A Possible Solution to Free Will and Sovereignty

This piece is taken from a larger work comparing Arminian theology to Calvinism, highlighting important differences. I am examining works of certain prominent Arminian theologians and exploring the core of their thought and motivations.

God Limits His Knowledge

Pinnock argues against sovereignty through a series of hypothetical possibilities. If God can do anything then God could have created a world where he did not rule every minute detail. If God can do anything then God surely can limit himself. This limited God can be “sovereign” if he “anticipates” and “responds” to his creatures. If we are to “make sense” of sovereignty and human freedom, we cannot think of God as timeless.[1] Like every Arminian, Pinnock places no weight on any scriptural concept, but on what he perceives and on what he desires to be true. Man is not a slave to sin (John 8.34), nor is he clay in the hand of the potter (Isaiah 64.8; Romans 9.21), but a free agent who reflects God’s “own creative agency in being able to make plans and carry them out.”[2] Never mind James’ words:

Come now, you who say, “Today or tomorrow we will go to such and such a city, and spend a year there and engage in business and make a profit.” Yet you do not know what your life will be like tomorrow. You are just a vapor that appears for a little while and then vanishes away. Instead, you ought to say, “If the Lord wills, we will live and also do this or that.” But as it is, you boast in your arrogance; all such boasting is evil.[3]

Pinnock understands that our freedom necessarily denies God’s sovereignty. If we are free, then God cannot be sovereign over us. If God in any way influences our choices, or even knows our choices before we make them, he can and may influence them, and therefore we are not free. Pinnock believes, however, that our rebellion proves that we are free. He says, “Human beings are creatures who have rejected God’s will for them and turned aside from his plan. This is another strong piece of evidence that God made them truly free.”[4] This is evidence that Adam was free, and our rebellion results from Adam’s and is not evidence that we are free. This rebellion proves exactly the opposite. Sin enslaves us (Romans 6.6, 17) in wickedness (Genesis 6.5), making us completely incapable of pleasing God (Romans 8.7, 8). Pinnock exclaims, “We are not dualists” and then proclaims dualism: “We must admit that history at the present time resembles the struggle of conflicting wills, as the creature strives with God in rebellion against him. The conflict between God and finite human agents is a very real one according to the biblical narrative.”[5]

Pinnock sees “conflict” where scripture declares purpose. Scripture is not as shallow as Pinnock assumes, nor is God as simple. In a truly profound statement of arrogance, Pinnock declares to God what he cannot possibly do: “It is surely not possible to believe that God secretly planned our rebelling against him.”[6] As if God is no wiser than Clark Pinnock! God cannot possibly know more than he! God cannot possibly have greater intentions, a greater purpose, a more glorious understanding of the world, of men, and of redemption than the illustrious Professor Emeritus of Systematic Theology at McMaster Divinity College, Clark Pinnock! Preposterous! But God has purpose in the Fall (Genesis 3.15). God had purpose in the sin of Joseph’s brothers (Genesis 45.5-8). God has purpose in Israel’s failure (Romans 11.11-15). God has purpose in Christ’s death. Can God not ordain sin without committing sin? Are we not exploring dimensions of his sovereignty? Scripture defines sovereignty, not by moving away from absolute power, knowledge, and wisdom, and towards a theology that we comprehend in our tiny, proud, sin-corrupted minds, but by heading full-bore into it, towards a God who defies comprehension and demands true faith. If we are to discover a complete and true theology, we must believe all that scripture teaches and simultaneously trust God when it offends us, confounds us, or contradicts our understanding of his Creation. God can ordain sin that ultimately glorifies him.

So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires. You will say to me then, “Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?” On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, “Why did you make me like this,” will it? Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use? What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction? And He did so to make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory.[7]

Pinnock realizes he can only reconcile sovereignty with freedom if either sovereignty or freedom receive some sort of limitation. If God knows everything that will happen, then everything we do is set. Nothing can change it. Whether God ordains our actions or merely knows them, we are not free. Exhaustive, unlimited knowledge of future events, decisions, and actions sets and locks them in place. We can veer from them neither to the left or to the right. Divine foreknowledge destroys human freedom. Pinnock will not stand for this. Unwilling to place limitations on human freedom, he resorts to limiting God’s sovereignty by limiting his knowledge. “God is dependent on the world for information about the world,” he says.[8] He continues

Reality is to an extent open and not closed. Genuine novelty can appear in history which cannot be predicted even by God. If the creature has been given the ability to decide hot some things will turn out, then it cannot be known infallibly ahead of time how they will turn out. It implies that the future is really open and not available to exhaustive foreknowledge even on the part of God. It is plain that the biblical doctrine of creaturely freedom requires us to reconsider the conventional view of the omniscience of God...If history is infallibly known and certain from all eternity, then freedom is an illusion.[9]

Neither does Pinnock find any comfort in God’s omnipotence. He says, “I recognize that this belief in strong omnipotence gives one a feeling of security, but it also communicates a denial of the dynamic reality of the lives we are living.”[10] Pinnock prefers this “dynamic reality” where God remains ignorant of the future and we control our lives to a reality where God rules his Creation by his wisdom, might, and love. Adhering to this biblical reality “mystifies” Pinnock.[11]

God cannot know anything about the future because the future does not exist. Never mind every prophetic book. Never mind eternity. Never mind every verse in the Bible that declares emphatically that God not only knows what will happen, but directs it precisely. I can skim through the first book of the Bible and find a number of prophecies, some rather specific, that cast serious doubt on Pinnock’s claims.

