

Also, “dominionism” as a term is not used by the NAR, nor by Christians other than those criticizing the NAR. It is a term used to demonize and marginalize the Christian project of transforming all spheres of society. One used by critics, not by people involved in any movement. When was the last time you heard a Christian describe themselves as a “dominionist?”

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominionism

Finally, Rushdoony is hardly a leading light in the NAR movement. His view of Christian Reconstructionism is a far cry from mainstream Christian understanding of the legitimate call on all Christians to transform every aspect of society.

As far as I can tell Rushdoony isn’t drawing from the Natural Law, but from a literal and uncontextualized reading of scripture. He is an extreme figure being used to tar people like Bachmann and Perry, IMHO.

Overall, I’m disappointed that there isn’t a more sophisticated reflection available here on the NAR. The comments so far have been pretty knee jerk and seemingly politically biased in a left leaning direction. I find that surprising.

 

[CopticChristian]

Citing adversarial articles as evidence is a poor choice of support for your opinions. I would want to see primary evidence from the works of the people involved in the movement.

Also, “dominionism” as a term is not used by the NAR, nor by Christians other than those criticizing the NAR. It is a term used to demonize and marginalize the Christian project of transforming all spheres of society. One used by critics, not by people involved in any movement. When was the last time you heard a Christian describe themselves as a “dominionist?”

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominionism

Finally, Rushdoony is hardly a leading light in the NAR movement. His view of Christian Reconstructionism is a far cry from mainstream Christian understanding of the legitimate call on all Christians to transform every aspect of society.

As far as I can tell Rushdoony isn’t drawing from the Natural Law, but from a literal and uncontextualized reading of scripture. He is an extreme figure being used to tar people like Bachmann and Perry, IMHO.

Overall, I’m disappointed that there isn’t a more sophisticated reflection available here on the NAR. The comments so far have been pretty knee jerk and seemingly politically biased in a left leaning direction. I find that surprising.

I have spent too much time studying Dominionism and have formed a conclusion. You stated in your posting that you wanted someone to respond with “personal experience”. The answer is no I have none. I do understand where it came from, where it is going, and want no part of it.

I am a Physician and I do not have to experience Cancer, Aids, Diabetes, Cholera, Depression, Seizures etc to understand those things and I do. You want personal experience. I cannot help you.

 

[Izdaari]

Overall, I’m disappointed that there isn’t a more sophisticated reflection available here on the NAR. The comments so far have been pretty knee jerk and seemingly politically biased in a left leaning direction. I find that surprising.

In my case, they are biased in a libertarian-right direction.

And like Coptic Christian, I am quite familiar with Dominionism and Christian Reconstructionism. I first encountered Rushdoony’s followers at a Young Americans for Freedom convention (I was an activist in conservative political circles for years), and read their stuff out of curiosity… and with growing alarm. I’ve kept an eye on those movements ever since, because I could visualize the Heinlein story, If This Goes On– happening right before my eyes.

 

[Izdaari]

Finally, Rushdoony is hardly a leading light in the NAR movement. His view of Christian Reconstructionism is a far cry from mainstream Christian understanding of the legitimate call on all Christians to transform every aspect of society.

There is only one way for Christians to legitimately “transform every aspect of society”: evangelism. If you expect people who aren’t Christians to behave like Christians, there are only two ways to do it: 1) coercion, or 2) persuade them to become Christians. Nothing relating to the coercion method can possibly be legitimate. It can only be theocratic tendencies, which I will resolutely oppose to the best of my ability, even if they are a lot milder than the Rushdoony version.

 

[CopticChristian]

There is only one way for Christians to legitimately “transform every aspect of society”: evangelism. If you expect people who aren’t Christians to behave like Christians, there are only two ways to do it: 1) coercion, or 2) persuade them to become Christians. Nothing relating to the coercion method can possibly be legitimate. It can only be theocratic tendencies, which I will resolutely oppose to the best of my ability, even if they are a lot milder than the Rushdoony version.

Veritatis Splendor addresses the notion of right doing, ascending to the Will of God, true freedom and in passing discusses Theonomy and clarifies it as not imposed, but participatory…

vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_06081993_veritatis-splendor_en.html

Others speak, and rightly so, of theonomy, or participated theonomy, since man’s free obedience to God’s law effectively implies that human reason and human will participate in God’s wisdom and providence. By forbidding man to “eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil”, God makes it clear that man does not originally possess such “knowledge” as something properly his own, but only participates in it by the light of natural reason and of Divine Revelation, which manifest to him the requirements and the promptings of eternal wisdom. Law must therefore be considered an expression of divine wisdom: by submitting to the law, freedom submits to the truth of creation. Consequently one must acknowledge in the freedom of the human person the image and the nearness of God, who is present in all (cf. Eph 4:6). But one must likewise acknowledge the majesty of the God of the universe and revere the holiness of the law of God, who is infinitely transcendent: Deus semper maior.

We must as you say evangelize, by changing ourselves to change others. You are so correct.