1. When I use the word “Democrats,” I often do so in reference to those who have achieved leadership in the party such that the whole direction of the party at the national level is determined by their influence. This would exclude people such as the so-called “Reagan Democrats” who are influential as a voting block but really no longer have a voice in the party itself.

2. With regard to peace being achieved through victory, I have two points of response:

(1) Please review the context of my remark. I believe Scripture teaches that there are different spheres of operation for the church and the state. The disciples misunderstood the nature of Jesus’ messiahship because they wanted political victory without a due recognition of their own sin and need for cleansing. But the same kind of reasoning does not apply to the state. The kind of peace that I am speaking of here is not the peace of the Kingdom of God; it is a measure of civil peace that the government has a responsibility to provide to its citizens. This kind of peace depends on just governments showing enough strength to deter or subdue those forces in the world (whether rogue states, terrorist networks, etc.) that would seek to undermine our ability to live life at all in a free society. The state cannot create any kind of final, lasting peace, but it can do great things for the world. I would again use President Reagan as an example of one whose actions led to the end of the Soviet empire, the virtual end of the threat of nuclear holocaust, and freedom for millions of people.

(2) The disciples were not completely wrong about Jesus being a militant Messiah. Even now he reigns at the Father’s right hand and is in process of putting all of his enemies under his feet (1 Cor 15:25-26). In the book of Revelation he is the most violent player in the eschatological drama. Jesus never repudiated militarism per se; he repudiated the misunderstanding and misapplication of it. The disciples seemed to have a nationlistic understanding of the kingdom that failed to take into consideration the kind of remedy that is required by sin. This is why they could not envision a suffering Messiah. But once the Messiah suffered, he entered into his glory and will one day come again to establish peace forever through his absolute victory, achieved through violence (2 Thess 1:5-10).

So my particular understanding of the state is that it has been ordained by God with a measure of authority to wield the sword so as to maintain a measure of justice in this fallen world through the restraint of sin (Rom 13:1-7).

Cool Name. Really Cool.

Just a few quick thoughts:

1. You said: “Democrats misunderstand the way the world works due to a misunderstanding of human nature as fallen, sinful, selfish, and corruptible.”

You are assuming that there are not a large number of people who would might call themselves “democrats” that do not hold this belief with you. I think this is a flawed and sweeping statement.

2. You said: “Peace is achieved through strength, through victory.” I wonder if this is what the disciples were thinking when they were dropping hints to Jesus about being a militant type Messiah.

Did you know that you can move all your posts from your previous blog to this one? Don’t ask me how. I had help to do mine!

Looking forward to being able to comment on your posts without tearing my hair out.