May June2009

8/9/2019 May June2009

1/36

Publisher & Chalcedon President

Rev. Mark R. Rushdoony

Chalcedon Vice-President

Martin Selbrede

Editor

Rev. Christopher J. Ortiz

Managing Editor

Susan Burns

Contributing Editors

Lee Duigon

Kathy Leonard

Chalcedon Founder

Rev. R. J. Rushdoony

(1916-2001)

was the founder of Chalcedon

and a leading theologian, church/

state expert, and author of numer-

ous works on the application of

Biblical Law to society.

Receiving Faith for All of Life: Thismagazine will be sent to those whorequest it. At least once a year we askthat you return a response card if youwish to remain on the mailing list.Contributors are kept on our mailinglist. Suggested Donation: $35 peryear ($45 for all foreign U.S. fundsonly). Tax-deductible contributionsmay be made out to Chalcedon andmailed to P.O. Box 158, Vallecito, CA95251 USA.

Chalcedon may want to contact its

readers quickly by means of e-mail.If you have an e-mail address, pleasesend an e-mail message includingyour full postal address to our office:[email protected].

For circulation and data

management contact Rebecca

Rouse at (209) 736-4365 ext. 10

or [email protected]

Faith for All of Life

May/June 2009

Faith for All of Life, published bi-monthly by Chalcedon, a tax-exempt Christian foundation, is sent to all who request

it. All editorial correspondence should be sent to the managing editor, P.O. Box 569, Cedar Bluff, VA 24609-0569.Laser-print hard copy and elect ronic disk submissions firmly encouraged. All submissions subject to editorial revi-

sion. Email: [email protected]. The editors are not responsible for the return of unsolicited manuscripts which

become the property of Chalcedon unless other arrangements are made. Opinions expressed in this magazinedo not necessarily reflect the views of Chalcedon. It provides a forum for views in accord with a relevant, active,

historic Christianity, though those views may on occasion differ somewhat from Chalcedons and from each other.

Chalcedon depends on the contributions of its readers, and all gifts to Chalcedon are tax-deductible. 2009Chalcedon. All rights reserved. Permission to reprint granted on written request only. Editorial Board: Rev. Mark

R. Rushdoony, President/Editor-in-Chief; Chris Ortiz, Editor; Susan Burns, Managing Editor and Executive Assistant.

Chalcedon, P.O. Box 158, Vallecito, CA 95251, Telephone Circulation (9:00a.m. - 5:00p.m., Pacific): (209) 736-4365 orFax (209) 736-0536; email: [email protected]; www.chalcedon.edu; Circulation:Rebecca Rouse.

Editorials

2 From the FounderTithing and the Kingdom

4 From the PresidentMessianic Economics: Mans Dream o Turning Stones to Bread

Features

6 The Mountains o PreyMartin G. Selbrede

14 Once Upon a Time: Challenging the Status QuoAndrea Schwartz

18 Rich Toward God: Kingdom-Centered Living in a Collapsing WorldChristopher J. Ortiz

Columns

12 Exodus Report Card Jabs Big MinistriesLee Duigon

23 God Arising!Mike ODonovan

Products

25 Catalog Insert

FREE

SHIPPING!On all orders thru

August 24, 2009

8/9/2019 May June2009

2/36

2 Faith for All of Life | May/June 2009 www.chalcedon.edu

With these verses,we come to theend o the laws con-cerning sacrices andbegin a shorter sectionon the priesthood. We

have here reerences to the wave oering(v. 30., c. 34) and to the heave oer-ing (v. 32., c. 34). S. C. Gayord bestdescribes their meaning:

The waving was a orward and returnmotion representing the oering o thebreast to God and His handing it backto the priest or his portion. The sym-bolism is clear rom Nu. 8:1022. TheLevites were oered by the congrega-tion as a wave oering to the Lord whogave them back to Aaron (v. 19) to as-

Tithing and the Kingdom(Reprinted rom Leviticus [Vallecito, CA: Ross House Books, 2005], 73-76)

R. J. Rushdoony

F r o m t h e F o u n d e r

sist him in his ministrations. There was

a dierence between the wave breast

and the heave thigh: the breast was

given to God who handed it back to

His priest; the thigh was given directly

to the priest. So the priest was the guest

o God in the ormer case and the guest

o the sacricer in the latter, and thus

became the mediator between God and

man in the common meal.1

The Hebrew text makes it clear that

the breast is a dedication (v. 30), and the

leg is a contribution (v. 34).2

To understand the meaning o the

heave oering, the leg or thigh, the

contribution to the priests, we must

examine Numbers 18:2528:

25. And the LORD spake untoMoses, saying,

26. Thus speak unto the Levites,and say unto them, When ye takeo the children o Israel the tithes

which I have given you rom themor your inheritance, then ye shalloer up an heave oering o it orthe LORD, even a tenth part o the

tithe.27. And this your heave oer-ing shall be reckoned unto you,as though it were the corn o thethreshingoor, and as the ulness othe winepress.

28. Thus ye also shall oer an

28. And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,

29. Speak unto the children o Israel, saying, He that oereth the sacrice o his peace oerings unto the LORDshall bring his oblation unto the LORD o the sacrice o his peace oerings.

30. His own hands shall bring the oerings o the LORD made by re, the at with the breast, it shall he bring,that the breast may be waved or a wave oering beore the LORD.

31. And the priest shall burn the at upon the altar: but the breast shall be Aarons and his sons.

32. And the right shoulder shall ye give unto the priest or an heave oering o the sacrices o your peaceoerings.

33. He among the sons o Aaron, that oereth the blood o the peace oerings, and the at, shall have the rightshoulder or his part.

34. For the wave breast and the heave shoulder have I taken o the children o Israel rom o the sacrices o theirpeace oerings, and have given them unto Aaron the priest and unto his sons by a statute or ever rom amongthe children o Israel.

35. This is the portion o the anointing o Aaron, and o the anointing o his sons, out o the oerings o theLORD made by re, in the day when he presented them to minister unto the LORD in the priests oce;

36. Which the LORD commanded to be given them o the children o Israel, in the day that he anointed them,by a statute or ever throughout their generations.

37. This is the law o the burnt oering, o the meat oering, and o the sin oering, and o the trespass oering,and o the consecrations, and o the sacrice o the peace oerings;

38. Which the LORD commanded Moses in mount Sinai, in the day that he commanded the children o Israelto oer their oblations unto the LORD, in the wilderness o Sinai. (Lev. 7:2838)

8/9/2019 May June2009

3/36

www.chalcedon.edu May/June 2009 |Faith for All of Life 3

Faith or All o Lieheave oering unto the LORD oall your tithes, which ye receive othe children o Israel; and ye shallgive thereo the LORDS heave o-ering to Aaron the priest.

The rest o the tithe, nine-tenths o

it, went to the Levites (Num. 18:2932). The Levites were the instructors oIsrael (Deut. 33:10), and they bore theark o the covenant (Deut. 10:8, 31:9).They assisted in the administration ocivil government (1 Chron. 23:28);they were choristers, musicians, guard-ians, and gatekeepers o the sanctuary(1 Chron. 9:1433), and overseers (1Chron. 23:4). Their role in music iscited in Psalm 42:1, 44:1, etc., and 2

Chronicles 20:19. They were connectedwith the temple treasury and with theroyal administration (1 Chron. 9:22,26.; 23:4, 28, etc.). They also served asjudges (2 Chron. 19:8, 11) and assistedthe priests (1 Chron. 6:31., 23:2732,etc.). At the same time, the priests alsohad duties as ocers o health and sani-tation (Leviticus, chapters 1114).

The primary role o the priests,however, pertained to the sanctuary andsacrices. The Levites had a broader

role, one which can be described aseducational, legal, and cultural.

With the New Testament, thesacricial work ended, and the work othe ministry became Levitical. Even ourEnglish wordpriesthas no relation tothe Old Testament word, andpriestisa contraction opresbyter. The instruc-tional and cultural unction is thusLevitical and the essence o the Chris-tian ministry. This duty o instructional

and cultural authority and leadershipwas basic to the medieval and earlyReormation eras. Christianity coulddominate society or two very practicalreasons. First, it was seen as the duty othe Christian community and its leader-ship to exercise dominion over society inthe name o Jesus Christ. Second, Gods

tax, the tithe, plus gits and oeringsover the tithe, were the nancial main-stay o this dominion mandate.

In the medieval era, a steady rebel-lion by princes and peoples developedagainst the tithe, and the church resort-

ed to all kinds o disgraceul devices toraise money. The same happened to theReormation churches, and again therewere resorts to painully bad practices inund-raising.

The medieval church had builtschools, universities, hospitals, cathe-drals, charitable organizations, andmore, and nanced music and thearts. With time, this waned and be-came something barely maintained

rather than a orce commanding society.Among the churches o the Reorma-tion, by the time o Johann SebastianBach, the same cultural orce wasdeclining. It lingered longer in America,where most universities had a Christianbeginning, but here, too, it diminishedin time.

Today, while a revival is under way,only a small minority tithe, and manytithers see the tithe as restricted to thechurch as a worshipping institution.

This is hardly the nature o the tithe inScripture, since nine-tenths o the tithewent to the Levites. When tithing onceagain nances such things as Christianscholarship, music, law, and the like, weshall see dramatic changes.

Note that the heave oering had tobe givenpersonallyto the priest, even ithrough a Levite. Christs work is donebypersons; Christian institutions aregroups o persons in Christs service.

