Culture Favors Mercy but Hate Judgment

Culture Favors Mercy and Hates Judgment

(Current events that inspired this article:  Refugees, Immigration, the Pope favors "mercy" over "judgment", debate of public duty to provide health insurance" , Sexual "self-identification", and other issues of the day that have this common theme.)

Most people seem to favor mercy over judgment, even to the point of wanting to obscure or erase all of the “lines” that distinguish good from bad, or truth from lies. Although Christians should understand that the nature of God embodies grace and mercy, as well has judgment and punishment, we seem reluctant to embrace the latter, while blindly (and loudly) proclaiming the former. Modern American culture proclaims a “progressive” posture that regards humans as fully capable of defining their own identity, and determining their own destiny. Failing to learn anything from history, modernism continues to assert (against the evidence) that man does not need God, or His “silly” rules.

Within the Roman Catholic church, there is a sharp schism dividing those who favor blurring lines between good and evil (including the Pope) from those conservatives who hold fast to the traditional teachings of the Bible.   Within Protestantism, the same schism is observed where many denominations/churches are comfortable absorbing all manner of culturally-inspired behaviors and beliefs and placing those ahead of clear, unambiguous, Biblical teaching. “Professing themselves to be wise [the modern church] became fools”.  (Ro 1:22)

Mercy is an acknowledgement that “There, but for the grace of God, go I”.  Judgment is the acknowledgement that God’s rules, and the standards of behavior, are right, and true, and that we are duty-bound to obey them or face the consequences.   These concepts are not mutually exclusive. In fact, they operate best when in balanced harmony with each other.  Warning others of the perils of sin, and pointing out with specificity, the standards by which righteousness is defined, is inarguably the greatest act of mercy.  

How often I have heard complaints of the agnostic or atheist or “nominal Christian” that “We don’t want you cramming your [Christian] beliefs down our throats”.  Fair enough.   But neither do I want (nor will I tolerate) your poor choices (i.e. rejection of sound principles) to create additional burdens on me or my family. Christianity does not COMPEL people to believe a certain way, but based upon the belief (and faith) it DOES establish a proven system of family, community and national parameters by which ALL people, regardless of personal belief, may prosper. While we may appreciate the application of mercy when we fail (individually) to operate within those parameters, the failure of the system to enforce the rules (corporately) will result in the destruction of the system.

Whether it be the Pope, or the President, or a parent, of any other person in authority, the mandate of our “office” is that we consistently, faithfully, and uniformly, apply the fundamental principles.  Apply this idea to any discussion in the public arena.  Is the world a better place with, or without abortion on demand?  Are we made better, or worse, as a result of national health insurance? Are we made stronger, or weaker, when our children are spoiled and people always take the “easy path”?  Is life sweeter when we tolerate wickedness in our midst, or when we become so “enlightened” that we no longer even recognize wickedness?

Mercy is a good thing when it reminds of our sinful state and draws us back into a relationship with God in Christ. It is NOT a good thing when it ceases to be “mercy” and becomes instead “tolerance”.  Judgment is the mechanism whereby we keep that distinction clear. It is the duty of civil government to be the “minister of God for judgment” (Ro 13: 4) and it is the duty of the Church to be the minister of God for Grace. In that sense, those who advocate a ‘separation of church and state” are absolutely correct.  NOT that the church has no legitimate role in the maintenance of social order, but that both church and state have “joint custody” with distinct roles to achieve a common outcome. God’s rules [should] govern both institutions.  When those institutions are united in common principles we have genuine community (“common” + “unity”). When both institutions abandon the fundamental principles, they become “partners in crime” and the people will become slaves of the juggernaut –the Leviathan about which Thomas Hobbes wrote.

John Sterling

March 14, 2017

Obedience to Law is Worship of God

Obedience is Worship

Love of God’s Law is evidence of relationship with God. When we despise the law, it is likewise evidence of our relationship.  We do not have the right, nor should we have the desire, to change the law to conform to our behavior, but rather, should desire to make our behavior conform to the law. Obedience to God is true worship. Our Holy God desires, and requires, holy worship.

I desire to do your will, my God; your law is within my heart." ( ps 40:8)

We know that we have come to know him if we keep his commands. (1 John 2:3)

Thy word have I hid in mine heart, that I might not sin against thee. (Ps 119:11)

I delight in your decrees; I will not neglect your word. (Psalm 119:16 )

I teach college classes at both the Bachelor’s and Master’s Degree levels of learning, in three different Christian institutions. Usually, but not always, students who sit in my classes are either Christians, or at least are not hostile to the Christian Message and Doctrines. It is not uncommon to find students who, having been educated in secular and state-run high schools and colleges, subscribe to a belief that the U.S. Constitution should be altered or amended (or altogether replaced) in order to accommodate a changing culture and changing standards of conduct.  I absolutely agree with those students who argue that there is a great chasm between the principles of the Founding of the Republic and the practices of society today.   But I argue that the solution is NOT to change the rules to conform to our changing morals. Rather the rules (laws) are the proper standard by which we must judge our conduct.  WE must conform our behavior to the law, which we understand to flow from the authority of God through the institution of government (Ro 13:1-7)

