Hall of Fame
Some in CR favor a constitutional monarchy, definitely--I've heard others refer to it as a "benign dictatorship."
I envy you. I've never met Dr. North. Where did you meet him? At seminars and/or debates? I'd like to pick his brain in person sometime. Was he accessable or did he not have time for any of the unwashed masses?Originally posted by granite1010
It's a cheap shot, I'll admit that. I've met Dr. North several times.
I agree but you'll have a hard time convincing any nonchristian (and most Christians) of that.He's certainly not a fanatic;
Agreed. Have you read his book, "Political Polytheism?" I'm not much of a history buff but I couldn't put that 700 page book down. I'm also amazed at how often he has to delete appendixes to his books because they turn into complete books themselves. People hearing about this assume he must be unnecessarily wordy but he's not that at all. In fact, I find him to be often quite laconic. It's just that he has this incredible wealth of knowledge.his observations of early American history and the state of the American church are sharp and insightful;
I saw the debate he had with Ice and House but those 2 were not mid Acts dispensationalists. I'd like to see North debate someone like Enyart or Bob Hill on eschatology. That would be a great show!and in regards to eschatology he's quite good at decapitating dispensationalists.
Why do you question public stoning? Why should the family of the murder victim shell out their tax money to feed and cloth the murderer of their beloved family member in our prison system?Bottom line, I agree with him that this society clearly needs some fine tuning. It's portions of his solution--public stoning, anyone?--that I question. As he is fond of saying, you can't beat something with nothing. But it's the "something" he proposes that scares the hell out of critics of CR (and some of his own associates).
"The question eventually must be raised: Is it a criminal offense to take the name of the Lord in vain? When people curse their parents, it unquestionably is a capital crime (Ex. 21:17). The son or daughter is under the lawful jurisdiction of the family. The integrity of the family must be maintained by the threat of death. Clearly, cursing God (blasphemy) is a comparable crime, and is therefore a capital crime (Lev. 24:16)."
[Gary North, The Sinai Strategy: Economics and the Ten Commandments (Tyler, TX: Institute for Christian Economics, 1986), pp. 59-60]
If it were a true theonomy, the way I've seen Jefferson and other posters here present the concept, then the witness of two believers is sufficient to condemn anyone to death... since we all know that believers never lie, only their diety does that...Originally posted by granite1010
While I think many theonomists could make a case for blasphemy being a capital crime, I don't think many of them contemplate the implications. How exactly would this be enforced? Would you have to have the blasphemy on tape, video, or would you rely on an accuser's word? Would we rely on verbal blasphemy or written heresy?
Making "blasphemy" a capital offense opens the proverbial can of worms and smacks of thought crime. And on that note, see Mr. Lewis's thoughts below...
To say nothing of defining what constitutes a blasphemous statement.Originally posted by granite1010
Would we rely on verbal blasphemy or written heresy?
Originally posted by Gerald
I've never really been able to find any concise criteria.
Originally posted by Zakath
This is kind of dancing around the question... how do the CR groups, yours in particular, define the term "blasphemy"?
I remember running those numbers with you, and although the numbers are greater due to an increase in part-time workers, the costs are lower because the vast majority are not paid.Originally posted by Zakath
We ran the numbers a couple of years ago and posted them here on TOL. Enyart's silly re-organization would actually add a significant number of federal employees.
Do you recall, which costs were lower than what? :think:Originally posted by Yorzhik
I remember running those numbers with you, and although the numbers are greater due to an increase in part-time workers, the costs are lower because the vast majority are not paid.