• ·         God prophesies Christ’s victory over Satan and Satan’s murder of Christ (Genesis 15.3).
• ·         The limit of men’s lifespans and his destruction of the human race (6.3,13).
• ·         The enduring existence of the planet (8.22).
• ·         The redemption of all men through Abraham’s lineage (12.3; 22.18).
• ·         Abraham’s descendants will become a great nation and he will have a son (15.6; 22.17).
• ·         The length of Israel’s slavery in Egypt (15.13).
• ·         The Arabic nation and where they will settle (16.10,12).
• ·         Joseph’s future status as ruler over his family (37.5-11).
• ·         Joseph prophesies the fate of the baker and the cupbearer (40.1-23).
• ·         Joseph prophesies the deliverance of Israel and the return of his remains to Canaan (50.24-25).

We find all of this in the first book of the Bible. These prophecies include both generic and specific details, and both near and distant future events. They include decisions of both God and men, and even future decisions of Satan. Even if we accept that God does not know the future, a ridiculously dubious claim at best, we must concede that God directs the future, and in directing the future, he directs the decisions of men to accomplish his purposes.

Clark Pinnock dismisses the predictive elements of prophecy with a slight wave of his hand of less than fifty words. Predictive prophecy does not prove that God knows the future.

A very high percentage of prophecy can be accounted for by one of three factors: the announcement ahead of time of what God intends to do, conditional prophecies which leave the outcome open, and predictions based on God’s exhaustive knowledge of the past and the present.[12]

First, Pinnock admits here that God knows the future. He says he can account for “a very high percentage of prophecy” with these three factors. What about the rest? He does not even mention them. He cannot account for all of predictive prophecy with these “factors” of his. Pinnock does not believe God knows the future yet he cannot account for when God does know the future. When Pinnock says he can account for a high percentage of God’s predictions by denying divine foreknowledge, he admits that he cannot account for all of God’s predictions by denying foreknowledge, and therefore God knows at least some future events. Second, if God knows what he’s going to do at some point in the future, then he either knows what we will do (for God must respond to our actions and accommodate his plans to us[13]), or he knows that he will disregard what we will do in order to accomplish his purposes. Pinnock’s god cannot merely tell us what he will do, for he does not know what we will do. He does not know how we will interfere with his plans, and therefore does not know how to respond to our actions. He can make no promises to us without knowledge of the future unless he plans to either completely override our will or completely ordain it. Every human opposes him (Genesis 6.5; Psalm 53; Romans 8.7,8), so for God to do his will, he must change ours or run roughshod over it. Not a single one of Pinnock’s hypothetical, unbiblical propositions fits.[14]

We can examine the implications of Pinnock’s ideas in Genesis. God appeared to Abraham in Genesis 15 and promised him that he would one day be the father of a great nation that would endure forever. Later, in Genesis 18, God reveals the exact time Abraham and Sarah would have their son. He says, “I will surely return to you at this time next year; and behold, Sarah your wife will have a son” (18.10). This tells us one of two things: either God knew when Sarah would become pregnant and when she would have her son, or that God planned to cause Sarah and Abraham to have relations at a specific time, knowing that nine months later Isaac would be born. If God knew when Isaac would be born, Pinnock is wrong about God’s knowledge of the future and this incident proves that God’s knowledge includes future events. If God did not know when Isaac would be born, then God caused Isaac to be born at a specific time by causing his parents to have relations, disproving Pinnock’s assertion that our acts are uncaused by God. Either way, we see that Pinnock has severely misinterpreted scripture in order to favor this idea that man is free because God is not God. But God is God, omnipotent over all of creation, including our desires, intentions, thoughts, and actions, and omniscient over everything that happens in his creation, past, present, and future.

I know the future. I know that tomorrow the sun will rise. I know that one day I will finish writing this little book. I know that one day I will die. Gamblers can find the odds that a certain sports team will win the pennant, and these odds are fairly accurate. Physicists know that the movement of every particle within the universe can be predicted, given the current position and velocity. A first-year physicist can calculate particle movement given this data using basic algebra. If a college student can make predictions about the nature of the universe, why can God not do this? Pinnock believes God is no greater than a man. God is less, actually, for God cannot counter our will. Any man can counter the will of another man, through argument or violence, but God cannot, according to Pinnock. He has limited himself to preserve our creaturely freedom.

Satan whispered to Eve that she “will be like God” (Genesis 3.5). Indeed, Pinnock seeks exactly this. “God summons us into partnership with himself in running the universe. His plan is open. God actually accepts the influence of our prayers in making up his mind,” he says.[15] God needs our help. He is not wise enough to make decisions regarding the universe without our input. We provide what he lacks. We make God complete. Pinnock lies. God does not command us to pray because he needs our prayers, because he values our input, or because we offer him something he is missing. We need, not God. God commands us to pray because we lack, because we are selfish, proud, and independent, and prayer changes us, creating humility and dependence on him. There is no situation where God has need of anything that we give him. Pinnock wants not only to remove God from his sovereign position, but to place himself there. God limits himself and not Pinnock. God does not order his Creation but responds to the whims of men. We determine our destiny and God waits for us. We control life and death, heaven and hell, redemption and condemnation.

---

[1] Ibid, 145-146.

[2] Ibid, 147.

[3] James 4.13-16.

[4] Basinger and Basinger, 149.

[5] Ibid.

[6] Ibid.

