Article On Government By Doug

[debrand]

answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v3/n2/one-nation-over-god

Most of this is what you'd expect from Doug Phillips so I don't know if you all will be interested in this article that he wrote.

Family government was introduced at the moment of Eve’s creation. Adam was to be the jurisdictional head of the family, and Eve was to be a helper suitable for him (Genesis 2:18). But Adam failed to honor his governmental duties. He should have refused to eat the forbidden fruit that Eve offered him. At that moment tension entered their relationship. God would then declare to Eve: “Your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over youâ€

So, if Adam ruled over Eve before the fall what changed after the fall?

There is no biblical evidence of a sword-bearing, civil government in the pre-Flood world.

Sometimes the conclusions that biblical literalists reach surprise me. Even if I took the story of Genesis as fact, there is nothing in it to suggest that Doug's conclusions would be true.

He states that god wanted people to be decentralized, spread out and self governing.

The new Babel state was distinctively religious in nature. It appeared to have a messianic vision of salvation by government and glory to man, symbolized by the erection of a tower to the heavens. Under this centralized religious state the people were one.

Again, how does he uses his own bible to reach this conclusion?

Just six thousand years ago, the Serpent asked Eve the question, “Has God said?†(Genesis 3:1). Modern man is asking the same question. He hates the moral law of God and refuses to be governed by it (Habakkuk 1:4). Instead of seeking the favor of the Lord through obedience to His law, modern humans seek deliverance through endless legislation and the promises of an all-powerful “nanny state

How can anyone read the nitpicky commandments of the Old Testament like not mixing fiber in clothing(really, why would god care?) and get that the biblical god wanted people to be self governed?

[thoughtful]

Wow.

Not that I'm surprised that Doug would think like that, but his conclusions are so disconnected from the text from which he extracted them, that's it's still mind-boggling.

12 +12 = 37, and the next in this series: A B C D E would be Q, I guess.

:roll:

[debrand]

Wow.

Not that I'm surprised that Doug would think like that, but his conclusions are so disconnected from the text from which he extracted them, that's it's still mind-boggling.

12 +12 = 37, and the next in this series: A B C D E would be Q, I guess.

:roll:

He uses the bible to justify his political ideology. Interesting he ignores the many verses that promise punishment for those who don't help the poor

[uber frau]

'Research' Fundy Style: Step One- Find conclusion.

Step Two- Ignore anything that does not support conclusion.

Step Three- Find anything that vaguely supports conclusion. If nothing available twist facts or make up your own. Double points for Biblical texts.

Step Four- Link 'evidence' to form argument to support conclusion, preferably tortuously and using as many leaps of logic as possible (Occum's Razor is of the devil). Remember to a liberal sprinkling of logical fallacies.

Walla. Instant argument. Brain cells not needed.

[DefraudedByPlaid]

How does this fit in with Rushdoony and the patriarchal move towards a theocracy? Or is that more a Botkin thing? You'd better believe that if the VF/ATI crowd were to ever attain political control in the USA, they would NOT give away all their power to family heads in favor of a completely decentralized, self-governing state. There are too many people who wouldn't fall into line on their own. In their system, self-government is for those who already govern by the same rulebook; they would be failing in their spiritual duties for letting those of other beliefs follow the broad path and not the narrow.

I'm a Christian, and the thought of them taking power scares the heebie-jeebies out of me. I don't believe Doug would reject the power if he had the opportunity to take it.

[debrand]

How does this fit in with Rushdoony and the patriarchal move towards a theocracy? Or is that more a Botkin thing? You'd better believe that if the VF/ATI crowd were to ever attain political control in the USA, they would NOT give away all their power to family heads in favor of a completely decentralized, self-governing state. There are too many people who wouldn't fall into line on their own. In their system, self-government is for those who already govern by the same rulebook; they would be failing in their spiritual duties for letting those of other beliefs follow the broad path and not the narrow.

I'm a Christian, and the thought of them taking power scares the heebie-jeebies out of me. I don't believe Doug would reject the power if he had the opportunity to take it.

I'm pretty certain that Doug Phillips is a Rushdoony admirer. I've often wondered if the Vision Forum would bring back slavery if given the ability to do so. They have a very disturbing love of the Old South.

[Dandruff]

Family government was introduced at the moment of Eve’s creation. Adam was to be the jurisdictional head of the family, and Eve was to be a helper suitable for him (Genesis 2:18). But Adam failed to honor his governmental duties. He should have refused to eat the forbidden fruit that Eve offered him. At that moment tension entered their relationship. God would then declare to Eve: “Your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over youâ€

So Eve's punishment was to be ruled over by Adam, who should have - but didn't - protect her from sin to begin with? :think:

[Olive Plant]

It sounds like Doug may be an anarchist. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism

... except for the non-hierarchical part. I'll just say Doug is a hierarchical anarchist (which may be a contradiction in terms, but otherwise it fits).