H. E. R. P. & E. S.

“Dominionist” – is that the new code word for the opposite of Liberal?

Daryl, I’m surprised to see you stoop to linking sites that mostly engage in name calling and demonizing people who don’t agree with them.

I usually give you credit for better analytical abilities….

Actually, I had to look it up…and I was correct, its a pejorative term:

Dominionism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

This article is on the political-religious concept of dominionism. See Dominion (disambiguation) for other meanings of the word dominion

Dominionism is a trend in Protestant Christian evangelicalism and fundamentalism, primarily though not exclusively in the United States, that seeks to establish specific political policies based on religious beliefs.

It is most often used to describe politically active conservative Christians with a specific agenda. The term is rarely used as a self-description; many feel it is a loaded or pejorative term, and use of the term is primarily limited to critics of the Christian Right.

So, using the term “dominionist” would sort of be like when some Christians are told they don’t qualify for the “believer” homeschool groups? It would sort of be like when they are told they do not attend a “Bible-believing” church? It would be like when a certain well-known pastor said that Methodists and Episcopalians are the “spirit of the anti-Christ”?

Folks who have for years used perjoratives and twisted language to exclude people of faith whose ideas aren’t identical to their own might expect an eventual waking up of mainline homeschoolers, mainline denominations, and conservatives who have never liked/are tired of seeing people of faith demonized by (some) (other) conservatives.

But of course, when people bring nonconforming ideas to the arena, we can chalk it up to a lack of “analytical abilities.” No perjoratives there…

A dominionist is a person who adheres to the belief that before the Second Coming can occur, Christians must rule the earth for 1000 years. The term ‘dominion theology’ comes from Genesis 1:26-28 of the Bible where God’s purpose for man is stated:
Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth.” So God created man in his own image…And God blessed them, and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth.” (RSV)

In other words, that only Biblically correct Christians should hold positions of power and that the world should be ruled by Biblical law.

To learn how this relates to PHC and homeschooling you need to go read Michael Farris’ “Christian World View of the Law”

reform...aw.pdf

I think these points are particularly interesting/scary:

36. We affirm that one purpose of civil law is to establish and maintain peace and order according to the principles and standards prescribed in revealed Law.

We deny that keeping peace and order is outside the purpose of civil law, and that revealed Law prescribes few or no principles and standards by which civil law should regulate peace and order.

37. We affirm that a second purpose of civil law is to specify, punish, and restrain wrongdoing according to the principles and standards prescribed in revealed Law.

We deny that the restraint of wrongdoing is outside the purpose of civil law, and that revealed Law prescribes few or no principles and standards by which civil law should restrain wrongdoing.

38. We affirm that the revealed Law of the New Testament sets forth purposes for the punishment associated with civil law today, including retribution, deterrence, and the vindication of God’s Law.

We deny that God has failed to specify the purposes of retribution, deterrence, and the vindication of His Law for the punishment He has authorized civil law to impose; that these purposes are not set forth in revealed Law; and that revealed Law prescribes few or no principles and standards by which civil law should exercise punitive justice.

39. We affirm that a third purpose of civil law is to recognize and encourage that which is right according to the principles and standards prescribed in revealed Law.

We deny that encouraging what is right is outside the purpose of civil law, and that revealed Law prescribes few or no principles and standards by which civil law should encourage the right.

I’d tend to agree…pretty scary list…but there are equally scary secular extremists out there…a lot of this ‘dominionism’ stuff comes from sources that are pretty scary in themselves. Have you seen the Jewsonfirst.org site? Talk about scare tactics.

The sum of this for me is that I’m more concerned with the leftists interfering with both my ability to homeschool and the freedom to practice my religion than I am of the rightists to try to make me worship the way they do. There are simply more protections against intermingling church and state than their are protections of religious freedoms.

I guess I’ll just have to skip some of your otherwise excellent posts when you go off the deep end like this one. Otherwise, I really like your site.

Yes, we’re safe from right-wing extremists like Dominionists because our laws and government protect us from them. Except — Dominionists are in high government office trying to change those laws and the interpretation of those laws. So how safe will we be in the future?

Since we’re discussing “analytical abilities”, Andy, could you tell your friends at HSLDA to stop inserting homeschool language into federal law?

The sum of this for me is that I’m more concerned with the self-appointed representatives of the Christian Right interfering both with my ability to homeschool and the freedom to practice my religion [or lack thereof] than I am of the leftists to try to make me think the way they do.

So disagreeing with Michale Farris is is going off the deep end?

