At the country’s founding, “there was a Christian political theory that was assumed as a consensus position, and the laws of nature and nature’s God don’t make sense without a common shared understanding of the divine and of created order,” Meadowcroft said, adding that the belief that “all men are created equal” and “endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights,” as the Declaration of Independence states, “only makes sense within the long story of the Christian West.”

Biblical language has been used throughout American history, from the founding and Abraham Lincoln’s arguments to end slavery, to combating communism and advancing the civil rights movement.

“We’re saying we need to return that biblical language and an acknowledgment of our Christian heritage to the public sphere if our institutions and our assumptions about human nature and the law are going to make sense, and that the longer that we keep those out of the public sphere, the more unmoored we become from these core moral assumptions that undergird our whole constitutional system and the more lawless our future will be,” Meadowcroft explained. “So this is not a call to revolution, or civil war, or any such thing, it is rather a restoration, a re-founding, and an establishment of genuine constitutional order again.”

  • PeepinGoodArgs@reddthat.comOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    8 months ago

    Act 4:32-35 is quite literally Communism:

    communism, political and economic doctrine that aims to replace private property and a profit-based economy with public ownership and communal control of at least the major means of production (e.g., mines, mills, and factories) and the natural resources of a society.

    Christian Nationalists would need to go to hell before they’d let that happen.

    • Bongo_Stryker@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Well I don’t think it’s communism in a strict sense because charity can’t be forced. As soon as the state is compelling you to do this or that, it’s no longer activity on behalf of the Kingdom not of this earth. There are numerous examples in the bible of God being often, if not always, in opposition to government and worldly powers.

      But still you make a good point that many people who publically profess to be Christian don’t really want to do anything that conflicts with their worldly wealth and power. Christians were also warned to beware of wolves in sheep’s clothing. There are many of those.

      • Neuromancer@lemm.eeM
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        8 months ago

        Acts 4 if I remember correctly is about Antioch. It’s talking about what happened there and only in Antioch.

    • Neuromancer@lemm.eeM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      19
      ·
      8 months ago

      Not sure where you are getting communism from that passage. Conservatives give more to charity than liberals. They’re more geniuses. That passage is about charity and Christian’s taking care of Christians.

      • Bongo_Stryker@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        8 months ago

        That last line bothers me a little. I think the parable of the good Samaritan informs us that we shouldn’t just “take care of our own”.

          • Bongo_Stryker@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            Yea sure context. I just don’t want anyone unfamiliar to think the takeaway is that it’s correct Christian theology to help and care for other Christians only, and fuck everybody else.

            Someone in this thread says Christians are hateful and racist. Well yea humans are hateful and racist, but that’s absolutely not what Jesus teaches. So people can easily get the wrong idea by witnessing the behavior of those who are bad at doing religion, or worse, those who are deceitful. So I want to be sure (or as much as I can) that our discussion is not a source for someone’s misunderstanding.