A Bigger Danger Than Obama
Again the anger of the Lord was aroused against Israel, and He moved David against them to say, “Go, number Israel and Judah.”
…And David’s heart condemned him after he had numbered the people. So David said to the Lord, “I have sinned greatly in what I have done; but now, I pray, O Lord, take away the iniquity of Your servant, for I have done very foolishly.” ~2 Samuel 24: 1, 10
What was David’s great sin, for which he repented but for which the nation of which he was covenant head still had to live with the consequences?
Statist idolatry.
From the notes in my Reformation Study Bible:
Taking a census does not appear to have been wrong in itself (Num. 1:1, 2; 4:1, 2; 26:1-4), but see Ex. 30:11, 12. This act of census may have pointed to a lack of trust in David’s heart, or even to a desire to gain control of God’s providence by making an inventory of His apparent resources. That the report (v.9) emphasizes military strength may suggest that David wanted to take more territory than what the Lord had granted him.
Thus, it wasn’t wrong to strategize, but to put his dependence upon his poll numbers rather than upon God’s promises was evil in God’s sight.
From the latest issue of Tabletalk magazine, in an article titled “Statism,” by R.C. Sproul:
About thirty years ago, I shared a taxi cab in St. Louis with Francis Schaeffer. I had known Dr. Schaeffer for many years, and he had been instrumental in helping us begin our ministry in Ligonier, Pennsylvania, in 1971. Since our time together in St. Louis was during the twilight of Schaeffer’s career, I posed this question to him: “Dr. Schaeffer, what is your biggest concern for the future of the church in America?” Without hesitation, Dr. Schaeffer turned to me and spoke one word: “Statism.” Schaeffer’s biggest concern at that point in his life was that the citizens of the United States were beginning to invest their country with supreme authority, such that the free nation of America would become one that would be dominated by a philosophy of the supremacy of the state.
In statism, we see the suffix “ism,” which indicates a philosophy or worldview. A decline from statehood to statism happens when the government is perceived as or claims to be the ultimate reality. This reality then replaces God as the supreme entity upon which human existence depends.
Providentially, our friend Pastor Bret has just written on statism, as well, in his article titled, “Nothing’s Changed—Despite Palin There Remains No Reason to Vote Republican” (which just happens to be the 1000th post at The Backwater Report). He says:
First, we should remember that the Republican party, like the Democratic party, is dedicated to the pursuit of Statism. At the top of the ticket remains the guy who in the McCain-Feingold legislation eviscerated first amendment rights, thus strengthening state freedom against individual freedoms. The Republican party is still the party that, completely in the face of vigorous protestations of an energized majority that was its natural constituency, recently sought to ram down the throat of Americans an immigration bill that would have effectively erased borders while refusing to offer any kind of solution to the presence of 12 million illegal immigrants in this county. John McCain was one of the Republican senators who was vigorously pushing for that legislation, which would have strengthened the state by making it the only agency that could bring peace to the strife of the balkanization it was trying to create by the immigration bill. The Republican party, along with its allies in the major media, is that institution that did everything in its power to marginalize the Ron Paul campaign. It did so because the party realized what a threat to its statist designs Ron Paul was. The Republican party under the leadership of George W. Bush has grown the federal government in ways that Lyndon Baines Johnson could have only dreamed. The Republican party during the Bush administration grew the state in a massive fashion with its legislation on prescription drugs for senior citizens. In the Patriot Act, the Republican party grew the power of the state in its ability to spy on its citizenry. At every turn, the Republican party has shown itself, by its actions, to be a statist party. In this regard there is little difference between it and the party they are supposed to be opposing. If there is any difference between the two parties on their advocacy of statist government, it is that Republicans, for some odd reason, feel compelled to brazenly lie about their intentions with claptrap speeches about limited government. As I’ve said countless times, the difference between the two parties does not lie in their mutual agreement on the aggrandizement of the state, but rather their difference lies in the differences that divided the National Socialists from the International Socialists in 1930s Europe.
