Magic City Morning Star

Advertising | RSS Feed | About Us 

Last Updated: Oct 13, 2013 - 12:38:22 AM 

An eclectic mix of news and information
Staff Login
Donate towards our web hosting bill!

Front Page 
  News
  -- Local
  -- State
  -- National
  Community
  Business
  -- IRS News
  -- Win at Work
  Education
  -- History
  Tech Notes
  Entertainment
  -- Comics
  International
  -- R.P. BenDedek
  -- Kenneth Tellis
  Outdoors
  Sports
  Features
  -- M Stevens-David
  -- Down the Road
  Christianity
  Today in History
  Opinion
  -- Editor's Desk
  -- Guest Column
  -- Scheme of Things
  -- Michael Devolin
  -- Tom DeWeese
  -- Ed Feulner
  -- Jim Kouri
  -- Julie Smithson
  -- J. Grant Swank
  -- Doug Wrenn
  Letters
  Agenda 21
  Book Reviews
  -- Old Embers
  Notices
  Archive
  Discontinued


Web Directory Reviews
WDR Directory of Directories
Restore The Republic - The Home of the Freedom Movement!

Charles Cutter

God's Law or Man's Choice?
By
Mar 11, 2005 - 8:20:00 PM

Email this article
 Printer friendly page
An atheist could speak all day long about the Constitutional rationale for the separation of church and state, and would probably sway few of the 76% of Americans who seem to oppose this principle.

So let’s listen instead to the voices of two proponents of breaking down the church/state wall. Taken together, they offer a persuasive argument for keeping as much distance as possible between governmental authority and religious belief.

Both men disagreed strongly with last week’s column, "The Godless Commandments." Briefly summarized, it held that the Holy Bible was wholly the work of man; and that, if we’re going to post the Ten Commandments on government property, we should also include the Bible’s various other barbaric laws (stoning rebellious children and adulterers to death, forcing some rape victims to marry their attackers, etc.).

First, Pastor Joseph Grant Swank, Jr., of New Hope Church (Windham, ME).

"There are 26 stipulations in the Old Testament by which Jehovah gave command to put to death…The biblical stipulations were given by a civil deity establishing a civil culture called the Hebrew culture…Jehovah had to establish a civil culture with barbaric cultures surrounding it…These punishments may appear unreasonable to some today for we live in a culture with laws, courts, judges, juries…[T]hose who believe the Bible to be divine revelation understand the cultural backdrop to the various sections of the Bible."

This illustrates why religious leaders prefer the concept of "blind faith," because Pastor Swank - while attempting to argue with logic and cultural/historical references - has stepped into the quicksand of self-contradictory positions.

What Mr. Swank seems to be suggesting is that God’s laws - with the apparent exception of the Ten Commandments themselves - are temporal in nature, that they were not intended for use in today’s world. While they may have been barbaric, they were excusable because they were employed during a barbaric time. He makes it clear that God’s punishments, and man’s obligations to enact those punishments, changes from year to year, from culture to culture. Mr. Swank would no doubt rebel at the notion, but he (and, by extension, his god) clearly embraces the concept of moral relativism.

Mr. Swank therefore embodies the essence of the need for church/state separation: He feels he can pick and choose which of God’s laws still apply, and which do not. He seems to have personal knowledge of God’s intent, which the rest of us are not privy to.

According to Mr. Swank, we need not linger on God’s antiquated laws calling for brutal punishments far in excess of the offense - we should instead focus on the Ten Commandments. He closes with a swirl of rhetoric: "…the United States needs to be reminded of that marvelous, powerful ten. And our culture needs to abide by them throughout all time; they keep us in line, even the unbelievers."

Yes, Bible Belt schoolchildren and atheists alike need to be reminded daily not to covet their neighbor’s ox and slaves.

How marvelous, how powerful.

And now, to the words of R. P. BenDedek.

Citing Deuteronomy 22:13-21 - which holds that a woman who has lied to her husband about her virginity must be stoned to death by the male townspeople - Mr. BenDedek seems to have no problem with such savagery: "…promiscuity leads to massive government handouts for single mothers, health care for same…" His premise is a little apples-and-oranges, but his perspective is clear.

Regarding the Biblical order that adulterers be likewise stoned, he believes "it would sure save a lot on community property splits, divorce lawyers, and the ever increasing desire for litigation." (One senses that fiscal matters figure prominently in Mr. BenDedek’s moral scheme.)

Should we uphold the Biblical decree that those who work on the Sabbath be put to death? "Anyone who doesn’t spend one day a week in quality time with his family ought to be shot!" Should rebellious children be put to death? "[W]e could certainly reduce general crime rates if we re-introduced this law and penalty."

And there you have it: Two defenders of breaking down the church/state wall offer vastly different interpretations of the Holy Bible and its meaning.

Pastor Swank suggests that God’s more brutal decrees are a legitimate part of the past, but not relevant to today’s world. Mr. BenDedek makes it perfectly clear that his religious view embraces societal barbarism, which would create a "society of DECENT PEOPLE" (his emphasis).

The U.S. Constitution empowers both these men to hold, and express, their differing viewpoints - just as it protects the expression of the beliefs contained in this column. The point that Mr. Swank and Mr. BenDedek conveniently miss is that the Constitution also expressly forbids the government from taking sides in this debate.

That is, unless a right-wing U.S. Supreme Court decides to abolish a fundamental cornerstone of American freedom.


© Copyright 2002-2013 by Magic City Morning Star

Top of Page

Charles Cutter
Latest Headlines
Democrats to the Rescue (Cue Laughter)
Bush and His Gang
An Attack on the King
Alito's Dark Vision of the World
The End of the World (Hopefully)

A Dinosaur of Education - a blog by James Fabiano.
Shobe Studios
Wysong Foods - Pets and People Too

Google
 
Web magic-city-news.com