Home » Posts tagged 'Declaration of Independence'
Tag Archives: Declaration of Independence
A Useful Exploration of Truth about Christian Nationalism (Part Four)
Even though the Constitution protects against a state religion, it nevertheless projects a Christian nation. The God about which Jefferson referenced in the Declaration was the God of Christianity, who is the true God. The founders wrote a Constitution for a Christian nation. The Constitution envisions a Christian nation.
The Constitution limits the power of government based on the truth that rights come from God. Government does not give the rights that the Constitution protects. God does. This puts the true God, the God of Christianity, above the government of the United States. It also places the people of the United States under God, like the pledge reads: “one nation under God.”
The people or government of the United States cannot replace God with something else and succeed. The framework still stands and hinders a significant decline, but by replacing God the nation then essentially opposes itself. True believers will tell the truth about this, so not stay silent.
God blesses only nations whose God He is (Psalm 33:12). That is axiomatic. But I’m writing something here even more than that. The United States started as a Christian nation under the one and true God. To cease from that would make the United States a different nation than how and what it began. It would eliminate Americanism, the true nature of the nation according to its founding.
Declaration of Independence
Laws of Nature and Nature’s God
The United States declared its existence on the following self-evident truths. First,
When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
This nation began with the dissolution of political bands to England. It declared that the laws of nature and nature’s God entitled it. This God is not some arbitrary God. In the context of the history of England and the United States, this was the Christian God.
All Men Are Created Equal and Endowed by their Creator with Certain Unalienable Rights
Second,
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, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
This nation declared that England did not give their rights. It was endowed with those rights by their Creator, who is the Christian God. The United States could rightly abolish the former colonial government and institute a new government on the rights the Christian God gave. The Christian God possessed higher authority than England and the new nation under Whom it stood. He gave them these unalienable rights and the right of independence.
Gettysburg Address
Dedicated to the Proposition That All Men Are Created Equal
Unless the nation made a new declaration, the United States continues a Christian nation. The founding principle of the Declaration of Independence faced a challenge during the Civil War. Abraham Lincoln gave the Gettysburg Address on November 19, 1863 and he attached that time to its founding with his words in that speech. First,
Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.
To start, he didn’t use the name, “God,” like Jefferson did and the Founders signed their John Hancocks. But he agreed that “our fathers” were “dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal,” referring to the Declaration of Independence again. By saying, “created,” he alluded to the Creator, the same Christian God of 1776.
Nation Dedicated to a Proposition
If I were to choose a key word in Lincoln’s address, I would pick, “dedicate.” His speech had three paragraphs and he used the word “dedicate” as crucial in all three. This connected the following two paragraphs to the first. The founders dedicated themselves to the proposition that God created men equal, so God gave men their rights by His creation. Even if the United States did not live out that proposition, they remained dedicated to living out that proposition. Second,
Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle-field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.
Civil Laws and Rights
A civil action is a legal dispute based upon laws. Old Testament Israel functioned according to civil laws. Civil rights essentially means the rights God gave according to His laws, having created mankind. The term comes from the Latin, jus civis, “right of the citizen.” The North and the South fought over a disagreement about the rights of citizens.
Lincoln said the Civil War was a test to see if a nation, dedicated to the proposition that God created men equal and gave them their rights, could endure. A Christian nation cannot endure if it rejects the Christian God. I believe this nation is in another struggle right now of the same nature as 1863. Lincoln uses “dedicate” twice. Was the nation dedicated to the proposition that it received its rights from the Christian God? Lincoln expressed that the nation could live because of those who gave their lives, a very nice turn of phrase. He came to dedicate a portion of the former battlefield as their final resting place.
Paragraph Three of the Address
Abraham Lincoln memorialized the cemetery at Gettysburg, the most crucial battle and turning point in the Civil War, according to the nation’s dedication to the Christian God. Third (this is one paragraph in the speech, but I’m dividing it into two),
But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate—we can not consecrate—we can not hallow—this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced.
It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us—that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion—that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain—that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom—and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.