None of this has changed in the Republican party. What was true of the party before it nominated Sarah Palin remains true on the eve of Sarah Palin’s Republican national convention speech. The Republican party is an old wineskin, and the idea that by voting for it we can get new wine into that old wineskin is preposterous beyond imagination.
I hope you will take time to read both articles as they offer some clear thinking about the muddy issues we are facing. As Bret has also said, as far as she speaks truth to the issues regarding abortion and other things on which we can agree, we have no quarrel with Mrs. Palin’s positions, and the liberal media attacks on her which are meant to vilify her for her conservative credentials are not the reasons why we don’t support her in the position of VP. First and foremost, the Bible speaks plainly that men are to be chosen for positions of covenant headship in government, just as they are covenant leaders in home and church. Deborah, who sat under her own tree and judged as judgment from God for the apostate Israel (Judges 4:1-3), was hardly in an ideal situation nor was it typical for God’s people to have a woman in that position of leadership as we know from every other example of godly rulers in civil and ecclesiastical spheres being men (Queen Esther did not rule as one of Ahasuerus’s wives). And even though Deborah ruled wisely, the impact on her nation was not lasting as the children of Israel continued to do “evil in the sight of the Lord” (Judges 6:1). Secondly, John McCain, the one who is actually running for president, is statist to the core, which Bret points out in the post I link, and he is not the pro-life hero that he wants evangelical voters to believe he is.
Some trust in chariots, and some in horses;
But we will remember the name of the Lord our God. ~Psalm 20:7
Our vote does not belong to us…whatever we do, whether we eat, or drink, or vote, we are to do it heartily as unto the Lord our God. We must please God, not anybody else, with how we vote. We must vote for men of integrity who are not double-minded, to represent us, covenantally (which is what representative government is, not to be taken lightly), in the spheres over which the state has legitimate authority. God will use our votes as He pleases, and place in power the ones He chooses. We need to stop playing the numbers game and prostrate ourselves before the King and seek His guidance and His mercy for our nation.
As Dr. Sproul concludes:
Throughout the history of the Christian church, Christianity has always stood over against all forms of statism. Statism is the natural and ultimate enemy to Christianity because it involves a usurpation of the reign of God. If Francis Schaeffer was right—and each year that passes makes his prognosis seem all the more accurate—it means that the church and the nation face a serious crisis in our day. In the final analysis, if statism prevails in America, it will mean not only the death of our religious freedom, but also the death of the state itself. We face perilous times where Christians and all people need to be vigilant about the rapidly encroaching elevation of the state to supremacy.
September 4th, 2008 at 6:00 am
I am about half way through Basement Tape #7 on Govt., it is very good. Cost you three bucks to download, worth it. I am admitted BT addict and shill, but I don’t get paid for it.
http://www.highlandsstore.com/products.cfm?product_id=102
September 4th, 2008 at 7:11 am
Statism is one of my greatest fears in this life. I am surprised by how few people realize that we live in a Statist State, and that invariably leads to totalitarianism.
September 4th, 2008 at 11:45 am
So Carmon, I’m confused…who do you think Christians should vote for? If Obama and the dems have their way we would all be socialists. Is that good?
I’m sorry, I usually agree with you, but this is one time I have to respectfully disagree. I don’t agree with McCain in every area, but I do believe that he is the better choice and on our ballot we only get two choices.
September 4th, 2008 at 6:13 pm
ah! I told myself no more blogs until the politics die down, but oh. Once again, I am excited to read where someone actually brought scripture into a post. It was edifying also. I can’t help but to notice a pattern of certain external websites that blog writers reference on their sites and having a tough-love/truthful/biblical attitude when discerning the times. I enjoyed reading this. God Bless
September 4th, 2008 at 10:23 pm
Kris, I think Christians should only vote for a godly person who is 100 per cent prolife, and that’s not John McCain…I hope you have been reading the links I’ve provided here and in the sidebar (Food for Thought). Those who prefer to think “strategically” and incrementally do not like the idea of voting for a candidate not in the two official parties, thinking their vote won’t count or that they are voting for Obama if they don’t vote for McCain. As I point out in this post, that is faulty logic in a Christian paradigm…our vote doesn’t need to count anywhere but with God. Incrementalism has brought us closer every election to a socialist state. If you want to think strategically, think about how Republicans tend to rule as liberals after they promise to act like conservatives. Even John McCain in his speech was saying he would bring “conservative” change to liberal Washington. Is he referring to his fellow conservative Republican George Bush, who for 6 years had a Republican Congress? So how come we’re in this mess if our team has had the reins of power for so long? When liberals (like Clinton) are in office, however, the Republicans come out of their stupor somewhat and act more like conservatives as they oppose the Democrats who have power.