We should note urther that, i apeople tithed aithully, and also gavegits over their tithe, the priests andLevites would be prosperous and e-ectual in their ministry. The economicstatus o those in Christs service isGods barometer o the aith o a people.Poor aith means poor Levites, a quest

by people or personal advantage ratherthan Gods dominion.

An evil inheritance rom Neopla-tonism is the equation o spiritualitywith poverty and a contempt or mate-rial things. Such an equation begins

with a alse view o spirituality which isdivorced rom Scripture and the HolyGhost. It then sees poverty as a kind ovirtue. There is no evidence that eitherpoverty or wealth makes people spiritualand godly, nor is there any evidence thatmaterial wealth makes people unspiri-tual and ungodly. The sin common toall the sons o Adam makes us ungodly,and wealth or poverty have little to dowith it. Only the sovereign grace o Godcan make us a new creation, not wealthor poverty.

Our Lord makes it clear that thelabourer is worthy o his hire (Luke10:7). Those who labor worthily inChrists calling deserve double honour(1 Tim. 5:17), i.e., double pay. To Hisdisciples, our Lord says, Thereore takeno thought, saying, What shall we eat?or, What shall we drink? or, Wherewith-al shall we be clothed? (Matt. 6:31).He did not mean thereby that they

would always have their necessary provi-sions. Rather, He had in mind the lawwhereby, as Paul summarizes it, Godsservants are partakers with the altar:

13. Do ye not know that theywhich minister about holy thingslive o the things o the temple?

And they which wait at the altarare partakers with the altar?

14. Even so hath the Lord ordainedthat they which preach the gospelshould live o the gospel. (1 Cor.9:1314)

The health o a society in Godssight is revealed by its support o thework o Christian evangelism and do-minion, by the preaching o the Word,

Continued on page 17

8/9/2019 May June2009

4/36


Much attention hasbeen ocused onthe messianic nature othe images and promo-

tion o Barack Obama.The criticism o politicalleaders is oten party-selective; such im-agery has been part o modern politicsor many years, most obviously in therhetoric o political nominating conven-tions. It behooves us to see as equallyoensive the tendency o all statists toproject themselves as noble paragons otruth and justice.

In 1982 my ather published Rootso Ination, which included an essay

describing what he reerred to as theeconomics o Satan, as displayed inthe rst temptation o Christ in the wil-derness. It was such an important point,we used it as part o the subtitle whenwe retitled the books re-release in 2002as Larceny in the Heart: The Economics oSatan and the Inationary State.

The rst temptation dealt withan economic need, ood (immediatelyChrists but also or those Christ came

to save). Satan suggested Christ turnstones into bread, to obviate the needor work and responsibility and provideprosperity by supplying ood, mansundamental economic need. This wasthe economics o Satanan economicsalvation, solving mans problems bycreating an articial, work-ree prosper-

Messianic Economics:

Mans Dream o Turning Stones to BreadMark R. Rushdoony

F r o m t h e P r e s i d e n t

ity. Later, when Jesus did miraculouslyeed those who came to hear Him teach,they wanted to orce Him to be theirking, a political leader who would usher

in prosperity by miracles. Such menlooked to Jesus as their savior romwant, not rom sin. Imagine what wentthrough their minds as they envisioneda miracle-working king!

The response o Jesus to Satanseconomic stimulus plan was to quoteMoses (Deut. 8:3): Man shall not liveby bread alone, but by every word thatproceedeth out o the mouth o God(Matt. 4:4). As God incarnate, this wasJesus message or man, that He was

responsible to the every last word oGod. Satans plan was or Jesus to solvemans economic need and prove Himselto be the Son o God. Satans denitiono a valid messianic ministry was notatonement and reconciliation to Godand His every word through repentanceand aith, but in meeting sinners wherethey are and lling their material need.For Satan, Jesus should be a service pro-vider giving man back an articial Eden

o economic security.Work is a prerequisite to ood and

all other orms o wealth. Work wasprescribed or Adam in Eden beorethe all. The curse or Adam was notwork itsel, but thorns and thistles, acreation no longer ully responsive tohis labors. Work would, ater the all, no

longer be ully productive. One o therepeated themes o Scripture is that manis responsible to provide or his own bywork without the thet o the labor or

capital o others. Moreover, his accumu-lation o wealth through honest laborwas then to be his personal resource orworks o charity.

The modern state now sees itsrole to be that commissioned by Satanbut reused by Jesus, to turn stones tobread, to create prosperity out o thinair. In pursuing this goal, it ollows theeconomic theories o John MaynardKeynes, the grand architect o our cur-rent scal house o cards. Keynes tried

to ree the state rom economic limita-tions by promoting its growth by meanso at money and legal tender laws. Fiatmeans it is only money because the statesays it is, and legal tendermeans thatyou are required by law to accept it intradelook at the notice on the ront oevery U.S. Federal Reserve Note.

Fiat money never stops at substi-tuting paper or gold or silver coin. Italways involves the creation o money,

because the state thereby gains powerby spending money it created by atand requiring its citizens to accept themoney or real goods and services.

Fiat money is countereiting as amonopoly o the state. Other counter-eiters are imprisoned or exchangingtheir worthless notes or something o

When economics becomes a branch o politics, it ceases to be economics and becomes messianic.It becomes an instrument o power whereby men play god and plan to use human beings as their raw material.1

~ R. J. Rushdoony

8/9/2019 May June2009

5/36


Faith or All o Lievalue, which is rightly regarded as thet.The modern state, however, allows itselthis prerogative o thet. The result othese government-created notes is risingprices. As the new at money movesthrough the market, the money supply

is watered down; the monetary unit isdevalued, and goods and services requiremore o the increasingly worthless cur-rency in trade.

Keynes method was or the stateto increase its power by at money butto slow the devaluation o the currencyby careul manipulation. Too suddenan infation o the money supply leadsto rapid price infation; constrictingthe money supply slows this but canresult in recession or depression. Thisresults in an entirely articial economycontrolled not by the marketplace butby the state. The states currency is adrug given to revive the economy. I theeconomy overreacts to this stimulus,the monetary drug is withheld, but aswith the drug addict, this can send thepatient into withdrawal.

The articial economy o Keynes-ianism means that the fow o moneymust keep moving through the mar-

ketplace. Consumer spending is en-couraged, as witness the 2008 stimuluschecks to individuals. Governments thatunction on at money take nancialresponsibility very lightly because theirdebt is payable in paper. Governmentby debt then leads to a citizenry in debt.An economy supposedly based on accu-mulated capital (savings) is then shitedto an economy based on debt.

Maintaining a balancing act

between the two extremes o runawayinfation and depression is, ultimately,a losing game, because each cycle oinfation takes the currency and econ-omy urther away rom any measureo soundness. When Keynes was askedabout the long-term impact o his ideas,he amously remarked that in the long

run we are all dead anyway. Individualsalso saw the problems in this balancingact. I they did nothing, their wealthwould decline because it is all measuredin terms o the increasingly worthlesscurrency. To prevent this, they got

with the game.Individuals then joined in the

balancing act, trying to stay ahead o thedecline in the currency. In an infation-ary economy, one must become a specu-lator, not a saver. Saving at currencyis investing in something that declinesin value. Imagine, or instance, i yourgrandparents had let you $10,000 incash orty years ago. Not invested in anyway, it would have declined precipitouslyin purchasing power. Invested in theright booms, it could have kept pacewith the decline o the dollar or better.The only way to prevent loss due tothe declining value o at money is tospeculate on what will rise in price dur-ing the infationary bubbles aster thanthe currency declines in value. Addition-ally, at money encourages debt as itsela means o beating infation. Consumerscontract debt hoping to repay it with lessvaluable dollars years down the road. For

most o the last century, real estate valuesoutpaced the decline o the dollar. Thatspeculative bubble burst in 2006.

The state prospers by at money,but its citizens lose. The harm to aneconomy rom at money is not aprocess that can be easily undone; todo so would necessitate decreasing thepower o the state. Infation is a one-waystreet. The state can only do more o thesameinfate or yet another infation-

ary bubble hoping that Keynes day oeventual death alls in someone elsesadministration. In desperation theyollow the economics o Satantheytry to produce miraculous wealth, breadrom stones. They ignore the neces-sity o work, thrit, and character inthe creation o wealth, and stick to the

same script and create more at money.They want prosperity, not by producingwealth, but by thetthe creation o atmoney.

On the road to destroying their cur-rency, the state also destroys a peoples

concept o wealth as coming by meanso work and thrit. Saving at cur-rency is pointless; as infation becomesobvious, men speculate with increas-ing abandonhence accelerating theboom-bust cycle. Most individuals willeventually lose the game.

The statists who prot rom allthis still talk about reedom, and theywant us to believe we are still ree. Butreedom once reerred to the right orindividuals to be sel-governing, and this

was in the context o a Christian moralethic. The new reedom is moral license.

In their new reedom as moral li-cense, men need some sense o comort.Material prosperity has always given aalse sense o security to men, so elec-tions increasingly turn on what BillClintons people already saw in 1992:Its the economy, stupid! By this theydid not mean sound, moral econom-ics and honest money, but the articial

prosperity o infation that borrowsrom the uture.Keynesian economics is not just

ineective economic theory; it isimmoral economics because it is basedon thet with the state as the syndicatethat runs the countereiting ring. Ourwealth is measured in terms o anincreasingly worthless commoditythestates currency.

Our modern governments have nooptions but to play out their hand. They

are responding to their ailed systemwith the need o a messianic leaderand more state intervention to solve theproblem o their own creation.

