Dean’s Bizarre Views on Government

The more I read Bradlee Dean’s columns at the Worldnetdaily the more obvious it is that the man simply has no idea what he’s talking about on pretty much any subject. His arguments are so muddled and incoherent that they just leave you shaking your head. This one is no exception. I’ve heard many variations of that tired old “we’re a republic, not a democracy” argument (we are both, of course), but this one is new to me:

Let’s get to our foundation so we can see what the problem in America is today.

In the biblical view of government:

  • The state is divinely ordained (Exodus 18:21)
  • State authority is limited
  • Which leads to patriotism
  • Which results in a republic (Article 4, Section 4, of the United States Constitution)
  • Based on creation

America, simply put, is ruled by law (republic), not opinion (democracy). This is the difference between following God’s Ten Commandments verse man’s 10,000.

On the contrary, in a godless, pagan view of government:

  • The state is divine
  • State authority is unlimited
  • Which leads to state worship
  • Resulting in tyranny
  • Based on evolution

America was founded on the biblical view, but the pagan view is in operation today.

*scratches head* So in the Biblical view, upon which he claims this nation was founded, government is “divinely ordained.” So wouldn’t that make the revolutionary war an immoral act taken against a divinely ordained government? Well yes, it would, but Dean simply isn’t smart enough to analyze his own claims and recognize the obvious contradictions.

There is no doubt that America is under attack. I have noticed that almost every circle of life in America has a deep concern about where this administration is attempting to take our country.

Every circle of life? This is gibberish, just completely meaningless battle.

While I do agree that things must change, it must not change to the new, but rather to the old (Jeremiah 6:16) – and not to what some want us to become, but rather back to what our forefathers intended. As you know, the problems we have today did not start in America in 1776. They started when we departed from the principles that have been given unto us.

Yeah, let’s go back to slavery and oppression for women. Actually, I’m guessing Dean would be just fine with that. After all, the Bible certainly endorses both.

"Yes, I suspect you would know. Did you see that fucking rally last night? Something ..."

Trump Wars 4: A New Hope
"True, I can't think of any foreign occupations of Afghanistan that have not gone swimmingly.Oh, ..."

Breaking Down Trump’s Afghanistan Speech
Follow Us!
POPULAR AT PATHEOS Nonreligious
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • http://www.facebook.com/den.wilson d.c.wilson

    The mother of all non sequiturs. Not one of his bullet points logically follows the one before it. And what exactly is the difference between the state being “divinely ordained” and “divine”?

  • doublereed

    I… what?

    I’m trying to find an example of coherence in all that. Can anyone point out any instance where he’s making a glimmer of sense. The closest I get is:

    Which results in a republic (Article 4, Section 4, of the United States Constitution)

    Based on creation

    …which only makes sense if you ignore the biblical thing and he’s just saying that republics are created.

  • jnorris

    I am amazed at the divinely ordained (Exodus 18:21) state authority being so limited. As I read the book of laws in the Old Testament, I see the state can tell you exactly what foods you can or not eat, tell you how much you can beat your slaves, what your wife can do during her period, when you can work, what you can wear as clothing, and a whole lot more. Many of which are enforceable by your death if you do not comply.

    Please Mr Dean tell me the US Constitution doesn’t give your high priest that much power in the government.

  • eric

    Every circle of life? This is gibberish, just completely meaningless battle.

    At the risk of mixing metaphors, I’d say he’s dug himself a hole so deep that the only “circle of life” he can see any more is his own.

  • alanb

    Every circle of life? This is gibberish, just completely meaningless battle.

    It might have something to do with holding up a lion cub at the top of a cliff so that the other animals of the jungle can see it, but I’m not sure how it fits in with the other stuff he says.

  • Hercules Grytpype-Thynne

    Every circle of life? This is gibberish, just completely meaningless battle.

    He would have said “every sphere of life”, but his two-dimensional worldview wouldn’t allow it.

  • http://en.uncyclopedia.co/wiki/User:Modusoperandi Modusoperandi

    So wouldn’t that make the revolutionary war an immoral act taken against a divinely ordained government? Well yes, it would…”

    No it would not. Only my preferred government is divinely ordained. That’s why, since this administration isn’t divinely ordained, criticism isn’t treason now.

     

    jnorris “I am amazed at the divinely ordained (Exodus 18:21) state authority being so limited. As I read the book of laws in the Old Testament, I see the state can tell you exactly what foods you can or not eat, tell you how much you can beat your slaves, what your wife can do during her period, when you can work, what you can wear as clothing, and a whole lot more. Many of which are enforceable by your death if you do not comply.”

    Look, government only has two duties: Promote virtue and punish vice. All of the above falls under those categories.

    And the term you’re looking for is “Small Government”. One too weak to protect Unpopular Minorities, but plenty strong enough to hold them down.