Maybe I never return to the shallow end…

Dominionist would have Christians hold all governement positions. This goes against the founding father as stated in the Constitution:

Art VI, Section 3: “The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.”

THAT is what is scary. They would change the very nature of our country.

Andy N’s first post: Pretends surprise at Daryl’s Uncalled-For Outspokenness. Follows this with a not-very-subtle insult to his intellectual capacity.

Andy N’s second post: Quotes Wikipedia, which as we all know could well have been newly edited by Andy himself to “prove his point.” Constitues a “because I said so, that’s why” level of argumentation.

Andy N’s third post: Claims that because a few of Andy’s… I mean “dominionism’s”… opponents are “scary,” we should all be scared and rush under his motherly wing. Calls his opponents “leftists” when what he really means is Godless Communists, but hasn’t the guts to say so. Pretends that his opponents’ exercise of the right to freedom of belief is somehow infringing his own right (it can’t). Accuses opponent outright of insanity.

Three posts. Hmmm. Do I see an agenda here?

Not if I turn my back, I don’t.

I see something different in Andy: a reasonably intelligent person who has their fingers firmly planted in their ears and is singing loudly about “demonizing” and “HIS freedom”. Sigh. He’s so loud he will not hear what’s happening: that no one is infringing on his freedom, just trying to sound alarm bells about the growing theocratic trends in OUR country. That’s ‘our’ as in all of us. Andy, too. He needs to stop singing, and start learning about theocracy and what is happening. Not that he’s supposed to understand, that was never the plan.

Noted writer and Reconstructionist Gary North claims that ‘the ideas of the Reconstructionists have penetrated into Protestant circles that for the most part are unaware of the original source of the theological ideas that are beginning to transform them.’ (Theocratic Dominionism Gains Influence,” The Public Eye, March and June 1994.) Note the date on that quote. This has been a slow change orchestrated by a handful of people.

The Chalcedon Foundation was founded in 1965. (chalce...re.php). According to their “The Creed of Christian Reconstruction”, “The Christian Reconstructionist believes the earth and all it’s fullness is the Lord’s; that every area dominated by sin must be ‘reconstructed’ in terms of the Bible. This includes, first, the individual; second, the family; third, the church; and fourth, the wider society including the state.” We are now seeing the efforts underway to transform our America to fit their ideal.

The Coalition on Revival was founded in 1982, presumably it was around that time the Michael Farris co-authored the organization’s “Christian World View of the Law”. Obviously, he believes it, otherwise he wouldn’t have written it. Obviously, those tenets have influenced him, and through him, homeschooling.

Andy, this is real, and accusing those who are trying to educate you of using ‘scare tactics’ is like a lawyer attacking the witness’ credibility because his client is hopelessly guilty. Homeschooling is about learning; try it sometime.

AirAmerica Radio’s “State of Belief” recently had a really good piece on the takeover of several mainstream denominations by Dominionist/Reconstructionist groups.

Rather than keep polarizing, or give up and just choose which scary takeover of my freedom I’d rather submit to, I’ve been searching some nonpartisan frames for actual progress and solutions. Is anyone here involved with this yet?
unity08.com/ and
PBS NewsHour: Unity Party Eyes 2008 Election | May 31, 2006
View the video or read the transcript that got people buzzing about Unity08:
pbs.or...1.html

Can it become something better than picking our poison between the raving power poles? Dunno – but it could hardly be worse?

U08 is a total non-starter. Which party would get the presidential slot? I vote for the Republican, so he can split the GOP vote and put a Dem in the WH. Conservatives would rather see the Dem at the top of U08 ticket.

Hmm, I wondered when I saw the party operatives in charge, if it would be just another flawed party mechanism. You’re way ahead of me, I just came across the Washington Monthly blog, all agreeing it’ll never work:
washin...41.php
Seems no one says what WILL work, though, except choosing between the sorry sides we’ve already got . . .
Ideas, anyone? Bueller? Bueller?

Read about what happened to 5 (now 6) professors who disagreed with Farris’ reigning doctrine at PHC. Seems they thought a liberal arts college was supposed to teach, you know, the liberal arts. Turns out it’s only called “liberal arts” to fool outsiders, prospective faculty, and incoming students into thinking it’s actually an institution of higher learning, rather than a fundamentalist, right-wing boot camp. At least some of the students benefitted from the teaching of professors who actually understood, promoted, and taught the liberal arts… until they were fired or resigned in protest. All the information is here: saveroot.com

saveroot.com

What a courageous bunch of young people! Love the cartoons!

Mary, former participant in HSLDA.us.