* Warning, really long, possibly offensive blog post — not for the faint of heart. If you want to see where this diatribe began, read part 2 — http://rileydad.wordpress.com/2009/11/14/rutherford-pt-2/

“We don’t discuss politics & religion”
Then you will leave your children tyranny & imorality and damn them to hell.

I have said for a number of years that the most evil phrase in the English language was possibly
“I know the Bible says, BUT . . .” because whatever comes after it is the “wisdom of this world” or a lie straight from hell.

However, a couple of years ago our pastor said something in a sermon that I think much more fully makes this point . He said we must love, obey, follow, seek, & trust in Christ alone. For us to have any hope , for us to be a true follower of Christ — not a deceived professor — we must HAVE CHRIST ALONE.
NOT “CHRIST, PLUS . . .” or “CHRIST, BUT . . .”

In other words : we cannot come to God with Christ, plus our own (self) righteousness, dead works, sacrifices, “decision for Jesus”, “sinner’s prayer” etc. We must trust in Christ alone

AND we cannot come to God with conditional obedience to an adjusted Christ.

Last Sunday we had a powerful sermon on I. Cor. 16:22 “If any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be Anathema Maranatha.” (Anathema means cursed or set apart for destruction; Maranatha means “Come Lord”)
No matter what our profession, we can know our Spiritual condition and will be judged based on whether or not we “love Christ”. And unlike the world’s deceitful idea of love, “Loving Christ” means more than emotion or sentimentalism, or nice words or flowery prayers or even sound doctrine. Our love for Christ is shown in our obedience to His word. Our love for the Brethren. Our service to the helpless (Spiritually & physically) and our taking captive every thought & every area of our life/ culture to His revealed will in His Word.
He tells us repeatedly what love to Him is. And He also warns “many will come in that day & say ‘Lord, Lord’”.

Equally important to “loving Christ” is loving the right Christ. Or the right God. Not an idol of our imagination/ invention, even one called “Jesus”. We must be sure that the God we are following is the one true God, as He has reveald because every church (even the most liberal, unbiblical ones) say they “love Jesus” and even most cults revere Him as a prophet, great teacher, etc.

An adjusted Christ — even one who bears a close resemblance — is an idol & will damn its followers. An adjusted Christ offers no hope to anyone temporally or eternally. “We know an idol is nothing in the world” I cor. 8:1. An adjusted God cannot hear our prayers & cannot help us — no matter how sincere we are (do we think that Muslims praying are insincere ?) Idols, God’s Word tells us, have “eyes but donot see, ears but do not hear, arms but cannot save”.

But how do we, people who really love Jesus & really want to believe & follow God’s Word adjust God ? I don’t think it’s anything that we set out to do. Adjusting God is an incremental, unconscious slippery slope. We make little choices, little decisions, day-by-day, hour by hour.

And I think that we are all guilty (myself especially) of adjusting God & His Word based on either our circumstances, our preferences, our pet sins, our “good works” (or areas that we are particularly strong– and others struggle) or just plain personality quirks.
“This is not me“, you say ?

Well. Let’s take it a step further. Be more clear.

“But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him. ” — John 4:23

“Spirit AND Truth”. Don’t we all tend towards one or the other ? The emotional & Spiritual. Or the doctrinal & practical ? Don’t we all emphasize the experience or the obedience ? Isn’t this based on our particular bent or our situation at a particular time? Don’t all we tend towards legalism or pietistic spiritualizing away everything — sometimes both ?

Is this acceptable if we are truly seeking to love & follow Christ; to take every thought captive ?!?!?

None of us (me included) want to look at the ugly reality that we adjust God & follow Christ as we would prefer — not as people who want to know His & follow Him as He tells us to. BUT, if we are going to truly love Him and be conformed to His image, and particularly if we want to be of some use in His Kingdom, we must learn to recognize where we are adjusting God and put these tendencies to death.

Perhaps, since Paul told us to follow him as he followed Christ, a good way to measure this — and keep it in check would be to see how we pick and choose how we “follow” some of our particular “heroes of the faith”. Since all men are fallen, sinful, imperfect and have glaring blind spots (just like us) this is an area we must approach with care, but I think it can be helpful.

