Quote:
We find the sons of Eli and Samuel abusing the people through the offering system; we find Ezra and Nehemiah requiring families to be split; and ultimately we find a Sanheidren so thoroughly corrupt that they threw every principle to the wind to effectuate the death of Jesus.
1. I fail to see how theocracy created that situation. It's more similar to an abusive modern day church or cult that defrauds its members through the wielding of spiritual power.
2. That's not corruption, that's what God's law specified. Take it up with the law, not the administration of it. Even so, I'm not convinced that the use of civil power was a significant factor here. It reads to me as though they people were told of the error of their ways by means of the teaching of a priest and repented and acted on it -- an outcome that would seem to be more connected with spiritual change than civil authority.
3. The Sanhedrin was not in any sense an example of theocracy. They were a religious body under the thumb of an Empire dominated by a rival religion, who had to appeal to the state to have their wishes honored They had no more power over Pilate than politically influential and powerful private persons have in any form of government.
This doesn't disprove your thesis about theocracy, but surely if it's right you could find a pertinent example.
I'm Goldberry, and I support this post.