The root problem is not economic: itis moral, and it is religious. Mans main


8/9/2019 May June2009

6/36


There are actuallythree things thatare certain in this world:death, taxes, and coverstories in the pre-Easterand pre-Christmas issues

oNewsweekand/or TIMEthat slamorthodox conservative Christianity. De-spite the controversial cover text (TheDecline and Fall o Christian America),

the April 13, 2009, issue oNewsweekisactually worth a second look, primarilybecause writer Jon Meacham was able tocatch Dr. R. Albert Mohler, Jr., wring-ing his hands in lamentation over thelatest religious demographics. In Mea-chams words, Dr. Mohler saw the lateststatistics as evidence that the historicoundation o Americas religious culturewas cracking.1

Dr. Mohler is bemoaning a culture-shit taking place around us, lament-ing the declineand, by implication,the imminent allo an Americashaped and suused by Christianity.2Mohlers gloom over the increasingnumber o religiously unidentiedpeople in the Northeast United States isnearly oppressive in tone: Clearly, thereis a new narrative, a post-Christian nar-rative, that is animating large portionso this society.

The nal paragraph o Meachams

article is touched with melancholysadness when it reports that Backin Louisville, preparing or Easter, AlMohler keeps vigil over the culture.Mohler does a little cheerleading or thenew packaging and marketing he thinkswill pep up the home team, assertingthat a new generation o young pastors

The Mountains o PreyMartin G. Selbrede

F e a t u r e A r t i c l e

intends to push back against hell in boldand visionary ministry. Expect to see thesparks fy. The comment amounts towhistling in the dark against the bulko the articles pessimism. But Mohlersultimate inability to diagnose eitherthe source or solution o the problemis revealed in his nal aside: Whatwe are seeing now is the evidence oa pattern that began a very long time

ago o intellectual and cultural andpolitical changes in thought and mind.The conditions have changed. Hard topinpoint where, but whatever came aterthe Enlightenment was going to be verydierent than what came beore.

Hard to pinpoint? Meacham pin-points the problem all too clearly, butmost oNewsweeksreaders have missedit. He quotes Mohler to the eect thatthe post-Christian narrative is radically

dierent; it oers spirituality, howeverdened, without binding authority Itis based on an understanding o historythat presumes a less tolerant past and amore tolerant uture, with the presentas an important transitional step. Notethat term binding authorityMohlerpresumes to be the deender o it as hemakes these indictments. But then noteMeachams ollowing words:

Roughly put, the Christian narrative isthe story o humankind as chronicledin the Hebrew Bible and the New Tes-tamentthe drama o creation, all andredemption. The orthodox tend to tryto live their lives in accordance with thegeneral behavioral principles o the Bible(or at least the principles they nd thereo which they approve) and anticipatethe ultimate judgment o God 3

There we have it:general behavioralprincipleso the Bible or at least theprinciples they fnd there o which theyapprove. Meacham sees the selectiveobedience driving the Christian narra-tive being deended today; he smells theradical disconnect between the conceptobinding authorityandprinciples weapprove oand is quick to point outthe consequences o such a discon-

nect, no more sharply than when heobserves that the terrible economictimes have not led to an increase inchurch attendance (see Economics,Justice, and Modern Preaching romthe November/December 2008 Faithor All o Lieto understand why theresnothing taught in modern churches tojustiy any such increase in attendance).Meacham, who cites Roger Williamsapprovingly, believes this underlying

disconnect to be a healthy thing: solong as people think themselves rightlyin charge o approving or disapprov-ing Biblical commandments, lets usesome pluralistic common sense! Smallwonder he thinks Dr. Mohler is makinga mountain out o a molehill.

Meacham Plays His Hole Card

Meacham cites another older bookavorably, whose authors also approveo Roger Williams and the call or

pluralism:A quarter century ago, three scholarswho are also evangelical ChristiansMark A. Noll, Nathan O. Hatch andGeorge M. Marsdenpublished animportant but too-little-known book,The Search or Christian America. In itthey argued that Christianitys claims

Thou art more glorious and excellent than the mountains o prey. (Ps. 76:4)

8/9/2019 May June2009

7/36


Faith or All o Lietranscend any political order. Chris-tians, they wrote, should not haveillusions about the nature o humangovernments. Ultimately they belongto what Augustine calls the city o theworld, in which sel-interest rules allgovernments can be brutal killers.4

Such humanistic attacks have beenaddressed long ago by previous Chris-tian Reconstructionists, yet were ndingourselves re-deending already-con-quered ground and re-reuting already-deeated arguments. This is true o thiscitation by Meacham, or last year Idrew attention to a reutation o Noll,Hatch, and Marsden written shortlyater their book appeared:

Mark A. Noll, Nathan O. Hatch,and George M. Marsden published abook in 1983 entitled The Search orChristian America. As reviewer Dr. W.David Gamble explains, these threeauthors believe that the United States oAmerica is not, was not, and never willbe a Christian nation. They hold thatthe very notion o a Christian society iserroneous and an impossibility, and thisidea usually has harmul eects uponthe individuals who entertain suchnotions. The authors thus state their

intention to debunk the mythologicalidea o a Christian origin o the UnitedStates and to declare that there willnever be a Christian culture

As Gamble reveals, the three authorsacknowledge that their conclusionsconcerning the non-Christian nature oearly America are conditioned by theirtheological understanding o the impos-sibility o a truly Christian culture (pp.28, 43). Thus, the authors give usan interesting insight into their task as

historians: they already believe, evenbeore examining the historical record,that there is no possibility that earlyAmerica, or any other culture in theworld, could be accurately described asChristian. Thereore, as they begin theirhistorical research, their conclusion isalready established, and acts are madeto conorm to their views concerning

the impossibility o Christian culture.

It is the authors understanding o thenature o the Gospel which radicallyinfuences their historiography Theytell us that the Gospel cannot changethe oundational principles o culture,

but they give us no exegetical reason orthis impotence o the Gospel.5

Dr. Gamble sees this last statementas seriously deective: This is a seriousoversight on the part o the authors. Iwe are expected to accept their under-standing o the relative impotence othe Gospel, they should at least give usan outline o how they arrived at thisconclusion. They are to be commended,however, in that they acknowledge that

their views o the limitations o thetransorming power o the Gospel haveinfuenced their historical research.6Noll, Hatch, and Marsden arent consis-tent either, as Gamble notes: On page150 they state that it is true that earlyAmerica was generally Christian in thestructure o its law, its institutions, andits culture, but, since this contradictsthe thrust o the entire book, I assumethis is an editorial mistake (emphasisadded).

Yet, this poorly researched volumeby Noll, Hatch, and Marsden is beingheld up as authoritative gospel truthtwenty-ve years later in Newsweek. Thislong-disabled rusted hammer is beingused anew as a resh sledgehammer tobust up any attempts to anchor ourthinking to the Bible.

Forgetulness o past victories makesit unclear to many today that much al-legedly disputed territory has long since

been taken captive to the obedience oChrist. To lose sight o Gods claimson that territory is to return ve talentsto the Lord ater having received tentalents rom His hand.

That is surely a earul thing to oerback to Him ater He entrusted us withthe results o hard-won, precious victo-

ries. It wont do to argue with Him thatless is more. Our Lord wants all.

Line upon Line,

Precept upon Precept

Writing in March 2001, I com-mented on the necessity Otto Scottelt June 1993 in reprinting an essay ohis that had rst appeared eleven yearsearlier in March 1982. The critical les-son o that essay (concerning the impacto Theodor Adornos work on ascism)had apparently gone unnoticed, callingor reiteration. As Scott put it, Adornoswork was largely unknown to Chris-tians when it appeared, remained un-known ten years ago when I mentionedit here, and is still largely unknown. It

is more than time that these threats tothe aith be recognized and their authorsnamed and read. Perhaps [my earlieressays] relevance will be more easily rec-ognized, this time around.7 There is noevidence that Scotts warnings have sunkany deeper into our collective Christianpsyche, and we are the worse o or it.There is a disconnect, but it exists onthe insideo the church.

With this kind o regressive think-ing, we logically end up with Dr.Mohlers position that the cause ocurrent demographic changes are hardto pinpoint. Sel-inficted blindnessis the most dicult to cure becauseits sel-diagnosis is atally fawed: itsees the error elsewhere than in itsel.Modern Christianity either believes thecore problem radiates solely rom theexternal culture, or it utterly misdiag-noses its own complicity in that culturesdeterioration.

The most requent comment elicitedby Dr. R. J. Rushdoonys writings romdecades ago is that they sound like theywere written yesterday, so relevant dothey appear. This is itsel a symptom othe same problem: we werent payingsucient attention at the time he wrotethose books and essays. The problems

8/9/2019 May June2009

8/36


Faith or All o Liehe pinpointed back then only waxedworse. This is where we end up when weindulge a suicidal contempt or history.

Contempt or History Is Natural

As Otto Scott puts it, modern manscontempt or history is rooted in hisattitude about reality. Scotts descriptiono the 1917 Soviet Revolution is spot onor us today:

[The Communist Party] then abolishedthe study o history and o law TheirParty would enact new laws. The pastwas dead; a new world with new peoplehad arrived:present-oriented peoplewith no past, and a uture that wouldbe constructed in the present, as timepassed. This was not a new concept; inact it is one o the oldest concepts o allsocieties. One might call it the averagemans concept, or that is how the aver-age man actually thinks. He despisesthe past, because he regards it as deadand thereore useless. He also despisesthe uture because it has not yet arrived,and is literally useless. All that is real isin the present, is all around us, and isall that we can seize and use at this mo-ment. Now. Today. At once.8

Modern evangelical Christianity hasdrunk deeply rom the well o the Now,the Relevant, the Existential Moment.It has sold its birthright or a mess oexistential pottage. As Otto Scott pointsout, with the depreciation o history,Gods law is also made o none eect,being incompatible with existential pre-tensions. The church has by and largebecome salt that has lost its savor.

