We don’t need Who?
Jul 22nd, 2008 by Randy Toman
There is a big difference between saying “this is a Christian nation” and then saying, “I believe this to be a Christian nation” and then saying, “ If it isn’t a Christian nation it should be” and last saying, “well it was once a Christian nation”. I have gone from “it is” to “it should be” to “it isn’t”. Now I ask, which of those options do you think we should adopt or maybe I should say which do you think we are?
I have for years known that we were not founded on principles put forth by the “Puritans” of the 1620 and that a shift from 1620 to 1789 had taken place and the “Constitution” is not a Christian document. So I wish to say with as few words as possible. The role of religion within the government based on “Puritan Theology” of 1620 is not what we received with the enactment of the “Constitution” of 1789.
John Locke and “Enlightenment” thinking had so infected the fundamental thinking of the time that we hear this;
“the care of souls cannot belong to the civil magistrate, because his power consists only in outward force; but true and saving religion consists in the inward persuasion of the mind, without which nothing can be acceptable to God.”
John Locke 1632-1704 “Letter concerning Toleration” 1689.
We went from Covenant Theology of the “Puritans” were the church and state had a covenant with God and that religion was a part of the social makeup, Governor John Winthrop explained the covenant in his sermon entitled “A model of Christian Charity”. To were we have no covenant with God and we have the “Constitution” of “We the people—”. The Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia established an environment in the new republic where in the state would not interfere with the individual conscience of its citizens in religious matters.
So as the church’s apostate from 1789-2008 we have a number of things happening which will have a negative impact on the social fabric. First we will have less righteous people who understand what truth is, as put forth in the Scriptures. And most of you will say so what, we have reason as our god, to which I say, we shall see what that god gives you. Second Emotion-ism within the social fabric that is a by product as people get further from God’s Law and Holy Scriptures. Third, government will grow to excessive size and tyranny will eventually come about us, ever so slowly, as we now can see it.
Let me not continue, 3 effects are enough and we really need not expand on the cause, people know there is something wrong. The question is, if the country is not a Christian nation do the people want it to be? We have a serious problem’s and if people cannot turn to God and His Son Jesus Christ for help why should God help us and I know what most of the people will answer; we don’t need him, but we shall see. Every knee will bow one day.

I have two questions.
First: Are you advocating a theocracy? It sounds like you believe that a government based heavily (or solely) on scripture would be best. And if you are, then…
Second: You speak of tyranny as a byproduct of a godless government. How do you respond to the idea that non-Christian citizens of a Christian theocracy would probably feel more tyrannized (whether intentional or not) than if the government were not religiously-affiliated at all?