John Calvin was born 500 years ago today. I mentioned the anniversary of his death a couple of months ago, and the rise of the "New Calvinism" here.
It might seem odd that an anarchist who opposes capital punishment would have any affection for Calvin. But I'm an anarchist because I believe in predestination and providence.
If I were to travel back in time to 16th century Geneva, I might well be executed by Calvin. But if he were to travel through time to the 21st century, and look back on the last 5 centuries, I'm confident I could convince Calvin that the State is not a "divine institution." And we would have a stimulating discussion on the subject of usury.
Many modern Calvinists seem to focus solely on Calvin's theology. Those in the Reconstructionist stream appreciate Calvin's opposition to tyranny, even if they have too much appreciation for Calvin's belief that God wants men to form governments.
The Calvin Quincentenary and American Liberty | Vision Forum Ministries
The Stream of Liberty from Calvin to the Founders | Vision Forum Ministries
Other items from the past few weeks on the Quincentenary, some of which help counter many of the myths and rumors about Calvin being a dour dictator:
Even at 500, Calvin Inspires Today's Reformers Christian History Blog
Faithful and Welcoming - FWC Sponsored luncheon at General Synod
Decline of John Calvin | The Australian
500th birthday of 'Great Reformer' John Calvin nears - USATODAY.com
Hundreds Kick Off Calvin Quincentenary Celebration in Geneva | Christianpost.com
Hundreds Flock to Boston to Celebrate 500th Calvin Anniversary | Christianpost.com
Reformed Leader Urges Church to Mine Calvin's Legacy | Christianpost.com page 2
Calvin and the Scots-Irish in America | Vision Forum Ministries
The Calvin Quincentenary and the Transformation of Christendom | Dr. Roger Schultz | The Chalcedon Foundation - Faith for All of Life
Man of His Time for All Times | Christianity Today
RNS Feature: "Even at 500, Calvin isn’t slowing down"
John Calvin: Man of Contradictions, Shaper of Modernity. Age? 500 This Week - BCNN1
A toast to this most maligned of theologians | Times Online
American exceptionalism predestined by John Calvin's birth 500 years ago
Calvin's writings also had an implicit anti-statism. Since fundamental law comes from God, obeying the law means obeying God, not necessarily the state. Rebellion against an unlawful state act, led by "lesser magistrates" such as local leaders, is really a justifiable maintenance of true law. One Calvin disciple in 1579 wrote Vindiciae Contra Tyrannos ("Vindication Against Tyrants"), which emphasized the limits of power.
AFP: Divided Geneva marks 500 years of Calvinist rigour
Calvin and American Exceptionalism - Damon Linker, New Republic.
Perpetuates the myth of Calvin and Puritans "formulating a sternly ascetic version of Christian piety." Calvin and the Puritans were against asceticism. Oxford Scholar C.S. Lewis writes:
Puritanism, as I have defined it, splits off from general Pro-
testantism in the second half of the sixteenth century. Stow
traces the word puritan to about the year 1567.* Originally
coined by certain Anabaptists to describe themselves, it came
to be used as a hostile term (though they sometimes accepted
it) for those Protestants who believed that the Elizabethan
Church was insufficiently reformed and wished to make her
more like the Protestant churches on the continent; especially
like that of Geneva. The puritans were so called because they
claimed to be purists or purifiers in ecclesiastical polity: not
because they laid more emphasis than other Christians on
'purity 5 in the sense of chastity. Their quarrel with the Church
of England was at first rather ecclesiastical than theological.
In Hooker Anglicanism is, indeed, already beginning to be
marked off from other species of Protestantism by its greater
respect for human reason and for tradition. But the specifically
Anglican faith defined itself less rapidly and neatly than the
puritan and chiefly under the pressure of puritan attacks.
Neither can be understood apart from the original Protestant
experience in which both were rooted, though puritanism more
exclusively. To that experience I must now turn. The very word
experience perhaps makes clear the angle at which I approach
it. Some social or economic historians treat the Reformation
solely from the point of view of their own disciplines, regarding
its spiritual and even its intellectual side as mere epipheno-
mena; perhaps as 'rationalizations' by which men explained
to themselves behaviour whose real causes were of quite a
different kind. Fortunately there is no need to discuss the cor-
rectness of this view: for even if it were wholly correct it would
not much concern the historian of literature. His business is
with the past not as it 'really' was (whatever 'really' may mean
in such a context) but with the past as it seemed to be to those
who lived in it: for of course men felt and thought and wrote
about what seemed to be happening to them. The economic or
social historian's 'appearances' may be the literary historian's
Tacts'. We want, above all, to know what it felt like to be an
early Protestant
One thing is certain. It felt very unlike being a 'puritan' such
as we meet in nineteenth-century fiction. Dickens's Mrs. Clen-
nam, trying to expiate her early sin by a long life of voluntary
gloom, was doing exactly what the first Protestants would have
forbidden her to do. They would have thought her whole con-
ception of expiation papistical. On the Protestant view one
could not, and by God's mercy need not, expiate one's sins.
Theologically, Protestantism was either a recovery, or a develop-
ment, or an exaggeration (it is not for the literary historian to
say which) of Pauline theology. Hence in Buchanan's Fran-
ciscanus ad Fratres the Friars' prophylactic against it is to keep
clear of the 'old man from Tarsus' (Tarsensis fuge scripta senis).
In the mind of a Tyndale or Luther, as in the mind of St. Paul
himself, this theology was by no means an intellectual construc-
tion made in the interests of speculative thought. It springs
directly out of a highly specialized religious experience; and
all its affirmations, when separated from that context, become
meaningless or else mean the opposite of what was intended.
Propositions originally framed with the sole purpose of praising
the Divine compassion as boundless, hardly credible, and utterly
gratuitous, build up, when extrapolated and systematized, into
something that sounds not unlike devil-worship. The experience
is that of catastrophic conversion. The man who has passed
through it feels like one who has waked from nightmare into
ecstasy. Like an accepted lover, he feels that he has done
nothing, and never could have done anything, to deserve such
astonishing happiness. Never again can he 'crow from the dung-
hill of desert*. All the initiative has been on God's side; all has
been free, unbounded grace. And all will continue to be free,
unbounded grace. His own puny and ridiculous efforts would
be as helpless to retain the joy as they would have been to
achieve it in the first place. Fortunately they need not. Bliss is
not for sale, cannot be earned. 'Works' have no 'merit', though
of course faith, inevitably, even unconsciously, flows out into
works of love at once. He is not saved because he does works of
love: he does works of love because he is saved. It is faith alone
that has saved him: faith bestowed by sheer gift. From this
buoyant humility, this farewell to the self with all its good
resolutions, anxiety, scruples, and motive-scratchings, all the
Protestant doctrines originally sprang.
For it must be clearly understood that they were at first
doctrines not of terror but of joy and hope: indeed, more than
hope, fruition, for as Tyndale says, the converted man is already
tasting eternal life. The doctrine of predestination, says the
XVIIth Article, is 'full of sweet, pleasant and unspeakable
comfort to godly persons'. But what of ungodly persons? Inside
the original experience no such question arises. There are no
generalizations. We are not building a system. When we begin
to do so, very troublesome problems and very dark solutions
will appear. But these horrors, so familiar to the modern reader
(and especially to the modern reader of fiction), are only by-
products of the new theology. They are astonishingly absent
from the thought of the first Protestants. 1 Relief and buoyancy
are the characteristic notes. In a single sentence of the Tischreden
Luther tosses the question aside for ever. Do you doubt whether
you are elected to salvation? Then say your prayers, man, and
you may conclude that you are. It is as easy as that.
It follows that nearly every association which now clings to
the word puritan has to be eliminated when we are thinking of
the early Protestants. Whatever they were, they were not sour,
gloomy, or severe ; nor did their enemies bring any such charge
against them. On the contrary, Harpsfield (in his Life of More)
describes their doctrines as 'easie, short, pleasant lessons' which
lulled their unwary victim in 'so sweete a sleepe as he was euer
after loth to wake from it'. For More, a Protestant was one
'dronke of the new must of lewd lightnes of minde and vayne
gladnesse of harte' (Dialogue, in. ii). Luther, he said, had made
converts precisely because 'he spiced al the poison' with 'liber-
tee' (ibid. m. vii). Protestantism was not too grim, but too glad,
to be true; 'I could for my part be verie wel content that sin
and pain all were as shortlye gone as Tyndale telleth us' (Con-
futation). Protestants are not ascetics but sensualists. They will
not fast (Dialogue , iv. i). They teach and use 'more sensual and
licentious liuing then euer did Makomet' (ibid. rv. ix). And it is
certainly true that in their own writings we find a strong bias
against asceticism. Even when we pass on from the first Pro-
testants to Calvin himself we shall find an explicit rejection of
'that vnciuile and froward philosophy' which 'alloweth vs in
no vse of the creatures saue that which is needful, and going
about (as it were in enuie) to take from vs the lawful enioyment
of God's blessings, yet can neuer speede vnless it should stoppe
vp all a man's senses and make him a verie block'. When God
created food, 'He intended not only the supplying of our neces-
sities but delight and merriment' (hilaritas). Clothes serve not
only for need but also for 'comelinesse and honesty'; herbs,
trees, and fruits, 'beside their manifold commodity', for 'good-
linesse, brauery, and sweete smelling sauour'. A comparison of
the whole passage (Institutio, m. x. 2) with, say, the sermons of
Fisher, will correct many misapprehensions. When Newman in
his Letter to X T professed an 'abstract belief in the latent sensu-
ality of Protestantism', he was, in my opinion, dreadfully mis-
taken; but at least, like More and Harpsfield, he was making
the right mistake, the mistake that is worth discussing. The
popular modern view of the matter does not reach that level.
To be sure, there are standards by which the early Protestants
could be called 'puritanical'; they held adultery, fornication,
and perversion for deadly sins. But then so did the Pope. If that
is puritanism, all Christendom was then puritanical together.
So far as there was any difference about sexual morality, the
Old Religion was the more austere. The exaltation of virginity
is a Roman, that of marriage, a Protestant, trait.
