LDS Church and the U.S. Constitution

[Bouvet]

Old-Timer wrote:

Bouvet, I don’t understand how anything I wrote is different than what you wrote. I mean that. I read your comment and agreed with nearly everything you said. The only parts with which I didn’t agree were those that related to what I believe, as I don’t believe what you read into my comment. Please quote directly from my comment to show where I even implied the Founding Fathers would have approved of Churches dictating national policy. If I inadvertantly implied that, I will go back and edit my comment – gladly.

Btw, please tone down the rhetoric of the last paragraph. It’s way over the top.

You are right. I’m sorry. I deleted it.

[GDTeacher]

Fig-bearing Thistle wrote:

Hi GDTeacher.

We could probably point to conflicting quotes from BY as to the type of government that he believed would be in place among the Saints when the Savior returns. I’ve got a few I will look up if you are interested. From what I’ve read, it will be a government which allows freedom of thought, worship, and expression but the laws will be strict. Those willing to abide by them will be welcome, even if they are not of our faith. Those unwilling to abide will probably not even desire to come.

Hello to you FBT

I understand the conflicting quotes from BY, no issue with that. My reference is primarily to the experiences of people in Utah under the theocracy that was headed on earth by BY. Of course people’s experiences are varied, but my thoughts wander to the period of the reformation and the unquestioning obedience that led to atrocities like MMM, and at least my perception of the degradation of women and to some degree children under the theocratically induced polygamy. Certainly as BRM said, one can quote BY against BY. That is not my intent, but to explore the real life experiences of people under a theocratic rule.

[hawkgrrrl]

Quote:

I think the church missteps when it influences laws based on doctrine.

I take it that you are not a social conservative. Me neither. I am more of a social libertarian. I would rather err on the side of personal freedom, even protecting the rights of sinners to sin, so long as their sins don’t violate the tangible rights of others (meaning secular rights – usually that means the right to life, property, freedom, pursuit of happiness) than to try to enforce morality. IMO, legislated morality is no morality at all, and I value freedom above morality. I don’t suspect that’s a very commonly held opinion in either of the two main political parties.

[Buscador]

Hawkgrrrl,

You said it better than I can:

GDTeacher wrote:

I would rather err on the side of personal freedom, even protecting the rights of sinners to sin, so long as their sins don’t violate the tangible rights of others (meaning secular rights – usually that means the right to life, property, freedom, pursuit of happiness) than to try to enforce morality. IMO, legislated morality is no morality at all, and I value freedom above morality.

Thanks

[Fig-bearing Thistle]

GDTeacher wrote:

Fig-bearing Thistle wrote:

Hi GDTeacher.

We could probably point to conflicting quotes from BY as to the type of government that he believed would be in place among the Saints when the Savior returns. I’ve got a few I will look up if you are interested. From what I’ve read, it will be a government which allows freedom of thought, worship, and expression but the laws will be strict. Those willing to abide by them will be welcome, even if they are not of our faith. Those unwilling to abide will probably not even desire to come.

Hello to you FBT

I understand the conflicting quotes from BY, no issue with that. My reference is primarily to the experiences of people in Utah under the theocracy that was headed on earth by BY. Of course people’s experiences are varied, but my thoughts wander to the period of the reformation and the unquestioning obedience that led to atrocities like MMM, and at least my perception of the degradation of women and to some degree children under the theocratically induced polygamy. Certainly as BRM said, one can quote BY against BY. That is not my intent, but to explore the real life experiences of people under a theocratic rule.

Thanks, GDTeacher,

I’m not sure we can accurately judge Brigham Young simply because the 1800’s aren’t our time period, and not our culture. The West was a rough place, and survival required a certain degree of strictness. The MMM is a terrible event, and people did follow their leaders unquestioningly–to much so. And they will have to answer for that. But those things happen as well in other forms of government.

I think there is evidence available to believe either way on Plural Marraige. Some women were amiable to the practice, some were not.

I think theocratic rule under the Savior will be different than rule under Moses, or Joshua, or BY. When the Savior reigns, people will be able to abide at least a terrestrial law, and largely govern themselves.

[Old-Timer]

Thanks, Bouvet. I’ve made the same mistake (mis-read something) WAY too many times to count.

[hawkgrrrl]

Here’s are more stumpers along the lines of the second coming bringing on a theocracy, although each goes in a slightly different direction:

1 – When Jesus comes again, will He really rule politically? Didn’t all of the original disciples make the mistake of thinking He was there to rescue them from political oppression, and He refused to get sucked in saying “Render unto Caesar”? Or did He think He was going to influence the political situation, and when He didn’t, the gospels re-interpreted His statements in a more enigmatic and open way to imply that it wasn’t what He meant?

2 – Will there be a “church” during the millenium? Why would there be? Isn’t the church like the babysitter while the Savior’s away?

3 – Will there be various churches then? Will some be non-Christian? Will there be a mass conversion? Will there be apostates after that?

4 – Would post-second coming govt be a theocracy or a democracy with a lot of unity of opinion? Will there still be dissenting opinions? Different political parties? Is Jesus a democrat or republican? If it’s a theocracy, sounds like fascism actually.