This is the primary root cause o thewoes that Dr. Mohler tabulates. Werelosing the culture not because weve

not marketed things in a sucientlycontemporary way, but because wevenot even remotely taught and observedthe whole counsel o God.

The statistics that Mohler nds sogloomy refect, in key respects, the tram-pling underoot o savorless saltsavor-less salt that the church was hell-bent on

becoming while it maintained spiritualpretensions o a higher way.9

The contempt or history and orGods law refects the churchs inabilityto recognize true salt; it knows only thealse salt it has manuactured on the

fy. This bias against history has beenexposed in these pages beore10 whenwe examined the ideas promoted byJe Sharlet11 and Richard A. Shweder,12among others. Those earlier essays inFaith or All o Lieunderscore the com-ment made by Herbert Schlossberg thatthe past is made to ght the battles othe people who are using it.13 Schloss-berg was doubtless reerring to such ar-guments as are raised anew by Meacham.

According to anti-Reconstructionistjournalist Frederick Clarkson, in alecture at a New York secularist seminarin October 2005, it seems as i onlyChristian Reconstructionists knowwhere they stand in history and therole theyll be playing in it. He contrast-ed this with the rest o society, which ispretty much disconnected rom history.Clarkson could with justice have added,and the rest o the church is prettymuch disconnected rom history too.

Intellectual Termites

In 1990 Otto Scott warned thatwe have intellectual termites in ouruniversities, and a governing class thatseems indierent to results and attentiveonly to elections, appointmentsandthe media while our elected leaderscontinue to talk about reedoms thatno longer exist.14 American reali-ties, he says, are light-years away romAmerican rhetoric.15 Todays Christian

realities are also light-years away romChristian rhetoric. Why?

The reason primarily lies in this,that intellectual termites have also beenbusily chewing through the beamsand timbers that orm the oundationo Biblical Christianity. This saps thestrength o the structure and its ability

to orm a credible bulwark against out-right attack. Cosmetics then dominateover structural integritywhich is thestory o the modern church reduced to asingle mournul sentence.

But there are urther parallels. Otto

Scott quotes Vladimir Bukovskys assess-ment o Soviet bureaucracy:

Unlike an autocracy, he said, wherethe ruling elite tainted by the regimescrimes is tiny, a totalitarian regime cre-ates a whole class o rulers, 18 milliono them in the Soviet Union, who areincapable o any other social unction.They are a state within a state, an oc-cupying army that cannot be nishedo by a coup and cannot be orcedto withdraw as they have no place to

withdraw to.16

Scott is describing a politicalstranglehold, but we nd ourselves in aspiritual strangleholdchoking AmericanChristendom, and or remarkably paral-lel reasons: our Christian leadership, bymaintaining aulty theological com-mitments, have no place to withdrawto and have insured they are incapableo any other social unction than beingblind guides leading our nation into the

pit. Weve made blind guides a protectedclass with its own system o seminariesto perpetuate it. The seminaries disagreeamong themselves over details, but areagreed in the general direction o theditch theyre leading their ollowers to-ward. They have become a state within astate, inficting spiritual rigor mortis onthe nation rom within.

It is as true or them (as things nowstand) as it was or Bukovskys Soviet

bureaucracy: they cannot be orcedto withdraw as they have no place towithdraw to. First, theyve staked theirtheological ortunes on having a corneron the truth, which serves to line theirpockets. Second, how much arthercan you withdraw when youve madeperpetual withdrawal the calling card o

8/9/2019 May June2009

9/36


Faith or All o Lieorthodoxy? How much more can youretreat when retreatism is the core oyour theology? How much less-engagedcan you be in a culture that youve o-cially abandoned to the devil? One mustwonder i Satan is compelled to think,

With enemies like modern Christians,who needs riends?

Which brings us, at last, to thecrucial lessons o Psalm 76 and theimplications it has or all we have justrecounted here.

Psalm 76How Things Work

When Gods People Are Faithul

Psalm 76 is a great victory psalmassuring Gods people o the omnipotentpower o their Lord. It will provide the

key point o contrast in this essay, orthe simple reason that the promises andassertions o this inspired psalm makeclear precisely where Dr. Mohler mustplace the nger o blame or the statisticshe laments so rueully. We shall nd thatthe descriptions the psalm reserves orthe ungodly, or the stouthearted oppres-sors o Gods covenant-keeping people,ironically now t the modern church.

This is particularly clear in respectto the th verse, which inorms us thatthe men o might will not nd theirhands. To be unable to nd ones handsis an emblem o powerlessness, o beingincapacitated. It stands as a symbol ortotal deeat. God delivers such oppres-sors o righteousness into the hands oHis people. They become thoroughlydeclawed and no longer pose a threat toanyone.

But rereading Dr. Mohlers lamen-tations in Newsweek, there can be no

doubt which men, precisely, truly cantnd their hands. Modern evangelicalChristianity has ound itsel in the posi-tion o Psalm 76:5or it has delib-erately placed itsel into that positionwhen it saw t to oer baptized human-ism in lieu o the aith once delivered tothe saints. As R. J. Rushdoony puts it,

The world seeks to interpose the King-dom o Man between man and GodsKingdom. It alters Gods law, or sets itaside, and it oers a substitute kingdomand law.17

But what has the vast bulk o evan-

gelical Christendom done? It too has in-terposed the Kingdom o Man betweenman and Gods Kingdom. It has alsoaltered Gods law or casually set it aside.It oers a substitute kingdom and law.And it doesnt scruple to label its handi-work as pleasing to God, as i co-optinghumanism would ever please Him.

He that killeth an ox is as i heslew a man; he that sacrifceth alamb, as i he cut o a dogs neck;

he that oereth an oblation, as ihe oered swines blood; he thatburneth incense, as i he blessed anidol. Yea, they have chosen theirown ways, and their soul delightethin their abominations. (Isa. 66:3)

This theological halway house isa house that the Lord is assuredlynotbuilding, and Dr. Mohler is perceptiveenough to recognize this. But we lookin vain (so ar as the article extends) or

a Biblical alternative other than morebusiness as usual, except perhaps ratch-eted up a notch.

In short, we are seeing a hair othe dog solution to the problem. Justas problems created by statism cant besolved with more statism, problemscaused by a distorted theology cannot besolved by pushing that distorted theol-ogy to the breaking point. You can onlyreap what you sow. You can never getpure water out o a corrupt stream.

The Mountains o Prey

We must bear in mind the signi-cance o this peculiar phrase in Psalm76:4, the mountains o prey. We aretold there that God is more glorious,more illustrious and excellent, than themountains o prey.

What we are dealing with, whenit comes to modern humanist states,armed to the teeth and reeking ototalitarian pretenses, are precisely that:mountains o prey. Our own nation, theUnited States, boasts o its status as such

a mountain. Consider the term as de-scribed by some o the better expositors.

The mountains o prey is an em-blematical appellation or the haughtypossessors o power who also plunderevery one that comes near them, or theproud and despoiling worldly powers.Far alot beyond these towers the gloryo God. God is light-encircled, orti-ed in light, in the sense o Dan. ii.22,1 Tim. Vi.16 This eld o corpses isthe eect o the omnipotent energy o

the word o the God o Jacob; c. Isa.xvii.13. Beore His threatening bothwar-chariot and horse are sunk intomotionlessness and unconsciousnessan allusion to Ex. ch. xv., as in Isa.xliii.17: who bringeth out chariot andhorse, army and heroestogether theyaint away, they shall never rise; theyhave fickered out, like a wick they areextinguished.18

Thou art illustrious, more glorious thanthe plunder mountains. Theplunder

mountainso verse 4 is a gurativeexpression or powerul plundering na-tions, conquering kingdoms.19

Patrick Fairbairn devotes one othe appendices to his Interpretation oProphecyto the question o mountainsas symbolic designations or kingdoms.Ater marshalling a list o examples, heconcludes his discussion with Psalm 76:

In Ps. lxxvi., the greater heathen king-doms are denoted, not only mountains,

but prey-mountains, as being appar-ently raised to the gigantic height theyattained or the purpose only o layingwaste and destroying others. Babylon,in particular, is called by Jeremiah,chap. li.25, a destroying mountain,that destroyed all the earth 20

The psalmist thus brings beore us a

8/9/2019 May June2009

10/36


Faith or All o Lieterrible image o humanistic might andtotalitarian powerand just as switlycrushes these intimidating representa-tions with the promise that God inHis providence easily renders thempowerless and anemic. The tenth verse,

the wrath o man shall praise thee: theremainder o wrath shalt thou restrain,is quoted more than a dozen times byDr. Rushdoony to establish Gods over-ruling providence against even the mostrebellious, violent actions o man.

But what do we hear today with allthe hand-wringing over these new de-mographic gures that Newsweekdwellsupon? Just this: that the mountains oprey, the plunder-mountains, have theupper handand that Christians, ratherthan considering what they did to evis-cerate the Word o God o its transorm-ing power, have only consolidated theirtheological positions the more rigidly.They are determined to stay the course,but have missed the boat.