Video: How Calvin has influenced WORLD Magazine | WORLD Magazine | Community | Blog Archive
Sticking by the Bible | Marvin Olasky | WORLD Magazine | Jul 04, 09
Liberty’s champion | Marvin Olasky | WORLD Magazine | Jul 04, 09
Video: Calvin and politics | WORLD Magazine | Community | Blog Archive
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query calvin. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query calvin. Sort by date Show all posts
Friday, July 10, 2009
Monday, March 16, 2009
The New Calvinism
I just learned that the latest TIME Magazine says that "The New Calvinism" is one of the 10 Ideas Changing the World Right Now.
This was the first I'd heard of "the New Calvinism."
I've been a hard-core Calvinist for over 20 years, but I don't keep up with the latest evangelical trends anymore, possibly because all my Calvinist friends from decades past have excommunicated me because I'm a radical libertarian.
For me, "Calvinism" has always been a world-and-life view, not just a debate about who gets to go to heaven when they die. When Abraham Kuyper, Prime Minister of the Netherlands, delivered his "Lectures on Calvinism" at Princeton University, he didn't talk much about who the elect were, he talked about:
Lecture 1: Calvinism as a Life System
Lecture 2: Calvinism and Religion
Lecture 3: Calvinism and Politics ( This includes the ideas of resistance to tyranny that ignited the American Revolution.)
Lecture 4: Calvinism and Science
Lecture 5: Calvinism and Art
Lecture 6: Calvinism and the Future
So when TIME Magazine announced that "the New Calvinists" are "changing the world," I assumed that since I hadn't heard about "the New Calvinists," they weren't really changing the world, that is, they weren't a threat to the Eastern Liberal Obamanian world of TIME Magazine.
TIME says (links are mine),
Neo-Calvinist ministers and authors don't operate quite on a Rick Warren scale. But, notes Ted Olsen, a managing editor at Christianity Today, "everyone knows where the energy and the passion are in the Evangelical world" — with the pioneering new-Calvinist John Piper of Minneapolis, Seattle's pugnacious Mark Driscoll and Albert Mohler, head of the Southern [Baptist Theological] Seminary of the huge Southern Baptist Convention. The Calvinist-flavored ESV Study Bible sold out its first printing, and Reformed blogs like Between Two Worlds are among cyber-Christendom's hottest links.
I've linked to Al Mohler once before. I recall seeing the fuzzy photo on the "Between Two Worlds" blog, but don't recall linking to it or any of the other "New Calvinists" mentioned by TIME.
It doesn't sound like the "New" Calvinists are much different from the Old Calvinists (though TIME never identifies who the truly "old" Calvinists are). Says TIME:
Calvin's 500th birthday will be this July. It will be interesting to see whether Calvin's latest legacy will be classic Protestant backbiting [Skirmishes among the Southern Baptists (who have a competing non-Calvinist camp) and online "flame wars" bode badly] or whether, during these hard times, more Christians searching for security will submit their wills to the austerely demanding God of their country's infancy.
I have had exactly zero contact with Southern Baptist flame wars between Calvinists and (presumably) Arminians. But the phrase "or whether" in the lines above is a complete non sequitur. The Calvinists of America's infancy surrendered America to the Unitarians and their atheist/ACLU progeny precisely by their theological flame wars over "security" (not "national security," but assurance of who goes where when they die) and submitting their wills not to "the austerely demanding God" of Calvinism, but to the austerely demanding clerics of the various established churches.
Pinpointing the elect seems to have annoyed the more deistic Founders like Jefferson, and protecting ecclesiastical power prevented various denominations from being able to promote a generic Christianity. John Adams, for example, proclaimed national days of prayer, but regretted some of them because they were exploited by one particular ecclesiastical body over others. These power-grabs prompted some Founders to tone down their public promotion of religion and resulted in an appearance of secularism which was exploited by the ACLU in the 20th century to create the modern myth of "the separation of church and state."
If they're really going to "change the world," the "New Calvinism" must undercut our trust in government and encourage submitting our wills (that is, every area of life -- even "public" life) to "the austerely demanding God" of Calvinism. John Calvin would never allow the civil government to ignore the most basic moral precepts: "Thou Shalt Not Kill" and "Thou Shalt Not Steal."
A note on the "austerity" of God and/or Calvinism. One could start with Leland Ryken's Worldly Saints: The Puritans as They Really Were
. Austerity is a myth. They dressed like peacocks and "Bloody" Mary said they danced jigs in church.
Anyone who attempts to obey God's commandments in a self-consciously systematic way (see the two "Thou Shalt Not" links above) will be called "austere" (or worse) by those who want the freedom to sin (meaning, in this case, the freedom to steal ("redistribute the wealth") and making the killing of inconvenient people "safe" and "legal."
The God of the Bible is hardly "austere." God designed the peacock. God commanded the building of a temple which could hardly be called austere. Toward those who obey Him, He promises blessings, not austerity. It is always secular governments that demand "austerity budgets."
The Invisible Hand of God's Sovereignty is the basis for optimism and a rising standard of living, not "austerity."
Look at the Bible Through New Eyes.
Odds 'n' Ends (Mostly for Google's Benefit)
Calvin's Institutes on the Civil Magistrate
Book III Chapter 19
Book IV Chapter 20
Book IV Chapter 20 Section 1
Book IV Chapter 20 Section 10
Book IV Chapter 20 Section 11
Book IV Chapter 20 Section 12
Book IV Chapter 20 Section 13
Book IV Chapter 20 Section 14
Book IV Chapter 20 Section 2
Book IV Chapter 20 Section 3
Book IV Chapter 20 Section 4
Book IV Chapter 20 Section 5
Book IV Chapter 20 Section 6
Book IV Chapter 20 Section 7
Book IV Chapter 20 Section 8
Book IV Chapter 20 Section 9
Calvin on Romans 12
Calvin on Romans 13
Calvin on Romans 13:8-10
Calvinism and Anarchism
Calvinism: Source of Democracy?
Calvin's America
Calvin's Defense of the State
Contents: Calvin Thesis files
Defining "The State"
God Sends EVIL ! Why Calvinists are Anarchists
In Defense of the Crusades
Outline - Calvinist Anarcho-Capitalism
Outline - Calvinist Anarcho-Theocracy
Predestination in American History
PROBLEMS IN EUROPEAN CIVILIZATION
Prospectus
Radical Calvinism
Refuting "the State" by Defining "the State"
Romans 12 and 13
Romans 12 Cross-References
Romans 13 and the American Revolution
Romans 13:9-10
Scandal and conscience in Romans 13
The Biblical Prohibition of Vengeance
THE DIVINE RIGHT OF KINGS THE DIVINE ORDINATION OF GOVERNMENT: The Parallels
"Private" Vengeance and "Public Justice."
A Prima Facie Case for Biblical Anarchism
Anarchism: Chaos or God's Law?
Bibliography - Calvinist Anarcho-Capitalism
The Myth of Private Religion
The Old Testament and the New America
The Structure of the Book of Romans
The Thesis in Broader Perspective
VIOLENCE AND THE STATE: Why the Prince of Peace was an Anarchist
This was the first I'd heard of "the New Calvinism."
I've been a hard-core Calvinist for over 20 years, but I don't keep up with the latest evangelical trends anymore, possibly because all my Calvinist friends from decades past have excommunicated me because I'm a radical libertarian.
For me, "Calvinism" has always been a world-and-life view, not just a debate about who gets to go to heaven when they die. When Abraham Kuyper, Prime Minister of the Netherlands, delivered his "Lectures on Calvinism" at Princeton University, he didn't talk much about who the elect were, he talked about:
Lecture 1: Calvinism as a Life System
Lecture 2: Calvinism and Religion
Lecture 3: Calvinism and Politics ( This includes the ideas of resistance to tyranny that ignited the American Revolution.)
Lecture 4: Calvinism and Science
Lecture 5: Calvinism and Art
Lecture 6: Calvinism and the Future
So when TIME Magazine announced that "the New Calvinists" are "changing the world," I assumed that since I hadn't heard about "the New Calvinists," they weren't really changing the world, that is, they weren't a threat to the Eastern Liberal Obamanian world of TIME Magazine.
TIME says (links are mine),
Neo-Calvinist ministers and authors don't operate quite on a Rick Warren scale. But, notes Ted Olsen, a managing editor at Christianity Today, "everyone knows where the energy and the passion are in the Evangelical world" — with the pioneering new-Calvinist John Piper of Minneapolis, Seattle's pugnacious Mark Driscoll and Albert Mohler, head of the Southern [Baptist Theological] Seminary of the huge Southern Baptist Convention. The Calvinist-flavored ESV Study Bible sold out its first printing, and Reformed blogs like Between Two Worlds are among cyber-Christendom's hottest links.
I've linked to Al Mohler once before. I recall seeing the fuzzy photo on the "Between Two Worlds" blog, but don't recall linking to it or any of the other "New Calvinists" mentioned by TIME.
It doesn't sound like the "New" Calvinists are much different from the Old Calvinists (though TIME never identifies who the truly "old" Calvinists are). Says TIME:
Calvin's 500th birthday will be this July. It will be interesting to see whether Calvin's latest legacy will be classic Protestant backbiting [Skirmishes among the Southern Baptists (who have a competing non-Calvinist camp) and online "flame wars" bode badly] or whether, during these hard times, more Christians searching for security will submit their wills to the austerely demanding God of their country's infancy.
I have had exactly zero contact with Southern Baptist flame wars between Calvinists and (presumably) Arminians. But the phrase "or whether" in the lines above is a complete non sequitur. The Calvinists of America's infancy surrendered America to the Unitarians and their atheist/ACLU progeny precisely by their theological flame wars over "security" (not "national security," but assurance of who goes where when they die) and submitting their wills not to "the austerely demanding God" of Calvinism, but to the austerely demanding clerics of the various established churches.
Pinpointing the elect seems to have annoyed the more deistic Founders like Jefferson, and protecting ecclesiastical power prevented various denominations from being able to promote a generic Christianity. John Adams, for example, proclaimed national days of prayer, but regretted some of them because they were exploited by one particular ecclesiastical body over others. These power-grabs prompted some Founders to tone down their public promotion of religion and resulted in an appearance of secularism which was exploited by the ACLU in the 20th century to create the modern myth of "the separation of church and state."
If they're really going to "change the world," the "New Calvinism" must undercut our trust in government and encourage submitting our wills (that is, every area of life -- even "public" life) to "the austerely demanding God" of Calvinism. John Calvin would never allow the civil government to ignore the most basic moral precepts: "Thou Shalt Not Kill" and "Thou Shalt Not Steal."
A note on the "austerity" of God and/or Calvinism. One could start with Leland Ryken's Worldly Saints: The Puritans as They Really Were
. Austerity is a myth. They dressed like peacocks and "Bloody" Mary said they danced jigs in church.Anyone who attempts to obey God's commandments in a self-consciously systematic way (see the two "Thou Shalt Not" links above) will be called "austere" (or worse) by those who want the freedom to sin (meaning, in this case, the freedom to steal ("redistribute the wealth") and making the killing of inconvenient people "safe" and "legal."
The God of the Bible is hardly "austere." God designed the peacock. God commanded the building of a temple which could hardly be called austere. Toward those who obey Him, He promises blessings, not austerity. It is always secular governments that demand "austerity budgets."
The Invisible Hand of God's Sovereignty is the basis for optimism and a rising standard of living, not "austerity."
Look at the Bible Through New Eyes.
Odds 'n' Ends (Mostly for Google's Benefit)
Calvin's Institutes on the Civil Magistrate
Book III Chapter 19
Book IV Chapter 20
Book IV Chapter 20 Section 1
Book IV Chapter 20 Section 10
Book IV Chapter 20 Section 11
Book IV Chapter 20 Section 12
Book IV Chapter 20 Section 13
Book IV Chapter 20 Section 14
Book IV Chapter 20 Section 2
Book IV Chapter 20 Section 3
Book IV Chapter 20 Section 4
Book IV Chapter 20 Section 5
Book IV Chapter 20 Section 6
Book IV Chapter 20 Section 7
Book IV Chapter 20 Section 8
Book IV Chapter 20 Section 9
Calvin on Romans 12
Calvin on Romans 13
Calvin on Romans 13:8-10
Calvinism and Anarchism
Calvinism: Source of Democracy?
Calvin's America
Calvin's Defense of the State
Contents: Calvin Thesis files
Defining "The State"
God Sends EVIL ! Why Calvinists are Anarchists
In Defense of the Crusades
Outline - Calvinist Anarcho-Capitalism
Outline - Calvinist Anarcho-Theocracy
Predestination in American History
PROBLEMS IN EUROPEAN CIVILIZATION
Prospectus
Radical Calvinism
Refuting "the State" by Defining "the State"
Romans 12 and 13
Romans 12 Cross-References
Romans 13 and the American Revolution
Romans 13:9-10
Scandal and conscience in Romans 13
The Biblical Prohibition of Vengeance
THE DIVINE RIGHT OF KINGS THE DIVINE ORDINATION OF GOVERNMENT: The Parallels
"Private" Vengeance and "Public Justice."
A Prima Facie Case for Biblical Anarchism
Anarchism: Chaos or God's Law?
Bibliography - Calvinist Anarcho-Capitalism
The Myth of Private Religion
The Old Testament and the New America
The Structure of the Book of Romans
The Thesis in Broader Perspective
VIOLENCE AND THE STATE: Why the Prince of Peace was an Anarchist
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
John Calvin
John Calvin died on this date in 1564. The 500th anniversary of his birth will be celebrated in some circles this coming July 10.
America was not just a Christian nation, but a Calvinist nation, and not a "Judeo-Christian" nation. Calvin and Calvinists produced the American ideas of resistance to tyranny and representative democracy.
Princeton Calvinist B. B. Warfield defined calvinism this way:
He who believes in God without reserve, and is determined that God shall be God to him in all his thinking, feeling, willing—in the entire compass of his life-activities, intellectual, moral, spiritual, throughout all his individual, social, religious relations—is, by the force of that strictest of all logic which presides over the outworking of principles into thought and life, by the very necessity of the case, a Calvinist.
New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge, Vol. II: Basilica - Chambers
Abraham Kuyper, Prime Minister of the Netherlands, presented his lectures on Calvinism at Princeton, and summed up the Calvinist worldview:
In the total expanse of human life there is not a single square inch of which the Christ, who alone is sovereign, does not declare, 'That is mine!'
Calvin was certainly not an anarcho-capitalist. But that is because, while Christianity had made a lot of progress in creating Western Civlization, it had not yet progressed that far, and Calvin, though revolutionary, was still necessarily a man of his time. His views on usury may have led, unintentionally and indirectly, to the Bush-Obama bailouts. Logically, however, Calvin's ideas lead to anarcho-capitalism:
Outline: Calvinist Defense of Anarcho-Capitalism
Defining "The State"
Calvin has been called the "Theologian of the Holy Spirit." That logically leads away from dependence on the State: Statism vs. Calvinism
Why Calvinism for Anarchists
America was not just a Christian nation, but a Calvinist nation, and not a "Judeo-Christian" nation. Calvin and Calvinists produced the American ideas of resistance to tyranny and representative democracy.
Princeton Calvinist B. B. Warfield defined calvinism this way:
He who believes in God without reserve, and is determined that God shall be God to him in all his thinking, feeling, willing—in the entire compass of his life-activities, intellectual, moral, spiritual, throughout all his individual, social, religious relations—is, by the force of that strictest of all logic which presides over the outworking of principles into thought and life, by the very necessity of the case, a Calvinist.
New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge, Vol. II: Basilica - Chambers
Abraham Kuyper, Prime Minister of the Netherlands, presented his lectures on Calvinism at Princeton, and summed up the Calvinist worldview:
In the total expanse of human life there is not a single square inch of which the Christ, who alone is sovereign, does not declare, 'That is mine!'
Calvin was certainly not an anarcho-capitalist. But that is because, while Christianity had made a lot of progress in creating Western Civlization, it had not yet progressed that far, and Calvin, though revolutionary, was still necessarily a man of his time. His views on usury may have led, unintentionally and indirectly, to the Bush-Obama bailouts. Logically, however, Calvin's ideas lead to anarcho-capitalism:
Outline: Calvinist Defense of Anarcho-Capitalism
Defining "The State"
Calvin has been called the "Theologian of the Holy Spirit." That logically leads away from dependence on the State: Statism vs. Calvinism
Why Calvinism for Anarchists
Tuesday, September 20, 2011
Six Killer Apps of Western Civ
At the end of China's "Cultural Revolution" (and the murder of tens of millions of Chinese by the Communists), the average American was 20 times richer than the average Chinese. Historian Niall Ferguson attributes this economic growth to "Six Killer Apps" or institutions unique to the West:
He lists the following as sources of economic wealth, arising largely after 1800:
1. Competition
2. The Scientific Revolution
3. Property Rights
4. Modern Medicine
5. The Consumer Society
6. The Work Ethic
To the extent that these are valuable and durable institutions, they are Christian institutions. "The State" is destructive of Christian institutions.
1. "Competition" means "freedom." The State hates competition. The State is itself a monopoly. The State attracts those who hate competition like a light attracts moths.
2. The Scientific Method "is not Western, but Christian," concluded Stanley Jaki, a prizewinning historian of science. (Jaki is discussed by Tom Woods in a book we referenced back in 2007.)
3. Property rights are described by the Prophet Micah:
And each of them will sit
under his vine and under his fig tree,
With no one to make them afraid.
80% of people living in Protestant nations own property. 10% in non-Christian nations.
More private property has been confiscated by thieves in the public sector than by thieves in the private sector. The greatest enemy of private property is archism.
4. Modern medicine stands in contrast to shamanism. Science and healing are dominion and charity. It was missionaries that took medicine to Africa. The availability of modern medicine to the masses is the product of private property and
5. The Consumer Society
Ferguson notes that most of the world's wealth (over $100 Trillion), was created after 1800. This also marks the rise of secularism in the west. Does this show that economic growth is better served by secularism than by Christianity? Economists consider porno DVD's as "wealth." Value is subjective. "The Consumer Society" is both a covetous and an idolatrous society. "The Consumer Society" eventually becomes the Warfare Society, to protect and conquer coveted "wealth." In the medieval era, wars were limited events fought by professional soldiers, and left workers and consumers alone. With the rise of "the consumer society," wars are fought by and against consumers, slaughtering them on a massive scale. Again, the State is the beneficiary.
What Ferguson should have identified as the valuable institution ("app") is the Division of Labor.
6. The Work Ethic, once known as the Protestant Work Ethic, is now the South Korean work ethic. The education of the average 15 year old in Shanghai is now superior to that of the average American teen to the same degree that the average American's test scores are higher than the average teenager from Albania or Tunisia.
The Calvinist Work Ethic was the doctrine that being a butcher, a baker, or a candlestick maker was every bit as holy as being a priest, and that God blessed work with economic prosperity as a foretaste of eternal salvation. Calvin was opposed to the covetous consumer society.
The rise of secularism, consumerist "wealth," and the mega-warfare/welfare state, coincide with the death of the Protestant Work Ethic.
"Western Civilization" is Christian Civilization.
"The Consumer Society" is not.
He lists the following as sources of economic wealth, arising largely after 1800:
1. Competition
2. The Scientific Revolution
3. Property Rights
4. Modern Medicine
5. The Consumer Society
6. The Work Ethic
To the extent that these are valuable and durable institutions, they are Christian institutions. "The State" is destructive of Christian institutions.
1. "Competition" means "freedom." The State hates competition. The State is itself a monopoly. The State attracts those who hate competition like a light attracts moths.
2. The Scientific Method "is not Western, but Christian," concluded Stanley Jaki, a prizewinning historian of science. (Jaki is discussed by Tom Woods in a book we referenced back in 2007.)
3. Property rights are described by the Prophet Micah:
And each of them will sit
under his vine and under his fig tree,
With no one to make them afraid.
80% of people living in Protestant nations own property. 10% in non-Christian nations.
More private property has been confiscated by thieves in the public sector than by thieves in the private sector. The greatest enemy of private property is archism.
4. Modern medicine stands in contrast to shamanism. Science and healing are dominion and charity. It was missionaries that took medicine to Africa. The availability of modern medicine to the masses is the product of private property and
5. The Consumer Society
Ferguson notes that most of the world's wealth (over $100 Trillion), was created after 1800. This also marks the rise of secularism in the west. Does this show that economic growth is better served by secularism than by Christianity? Economists consider porno DVD's as "wealth." Value is subjective. "The Consumer Society" is both a covetous and an idolatrous society. "The Consumer Society" eventually becomes the Warfare Society, to protect and conquer coveted "wealth." In the medieval era, wars were limited events fought by professional soldiers, and left workers and consumers alone. With the rise of "the consumer society," wars are fought by and against consumers, slaughtering them on a massive scale. Again, the State is the beneficiary.
What Ferguson should have identified as the valuable institution ("app") is the Division of Labor.
6. The Work Ethic, once known as the Protestant Work Ethic, is now the South Korean work ethic. The education of the average 15 year old in Shanghai is now superior to that of the average American teen to the same degree that the average American's test scores are higher than the average teenager from Albania or Tunisia.
The Calvinist Work Ethic was the doctrine that being a butcher, a baker, or a candlestick maker was every bit as holy as being a priest, and that God blessed work with economic prosperity as a foretaste of eternal salvation. Calvin was opposed to the covetous consumer society.
The rise of secularism, consumerist "wealth," and the mega-warfare/welfare state, coincide with the death of the Protestant Work Ethic.
"Western Civilization" is Christian Civilization.
"The Consumer Society" is not.
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
The Real Columbus Day
Today (October 12) is the real anniversary of Columbus making landfall in the New World in 1492. The first celebration of Columbus Day was held in New York on this day in 1792. One hundred years later (1892), the Pledge of Allegiance was first recited by students in many US public schools, as part of a celebration marking the 400th anniversary of Columbus's voyage. In 1992, TIME Magazine asked, "Is the 500th anniversary of Columbus' voyage to America an event the country should celebrate?" Evidently not, as South Dakota has changed the day to "Native American Day," and the city of Berkeley, California has replaced Columbus Day with "Indigenous People's Day."
It was Columbus' goal to bring the light of Christianity to the New World. In the final years of his life he realized that he may have also brought the institutions of the Roman Empire (church, state, slavery) to the New World. He refused to don the uniform of the Admiral, instead choosing to wear the humble garb of a Franciscan monk.
In 1892, during the four hundredth anniversary of Columbus' landing, teachers, preachers, poets and politicians used Columbus Day rituals to teach ideals of patriotism. These patriotic rituals were framed around themes such as support for war, citizenship boundaries, the importance of loyalty to the nation, and celebrating social progress. (source)
In 1928, Calvin Coolidge could still speak admiringly of Columbus, mixing the themes of Christianity and statism. Obama cannot speak with the same admiration. Compare Coolidge and Obama here.
It was Columbus' goal to bring the light of Christianity to the New World. In the final years of his life he realized that he may have also brought the institutions of the Roman Empire (church, state, slavery) to the New World. He refused to don the uniform of the Admiral, instead choosing to wear the humble garb of a Franciscan monk.
In 1892, during the four hundredth anniversary of Columbus' landing, teachers, preachers, poets and politicians used Columbus Day rituals to teach ideals of patriotism. These patriotic rituals were framed around themes such as support for war, citizenship boundaries, the importance of loyalty to the nation, and celebrating social progress. (source)
In 1928, Calvin Coolidge could still speak admiringly of Columbus, mixing the themes of Christianity and statism. Obama cannot speak with the same admiration. Compare Coolidge and Obama here.
Saturday, July 11, 2009
Obama's Saturday Morning Radio Address
Every Saturday morning the President delivers a radio address to the nation, and moments later we analyze it on "The Ozarks Virtual Town Hall."
For the benefit of the search engines, here is a list of our Virtual Town Hall Meetings since the Bush Bailout last fall:
For the benefit of the search engines, here is a list of our Virtual Town Hall Meetings since the Bush Bailout last fall:
John Calvin's 500th Birthday
Click here to go to a replay of
the July 11th, 2009 Ozarks Virtual Town Hall
Subject: "Recession: Act of Government or Act of God?"
Independence Day July 4th, 2009
Click here to go to a replay of
the July 4th, 2009 Ozarks Virtual Town Hall
Subject: "Time for Another American Revolution?
1776-2009
Click here to go to a replay of
the June 27th, 2009 Ozarks Virtual Town Hall
Subject: "Does Government Generate Energy and Create Jobs?"
Click here to go to a replay of
the June 20th, 2009 Ozarks Virtual Town Hall
Subject: "Does Government Protect Consumers?"
Click here to go to a replay of
the June 13th, 2009 Ozarks Virtual Town Hall
Subject: "Health Care Reform, the Key to Our Fiscal Future"
Click here to go to a replay of
the June 6th, 2009 Ozarks Virtual Town Hall
Subject: "Would Jesus Celebrate D-Day?
Who Really Won World War II?
Click here to go to a replay of
the May 30th, 2009 Ozarks Virtual Town Hall
Subject: "Choosing a Minister of God"
Obama Nominates Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court
Click here to go to a replay of
the May 23rd, 2009 Ozarks Virtual Town Hall
Subject: "Memorial Day"
Would Jesus Celebrate "Memorial Day?"
Click here to go to a replay of
the May 16th, 2009 Ozarks Virtual Town Hall
Subject: "Health Care and Energy"
The New Fascism
Click here to go to a replay of
the May 9th, 2009 Ozarks Virtual Town Hall
Subject: "Giving Mothers Credit"
Mother's Day Edition
Click here to go to a replay of
the May 2nd, 2009 Ozarks Virtual Town Hall
Subject: "Dr. Obama's Swine Flu Prescription"
Click here to go to a replay of
the April 25th, 2009 Ozarks Virtual Town Hall
Subject: "The Myth of Government Frugality"
Click here to go to a replay of
the April 18th, 2009 Ozarks Virtual Town Hall
Subject: "The Myth of Government Responsibility"
Click here to go to a replay of
the April 11th, 2009 Ozarks Virtual Town Hall
Subject: "Passover & Easter"
Click here to go to a replay of
the April 4th, 2009 Ozarks Virtual Town Hall
Subject: "No Taxation Without G-20 Representation"
Click here to go to a replay of
the March 28th, 2009 Ozarks Virtual Town Hall
Subject: "Service: Voluntary or Coerced?"
Click here to go to a replay of
the March 21st, 2009 Ozarks Virtual Town Hall
Subject: "Huge Proposed Federal Budget"
Click here to go to a replay of
the March 14th, 2009 Ozarks Virtual Town Hall
Subject: "The FDA: Making Life Safer?"
Click here to go to a replay of
the March 7th, 2009 Ozarks Virtual Town Hall
Subject: "The Case for Bold Action"
Click here to go to a replay of
the February 28th, 2009 Ozarks Virtual Town Hall
Subject: "Obama is Bush 2.0"
Click here to go to a replay of
the February 21st, 2009 Ozarks Virtual Town Hall
Subject: "A Major Millstone"
Click here to go to a replay of
the February 14th, 2009 Ozarks Virtual Town Hall
Subject: Valentine's Day and more on Obama's Spending Plan
Click here to go to a replay of
the February 7th, 2009 Ozarks Virtual Town Hall
Subject: "Stimulus: Good News or Bad News?"
Click here to go to a replay of
the January 31st, 2009 Ozarks Virtual Town Hall
Subject: "Moving Forward?"
Click here to go to a replay of
the January 24th, 2009 Ozarks Virtual Town Hall
Subject: "The Old Socialism Begins Anew"
Click here to go to a replay of
the January 17th, 2009 Ozarks Virtual Town Hall
Subject: "Inauguration of a Dictator"
Click here to go to a replay of
the January 10th, 2009 Ozarks Virtual Town Hall
Subject: "The War President"
Click here to go to a replay of
the January 3rd, 2009 Ozarks Virtual Town Hall
Subject: "The Path of Peace"
Click here to go to a replay of
the December 27th, 2008 Ozarks Virtual Town Hall
Subject: "War on Earth" - Christmas in Washington, D.C.
Click here to go to a replay of
the December 20th, 2008 Ozarks Virtual Town Hall
Subject: Automaker Bailout
Click here to go to a replay of
the December 13th, 2008 Ozarks Virtual Town Hall
Subject: The War on Drugs and the War on Housing
Click here to go to a replay of
the December 6th, 2008 Ozarks Virtual Town Hall
Subject: Terrorists on the Run
Click here to go to a replay of
the November 29th, 2008 Ozarks Virtual Town Hall
Subject: Thanksgiving, Liberty, and Theocracy
Should the Government Give Thanks to God?
Click here to go to a replay of
the November 22nd, 2008 Ozarks Virtual Town Hall
Subject: The U.S. vs. the Free Market
Click here to go to a replay of
the November 15th, 2008 Ozarks Virtual Town Hall
Subject: International Financial Regulation?
Did you vote for our Foreign "Partners?"
Click here to go to a replay of
the November 8th, 2008 Ozarks Virtual Town Hall
Subject: Was Voting a Waste of Time?
The Bush-Obama Transition
Click here to go to a replay of
the November 1st, 2008 Ozarks Virtual Town Hall
Subject: Is Voting a Waste of Time?
Click here to go to a replay of
the October 25th, 2008 Ozarks Virtual Town Hall
Subject: Bailout Idolatry - America's False Religion
International Bankers are our Saviors
Click here to go to a replay of
the October 18th, 2008 Ozarks Virtual Town Hall
Subject: More Reassurances about the Bailout Rescue Plan
Click here to go to a replay of
the October 11th, 2008 Ozarks Virtual Town Hall
Subject: Reassurances about the Bailout Rescue Plan
Click here to go to a replay of
the October 4th, 2008 Ozarks Virtual Town Hall
Subject: The Bailout: Government Gift to Foolish Investors
Click here to go to a replay of
the September 27th, 2008 Ozarks Virtual Town Hall
Subject: The Bailout: Rescue Plan or Enslavement Plan?
Click here to go to a replay of
the September 20th, 2008 Ozarks Virtual Town Hall
Subject: Free Enterprise or Fascist Bailouts?
Saturday, October 29, 2011
Should We Celebrate "Reformation Day?"
I asked that question back in 1999:
Should We Celebrate "Reformation Day?"
I still don't have the answer.
Here is the text of that post, with the links updated:
*****
Should We Celebrate "Reformation Day?"
I say NO.
I'm grateful that there is an Internet mailing list like this one.
Imagine a carrier-pigeon mailing list a couple of months before
Y1k. The question asked: "Should We Celebrate Constantine Day?"
There were certainly some advantages to Constantine's removal
of Christianity from the list of illegal religions. But it was a
mixed bag. As much good as Constantine may have done, it's
a good thing we got out of the "Holy Roman Empire" biz.
"Reformation Day" is a celebration of Martin Luther.
I'm glad I'm not a Catholic, but I'm also glad I'm not a Lutheran.
Luther is like Constantine. God used him to make progress,
but we're not finished yet.
I received the following email from a Christian organization.
It's an "educational" piece. It appears to be filled with historical facts
of which most Christians are probably not aware.
I'm all for educating Christians, of course. But I'm not sure
this piece is telling us anything important. Let's read it and
then ask some questions.
----------==========**********O**********==========---------
Subj: 31 October
Date: 10/30/99 8:27:03 AM Pacific Daylight Time
From: http://www.blogger.com/group/vft/post?postID=tDloJXdTh2jFu1TGeOUFZvlTS1Nf4XloGRrIXKwhG_nmAdoo0rBedUg00LqHRltjmH7MkTbDVzZE_y8X6g (Servant_l)
To: http://www.blogger.com/group/vft/post?postID=Kkg65MJrgkQeOPL2qRC8l0myrpk5EzZ6jWD0UoOCzfLObXlB3HMcqxBSj_b0wXH_dQ8Q6FyNIlk
Hi Servant_L and CHRISED-L folks!
Last year Christian History Magazine sent out the first part of the
following in their newsletter. Further down, separated by dashed lines
and the byline of the new editor, is the rest of the story.
I just thought to send this to you because it truly marks what the
date of 31 October is really all about. While it is true, as noted below,
that we have better issues to distinguish ourselves on, let us continue
to fight prayerfully against the forces of darkness that attempt to exert
tremendous influences on this day as no other.
This story will not be repeated in the monthly SERVANT_L newsletter.
God bless
-----------------------------------------------------
The Importance of October 31
From Ted Olsen, Assistant editor
October 31. Forget about Jack-o-Lanterns and Trick-or-Treating -- history
took a major turn on this date nearly 500 years ago. Though officially,
most Protestant denominations will celebrate it on Sunday, October 31
is Reformation Day -- the day in Martin Luther walked up to the Castle
Church in Wittenberg, took out a hammer, and nailed his 95 Theses to
the door.
Well, probably, anyway. Luther himself never actually reported engaging
in such an act of protest. The whole nailing story actually comes from
his younger colleague, Philipp Melanchthon--who wasn't anywhere near
Wittenberg in 1517 and who didn't record the event until years after
Luther's death.
According to many historians, Luther probably mailed, not nailed, his
Theses to his fellow Catholics.
But even if his Theses didn't leave a hole in the Wittenberg door,
they certainly left a giant mark on Christianity. It began on when
Luther publicly objected to the way preacher Johann Tetzel was selling
indulgences. These were documents prepared by the church and bought by
individuals either for themselves or on behalf of the dead that would
release them from punishment due to their sins. As Tetzel preached,
"Once the coin into the coffer clings, a soul from purgatory heavenward
springs!"
Luther questioned the church's trafficking in indulgences (though he
did not oppose indulgences rightly practiced) and called for a public
debate of the 95 theses he had written. Instead, his 95 Theses spread
across Germany as a call to reform, and the issue quickly became not
indulgences but the authority of the church.
Pope Leo X soon moved to "quench a monk, ... Martin Luther by name,
and thus smother the fire before it should become a conflagration."
By the time an imperial edict was issued, calling Luther "a convicted
heretic," he had escaped, and would spend the rest of his life as an
outlaw. He elicited so much hostility that it was rumored--and taken
seriously for a time by some respected intellectuals of the day--that
he was the product of a bathhouse liaison between his mother and the
Devil. The church called him a "demon in the appearance of a man."
Still, he was a sensation. In 1520 and 1521, Luther was the rage.
Posters with his picture (single-sheet woodcuts) sold out as soon
as they went on sale, and many were pinned up in public places.
He's a fascinating character, not just for the importance he serves
in Christian history, but in the often strange details about his life.
He was infamous for his vulgar language. Evidence suggests he may have
made his astounding discovery of justification by faith while he was on
the toilet. At his first Mass as priest, he almost dropped the bread and
cup, and was so terrified that he tried to run from the altar. He claimed
that he hadn't even seen a Bible until he was 20 years old. And though he
has contributed several key documents to the church totalling more than
60,000 pages (including an important German translation of the Bible,
the hymn "A Mighty Fortress is Our God"; his Larger and Smaller
Catechism), he hoped that "all my books would disappear and the Holy
Scriptures alone be read."
That hasn't happened. In fact, it has been said that in most libraries,
books by and about Martin Luther occupy more shelves than those concerned
with any other figure except Jesus of Nazareth.
But for all that importance, many Christians today don't use the day to
discuss justification by faith alone. Or whether they're trying to buy
their way into heaven. Or countless other areas that Martin Luther's life
still bears relevance. Instead, it's all about the evils of Halloween.
It seems to me that there are better issues for us to distinguish
ourselves on and say, as Luther, "Here I stand, I can do no other."
By the way, both of our issues on Martin Luther, Issues 34 (early years)
and 39 (later years), can be ordered online at
http://st3.yahoo.com/cti/chrishispasi1.html or by calling 1-800-806-7798.
=======================================================
Return to Augsburg
from Elesha Coffman, assistant editor of Christian History
It's not often that in remembering the anniversary of a historic event
we can also highlight corresponding "history in the making." But the
ceremony in Augsburg on October 31 will go a long way toward bringing
one story full circle.
This Sunday, representatives of the Lutheran World Federation and the
Vatican will sign a Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification,
thus stating agreement on an issue that has divided Protestants and
Catholics since Martin Luther nailed his 95 Theses to the Wittenburg
door on October 31, 1517. The declaration reads, in part, "Together we
confess: By grace alone, in faith in Christ's saving work and not because
of any merit on our part, we are accepted by God and receive the Holy
Spirit who renews our hearts while equipping and calling us to good
works." Dialogue leading to this agreement began after the Second Vatican
Council in 1967, and much of the scholarly work behind it was carried
out in the United States, but no better place than Augsburg could have
been chosen for the signing itself.
In 1518, Cardinal Cajetan met Luther in Augsburg with the goal of
forcing the upstart monk to recant his controversial theses. Luther,
of course, refused, and he immediately fled the city. In 1530, Luther
still couldn't show his face in Augsburg, so it was his friend Philipp
Melancthon who appeared on his behalf to submit the conciliatory
Augsburg Confession to Emperor Charles V. Melancthon's attempt at making
peace was, however, unsuccessful, and religious conflict continued to
escalate.
Augsburg was again the site of an attempted compromise in 1548, when the
Interim of Augsburg was proffered as a temporary settlement between
Protestants and Catholics, awaiting a final settlement at the Council
of Trent. But various issues kept the Council of Trent from settling
much of anything that met the Protestants' approval, and it was not
until the 1555 Peace of Augsburg that a long-term solution was accepted.
This settlement recognized the existence of both Catholicism and
Lutheranism and stipulated that people should follow the religion of
their local ruler. This was more a victory for territorialism than for
tolerance (though people could sell their property and move, shifting
their allegiance).
In addition to the ghosts of past conflicts, however, Augsburg features
a visual reminder that peace is possible. On the plot of land where a
Roman temple once stood, the churches of St. Ulrich and St. Afra sit
side-by-side. Built between 1476 and 1500, the structures were once part
of the same ecclesiastical compound. However, after the Peace of Augsburg,
Lutherans took over what had been the monastery assembly hall and
established St. Ulrich's as a Protestant church. A shared crypt houses
the remains of the two namesake saints.
At the end of the 1530s, Luther said, "I am worried that we will never
gain come so close together as we did at Augsburg." His fear was justified
for several centuries, but this weekend, his descendents and those of his
former foes will once again be as close as Ulrich and Afra have always been.
---
----------==========**********O**********==========---------
KC:
So as I understand this letter, the big issue to be discussed on
"Reformation Day" is "Justification by Faith Alone." The meeting
in Augsburg will undoubtedly have some hard-core Reformed
pundits shouting about "compromise" and retreat from the
"purity" of the Reformed Doctrine of Justification by faith alone.
http://vftonline.org/VFTINC/anabaptists/Ref_Day.htm
It seems to me that Luther's ideas were important because
they liberated Christians from liturgical slavery; Luther prompted
revolution against Humanistic ecclesiocracy and man-made
traditions. I suppose this is a good reason to celebrate
"Reformation Day."
But for the most part, the letters above seem to me to be hopelessly
irrelevant.
Just a few years after Luther nailed/mailed his theses,
20-30,000 peasants were killed with Luther's tacit approval,
in uprisings which Luther had no small part in fomenting.
Not only was the issue in those uprisings (usury) never
resolved, but Luther (and Calvin), by retreating from a
full Theonomic position, entrenched the economics of
usury, and it is today the central organizing feature of
modern economics and foreign policy, supplanting
constitutional liberties in America and resulting in
the enslavement of millions more peasants in "Third World"
nations.
Should we celebrate "Reformation Day?"
http://vftonline.org/VFTINC/anabaptists/13-0index.htm
http://vftonline.org/VFTINC/frn/unabomb3.htm
I am a Theonomist. My passion is to see God's Law
obeyed throughout the world.
What has been the effect of the doctrine of "Justification by
faith alone?" Incomparable evil. Half a billion people deliberately
murdered in this century alone (not counting murders unauthorized
by the State), and the big discussion is the doctrine of
"imputation." I hasten to note at this point that I just reviewed
the chapters in the Westminster Confession of Faith on
soteriology (chas. 11-18), and find nothing I really disagree
with. In fact, I still find it to be a remarkably accurate statement
of Biblical doctrines, at least in this limited area of life. But as
a slogan, "Justification by Faith" has proven to be a washout.
The Catechism says man's chief purpose in life is to glorify
God. Our first question should be, "How can I glorify God?"
The "Justification by Faith" slogan has focused men's
attention on the question, "What must I do to be saved?"
**Indirectly,** of course, God is glorified by saving sinners.
But the focus of this question is man-centered: "What
do I have to do to avoid eternal punishment?" "What do I
have to do to make the after-life easier for myself?"
"What can I do for ME?"
Millions of people believe in "Justification by Faith Alone"
and fail the tests of the Justified Man in James 1-2.
The "Vine & Fig Tree" vision of the Prophet Micah does not
focus on "Justification by Faith." Its themes are
1. The Presence of God with us in His Kingdom
2. The World-wide Triumph of His Kingdom
3. The Thirst for Righteousness (Theonomy)
4. The Blessings of Peace
5. Family Values
6. Property
7. Community.
http://vftonline.org/Patriarchy/definitions/micah.htm
Why have these Biblical Themes been neglected in favor of
"Justification by Faith?" Why are thousands of verses in
the Bible ignored and huge tomes written on just a few
verses in Romans and Galatians?
http://covenanter.org/Justification/justificationhome.htm
Why has such a vast amount of theological ink been
devoted to "personal peace and affluence" in the after-life,
while ignoring "True Religion" as James defined it (James 1:27).
Theology by slogan is a strategy of death. It creates
superficiality rather than disciplined learning and wisdom.
But if I had to come up with a slogan to replace "Justification
by Faith," it would be "Justification by Allegiance." Just
as modern retrospective psychoanalysis of Luther has
"discovered" the origin of "Justification by Faith" in
Luther's internal, subjective angst, so "Justification by
Allegiance" comes out of my own wrestling with the
California State Bar in an attempt to become a licensed
attorney. The concept of allegiance is a fundamental
category of federalist or covenantal thought. It expresses
loyalty, willingness to obey orders, and a participation
in the blessings of the commonweal.
http://vftonline.org/TestOath/WhatIs.htm
None of this is present in any sufficient degree in
"Justification by Faith." (Although it is certainly implicit
in the term "Faith" -- see WCF, 14:2, "Saving Faith" --
"By this faith, a Christian believeth to be true whatsoever is
revealed in the Word, for the authority of God himself
speaking therein; and acteth differently upon that which
each particular passage thereof containeth; yielding obedience
to the commands, trembling at the threatenings, and
embracing the promises of God for this life,
and that which is to come.")
Finally, IMHO, the key to the fulfillment of Micah's
"Vine & Fig Tree" prophecy is the elimination of
the institutions of church and state. "Reformation Day"
gave us little if anything in this direction. As Milton
wrote, "New presbyter is but old priest, writ large."
http://vftonline.org/Patriarchy/attend.htm
Again, I emphasize my near-enthusiastic agreement with
everything in the Westminster Confession of Faith, chapters
11-18. But the time has come for a paradigm shift.
Kevin C.
http://VFTonline.org/VF95Theses/paradigm.htm
---------------------------------------------
And they shall beat their swords into plowshares
and sit under their Vine & Fig Tree.
Micah 4:1-7
[end 1999 post]
Should We Celebrate "Reformation Day?"
I still don't have the answer.
Here is the text of that post, with the links updated:
*****
Should We Celebrate "Reformation Day?"
I say NO.
I'm grateful that there is an Internet mailing list like this one.
Imagine a carrier-pigeon mailing list a couple of months before
Y1k. The question asked: "Should We Celebrate Constantine Day?"
There were certainly some advantages to Constantine's removal
of Christianity from the list of illegal religions. But it was a
mixed bag. As much good as Constantine may have done, it's
a good thing we got out of the "Holy Roman Empire" biz.
"Reformation Day" is a celebration of Martin Luther.
I'm glad I'm not a Catholic, but I'm also glad I'm not a Lutheran.
Luther is like Constantine. God used him to make progress,
but we're not finished yet.
I received the following email from a Christian organization.
It's an "educational" piece. It appears to be filled with historical facts
of which most Christians are probably not aware.
I'm all for educating Christians, of course. But I'm not sure
this piece is telling us anything important. Let's read it and
then ask some questions.
----------==========**********O**********==========---------
Subj: 31 October
Date: 10/30/99 8:27:03 AM Pacific Daylight Time
From: http://www.blogger.com/group/vft/post?postID=tDloJXdTh2jFu1TGeOUFZvlTS1Nf4XloGRrIXKwhG_nmAdoo0rBedUg00LqHRltjmH7MkTbDVzZE_y8X6g (Servant_l)
To: http://www.blogger.com/group/vft/post?postID=Kkg65MJrgkQeOPL2qRC8l0myrpk5EzZ6jWD0UoOCzfLObXlB3HMcqxBSj_b0wXH_dQ8Q6FyNIlk
Hi Servant_L and CHRISED-L folks!
Last year Christian History Magazine sent out the first part of the
following in their newsletter. Further down, separated by dashed lines
and the byline of the new editor, is the rest of the story.
I just thought to send this to you because it truly marks what the
date of 31 October is really all about. While it is true, as noted below,
that we have better issues to distinguish ourselves on, let us continue
to fight prayerfully against the forces of darkness that attempt to exert
tremendous influences on this day as no other.
This story will not be repeated in the monthly SERVANT_L newsletter.
God bless
-----------------------------------------------------
The Importance of October 31
From Ted Olsen, Assistant editor
October 31. Forget about Jack-o-Lanterns and Trick-or-Treating -- history
took a major turn on this date nearly 500 years ago. Though officially,
most Protestant denominations will celebrate it on Sunday, October 31
is Reformation Day -- the day in Martin Luther walked up to the Castle
Church in Wittenberg, took out a hammer, and nailed his 95 Theses to
the door.
Well, probably, anyway. Luther himself never actually reported engaging
in such an act of protest. The whole nailing story actually comes from
his younger colleague, Philipp Melanchthon--who wasn't anywhere near
Wittenberg in 1517 and who didn't record the event until years after
Luther's death.
According to many historians, Luther probably mailed, not nailed, his
Theses to his fellow Catholics.
But even if his Theses didn't leave a hole in the Wittenberg door,
they certainly left a giant mark on Christianity. It began on when
Luther publicly objected to the way preacher Johann Tetzel was selling
indulgences. These were documents prepared by the church and bought by
individuals either for themselves or on behalf of the dead that would
release them from punishment due to their sins. As Tetzel preached,
"Once the coin into the coffer clings, a soul from purgatory heavenward
springs!"
Luther questioned the church's trafficking in indulgences (though he
did not oppose indulgences rightly practiced) and called for a public
debate of the 95 theses he had written. Instead, his 95 Theses spread
across Germany as a call to reform, and the issue quickly became not
indulgences but the authority of the church.
Pope Leo X soon moved to "quench a monk, ... Martin Luther by name,
and thus smother the fire before it should become a conflagration."
By the time an imperial edict was issued, calling Luther "a convicted
heretic," he had escaped, and would spend the rest of his life as an
outlaw. He elicited so much hostility that it was rumored--and taken
seriously for a time by some respected intellectuals of the day--that
he was the product of a bathhouse liaison between his mother and the
Devil. The church called him a "demon in the appearance of a man."
Still, he was a sensation. In 1520 and 1521, Luther was the rage.
Posters with his picture (single-sheet woodcuts) sold out as soon
as they went on sale, and many were pinned up in public places.
He's a fascinating character, not just for the importance he serves
in Christian history, but in the often strange details about his life.
He was infamous for his vulgar language. Evidence suggests he may have
made his astounding discovery of justification by faith while he was on
the toilet. At his first Mass as priest, he almost dropped the bread and
cup, and was so terrified that he tried to run from the altar. He claimed
that he hadn't even seen a Bible until he was 20 years old. And though he
has contributed several key documents to the church totalling more than
60,000 pages (including an important German translation of the Bible,
the hymn "A Mighty Fortress is Our God"; his Larger and Smaller
Catechism), he hoped that "all my books would disappear and the Holy
Scriptures alone be read."
That hasn't happened. In fact, it has been said that in most libraries,
books by and about Martin Luther occupy more shelves than those concerned
with any other figure except Jesus of Nazareth.
But for all that importance, many Christians today don't use the day to
discuss justification by faith alone. Or whether they're trying to buy
their way into heaven. Or countless other areas that Martin Luther's life
still bears relevance. Instead, it's all about the evils of Halloween.
It seems to me that there are better issues for us to distinguish
ourselves on and say, as Luther, "Here I stand, I can do no other."
By the way, both of our issues on Martin Luther, Issues 34 (early years)
and 39 (later years), can be ordered online at
http://st3.yahoo.com/cti/chrishispasi1.html or by calling 1-800-806-7798.
=======================================================
Return to Augsburg
from Elesha Coffman, assistant editor of Christian History
It's not often that in remembering the anniversary of a historic event
we can also highlight corresponding "history in the making." But the
ceremony in Augsburg on October 31 will go a long way toward bringing
one story full circle.
This Sunday, representatives of the Lutheran World Federation and the
Vatican will sign a Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification,
thus stating agreement on an issue that has divided Protestants and
Catholics since Martin Luther nailed his 95 Theses to the Wittenburg
door on October 31, 1517. The declaration reads, in part, "Together we
confess: By grace alone, in faith in Christ's saving work and not because
of any merit on our part, we are accepted by God and receive the Holy
Spirit who renews our hearts while equipping and calling us to good
works." Dialogue leading to this agreement began after the Second Vatican
Council in 1967, and much of the scholarly work behind it was carried
out in the United States, but no better place than Augsburg could have
been chosen for the signing itself.
In 1518, Cardinal Cajetan met Luther in Augsburg with the goal of
forcing the upstart monk to recant his controversial theses. Luther,
of course, refused, and he immediately fled the city. In 1530, Luther
still couldn't show his face in Augsburg, so it was his friend Philipp
Melancthon who appeared on his behalf to submit the conciliatory
Augsburg Confession to Emperor Charles V. Melancthon's attempt at making
peace was, however, unsuccessful, and religious conflict continued to
escalate.
Augsburg was again the site of an attempted compromise in 1548, when the
Interim of Augsburg was proffered as a temporary settlement between
Protestants and Catholics, awaiting a final settlement at the Council
of Trent. But various issues kept the Council of Trent from settling
much of anything that met the Protestants' approval, and it was not
until the 1555 Peace of Augsburg that a long-term solution was accepted.
This settlement recognized the existence of both Catholicism and
Lutheranism and stipulated that people should follow the religion of
their local ruler. This was more a victory for territorialism than for
tolerance (though people could sell their property and move, shifting
their allegiance).
In addition to the ghosts of past conflicts, however, Augsburg features
a visual reminder that peace is possible. On the plot of land where a
Roman temple once stood, the churches of St. Ulrich and St. Afra sit
side-by-side. Built between 1476 and 1500, the structures were once part
of the same ecclesiastical compound. However, after the Peace of Augsburg,
Lutherans took over what had been the monastery assembly hall and
established St. Ulrich's as a Protestant church. A shared crypt houses
the remains of the two namesake saints.
At the end of the 1530s, Luther said, "I am worried that we will never
gain come so close together as we did at Augsburg." His fear was justified
for several centuries, but this weekend, his descendents and those of his
former foes will once again be as close as Ulrich and Afra have always been.
---
----------==========**********O**********==========---------
KC:
So as I understand this letter, the big issue to be discussed on
"Reformation Day" is "Justification by Faith Alone." The meeting
in Augsburg will undoubtedly have some hard-core Reformed
pundits shouting about "compromise" and retreat from the
"purity" of the Reformed Doctrine of Justification by faith alone.
http://vftonline.org/VFTINC/anabaptists/Ref_Day.htm
It seems to me that Luther's ideas were important because
they liberated Christians from liturgical slavery; Luther prompted
revolution against Humanistic ecclesiocracy and man-made
traditions. I suppose this is a good reason to celebrate
"Reformation Day."
But for the most part, the letters above seem to me to be hopelessly
irrelevant.
Just a few years after Luther nailed/mailed his theses,
20-30,000 peasants were killed with Luther's tacit approval,
in uprisings which Luther had no small part in fomenting.
Not only was the issue in those uprisings (usury) never
resolved, but Luther (and Calvin), by retreating from a
full Theonomic position, entrenched the economics of
usury, and it is today the central organizing feature of
modern economics and foreign policy, supplanting
constitutional liberties in America and resulting in
the enslavement of millions more peasants in "Third World"
nations.
Should we celebrate "Reformation Day?"
http://vftonline.org/VFTINC/anabaptists/13-0index.htm
http://vftonline.org/VFTINC/frn/unabomb3.htm
I am a Theonomist. My passion is to see God's Law
obeyed throughout the world.
What has been the effect of the doctrine of "Justification by
faith alone?" Incomparable evil. Half a billion people deliberately
murdered in this century alone (not counting murders unauthorized
by the State), and the big discussion is the doctrine of
"imputation." I hasten to note at this point that I just reviewed
the chapters in the Westminster Confession of Faith on
soteriology (chas. 11-18), and find nothing I really disagree
with. In fact, I still find it to be a remarkably accurate statement
of Biblical doctrines, at least in this limited area of life. But as
a slogan, "Justification by Faith" has proven to be a washout.
The Catechism says man's chief purpose in life is to glorify
God. Our first question should be, "How can I glorify God?"
The "Justification by Faith" slogan has focused men's
attention on the question, "What must I do to be saved?"
**Indirectly,** of course, God is glorified by saving sinners.
But the focus of this question is man-centered: "What
do I have to do to avoid eternal punishment?" "What do I
have to do to make the after-life easier for myself?"
"What can I do for ME?"
Millions of people believe in "Justification by Faith Alone"
and fail the tests of the Justified Man in James 1-2.
The "Vine & Fig Tree" vision of the Prophet Micah does not
focus on "Justification by Faith." Its themes are
1. The Presence of God with us in His Kingdom
2. The World-wide Triumph of His Kingdom
3. The Thirst for Righteousness (Theonomy)
4. The Blessings of Peace
5. Family Values
6. Property
7. Community.
http://vftonline.org/Patriarchy/definitions/micah.htm
Why have these Biblical Themes been neglected in favor of
"Justification by Faith?" Why are thousands of verses in
the Bible ignored and huge tomes written on just a few
verses in Romans and Galatians?
http://covenanter.org/Justification/justificationhome.htm
Why has such a vast amount of theological ink been
devoted to "personal peace and affluence" in the after-life,
while ignoring "True Religion" as James defined it (James 1:27).
Theology by slogan is a strategy of death. It creates
superficiality rather than disciplined learning and wisdom.
But if I had to come up with a slogan to replace "Justification
by Faith," it would be "Justification by Allegiance." Just
as modern retrospective psychoanalysis of Luther has
"discovered" the origin of "Justification by Faith" in
Luther's internal, subjective angst, so "Justification by
Allegiance" comes out of my own wrestling with the
California State Bar in an attempt to become a licensed
attorney. The concept of allegiance is a fundamental
category of federalist or covenantal thought. It expresses
loyalty, willingness to obey orders, and a participation
in the blessings of the commonweal.
http://vftonline.org/TestOath/WhatIs.htm
None of this is present in any sufficient degree in
"Justification by Faith." (Although it is certainly implicit
in the term "Faith" -- see WCF, 14:2, "Saving Faith" --
"By this faith, a Christian believeth to be true whatsoever is
revealed in the Word, for the authority of God himself
speaking therein; and acteth differently upon that which
each particular passage thereof containeth; yielding obedience
to the commands, trembling at the threatenings, and
embracing the promises of God for this life,
and that which is to come.")
Finally, IMHO, the key to the fulfillment of Micah's
"Vine & Fig Tree" prophecy is the elimination of
the institutions of church and state. "Reformation Day"
gave us little if anything in this direction. As Milton
wrote, "New presbyter is but old priest, writ large."
http://vftonline.org/Patriarchy/attend.htm
Again, I emphasize my near-enthusiastic agreement with
everything in the Westminster Confession of Faith, chapters
11-18. But the time has come for a paradigm shift.
Kevin C.
http://VFTonline.org/VF95Theses/paradigm.htm
---------------------------------------------
And they shall beat their swords into plowshares
and sit under their Vine & Fig Tree.
Micah 4:1-7
[end 1999 post]
Wednesday, December 26, 2007
Day 2: I'm Dreaming of a Large Christmas
On this second day of "The 12 Days of Liberty," we're going to look at one of the most misunderstood aspects of Christmas and Liberty: the meaning of the word "salvation."
When the angel announced the meaning of Christmas to Joseph, the angel said Jesus would save us from something. From what?
Most people give the answer: "From hell."
But this is what the angel said
And she will bring forth a Son, and you shall call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins
(Matthew 1:21)
This is actually a very different concept than being saved "from hell."
When the angel announced the meaning of Christmas to Joseph, the angel said Jesus would save us from something. From what?
Most people give the answer: "From hell."
But this is what the angel said
And she will bring forth a Son, and you shall call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins
(Matthew 1:21)
This is actually a very different concept than being saved "from hell."
Imagine a man who needs to be saved from his sins. At one time he was viewed as a success by all who knew him. After college, he earned an MBA and got on the executive fast-track at a Fortune 500 company. He has a nice home, a Lexus and a Hummer. But recently he has developed a compulsion to shoplift. He also can’t control his desire to visit prostitutes. Because of his arrests for shoplifting and prostitution, he has recently lost his job. As a result of the widespread publicity of his compulsions and arrests, he is rapidly losing the respect of his friends, neighbors, and now even his family. His wife is ready to leave him. His children are embarrassed by him, and they have begun “acting out” in school, with grades plummeting and frequent suspensions for discipline problems. He is watching his entire life crumble in front of him. But he can’t stop the shoplifting and the prostitutes. He says “Wal-Mart is a huge multi-billion dollar corporation; what’s a few hundred dollars worth of junk from China?” He also says, “A man has natural desires, and my wife doesn’t respect me anymore.” But in spite of this talk, he’s miserable, and kicks himself whenever he shoplifts, even when he “gets away with it.”
The evangelist on TV tells him that if he accepts Jesus into his heart, he can be saved from hell, and when he dies he will go straight to heaven. “Yeah,” he says to himself, “after living the next 40 years in hell.”
He doesn’t just want to be saved from hell, he wants to be saved from his sins.
How many families experience “hell on earth” because of the drunkenness, infidelity, domestic abuse, and financial anguish caused by “addictions” to drugs, sex, shopping, gambling, and power, while their church pastor drones on about “salvation” and going to heaven?
Must this misery continue till we die?
Why keep on living? Let’s all go to heaven NOW!!
This is wrong. There is an answer to earthly misery. Christmas is the answer.
A previous generation knew these “addictions” were sinful and their painful consequences wrong. Today’s relativist generation is not even sure Adolph Hitler was wrong (“He was acting according to his own standards”), but previous generations knew these things were wrong, and a measure of consolation could be obtained by trusting in God to bring repentance in the life of the adulterer, abuser, or alcoholic, even if repentance never came. Moral standards give hope. But today we have lost touch with God’s standard of holiness, and “dysfunctional” behavior is assumed to be normal, and is sometimes protected by law as an “alternative life style.” Many people today live their entire lives engulfed in a sense of meaninglessness and moral confusion. This weakened state leaves them vulnerable prey for the politically powerful.
The Bible promises more than “heaven.” In fact the Bible says very little about heaven, and far more about being “saved from our sins” in this life. These promises are summed up in the term “sanctification.”
Webster (1828 edition) defined “salvation” as, “The redemption of man from the bondage of sin and liability to eternal death, and the conferring on him everlasting happiness.”
The vast majority of verses in the Bible which talk about "salvation" are talking about a libertarian society, in which people are free from their addictions to sin, and as a result, free from the initiation of force by others -- especially "the government."
When the Angel announced that the Christ (the word means "Messiah") who was to be born on the first Christmas would save us from our sins, and be named JESUS, the angel was being redundant. “Jesus” means “God will save.” The name comes from the Hebrew word yasha. John E. Hartley, in the Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament
Yasha and its derivatives are used 353 times. The root meaning . . . is “make wide” or make sufficient: this root is in contrast to sarar, “narrow,” which means “be restricted” or “cause distress.” To move from distress to safety requires deliverance. [T]he majority of references to salvation speak of Yahweh granting deliverance from real enemies and out of real catastrophes. That which is wide connotes freedom from distress and the ability to pursue one’s own objectives. Thus salvation is not merely a momentary victory on the battlefield; it is also the safety and security necessary to maintain life unafraid of numerous dangers.
We will be studying this definition during "The 12 Days of Liberty." It is most important to get a truly Biblical definition of “salvation” -- and its connection with Liberty -- into our heads.
Let’s begin with the idea that the Hebrew word for “salvation” means “make wide” or “large.” There are many verses that say this, and yet most Christians are completely unaware of the idea that a fundamental meaning of “salvation” means “being put into a wide open space.”
But let’s not take Prof. Hartley’s word for it. Let’s be like the Bereans, who studied the Scriptures daily to see if these things are so (Acts 17:11). You may want to look at some of these passages in their context in your own Bible.
(Psalm 118:5) I called upon the Lord in distress: the Lord answered me, and set me in a large place.
(2 Samuel 22:20) He brought me forth also into a large place: He delivered me, because He delighted in me.
(Genesis 26:22) He moved from there and dug another well, and they did not quarrel over it; so he called it Rehoboth, saying, “Now the Lord has made room for us, and we shall be fruitful in the land.”
(Hosea 4:16) For Israel slideth back as a backsliding heifer: can now the Lord feed them as a lamb in a large place?
(Psalm 31:8) and hast not delivered me into the hand of the enemy; Thou hast set my feet in a broad place.
(Psalm 18:19) He brought me forth also into a large place; he delivered me, because he delighted in me.
(Psalm 66:12) Thou hast caused men to ride over our heads; we went through fire and through water: but thou broughtest us out into a wealthy place.
(Psalm 69:35) For God will save Zion, and will build the cities of Judah: that they may dwell there, and have it in possession.
In the Bible, people who truly understand the meaning of Christmas are shown to be concerned about living in a “large” land. Of course, in a more agrarian society, “large” is better, as far as land goes. But when God promises to save us by putting us into a “large land,” it’s clear that more is included than going to heaven after living for decades in a narrow land before we up and die. What is the modern equivalent of a “large land?” It varies from person to person, but it includes some form of economic and political prosperity. “Liberty” and “large” are Biblical concepts we are not familiar enough with. Let’s review them and put them in our brains, so that as we read the Bible we will be more aware of them.
Exodus 3:8 So I have come down to deliver them out of the hand of the Egyptians, and to bring them up from that land to a good and large land, to a land flowing with milk and honey, to the place of the Canaanites and the Hittites and the Amorites and the Perizzites and the Hivites and the Jebusites.
Leviticus 25:10 And you shall consecrate the fiftieth year, and proclaim liberty throughout all the land to all its inhabitants. It shall be a Jubilee for you; and each of you shall return to his possession, and each of you shall return to his family.
Judges 18:10 When you go, you will come to a secure people and a large land. For God has given it into your hands, a place where there is no lack of anything that is on the earth.”
1 Chronicles 4:40 And they found rich, good pasture, and the land was broad, quiet, and peaceful; for some Hamites formerly lived there.
Nehemiah 7:4 Now the city was large and spacious, but the people in it were few, and the houses were not rebuilt.
Nehemiah 9:35 For they have not served You in their kingdom, Or in the many good things that You gave them, Or in the large and rich land which You set before them; Nor did they turn from their wicked works.
Psalm 119:45 And I will walk at liberty, For I seek Your precepts.
Isaiah 61:1 “The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon Me, Because the LORD has anointed Me To preach good tidings to the poor; He has sent Me to heal the brokenhearted, To proclaim liberty to the captives, And the opening of the prison to those who are bound;
Jeremiah 34:8 This is the word that came to Jeremiah from the LORD, after King Zedekiah had made a covenant with all the people who were at Jerusalem to proclaim liberty to them:
Jeremiah 34:15-17 Then you recently turned and did what was right in My sight—every man proclaiming liberty to his neighbor; and you made a covenant before Me in the house which is called by My name. 16 Then you turned around and profaned My name, and every one of you brought back his male and female slaves, whom you had set at liberty, at their pleasure, and brought them back into subjection, to be your male and female slaves.’
17 “Therefore thus says the LORD: ‘You have not obeyed Me in proclaiming liberty, every one to his brother and every one to his neighbor. Behold, I proclaim liberty to you,’ says the LORD—’to the sword, to pestilence, and to famine! And I will deliver you to trouble among all the kingdoms of the earth.
2 Corinthians 3:17 Now the Lord is the Spirit; and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.
James 1:25 But he who looks into the perfect law of liberty and continues in it, and is not a forgetful hearer but a doer of the work, this one will be blessed in what he does.
James 2:12 So speak and so do as those who will be judged by the law of liberty.
For a people to enjoy liberty in a "large place," they must have been "saved from their sins." America's Founding Fathers understood this. In one of the most important addresses in the history of America, George Washington reminded the nation:
Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of man and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connexions with private and public felicity.
It is substantially true, that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government. The rule, indeed, extends with more or less force to every species of free government.
In a very important sense, we no longer have to dream of a "large Christmas," a Christmas of liberty. Throughout the Christmas story, a decidedly un-libertarian government looms large, crushing the weak with an iron hand, compelling Joseph and the pregnant Mary to hike to Bethlehem from their home town for the imperial census (Luke 2:1-7;), and killing all the babies (Matthew 2:16-18) in an attempt to kill a rival king (Matthew 2:3). The corruption and violence of a government that claimed to be divine would shock us if we could visit that age. We have become accustomed to living under a government that at least professes the ideal of "Liberty Under God."
Adherents of the religion of Secular Humanism want us to believe that everything good about America came from the minds of the Caesars and their court philosophers. But Greece and Rome gave us little -- except bad examples. These ancient empires were dominated by irrationalism and occultism. Karl Popper devoted the first volume of The Open Society and Its Enemies
John Lofton has compiled some telling quotations from scholars in a previous -- more Christian -- century. What follows is from his essay:
And make no mistake about it. Regardless of what you’ve heard regarding the alleged greatness of the ancient, Greco-Roman, pre-Christian world, there was no real, true freedom and/or liberty during this era. None. In his book The Ancient City: A Study On The Religion, Laws And Institutions Of Greece And Rome
The citizen was subordinate in everything, and without any reserve, to the city; he belonged to it body and soul. The [pagan] religion which produced the State, and the State which supported [this] religion, sustained each other; these two powers formed a power almost superhuman, to which the body and soul were equally enslaved. There was nothing independent in man; his body belonged to the State and was devoted to its defense.
For example, Aristotle and Plato incorporated into their ideal codes the command that a deformed baby son was to be put to death. And in his “Laws,” Plato says (and this sounds very familiar today): “Parents ought not to be free to send or not to send their children to the masters to whom the city has chosen [for their education]; for the children belong less to their parents than to the city.” And in ancient Athens, a man could be put on trial and convicted for something called “incivism,” that is being insufficiently affectionate toward the State! Coulanges says (emphasis mine):
The ancients, therefore, knew neither liberty in private life, liberty in education, nor religious liberty. The human person counted for very little against that holy and almost divine authority called the country or the State…. It is a singular error, among all human errors, to believe that in the ancient cities men enjoyed liberty. They had not even the idea of it.
Commenting on our Lord’s God/Caesar distinction, Coulanges says:
It is the first time that God and the state are so clearly distinguished. For Caesar at that period was still the pontifex maximus, the chief and the principal organ of the Roman religion; he was the guardian and the interpreter of beliefs. He held the worship and the dogmas in his hands. Even his person was sacred and divine, for it was a peculiarity of the policy of the emperors that, wishing to recover the attributes of ancient royalty, they were careful not to forget the divine character which antiquity had attached to the king-pontiffs and to the priest-founders. But now Christ breaks the alliance which paganism and the empire wished to renew. He proclaims that religion is no longer the State, and that to obey Caesar is no longer the same thing as to obey God.
Christianity … separates what all antiquity had confounded…. It was the source whence individual liberty flowed…. The first duty no longer consisted in giving one’s time, one’s strength, one’s life to the State … all the virtues were no longer comprised in patriotism, for the soul no longer had a country. Man felt that he had other obligations besides that of living and dying for the city. Christianity … placed God, the family, the human individual above country, the neighbor above the city.
Because of this hideous tyranny, it is no surprise that self-murder (suicide) was so rampant in the ancient world. As Dr. Gerhard Uhlhorn tells us in his The Conflict Of Christianity With Heathenism
Heathenism ended in barrenness and sheer despair, and at last the only comfort was that men are free to leave this miserable world by suicide. Patet exitus! The way out of this life stands open! That is the last consolation of expiring heathenism.
And he quotes Seneca, who said that “the aim of all philosophy is to despise life,” as saying, concerning the suicide option:
Seest thou yon steep height? Thence is the descent to freedom. Seest thou yon sea, yon river, yon well? Freedom sits there in the depths. Seest thou yon low, withered tree? There freedom hangs. Seest thou thy neck, thy throat, thy heart? They are ways of escape from bondage.
To which Dr. Uhihorn adds:
Can the bankruptcy of Heathenism be more plainly declared than in these words…? With what power then must have come the preaching of this word: "Christ is risen! The wages of sin is death: but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord."
And in a little noticed and seldom quoted passage from Democracy in America, Alexis de Tocqueville says:
The most profound and capacious minds of Rome and Greece ... tried to prove that slavery was in the order of nature and that it would always exist. Nay, more, everything shows that those of the ancients who had been slaves before they became free, many of whom have left us excellent writings, themselves regarded servitude in no other light.
All the great writers of antiquity belonged to the aristocracy of masters, or at least they saw that aristocracy established and expanded before their eyes. Their mind, after it had expanded itself in several directions, was barred from further progress in this one; and the advent of Jesus Christ upon earth was required to teach that all members of the human race are by nature equal and alike.
The historian Arnold Toynbee saw, accurately, the great failing of the ancient Greeks, that they “saw in Man, ‘the Lord of Creation,’ and worshipped him as an idol instead of God.” And this rejection of the true God —- which similarly threatens modern Western civilization —- led to Hellenism’s breakdown and disintegration. Rejecting Gibbon, Toynbee says neither Christians nor barbarians destroyed the Roman Empire; they merely walked over a corpse.
And in his book Religious Origins of the American Revolution
The American Revolution might thus be said to have started, in a sense, when Martin Luther nailed his 95 theses to the church door at Wittenberg. It received a substantial part its theological and philosophical underpinnings from John Calvin’s Institutes Of The Christian Religion
Put another way, the American Revolution is inconceivable in the absence of that context of ideas which have constituted radical Christianity. The leaders of the Revolution in every colony were imbued with the precepts of the Reformed faith.
Indeed, he adds, in early America, the Reformation
left its mark on every aspect of the personal and social life of the faithful. In the family, in education, in business activity, in work, in community and, ultimately, in politics, the consequences of the Reformation were determinative for American history.
As remote or repugnant as Puritanism may be to some, Smith says “it is essential that we understand that the Reformation in its full power was one of the great emancipations of history.” He says the passage in the book of Micah about “every man…under his vine and under his fig tree” was “the most potent expression of the colonist’s determination to be independent whatever the cost,…having substantial control over his own affairs. No theme was more constantly reiterated by writers and speakers in the era of the Revolution.”
* * *
Tomorrow we'll begin looking at this idea of salvation-as-liberty in the prophecy of John the Baptist's father Zacharias.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)