As a theonomist Wilson believes in “the need to restore the Bible as the quarry from which to obtain the needed stone for our foundations of social order” (149), he strongly argues against state imposed punishment for blasphemy. He reminds us that “those who want the government to have the right to kill blasphemers are also asking for the government to have the right to kill those who rebuke their (the government’s) blasphemies” (157)[…]
There are political wolves in sheep’s clothing just as there are religious wolves in sheep’s clothing. Evil men are going to do what evil men do, regardless of what good Christian men do. We already know, we have a massive surfeit of knowledge, of what happens when Christian men do not enforce Christian societal norms
What this reveals is that Wilson is more dedicated to his Enlightenment ideals than his Christian ideals. I have no doubt that he is also an ersatz nationalist, which is to say, a common Churchian civnat who makes positive noises about tribes and nations, but as with blasphemy, refuses to acknowledge the right of the state to enforce the nation’s will
The protection of free speech has literally nothing to do with Christianity, much less represents its “theo-political genius”. That is pure bafflegarble worthy of Jordan Peterson his own babbling self. Free speech is just another false virtue no more worth of state protection than equality, diversity, anti-racism, or the free movement of peoples
7 comments
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register. Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
