Does a Christian Party lead to a theocracy?
This is a scare-mongering accusation from people, even Christians, who don’t want a Christian party. This scare-mongering can take various forms.
Assertion and accusation are not proof, and we leave it to these accusers to try to prove their assertions. In the meantime we suggest that people should press these accusers to prove their point. As for the CP, we consider this charge to be utter nonsense. People who make such an accusation must be very uncertain about the stability of our Parliamentary democracy, and you will be better not putting too much trust in these fearful people who think that Christian politicians are to be feared. Rather, people should be more concerned about the Muslim Parliament and that the last Archbishop of Canterbury has suggested Sharia law is unavoidable in the UK. This is at least a real threat.
We live in a modern democracy, introduced and promoted by Oliver Cromwell, a Christian and the father of Parliamentary democracy, whose statue stands outside the Houses of Parliament, who promoted the doctrine of Christian toleration as few others have done. Rather than promoting a theocracy, he overturned the despotic Stuart Monarchy which believed in the divine right of kings (even to the extent of attacking their own citizens in the English Civil War, for which they were removed from the British throne, and the very thing that the UK intervened to prevent in Libya in 2011), and gave us accountable Parliamentary democracy.
Rather, the boot is on the other foot. Aggressive humanists with their Thought Police and political correctness are worse than a theocracy. They criminalise wrong thought and have created ‘hate crimes’. Christians call wrong thought ‘sin’, but Christians do not criminalise sin. Aggressive humanists are legislating for politically incorrect thinking to make it criminal behaviour. This is worse than a theocracy - Michael Portillo called it a secular theocracy.
Sin addresses itself to bad thoughts as well as bad words and actions. Sin, as such, is not a criminal offence in Christian society. Nor is it even a disciplinable offence in the Christian church in the modern sense of the word ‘discipline’, which is usually interpreted as punishment. Sin is disciplinable in the sense that disciples are disciplined into, (or taught), the paths of righteousness by the teaching of Scripture.
However humanists have no way to motivate sinners to keep criminal or civil law other than with the heavy stick of criminalising thoughts that they cannot tolerate - using political correctness and ‘diversity training’. The law makes a distinction between criminal and civil law, and neither of these define sin. Sin is breaking divine law, not breaking criminal nor civil law. Divine law has disappeared from many people’s reckoning so that the word sin is being removed from conversational English. It is a useful climate for scaremongering people who are frightened of Christianity.
Back to list
This is a scare-mongering accusation from people, even Christians, who don’t want a Christian party. This scare-mongering can take various forms.
Assertion and accusation are not proof, and we leave it to these accusers to try to prove their assertions. In the meantime we suggest that people should press these accusers to prove their point. As for the CP, we consider this charge to be utter nonsense. People who make such an accusation must be very uncertain about the stability of our Parliamentary democracy, and you will be better not putting too much trust in these fearful people who think that Christian politicians are to be feared. Rather, people should be more concerned about the Muslim Parliament and that the last Archbishop of Canterbury has suggested Sharia law is unavoidable in the UK. This is at least a real threat.
We live in a modern democracy, introduced and promoted by Oliver Cromwell, a Christian and the father of Parliamentary democracy, whose statue stands outside the Houses of Parliament, who promoted the doctrine of Christian toleration as few others have done. Rather than promoting a theocracy, he overturned the despotic Stuart Monarchy which believed in the divine right of kings (even to the extent of attacking their own citizens in the English Civil War, for which they were removed from the British throne, and the very thing that the UK intervened to prevent in Libya in 2011), and gave us accountable Parliamentary democracy.
Rather, the boot is on the other foot. Aggressive humanists with their Thought Police and political correctness are worse than a theocracy. They criminalise wrong thought and have created ‘hate crimes’. Christians call wrong thought ‘sin’, but Christians do not criminalise sin. Aggressive humanists are legislating for politically incorrect thinking to make it criminal behaviour. This is worse than a theocracy - Michael Portillo called it a secular theocracy.
Sin addresses itself to bad thoughts as well as bad words and actions. Sin, as such, is not a criminal offence in Christian society. Nor is it even a disciplinable offence in the Christian church in the modern sense of the word ‘discipline’, which is usually interpreted as punishment. Sin is disciplinable in the sense that disciples are disciplined into, (or taught), the paths of righteousness by the teaching of Scripture.
However humanists have no way to motivate sinners to keep criminal or civil law other than with the heavy stick of criminalising thoughts that they cannot tolerate - using political correctness and ‘diversity training’. The law makes a distinction between criminal and civil law, and neither of these define sin. Sin is breaking divine law, not breaking criminal nor civil law. Divine law has disappeared from many people’s reckoning so that the word sin is being removed from conversational English. It is a useful climate for scaremongering people who are frightened of Christianity.
Back to list