[7] Romans 9.18-23. If you disregard scripture on sin, then you can make any passage about anything. Arminians say that this passage speaks of nations with no regard to individuals, though plainly transitioning from a nation to four individuals and plainly anticipating and answering the objections to God hardening individuals. Paul uses these individuals as an example of God’s election to illustrate Paul’s statement that “they are not all Israel who are descended from Israel.” God must elect individuals within Israel if “all are not Israel.” All are not Israel because God elects certain individuals within the physical descendants of Abraham, because he has compassion on some and hardens the rest.

[8] Basinger and Basinger, 146.

[9] Ibid, 150.

[10] Ibid, 154.

[11] Ibid.

[12] Ibid, 158. Newtonian physics tells us that exhaustive knowledge of past and present necessarily leads to exhaustive knowledge of the future, though some physicists will cite Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle to deny this kind of determinism. If Pinnock in his gracious wisdom grants God this exhaustive knowledge of past and present (including even the uncertain past and present position of any and every subatomic particle), he has unwittingly also granted to God knowledge of the future.

[13] Ibid, 152, 154-155.

[14] Conditional prophecies neither help nor hurt Pinnock on this point. God prophesies that he will bless or curse the Israelites, knowing exactly what they will do (Deuteronomy 28-29). If our faith only comes from God, why does God allow Israel to stray from him? He has his reasons (Romans 11). I can easily answer Pinnock’s last factor by remarking that if we have already established that God possesses at least a partial knowledge of the future, it is no large leap from God’s “exhaustive knowledge of the past and present” to that of the future, especially if we are humble enough to actually believe scripture. Furthermore, if God merely uses his exhaustive knowledge of past and present to declare all future events, then what is the functional difference between God predicting all future events with perfect accuracy and him possessing perfect knowledge of the future? If all of his predictions about future events come true 100% of the time, what is the difference between God not knowing but perfectly predicting and God knowing and perfectly predicting? He predicts the future because he knows the future, whether he uses the past and present to know the future (as Pinnock incorrectly asserts, even though his assertion leads him to the same self-defeating conclusion) or because he actually directs it.

[15] Ibid, 153.

David Basinger and Randall Basinger, editors, Predestination and Free Will: Four Views on Divine Sovereignty, (Downers Grove, InterVarsity Press: 1986).

A Christian Worldview

The State of the World

At any given time, one can scroll through Twitter (depending on who or what one follows) and discover the current state of the battles of the sexes, the races, the political parties, or the nations. Just tonight I found these gems:

·      Hundreds of illegal immigrants/asylum seekers (?) rush the United States port of entry as they are repelled with tear gas.[1]

·      Newly elected Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez struggles to find a place to live in Washington, D.C., yet will be responsible in shaping national policy for at least the next two years.[2]

·      Journalist Laura Loomer was banned for questioning an American politician’s support of female genital mutilation.[3]

·      A mother in Germany whose daughter was raped is being prosecuted by the police for uploading a photo of her daughter’s attacker to Facebook without his permission.[4]

·      Twitter permanently bans feminist for writing that men are not women.[5]

We live in this corrupt, confused, ridiculous world.

Is the world God’s creation or is it a product of random, impersonal forces? Either of these answers leads to entirely different approaches to life. If we view the world as the creation of a loving, almighty God, then we will live our lives differently than if we imagine the world accidentally happened into existence. If God created the universe, then man has a purpose, for God, being an entity with desires, intellect, and a will, must have a purpose for his creation. If the universe is the product of happenstance, then we may have no purpose, or we may define our own purpose, accidentally defined by the accidental firings of an accidentally formed brain in an accidental universe. Either way, our beliefs about the world define our worldview.

However we view the world, we cannot escape faith. If the idea of God did not exist, then we may honestly say that there is no such thing as faith. God as a concept does exist, and to declare he does or does not exist is to make a statement of belief. If all of existence was contained in our little world here, and science exhaustively studied everything we perceive with our senses, and we infallibly knew nothing existed beyond our sense, then we completely eliminate the idea of faith. We would not even understand the word. This is not the case, however, and everyone who lives has faith either to deny or affirm the existence of God. Indeed, God has created us this way (Ecclesiastes 3.11; Romans 1.19-20). To say God exists or doesn’t exist is to make a declaration beyond what we perceive through our senses. Every person has faith, either positively or negatively.

What is a Worldview?

Our worldview consists of our beliefs and how we respond to those beliefs as we live our lives. If we believe that the universe is entirely without purpose, an accidental event of the impersonal cosmos, then we are free to create whatever purpose for our lives as we see fit. We are also free from purpose, left alone in the void to wander aimlessly and hopelessly. We are responsible and accountable to no one but ourselves. I am accountable to no one but myself, if even that. If we are not accountable to God for our words and our actions, how can we be accountable to each other to uphold the fragile foundations of society? The less we are accountable to God, the less we are accountable to each other, and the greater the force and violence of government is required to maintain society. However, if we believe that God created us for a purpose, then we are responsible to God to seek this purpose. We are accountable to him for how we live our lives. If we hold ourselves individually accountable to God to live well and righteously, with kindness and unselfishness, then free society is possible, and less violence is required from our government to maintain peace and liberty.