The right way to apply this axiom “follow me as I follow Christ” is to not “throw the baby out with the bathwater. Let’s say, for instance, that you like to read an old writer who’s work on prayer or communion with God in the mundane or doctrine is Christ exalting & soul uplifting. Their life & ministry give you a clearer picture of who God is in some area or help you draw near to Him. But then you learn that in some other secondary point of doctrine they were WAY off base. Or they were so strict on secondary matters that they died a recluse w/o fellowship– not even attending church. Or they were weak in their families. Or they struggled with doubt and depression. (I have left particular instances out to not slander Brethren — even dead ones. All of us can find some of our “heroes” in these examples)

We still are to follow them as they follow Christ. We are to drink deeply from those things that they left us that exalt Christ and leave those things that they stumbled with.

Yes, but what does this have to do with “adjusting God”. Quite simple. When we WRONGLY apply this axiom it is a flashing warning sign that we could be tending towards adjusting God.

Let us use two saints from the past that are very popular in our little circles to illustrate this theory.
Amy Carmichael & Samuel Rutherford.

First, a short one about Carmichael then a little longer example about Rutherford.

The life & writings of Amy Carmichael are a gift to the church and a picture of how “love for Christ” is lived out. But we tend to emphasize what part of her life & ministry that we focus on based on how we have adjusted God. Remember “true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit AND in truth”. And apply it here.

If we want to adjust God (and elevate ourselves) by focusing on the pietistic, experiential, PERSONAL & emotional aspect of worship, then we drink deeply of Carmichael’s writings that are deeply personal, Spiritually challenging, and poetic. But we downplay or ignore the fact that her work was going to the ends of the earth — literally — to preach the Gospel. And that her most effective & lasting ministry was in violating the laws & customs of the nation she was in, in rescuing girls from a life of little more than sexual slavery, and in running an orphanage. It was in her cultural work and practical acts of mercy towards orphans in which she best displayed the “true religion” of James 1:27. To Spiritualize away or pietisically dismiss calls to similar service today is to presumptuously dismiss direct commands of God and adjust Him.

On the other hand, if we want to adjust God (and elevate ourselves) by strutting about with our law/culture challenging pro-life work, or evangelistic zeal, or orphan care/ adoption ministry. We tend to emphasize this parts of her work — and forget/ ignore that the source & foundation of her work was an ongoing, zealous love for Christ and deep drinking from the well of His Spirit.

Or, take Samuel Rutherford. My son just bought a book by Rutherford called “The Trial and Triumph of Faith”, originally published in 1645. Perhaps a few quotes from the “Publisher’s Preface” can explain what I am trying to say better than I.

It begins :
“Samuel Rutherford is best remembered today for the soaring eloquence and pastoral wisdom in his Letters. But he was more than a devotional writer. He was also a distinguished preacher, theologian, and political thinker. . . . A visiting London merchant said Rutherford’s preaching showed him ‘the loveliness of Christ’”

Sounds like a full orbed Christianity, taking every thought captive, built on the right foundation — love for an unadjusted Christ.

Further the Preface states that Rutherford stood for doctrinal soundness & Gospel purity to his own harm :
“First, Rutherford, himself banished from his parish for his opposition to Armininanism, used his preaching and writing to discuss theological errors and controversies at the time of writing . For example, in this book he deals at length with the Antinomianism of men like . . .”

How does this benefit us 350 years later ?
“. . .such discussions of errors and misconceptions regarding faith and salvation are still of great value today. Old errors are constantly being revived in new guises by those who are unaware of the discussions of the past”.

But what about the “political thinker” part. Isn’t this an example of a blind spot or not “focusing on Christ”.
Rutherford’s Christianity would have no room for such distinctions between secular & sacred :
“Rutherford was deeply interested in the struggle for further reformation . . . and ONGOING ATTEMPTS TO LIMIT THE POWER OF THE KING. . . .”
This “might seem to distract from Rutherford’s higher concern with the Kingdom of God and salvation in Christ. We might better understand . . . if we remember that . . . these conflicts in church and state were literally life and death struggles. It is because the leaders of this time were prepared to risk their own lives in resisting tyranny in church AND state that we have inherited many of our rights and liberties, as well as the invaluable heritage of the writings of the time.”