Hallow or Sacred
In general, people today don’t use “dedicate,” “consecrate,” and “hallow.” “Hallow” is a form of “holiness.” Almost nothing is sacred anymore. No one wants hallowed ground. They don’t want to acknowledge anything as holy. More important are their own conveniences and privileges, living not for anything greater than themselves.
Lincoln would not use “consecrate” and “hallow” without reference to the Christian God. The ground at Gettysburg was not hallow because of a Lincoln speech. Hallow ground goes back to Exodus 3 and Moses’ encounter at the burning bush. The ground at Gettysburg was hallow because the reason that justified these men’s death. A great proposition, dedicated to the Christian God, hallowed their deaths. They didn’t die for self, for their own rights, but for rights vindicated by a biblical proposition. These were true rights that proceed first from Genesis 1 and God’s mandate.
Christian Nation
Consider again that Lincoln says, “we can not dedicate” and “to be dedicated here to the unfinished work” and “to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us.” What is the increased devotion the living were to take from the dead’s last full measure of devotion? He implied the dead at Gettysburg would die in vain without dedication to the proposition of a nation under the Christian God. The Christian God gave everyone their rights.
For a government to protect the rights of the people and be a government for the people, it must submit to the highest authority: the Christian God. This nation as a whole loses its dedication when it denies that God. It rejects its purpose for existence. No principle holds it together. How does it do that? Many, many ways that every Christian at least should understand.
I hope I’m expressing a legitimate idea or concept of Christian nationalism, based upon natural laws ordained by God, scripture, and history. Christians should not apologize for these laws, scripture, and history. It is the truth about the United States. May the one and true God, the Christian God, be praised!
More to Come
A Useful Exploration of Truth about Christian Nationalism
Probing Christian Nationalism
The mainstream media now uses the words “Christian nationalism” as a political cudgel against Republicans. Rob Reiner, the former “meathead” of Archie Bunker fame produced a documentary against his caricature of “Christian nationalism.” The left labels new Speaker of the House, Mike Johnson, a “Christian Nationalist.” This last week, Politico writer, Heidi Przybyla, made news herself with this statement on television, attacking Christian Nationalism:
The thing that unites them as Christian nationalists, not Christians because Christian nationalists are very different, is that they believe that our rights as Americans and as all human beings do not come from any Earthly authority. They don’t come from Congress, from the Supreme Court, they come from God. . . . The problem with that is that they are determining, men, are determining what God is telling them.
Apparently this is news on the left, that people believe that rights come from God. This was, of course, found in the Declaration of Independence (1776) by the apparently Christian Nationalist, Thomas Jefferson:
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.
Not long ago in 2018, professing conservative commentator, Jonah Goldberg, wrote something akin to Przybyla in National Review:
Let’s begin with some somewhat unusual assertions for these pages.
Capitalism is unnatural. Democracy is unnatural. Human rights are unnatural. God didn’t give us these things, or anything else. We stumbled into modernity accidentally, not by any divine plan.
Christian Discussion of Christian Nationalism
As much as the left picks Christian Nationalism as a talking point, Christians are discussing it. Here are important books in the debate:
The Case for Christian Nationalism, by Stephen Wolfe
Citizens & Exiles: Christian Faithfulness in God’s Two Kingdoms, by Scott Aniol
Also several have written many articles on Christian Nationalism, both pro and con. I understand the rise of the terminology. I’ve written posts here with a consideration of Christian Nationalism, but the very idea of consideration drew fierce opposition for even broaching the subject. Never have I said I agreed with Christian Nationalism. However, I have questions that did not and do not relate to the popularization of the concept of Christian Nationalism.
Basis For Considering Christian Nationalism
My questions and then thoughts, perhaps answers, arise from the following.
One
One, the first amendment of the Bill of Rights and to the United States Constitution guarantees religious freedom. The first sentence of the Bill of Rights starts with this:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.
Analysis sees two clauses: (1) no establishment of state religion, and (2) free exercise of religion. I contend there is already the establishment of a state religion and that free exercise is at least abridged. The latter proceeds from the former. I like saying, “If there is a state religion, then it matters which one.” There is a state religion and it is against God, not even for God. Everyone does already subjugate to the anti-God state religion.