If it is true that the principles of self-governance require self-discipline, and that that self-discipline is best achieved through a right relationship with Jesus Christ, then it is reasonable to conclude that the greatest success of our legal/political/economic system will be achieved through adherence to the laws of God.    Our Founders gave us a doctrine called the “Rule of Law” which presumes that legitimate authority comes from God, and is delegated by the people to a governing body, which is divided into three branches to achieve a balance of power.  Since the laws promulgated by that government are presumptively valid, originating as they do from the people, who are themselves acting in the constraints of their faith, then the law is presumptively good. (This is of course a rebuttable presumption since the government does not always operate within its legitimate constraints)  Starting with a presumption that the Law is good, then conforming our behavior to the law is therefore also good.  When our behavior departs from the standard of the law, our behavior is presumptively bad.  It will be therefore destructive of the government, and the law, and the authority from whence those derive, if we grant our behavior supreme authority over the law.  This NEVER works out well.

In those days there was no king in Israel; everyone did what was right in his own eyes. (Judges 21:25)

In those days there was no king in Israel; every man did what was right in his own eyes. (Judges 17:6)

Following the death of Joshua, there merged a new political model in Jewish history for over 200 years. For the first time in history, the Jewish people were independent in their own homeland. Perhaps more importantly they did not have a single, strong leader to unify and direct social interaction. Besides lacking central temporal authority (i.e. central government) at the time of the judges, there was also little reverence for religious law as well. Differences between people were resolved at the tribal level by leaders chosen from among the people of the tribe.  Sometimes this worked well, but often it did not because politics has not changed. History reveals to us that leaders who neglect the Law of God, and become a law unto themselves, will ultimately destroy their own system of governance.  In every case where man “does what is right in his own eyes” he will ultimately be destroyed.

The king is the actual and symbolic figure of authority which is presumptively established by the people and anointed by God and therefore “legitimate”. (Ro 13: 1-7) When there is no “king” (no law-no authority) then people are left to do whatever THEY think is best and the end result is NEVER happy.  Because when everyone follows their own path, and seeks only their own self-interests, there is no “community” (common + unity = community). The law “regularlizes” our relationships and gives predictability and stability to society. When it is absent, so is social stability.

“Thus you shall say to the house of Jacob, and tell the people of Israel: You yourselves have seen what I did to the Egyptians, and how I bore you on eagles’ wings and brought you to myself. Now therefore, if you will indeed obey my voice and keep my covenant, you shall be my treasured possession among all peoples, for all the earth is mine; and you shall be to me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.” Exodus 19:3-6

If thy children will keep my covenant and my testimony that I shall teach them, their children shall also sit upon thy throne for evermore. (PS 132:12)

The way that you show someone you love them is that conduct express that you are putting the other person ahead of yourself.   We worship God when we demonstrate that we are placing EVERYTHING in subjection to Him.  The First Commandment is that we shall have no other gods before the Lord God. All of the other Commandments illustrate the principle that God is supreme. His rules require obedience.  We demonstrate worship by honoring God and obeying His Commandments. Conversely, we dishonor God when we take matters into our own hands, and we pursue OUR interests above His.  The very idea that we should re-interpret the law (whether Scripture, or the U.S. Constitution which is presumably based upon His Holy Principles) is tantamount to “placing other gods” before Him. Trashing the Constitution and replacing it with something that reflects our godless, permissive, self-indulgent lifestyles would be the exact opposite of worship.  It would be the polar opposite of giving God Honor. It would be showing God our heel, turning our back on Him, rejecting Him. If we desire HIS blessings, we are to honor HIS Word.

Whoever has my commands and keeps them is the one who loves me. The one who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I too will love them and show myself to them." (John 14:21)

Jesus replied, "Anyone who loves me will obey my teaching. My Father will love them, and we will come to them and make our home with them. (John 14:23)

If your law had not been my delight, I would have perished in my affliction. (Ps 119:92

There is much hand-wringing these days about the state of our nation.  America is in decline and most people seem unable to propose a “fix”.   It seems clear to almost everyone that society is in a mess, yet the popular “solution seems to be to go even further away from God.   Suggesting that we abandon the fundamental principles articulated in the Declaration and the U.S. Constitution would be just another move in the WRONG direction. If we truly desire to correct the problems of our society, our ONLY answer is to return to the God of our fathers.

For this people's heart has become calloused; they hardly hear with their ears, and they have closed their eyes. Otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts and turn, and I would heal them.' (Acts 28:27 )

My comfort in my suffering is this: Your promise preserves my life. (Psalm 119:50)

If my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land. (2 Chron 7:14)

Because of our selfish and inward-looking nature, we have accepted the lie of the Devil that obedience to God is to hard, too cumbersome, too painful.  But those who walk in obedience soon discover that Jesus told the truth when He said, my yoke is easy, and my burden is light. (Mt 11:30).  We also read in 1 John 5:3 that “In fact, this is love for God: to keep his commands. And his commands are not burdensome.”  We will discover that giving God our due worship in the form of obedience to His Word, will reap enormous rewards in terms of Peace, Security, and confidence. That is the life to which we have been called.