We can hardly say that our worldview affects our beliefs on public policy, though we assume that it should. While over 70% of white Evangelical Protestants oppose abortion, only 41% of black Protestants and 44% of Catholics do. This may only be the case for those who claim to believe in God however, as 80% of religiously unaffiliated people support a woman’s right to an abortion.[6] Data on religious and non-religious support of gay marriage reveals a similar bent. Among evangelical Protestants, 64% oppose gay marriage, while 52% of black Protestants, 34% of Catholics, and 35% of mainline Protestants do. Non-religious people appear to be mostly united again, with 78% supporting gay marriage.[7] Even though Christians and Catholics are not as unified as non-religious people, we can say that a Christian worldview has some effect on political matters.

A religious worldview greatly effects a personal sense of spiritual well-being. Evangelic Protestant and black Protestant report a consistent (75% and 73%) sense of spiritual peace and well-being (at least once a week). Jehovah’s Witnesses (82%) and Mormons (81%) report the highest frequency of peace and well-being, with Catholics (57%), mainline Protestants (56%), and Orthodox Christians (53%) all reporting more than 50% experience a sense of spiritual peace at least once a week. Hindu (40%), non-religious (40%) and the anomalous Jewish (39%) round out the bottom.[8]

Our worldview affects our moral choices. The person who does not believe in God may have moral beliefs, but these beliefs do not have a strong foundation. The depraved nature of man erodes the weak moral foundation of the unbeliever and of society as the decades move forward. We see this as attitudes change towards such public issues as homosexuality, drug use, polygamy, and even pedophilia.[9] The believer has a foundation for morality. The Word of God serves as his foundation and direction for morality. The Word of God doesn’t change (Isaiah 40.7, 8). God has given us the Ten Commandments to guide our moral choices. We believe that murder, adultery, theft, and lying are immoral acts. These beliefs guide and dictate our everyday lives. As believers in God, we strive to be honest, to be kind, to respect the property and rights of others, and to tell the truth. The believer’s worldview will absolutely affect his life.

The Christian Worldview

We believe that God created us, that he created us for a purpose, and that we are responsible to him to fulfill this purpose. I believe the Westminster Catechism best describes our purpose. Written by the Westminster Assembly of Divines in 1647, the Church of England used the Catechism to teach the main truths of scripture.[10] According to the Catechism, “Man’s chief end is to glorify God, and to enjoy him forever.”[11] This is my worldview.

Scripture affirms this. The two most prolific and influential apostles exhort believers to do all to God’s glory. Peter says, “Whoever speaks, is to do so as one who is speaking the utterances of God; whoever serves is to do so as one who is serving by the strength which God supplies; so that in all things God may be glorified through Jesus Christ”[12]. In our actions and words, Peter tells us to live for God’s glory. Paul concurs, “Whether, then, you eat or drink or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God” (1 Corinthians 10.31). Puritan minister Thomas Watson (1620-1686) vividly declares that “the glory of God is a silver thread which must run through all our actions.”[13] God proclaims the reasons for his actions are to uphold the goodness of his name, closely identified with his glory. When the Israelites worshipped the idols of Egypt, God says to Ezekiel

I resolved to pour out My wrath on them, to accomplish My anger against them in the midst of the land of Egypt. But I acted for the sake of My name, that it should not be profaned in the sight of the nations among whom they lived, in whose sight I made Myself known to them by bringing them out of the land of Egypt. So I took them out of the land of Egypt and brought them into the wilderness. I gave them My statutes and informed them of My ordinances. [emphasis added][14]

Creation shares our purpose. David says, “The heavens are telling of the glory of God; and their expanse is declaring the work of his hands” (Psalm 19.1) When the Pharisees urged Jesus to rebuke his disciples and keep them from praising him, he told them, “If these become silent, the stones will cry out!” (Luke 19.40) Paul says that God’s glorious creation removes every excuse that men have to deny God’s existence (Romans 1.20).

We can only glorify God if we know who he is, and we know God mainly through His word. Dietrich Bonhoeffer lamented the loss of knowledge in his book, The Cost of Discipleship. He says, “The real trouble is that the pure Word of Jesus has been overlaid with so much human ballast—burdensome rules and regulations, false hopes and consolations.”[15] Men cloud the knowledge of God with their presumptions, and their prejudices, and they assume they know the truth before they have even attempted to seek God in his word. We who were made by God, can only find fulfillment in life through knowledge of God. Theologian J.I. Packer says, “Disregard the study of God, and you sentence yourself to stumble and blunder through life blindfolded, as it were, with no sense of direction and no understanding of what surrounds you.”[16] Packer echoes the words of the psalmist who says, “Your word is a lamp to my feet and a light to my path” and “The unfolding of your words gives light; it gives understanding to the simple” (Psalm 119.105, 130).

We glorify God when we trust in Him because trust magnifies his worth. Our trust reveals our humility and our acknowledgement that we are nothing without him (John 15.5). John Piper says, “We have a God whose nature is such that what pleases him is not our work for him but our need of him.”[17] Scripture everywhere speaks of humility as the key which unlocks intimacy with our Creator. David says, “The Lord is near to the brokenhearted and saves those who are crushed in spirit” (Psalm 34.18) and “He leads the humble in justice and he teaches the humble his way” (Psalm 25.9). He strengthens the heart of the humble (Psalm 10.17) but he opposes the proud (1 Peter 5.5). God proclaims blessing on the man who trusts in him (Jeremiah 17.7), but a curse on any man who trusts in himself (17.5).

In Ethics, Bonhoeffer examines the account of the Fall. Adam brought the curse on himself and all humanity when he ate of the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. Bonhoeffer says, “To know good and evil is to know oneself as the origin of good and evil.”[18] If we believe that we possess the knowledge of good and evil, rather than God, we believe that we do not trust God to teach us right and wrong. We have “become like God, but against God.”[19] We refuse to trust in God, and we refuse to obey him as the source of knowledge and truth.