[magicmusician]

Having said all the above

When He does return

Dont you think that all the politicians will maybe just want to listen to what He has to say?

[Old-Timer]

I’m not sure some would listen to anyone. 😈

[magicmusician]

LOl true

[Fig-bearing Thistle]

hawkgrrrl wrote:

Here’s are more stumpers along the lines of the second coming bringing on a theocracy, although each goes in a slightly different direction:

Great questions, I’ll offer my 2 cents.

hawkgrrrl wrote:

1 – When Jesus comes again, will He really rule politically? Didn’t all of the original disciples make the mistake of thinking He was there to rescue them from political oppression, and He refused to get sucked in saying “Render unto Caesar”? Or did He think He was going to influence the political situation, and when He didn’t, the gospels re-interpreted His statements in a more enigmatic and open way to imply that it wasn’t what He meant?

As I read the scriptures, Jesus will reign personally on the earth during the millennium. But He will have a lot of servants that help to administer the laws of Zion under His direction and leadership.

hawkgrrrl wrote:

2 – Will there be a “church” during the millenium? Why would there be? Isn’t the church like the babysitter while the Savior’s away?

I think the ‘Church’ will become Zion during the millennium. Jesus won’t call us “Mormons” but in the realest sense of the word, “The Church” is nothing more than an organization of disciples of Christ, led and administered under Priesthood Authority and Gospel laws. Jesus not rule single handedly in my opinion.

hawkgrrrl wrote:

3 – Will there be various churches then? Will some be non-Christian? Will there be a mass conversion? Will there be apostates after that?

From what I have read, there will be other churches and faiths during the Millennium. All those willing and worthy to abide by Terrestrial law will remain on the earth–regardless of their religion or faith. But with wicked will be burned at His coming.

hawkgrrrl wrote:

4 – Would post-second coming govt be a theocracy or a democracy with a lot of unity of opinion? Will there still be dissenting opinions? Different political parties? Is Jesus a democrat or republican? If it’s a theocracy, sounds like fascism actually.

Jesus is a Republican Conservative.

Actually, I think that the Government that Jesus Christ heads will be unified under His Priesthood direction and leadership. There may be other governments around in the earth, but they will all eventually come to see that their governments fail, and will over time desire to place themselves under the government of the Savior. But that is just a guess.

Thanks.

[Buscador]

Having started this thread, I am surprised it has turned out to be a discussion on the millennial government under Jesus. Happily, what this has morphed into I find interesting. So here is what I have to say on the matter:

Since Jesus inspired the U.S. Constitution to be the guiding document for a secular government, it may hold some water to say that the government under Jesus would contain a separation of church and state. Especially seeing that the word of God will come forth from Jerusalem, and his laws from the New Jerusalem. In fact, a secular government provides for more genuine religious experiences because those experiences are not tainted by the edicts of the state, not that a state under the rule of Jesus would would harm religion in the first place.

[hawkgrrrl]

I find the idea that Jesus will literally rule when he comes again to be a little inconsistent. When he was here the first time, he was definitely not interested in political power. Disciples were given great latitude in running the affairs of the church. Even so, people always want him to rule for some reason. Are we still expecting him to solve the problems of the world (terrorism, poverty, and economic woes)?

[Brian Johnston]

hawkgrrrl wrote:

Are we still expecting him to solve the problems of the world (terrorism, poverty, and economic woes)?

Good question. Will Jesus *force* people to do the right things when He rules? Those things hawkgrrrl listed are consequences of unrighteous behavior. The power of government to compel behavior is force. What happens when people refuse to pay taxes or obey the law? Eventually people from the government will come with guns.

Will we solve the problems? or will Jesus do it?

[Fig-bearing Thistle]

Buscador wrote:

Having started this thread, I am surprised it has turned out to be a discussion on the millennial government under Jesus. Happily, what this has morphed into I find interesting. So here is what I have to say on the matter:

Since Jesus inspired the U.S. Constitution to be the guiding document for a secular government, it may hold some water to say that the government under Jesus would contain a separation of church and state. Especially seeing that the word of God will come forth from Jerusalem, and his laws from the New Jerusalem. In fact, a secular government provides for more genuine religious experiences because those experiences are not tainted by the edicts of the state, not that a state under the rule of Jesus would would harm religion in the first place.

From what I have studied, there will be 2 types of governments during the millennium. One will be Theocratic pertaining to members of the Church who are under covenant to obey laws that others are not under covenant to obey. It will be administered through the Priesthood. The other government will be more of a civil government with laws much like those in our Constitution, but w/o the laws pertaining to the Gospel covenants. This will be for those who wish to be ruled under the Savior’s government, but not enter the covenants and higher laws of the Gospel.

Both governments will work, because the wicked will be burned and removed from the earth. Those who remain will be members of the Lords Church as well as righteous, honorable people of the earth.

Until the wicked are removed, no government will survive. Even the Savior can’t bring his government over wicked people.

[Author]

Posts