  • Larry

    Modus said:

    And the term you’re looking for is “Small Government”. One too weak to protect Unpopular Minorities, but plenty strong enough to hold them down.

    Cue the old Monty Python clip of a bunch of old women clapping!

    Brilliant definition, MO. Best I’ve ever seen. If it’s yours, mega-kudos, otherwise, to the original author.

  • NitricAcid

    “This is gibberish, just completely meaningless battle.”

    You mean, “prattle”?

  • Hercules Grytpype-Thynne

    You mean, “prattle”?

    It’s a portmanteau word: “babble” + “prattle” = “battle”

  • Doug Little

    Remind me again on how a form of government has anything to do with an explanation for the diversity of life we observe?

    Does not fucking compute.

  • http://www.holytape.etsy.com holytape

    Knuckle-dragging, mouth-breathing Idiots use argumentum ad CAPSLOCKS. Sophisticated idiots use argumentum ad italics.

  • lorn

    Forgetting seem to be a theme. The good old days when blacks and women knew their place is what we were trying to get away from. But now that nobody is alive to recount the horrors it takes on a sweet sepia-toned and nostalgic feel.

    The same goes for Social Security and Medicaid. When every community had examples of suffering in poverty and old age clearly visible on the injustice motivated allocations of funds. As soon as the visible evidence was whitewashed over people stopped caring. Down the memory hole it goes. Was there really a time when then poor and the old were seen suffering in public?

    How can we advance as a people, culture, nation, if we can’t remember.

  • John Pieret

    Modus @ 7:

    A slight amendment: “Look, government only has two duties: Promote my virtue and punish your vice.

  • jamessweet

    We need a version of “tl;dr” that is similarly pithy but signifies “I stopped reading because it was so utterly incoherent, I couldn’t even follow the argument the author was attempting to make.” Seriously, at the risk of being able-ist, I must say that my schizophrenic brother-in-law has offered more coherent arguments to support his delusions. I’m not joking. His arguments are bizarre and erratic, but it is clear how he intends for A to follow from B follows from C. With this… I don’t even know what he’s getting at!

  • John Hinkle

    Dean must’ve written that “heavier than a duck yet floats” logic in the Holy Grail.

  • Pierce R. Butler

    So that which is divinely ordained is ipso facto also limited?

    Works for me: those commandments and their baggage applied only to a long-extinct tribe of sheep herders; the maunderings of a small-time wandering preacher pertain only to his immediate audience.

  • http://www.pandasthumb.org Area Man

    In the biblical view of government:

    State authority is limited.

    Yes, of course, the people arguing for the divine right of kings were surely trying to limit the power of the state.

  • freehand

    I think I have a handle on it:

    1. The state is divinely ordained =

    I like the state, so it must be from God.

    vs

    The state is divine =

    I don’t like the state, but others do, so they must be atheist state worshipers.

    2. State authority is limited =

    To things I like.

    vs

    State authority is unlimited =

    because it enforces laws I don’t like.

    3. Which leads to patriotism =

    So, I love my country!

    vs

    Which leads to state worship =

    They love my country.

    4. America is ruled by laws I think I understand – a republic.

    vs

    America is ruled by “opinions”

    That is, laws I don’t understand (Feed the poor? No state religion? WTF? Democracy – help!).

    5. Based on creation =

    Run by (enough) superstitious authoritarians proud of their ignorance, with strong opinions supported by no data

    vs

    Based on evolution =

    Run by (too many) educated folks who value knowledge and have opinions based on verifiable evidence but expressed with caution.

    In rants like this, remember that technical terms (e.g. evolution, republic) and labels of logical relations (e.g. “based on”, “leads to”, “is”) are really just Freudian placeholders for emotion connections. They are a psychological window into the grammar of newspeak.

  • dingojack

    Uh Bradlee-baby the English Civil War (1640-5 roughly) was fought, amongst other reasons, over limiting the rights of the king and freedom of religious conscience*. Puritans came back from the colonies to help out. This was long before any of ‘founding fathers’ were even born, let alone the United States of America.

    Learn some history.

    Dingo

    ——–

    * they got the first but not the second (well sort of. Much like forcing people to actually read the bible, diminishes the power of the religions who claim it as theirs, forcing people into churches weakened it’s hold).

  • lpetrich

    The Bible doesn’t have anything close to a democracy or a republic in it. In fact, those words are absent from the Bible. The main forms of government in it are:

    Absolute monarchy

    Theocracy

    Warlordism

    No regularly-elected leaders in it, no councils of elected citizens, not even councils of aristocrats.

  • Richard Smith

    jamessweet (#15): “too stupid; couldn’t finish” / ts;cf?

  • http://aceofsevens.wordpress.com Ace of Sevens

    I notice his lack of biblical citations for any of his claims about biblical government after the first one.