Subject: Constitution
Mythbusters
Constitution
Mythbusters
|
|
Posted: 13 Dec 2013 10:16 AM PST
[T]he law is ignored and justice is never
upheld. For the wicked surround the righteous; therefore, justice comes out
perverted. (Habakkuk 1:4)
November 19, 2013, was the 150th anniversary
of President Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address. The speech is iconic, but
is it Biblical?
Under God
…—that this nation, under God, shall have
a new birth of freedom—….
The term “under God” (along with “God bless
this nation!” and similar declarations) is often used to provide an air of
sanctity to what is otherwise ungodly. So it was with this address, most
Presidents’ speeches, and Christian support of the Biblically incompatible
Constitution. For example, consider Article 6’s claim that the “Constitution … shall be the
supreme law of the land”:
The framers were fully cognizant of the word
“supreme” and its meaning when they declared the supremacy of the
Constitution. In so doing, they made the law of Yahweh1
subservient to the law of WE THE PEOPLE.
“Thus have ye made the commandment of God of
none effect by your tradition. Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of
you, saying, This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth
me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. But in vain they do
worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.” (Matthew 15:6-9)
The framers, and today’s political leaders and
Constitutionalists (non-Christians and, ironically, Christians alike) pay
homage to the traditions and commandments of men as the supreme law of the
land. Even the Pharisees of Jesus’ day weren’t so brazen as to call their
man-made traditions supreme….
Constitutionalists who claim to be Christians
will predictably add “under God” or “under the Bible” to the declaration in
[Article 6’s] Clause 2. But their authority to do so is not derived from the
Bible or the Constitution. This is another futile attempt to make the
Constitution a Christian document and a classic case of trying to serve two
masters. Either the Constitution must be rejected because it never was
subservient to Yahweh’s law, or Yahweh’s law must be rejected because it
demands any inferior constitution be subject to and in concert with its
supreme law.
If you choose to promote the Constitution on
its own merit, that is your prerogative. However, if you choose to promote
the Constitution as a Biblically based document [under God], that is
deception and subterfuge. Anyone who chooses the former becomes an idolater;
anyone who chooses the latter attempts to provide Biblical sanction for his
idolatry by making Yahweh his partner.2
The same is true for Lincoln’s nation. It was
built on a document that not only fails to recognize Yahweh as God, King,
Judge, and Lawgiver (Isaiah 33:22), but in numerous components is hostile to
His perfect and righteous law (Psalm 19:7-9). It’s doubtful God views the
Constitutional Republic as “under” Him, at least in the sense Lincoln
implied.
Of, By, and For the
People
…—and that government of the people, by
the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.
If ever there was a declaration of humanism,
this is it:
Humanism is the placing of Man at the center
of all things and making him the measure of all things. (Francis Schaeffer3)
Lincoln couldn’t have made a more exact
statement about the Constitutional Republic—at least not if the following
men, some of whom were involved in drafting the Constitution, are to be
believed:
As the people are the only legitimate fountain
of power … it is from them that the constitutional charter under which the
[power of the] several branches of government … is derived. (James Madison4)
The fabric of American empire ought to rest on
the solid basis of THE CONSENT OF THE PEOPLE. The streams of national power
ought to flow immediately from that pure, original fountain of all legitimate
authority. (Alexander Hamilton5)
This government, the offspring of our own
choice … has a just claim to your confidence and support. (President George
Washington6)
[T]he people are the sovereign of this
country. (John Jay, First Chief Justice7)
The people, the highest authority known in our
system, from whom all our institutions spring and on whom they depend, formed
it. (President James Monroe8)
[T]he people are the only sovereigns
recognized by our Constitution…. (President James K. Polk9)
In our Constitution, We The People … are the
masters…. [H]ere in America, We The People are in charge. (President Ronald
Reagan10)
The Constitution’s Preamble, which begins “WE THE PEOPLE,” is arguably the
most brazen human claim to sovereignty ever written. It is humanism of the
rankest sort:
As non-theists, we begin with humans, not God,
nature, not deity. (Humanist Manifesto II11)
The framers not only slighted Yahweh and
compromised His law, they completely ignored it, and, in many instances,
legislated against it (and the wicked have compassed the righteous ever
since).
