After a brief prologue, our Declaration of Independance contains the following:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the consent of the governed…
If our rights are endowed by our Creator, and only secured by the government, rather than endowed from majority opinion (or the government), should an atheist, one who does not recognize the source of our rights, be allowed to hold office in any branch of government? If all our law is founded on these self-evident truths of the existence of a Creator, and of those rights which he endows, what of that man who rejects the existence of a Creator, and (therefore) that those rights are endowed by him? If the three branches of government, sprung from the desire for checks and balances, are all founded on these primal self-evident truths, what of him who bows to a contradictory set of self-evident truths?
Should that man have the right/privelege/responsibility to govern? Should he who fears no Absolute Authority, who looks ahead to giving no account of his life and decisions–should he ‘bear the sword’ (Romans 13 [show] Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. [2]Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. [3]For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, [4]for he is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God's wrath on the wrongdoer. [5]Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God's wrath but also for the sake of conscience. [6]For because of this you also pay taxes, for the authorities are ministers of God, attending to this very thing. [7]Pay to all what is owed to them: taxes to whom taxes are owed, revenue to whom revenue is owed, respect to whom respect is owed, honor to whom honor is owed.
[8]Owe no one anything, except to love each other, for the one who loves another has fulfilled the law. [9]For the commandments, "You shall not commit adultery, You shall not murder, You shall not steal, You shall not covet," and any other commandment, are summed up in this word: "You shall love your neighbor as yourself." [10]Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfilling of the law.
[11]Besides this you know the time, that the hour has come for you to wake from sleep. For salvation is nearer to us now than when we first believed. [12]The night is far gone; the day is at hand. So then let us cast off the works of darkness and put on the armor of light. [13]Let us walk properly as in the daytime, not in orgies and drunkenness, not in sexual immorality and sensuality, not in quarreling and jealousy. [14]But put on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make no provision for the flesh, to gratify its desires. (ESV)
) of the State?
Why, or why not? What do you think?
[Update: for many years, a number of states (NC, MI, SC, TN) actually had such prohibitions, e. g.: "The following classes of persons shall be disqualified for office: ... All persons who shall deny the existence of Almighty God, " etc. - NC]
gmail.com
You scribe the oft cited phrase from Jefferson’s Declaration. That short paragraph separates the United States from any and all nations. That our rights come from ‘our Creator’ is as revolutionary today as it was then. And, at all times, for the love and blessings of God, should be ‘[held] true’.
However, because of the guarentees afforded US citizens in the Constitution, I answer yes. An athiest should be allowed to hold office. For, as along with the axiom you quote, remember this frightening gem as well – ‘Americans deserve the candidates they elect’. I heard it first in Dr. Bauman’s class, but uncertain if I can call it his.
Perhaps, then, the State bears the sword in the same sense that the ancient Phillistines did… They were the instruments of God’s judgment – yet unwittingly, and not at all reverently. So, calling the sword-bearing magistrate “a servant of God” (Romans 13 [show] Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. [2]Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. [3]For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, [4]for he is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God's wrath on the wrongdoer. [5]Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God's wrath but also for the sake of conscience. [6]For because of this you also pay taxes, for the authorities are ministers of God, attending to this very thing. [7]Pay to all what is owed to them: taxes to whom taxes are owed, revenue to whom revenue is owed, respect to whom respect is owed, honor to whom honor is owed.
) could be an external, “machinistic” designation, and not a pious one.
[8]Owe no one anything, except to love each other, for the one who loves another has fulfilled the law. [9]For the commandments, "You shall not commit adultery, You shall not murder, You shall not steal, You shall not covet," and any other commandment, are summed up in this word: "You shall love your neighbor as yourself." [10]Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfilling of the law.
[11]Besides this you know the time, that the hour has come for you to wake from sleep. For salvation is nearer to us now than when we first believed. [12]The night is far gone; the day is at hand. So then let us cast off the works of darkness and put on the armor of light. [13]Let us walk properly as in the daytime, not in orgies and drunkenness, not in sexual immorality and sensuality, not in quarreling and jealousy. [14]But put on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make no provision for the flesh, to gratify its desires. (ESV)
This flies in the face of Kuyper’s interpretation that the magistrate must recognize that he bears the sword as a servant of God, and bow the knee–yet without bearing it for religious/denominational matters.
Hm. If the “external, machinistic” view is right, I think we can chalk another one up for the Kline camp…
On another note, that the foundation of all our law is a divine Creator was also the basis of the mostly-repealed anti-blasphemy laws. Blasphemy was considered a civil, not religious, crime; for to decry the Creator was to bring down the very basis and foundation of civil law, implicitly promoting both anarchy and civil chaos. (Context was key, of course; academic or philosophical debate was excluded from prohibition. – See Kuyper, Cooley on this.)