We glorify God as we obey him. We begin in trust and faith, as Paul says (Romans 1.17), and we live in obedience by this trust. Whoever believes will obey, and whoever obeys, believes.[20] Obedience is the natural result of trust. If we believe that God loves us, we will love each other (1 John 4.11). Christ commanded his disciples to love each other because they believed that he loved them (John 13.34). Faith and obedience must work together. Obedience without a heart full of faith does not please God. God says to Isaiah, “To this one I will look, to him who is humble and contrite of spirit, and who trembles at my word” (Isaiah 66.2), but he says that sacrifice without humility is worthless violence (66.3). Likewise, faith that does not obey is not true faith. James says that “faith, if it has no works, is dead” (James 2.17). According to Bonhoeffer, “Faith is only real when there is obedience, never without it, and faith becomes faith in the act of obedience.”[21] Faith creates obedience and obedience validates faith.

Obedience will reveal itself as we interact with the world. We live in a country that allows its citizens to vote and participate in establishing policy together. Obedience to God’s word and Christ’s example will shine in our support and opposition to various issues and political parties. God’s word tells us what he expects, what he values, what he loves and what he hates. We have clear direction to aid us in evaluating most if not all of the controversial issues that we face. God has spoken to us about personal responsibility and morality, yet many in America openly defy God’s direction.

The freedom that we enjoy in the United States requires each individual to exercise responsibility in every area of life. Each of us depend on each other to respect the law, to work hard, to be honest, and to raise our children to do the same. If this expectation were ever to generally fail, our nation would crumble. When we drive in our vehicles, we obey the law and we trust that the vast majority of the people will also obey the law. When we shop at the mall, we trust that the vast majority of the people will respect each other’s persons. We depend on each other when we engage in business, when we go to work, when we drop our children off at school or send them on a plane to their grandparents. Benjamin Franklin said, “Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become more corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters.” Without virtue, the nation will descend into lawlessness and chaos. The authorities will then need greater and more severe forms of force to maintain order, and then the country forfeits its freedom.

Personal responsibility manifests in public policy. When government happily provides for many basic needs, men ignore the duty they have to provide for themselves and their families and rely on government. God has commanded us to be diligent workers. Bonhoeffer writes, “It is God’s will that there shall be labour, marriage, government, and church in the world.”[22] Solomon says in Proverbs, “Poor is he who works with negligent hand, but the hand of the diligent makes rich” (10.4). Welfare benefits and other entitlement programs contribute to an increase in crime.[23] Welfare benefits enable fathers to abdicate their familial responsibilities and surrender them to the state. Children without fathers are twice as likely to commit crime.[24] Studies also link out-of-wedlock births to welfare. Michael Tanner writes, “By removing the economic consequences of an out-of-wedlock birth, welfare has removed a major incentive to avoid such pregnancies.”[25] Welfare discourages out-of-wedlock mothers from marrying in the future.[26] When fathers do not participate in the rearing of their children, the children lack direction, instruction, and moral guidance. Many believers contend that welfare is “compassionate” and “Christian”, while they fail to realize that Christ did not command the state to care for the poor, but the individual believer (Matthew 25.31-46; Luke 18.22). He commands us to visit the prisoner, and feed and clothe the poor. Compassion does not involve surrendering our taxes to a wasteful state to distribute without wisdom to whoever holds out their hand or refuses to work.

Compassion also requires a measure of wealth that surpasses meeting our basic needs. Christ says that we will always have the poor (Matthew 26.11), but we cannot show compassion if government assumes responsibility for meeting the needs of all its citizens. Currently, two economic systems battle for dominance between the two political parties. In socialism, the ideal of the Democrat Party, the citizen gives the majority of his wealth and income to the state, and the state redistributes this wealth as it sees fit. In capitalism, men earn according to their ability and diligence and keep the majority of their wealth. Socialism destroys both diligence and compassion by destroying incentive. We are selfish by nature, but if we keep little that we earn, we have no reason to work nor do we have anything to give. Paul says, “If anyone is not willing to work, then he is not to eat” (2 Thessalonians 3.10), and “he who sows bountifully will also reap bountifully” (2 Corinthians 9.6). When a powerful state taxes its people heavily, and redistributes wealth wastefully, it removes not only diligence but charity.

Emotionalism substitutes for compassion in modern politics. The left side of American politics weeps and wails over the plight of citizens of other countries, and supports their illegal entry into this one. Christians who oppose illegal immigration for being an illegal and illegitimate way of solving a problem are condemned as “unchristian” and “not compassionate”, but if anyone challenges these accusers to travel to other countries and feed the poor or clothe the naked, they sit in silence. Weeping and wailing, while causing no discernible change in the world, pacifies the lazy conscience of the leftist. In the household where Bonhoeffer grew up, “Emotionalism, like sloppy communication, was thought to be self-indulgent.”[27] Indeed, emotionalism contributes nothing to the current discourse. Emotionalism complains, and complaints without solutions only serve to anger and frustrate. In our case, emotionalism drives one side to the voting booths so that others will pretend to solve the problem, when in reality the elected authorities have no interest in solving problems, but only in maintaining power. Lazy emotionalism continues.

