Is Jesus for “Law & Order?”

[JohnH]

Boot,

Is there a reason you didn't list any left-wing authoritarians in your list?

[Bootstrap]

Boot,

Is there a reason you didn't list any left-wing authoritarians in your list?

I don't think "law and order" is a left-wing slogan. Stalin, Mao Zedong, Fidel Castro, and Hugo Chávez also used law as an instrument of control and oppression, but they used slogans like “revolutionary justice” or “defense of the revolution,” not “law and order.”

“Law and order” usually comes from the political right. Once “law and order” is used to target certain groups or excuse leaders, it stops meaning rule of law and becomes the opposite.

If “law” applies equally, it’s rule of law.
If “order” means silencing dissent, it’s tyranny.

[JohnH]

Boot,

Is there a reason you didn't list any left-wing authoritarians in your list?

I don't think "law and order" is a left-wing slogan. Stalin, Mao Zedong, Fidel Castro, and Hugo Chávez also used law as an instrument of control and oppression, but they used slogans like “revolutionary justice” or “defense of the revolution,” not “law and order.”

“Law and order” usually comes from the political right.

That's nice, but what does compiling lists of right-wing authoritarians have to do with "General Theology"?

[Bootstrap]

That's nice, but what does compiling lists of right-wing authoritarians have to do with "General Theology"?

See the Bible verses that I posted a few posts back. Or see the OP, which asks whether a political statement about "law and order" really does represent what Jesus taught. He was responding to this question:

I think that Christ is for law and order.

I don't think Jesus stands for the kind of "law and order" that we see in secular politics. That's the subject of this thread.

Any comments on the subject of this thread? On the Bible verses that have been cited? On whether Christians should associate "law and order" with our own faith?

[JohnH]

That's nice, but what does compiling lists of right-wing authoritarians have to do with "General Theology"?

See the Bible verses that I posted a few posts back. Or see the OP, which asks whether a political statement about "law and order" really does represent what Jesus taught. He was responding to this question:

I think that Christ is for law and order.

I don't think Jesus stands for the kind of "law and order" that we see in secular politics. That's the subject of this thread.

Any comments on the subject of this thread? On the Bible verses that have been cited? On whether Christians should associate "law and order" with our own faith?

I'm specifically asking you if you think compiling lists of right-wing political figures is appropriate in a "General Theology" thread.

Do you have Bible verses to support that?

[Bootstrap]

I'm specifically asking you if you think compiling lists of right-wing political figures is appropriate in a "General Theology" thread.

Do you feel the need to stand up for Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini, Francisco Franco, Augusto Pinochet, Ferdinand Marcos, Vladimir Putin, Rodrigo Duterte, and Richard Nixon? Does it bother you when I point out what kind of leader has historically used that phrase? And how that has worked out?

I think that's relevant when we ask what our relationship to "law and order" is as Christians. It's not the same thing as our relationship to (1) law and (2) order. The way this phrase has been used historically is not what Christians should stand for. And I think that's the question we are discussing in this thread.

[JohnH]

I'm specifically asking you if you think compiling lists of right-wing political figures is appropriate in a "General Theology" thread.

Do you feel the need to stand up for Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini, Francisco Franco, Augusto Pinochet, Ferdinand Marcos, Vladimir Putin, Rodrigo Duterte, and Richard Nixon? Does it bother you when I point out what kind of leader has historically used that phrase? And how that has worked out?

I think that's relevant when we ask what our relationship to "law and order" is as Christians. It's not the same thing as our relationship to (1) law and (2) order. The way this phrase has been used historically is not what Christians should stand for. And I think that's the question we are discussing in this thread.

I'm just asking why you are compiling lists of right-wing authoritarians in a thread in General Theology. It doesn't seem to be particularly relevant to the discussion at hand, but it does seem like it would be very appropriate for one of the "Politics" threads.

As I understand it, we are supposed to avoid political debate in this subforum, and compiling lists of right-wing political figures seems to be the polar opposite of that.

[ohio jones]

As I understand it, we are supposed to avoid political debate in this subforum, and compiling lists of right-wing political figures seems to be the polar opposite of that.

If you want this moved to Politics, please use the Report Post button rather than complaining in the thread.

It appears to me, though, that Boot is providing examples rather than "compiling lists." Maybe a shorter subset of examples would be more to your liking?

[ken_sylvania]

Why is it that "Law and Order" often sounds like the opposite of "The Rule of Law"?

"Rule of Law" puts the law above the rulers and says they have to obey the law. "Law and Order" often puts the rulers above the law, excusing their lawlessness. That’s how authoritarian leaders such as Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini, Francisco Franco, Augusto Pinochet, Ferdinand Marcos, Vladimir Putin, Rodrigo Duterte, and Richard Nixon used the slogan.

They turned “law” into a weapon of control and “order” into a justification for investigating, harassing, or silencing those who disagreed.

Why is it that the two sound opposite? Possibly because of the type of literature one reads or the type of thing one listens to. Might it surprise you to learn that "Rule of Law" is something that President Trump champions, even though he seems to believe that he has a special allowance to not be required to follow the law himself?

What you are calling "The Rule of Law," as commonly practiced, while it says rulers have to obey the law, seems to often include a component of failing to enforce the law in various ways. Some of the "being subject to the law" is merely a veneer, allowing rulers to violate the intent of the law while technically complying with the law. It also, as shown by Ms. Letitia James, sometimes includes a component of selective investigation and prosecution of one's political opponents. Similarly, "Law and Order" as you describe it also includes selective enforcement of the law, allowing those in positions of authority to violate the law with impunity without taking the bother to whitewash their actions.

Abraham Lincoln would be an example of a President who believed that the need of the moment including the importance of keeping order justified him in overstepping the bounds of the law.

[ken_sylvania]

I think that Christ is for law and order. I don’t think he is for the kind of rioting that we witness where people get hurt.

I want to dig into this a bit. Is Jesus really for “law and order” or did his life, death and resurrection challenge the laws and orders of the world he was born in? Does the Kingdom of God confront or comfort worldly power and society’s hierarchies?

Which scriptures point in either direction?

While this is an inherently political discussion, I’d like this thread to stick to theology and not partisan politics. I think this is a topic much bigger than US politics.

I can't think offhand of any instances where Jesus violated civil law in the country where he lived. He advocated compliance with taxation laws, and when brought to trial there seemed to be no civil or criminal case against him. In general, New Testament teaching about our relationship with civil government seems to be that we should obey unless God's command is clearly different.