But again, his standing for truth, his resisting tyranny cannot be separated from the fountain that was Rutherford’s deep and abiding love for Christ. It drips from every page of his writing because it flowed through his life. He drank so deeply and often from the love of Christ in a personal way that it overflowed into everything he did.

But how does this, practically, serve as any kind of warning about “adjusting God” and in doing so endangering ourselves of being “accursed” because we show that we do not “LOVE CHRIST” ?

Simple. One of Rutherford’s two most famous & lasting books is his courageous Lex Rex (law is king). Which set forth the idea there is a law higher than the king‘s word. Earthly rulers‘ authority is limited by God and when they step over these bounds they are rebellious usurpers that are to be resisited.
This idea shook the foundations of the centuries long stranglehold tyrannical rulers held through an idolotrous heresy known as the “divine right of Kings”. The word of the king was law (Rex Lex).

This set the stage for America’s independence and has spread liberty throughout the formerly Christian West and to parts of the world that have never heard of Rutherford or even Christ.

However, there are many out there who use Rutherford’s writings in Lex Rex as a thin cover for their rebellious hearts but have little or no use for his more important, much more volumous work on the true doctrines of Christianity and the loveliness of Christ. If Rutherford’s writings about loving Christ and his letters on how to walk in that love are ignored we are doing worse than “missing the forest for the trees”, we have actually perverted his work and adjusted God to our great peril.

On the other hand, among people who revere Rutherford’s writings on love for Christ and sound doctrine. Rutherford (like Carmichael) has been used by God to show them a bigger picture of who Christ is and how we are to draw near to & love him. With Rutherford’s own glorious relationship flowing into his hand as a guide for his pen, they have begun on the path that he lived on. They have dug deeply beyond a surface reading of God’s Word and found therein a great wellspring for their soul.

However, too often –like the rebellious Lex Rex fans who have little use for Christ –the “digging deeper with Rutherford” ends with the Spiritual and does not expand to the practical. Using a different hermeneutic when it comes to relating to civil magistrates. By using passages like Romans 13:1-4 and Luke 20:25 as “proof texts” we idolatrously assign rights to government that belong only to God and unjustly accuse (in word or deed) Believers who challenge this view (or the government’s unlimited authority) of sin & rebellion.

The Spiritual descendants who still enjoy remarkable freedom because of his application of God’s Word to government that was as deep as his digging for truths about our intimacy with Christ are now a real threat to return us to “Rex Lex” all the while thinking they are taking the higher road Spiritually.

How can we tell if we are adjusting God ? Perhaps one way might be to examine how consistently we balance our reading and apply what we learn.

The above was actually prompted by finding the following. Which was prompted by some discussions we have had lately about the Christian & obedience to the civil magistrate with folks who love Rutherford’s poetic prose about Christ, but either strongly disagree with his pivotal work Lex Rex — or just flat refuse to read it because it challenges their presuppositions and comfort zones too much.

I know it is bad blog etiquette to post something this long off another web site rather than just a link, but I felt at liberty to do so, since it is merely an excerpt from a long published work. For the record, I found this on “A Puritan’s Mind”

http://www.apuritansmind.com/SamuelRutherford/SamuelRutherfordLexRex.htm

Samuel Rutherford (1600-1661)
Lex Rex
A One of the greatest works on Government, the Civil Magistrate, Church and State ever written. This is an excerpt from the book, and if you click on the title (Lex Rex) at the top of the article, then you will be transported offsite to a complete book online of the work.
 
Lex, Rex
by Rev. Samuel Rutherford
 
For the lawfulness of resistance in the matter of the king’s unjust invasion of life and religion, we offer these arguments.

