Rise of the Reconstructionists

I�ve been doing of some research into the religious nature of the Bush political machine. I�ll summarized the main points contained in the articles I read and give extensive references at the end for those interested in learning more. In fact I urge you to learn more.

What is Christian Reconstruction?

Quote�

A Christian Reconstructionist is a Calvinist. He holds to historic, orthodox, catholic Christianity and the great Reformed confessions. He believes God, not man, is the center of the universe--and beyond; God, not man, controls whatever comes to pass; God, not man, must be pleased and obeyed. He believes God saves sinners--He does not help them save themselves. A Christian Reconstructionist believes the Faith should apply to all of life, not just the "spiritual" side. It applies to art, education, technology, and politics no less than to church, prayer, evangelism, and Bible study.

A Christian Reconstructionist is a Theonomist. Theonomy means "God's law." A Christian Reconstructionist believes God's law is found in the Bible. It has not been abolished as a standard of righteousness. It no longer accuses the Christian, since Christ bore its penalty on the cross for him. But the law is a description of God's righteous character. It cannot change any more than God can change. God's law is used for three main purposes: First, to drive the sinner to trust in Christ alone, the only perfect law-keeper. Second, to provide a standard of obedience for the Christian, by which he may judge his progress in sanctification. And third, to maintain order in society, restraining and arresting civil evil.

A Christian Reconstructionist is a Presuppositionalist. He does not try to "prove" that God exists or that the Bible is true. He holds to the Faith because the Bible says so, not because he can "prove" it. He does not try to convince the unconverted that the gospel is true. They already know it is true. They need repentance, not evidence. Of course, the Christian Reconstructionist believes there is evidence for the Faith--in fact, there is nothing but evidence for the Faith. The problem for the unconverted, though, is not a lack of evidence, but a lack of submission. The Christian Reconstructionist begins and ends with the Bible. He does not defend "natural theology," and other inventions designed to find some agreement with covenant-breaking, apostate mankind.

A Christian Reconstructionist is a Postmillennialist. He believes Christ will return to earth only after the Holy Spirit has empowered the church to advance Christ's kingdom in time and history. He has faith that God's purposes to bring all nations--though not every individual--in subjection to Christ cannot fail. The Christian Reconstructionist is not utopian. He does not believe the kingdom will advance quickly or painlessly. He knows that we enter the kingdom through much tribulation. He knows Christians are in the fight for the "long haul." He believes the church may yet be in her infancy. But he believes the Faith will triumph. Under the power of the Spirit of God, it cannot but triumph.

A Christian Reconstructionist is a Dominionist. He takes seriously the Bible's commands to the godly to take dominion in the earth. This is the goal of the gospel and the Great Commission. The Christian Reconstructionist believes the earth and all its fulness 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. The Christian Reconstructionist therefore believes fervently in Christian civilization. He firmly believes in the separation of church and state, but not the separation of the state--or anything else--from God. He is not a revolutionary; he does not believe in the militant, forced overthrow of human government. He has infinitely more powerful weapons than guns and bombs--he has the invincible Spirit of God, the infallible word of God, and the incomparable gospel of God, none of which can fail.
He presses the crown rights of the Lord Jesus Christ in every sphere, expecting eventual triumph. The Creed of Christian Reconstructionism

Close Quote

So basically we have a group of fundamentalist Christians who are behind the efforts to blur the lines between State and Church. They are behind the Creationist/Intelligent design movement, behind the anti-gay and anti-abortion issues and they want to impose Biblical Law based on the Old Testament.

Who are the Christian Reconstructionist?

The size of the group is unknown. Most Reconstructionists are active on the social and political front rather than affiliated with a particular denomination. The character of the movement is also difficult to pin down since it is more an intellectual trend than organizational. Many Reconstructionists would only recognize it politically, and not necessarily religiously.

Pat Robertson's views have always been characterized as Reconstructionist in theory, yet he repeatedly denies allegiance to the movement. His Christian Coalition and Falwell�s Moral Majority are still having great influence.

But most importantly they are the people behind Diebold and the other three companies making voting machines in the US and the Help America Vote Act was sponsored (lobbied) in congress by the defense industry. (See The Diebold Factor)

The American vote-count is controlled by three major corporate players -- Diebold, ES&S, and Sequoia -- with a fourth, Science Applications International Corporation, coming on strong. These companies -- all of them hardwired into the Bushist Party power grid -- have been given billions of dollars by the Bush Regime to complete a sweeping computerization of voting machines nationwide by the 2004 election.

