Mosaic Theocracy and Islamic Shariah Lawby Rit Nosotro
Contrast the theocracy of Moses over the Hebrews, with an Islamic State under Shariah law. What is the result of authority based on revealed absolutes?
[Ed. note: The following essay does not compare Mosaic Law and it attacks Shariah law. It mentions, but does not detail, a "Christian Theocracy". Although the presenting question was misinterpreted by the author, the resulting essay proposes an interesting and controversial thesis.]
The United States of America was founded on the cornerstone of Christian theocracy. The founding fathers, mainly the Pilgrims, founded the country on the basic principle of evangelizing other nations.1 To do this, the leaders created a civil government. They did this with they knowledge that if the government is not actively promoting Christianity, it is actively destroying it. There is not a middle ground, no way around it. It was known as "a city on a hill" that gave light and hope to the nations of the world. Many Christians of the 21st century still work towards promoting solid Christian leaders in their government.
Government cannot, and certainly will not, be separated from religion. Certainly Hammurabi's Code, Mosaic Law, and Justinian Law had a religious standard. Today's Civil law is still deduced from some standard of morality. Everyone has some form of supreme source of morality – religion – from which they get all of their law. With that being said, we can see that a theocracy is not so extreme. “Theo,” Greek for God, morphs with “kreos,” or law, to form the idea of “rule of God.”1 Opponents of a theocracy oppose the idea of God as God (of the Bible), but support the idea of Man as God. Today’s secular culture replaces God with Man as the measure of all things, something that would have shocked the Founding Fathers.
Many people, especially radical left-wing liberals, have no qualms about dragging in the oft-used, yet misused, phrase “separation of Church and State.” 5 Not only is this phrase never found in the Constitution, but it also goes against the entire foundation of government and the total integration of Religion. While the Founding Fathers did not advocate the alliance of the Government with any specific denomination, they actively advocated the integration of God’s law and morals. It is impossible to have a government without such a standard – it goes against the definition of government.
With the fact the government is always based in a religious ideology, the question immediately arises: Which religion should guide this government? Humanism, Hedonistic Agnosticism, Papal Catholicism, White Supremacy Anarchy or a Theocracy? Theocracy was the clear choice of the Founding Fathers. It was a Theocracy with the God of Christianity on the throne rather than today's theocracy whereby man claims to be his own god and sets a collective humanity on the throne, renaming it "democracy". Imposters that reign with self-proclaimed wisdom of today are the A.C.L.U. and other self-appointed anti-Christian watch dog groups.
Christianity was the religion that changed the world – it has established the roots of civilization and advanced the general well being of humanity. It also greatly influenced our Founders: New Haven Colony Law, 1644: "The judicial laws of God as they were delivered by Moses . . . [are to] be a rule to all the courts in this jurisdiction.”2 Therefore, this essay supports the Christian Theocracy which evolved from the Mosaic Law. Major human events such as birth, marriage, divorce, and death reflect the theocracy of the government whether it be based Greek Orthodox or Sunni Islam.
History shows that Christianity’s greatest enemy is Islam.6 In fact, from the early 7th century, Islam has threatened to engulf the world in a tide of darkness and destruction. How Christianity and Islam spread during their first two hundred years can be sharply contrasted. Shariah law is only one of the ways that radical Muslims plan to enslave the non-Islamic world. Shariah law is set of astoundingly complex laws that govern every facet of everyday life.3 They have no concept of grace, no concept of salvation.
Some argue that Old Testament Mosaic law is just as hopeless and restrictive. This argument is incorrect because everything in the Old Testament pointed the coming Christ. Jesus himself said that he was the fulfillment of the law. The sacrifices, the cleansing, all pointed towards Christ’s ultimate sacrifice, the believer's salvation, and Christ's return. However, Shariah law only points to a work based enslavement to requirements which provide no joyful assurance of salvation.
The initial requirements of Shariah law are simple to understand. There are the five pillars: 1) reciting the creed that there is one god, Allah, and his prophet is Muhammad, 2) praying five times a day toward Mecca, 3) giving alms to the poor, 4) fasting from sunrise to sunset one month a year during the month of Ramadan, 5) and making a pilgrimage to Mecca.4
Beyond these pillars, the complexities of Shariah law are debated, sometimes violently, among Muslims. Yet, the heart of Islam is directly opposed to Christianity. The Koran lays out several doctrines that are fiercely denied by Biblical Christianity. The Koran is specifically opposed to God himself being the only One qualified to pay the death sacrifice for sin. Mohammad taught against John 3:16 by denying that "God gave his only begotten Son" as the sacrifice for sin. Consequently Muslims must work for their salvation by any means possible. As they believe the ends justify the means4, Islamic suicide bombers are more frequent than were kamikaze pilots. Not surprisingly, the Koran also sanctions revenge: “If anyone transgresses . . . against you, transgress likewise against him” (Sura 2:194). Shariah law is also structured so that good actions cancel out the bad actions. This is very close to Pelagianism – where man can save himself through good works. However, Pelagianism is a pagan religion with no basis in the Bible at all.
Christian theocracy served as the foundation for the USA government. As the broad path of democracy has turned away from involving Christian morals in government, the country has moved off the narrow Godly path. In post-Christian Europe, peoples such as the French are embracing Islam. Although there are dissenters, this trend leads to a Shariah theocracy where civil liberties are nonexistent and women’s rights are vaporized.
The contrast between a Christian theocracy and an Islamic theocracy are dramatic. Could America ever be subject to an Islamic dictator? Some see this gradual slope to enslavement accelerated after the 9/11 attack when textbook publishers promoted Islam over Christianity. There is an insidious indoctrination which does not recognize the very present danger of Islam. Yet, the biggest deception of all is that man can be his own god and govern in the collective quagmire of democracy where sin is rationalized away under individual freedoms. This form of theocracy is doomed for destruction.
1. Who founded our country with the intent of evangelizing other nations?
b. The Vikings
d. The Pilgrims
2. With which religion did they found America?
d. Secular Humanism
3. All of the following are pillars of Sharia Law EXCEPT:
a. “reciting the creed that there is one god, Allah, and his prophet is Muhammad”
b. “praying five times a day toward Mecca”
c. “fasting from sunrise to sunset two months a year during the month of Ramadan and Allasha,”
d. “giving alms to the poor”
4. All of the following are differences between Christianity and Islam EXCEPT:
a. There is only one God
b. The ends justify the means
c. Women’s rights
d. Christianity is based on grace and love
Answers: 1d 2b 3c 4a
1. NA. Government and Theocracy. http://www.geocities.com/fathersmanifesto/christianation.htm World History. 19 Nov. 2004.
2. Russ Walton, Biblical Principles of Importance to Godly Christians, NH: Plymouth Rock Foundation, 1984, p. 356; Barton, p. 88.
3. Wikipedia.com. “Shariah.” World History. 19 Nov. 2004
4. NA. The Truth About Islam. http://www.lamblion.com/New08.php. World History. 1 Dec. 2004.
5. NA. The Myth of Separation of Church and State. http://www.noapathy.org/tracts/mythofseparation.html. World History.
6. NA. The Origins of Islam. http://markmason.net/ch8ex1.htm. World History.
Additional information about <http://hyperhistory.net/apwh/essays/comp/cw06lawmosaicsharia.htm>
The above essay was donated to hyperhistory.net.
of inaccuracies or plagiarism.
Post a link to this essay,
a great essay
on your blog or website :
|Comparative Essays||Biographies||Doc. Based Questions||Change Over Time|