Two
Two, if the United States functions according to God-given rights, then it should not ignore the one and true God. All truth comes from God and it is a lie when the state will not acknowledge this. Going back to number one, it is a religion that rejects this, not neutrality.
The vacuum from great desire not to establish state religion acquiesces to false state religion. God is truth. The Bible is truth. The one God and His Word, the Bible, are not some tier of religion, which is separate from reality. This is our Father’s world. A nation cannot and will not function according to truth and laws without the acknowledgment of the true God.
Three
Three, God wants application of His Word to everything. The Bible is sufficient. God wants application of scripture to employment, to culture, to art, to government, yes, to everything and everywhere. To occur, this must be open, welcome, and purposeful. It should not be a process incessantly hidden or camouflaged, so as not to reveal its occurrence. Let God be God.
Four
Four, free exercise requires openness in conversation about everything in God’s Word. It requires quoting scripture like scripture is in fact authority. This means saying, we’re going to do this because God wants us to. God founded government. It isn’t matter and motion. Truly discussing rights, since they do come from God, requires including God in the discussion.
Opening the Can of Worms
I believe I can give more than the above four, but that’s enough to percolate thinking and expressing on this matter. The closing of the Constitution of the United States does not mean the end of discussion on the Constitution. It is not inspired. It is not God’s Word. Did it fail in the first amendment and really throughout the Constitution because of that failure?
Before the completion of the United State Constitution, Hamilton and Madison spent hundreds of pages discussing these ideas. Did that yield a perfect masterpiece? Is any kind of correction over? Questioning it is not akin to challenging the Word of God. I believe it is just the opposite. The Bible requires someone to prove it and even go back to the drawing board.
More to Come
The Watershed Moment in the Decline of the American Church: Distinction Between the Sexes
The Beginning of the Bible
When you open your Bible to the first chapter of Genesis, you read in verse 27:
So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
As if that mattered, God repeats this in Genesis 5:1-2:
1 This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him; 2 Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created.
Male and female. That’s it. God created male and female, two different sexes. When I read scripture I notice also two different genders for mankind, communicated by he, him, his and she, her, and hers. “It” never refers to a member of mankind, only the masculine or feminine genders.
God Designed
Furthermore, God designed distinction between the sexes. He gave each a distinct kind or type of body and emotional make-up. God also differentiated a separate, distinct role for each sex. Each role complements the other. According to this truth, God forbade same sex coital activity and marriage.
God also mandated the preservation or keeping of the designed distinctions between male and female. He banned or outlawed masculinity for women and effeminacy for men. God never rescinded any of that. He repeated the regulation in both the Old and New Testaments. God also instructed on it with varied statements intended for compliant application.
The fall of mankind in Genesis 3 resulted from abrogation of the male and female roles. The curse of sin on mankind then instructs also in Genesis 3 concerning the future disorientation of sexual roles. God prohibits men and women from changing or exchanging roles. He also requires them to preserve clear symbols or marks of distinction in appearance.
Rebellion
The rebellion against God starts with the man abrogating headship. It continues with the woman usurping male authority. Mankind perverts the God designed and created hierarchy.
Mankind follows role rebellion with role and then sex confusion. A person becomes his sex at conception. God ordains parents to train the conceived and then born male to continue a man in every way; likewise the female to be a woman in all manners.
The animus between male and female in Genesis 3 continues. People must support God’s design. They must also oppose all manner of role confusion. God especially demands this of true churches.
Long ago churches began relinquishing their responsibility to distinguish between sexes. The world started this decline, but churches followed. Churches accommodate role rebellion now in numbers of ways. Some churches take some stand against the decline, but nearly every church capitulates in some manner out of fear, convenience, or pragmatism.
Rick Warren and Southern Baptist Convention
In a very obvious, public way, the Southern Baptist Convention battles right now who can lead their churches. Will they be men or men and women? So-called “America’s pastor,” Rick Warren, fights for the egalitarian, role confusion in the Convention. He threatens the departure of thousands of “purpose-driven” churches from the convention over the issue.