Who's behind these private companies? It's hard to tell: The corporate lines -- even the bloodlines -- of these "competitors" are so intricately mixed. For example, at Diebold -- whose corporate chief, Wally O'Dell, a top Bush fundraiser, has publicly committed himself to "delivering" his home state's votes to Bush next year -- the election division is run by Bob Urosevich. Bob's brother, Todd, is a top executive at "rival" ES&S. The brothers were originally staked in the vote-count business by Howard Ahmanson, a member of the Council for National Policy, a right-wing "steering group" stacked with Bushist faithful [the CNP believes only Christians should be allowed to vote]. Ahmanson is also one of the bagmen behind the extremist "Christian Reconstructionist" movement, which openly advocates a theocratic takeover of American democracy, placing the entire society under the "dominion" of "Christ the King." source

Then there are the Moonies.

Rev Sun Myong Moon has ties to Falwell (business loans) but I have not yet found a direct connection to the reconstructionists. Moon is a convicted felon in Japan and Europe. Oh and did you know that congress crowned him as �none other than humanity's Savior, Messiah, Returning Lord and True Parent"? Moonies 1, Moonies 2.

The moonies are another religious based group exerting political and economic influence on the US government. They are the force behind the Washington Times and Sinclair Broadcasting.

These religious movements now have a firm handle on political influence in the United States.

Remember every religion has its fanatics and its fascists. America is now under the control of Christian fundamentalism. It�s the natural response to Islamic fundamentalism I guess.

As an atheist/agnostic (and ex-Roman Catholic) the rise of religious cults like the reconstructionists and moonies aided by big media and defense contractors scares the carp out of me.

Their ideal candidate would be anti-science, anti-abortion, anti-gay, anti-liberal, pro-war and anti-intellectual.

They have just consolidated their hold on power for another four years.

References:
Christian Reconstructionism
Christian Reconstructionism, Dominion Theology, and Theonomy
Theocratic Dominionism Gains Influence
Religious Freedom Coalition
The Despoiling of America
The Covert Kingdom
Disinfopedia Page
Wikipedia Page

.

Well gools if bush appoint fawell or Pat Roberson to be the next secretary of justice we pretty much can said he got his chritian agenda ahead.

Put then 4 new christian fundamentalist judges in the bench and there you got a cleric rule with a reconstrution on the "constitution"

so in a nutshell they are all as arogent and self serving as the radical muslims we wish to destroy.

i take all religion with a grain of salt. everyone should express their own interpretaion of the universe, and we can then respect one another.

I forgot to mention that Ahmanson's Council for National Policy actually runs the republican party.

Bush said today that "God is not neutral" and that he had earned some "political capital" he is eager to spend.

Diluted here to the most important point.

Originally posted by Gools
These religious movements now have a firm handle on political influence in the United States.

Yes. They've got the bomb.

Expanding from that, one additional point. These aren't xenophobic thinkers. The vision is global, without apology in the case of Rev. Moon at least. His "birthday gift" of $3 million to Kim Jong Il for "defense" came at the same time Moon was actively supporting former President George HW Bush and then Governor Bush (and vice versa).

All the governments of the world (and people) are bit players toward this theocratic goal. The clash of civilizations is intent to be one of Christian versus Islam, not secular versus anything. The current diversion is the pretense of a war on Islam/Terror. That means is merely to the greater immediate end of eliminating secularism by the taking (or giving up) of those rights. Moon and the Christian Reconstructionalists are especially intenet on reforming our sexual lives, criminalizing abortion and homosexuality. It's a baptism of our country for war. You don't go into battle with sin.

Once Providence has shown to be on "our" side (meaning we are a less sinful nation) then we'll take on Osama and his kind. But only after rallying others to his cause. To use a "secular" analogy, we're in the opening chapters of Stephen King's "The Stand." Choose your side: Denver or Vegas. (In their thinking mind you, as I'm not crazy.)

The conflict is merely being charged at this point. There is no incentive to crush an enemy integral to the final conflict. Who did we take out in the Middle East? The only secular power there was, further empowering the fundamentalism of our "enemy" to take hold. These aren't stupid or even "faith-based" people. They are logical thinkers working toward an end. The final conflict.

Frankly, why anyone would want to be led by people that seek to bring about Revelations is beyond me. This started with Reagen. Taking out the "Evil Empire" via a cold war was more about stamping out a secular influence than anything. At that point Islam was our ally. The enemy of my enemy... Just getting the seculars out of the way in a joint effort for the "hot" war of ideologues to come.

Some may rightfully dismiss Bush as a charlatan on values. Rove (in particular) may be accurately described as merely using the Evangelical movement for selfish gain. But really, who's using who here? Who did the RNC just hand the keys of government to? I think alot of liberals are missing the big picture when they cite greed or profit as the goal of neo-cons. That may be true in the short term, but they're losing control as we speak. We are knee deep in a conflagration that has no end but the end. Our "values" can be thanked for that.

We could have changed course. Millions tried. More people voted for the number one liberal in America than Reagen or Bush 41, but the wedging of fiscal conservatives with evanglicals overcame the course correction. Now it's on. The fiscal conservatives lost control when Bush came to power anyway. Economics based politics is dead, they just don't know it yet. The road is now paved for the fundamental overthrow of secularism on the march to armageddon. Spare another $70 billion for a vet friend?

