Tuesday, October 11, 2016

October 12, 2016

"Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and you will be commended. For the one in authority is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer." Romans 13:1-4

When the Founders designed and instituted the governing principles of the United States of America they had to make a moral judgment of what constitutes right and what constitutes wrong? 

After considerable study of historic philosophies and moral codes they came to a strong consensus that the moral teachings set forth in the Bible best defined what is good and what is evil.

Dr. Garlow writes about the importance of a clearly defined moral code is to good governance.(Pages 34-35 of "Well Versed")

"The restraining of evil includes trying to restrain evil in government itself. This is profoundly demonstrated by the fact that we have three supposedly equal branches of government: executive, legislative and judicial. They were instituted to keep each other in check because of the capacity for evil in the human heart - including those in political leadership. The fact that we have three supposedly equal branches of government is a clear acknowledgement by our Founders held a deeply theological truth: humans are prone to evil by nature.

Our Founders knew and understood evil. They had fled evil in their homelands. One of their driving passions was to construct a government that would hold evil in check, even within the government itself. The purpose of the Bill of Rights is to limit government. The failure to understand the capacity of evil itself has been illustrated by both President Franklin Roosevelt (January 11, 1944) and President Barak Obama when they suggested - many decades apart - that here should be a Bill of Rights FOR the government. Bluntly stated, the government does not need more rights. We need protection as citizens, often times FROM our government.

Remember the Bill of Rights are the rights for citizens and are designed to restrain government. But these two Presidents (as does the current Democratic candidate) wanted a Bill of Rights FOR the government (and thereby AGAINST our freedoms). Their view represents an inadequate and sophisticated understanding of the nature of evil and the damage that can be done by an unrestrained government." - Dr. Garlow

I find it interesting that the final verse of Chapter 12 that precedes this portion of Scripture says, "Be not overcome by evil but overcome evil with good."

A government that cannot clearly define evil will eventually be overcome by it.

October 11, 2016

“Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you. “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye?" Matthew 7:1-4

With the most important national election of your lifetime just 27 days away, I want to again refer you to a helpful and thought-provoking book recently released by Wesleyan pastor, Dr. Jim Garlow. The Rev. Dr. Garlow pastors Skyline Wesleyan Church in the San Diego area. He is a very influential and articulate voice for Biblical political conservatism across our nation. I highly recommend his book "Well Versed" and will be borrowing from it liberally over this next month.

I want to begin by challenging the notion that you should not judge the statements and or actions of others - particularly politicians.

A careful reading of the few verses above will correct your thinking on that false charge.

Jesus clearly says that you can and should judge others IF you are willing to hold yourself accountable to the same standard.

To paraphrase Jesus, "Bring yourself under the judgment of God's Word and you are free to hold others to that standard. Judge yourself before you judge anyone else."

The second President of the United States of America, John Adams wisely said, "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."

President Adam's statement is, itself, judgmental isn't it? Does it not declare that there is a moral standard by which the citizens of this new nation will be expected to judge themselves? There is also an implied judgment that it will require a religious faith to for citizens to govern themselves according to this moral standard.

The vision of government held by the Founders was a government that was necessary only to define the standards which contribute to liberty and to hold those accountable who are unable to govern themselves according to those standards.

Where did that notion come from?

See if this sounds familiar?

"Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and you will be commended." Romans 13:1-3

Our Founders drew this principle of moral self-government right from the pages of the New Testament!

It is not only right to judge others, it is necessary for a free, orderly and productive society. But the first responsibility of each individual citizen is to judge himself.

When this doesn't happen you end up with the sort of repugnant behavior we have witnessed through the past several National election cycles. We are wearied by candidates who feign moral indignation in "judging" their opponent guilty of the very moral failures corrupting their own lives.

So, as we are again with this coming election, we are compelled to make a judgment on which of these hypocritical and corrupt candidates we can conscientiously support.