God commands his people to love him from the heart, but also with the mind. He has given us a mind and also his spirit to discern right from wrong and know how to act. God commands all believers to love each other and to clothe and feed the poor. God does not command us to support illegal activity as a means of compassion, as some people confuse illegal immigration to be. God commands us to go, to give our time, money, and energy. God does not command us to murder our unborn children or our sick in order to improve our quality of life or prevent a low quality of life.

The Democrat party supports abortion, euthanasia, gay marriage, transgenderism, open borders, and government entitlement programs, among many others. Every single one of these positions openly defies God’s commands. Abortion destroys a person, when God commands to not murder (Exodus 20.13). David said, “In sin my mother conceived me” (Psalm 51.5). Every person has a soul from conception, and the Democrat party relishes the power that abortion gives them over life and death. They find the same power in euthanizing the sick and elderly. Doctors in Belgium euthanize children with cystic fibrosis, a treatable disease.[28] Doctors are allowed to terminate the life of any child who makes the request. God alone has the authority to give and end life. He says to Israel, “There is no God besides me; it is I who put to death and give life” (Deuteronomy 32.39). When we usurp his authority and take a life, we declare ourselves independent of his authority and we return to the Garden of Eden to eat again of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil.

God has defined marriage as the union between one man and one woman (Genesis 2.18-24). He has defined gender as male and female (Genesis 1.27). Paul says that as believers, our body is a temple of the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 6.19) and he exhorts us to glorify God in our body (1 Corinthians 6.20). Liberals defy God by supporting gay marriage, homosexuality, and other forms of sexual perversion. I do not even oppose the legal unions of men to men and women to women, but to call that “marriage” is open defiance to God’s word. Certain groups advocate men having sexual relationships with boys.[29] Transgenderism, formerly known as gender dysphoria, has gained traction as an acceptable state of being, rather than a mental illness. Paul condemns these distortions of sexual identity (Romans 1.24-27). God created man for a purpose, and his biological sex defines his purpose as much as his relationship to God. We relate to God as men and as women. God has defined our responsibilities to each other in terms of our gender. God commands men to sacrifice (Ephesians 5.23, 25) and women to submit and trust (Ephesians 5.22; 1 Peter 3.1). When we confuse our masculinity or femininity, we confuse our duties as believers to God and each other. Elisabeth Elliot writes of the “glorious distinction” of sexuality. She says, “I dare to call it even a glorious inequality, so that we may understand how important it is and how utterly noninterchangeable men and women are. If we understand it, we will rejoice in it.”[30]

Many of our nation’s founders believed in God. Many Americans do today also. Most settlers came to America searching for the freedom to practice their religion.[31] Historians Larry Schweikart and Michael Allen write that “America … operated on an understanding that the nation would adopt an unofficial, generic Christianity that fit hand in glove with republicanism.”[32] As Benjamin Franklin said, a free nation requires virtue. True virtue requires faith in God, yet if America opens its borders indiscriminately, we weaken our national beliefs because not everyone believes as we do. Democrats support open borders as a means of maintaining power without regard to preserving a culture that largely values law and order, personal responsibility, or respect for life and property. Though illegal immigrants are not allowed to vote, many do[33], and of those who do, 54% identify with the Democrat, party, as opposed to 19% who identify with the Republican Party.[34] Europe has largely adopted a policy of allowing the entrance of thousands of immigrants who do not share the values of the permitting country. Dramatic increases in riots[35], rape[36], and various other forms of crime[37] have resulted. If America pursues the same policy of indiscriminate immigration, we will face a similar future. Illegal immigrants break the law by definition. If they have no respect for the law when they enter the country, how can we expect them to respect the law after they have entered it? Scripture asserts the need for borders. When the Israelites entered the land of Canaan, God commanded them to “utterly destroy” all the inhabitants (Deuteronomy 7.2). The Canaanites worshipped other gods, they sacrificed their children to their idols (2 Kings 16.3), and God knew they would turn the hearts of the Israelites away from him (7.4). When King Solomon married foreign wives and took foreign concubines, he began to turn away from God and the nation followed with him (1 Kings 11). Countries have borders to preserve their values and customs. If there are no borders, there are no countries and no people. A government protects its people by protecting its values and its borders.

Religion and Politics

“The cross is laid on every Christian,” says Bonhoeffer.[38] Christ commands us to seek him in his word, yet many prefer to trust the words of anyone else, rather than, with reason, diligently pursue a Christian worldview. If we don’t know what to believe, someone else will tell us what they want us to believe. In 2006, I began working at Kern County for the Engineering and Survey Services Department. I rode in an enormous survey truck with a coworker who listened to conservative talk radio. As I listened, I realized that I agreed with everything these people had to say. Previously, I agreed with the men and women who preached “compassion” through shallow emotionalism. Conservatism takes its stand largely from Scripture, though obviously conservatism does not equal Christianity, or discipleship, or the sacrifice Christ calls us to. Those ventures across Kern County greatly influenced my political mind, but God had already begun work on my spiritual mind and heart years earlier. I “grew up” spiritually reading about Elisabeth Elliot on masculinity and the sacrifice of her husband Jim Elliot, reading John Piper and Thomas Watson talk about God’s passion for his glory, and reading J.I. Packer tell of theology as the grandest study of all. Bonhoeffer writes, “When Christ calls a man, he bids him come and die.”[39] I choose to vote as a conservative, but I choose to live as a disciple. Glorifying God involves trusting Christ and obeying his word. It requires the daily death of humility in acknowledging sin, of diligence in seeking Christ, of trust in God as we surrender ourselves to love other people who may not love us in return.