Consequently, we have no basis orcommanding any obstructing moun-tains to be leveled to a plain, as Zerub-babel was able to do (Zech. 4:110).Our position with the mountains o

prey then becomes reversed, and we allunder their weight. We then compro-mise by co-opting statism. This processis not new, as Rushdoony makes clearby quoting William Barlow (died 1613)thus: But RELIGION turned intoSTATISME, will soon prove ATHE-ISME.21 And without the law o God,we have neither a transcendent standardto counter the gravitational tug towardstatism, nor a solid basis or liberty.

What Is the WorldActually Waiting For?

The shiting demographics makeclear that the church is notoering whatthe world is waiting or. What the worldis waiting or, according to the inallibleWord o God, will doubtless surprisemany modern Christians:

He [the Messiah] shall not ail norbe discouraged, till he have set

judgment in the earth: and the islesshall wait or his law. (Isa. 42:4)

This, in a nutshell, is the missingpiece o the puzzle. The church, by

neglecting the law o God, goes empty-handed to the nations with a tattered,incomplete message. The gospel proc-lamation is abridged and incompletelytaught, and the ar-o lands (the isles)are let to keep waiting, ever waiting, orHis lawdespite Pauls clear statementthat Christians are the ones chosen byGod to establish the law (Rom. 3:31).

I the church were to aithullyproclaim Gods law (and not go to

battle lopsided with only the gospel butwithout every word that proceeds romthe mouth o God), the isles wouldreceive instruction, and the demograph-ics would be signicantly dierent. Butthe church is too intent on trying to besuccessul to waste time on obedience.Being disobedient, it wont be successuleither.

Moreover, Psalm 76 has a bearingon why the Messiah shall not ail norbe discouraged in setting up justice in

the earth, with the isles (distant lands)waiting or His law. The psalmist thereexplains how God handles His oppo-nents to insure no ailure or discourage-ment plague the Messianic enterprise:

He can stop their ury when hepleaseth. Surely, saith the Psalmist,the wrath o man shall praise thee: theremainder o wrath shalt thou restrain,Ps. lxxvi.10. When so much o theirwrath is let out as shall exalt his praise,

he can, when he pleaseth, set up a pow-er greater than the combined strengtho all sinning creatures, and restrain theremainder o the wrath that they hadconceived. He shall cut o the spirito princes: he is terrible to the kings othe earth, verse 12. Some he will cuto and destroy, some he will terriy andaright, and prevent the rage o all. He

can knock them on the head, or breakout their teeth, or chain up their wrath;and who can oppose him?22

See also John Owens sermonon Psalm 76:5, Human Power De-eated.23 Owen there actually ties in

the covenant law o Deuteronomy 28with the judgments being pronouncedand executed in this psalm.24 That keyinsight is one we turn to last.

The Incomplete God We Preach

The so-called lordship controversyo recent decades ocused on the (alse)claims o those who held that they hadaccepted Christ as Savior, but not (yet)as Lord. Those who have led the battleagainst this diminution o Christsclaims have rightly seen the blasphemyinherent in demoting Christ rom ocesthat are legitimately His by divine right.

But modern Christianitys disdainor Gods law is a replay o the lordshipcontroversy all over again. Isaiah 33:22states, For the LORD is our judge, theLORD is our lawgiver, the LORD isour king; he will save us. We have ouroces or God proclaimed here: judge,lawgiver, king, and savior. Yet ew Chris-

tians since the Puritans have done anyjustice at all to God as their lawgiver.We go into battle, not with a two-edgedsword, but with a limp toothpick, whenwe ail to proclaim God as He proclaimsHimsel to us. To pick and choose whicho the our oces were comortablewith is to build ourselves an idol.

To a large extent, God as lawgiver isan alien concept and His law (revealedin Exodus through Deuteronomy) an

alien concept to most modern Chris-tians. This weakness in our collectiveChristian aith gives rise to the patholog-ical demographics Dr. Mohler bemoans.

I anything, the decline o modernpietistic Christianity that appears to bereported in Newsweekis evidence thatGod is not mocked. To the law and to

8/9/2019 May June2009

11/36


Faith or All o Liethe testimony: i they speak not accord-ing to this word, it is because there isno light in them (Isa. 8:20). Christianswho have preached lawless darkness ortoo long have ound their harvests tobe ravaged by drought. They may have

exorcised a particular humanistic demonhere or there, but without the law oGod, seven worse demons can occupythe seat o Christian discourse and makea mere pretense o orthodoxy.25

Will God bless such slothulstewardship with ruitulness? Or willHe continue to insure that such weak-minded Christian outreach be unable tond its hands (an outcome that doubt-less would please Jon Meacham)? As

Rushdoony so uncompromisingly putsit in his exposition o 2 Chronicles 36,In Gods sight, weakness and cowardiceare evil.26 When Christians recover thecourage to preach the whole counsel oGod, including the law, we shall, in Hismercy, again nd our hands.

For we very much will need ourhands in the days to come.

Where areyourhands?

1. Jon Meacham, The End o Christian

America, Newsweek, April 13, 2009, 34.2. Ibid.

3. Ibid.

4. Ibid.

5. Martin Selbrede, The World in GodsFist: The Meaning o History, Faith or Allo Lie, July/August 2008.

6. W. David Gamble, In Search o Chris-tian Historians, originally published in OnTeaching and reprinted with his permissionin Dominion Network, Vol. 1, Jan./Feb.1985, 58.

7. Martin Selbrede, The Day the MusicDied, Faith or All o Lie, March 2001.

8. Otto Scott, The Present Oriented, OttoScotts Compass, July 1, 1999, Vol. 9, Issue107.

9. R. J. Rushdoony, Salvation and GodlyRule(Vallecito, CA: Ross House Books,1983), 13.

10. Martin Selbrede, The EmperorsContinued Nudity: Je Sharlets Critiqueo Christian Historiography Examined,Faith or All o Lie, March/April 2007, andSelbrede, The World in Gods Fist.

11. Je Sharlet, Through a glass, darkly:How the Christian right is reimaginingU.S. history, Harpers Magazine, December2006, 3343.

12. Richard A. Shweder, Guess whosunwelcome at dinner? Nonbeliever elites mayas well get comortable with God in conversa-tion. Shweder, a Guggenheim Fellow andwinner o the AAAS Socio-PsychologicalPrize, was president o the Society or Psycho-logical Anthropology. Shweders piece rst ap-peared in the New York Timeson November27, 2006, under the title Atheists Agonistes.

13. Herbert Schlossberg, Idols or Destruc-

tion (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Publishers,1990), 1920.

14. Otto Scott, Entering the Tunnel,speech delivered to the Eighteenth AnnualConerence o the Committee or MonetaryResearch and Education, Arden House,Harriman, NY, 911 March 1990.

15. Ibid.

16. Ibid., quoting rom the Wall Street Jour-nal, 27 November 1989.

17. Rushdoony, Salvation and Godly Rule,454.

18. Franz Delitzsch, Commentary on the OldTestament in Ten Volumesby C. F. Keil andF. Delitzsch (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans,1982 reprint), Vol. 5, 345346.

19. Ernst Wilhelm Hengstenberg, The Workso Hengstenberg Vol. 6: The Psalms(CherryHill, NJ: Mack Publishing Company, n.d.),438.

20. Patrick Fairbairn, The Interpretation oProphecy(London: The Banner o TruthTrust, 1964, 1856), 504505.

21. Rushdoony, Salvation and Godly Rule,

456, quoting William M. Lamont, GodlyRule: Politics and Religion, 16031660 (Lon-don: Macmillan, 1969), 113.

22. John Owen, The Works o John Owen,ed. William H. Goold (Carlisle, PA: TheBanner o Truth Trust), Vol. 6, 269.

23. Owen, The Works o John Owen, Vol. 9,197217.

24. Ibid., 213.

25. Some recent open exchanges betweensome better-inormed Christian leaders,including Bruce N. Shortt, author oTheHarsh Truth About Public Schools(an impor-tant volume published by Chalcedon), has

shed partial light on this general problem.Shortt, examining the recent missives bycolumnists Kathleen Parker, David Brooks,and others, sees something here very muchakin to Meachams gambit: attempts todemoralize Christian conservatives as ameans to encourage them to withdraw rominvolvement in politics. Shortt sees theReligious Rights oundational problem asbeing a radically incomplete agenda, andwarns that the answer cannot possibly leadin the direction o replicating this error bysetting orth yet another incomplete agenda,

let alone buying into the alse choice oeredby the compromising pundits. He coun-sels rejection o the culture vs. politicsdichotomy and calls or engagement on allronts: culture and politics.

Among others responding to Shortts callor comment and discussion was one leaderwho said the absence o expositional, ap-plicatory, organic teaching o Gods law isresponsible or the prevailing void nowdriving the churchs conusion and impo-tence. Ironically, he could even point to

other analyses oered in this circle o think-ers that tended to prove his point: the lawo God was shorted in most o the analysesbeing oered or consideration. Since thelate 1980s he has warned that the ReligiousRights omission o Gods law would besel-destructive. He concluded that so longas the law o God remains dislodged romits rightul place, the exodus rom the publicschools will itsel be neutered. Until this a-tal hole is properly lled, talks or balancein setting Christian agendas will be ruitless.Talk about the churchs desertion in a time

o war (the title o the essay that triggeredthese exchanges) cant resolve a problem thatoriginated with the churchs prior desertiono Gods law. This specic breach needs tobe repaired (Isa. 58:12) otherwise, therewill be no remedy (2 Chron. 36:16).