If he wins the election, John McCain will be running for re-election as soon as he gets into the Oval Office. It’s the nature of the beast. And he will rule as a centrist, trying not to rock the boat and offend the liberals so that he can stay in the job he has spent a great deal of his political career trying to attain. In his speech, he made a big deal about “reaching across the aisle.” He is known for his affinity for friendships with liberals and his record bears out his very liberal record on many issues.
You can write in a better candidate or not vote. If Obama wins, something I do not wish for, I think he will be vigorously opposed and that we will see a reinvigoration and reunification of conservatives, who will remember their principles and be less likely to compromise on crucial issues. if McCain wins, something I do not wish for, I think we will see further disintegration of conservatism in this country.
Call me Jeremiah
.
September 5th, 2008 at 3:17 am
Re: Kris’s question about for whom to vote? Presidential elections are all hype. Pay more attention to local and state races. If the citizens of Alaska hadnt supported a woman at the local level, Palin would never be where she is today. We’re a little late with our whining :/
September 5th, 2008 at 5:31 am
Carmon, You GO Girl! I just wanted to pop in on the comments and say that I’m so thankful for your sidebar links. Praying for you and yours.
September 5th, 2008 at 7:03 am
Dana, I do agree with you about the importance of the local elections. I also think that considering what the Constitution says the limited responsibilities of a president should be, we make way too big a deal out of this race every four years…and because we don’t pay attention to the Constitution we have let those who fill that office have way too much power. Both McCain and Obama have already broken the oath of office they want to take with speeches they have given pledging things they will do that they will have no authority to do.
September 5th, 2008 at 12:35 pm
I was kind of undecided about her for a while. The she said she believes it was God’s will that we invaded Iraq. Sorry Sarah Palin, you do not speak for God.
September 5th, 2008 at 3:45 pm
The dispensational pentecostal angle on Sarah Palin leaves me most disconcerted. Will she get a “word from the Lord” while in office? Is she convinced that since Israel is God’s people they must be defended at all cost? Will she be interested in seeing a new Temple go up where the dome of the Rock now stands?
I don’t know how infected she has been with dispensational pentecostal theology. It would be interesting to find out.
I will say this though… this woman is the closest I’ve ever seen to a regular person, average Joe type in national politics.
September 5th, 2008 at 5:59 pm
I will say this though… this woman is the closest I’ve ever seen to a regular person, average Joe type in national politics.
Yes, it’s quite a contrast with Cindy McCain…Vanity Fair estimated one of the outfits she wore at the convention cost over $300,000. And John McCain (who married his wife’s money, after leaving his injured and hospitalized first wife and mother of his older children) can’t remember how many houses they own. That’s not exactly an average Joe or in touch with regular people.
September 6th, 2008 at 4:17 pm
Carmen,
This is the first time I have read your blog or been to your site. I linked here from Doug Phillips blog. Thank you for your very helpful post. All week I have been wrestling with how to think about the Republican nominee and his VP choice. I found your post about statism to be what I need to help redirect me back to the real issues. And I appreciated your comments to in answer the the person who is thinking to vote against Obama. Thanks for speaking the truth.
Jennifer
September 6th, 2008 at 5:56 pm
Your comments about Cindy McCain are so disppointing. You have a no gossip symbol on your website and yet you indulge in it yourself. As is apparent from this link to the Vanity Fair website (about as liberal and anti-Republican and conservative publication as one can find) – http://www.vanityfair.com/online/politics/2008/09/cindy-mccains-300000-outfit.html – the $300,000 figure was simply rank speculation. I don’t know Cindy McCain but I do know that she was so moved by a baby with a cleft palate she met at Mother Theresa’s orphanage that she brought her to the United States and adopted her. She is, as we all are, a human with all the complexities of all humans. She certainly deserves better than to be the object of recycled speculation and gossip.
