You Should Fear a Charismatic-Pentecostal Theocracy

467px-Sarah_Palin_portraitOn this blog, I tried to have a series of posts on an Armstrongist theocracy in North America whether in Canada or the United States. It is a shuddering thought but it is a necessary thought to make darn sure that any kind of theocracy NEVER EVER creeps in a  continent like North America that values the democratic way in all aspects of our governance.

On my other blog, The Independent Thinker (which formerly called The Way I See It, Anyway) I expressed my fear of a Sarah Palin presdiency in 2012. Thankfully, political pundits are saying that her chances are slim and I literally pray to God that it stays that way. I mentioned one of the reasons I do not wish a Palin presidency is because of her charismatic Pentecostal background. My post was picked up on another blog, a more famous one called Booker Rising and one person who was of charismatic Pentecostal background took offence and concluded that I was a bigot.  For those who know and read my works that this is not case. I am not against the people in charismatic-Pentecostal expression of Christian faith  but have deep reservations over a theology (and dare I say religious ideology)  that is chauvenistic towards rigourous study and independent rational thinking and therefore  overemphasizes ecsatic experiences as a test of  spirituality.

Thank God there is a website that is challenging the excesses of charismatic Pentecostal theology and they had a message board site (by the name of Azusa Street Survivors). One person  imagines a country runned by a charismatic Pentecostal theology. What he details in his theory is not a pleasant picture. In other words, where a  state religion  is intrusive into the politics and governance of a nation it is never good. Dare I say “Iran?”

I had to post Sarah Palin for attention and an excuse for my friend James Pate to drool over. There was one picture that I wanted to show James (and he would definately be hot and steaming in a pleasurable way) but I felt I had to show the “real deal“. 🙂

Suppose that somehow, Pentecostals managed to take over a small country or part of a larger country and decided to create a Pentecostal theocracy…How would it come about, what would it do, what would it look like and how long would it last? Feel free to be as evil or snarky as you want with your ideas.

My personal theory is that something like this would come about through Pentecostals gaining control of a regional or state government and manipulating a vote on secession from a larger country.
Of course, all minorities, non-Christians (meaning non-Pentecostals) and women instantly became second class citizens. Abortion became illegal, and birth control became so expensive only those with connections and lots of money could even afford it. The living standards for the common people went down, while those of government officials, preachers, and the other elites went up even more. Of course, unrealistic economic expectations combined with it actually being illegal to forecast anything other then stellar economic growth combined with bad management practices to cause problems. It wasn’t very long before the theocracy ran out of money. Then it got invaded both because of serious human rights violations and because the neighboring countries decided to collect on defaulted loans and whatnot the old fashioned way.
Of course, this wasn’t helped by the theocracy declaring its soldiers to be God’s invincible army. When the other side’s forces crossed the border, the generals told the theocrats that the military was ready. Of course they neglected to mention that they’d sold a lot of its supplies…food and fuel and spare parts…on the black market and then just made up the readiness reports as they went along. God would provide, after all, and He would not let an invader trouble His country, would He?
Worse, the invasion hit at around 10 AM on a Sunday morning, ensuring that because of mandatory church attendance for all but the most vital corporate,government, and military personnell (and with law enforcement enforcing this) that the invaders have at least an hour or two before they would have to worry about much of a response.
That was more then they needed because the air defense radars didn’t work (money for maintenance and software upgrades had been spent to pay the units tithes) all but a few of the fighter jets were grounded due to lack of fuel and spare parts (but the airbase had a new chapel that was all decked out) most of the tanks wouldn’t start (simple incompetance) and the patrol boats were tied up alongside their piers…all the boats worked fine and their machine guns were even loaded and ready to rock (but the chaplains,who had almost as much power as their commanders, had a lot of the sailors doing extra duty that morning, assisting the chaplains with blessing places in the neighboring towns and warding them against demons.) While there was some scattered fighting as some airmen, sailors, and soldiers managed to arm themselves and follow pre-set battle plans (though they were effectively mostly light infantry fighting against a mechanized force) the civilian theocracy first panicked, then tried to bribe the invaders, then made a lot of threats that God would rain fire down on the attackers. No one was impressed. No fire fell from the sky. Within a few hours, even as the theocrats threatened to have the generals shot for treason, the invaders took over the theocracy’s capital.

Money, or rather the Pentecostal obession with money, and general lack of responsibility would be the end of the Pente-ocracy. That’s my theory anyway.