26. Rushdoony, Salvation and Godly Rule,138.

8/9/2019 May June2009

12/36


How well are thenations biggestministries and pro-am-ily organizations doingat encouraging Chris-tian parents to get their

children a Christian education?According to the Exodus Mandate,

not very well at all.Exodus Mandate recently went to

the National Religious Broadcastersconvention to make a public release oits Report Card, grading nine nationalministries on their commitment toChristian schooling.

The organizations graded wereFocus on the Family, the Family Re-search Council, Concerned Women orAmerica, the American Family Associa-tion, WallBuilders, FamilyLie, JoshMcDowell Ministries, Vision America,and Coral Ridge Ministries.

Coral Ridge earned the highest

overall grade, a B, and none o the othereight scored better than C+. No onereceived an A. The Report Card can beseen on the Exodus Mandates website,www.exodusmandate.org.

Failing Tactics, Failing Grades

Exodus Mandate studied pro-grams, publications and web pages othe ministries and organizations rated.The persons who conducted the revieware listed, with their credentials, on the

Exodus website.The groups were graded on nine

individual rating criteria. Some othese criteria brought in poor marks orall concerned. For example, Does notadvocate lobbying, voting, or legisla-tion as the primary means to eectcultural renewal resulted in a C- or

Exodus Report Card Jabs Big MinistriesLee Duigon

G u e s t C o l u m n

Coral Ridge and D or D- or all theothers. The organizations and ministriesdid even worse when it came to Doesnot support the delusion that publicschool reorm will resolve our spiritualand cultural crisis. There, Coral Ridgeeked out a C while the Family ResearchCouncil and WallBuilders each receivedan F or ailure. The others didnt domuch better.

Exodus Mandate Director E. Ray

Moore said the Report Card projectmight have generated some hard eel-ings, but was necessary.

These are the ministries andorganizations that say theyre going tochange society and aect the courseo the countryand theyre ailing,Moore said. Many o these people dosee politics, legislation, and lobbying asthe primary means o cultural change.They may say they dont, but thats howthey behave. They buy into a corrupt

system that they went into politics todeeat.

Exodus Mandate says education is,and always has been, the primary meanso changing the culture. Certainly theIrreligious Let, which has or so longcontrolled public schooling in America,has successully brought about mucho the cultural change it wantedevenwhile America was electing conserva-tives to the presidency and Congress.

I you want to change the culture,Moore said, you have to start whereGod starts, with the amily and church.That means a Christian education orthe children, as mandated by Scripture.But Im araid most evangelicals appar-ently do not have a Biblical theology oreducation.

Getting the MessageWith tens o millions o Chris-

tian children receiving a daily dose osecular, anti-Christian education in thepublic schools, the national ministriesdevotion to politics and lobbying is aprescription or losing the culture war,argues the Exodus Mandate.

Were asking these leaders to takea sabbatical rom politics and join us,Moore said. Its better to drain the

swamp than to try to kill all the mos-quitoes. Unless Christian children get aChristian education, we cant even main-tain our culturemuch less take it back.

The Christian Right, he said, wentinto politics while the Secular Letwent ater our culture and our institu-tions. Anyone can see the result.

We have appealed to many othese leaders or years. Ive personallyhanded books and literature and tapesto some o the leaders o these groups at

conerences, seminars, etc. I dont knowi theyve all gotten the message, but Iknow some o them have. We are goingto hold them accountable.

As well as the national ministriesand organizations, Moore said, many oAmericas churches have been AWOL inthe most important battle o our time.

As a result, he said, aggressivesecularism has not only dominatedAmerican culture, but has now obtained

political dominance, too.The next couple o years will be the

moment o maximum danger or thechurch and the nation, Moore said, butalso the moment o maximum opportu-nity. The church has always operated bestunder pressure. The early church grew upin an anti-Christian culture.

8/9/2019 May June2009

13/36


Faith or All o LieMinistries Respond

The ministries and organizationsgraded in the Report Card have not re-sponded publicly. When we asked Focuson the Family to respond, a terse emailanswered, [W]e are not commenting

on the Exodus Mandate Report Cardand will be unable to accommodateyour request. Others simply didntreturn our phone calls.

However, we did get responses romJosh McDowell, Coral Ridge Ministries,and WallBuilders.

Ward Coleman, speaking or JoshMcDowell Ministries, said he didntthink the Report Card was accurate.

I think they just looked at websites,

etc., which dont show everything,Coleman said. Whenever Josh speaks,he really promotes Christian schools andhomeschooling. Hes got two daughtersin Christian schools. At least hear thespeaker in an appropriate setting beoreyou grade the ministry.

Nevertheless, Coleman said heagreed that the ministries should domore to get Christian children intoChristian educationbut dont alien-ate the public, he added.

On the whole, he said, ourchurches have been too accommodat-ing with the culture. We let an anti-Christian culture take over what was aChristian culture in America. Over theyears, our churches have not been trulycommitted to preserving a Christianway o lie.

John Aman o Coral Ridge Min-istries reminded us that the ministrysounder, D. James Kennedy, actively

supported Christian schooling andcampaigned to have Christian childrentaken out o anti-Christian schools.1

Sending our kids to the publicschools, Aman said, is a bit like whenthe Turks used to capture Christianchildren and raise them to be Muslimjanissaries.

What Exodus Mandate hasbrought to light really is a very sig-nicant point. I we dont educate ourchildren, the battles on Capitol Hill arejust last-ditch eorts to keep the Hunsrom the gates. Its a very dicult issue

or churches and ministries to address,but necessary i we want to stop thesecularization o our children. Im gladthey brought this issue to light.

Dr. Kennedy died in 2007. Hisplace as host o The Coral Ridge Houron television has been taken by JerryNewcombe, who also commented avor-ably on the Exodus Mandates mission.

What scares me most, Newcombesaid, is the younger evangelicals who

dont seem to care about abortion,whove bought into certain aspects othe homosexual agenda. And where dothe young evangelicals get those secularideas? In public schools!

Were in trouble, educationally andculturally. Homeschools and Christianschools are the shining light. Can youimagine how badly o wed be withoutthem?

Even so, Newcombe did not seemto like the tone o the Exodus Mandate

Report Card.At Coral Ridge, we support all

those ministries, he said. Each worksin its own area and makes valuableresources available to all o us.

David Barton, head o WallBuilderswas not at all pleased with the ReportCard. WallBuilders was given an overallgrade o C-, with an F or Does notsupport the delusion that public schoolreorm will resolve our spiritual and

cultural crisis.They never even talked to us,

Barton said. We totally agree withthem, that Christian children ought tobe in Christian educationso why arethey going ater me? O course we sup-port Christian schooling. I ounded aChristian school!

But there are millions o Christiankids in the public schools today, and howdo you get them out? I agree that thosekids need to leave the public schools,but Im not going to sit back and throwbombs without proposing an alternative.

I the Foundations Be Destroyed

Taken together, the nine nationalministries and pro-amily organizationsare supported by millions o Americans,to the tune o tens o millions o dollarsin contributions and dues. And yetthe secularization and deterioration oAmerican culture continues as i none othese groups even existed.

America is under judgment ordisobedience to God. Rev. Joseph

Morecrat, III, pastor o the ChalcedonPresbyterian Church in Atlanta, Geor-gia, comments:

When politicians turn rom God asthe source o salvation, lie and sovereign-ty, and legislate, adjudicate and executetheir laws and policies, they will always:(1) call evil good and good evil; (2)encourage evil and lawlessness in society;(3) bring down the judgment o God ontheir nation, which will dry up prosper-ity, blessing, health and security.2

Throughout the Bible, God com-mands His people to be responsible orthe education o their children and seeto it that the children grow up with aknowledge o Gods Word and in lovingaithulness to Him. There is certainlyno Biblical warrant whatsoever or turn-ing children over to strangers ve daysa week or thirteen years, to be taughtthat Christianity is bad, abortion andsodomy are good, and government and

Darwin have all the answers.But this is exactly what we havedone or better than one hundred years.The result is a culture in which one inthree babies is born out o wedlock, inot aborted; government and corporateunds are used to promote and celebrate


8/9/2019 May June2009

14/36


Once upon atime, there werechildren who wereeager to learn to read.They wanted as muchhelp as possible to be

able to read wonderul books like theBible. This was not surprising becausethese children watched and listened as

their parents and older brothers andsisters looked at pages with small, blacksymbols on them and learned importantideas such as our duty to love and obeyGod and how Jesus Christ died on thecross to make atonement or His people.In act, in many households, the rewardor learning how to decipher this codewas a Bible o ones own. These childrendid not work or test scores or scholar-ships. They just wanted to learn.

They read about araway people andplaces and learned rom other peoplesexperiences. They had the chance towork with their parents and learn atrade. They were encouraged to learnGods Word and pray that God wouldshow them the calling He intended orthem. Their amilies would help themnd opportunities to apprentice underothers who shared the same calling Godhad placed on their lives. It was a systemthat worked or centuries.

Time passed and experts camealong who inormed parents that theywere no longer capable o teaching theirchildren. Sadly, many parents believedthese experts, and they began to gettheir little boys and girls up early in themorning, ve days a week, to travel to aplace where there were other boys and

Once Upon a Time:

Challenging the Status Quo

Andrea Schwartz


girls their own ages. The needs o theindividual child did not matter; eachhad to do what all the other childrendid. It was dicult at rst or them togive their children over to other peopleor six hours a day, but the motherseventually got used to it and sought ormeaningul things to do with their sparetime. Some went back to school or got a

job to eel useul and important.As children progressed through the

dierent grades, they lost much o theirenthusiasm or learning. Instead o be-ing excited about learning new things,they merely nished their homework.They liked Saturdays and Sundaysbest because they did not have to goto school. They also liked the summermonths because school was not in ses-sion. Some completely orgot that there

was a time in their lives when learningwas un and they could not wait to learnnew things. It was a good thing TV andvideo games were invented because kidsneeded to do things that did not have todo with learning.