September 6th, 2008 at 7:18 pm
Hi, Elizabeth…you are right, I don’t know how much it cost, though I did say it was an estimate, which is what it says on the link you give. I don’t want to disparage at all her adoption of her daughter, which is a good thing, but from all the news reports, she and Senator McCain have a lifestyle that is far removed from the “average Joe.” I don’t have a problem with people being wealthy, but as more of our political leaders live such lavish lifestyles, I do wonder how they are able to understand the issues which affect the rest of us. They know that is a P.R. problem, which is why they often go to great lengths to show us they are just regular folks. That’s one of the appeals of Sarah Palin.
I know this is a tense time with some big emotions on both sides of the issue of the Palin choice. Cindy McCain’s outfits don’t figure into the bigger picture or the main reasons I am against McCain as president or Palin as VP. I mentioned it as a side note in the comments only because I thought it interesting in relation to the idea that Mrs. Palin is like us common folk
.
September 7th, 2008 at 11:55 am
Admittedly, I have only just begun to read your blog. However, I have read several of your past posts as well as the ones dealing with the nomination of Sarah Palin. I made a comment in which I stated that I believed that your calling HC the “Wicked Witch of the White House” was unkind. You wrote that it is “rare” for you to call people names and that you shouldn’t be called on it. You equated it to Paul taking the Judaizers to task. I don’t see how the comparison is even close. The Judaizers, as you wrote, were adding to grace by demanding works. What does HC’s politics have to do with salvation? Is HC even a believer?
It is with that as a backdrop that I write. At the risk of getting hammered, I agree with Elizabeth with regard to your comments about McCain and his wife. I submit that none of the candidates struggle financially, so none of them should be considered an Average Joe (your words). Regardless, what does their economic status have to do with the election? Your crack that McCain “…married his wife’s money” sounds disparaging, scurrilous and catty.
What is it that worries you about fellow believers voting for the McCain/Palin ticket? Why are you so adamant that other thinking, praying (even Reformed) Christians shouldn’t vote for that ticket?
Please, vote for whom you believe God wants you to, but don’t wrongly assume that other believers who love God and have a walk with Him, aren’t considering the facts when they enter the voting booth.
Jesus said that His kingdom isn’t of this world, and, as such, I try not to get overly exorcised about the political landscape. As a believer and citizen, I take voting seriously, but I know that politics don’t change hearts. My “chief end,” as the Westminster Chatecism states, is “to glorify God and enjoy Him forever.” I’m not being pedantic since I’m sure you’re more than a little familiar with the WC. Rather, it is to make the point that my job isn’t to change the culture.
Harsh political rhetoric never changed one person’s heart. Only the Gospel has that power.
Cathy
September 9th, 2008 at 8:06 pm
Carmon,
Thanks for your cool head and irenic spirit through these discussions. You often have and show more patience than I think I could in similar situations.
Perry
September 9th, 2008 at 8:08 pm
#9 Laura – that’s not quite accurate…I’m no Palin fan but I read several reports where she said or prayed that God’s will be done. Not “I know this is God’s will”
Cheers
Pc3
September 10th, 2008 at 6:33 am
So is your option or position to just not vote? That seems illogical because we have the option to vote for the BEST option.
September 10th, 2008 at 6:41 am
Krislynn, go read the link I just put in the sidebar under “Food for Thought.” And yes, I do think it better not to vote rather than to vote for what is wrong. The best option is always to please God.
September 10th, 2008 at 6:49 am
Perry,
I don’t get it. Carmon doesn’t mince words when she writes. Why isn’t it OK to question her or bring something else to the table?
Carmon,
Yeah, the best option is to please God, so are you implying that a vote for McCain/Palin is not pleasing to God?