Value voters. :shk: Genius.

Liberals got beat, but fiscal conservatives just got punked. I'll take beat anyday. They should have voted Libertarian.

Interesting use of the word reconstructionists, I can remember my great grandfather still using the word carpet baggers and scallowwags when he would talk about those 'damn yankees'. I used to think 'wow, what a bitter old man' but the more I studied the american civil war and the more I learned about the reconstruction era, the more I understood his anger. Though the civil war was before even his time, the resentment was still there. I wonder now in retrospect if the american civil war wasn't to fight the comming industrial revolution...

Originally posted by RANT
Diluted here to the most important point.

More people voted for the number one liberal in America than Reagen or Bush 41, but the wedging of fiscal conservatives with evanglicals overcame the course correction.

What proof do you have of this quote?

Originally posted by dcgolf

Originally posted by RANT
Diluted here to the most important point.

More people voted for the number one liberal in America than Reagen or Bush 41, but the wedging of fiscal conservatives with evanglicals overcame the course correction.

What proof do you have of this quote?

Tuesday's vote. They've been talking about it all week. Highest turnout in history. More people voted for BOTH candidates than anyone every before.

So it can also be said more voted for Bush than Reagen or Clinton, but the point I was making is that more voted for "the #1 liberal Senator in America" than either too.

Or are you asking about the wedge issue? That's on the news too and a dozen threads on ATS. The ban on gay marriage put to 11 states made the difference for Bush. 100 million evangelicals are celebrating a win today that has nothing to do with economics. The exit polls showed the most important "issue" to voters this election was values. "Taxes" were meaningless (at 5%).

What proof do you want? What are you disagreeing with?

Originally posted by RANT

Originally posted by dcgolf

Originally posted by RANT
Diluted here to the most important point.

More people voted for the number one liberal in America than Reagen or Bush 41, but the wedging of fiscal conservatives with evanglicals overcame the course correction.

What proof do you have of this quote?

Tuesday's vote. They've been talking about it all week. Highest turnout in history. More people voted for BOTH candidates than anyone every before.

So it can also be said more voted for Bush than Reagen or Clinton, but the point I was making is that more voted for "the #1 liberal Senator in America" than either too.

Or are you asking about the wedge issue? That's on the news too and a dozen threads on ATS. The ban on gay marriage put to 11 states made the difference for Bush. 100 million evangelicals are celebrating a win today that has nothing to do with economics. The exit polls showed the most important "issue" to voters this election was values. "Taxes" were meaningless (at 5%).

What proof do you want? What are you disagreeing with?

Upon further review, you are right. More people voted for Bush than any other president in history. Thank goodness 100 million evangelicals are rejoicing in the election of our President during an election in which 125 million people cast their votes. I guess the people have spoken.

Look, more Americans voted for a free America. Unfortunately over 50 million voted for the terrorist. Bush is too liberal for me, but maybe he will come around now and crush all those who oppose freedom. Liberal freedom is "think our way" or you are an idiot, moron, "mouthbreather". Being "PC" is no freedom at all.

You are right Rant I understand now the corporal agenda and the secular agenda, now we just have to sit and what how American become Armageddon and how the rest of the world will try to stop the spread of US and his republican (fundamentalist) agenda.

I still think bush is a poppet and he is being used from both sides. And yes the republican party does belong to the fundamentalist.

I can way to see the group between that voted for bush screaming foul play when things start to go to "cleric to handle"

If people think that these elections were a record braking you wait to the ones in 2008.

By then the damage will be already done and irreversible.

This country policies will change into �god versus the evil� in the world.

People tend to forget that for every law and constitutional amendment is consequence to follow

Religion is not mean to be evil is the people behind religion the ones that are evil.

God is not mean to be a politician or involved in politics, but people behind god hides to pursue in his name and to commit crimes against humanity.

Religion and fundamentalist can not be allowed to be in power, but most people does not realized that is how most wars in this world are started and fought for.

Barry Goldwater saw this exact problem happening in 64.

If it wasn't for the christian movement in the republican party, goldwater conservatives would of never started the libertarian party.

Tell you what true lies I got the feelign that if the democrats does not fix their act, the libertarians are going to become the second best choice in the future.

I will be more than glad to give a chance in the next elections if nothing good comes from the other two parties.

RANT - I agree with you analysis, especially�

The current diversion is the pretense of a war on Islam/Terror.

I also agree that this is not some sort of historical fluke. It's too damn obvious. The boldness, hubris and force with which policies are being implemented and objectives are being reached are breathtaking.

So is the willful blindness.

The fear generated on September 11, 2001 has taken root on fertile ground.

Liberals got beat, but fiscal conservatives just got punked.

And the whole world is going to pay the price.

Edit: brain fart

[edit on 11/8/2004 by Gools]

Shameless bump

I think the research in my original post is relevent to the new forum.
.