Dobson exposes Senator Obama's blood-guilt...

(Tim, w/thanks to Jeff) Today, Dr. James Dobson aired a fifteen minute exposure of Senator Barack Obama's attempt to cloak his radical politics as if it were on version of a faithful Christian conscience. In the program, Dr. Dobson said Senator Obama is trying to govern by the "lowest common denominator of morality." Dr. Dobson labelled Senator Obama's support for the killing of the unborn as "a fruitcake interpretation of the Constitution," going on to ask, "Am I required in a democracy to conform my efforts in the political arena to his bloody notion of what is right with regard to the lives of tiny babies? What (Senator Obama is) trying to say here is unless everybody agrees, we have no right to fight for what we believe."

"Bloody notion of of what is right" indeed.

Comments

[Les Prouty]

David or Tim (or both), bloody is surely right. The "blood" will be on the hands of uninformed and weak (at best) evangelicals and "name only" Christians (at worst) if evangelicals help elect this advocate of baby killing. If anecdotal evidence is correct, many younger evangelicals are star-struck with Obama and do not see the abortion issue as of the highest importance. Rather, they are willing to look past his extreme pro-abortion stance because he says he favors helping the poor and needy. Help them, if they survive the abortion mill, I suppose.

[Mark Chambers]

All law is, by its very nature, religious. Ergo the laws of a nation reflect the religion of that nation. They are the outward manifestation of a peoples inward beliefs. Legalized abortion, the present, and in some states successful, thrust to legalize homosexuality and homosexual unions, along with the fact that Obama is even considered a legitimate candidate, ought to put to rest any foolish notions about this country being Christian. The knowledgeable Christian ought to see in these things the fulfillment of Romans 1:26-32, and the divine giving over of the reprobate to their depraved minds. These things are God’s judgment ON an evil people. Homosexuality and abortion are self destructive; genetic suicide so to speak.

Now Christians ought to stand against those things in every way possible and expose them as the vile sins that they are. But we ought not to imagine that we can change the laws without changing the minds of the people of whom that law is a reflection. When you look at the laws of a nation you look at the heart of its people and right now it’s an ugly thing to behold.

The church must bear part of the guilt here. Plagued with false conceptions of the separation of church and state, believing that to mean a separation of God from the state; and imagining that it has something to say to the soul of man but not to the culture of man; and being encumbered with anabaptistic ideas of civil government, it has abrogated its duties to bring every sphere of life under the Lordship of Christ and left society to be ruled by heathens.

God help us.

[David Bayly]

Absolutely, Mark.

David Bayly

[Bret L. McAtee]

It is quite true that law is reflective a people’s heart but law also serves to shape a people’s heart. Law is a double edged sword in this fashion. On one hand it reflects what a people believe, while on the other hand it shapes what a people believe. Personally, I do believe that laws are often changed that don’t reflect the minds of the citizenry, instead serving the desires of the elite to shape the citizenry in a direction that they prefer. This is called “legislating against the majority” and it happens quite frequently in our culture. One example of this is homosexual marriage. If a plebiscite was held on this issue I believe it would be overwhelming turned down (we will soon find out in California) but the elite is forcing this law upon the citizenry in order to use the law to shape the citizenry. Another example in California of this type of thing was proposition 187. This was a 1994 ballot initiative designed to deny illegal immigrants social services, health care, and public education. It passed with 58.8% of the vote, but was overturned by a federal court. The law that is now in force most certainly does not reflect the people’s heart and this reveals that the law is sometimes used as a cudgel to force people to conform.

So, my point here is that law both reflects AND shapes a people and further, because it shapes a people, we should be pursuing laws so that the people’s minds would be shaped. I am not arguing that law can be used to convert people. I am arguing that even unconverted people can be shaped in directions that are more or less evil, and that Christians should pursue laws that would work so that the unconverted citizenry would not all be as totally depraved as possible.

Mark and I have had this discussion before, so my slight caveat will come as no surprise.

[Mark Chambers]

It is quite true that law is reflective a people’s heart but law also serves to shape a people’s heart. Law is a double edged sword in this fashion. On one hand it reflects what a people believe, while on the other hand it shapes what a people believe.

Law can shape a people’s behavior, but the law has no power to shape or change the heart/mind. That is, it has no transforming (i.e. ontological) power. So while I did say that civil law is a manifestation of a peoples inward beliefs (a phrase coined by a good friend of mine) it doesn’t really express my meaning. Rather it should read “an outward manifestation or expression of a peoples inward condition.” Given that I don’t think we disagree.

Personally, I do believe that laws are often changed that don’t reflect the minds of the citizenry, instead serving the desires of the elite to shape the citizenry in a direction that they prefer. This is called “legislating against the majority” and it happens quite frequently in our culture.

Sure. Like Pavlov’s dog a people can be conditioned. But a dog can only be conditioned to behavior that is consistent with its dogness. It can’t be made to meow or climb trees or spend hours preening itself. A dog is a dog. Likewise men can’t be shaped in a manner inconsistent with what they are. Fallen men can be conditioned in any number of fallen directions. But men whose heart/mind has been transformed by the Gospel of Jesus Christ (and remember we are talking what is normative) those men will not be / cannot be conditioned to accept those things that are contrary to the new life which is theirs in Christ. So where in the world is the church?

One example of this is homosexual marriage. If a plebiscite was held on this issue I believe it would be overwhelming turned down (we will soon find out in California) but the elite is forcing this law upon the citizenry in order to use the law to shape the citizenry.

This makes my point and I am referring specifically to Romans chapter one where the reprobate are given over to their depravity because they refuse to honor God as God. Homosexual sins are given special attention there. It is not such debauchery that leads to the fall of a society, but the rejection of the living God (a reflection of the inward condition) that leads to such debauchery. So while it is quite possible, even likely, that the majority of men and women in this country find homosexuality repulsive it is also quite irrelevant. That repulsion is not the result of faith in the living God and whatever is not of faith is sin.

Another example in California of this type of thing was proposition 187. This was a 1994 ballot initiative designed to deny illegal immigrants social services, health care, and public education. It passed with 58.8% of the vote, but was overturned by a federal court. The law that is now in force most certainly does not reflect the people’s heart.

Oh yes it does and I recognize that this is probably a semantic issue here. Civil law may not necessarily reflect what people prefer, but it certainly does reflect what people are (the heart) and that necessarily. A nation is given the leadership it deserves. Sow to the wind and reap the whirlwind.

So, my point here is that law both reflects AND shapes a people and further, because it shapes a people, we should be pursuing laws so that the people’s minds would be shaped. I am not arguing that law can be used to convert people. I am arguing that even unconverted people can be shaped in directions that are more or less evil, and that Christians should pursue laws that would work so that the unconverted citizenry would not all be as totally depraved as possible.

As I said in my first post, Christians ought to stand against all that is evil in every way possible. But you will not change the laws of this nation now—at this time, without changing the heart of this people and by that I mean conversion. God will not bless this nation with righteous rulers until the heart of this nation turns toward Christ. And that turning will have to start with a church that is presently more concerned with “having its best life now” than it is with living in obedience to the Law of God. My prayer is that the church, having run from God and finding itself in the belly of the whale will like Jonah return to their Lord and start preaching the true Gospel. Then only time will tell whether we’re living in Nineveh or in Jerusalem with the Babylonians camped outside.

Peace brother