Arg. 1: That power which is obliged to command and rule justly and religiously for the good of the subjects, and is only set over the people on these conditions, and not absolutely, cannot tie the people to subjection without resistance, when the power is abused to the destruction of laws, religion, and the subjects. But all power of the law is thus obliged, (Rom. xiii. 4 ; Deut. xvii. 18-20 ; 2 Chron. xix. 6 ; Ps. cxxxii. 11, 12 ; lxxxix. 30, 31; 2 Sam. vii. 12 ; Jer. xvii. 24, 25,) and hath, and may be, abused by kings, to the destruction of laws, religion, and subjects. The proposition is clear. 1. For the powers that tie us to subjection only are of God. 2. Because to resist them, is to resist the ordinance of God. 3. Because they are not a terror to good works, but to evil. 4. Because they are God’s ministers for our good, but abused powers are not of God, but of men, or not ordinances of God ; they are a terror to good works, not to evil ; they are not God’s ministers for our good.

Arg. 2: That power which is contrary to law, and is evil and tyrannical, can tie none to subjection, but is a mere tyrannical power and unlawful; and if it tie not to subjection, it may lawfully be resisted. But the power of the king, abused to the destruction of laws, religion, and subjects, is a power contrary to law, evil, and tyrannical, and tyeth no man to subjection : wickedness by no imaginable reason can oblige any man. Obligation to suffer of wicked men falleth under no commandment of God, except in our Saviour. A passion, as such, is not formally commanded, I mean a physical passion, such as to be killed. God hath not said to me in any moral law, Be thou killed, tortured, beheaded ; but only, Be thou patient, if God deliver thee to wicked men’s hands, to suffer these things.

Arg. 3: There is not a stricter obligation moral betwixt king and people than betwixt parents and children, master and servant, patron and clients, husband and wife, the lord and the vassal, between the pilot of a ship and the passengers, the physician and the sick, the doctor and the scholars, but the law granteth, (l. Minime 35, de Relig. et sumpt. funer,) if these betray their trust commited to them, they may be resisted: if the father turn distracted, and arise to kill his sons may violently apprehend him, and bind his hands, and spoil him of his weapons; for in that he is not a father……The servant may resist the master if he attempts unjustly kill him, so may the wife do to the husband; if the pilot should wilfully run the ship on a rock to destroy himself and his passengers, they might violently thrust him from the helm. Every tyrant is a furious man, and is morally distracted, as Althusius said, Polit. c. 28, n. 30, and seq.

Arg. 4: That which is given as a blessing, and a favour, and a screen, between the people’s liberty and their bondage, cannot be a given of God as a bondage and slavery to the people. But the power of king is given as a blessing and favour God to defend the poor and needy, to preserve both tables of the law, and to keep the people in their liberties from oppressing and treading one upon another. But so it is, that if such a power be given of God to a king, by which, actu primo, he is invested of God to do acts of tyranny, and so to do them, that to resist him in the most innocent way, which is self-defence, must be a resisting of God, and rebellion against the king, his deputy ; then hath God given a royal power as uncontrollable by mortal men, by any violence, as if God himself were immediately and personally resisted, when the king is resisted, and so this power shall be a power to waste and deatroy irresistibly, and so in itself a plague and a curse; for it cannot be ordained both according to the intention and genuine formal effect and intrinsical operation of the power, to preserve the tables of the law, religion and liberty, subjects and laws, and also to destroy the same. But it is taught by royalists that this power is for tyranny, as well as for peaceable government; because to resist this royal power put forth in acts either ways, either in acts of tyranny or just government, is to resist the ordinance of God, as royalists say, from Rom. xiii. 1-3. And we know, to resist God’s ordinances and God’s deputy, formaliter, as his deputy, is to resist God himself,(1 Sam. viii. 7; Matt.x. 40,) as if God were doing personally these acts that the king is doing; and it importeth as much as the King of kings doth these acts in and through the tyrant. Now, it is blasphemy to think or say, that when a king is drinking the blood of innocents, and wasting the church of God, that God, if he were personally present, would commit these same acts of tyranny, (God avert such blasphemy !) and that God in and through the king, as his lawful deputy and vicegerent in these acts of tyranny, is wasting the poor church of God. If it be said, in these sinful acts of tyranny, he is not God’s formal vicegerent, but only in good and lawful acts of government, yet he is not to be resisted in these acts, not because the acts are just and good, but because of the dignity of his royal person. Yet this must prove that those who resiet the king in these acts of tyranny, must resist no ordinance of God, but only resist him who is the Lord’s deputy, though not as the Lord’s deputy. What absurdity is there in that more than to disobey him, refusing active obedience to him who is tha Lord’s deputy, not as the, Lord’s deputy, but as a man commanding besides his master’s warrant?