As the experts continued theirexperiment, they decided that to betruly educated, children had to be inschool or twelve years. (And i childrenwent to preschool or kindergarten,

both highly recommended, more thantwelve years could be spent in getting aneducation.)

One would think that ater allthis time, students, now young adults,would be ready to do something pro-ductive. However, the experts thoughtotherwise. They thought our to six

more years o even higher educationwere needed. So they convinced parentsand young adults to work hard so theycould get into good colleges. Studentsworked to get good grades and scores onstandardized tests. Parents spent lots otime and money sending their childrento special classes to help them pass tests.They paid people to help them write es-

says and ll out applications to get intothe best schools.

The journey did not necessarilyend ater these years o undergraduateeducation. The experts kept movingthe nish line. Beore long, there weretwo or three more years added to thejourney. By the time many young adultsnished the course, they were exhaustedand most oten had a lot o debt becauseit is costly to be a perpetual student.

Some were so glad to be nished thatthey hardly ever picked up a book again.

According to the projections o theexperts, all o this schooling should haveproduced smarter people, people whowere loyal to their amily and country,and productive members o the workorce, living responsibly within theirmeans and eager to become mothersand athers themselves.

But that is not what happened.

Instead, they abandoned much o whattheir athers and mothers had taughtthem about loving Jesus Christ andkeeping His commandments. Theydecided that institutions like marriagewere old-ashioned and out-o-date.They lived as though they were entitledto the luxuries o lie without having

8/9/2019 May June2009

15/36

8/9/2019 May June2009

16/36


Faith or All o Liethe case o large amilies, it is squander-ing resources to send your most highlytrained members away. Moreover, thecollege experience is much more aboutdrinking binges, sexual promiscuity,Marxist political and social theory, en-

vironmentalism, and the deication oother ideologies. These are the kinds oexperiences the Christian should wantno part o. The Scripture teaches:

Be ye not unequally yoked togetherwith unbelievers: or what el-lowship hath righteousness withunrighteousness? And what com-munion hath light with darkness?

And what concord hath Christwith Belial? Or what part hath he

that believeth with an infdel? Andwhat agreement hath the templeo God with idols? For ye are thetemple o the living God; as Godhath said, I will dwell in them, and

walk in them; and I will be theirGod, and they shall be my people.

Whereore come out rom amongthem, and be ye separate, saith theLord, and touch not the uncleanthing; and I will receive you. And

will be a Father unto you, and yeshall be my sons and daughters,saith the Lord Almighty. (2 Cor.6:1418)

One would think that twelve yearso schooling under the supervision ohighly trained, credentialed teacherswould be enough to prepare most tobecome useul, productive individu-als, since the majority are not headingtoward careers in rocket science or brain

surgery. But the modern educationalsystem states that twelve years is notenough and needs to be enriched byour years o college, two years moreor a masters program and then on to aPh.D. The harsh truth is that with thephilosophy and practice o humanisticeducation, graduates o twelve years o

schooling are not prepared to do verymuch.

This is a dramatically dierent situ-ation rom colonial and early Americawhere young men thirteen and ourteenyears o age were attending colleges. By

lengthening the duration o schooling,we have not produced more maturegraduates. We have only prolonged thecontrived and abricated stage o humandevelopment called adolescence. Rush-doony is correct when he asserts,

Some Christian parents have boughtinto the modern perspective that seesadolescence and its storm and stress,its rebelliousness and spirit o inde-pendence, as biologically determinedand natural to man. In act, however,

adolescence is a cultural product, a hall-mark o a decadent culture, and almostunknown in the history o civilizationoutside the modern era. In most cul-tures, what we call adolescence is rathera time o the most careul and attentiveimitation o adults and o the older gen-eration. Youth, on the verge o maturelie and work, is then most concernedabout being closer to the adult worldand accepted by it. Instead o rebellingagainst it, youth seeks admission and

initiation into the world o adults. Onlybecause existentialism places a premiumon isolation and radical independencedo youth associate the dawn o physicalmaturity with a declaration o war andindependence. They are simply enactingthereby the necessary religious conr-mation rite o the modern world. TheChristian child is conrmed in the aitho his athers as he approaches maturity;the conrmation rite o the humanistchild is adolescence and its rebellious-ness or existentialism.3

No Ready Market

One would think that knowing thata young person had been educated tolive, think, and act as a Christian wouldmake him more marketable in Christiancircles. Sadly, this is not always the case.Many Christians are in the position

o hiring employees. Why dont theseChristians give preerence to otherChristians? Paul the Apostle instructsthe church:

Thereore, as we have opportunity,let us do good to all, especially to

those who are o the household oaith. (Gal. 6:10 NKJV)

How is it doing good to Christianyoung people to make it a requirementthat secularists credential them? Mostproessing Christians ail to see this asa betrayal o Pauls words. Jesus made itclear that the world would be given wit-ness to those who were His disciples.

A new commandment I give toyou, that you love one another; as

I have loved you, that you also loveone another. By this all will knowthat you are My disciples, i youhave love or one another. (John13:3435 NKJV)

The modern version o loving oneanother involves sentimental eelingsrather than a deliberate application oGods law to the practical situations olie. O what value is a Christian educa-tion i by the time it is complete, there

isnt a ready market to receive and benetrom these graduates? Could it be thatthe denigration o Gods law withinthe church has led to the reality that nodierence exists between dealing withChristians and pagans? Other ethnic andreligious groups give more heed to thespirit o Pauls words within their owncultures than does the Body o Christ.

Godly Alternatives

There areChristian colleges and

universities, but many have been co-opted and teach the standard are otheir secular counterparts. Those thatare aithul to the orthodox aith areoten a considerable distance rom homeand involve uprooting the student romhis amily and amiliar surroundings,not to mention oten going into debt to

8/9/2019 May June2009

17/36


Faith or All o Liedo so. Choices closer to home includea college or university that is secular innature, where integrity, godliness, andBiblical law are mocked and ridiculed.What are amilies to do? Just skip collegealtogether?

I you do not send your child to col-lege, are you abandoning higher educa-tion? O course not. Rather, aithul,close-to-home alternatives to the demon-ic environment o most college campusesneed to be developed. I a particularcalling truly dictates venturing into suchplaces, parents need to be equipped tomentor their children through the pro-cess o selecting classes, teachers, majors,etc. They need to educate their children

with inormation and tactics in dealingwith those who seek to alienate themrom Jesus Christ and His law-word.

Summer worldview conerences arehelpul (http://wcwc.ws),4 but muchmore is needed. Every Christian studentneeds to have a support network thatincludes aithul believers who not onlypray or and with them, but also arewilling to engage in extensive conversa-tions about the presuppositions o thecoursework that is being studied, and

highlighting where the material deviatesrom a Biblical perspective. Failing this,we are sending our children into situ-ations with a big dartboard painted ontheir acegreatly impaired to deendthemselves against the ery darts that areaimed at them.5

Another very positive model to beutilized is the apprenticeship model.There are apprenticeship programs avail-able or a wide variety o vocations. How

marvelous it would be or a Christianchild to be able to pursue such programsunder the oversight o talented Chris-tian teachers. This may not be possiblein all instances, but it is a worthy goalnonetheless. Sure, coursework might beneeded in order to get the union cardcredential or a particular eld, but those

whom the apprentices learn under canserve as mentors and master teachers,guiding the students as to how best toavoid the pitalls. This would includeapprenticing under physicians, teach-ers, lawyers, nurses, pastors, engineers,

plumbers, and electricians.6Some argue that ater years in the

homeschool setting, it is important anddesirable or these students to get a doseo the real world. However, as Scrip-ture so clearly denes it, the real world isthe world where Jesus Christ is King okings and Lord o lords. Anything else isa countereit. Thus, to accept the statusquo o needing to get a degree rom asecular college or university as the mark

o being educated and marketable orones vocation is really taking a hugestep backward or these students. Thosewho are called into proessions that needthis credential should make amplepreparation in the subject areas to bestudied, to be sure that they can success-ully stand against the wiles o the devilsin such places.

Although the Christian educa-tion movement has made great stridesin the primary and secondary grades,

the prospects or higher education areconsiderably less preerable than the en-vironments rom which homeschoolersemerge. God knows we can and mustdo better.

Andrea Schwartz is the ChalcedonFoundations active proponent o Christianeducation. She has authored two books onhomeschooling along with writing a regularblog www.StartYourHomeschool.com . She isspearheading the Chalcedon Teacher Training

Institute and continues to mentor, lecture, andteach. She lives in San Jose with her husbando 33 years and continues to homeschool heryoungest daughter. She can be reached byemail at [email protected]

1. R. J. Rushdoony, Roots o Reconstruction(Vallecito, CA: Ross House Books, 1991),159160.

2. Andrea Schwartz, The Biblical TrusteeFamily, Faith or All o Lie(Nov./Dec.2007), 30.

3. R. J. Rushdoony, The Philosophy o theChristian Curriculum (Vallecito, CA: RossHouse Books, 2001), 163164.

4. The mission o the West-Coast ChristianWorldview Conerence is that we shouldno longer be children, tossed to and ro andcarried about with every wind o doctrine,by the trickery o men, in the cunning crat-iness o deceitul plotting, but, speaking thetruth in love, may grow up in all things intoHim who is the headChristrom whomthe whole body, joined and knit together bywhat every joint supplies, according to theeective working by which every part doesits share, causes growth o the body or theediying o itsel in love (Eph. 4:1416).