John Sterling, MA JD    2/4/15/2015

Self-discipline required for self-government

Note* This post is a composite of several responses made to students when we were discussing the influence of Christianity on our system of law and government. There was a great deal of confusion at first because students were using ambiguous terms and were not carefully analyzing the sources they were using!

God and Government

It is not always an easy thing to communicate effectively with someone. Words are symbols of ideas..an attempt to make concrete something that is abstract. First... "there is a lot of misinformation and half-truths." Most communication takes place for a PURPOSE, that is, the speaker (or writer, or movie producer) has AN AGENDA. The PURPOSE of communication is to move an idea forward. When the subject is as sensitive as religious faith, or political influence, or some other deeply held belief, then the field of speakers and writers becomes quite crowded and very noisy. I am one of those people who communicates with a purpose: that is, I speak (or write) in order to MOVE an idea forward. Listening to (or carefully reading) a message from another is also moving an idea forward.

Second...the CONTENT of the communication may contain error, either by design, or by ignorance, or through carelessness. In this day of instant information via media (including Internet), it is HARDER (not easier) to get accurate information. There is a plethora of "information" that is more conjecture than fact. It is very important that we exercise due diligence as we process new information.

Third... there are different kinds of TRUTH. There is OBJECTIVE truth (which is generally held to be true because sufficient experience/research/study has gone into the matter that most people are persuaded without further evidence) and there is SUBJECTIVE truth (which is "subject" to the filtering process of one's own personal experience, or perceptions.) These two terms are NOT mutually exclusive...that is, one MAY exist with the other. In other words, some "truth" may be a mix of objective and subjective reality. ALSO, truth itself is used differently in context. There is TRUE (as in morally right), and there is TRUE (as in factually correct), and there is TRUE (as in "original") etc.. You see, the word "true", without context, is ambiguous (having more than one possible meaning).

Concerning legal and social issues, there are many sources of beliefs, among the most prominent, religion. People draw upon their religion (or religious upbringing) to frame their values and expectations in their social relationships. In another article, I address the question of whether America is a “Christian” nation. Although many people claim to be “Christian” they are really describing a moral system that governs, at least to some extent, their conduct and their social interaction. This group of “Christians” is NOT describing a relationship with Jesus Christ in which they regularly and materially participate. There are probably millions of people for whom religion is merely a social framework within which they interpret behavior and regulate social relationships. There is nothing "spiritual" about their experience! Jesus taught AGAINST this kind of religion! Religion (and religious experience) is both objective AND subjective. There are people who claim to be "Christian" but who lack faith, and have no RELATIONSHIP with Christ. These people have transformed a faith into a fraud. These people are "religious", but NOT Christian, even though they go to traditional "worship" services and perform ritualistic "Christian" acts like pray before mealtime, pay tithe to the their church, and even do good works. You see, the Taliban is a very "religious" group. The Muslim Extremists that threaten us are deeply "religious" people.

Christianity is NOT a religion...it is a RELATIONSHIP. You cannot be a Christian by "belonging" to a Christian church. The people who try to ram their religion down your throat are, probably, not secure in their relationship (if they even HAVE a relationship with Christ. Those who have never HAD the experience are in no position to deny the validity of that experience for those of us who HAVE. You will notice that, very often, it is people that have not even an inkling of spiritual experience who are the loudest protestors against it. (That is a case of subjective reality or truth, trying to suppress objective reality or truth.)

Atheists are people who hold a belief that there IS NO GOD. A person who is not yet decided, and holds forth the possibility that God may, or may not exist, is properly labeled AGNOSTIC. An Agnostic is, by definition, a searcher. As to being "anti-religious", JESUS was definitely "anti-religious". He spoke out repeatedly against the Sadducees (theological liberals), and the Pharisees theological conservatives) of His day.

WHY IS THIS IMPORTANT? Because religion is at the very heart of the conflict in which we are currently embroiled. The Muslim Extremists are devoutly "religious" and they very much believe in the idea that religion is necessary for the control of people (Just like the Pharisees of Jesus' day). Anti-Christians HATE Christianity because it teaches the AUTONOMY of man. If a man (or woman) is under the control of Christ, he will not be controlled by other men. Christianity teaches that women are spiritually equal to men (this idea REALLY rankles the Muslims.) Christianity teaches that men are FREE to choose between good and evil. THAT is an idea that is not popular with "control-freaks" (like the Taliban, and many in our own government). Christianity teaches INTERNAL control (SELF-Discipline) which leads us to a form of government that possess and exerts minimal external control. John Adams once said, “Our constitution is only fit for a moral and religious people. It is wholly unsuited to the governance of any other kind.” When we grant ever more power to our government in order to control our behavior, we are acknowledging that we are no longer a “moral and religious people”. Self-government can ONLY work with a self-disciplined people, and apart from the internal direction and discipline that comes from our faith, we Americans are incapable of self-governance. If we allow the destruction of our historic principles, rooted in our historic Christian faith, we are deserving of the tyranny of big, controlling, intrusive, government.

John A. Sterling