Arg. 5: That which is inconsistent with the care and providence of God in giving a king to his church is not to be taught. Now God’s end in giving a king to his church, as the feeding, safety, preservation, and the peaceable and quiet life of his church. (1 Tim. ii. 2 ; Isa. xlix. 23 ; Psal. lxxix. 71). But God should cross his own end in the same act of giving a king, if he should provide a king, who, by office, were to suppress robbers, murderers, and all oppressors and wasters in his holy mount, and yet should give an irresistible power to one crowned lion, a king, who may kill ten hundred thousand protestants for their religion, in an ordinary providence; and they are by an ordinary law of God to give their throats to his emissaries and bloody executioners. If any say the king will not be so cruel, – I believe it; because, actu secundo, it is not possibly in his power to be so cruel. We owe thanks to his good will that he killeth not so many, but no thanks to the nature and genuine intrinsical end of a king, who hath power from God to kill all these, and that without resistance made by any mortal man. Yea, no thanks (God avert blasphemy!) to God’s ordinary providence, which (if royalists may be believed) putteth no bar upon the unlimited power of a man inclined to sin, and abuse his power to so much cruelty. Some may say, the same absurdity doth follow if the king should turn papist, and the parliament all were papists. In that case there might be so many martyrs for the truth put to death, and God should put no bar of providence upon this power, then more than now; and yet, in that case, the king and parliament should be judges given of God, actu primo, and by virtue of their office obliged to preserve the people in peace and godliness. But I answer, If God gave a lawful official power to king and parliament to work the same cruelty upon millions of martyrs, and it should be unlawful for them by arms to defend themselves, I should then think that king and parliament were both ex officio, by virtue of their office, and actu primo, judges and fathers, and also by that same office, murderers and butchers,- which were a grievous aspersion to the unspotted providence of God.

Arg. 6: If the estates of a kingdom give the power to a king, it is their own power in the fountain ; and if they give it for their own good, they have power to judge when it is used against themselves, and for their evil, and so power to limit and resist the power that they gave. Now, that they may take away this power, is clear in Athaliah’s case. It is true she was a tyrant without a title, and had not the right of heaven to the crown, yet she had, in men’s court, a title. For supposing all the royal seed to be killed, and the people consent, we cannot say that, for these six years or thereabout, she was no magistrate: that there were none on the throne of David at this time: that she was not to be obeyed as God’s deputy. But grant that she was no magistrate; yet when Jehoash is brought forth to be crowned, it was a controversy to the states to whom the crown should belong. 1. Athaliah was in possession. 2. Jehoash himself being but seven years old, could not be judge. 3. It might be doubted if Joash was the true son of Ahaziah, and if he was not killed with the rest of the blood royal. Two great adversaries say with us ; Hugo Grotius…..saith he dare not condemn this, if the lesser part of the people, and every one of them indifferently, should defend themselves against a tyrant, ultimo necessitatis proesidio. The case of Scotland, when we were blocked up by sea and land with armies: the case of England, when the king, induced by prelates, first attempted to bring an army to cut off parliament, and then gather an army, and fortified York and invaded Hull, to make the militia his own, sure is considerable. Barclay saith, the people hath….a power to defend themselves against prodigious cruelty. The case of England and Ireland, now invaded by bloody rebels of Ireland, is also worthy of consideration. I could cite hosts more.

Who’s fault is it we’re in this mess as a nation ? Democrats ? No. Republicans ? No. Men — particularly Chrsitan fathers ? YES

Will Mississippi’s Epitath be : “Yeah, but that’s something people care about ?”