Bibliography

Pew Research Center, Public Opinion on Abortion, Retrieved from http://www.pewforum.org/fact-sheet/public-opinion-on-abortion, July 7, 2017.

Pew Research Center, Views on Same-Sex Marriage. Retrieved from http://www.pewforum.org/religious-landscape-study/views-about-same-sex-marriage, on August 7, 2018.

Pew Research Center, Frequency of feeling spiritual peace and wellbeing, http://www.pewforum.org/religious-landscape-study/frequency-of-feeling-spiritual-peace-and-wellbeing/

Thomas Watson, A Body of Divinity, (Carlisle: Banner of Truth Trust, reprinted 1992)

Westminster Assembly of Divines, Westminster Shorter Catechism, “I. Man’s Chief End.”

Lockman Foundation, New American Standard Bible, 1995 Update

Dietrich Bonhoeffer, The Cost of Discipleship, (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1959)

J.I. Packer, Knowing God, (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1993)

John Piper, The Pleasures of God, (Portland, Multnomah: 1991)

Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Ethics, (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1955)

Michael D. Tanner, “Relationship between the Welfare State and Crime.” Cato Institute (June 7, 1995). https://www.cato.org/publications/congressional-testimony/relationship-between-welfare-state-crime-0

Eric Metaxas, Bonhoeffer: Pastor, Martyr, Prophet, Spy, (Nashville: Nelson Books, 2010)

Charles Lane, “Children are being euthanized in Beligum”, The Washington Post, https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/children-are-being-euthanized-in-belgium/2018/08/06/9473bac2-9988-11e8-b60b-1c897f17e185_story.html

Elisabeth Elliot, The Mark of a Man, (Tarrytown, Fleming H. Revell Company, 1981)

Larry Schweikart and Michael Allen, A Patriot’s History of the United States, (New York: Penguin Books, 2007)

Rowan Scarborough, “Study supports Trump: 5.7 million noncitizens may have cast illegal votes”. The Washington Times, June 19, 2017. https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jun/19/noncitizen-illegal-vote-number-higher-than-estimat

Eileen Patten and Mark Hugo Lopez, “Are unauthorized immigrants overwhelmingly Democrats?”, Pew Research Center, July 22, 2013. http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/07/22/are-unauthorized-immigrants-overwhelmingly-democrats

Brett T., “WARZONE: Those ‘youths’ in Sweden seem to be rioting and torching cars again”. Twitchy, August 13, 2018. https://twitchy.com/brettt-3136/2018/08/13/warzone-those-youths-in-sweden-seem-to-be-rioting-and-torching-cars-again-video/

Tom Wyke, et al, “Migrant rape fears spread across Europe: Women told not to go out at night alone after assaults carried out in Sweden, Finland, Germany, Austria and Switzerland amid warnings gangs are co-ordinating attacks”, DailyMail, August 15, 2018. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3390168/Migrant-rape-fears-spread-Europe-Women-told-not-night-assaults-carried-Sweden-Finland-Germany-Austria-Switzerland-amid-warnings-gangs-ordinating-attacks.html

Grace Guarnieri, “MIGRANTS IN EUROPE LINKED TO SOARING VIOLENCE AND CRIME IN GERMANY, STUDY FINDS”. Newsweek, January 13, 2018, https://www.newsweek.com/migrants-europe-violence-crime-germany-study-770105

---

[1] Gregg Re, “Hundreds of migrants try rushing toward California port of entry, as Trump threatens to close entire border”, November 25, 2018. https://www.foxnews.com/world/mexico-denies-deal-with-white-house-on-migrants-as-trump-threatens-to-close-entire-border

[2] Ashley May, “Alexandra-Ocasio Cortez, new youngest Congresswoman, says she can’t afford D.C. apartment”, November 9, 2018. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2018/11/09/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-cant-afford-my-washington-d-c-apartment/1940870002/

[3] Alana Mastrangelo, “Conservative Activist Laura Loomer Banned From Twitter After Criticizing Congresswoman-Elect Ilhan Omar”, November 22, 2018. https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/11/22/laura-loomer-banned-from-twitter-after-criticizing-ilhan-omar/

[4] Robert Spencer, “Germany: Police to prosecute mother for posting photo of her daughter’s sex attacker on Facebook”, November 25, 2018. https://www.jihadwatch.org/2018/11/germany-police-to-prosecute-mother-for-posting-photo-of-her-daughters-sex-attacker-on-facebook

[5] Nicole Russell, “Twitter Permanently Bans Feminist For Writing That ‘Men Are Not Women’”, November 25, 2018. http://thefederalist.com/2018/11/25/twitter-permanently-bans-feminist-writing-men-arent-women

[6] Pew Research Center, Public Opinion on Abortion, Retrieved from http://www.pewforum.org/fact-sheet/public-opinion-on-abortion, July 7, 2017.

[7] Pew Research Center, Views on Same-Sex Marriage. Retrieved from http://www.pewforum.org/religious-landscape-study/views-about-same-sex-marriage, on August 7, 2018.

[8] Pew Research Center, Frequency of feeling spiritual peace and wellbeing, Retrieved from http://www.pewforum.org/religious-landscape-study/frequency-of-feeling-spiritual-peace-and-wellbeing/ on August 7, 2018

[9] The general public has been changing attitudes towards many things previously considered taboo and illicit.