Cathy
September 10th, 2008 at 2:20 pm
I haven’t been here for at least a few years because I disagree with much of what you write, but I ended up on your blog via a rabbit trail of blogs reading about Sarah Palin.
I agree with you that a woman should not be elected vp for biblical reasons, but I am going to vote for Palin and McCain because they would do less harm to this country than Obama would. No matter how you put it Carmon, voting independent or not voting at all is most definitely a vote for Obama.
And I think THAT would be more displeasing to God than the choice I am making.
September 10th, 2008 at 2:58 pm
I agree with you that a woman should not be elected vp for biblical reasons, but I am going to vote for Palin and McCain because they would do less harm to this country than Obama would.
Cathy, the quote above is from Joanna, who commented just below you. I will not mince words this time either: if you know what the Bible teaches about women being keepers at home, about wives submitting to their own husbands, about the headship of man established from creation, of the biblical mandates regarding choosing elders and rulers, and you still vote for “Palin and McCain” (interesting order!), then you are not pleasing God, you are fearing man (Obama), and going outside of God’s explicit commands, replacing them with your fallen human reason. You both need to read the passage I quote from I Samuel, where Saul got tired of waiting for Samuel to show up, his troops were leaving him, and he decided to help God out by doing the sacrifices himself (which, by the way, is also a good example of the impropriety of the civil sphere as represented by the king, taking over that which is given to the church to do…but BOTH are to obey God). Saul had some good reasons from a human standpoint to try to curry God’s favor with his sacrifices, but God was not pleased with his human reasoning. God took the kingdom from him and the whole nation continued to suffer with perpetual war. To obey is better than sacrifice.
September 10th, 2008 at 6:01 pm
Thanks, Carmon, for the comment addressed to Joanna and me. However, unlike Joanna, I don’t believe that it is unbiblical for me to vote for that ticket–even if I am still undecided about whom I will vote. I’m glad that you didn’t mince words–and I won’t, either. I have read I Samuel, more than once, and understand what Samuel meant when he said, “To obey is better than sacrifice.” Your application is with what I don’t agree. To presume I haven’t read the passage because I don’t agree with your exegesis of Titus 2 is erroneous. Furthermore, to go after me because of something Joanna wrote is misplaced. Again, you are not the only one who thinks and prays through the issues.
Thanks for the lively discussion.
Best,
Cathy
September 11th, 2008 at 3:51 am
Hi, I am voting for McCain /Palin ticket. Abortion is the greatest evil of our times. We only have one more supreme court justice to get to overturn roe vs wade. Mccain will give us a strict Judge who will be the deciding vote to oveturn roe vs wade. Obama has stated he wouldn’t want his child to be punished with a baby if she got pregnant out of wedlock. He also voted against partial birth abortion and he is against the help of unborn baby’s born alive( he has a horrible story look it upo). Obama would put in a new judge who will most certainly side with roe vs wade. The life and death of millions of babies surpasses the wrong or right of a woman in office. I am a homemaker and feel woman should be keepers of the home. I will say this when roe vs wade is overturned having a woman in the white house who had a baby with down syndrome(many kill why do you think they do testing..to give option of death)will be helpful against the remarks of how this is a womans issue with men overtuning it. McCain adopted and orphan and Palin has a special needs child. No one can say they are hippocrites. Do you know that very soon one of the pro roe vs wade supreme court justices will retire? How can we sit back and not vote. Millions of unborn babies die everyday. I am voting for McCain. Look at who planned parenthood is supporting….Obama…that speaks volumes.
September 11th, 2008 at 12:39 pm
Hi; this is my first visit to your blog… Lively discussion indeed!
I agree with what you have written and I am voting for Chuck Baldwin, Presidential nominee for the Constitution Party. He will be on the ballot in 35 states and can be written in in the others. “Pro-life” Republicans have been in Washington for YEARS and never got anything done to save the lives of innocents. Baldwin will.
It’s not my job to see to it that the right man gets in office – all authority comes from God – but it is my job to vote according to Biblical principles, and as we have a good choice, why would I vote for one of the bad choices?