From a recent Mississippi Personhood Amednment Update

Back in the spring, we were meeting with some leaders from one of the state’s big denominations to try to get them on board to support Personhood in & through their churches. One man told us how diffficult it would be for us to gather all the signatures and pass the Amendment at the ballot box.

I reminded him that in 2001 there was an effort made to change our state flag. Grassroots people with no money, no existing organization, and no plan came out of the woodwork and gathered the signatures. Then — while being outspent about 10 to 1 they led an effort to protect the flag. I asked, “can the Christian people of Mississippi not do the same to protect the most innocent & helpless human beings among us ?!?!?”

He gave me an answer that chills me to this day.
He said :
“Yes, but that was something that people cared about.”
Do you — do we — care as much about defending the lives of innocent children as we did about defending our state flag ?
If not, when God judges America, there could be a big sign hanging over Mississippi with a picture of the state flag & a dead baby that says “Yeah, but that’s something people care about.”

NEEDS –

Ultimately, this petition drive & the vote that follows is a referendum — before God — on the people of Mississippi. Thinking “pro-life” won’t stop the killing of unborn babies. Neither will talking pro-life or going to the polls every four years and voting for politicians who claim to be pro-life, but do not have the courage to do ALL that they can to stop the killing if it might cost them the election.
Abortion will end when God’s people pray & act like they’re pro-life

We would ask that everyone on this list and everyone that you know who is a pro-life Christian would commit to at least one day a week of fasting and prayer about this. But don’t just pray that God would act pray that He would give you a burden & an opportunity to be used to stop the killing.

** C.T. Studd was a missionary from England in the 1800’s he was a nationally famous athlete who gave up opportunities for fame & fortune to serve & suffer for Christ. God used him mightily in India, China, and Africa. He was a man of prayer, but here’s what he said about prayer without action :

“We Christians too often substitute prayer for playing the game. Prayer is good; but when used as a substitute for obedience, it is nothing but a blatant hypocrisy, a despicable Pharisaism…To your knees, man! and to your Bible! Decide at once! Don’t hedge! Time flies! Cease your insults to God, quit consulting flesh and blood. Stop your lame, lying, and cowardly excuses. Enlist!”~C.T. Studd

PLEASE DO MORE THAN THINK, VOTE, OR TALK PRO-LIFE. PUT FEET ON YOUR CONVICTIONS.

Everyone who gets this who is pro-life :
1) Please commit to PERSONALLY gathering at least one more sheet of signatures (more than one sheet is not difficult).
NOT SOMEONE ELSE — YOU. Everyone who gets this message whether you are very limited and live in a very rural area or you have already gathered thousands of signatures can fill up ONE MORE SHEET of ten signatures
2) Please spread the word & ask others in your area and people that you know in other parts of the state. Send them an e-mail/ make a call. I KNOW that getting the same message forwarded to you is annoying, I know many people get tired of emails from Personhood — BUT WHAT IS THAT IN LIGHT OF THE FACT THAT CHILDREN ARE BEING KILLED IN OUR STATE ?!?!?
3) Please prayerfully consider committing to producing at least 100 more signatures — directly or indirectly — by contacting churches in your area, letting us know when an event is coming up that we can get signatures at (or plan on going yourself). Petitioning at an event may seem intimidating or uncomfortable — but it is not as hard as it seems. Our most effective & productive petitioners are a bunch of shy homeschool kids who have stepped out in faith
4) Please consider making a donation to help. If you would like, you can purchase a nice Personhood T-shirt or make a donation electronically at http://personhoodmississippi.com/. Or you can mail a donation to the address below. Even $10 would help

Beyond Personhood

— please consider getting involved in sidewallk counseling at the abortion clinic in Jackson or Memphis or New Orleans. Or volunteer at a local Crisis Pregnancy Center. Or consider adoption or foster care (or financially support those who do these things. If you would like to get involved in stopping abortion in our state in other ways, we can help put you in contact with folks that coordinate some of these worthy works. If you will step out in faith, God will honor this faith with opportunities to share His Gospel & live out His love with people who need it — and you will bear much fruit.