With such a significant Christian beginning in
the 1600s, how can we have strayed so far from our Christian roots? The
answer is simple: the framers’ hearts were divided (Hosea 10:2).
Consequently, Yahweh’s law was slacked (Habakkuk 1:4, KJV). Once that door
was unbolted, there was nothing to stop the continuing compromise, especially
when Christians heralded the very document that started America down
the pernicious road on which she finds herself today.
Lincoln’s statement about “government of the
people, by the people, [and] for the people” (incredibly, esteemed by
Christians as much as non-Christians) is perhaps the most iconic part of the
entire Gettysburg Address. Nothing could be more unbiblical. It is, in fact,
Biblically seditious.
Nothing is more oxymoronic than the fact that
many contemporary Christians condemn the Puritans for establishing
governments of, by, and for Yahweh while lauding the framers (and Lincoln)
for their humanistic government of, by, and for the people.
Shall not perish from off the earth
…—and that government of the people, by
the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.
It would seem Lincoln not only fancied himself
a monarch,12 but also a prophet. The day is coming when he’ll be
proven a false prophet:
And every one that heareth these sayings of
mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built
his house upon the sand: And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the
winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of
it. (Matthew 7:26-27)
The house known as the United States
Constitutional Republic was not built on the rock of Yahweh’s inspired
Word. There is hardly an article or amendment that, in some fashion, is not
antithetical, if not seditious, to Yahweh’s Word and Law.13
Lincoln was correct. The Constitutional
Republic is a humanistic contract of, by, and for the people—and therefore
Biblically seditious. Consequently, he was also wrong. The Constitutional
Republic is not under God, and, therefore, one day, it will
perish from the earth. When that day arrives, may Christians be prepared to
establish government of, by, and for Yahweh in its place. (See our suggested Biblical rewrite of the Secular Constitution’s Preamble
and Articles 1-3 as a place to begin.)
Related posts:
Chapter 3 “The Preamble: WE THE PEOPLE vs. YAHWEH” of Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian
Perspective
1. YHWH, the English transliteration of the
Tetragrammaton, is most often pronounced Yahweh. It is the principal Hebrew
name of the God of the Bible and was inspired to appear nearly 7,000 times in
the Old Testament. It was unlawfully deleted by the English translators. In
obedience to the Third Commandment and the many Scriptures that charge us to
proclaim, swear by, praise, extol, call upon, bless, glorify, and hold fast
to His name, we have chosen to memorialize His name here in this document and
in our lives. For a more thorough explanation concerning important reasons
for using the sacred name of God, see “The Third Commandment.”
2. Chapter 9 “Article 6: The Supreme Law of the
Land” of Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian
Perspective.
3. Francis Schaeffer, A Christian Manifesto (1981),
in The Complete Works of Francis
Schaeffer, 5 vols. (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 1982) vol. 5, p.
426.
4. James Madison, The Federalist, No.
46 (New York, NY: G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1888) p. 217.
5. Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist, No. 22 (New
York, NY: G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1888) p. 135.
6. George Washington, “Farewell Address,”
Worthington Chauncey Ford, ed., The
Writings of George Washington, 14 vols. (New York; NY: G.P.
Putnam’s Sons, 1892) vol. 13, p. 297.
7. John Jay, First Chief Justice, Chisholm
v. Georgia, 1793
8. James Monroe, “Views of the President of
the United States on the Subject of Internal Improvements,” 4 May 1822, http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/preambles20.html.
9. James K. Polk, Third Annual Message,
7 December 1847, The American Presidency Project, <http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/index.php.>
10. President Ronald Reagan, State of the
Union Address, 1987.
11. Humanist Manifesto II, www.americanhumanist.org/who_we_are/about_humanism/Humanist_Manifesto_II.
12. The Real Lincoln: A New Look at Abraham Lincoln, His Agenda,
and an Unnecessary War, Thomas DiLorenzo.
|
No comments:
Post a Comment