September 11th, 2008 at 12:44 pm
Wow ladies! What a lively discussion! I might add that we need to remember to trust in the Lord with all our heart and lean not on our own understanding. We must pray that the Lord give us wisdom in this matter not only for us, but for our husbands (not forgetting that we are also being watched by our children to see if we respond in a Christ exhalting manner). I will vote the same as my husband. It is not good for the house to be divided. I know this is a whole nother issue.
No matter what, God can and does do mighty things. May we not forget that.
May He give us wisdom and boldness to do what he calls us to do.
September 11th, 2008 at 8:43 pm
Hi Carmon,
This is certainly an interesting discussion. I just watched another interview with Sarah Palin. She definitely has a Rah-rah-sis-boom-bah cheerleaderish approach to politics. I prefer this over Hilary Clinton’s manish grab the bull by the nose ring and yank where you want him to go..I guess she’s polished this technique on ole billy boy.
The more I see/hear from Ms. Palin, the less convincing she seems. As for McCain, I can hardly stand listening to him. He comes across as incredibly insincere and completely out of touch. And his wife Cindy…Bleeech!!! Her syrupy sweet, “John’s the guy for us” speech, nauseated me. How on earth did those two plastic figures get to be front and center?
I don’t think any Christ-following believer could actually in good conscience vote for Obama or McCain. It’s time to quit trying to play God and just do what we know is right. Let God take care of the fall-out.
At the very least…if we don’t have to watch too much more of the John and Cindy show, it should be a very interesting election.
September 11th, 2008 at 9:40 pm
I wrote about the interview, Grace, at Backwater Report. It only added to my concerns about her as a candidate who, if elected, would be given a great deal of power without the wherewithal to properly wield it.
September 14th, 2008 at 4:32 pm
I have been engrossed with the posts concerning voting for the lesser of two evils etc.
Voting for the lesser of two evils is still voting for evil…The Hitler or Stalin choice comes to mind.
We, in America, do have other choices such as Chuck Baldwin of the Constitution Party or Bob Barr (pro-life) of the Libertarian Party (not your father’s pot-smoking party). One must remember that our vote is the coinage of our conscience and at an appointed time we will be judged for what we have done in this life to promote the Kindgdom of God. Scripture is very clear on the role of women–I have yet to find one Scripture supporting the leadership of a woman with five children, one of whom is an infant. Why wasn’t her husband pursuing the position instead of playing “Mr. Mom?” Her loyalties will be divided as she must please another man who is not her husband and her children will be lacking the critical nurturing that only a mother can give, while she is jetting all over the world. I fail to see how Mrs. Palin is upholding Scripture or Scriptural principles by accepting the VP slot. This is not a “matter of prayer” but one of reading and believing the plain meaning of the Scripture.
The Lord God is sovereign and I choose to trust Him in this matter. Therefore, I will vote according to Scriptural principles and leave it in His hands.
Who knows but that an Obama presidency is what is needed to wake the Church from her coma?
September 27th, 2008 at 7:47 pm
“conservative” judges are not a necessity on the Supreme Court.
1) They will NOT solve the abortion problem
2) McCain’s track record on judges is not in one’s wildest dreams “conservative”
3) despite his lies at Saddleback forum, McCain VOTED TO CONFIRM three of those “liberal” judges.
what IS necessary is to pass Congressman Ron Paul’s Sanctity of Life Act. It will define life as starting at conception, and THAT will make depriving conceived people of life a crime. For some interesting reason, (although it has be re-introduced EVERY YEAR) his bill has NEVER come up for discussion. Why, would a (supposedly) pro-life congress not make this bill #1 priority? Why NO action by an (alleged) pro-life President?
I found an option that not only agrees with my convitions, but I’m sure it is the best for the country, and is “unto the Lord”. the Constitution Party is not only 100% pro-life, but also pro one-man-one-woman marriage, and is going to do its absolute best to restore the Constitutional method to this government. I have personally met Chuck Baldwin. I am voting Constitution Party. Evil is evil, even if it is “lesser”.
http://baldwin08.com