DOES ANY PRO-LIFE CHRISTIAN CARE ???? IF WE DO NOT MAKE IT, WILL YOU BE SATISFIED KNOWING THAT WE HAD TH…E CHANCE TO END ABORTION & YOU SPENT YOUR WEEKENDS ENTERTAINING YOURSELF FOR A WHOLE YEAR ?!?!?
I like sports and having fun as much as anyone but how can Christians spend every non working/ non school/ non church hours feeding their flesh & Spiritualizing any call to service ? Football & frisbee ? Volleyball & vacations ? Shopping & movies ? Biking & baseball ? Love ‘em all. BUT while innocent children are being dismembered ?!?
God says in Isaiah 1 that when our hands (as a naition) are covered with the blood of the innocent that our very prayers are stench in His nostrils & our acts of worship are hated by Him.
God HEARS the cries of the fatherless . Are we so enraptured with the music if vanity fair that we cannot ?

“He will turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, LEST I COME & STRIKE THE EARTH WITH A CURSE”

Oftentimes, people who are opposed to socialism — or the expansion of government in general — get (falsely) accused of “not caring about the poor”. I can’t speak for everyone, but compassion for the poor is one of my chief motivators for opposing the idea that government is the solution to everything. The best motivator, of course, is that the Messianic Statism of the left AND right is idolotrous and an affront to King Jesus’ claims.

However, I have often said that if there was no other reason, we sould oppose socialistic programs to “help the poor” precisely because it harms, impoverishes & enslaves the very people it sets out to help. The bloody ground of the 20th Century screams out against the idea of “government compassion”. Modern history is one long, multinational object lesson in how Messianic, Utopian, tax-funded goverment “solutions” actually create much worse problems. It impoverishes millions, destroys families, advances immorality, hinders faith, and even directly kills many.

A basic rule of economics is that if you want an oversupply of anything, subsidize it. It’s true in the agricultural realm ( the only agricultural crops that we ever have a significant oversupply of in the US are the five that we subsizie the most heavily in some form : cotton, corn, soybeans, wheat, rice).
This is seen more clearly in the realm of the welfare state. Since Lyndon Johnson’s “Great Society” began with the lofty goal of using tax dollars to “end poverty in our time” there has been enough money spent on government poverty fighting programs to buy all the assets of the Fortune 500 & every acre of tillable farmland in North America — and we have MORE people below the poverty level than we did when the programs began **
A pretty poor track record.

Yesterday, I saw a living picture of the harm we have done in creating multigenerational, fatherless, government dependant families over the last 40 years.

I was in a store in a little town in North Mississippi & two young females were having a conversation while I was in line. I knew one of the girls — the mother of four children with three fathers, none of whom she’s been married to. (It was a white girl & a black girl, so this cuts across racial lines).
The unmarried mother of four told the other female : “This place don’t pay enough, I need to find me a man to take care of me.”
The other girl responded, “Girl, you don’t need no man, the government will take care of you. . .”
Then she began to explain to her all the ways the government would provide for her and why she didn’t “need no man.”
May God have mercy and may we remember that it is not the fault of these girls, “liberal” politicians, or even the decadent culture we live in (even though they all conspired to create & expand this problem), but rather the fault lies at the feet of the Church.
May we repent of our apathay & lack of love for Christ, His Gospel, and those hurt by a culture that hs rejected His kind rule.

When His gospel runs freely through His Word, His Spirit, and the love of His people lives & nations are transformed & the “pretenders to the throne” retreat in fear.

Rom 8:15 For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.

What is this “Abba Cry” that we & the creation “scream” ? According to Russ Moore

“Horrifyingly beautiful . . .a yell of desperation. It is the full throated desperate recognition of horror. It is the sound that a toddler would make as his face is being torn off by a pit bull. — ‘Daddy !’ “

Last weekend we went to the Together for Adoption Conference in Franklin, TN.