Transgenderism, surgical sex changes, and gender neutral bathrooms make the headlines. This ship started sailing long ago. Conservative evangelical John MacArthur preached a standard exposition of Ephesian 5 on the two distinct marriage roles. Women in mass rose and left the auditorium in protest.
Sixty to seventy years ago, every woman wore a dress or skirt in church, let alone at home. Of course, every man wore pants. This was (and still is) the only symbol of sexual distinction. It’s why transgender “women” wear dresses like Kaitlyn Jenner. It’s also why transgender “men” wear short hair and pants.
Anecdotal
In the first month after my wife and I moved to Indiana, I went to a junior boys basketball game at the elementary school. A blue jean wearing woman coached the boys team. She stomped and yelled like Bobby Knight on the sideline. No one flinched at her antics. Just another day in rural, red-state Indiana. This, my friends, is the new normal.
The next night my wife and I went to an ice cream place and started up a conversation with some professing Christians there. We continued in pleasant interaction. Then I told the story of the junior boys game, its four overtimes, ending with sudden death. I described the coach something like in the previous paragraph. They met my story with no response. They went mute silent with pained expressions on their faces. After an awkward moment of hearing the crickets in the background and feet shuffling, subject changed.
For the Future of Churches and America
Maybe at one time in the United States, leadership fires a woman for behaving like a man. Today, leadership, maybe even female leadership, fires a man for criticizing the woman. This fits into the contemporary battle of first amendment rights. According to the Declaration of Independence, these inalienable rights come from God. The country banishes God from public conversation. Government and society in general prevent speech from and about God.
If you visit a business promoting transgenderism today, you could say the following. “I will be back when you stop pushing your left wing religion on me.” It is a very dogmatic religion established by the state today.
Churches will die with concession on sexual distinction. The Democrats famously booed including the name of God in their political platform in 2012. Will churches boo sexual distinction? Have we reached a moment when this is even an unwelcome subject matter?
To stop American decline, judgment must begin in the house of God. Churches must stand on the designed distinctions between male and female. They may say they support supernaturalism and young earth creationism. Will they worship and serve the creature rather than the Creator? If creation means anything in a practical way, it means male and female created He them.
How Does Natural Law Work in and for Evangelism of the Lost?
Romans 1:18-21 read:
18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; 19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. 20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: 21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
I’m assuming a lot of you readers know these verses. According to them though, based on what people know, they will be judged rightly by God, because what they know means that they are without excuse. At the same time, people are not going to experience the wrath of God’s judgment because of ignoring information, but because of ignoring law. When they knew God, they didn’t glorify Him as God and were not thankful unto Him. Glorifying God as God is represented by various prescriptions, which are laws. This knowledge isn’t a mere bunch of facts. Bare acknowledgement of God’s existence isn’t sufficient to avoid the wrath of God. The judgment and wrath of God is justice for disobeying natural law.
Natural law relates to the theological terminology, general revelation. “General” is general in audience, that is, everyone knows it, so everyone is responsible for these laws. Knowing God and glorifying Him as God in Romans 1 means knowing these laws to the extent that someone is responsible for obeying them. They relate to the revelation of God, so according to His nature. No one has an excuse for not knowing these. They’re natural to know. All men are responsible for them.
In my assessment, the natural laws are those most denied, and against which men are most rebellious. On the other hand, men like what they consider to be their natural rights, like what Thomas Jefferson’s Declaration of Independence mentions at the beginning:
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
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.
He uses the language, “Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God,” “truths to be self-evident,” and “endowed by their Creator.” Natural laws are self-evident truths.
Men know natural laws. They’re natural to them, so to deny them, they are at their most rebellious. The Apostle Paul talks about some of them later in chapter 1. They rebel against God’s natural order, because it clashes with what they want. It’s natural that the woman is the weaker vessel, and women very often don’t want to hear that. The natural order of two parents and children obeying their parents is repulsive to children.
