Democracy

In our interpretation of life and thought/conduct in contexts related to God (spiritual) and mankind (natural) we return to concepts of government and respect.  God will govern his kingdom even if in human logic nature rules mankind.  At best, human government is under the direction of faulty persons, but competent to guide it.  In a spirit of fairness the American Founding Fathers created a good plan for overcoming human frailty by forming a threefold system, and leaving the authority for initiation to the majority of the electorate.  Plato accented doubt in an electorate, crediting the intellectuals as more competent, so to representative states.  That belief held even by much of the peasantry likely lengthened the authority of royal heirs living in a romantic concept of royalty.  At length the size of the general public populations slowly overpowered kingship authority, and became openly authoritative in the founding of the United States.  It was dubbed everywhere in the known world as the American Experiment.

God’s idea of human government is that it is temporal and temporary in nature, subject to differences, change, human differentials, varied presuppositions, value fluctuations, and related factors.   God is quite willing to assist any nations, under any authoritative procedure, in the degree that they adjust to values summarized as righteousness (right).  Whatever is contributed from righteousness (right/moral) can be managed by God for the people, with the natural likely related to the morality of the citizenry and the leaders they follow.  Since both God and mankind like order and do best living in an orderly context, God accepts man-made forms under which the citizenry lives.  God’s acceptance of it does not mean he approves of this or that.  It is to be taken seriously as the creation of mankind, but not really meaningful to God’s kingdom.  That kingdom is based on the citizenship of each person choosing God’s qualifications for heaven.  In this the creation can move forward in a pluralistic context, from which citizens may choose context defined in effective righteousness.  God never omits mankind: mankind commonly omits God.

If government is defined as that which possesses ultimate authority, then God’s kingdom is affirmative righteousness we choose.  The logic, as I understand the issue, is that somewhere in primordial time there emerged a satanic figure, seemingly based on revolt in order to displace God.  That cannot be permitted, or God would have to deny himself, something that even God can’t do.  In that context the highest undeniable context is that God is God, and that can never be changed – even by God.  If we carry out the steps to conclusion, it is likely that heaven needs no government – only his Word  Perfect persons need only creativity (meaning in service for life, life whether human or divine) and celebration (worship in the spirit of thanksgiving to God for life).  Of God’s context his government is in offering perfection (holiness) as the context of its management system.  That gains a built-in system offering freedom.  There is no need for police, weapons, charity, infra-structure, or whatever else we may design for maintaining order for multiple masses.  There will be no need to repair wrong-doing – repair that devours much of the energy of current earth society.  All will be well in the miracle of holiness.  The big distraction of government in earth’s structure is ended.  Of his government there is no end – Isaiah 9:6-7; 22:21-25.  (Revelation 21:22-27)

Our information is too scanty to permit us to be too definitive, but too plentiful for us to avoid some leaps into the unknown.  Our language is too fundamental to earth to embrace perfection (identified as holiness).  We live and learn by comparisons and contrasts.  In mortal life, for every affirmative (good) there is a negative (evil).  We cast them as day and night.  Night is cast as negative.  It can’t penetrate day.  Day can penetrate night.  There is no night in God’s kingdom.  Heaven has affirmatives only: earth has both.  The differences are as great as day and night.  The modern development of artificial light may take away some of the meaning of night in language and parables.  The Apostle John covered that in reminding readers that there was no need for candles (light) in God’s kingdom. The differences between mortal and immortal are too extensive for language – not for faith.   Faith offers reality beyond prevailing nature.