Russ Moore gave the last sermon — “Adoption and the Renewal of Creation” and it was utterly amazing. I thought I was going to jump out of my seat & shout or lay down on the floor weeping several times. I cannot recommend it highly enough. Every person who loves Jesus should hear this sermon, whether you have any interest in adoption & orphan care or not. I assure you that IF you download & listen to the first five minutes, you won’t be able to turn it off

http://www.togetherforadoption.org/T4A%2009%20Audio/Russell%20Moore.mp3

* See disclaimer below
These three videos are of the speech I gave at the Mississippi State Capitol on Sept 12 at the “9/12 – TEA Party Rally”.
If it won’t load, you can watch it here

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

* In the 3rd video I mention a candidate for US Senate from Alamaba that had run a Planned Parenthood Clinic. This was a misstatement. In the mid 1990’s Life Advoate magazine ran a story about an abortionist who ran for Senate on the Republican ticket — I think it was actually the State Senate, not the US and I think he was an abortionist who owned his own clinic — not one who ran a PP clinic. I could not find the story archived. Please do not allow this mistake to cause you to discount the rest of what I say *

Last week I posted an article about a poll that showed that Americans were more conservative but NOT more Republican.

Now, a new Rasmussen Poll indicates that 2/3 of Americans are angry with their government. But, that doesn’t necessarily translate into a resurgence for the GOP because the same poll shows a strong majority of Americans also think neither of the “big box” parties have a clue.

Can you say “multi party system” ?

66% Angry at Government Policies, 60% Say Neither Party Has Answers

Tuesday, September 22, 2009
Sixty-six percent (66%) of voters nationwide say they’re at least somewhat angry about the current policies of the federal government. That figure includes 36% who are Very Angry.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that only 30% are not angry about the government’s policies, including 10% who are Not at All Angry.

Adding to the voter frustration is the fact that 60% believe neither Republican nor Democratic political leaders have an understanding of what is needed today.

Among those who are Very Angry about government policies, 80% say that neither political party’s leaders have the answers.

Read the rest here

**For some reason (I’m technically challenged) I couldn’t get the video itself posted here

‘Unforgettable’ Pro-Life Film
“It’s The Same Thing” is controversial, polarizing, and unique in the way it depicts present-day attitudes about abortion. This film will impact you deeply, and you’ll either be infuriated or in solemn agreement. Regardless of your beliefs about abortion, you will never forget “It’s The Same Thing.”

CLICK HERE TO VIEW 3 minute video or cut-and-paste to your browser

http://www.covenantnews.com/blog/archives/060929.html

I have a new hero. Or at least a new goal to shoot for. Talk about a multigenerational vision

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3778275,00.html

Woman dies at 99, leaves behind 1,400 descendents

One of Jerusalemite Rachel Krishevsky’s grandchildren says with pride, ‘Grandma knew all of her descendents’
Nissan Shtrauchler
Published: 09.17.09, 12:24 / Israel News

The commandment to “be fruitful and multiply” the Krishevsky family follows quite closely. Last Saturday, the great grandmother, Rachel Krishevsky passed away at the age of 99, leaving behind no less than 1,400 children, grandchildren, great-grandchildren, and even great-great-grandchildren.

Krishevsky got married to her cousin, Yitzhak, just before turning 19. The couple brought seven sons and four daughters into the world. In accordance with haredi custom, Krishevsky brought up her children to see children as a great joy. Her children subsequently adopted her outlook and produced 150 children of their own.

These 150 children continued the commitment to be fruitful and multiply and themselves had no less than 1,000 children. From here, the lineage continued even further, and Rachel Krishevsky was blessed with a few hundred great-great-grandchildren.

Rachel Krishevsky died on Saturday surrounded by loving descendents.

Due to their great numbers, the family is not quite clear on precisely how many descendents there are. “The estimate in the family is that we are about 1,400 people since almost all of those from the family line were blessed with many children,” said one of the grandchildren Wednesday. . . .

Read the rest

***********************
Christy posted this quote from Rushdoony on her Facebook page yesterday. I thought it an appropriate accompaniment to this article

“To love Christ is to love life. Life is full of the unexpected (including guests) and the untidy. Too many people want showcase living in showcase houses, where everything is hostile to life and to children. To be truly against abortion means to love life and children, and children mean dirty diapers and messy rooms, toys strewn about, noise, and more.”