When people think of the Declaration, they especially think, “all men are created equal.” They focus on the word, “equal.” Most often, however, I’ve noticed that they ignore the first four words, “all men are created.” It is self-evident that “all men are created.” Equal, yes, but it is self-evident that man is created by God. To Jefferson, creation of man carried with it more than sheer existence. With God as Creator, He s also Lawgiver and then Judge.
I’ve found when evangelizing lost people that they will still act like they don’t know certain things. Since Romans 1 says they really do know, I assume they do. This is presuppositionalism. I presuppose people know what is natural to know. Many of those things people say they don’t know, they rely on for enjoying their lives, which is why Jefferson uses “Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of Happiness.” People like those things and yet they act as though they’ve somehow received them by accident. This is the part in Romans 1:19, “who hold the truth in unrighteousness.” As many of you know, it means they suppress the truth. The way I put it is that the problem is not intellectual, but volitional.
Romans 1:18-22 assure what is already known by everyone. I’m saying, you know that everyone knows what Romans 1:18-22 say because those verses say they do. People can act like they don’t know, but you know that they do, so that you don’t believe that they don’t know. God says they do know, so they do know.
If someone is suppressing the truth, that means he knows and he is rebelling against what he knows. In evangelism, you expose the lost on his rebellion. How do you do that?
When I encounter someone who says he is a scientist, a professing atheist, too uncertain, or just not sure because he says he’s not gotten enough proof, I rely on natural law. I refer to a number of different examples. “When you look out there at the vast and intricate world, does that look like it all came about by accident?”
I haven’t found anyone who likes to be characterized as thinking or believing that everything came about by accident, but if this world isn’t an accident, then it is design. People know this is design. Scripture says, according to the way I like to put it, that they don’t want to have a boss. The Designer would be their Boss. They like having their own way, which you can read in the rest of Romans 1 and in 2 Peter. 2 Peter 3 says these scoffers are walking after their own lust.
I continue. “Everything out there is so complex. So many occurrences have to be going right at one time, that it is mathematically impossible to be an accident. It looks like design. Four or five hundred different circumstances need to be going right for us to even survive. If just one of those hundreds does not go exactly right, we couldn’t survive. This can’t be an accident. The human body itself is so complicated, the human eye, speech, the operation of the brain, the circulatory system, our heart beat, so many that have to be functioning in just a certain way at one time. And that’s just to survive.”
Romans 1:21 says, “Neither were thankful.” “So we breathe God’s air, eat the food that comes from a seed growing from the ground, enjoy all of the good things all around on this earth, use all of that, and then just ignore Him.” This is when you can turn to scripture to point rebellion out. “Romans 1 says that everyone already knows all this and rather than worship and serve the Creator, they serve the creature. It describes this as not being thankful, being unwilling to give the credit to God, because that acknowledgement would carry with it responsibility. Next chapter, Romans 2, says the goodness of God leads us to repentance.”
The statement of what people know, natural law, aligns with what is written by God in men’s hearts as a default position (Romans 2:15). Pointing out natural law strikes a cord in men’s hearts, their conscience then also bearing witness (v. 15). They feel guilty because of their ungratefulness.
Then I may say, “What we see occurring out in the world also aligns with the Bible. The history of the world reflects what we see there. There is a God, we are here because of Him, He has put us here for a particular purpose, we are responsible to Him, and we are going to meet Him someday. This is what the gospel is about. God is just, but He also loves us, and the good news is that He wants us to save us. However, we really do need to be saved.”
Since the problem is not an intellectual one, the solution is supernatural. The volition, the will of a person, must be dealt with scripture. The Bible is powerful (Hebrews 4:12) and a spiritual weapon to pull down the strongholds in people’s minds (2 Corinthians 10:4).
The approach I’m giving you is biblical. It’s what the Apostle Paul did in Acts 17. It doesn’t mean that it will result in your audience either listening or being converted, but it gives people an opportunity, which is what you want. It might be too late for most. You don’t know. More than ever, we’re living in an age in which natural law is a necessity in an evangelism approach.
Recent Comments