The Authority to Govern

As Monty Python put it : "Listen, strange women lyin' in ponds distributin' swords is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony... you can't expect to wield supreme executive power just because some watery tart threw a sword at you!"

If the ultimate basis for your authority isn't a mandate from the people you exercise the authority over, then that authority isn't legitimate as far as I am concerned.
 
Craig4 said:
Then why should we care about this god's self imposed authority? He can't even be bothered to speak for himself.
Click to expand...
If you're even going to bother to talk about God as if there were a god, though, you must, briefly at least, hum along with the theists' tune. You don't go up to God and say "What gives you the right to play God?" He's God. and if you believe that stuff then there's a book of that stuff just for you, about how he has spoken for himself. He walked in the garden and he yanked Abraham's chain, and spoke to Job from his private whirlwind. And he doesn't need to show you any stinking badges.
 
Seismosaurus said:
If the ultimate basis for your authority isn't a mandate from the people you exercise the authority over, then that authority isn't legitimate as far as I am concerned.
Click to expand...
The only 'legitimacy' that God has is "Might makes Right". The Bible is littered with examples of God threatening violence if we don't accede to His demands. The reason He keeps threatening us is simply because He has no legitimate argument. Apart from a few 'superpowers', He is no better than us.

"And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:"
 
Using it only because it provides a solid comparison, not to be inflammatory, Hitler originally had authority to rule in Germany because he was elected by the people. He continued to have that authority for a number of reasons, from love to fear, until his death. If a person did not accept his authority, they were free to do so, but they had to accept the consequences of their decision and face severe punishment if it were discovered.

The case with the god of the bible is identical. Assuming it to be true for the purposes of this, he has authority to rule because he has power. People follow his rule for a number of reasons, from love to fear. If they don't accept his authority they are free to do so, but they accept the consequences of that decision and face severe punishment when they die.

ETA: Thinking about it a bit more, I suppose that any sort of authority over another person can only come because they have power of one sort or another.
 
Last edited:
Craig4 said:
With the key point being that the police must then go before a judge and show cause for why they assaulted to.
Click to expand...

The representative of the government must present his case before a representative of the government to make sure that the whole government agrees with the application of violence. Which they generally do. Governments rule because they hold the monopoly on violence, plain and simple. In more liberal and more democratic republics the government is more beholden to the people, but only a bit. Beezlebuddy is quite accurate in his description.
 
JihadJane said:
God is his own authoritah and, therefore, needs no mandate!



To maintain the integrity of their personality. It would be irrational not to follow instructions one believed were handed down from God.
Click to expand...

I'm with you on that one.

An almighty god needs not obey laws, and he wields the biggest stick in all creation. Need you more incentive to obey him?:boggled:

Hans
 
dafydd said:
That Belgium was not the only country to use violence in it's colonies.
Click to expand...

Ok, let me be more clear; JihadJane stated "State's exist because they have the monopoly on violence. That's how they govern. We haven't really moved so far from the Divine Right of Kings."

To which you replied "The state here in Belgium does not govern by violence."

My remark about the Congo was meant to point out that your country is really no different than any other country in it's use of violence as a means of government. I'm not singling Belgium out, I'm saying that they can't be singled out.

Don't get me wrong, I love Belgium. If I lived there I'd be proud of my country too. The beer is great, the people are polite and the food's tasty. But don't presume that the government doesn't hold a monopoly on violence. If you doubt this, go try to do some violence to your neighbor. The police will quickly arrive to prevent you from doing it again. If you resist enough, they will cheerfully start to do violence on you.
 
joesixpack said:
Ok, let me be more clear; JihadJane stated "State's exist because they have the monopoly on violence. That's how they govern. We haven't really moved so far from the Divine Right of Kings."

To which you replied "The state here in Belgium does not govern by violence."

My remark about the Congo was meant to point out that your country is really no different than any other country in it's use of violence as a means of government. I'm not singling Belgium out, I'm saying that they can't be singled out.

Don't get me wrong, I love Belgium. If I lived there I'd be proud of my country too. The beer is great, the people are polite and the food's tasty. But don't presume that the government doesn't hold a monopoly on violence. If you doubt this, go try to do some violence to your neighbor. The police will quickly arrive to prevent you from doing it again. If you resist enough, they will cheerfully start to do violence on you.
Click to expand...

I am all in favour of that as long as the government holds a mandate from the people. The alternative is anarchy. I meant that the Belgian state does not go around kicking peoples front doors in at 3 am with jackboots. I would be interested in any alternative system that Jane proposes.
 
Craig4 said:
Does the god in the bible have the authority to govern?
Click to expand...
If you have infinite powers to do whatever you want to whomever you want.

Craig4 said:
At what point does he secure a mandate from anyway giving him the authority to set down rules and laws?
Click to expand...
He secured an eternal mandate by showing his powers to a handful of shepherds 2000-3000 years ago.

Craig4 said:
Is there any reason anyone should feel compelled to follow any instruction they believe to be handed down from this god?
Click to expand...
Maybe not if you believe that your God is merciful and forgiving. For that reason, mostly not, if you look how the Faithful live vs. what is Written.
 
Craig4 said:
I've alluded to this in some other threads but I think it deserves one all to itself: Does the god in the bible have the authority to govern? At what point does he secure a mandate from anyway giving him the authority to set down rules and laws? Is there any reason anyone should feel compelled to follow any instruction they believe to be handed down from this god?
Click to expand...

He who can smite can declare what is right.
 
Craig4 said:
So this god thing is an unprincipled bully?
Click to expand...

Not unprincipled. It has some very strict principles, but they only apply when convenient (in that respect, god is surprisingly human ;)).

Hans
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom