What are the consequences of a document that enshrines a humanistic oath to support and defend man's word, the constitution, and not God's word? We're seeing them play out in front of our eyes. The country is polarized - not because of an irrational commitment to beliefs that should be compromised but because of the logical and foreseeable conclusions of people's religious commitments. The humanist, committed to an evolutionary view of the world, cannot subscribe to timeless principles, no matter how often Christians tell him that he must. The only timeless principle for the evolutionary humanist is change. So, when we tell the evolutionary humanist that murdering the unborn is a crime of murder, he thinks (no matter what he says), "There is a need to eliminate the unfit, the problematic; it's better the parent(s) decide than that the government decide." When we tell him that marriage is for procreation of the species and only between a man and a woman, he asks, "Why? Perhaps that's the wave of the future. Perhaps that will save mankind, whose population is exponentially increasing and using up too many resources."
Therefore, those who believe in God's law-word, His sanctions that He imposes on nations that deny Him, we are seen as adhering to the antiquated words of men long dead. We are seen as hinderers of progress, threats to the health of the nation which is moving forward into the future. Our arguments are not convincing to those who are committed to a completely different foundational meaning for life and existence. As for debate, we merely confirm the humanists' view that we are a threat to progress. We are prophets, like those of the Old Testament, whose words were mere entertainment: "Listen to that crazy mad man telling us God's judgment will fall on us for killing babies and enshrining perversions of sex in same sex marriage!"
Without sanctions, we are just the voice of another interest group trying to get our way with the legislators, the president, the governor, whoever. The Christian position is not that we have a better way as to which we are trying to convince people; we have the only way. It is not that one day people will wake up and decide that following the bible will result in the most prosperity and progress for the world; it is that they must submit to the all sovereign governor of the universe and His laws. Acts states: "God commands all men everywhere to repent."
Even when we compromise and say, "Let's just obey the Constitution and you don't command us with anti-Christian laws from Washington, D.C., and we won't demand you obey God's law," and that is a compromise, they say, "We do obey the Constitution, but not the way some white, slave-owning men, dead for over two hundred years, intended. If you don't follow us, you're hindering our country's progress! We can't have that. You drag everyone down with your parochial, antiquated ways. You will follow us, and we'll all prosper and evolve into the future."
So how do they do it? The liberals, I mean. They adopt a comprehensive view of life, and they go about implementing it, ignoring criticism. Hillary Clinton, wife of President Bill Clinton in the 1990's, wrote a book titled "It Takes a Village." It was mocked because it wasn't individualistic; it was communitarian, like her politics. However, education is where the future is taught how to think. The liberals can always count on a new crop of liberals, no matter how many failed policies they implement. Public schooling is faithful to produce "former" bible believers. They convince us Christians that "education" needs improving, more funding. And we say, "Oh yes, of course, we're not against education!" So, they fool us again and train up our children to be the future evolutionary humanists of the nation.
It also demonstrates the folly of relying upon natural law. Natural law says that there are fixed laws in the natural world and that we can find them there by being objective in our study of nature. Yet, the humanist observes nature and sees only change, not fixed laws. We support education, controlled by humanists, and we advocate for natural law, which supports the evolutionists view that nature teaches us, not the sovereign God of the bible. And we wonder why nothing changes, it only gets worse.
We also say that we should save souls not change society. Yet, the society's ways pervert people's souls. Not everyone will be saved, which reformed believers in the biblical doctrine of election know. However, just because not everyone will be saved, that doesn't mean that society has to from God and His law, thus dooming the society. Society is doomed by forsaking God's law, for they forsake the God of justice and judgment upon nations that deny Him. A smorgasboard legal system results in a pre-flood society when violence reigned, a Judges society when every man did what was right in his own eyes, a Roman empire polytheistic society when the civil government tried to accommodate everyone's viewpoint resulting in worship of man, the emperor, the state.
What happens when Christians, who are more than conquerors and with whom Christ promises to be forever, join with the humanists. Humanists win, and the world fails and is judged. If we align with Christ and His word alone, we have victory for Christ's kingdom.
No comments:
Post a Comment