Homosexuality: Pew Research Center, “Changing Attitudes on Gay Marriage”. June 26, 2017. http://www.pewforum.org/fact-sheet/changing-attitudes-on-gay-marriage/

John Bingham, “Revolution in attitudes to homosexuality is biggest change in generation”, September 10, 2013. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10297205/Revolution-in-attitudes-to-homosexuality-is-biggest-change-in-generation.html

Pan Suiming, “Gay or Nay: China’s Changing Attitudes towards Homosexuality, December 9, 2017. http://www.sixthtone.com/news/1001348/gay-or-nay-chinas-changing-attitudes-toward-homosexuality

Drugs

Bill Landefeld, “Changing Attitude Toward Drugs”, January 30, 2014. https://whitmanwire.com/opinion/2014/01/30/changing-attitude-towards-drugs/

Lillian Holmes, “Psychedelic Revolution: Changing attitudes towards psychedelic drugs in Berkeley and beyond”, April 24, 2017. http://www.dailycal.org/2017/04/23/psychedelic-revolution-changing-attitudes-towards-psychedelic-drugs-berkeley-beyond/

Polygamy: While polygamy isn’t mainstream, the fact that a national publication acknowledges their “fight” to become mainstream shows that either public attitudes are changing or this national publication wants them to change.

John Pomfret, “Polygamists fight to be seen as part of mainstream society”, November 21, 2006. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/21/AR2006112100206.html?

Andrew Dugan, “Moral acceptance of Polygamy at Record high—but why?”, July 28, 2017. https://news.gallup.com/opinion/polling-matters/214601/moral-acceptance-polygamy-record-high-why.aspx

Pedophilia: Mirjam Heine at the University of Wurzburg argues that pedophilia is an “unchangeable sexual orientation”. This video has since been removed from YouTube, but copies exist.

Mirjam Heine, “Pedophilia is a natural sexual orientation”, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MNr3yhjQPI8

In 1997, Mary Kay Letourneau engaged in an affair with her then sixth grade student, Vili Fualaau. Many publications published stories of the incident, often seeming fairly sympathetic.

[10] Thomas Watson, A Body of Divinity, (Carlisle: Banner of Truth Trust, reprinted 1992), pages 1-5.

[11] Westminster Assembly of Divines, Westminster Shorter Catechism, “I. Man’s Chief End.”

[12] Lockman Foundation, New American Standard Bible, 1995 Update, 1 Peter 4.11

[13] Watson, 6.

[14] Ezekiel 20.8-11

[15] Dietrich Bonhoeffer, The Cost of Discipleship, (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1959), page 35.

[16] J.I. Packer, Knowing God, (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1993), page 19.

[17] John Piper, The Pleasures of God, (Portland, Multnomah: 1991), page 222).

[18] Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Ethics, (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1955), page 23.

[19] Ibid, 23.

[20] Bonhoeffer, Cost, 63.

[21] Bonhoeffer, Cost, 64.

[22] Bonhoeffer, Ethics, 204.

[23] Michael D. Tanner, “Relationship between the Welfare State and Crime.” Cato Institute (June 7, 1995). https://www.cato.org/publications/congressional-testimony/relationship-between-welfare-state-crime-0

[24] Tanner.

[25] Tanner.

[26] Tanner.

[27] Eric Metaxas, Bonhoeffer: Pastor, Martyr, Prophet, Spy, (Nashville: Nelson Books, 2010), page 15.

[28] Charles Lane, “Children are being euthanized in Beligum”, The Washington Post, https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/children-are-being-euthanized-in-belgium/2018/08/06/9473bac2-9988-11e8-b60b-1c897f17e185_story.html

[29] North American Man Boy Love Association, for example.

[30] Elisabeth Elliot, The Mark of a Man, (Tarrytown, Fleming H. Revell Company, 1981), page 30.

[31] Larry Schweikart and Michael Allen, A Patriot’s History of the United States, (New York: Penguin Books, 2007), page 96.

[32] Ibid, 97.

[33] Rowan Scarborough, “Study supports Trump: 5.7 million noncitizens may have cast illegal votes”. The Washington Times, June 19, 2017. https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jun/19/noncitizen-illegal-vote-number-higher-than-estimat/

[34] Eileen Patten and Mark Hugo Lopez, “Are unauthorized immigrants overwhelmingly Democrats?”, Pew Research Center, July 22, 2013. http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/07/22/are-unauthorized-immigrants-overwhelmingly-democrats/

[35] Brett T., “WARZONE: Those ‘youths’ in Sweden seem to be rioting and torching cars again”. Twitchy, August 13, 2018. https://twitchy.com/brettt-3136/2018/08/13/warzone-those-youths-in-sweden-seem-to-be-rioting-and-torching-cars-again-video/

[36] Tom Wyke, et al, “Migrant rape fears spread across Europe: Women told not to go out at night alone after assaults carried out in Sweden, Finland, Germany, Austria and Switzerland amid warnings gangs are co-ordinating attacks”, DailyMail, August 15, 2018. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3390168/Migrant-rape-fears-spread-Europe-Women-told-not-night-assaults-carried-Sweden-Finland-Germany-Austria-Switzerland-amid-warnings-gangs-ordinating-attacks.html

[37] Grace Guarnieri, “MIGRANTS IN EUROPE LINKED TO SOARING VIOLENCE AND CRIME IN GERMANY, STUDY FINDS”. Newsweek, January 13, 2018, https://www.newsweek.com/migrants-europe-violence-crime-germany-study-770105

[38] Bonhoeffer, Cost, 89.

[39] Ibid.