7 thoughts on “You Should Fear a Charismatic-Pentecostal Theocracy

  1. Judging Sarah Palin by her past association with a a charismatic church would be the same as judging all of us former WOG members as being unable to be trusted to have any ability to voice an opinion that would not be tainted by that connection.

    If you still have a connection to christian theology at all (I don’t.), you are only painting yourself as one those whose opinions and reasoning cannot be trusted because of your previous beliefs. (Judge not, etc.)

    I am a political independent and a moderate conservative. I am reserving an opinion about Mrs. Palin’s political acumen and any former theological background is way down on the list as a reason to question her qualifications for office. I would suggest that you might want to consider doing the same.

  2. Fair enough Sargentlane about Governor Palin’s “former” association. Here is what I got from wikipedia about Sarah Palin’s faith,[[ Palin described herself in an interview as a “Bible-believing Christian.”[225] After the Republican National Convention, a spokesperson for the McCain campaign told CNN that Palin “doesn’t consider herself Pentecostal” and has “deep religious convictions.”[52]]] At the same time there are some political canidates with some religious convictions I do worry about and I have a right to worry about. If one is expecting me to be “nice” to everybody, this simply does nobody good and it is obviously not healthy for the democratic process. To put on blinders and say Pat Robertson’s theology is “not important” if he ran again for president or anyother office is dangerous.

    Your assertion that [j]udging Sarah Palin by her past association with a charismatic church would be the same as judging all of us former W[C]G members as being unable to be trusted to have any ability to voice an opinion that would not be tainted by that connection,” I do not see it that way and I think you know that it’s way more complex than your suggesting and allowing. On the other hand, some old habits are hard to break and trust me I have had first hand experience with some former XCGers to verify that! Can I apply the old habits die hard to Governor Palin? In the affirmative! Her anti-intellectual, simple solutions to complex problems can be traced her past association. I have known people from charismatic-Pentecostal faiths to have those characteristics. So in other words, I just cannot simply pretend to ignore it and look the other way.

    ((I am a political independent and a moderate conservative.))

    Finally a voice of reason in the conservative movement! This makes two of us! 🙂

    ((I am reserving an opinion about Mrs. Palin’s political acumen and any former theological background is way down on the list as a reason to question her qualifications for office. I would suggest that you might want to consider doing the same))

    That is fine that you want to reserve judgement on Sarah Palin’s political acumen and/or former or current theological background for office. I must respect that. As I said, I believe I have a right to worry about anyone’s qualifications for public office. It simply does nobody any good to bully and to shut one up about a debate about who is qualified or not qualified for office. As I said that is a part of the democratic process and I intend to make full use of it. Sir, we must respectfully agree to disagree on my assessment of Governor Palin. For me, to submit myself under the tyranny of niceness under any politico for office has grave consequences and this is where I stand.

  3. I think that any type of theocracy will ultimately turn out to be a bad thing. History has shown over and over again that a state run by any religion will eventually go badly. Two that come to mind are the New England Puritans and John Calvin’s Geneva (I won’t even mention the Holy Roman Empire).

    While I don’t agree with many different theologies, I don’t necessarily think that any particular one might eventually do a worse job in a theocracy than any other. “Absolute power corrupts absolutely”. Until Jesus returns and sets up His Kingdom, religion and politics will never mix well over the long course.

    God didn’t create religion and denominations, man did. And whatever man creates, we tend to screw it up.

    While I don’t completely isolate myself from the political environments in which we as citizens must live in, I try to remember that ultimately, God is running the show. I place my votes, and then don’t worry about it much after that. As far as individual politicians go, I really don’t trust any of them very much, no matter what they may state as their religious convictions.

  4. You wouldn’t have known it to look at him, but the last President Bush had a “Pentecostal” Attorney General for several years.

    John Ashcroft was an Assembly of God man. As Missouri Attorney General, he’d go around the state with another politician (a Democrat, whose name escapes me now) singing gospel songs and giving their testimonies.

  5. I did like Mr.Ashcroft as a person. He seems like a very nice guy but I just could not help being discomforted with some eccentric beliefs of his denomination AOG.

  6. Why are local Pentecostals getting concealed fire arm permits and carrying guns to services?Always thought they were stupid,giving money to get money and into Heaven.But now I’m convinced of it.All that Holy rollin and flippin an a floppin with loaded guns in the’church’ is a recipe for disaster.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s