5. Students ace a persistent dilemma whenthey attend a humanistic, God-mockingeducational institution. They can standor their aith and risk ailing a course, orthey can remain silent and go through thenecessary steps to obtain a passing grade.With the rst option, they risk wasting boththeir time and money or a very dubiousoutcome. With the second option, theyrisk alling into syncretistic and lukewarmChristianity.

6. Individual amilies could work outinormal summer internships that wouldacquaint a prospective student with therealities o a particular career, helping himor her to discover whether this eld is trulysomething to pursue.

by education, scholarship, music, publi-cations, and more. I we limit our viewo what constitutes Christs work, welimit His Kingdom, and our blessings.

1. S. C. Gayord, Leviticus, in CharlesGore, Henry Leighton Goudge, and AlredGuillaume, eds.,A New Commentary onHoly Scripture(New York: Macmillan,1929), 107.

2. Gordon J. Wenham, The Book o Leviticus(Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans,1985), 126.

Rushdoony Tithing cont. from page 3

8/9/2019 May June2009

18/36


The world is un-dergoing a blackcoee routine, becauseblack coee is what yougive to someone who

needs to sober up. Cupater cup is supposed to clear the mindand oset the eect o a bloodstreamsoaked with alcohol. It may be an oldwives tale, but both Christian and non-Christian are being orced via nancialloss to examine the very oundations otheir liestyle. And bad news o econom-ic contraction, mass unemployment,and uncertainty about the uture isdoled out to them daily like an incessant

stream o unsweetened caeine.On the positive side, an increasedawareness o basic economics is spread-ing throughout the American populace.More and more people are trying tounderstand infation, the origins o thebanking crisis, and the policies o theFederal Reserve. All well and good, butwhat theyre not recognizing is the actthat their treasures are established onearth. And or God, its not so muchthe act that there are treasures, but thatthese treasures own our hearts. OurLord was quite clear that we cannotserve both:

No servant can serve two masters:

or either he will hate the one, andlove the other; or else he will hold

to the one, and despise the other.

Rich Toward God:

Kingdom-Centered Living in a Collapsing World

Christopher J. Ortiz


Ye cannot serve God and mam-mon. (Luke 16:13)

Seeking First the Kingdom o Man

and His Unrighteousness

Is Gods Word concerned with

sound money by itsel? Ethics without anend in mind is not Biblical religion. Thereis no point in discussing debt avoid-ance, sound money, and other Biblicaleconomic principles i adhering to thoseprinciples leads to something greaterthan the mammon they represent. Inot, then sound mammon is still servingthe god o mammon because its goal isnot service to Christ. Sound money with-out service to Christ is still satanic.

The basic problem is that whetherwe have at currencies, or a gold-backedmonetary base, we cannot permita secularized economic outlook todominate. We are at war with the god omammon, and i we isolate the concepto value to sound money, we can end upunwittingly at war with God. Rush-doony, although a proessing Christianlibertarian and ree market advocate,puts orward this basic critique o gold-backed secularism:

Money thus is very important, andnecessary. But to make it the source oall value is a serious error and an evil.It leads in some, such as the libertar-ians, to absolutizing the marketplace, tomaking the ree market and a monetaryprice the criterion o value per se. Butmoney establishes economic value only.1

Without a Biblical emphasis upon

the use o mammon to advance thereign o God, money itsel becomeswealth. This has long been the universalproblem in the West. As Rushdoony

notes, men work or money, and there-ore work loses its theocentric meaningand dominionist orientation. Men nowwork to establish the kingdom o manand his unrighteousness.

[M]oney has become or them more

than a yardstick or even a storehouse

o value: it has become value itsel. The

result is a radical social disorientation.

Men work, not to produce, nor to gain

properties, lands, and other assets, but

or money. Money then becomes a god;it becomes the mammon o unrigh-

teousness (Luke 16:9), the god o in-

justice, and the logical goal o unbelie

(Luke 16:78, 11, 13).2

As I wrote previously, the issuebeore us as Christians is the restorationo spiritual capital: aith, character, andthe ear o God. With all the discussionsregarding money, assets, and the state othe economy, humanistic man is dem-

onstrating that his treasure is upon earthbecause thieves are stealing it and theinfationary moths are corrupting it.Yet through all o the booms and busts,the value o Gods law-word remains,

and His practical provision is contingentupon our treasuring that which proceedsrom His mouth:

Lay not up or yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and

steal: but lay up or yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break

through nor steal: or where your treasure is, there will your heart be also. (Matt. 6:1921)

8/9/2019 May June2009

19/36


Faith or All o LieLie is more than economics, and muchmore than money. Our Lord is clear onthis point: It is written, Man shall notlive by bread alone, but by every wordthat proceedeth out o the mouth oGod (Matt. 4:4).3

Leveraging or EternityTo lay up treasure upon earth is tolay up treasure or onesel, and to lay uptreasure or onesel is to be impoverishedin relation to God and His true riches.This is not wise investing. The time tocome, as the Bible says, is eternal, andenriching that portolio should denethe meaning and intent o our goodworks on this side o glorication. It isGods pleasure to enrich us in this lie,but the purpose is so that we might

enrich others by being His hand ex-tended to them. I we are aithul in thisassignment, we are leveraging ourselvesor eternity:

Charge them that are rich in thisworld, that they be not highmind-ed, nor trust in uncertain riches,but in the living God, who givethus richly all things to enjoy; thatthey do good, that they be rich ingood works, ready to distribute,

willing to communicate; layingup in store or themselves a goodoundation againstthe time tocome, that they may lay hold oneternal lie. (1 Tim. 6:1719; em-phasis added)

This theme is so pervasive in boththe Epistles and the Gospels that it isno surprise that the social gospel writ-ers, and the contemporary Christianprogressives, seize upon such texts to

substantiate wealth redistribution andeconomic envy. The Scriptures are clearin their consistent admonishment to therich, but the text is also clear that thenancially rich must be willing to com-municate. There can be no coercionother than the Scriptures that are useulor a proper training in righteousness

(2 Tim. 3:16). Benevolence is the act o awilling soul that sees his personal enrich-ment as a git o God enabling him toadvance His Kingdom by underwriting itsnecessities. The question is one o out-look, as our Lord teaches in the parable

o the rich man:And he spake a parable unto them,saying, The ground o a certainrich man brought orth plentiully:and he thought within himsel,saying, What shall I do, becauseI have no room where to bestowmy ruits? And he said, This willI do: I will pull down my barns,and build greater; and there will Ibestow all my ruits and my goods.

And I will say to my soul, Soul,thou hast much goods laid up ormany years; take thine ease, eat,drink, and be merry. But God saidunto him, Thou ool, this nightthy soul shall be required o thee:then whose shall those things be,

which thou hast provided? So is hethat layeth up treasure or himsel,and is not rich toward God. (Luke12:1621)

It is no sin to possess productiveland, but it is sin to lay in store merelyor your own pleasure with no regardor the well-being o others, or theneeds o the gospel. The rich man inthis parable saw no other use or hisabundance other than a very comort-able retirement. He exploited no one ingaining his wealth, and it doesnt appearhe was using it to undermine another.He simply saw the good lie as denedby material comortthe very idea our

Lord was challenging:

And he said unto them, Take heed,and beware o covetousness: ora mans lie consisteth not in theabundance o the things which hepossesseth. (Luke 12:15)

The man should have had more

regard or his soul in eternity than intaking ease by eating, drinking, andmerriment. The man could not takehis wealth with him, and he could notcontrol its distribution ater his death.Why then should it have ever been

the ocus o his lie? He should haveregarded the Kingdom o much greatervalue. This would have made him richtoward God.

What the Nations Seek Ater

This parable soon became a parto the Sermon on the Mount with Hisadmonishment to Take no thought oryour lie (Luke 12:2230). However,these instructions spoke more o the con-cerns o a poor man than that o the rich:

And seek not ye what ye shall eat,or what ye shall drink, neitherbe ye o doubtul mind. For allthese things do the nations o the

world seek ater: and your Fatherknoweth that ye have need o thesethings. (Luke 12:2930)

This is what the rich and poor sharein common when their lives are notKingdom-centered. In both cases, theyseek or their material well-being, and

in both cases this is sheer covetousness.It is also unbelieneither be ye odoubtul mindand that doubt hasa great deal to do with our unansweredprayers and the realization o our earso impoverishment:

But let him ask in aith, nothingwavering. For he that wavereth islike a wave o the sea driven withthe wind and tossed. For let notthat man think that he shall receiveany thing o the Lord. A doubleminded man is unstable in all his

ways. (James 1:68)

In Luke 12, verse 30, our Lord says,For all these things do the nations othe world seek ater. We should con-template the ull meaning o this pas-sage, because it reveals in plain speech

8/9/2019 May June2009

20/36


Faith or All o Liethe radical nature o the Kingdom-driven lie: do not seek what the nationso the world are seeking ater. This shouldhave proound meaning or us, since welive in a time in which we can actuallyobservethrough mediawhat the na-

tions o the world are seeking ater. Theconclusion: whatever you see the nationsseeking ater, seek the opposite.

The world is enguled in anxiety, soyou must demonstrate aith. The worldis hoarding, so you must give. Theworld is seeking economic salvation bythe state, so you must establish the ruleo God and labor or an internationalreturn to Gods law.

The Kingdom as the Will o God

Documents

May June2009