And Samuel came to Saul, and Saul said to him, "Blessed are you of the LORD! I have carried out the command of the LORD." But Samuel said, "What then is this bleating of the sheep in my ears, and the lowing of the oxen which I hear?" (1 Samuel 15:13-14)
You no doubt remember the events of the story above. God had commanded Saul to utterly destroy the Amalikites and all their possessions. Saul, always seeking the approval of the people, sought to rationalize that practical matters were more important than unflinching obedience. God never wanted Israel to have a physical king, He was their King. Nevertheless, He gave them what they wanted and promised they would regret it. The horror of his reign began following this event. In the very next chapter we read the Spirit of the Lord departed from him and he was seized by a terror which haunted him until his death.
How important are the things which God charges us to do? How important is it for us to follow His instruction rather than what seems right in our own eyes? I suspect most of us will agree it is extremely important. Dare I say essential?
Yet, in living out our lives there are many ways we can fall into the same kind of mistake Saul made. We won
=t revisit all the story, but why did Saul allow the people to keep some of the possessions of the Amalekites and allow their king to live? Remember Saul=s explanation to Samuel? He said the people had taken the very best of the spoil to offer to the Lord at Gilgal. Samuel didn=t even bother to confirm what their intentions were, he zeroes in on God=s instruction. Scripture doesn=t tell us so, but I agree with those commentators who think Saul was seeking to appease the people.The end of the previous chapter tells us Saul made it a practice to look for mighty men and enlist them in his service. This act alone provides us with insight into a life lacking in faith. Saul
=s dependence was on men, not God. Allowing them to keep the spoils of war would help assure their future allegiance. Though the scripture is silent on the matter, it is reasonable to assume there was never any intention of sacrificing what had been taken. Samuel saw right through the charade and the consequences were grievous for Saul and for the nation.We all compromise. There are times when compromise is appropriate or even the right thing to do. In fact there are times when the right thing to do is to simply let others have their way. Still, there are times when compromise is evil, as Saul learned the hard way. To the point, where God has spoken, there can be no compromise without adverse consequences: sometimes, as in Saul
=s case, very serious ones.Having made grievous compromises in my own life, I approach this subject with great humility. This is not an exercise in finger pointing but a warning born of experience. As you read on, you may feel as if what you read is a personal confrontation. Let me assure you it is not. What follows applies to all people in general, and to most in the specific area of discussion. That area once included me, but by God
=s grace, I was freed from what I now believe is seriously flawed thinking.Specifically, I want us to consider how we are to decide whom we choose to represent us. Whether it is in our business dealings, social organizations, church leadership, civil government, or any other venue, what is our standard? Has God given us a standard? There is little argument regarding a standard within the fellowship of believers but what about other venues?
John Jay, first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court said,
AProvidence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers.@ Is there a biblical basis for such an admonition. I think so. While you won=t find a Athus saith the Lord,@ there are examples and principles to consider for guidance in this matter.Moses was really stressed out over dealing with all the people in the wilderness so his father-in-law Jethro gave him good advice which he followed:
Furthermore, you shall select out of all the people able men who fear God, men of truth, those who hate dishonest gain; and you shall place these over them, as leaders of thousands, of hundreds, of fifties and of tens. (Ex. 18:21)
There is no question the situation of the covenant people was unique, nevertheless, the standard set for those who would be in positions of authority is clear. Let
=s look at each of them briefly and consider their importance.Able men: The original has various shades of meaning including wealth, physical strength, power, etc. The idea is they are to have the necessary resources appropriate for the task, or as one meaning describes them: worthy. On the practical side this means we need to know what a job requires before we can decide who is
Aable@ to do it.Who fear God: Those who are appointed to positions of authority should reverence God above all else. If they don
=t, it doesn=t matter how able they are, they will abuse the authority entrusted to them. There is no sliding scale here.Men of truth: Though the word is translated truth in many translations, it is more specific in nature. It has the idea of men who are true to their word, dependable, trustworthy, etc. How often do we hear complaints that men will say anything to get elected but once they are elected they support the very things we are against? Truth certainly expands to every aspect of one
=s life of service, but following through with what one professes is a critical qualification of those we choose to represent us.Who hate dishonest gain (literally, the enemy of plunder): Those in authority should not simply refrain from ill gotten gain, they should be its worst enemy. If you see any connection here with our representatives who just voted themselves another $4,000 raise, good for you. Our imperial Congress makes so much more than the typical American (and has vastly more perks), that it is a rare one who can withstand the pressure to keep feathering their own nests out of the livelihood of those they are supposed to be serving: to say nothing of all the questionable sources of revenue for campaign funds.
Do you see wisdom in Jethro
=s advice? Moses did, and so do I. When Moses recounts the events in Deuteronomy 1, he gives us further insight into the qualities of those leaders, ATake you wise men, and understanding, and known among your tribes, and I will make them rulers over you.@ (vs. 13)Wise and Understanding: artful, skillful, cunning. Without a doubt, many of our servants today possess this quality - to a fault! That makes the rest of the qualifications all the more important.
Known among your tribes: Those chosen to represent us need to be known by us. Practically, that means we have to make the effort to know as much about them as is reasonably possible. While we can consider what others say, diligence demands we know a candidate as a result of our own research. It is not acceptable to listen only to the voices which tell us what we want to hear. We must be particularly attentive to those who bring us news we may not want to hear. (Yes, I
=m aware that last statement is self-serving since I regularly share things with you which you might rather not know. Just realize, others share things with me which I=d rather not know. Still, my desire to make informed choices forces me to consider such things and respond appropriately)There are many places to look for qualities of those who would serve, but we
=ll end for now considering the story of Gideon. He started out with 32,000 and that was way more than God needed (hint: He still works in small ways to accomplish big things). God sent the cowards home - 22,000 of them. Those who would serve must have courage. When push comes to shove, they must be absolutely committed to doing the right thing at all costs. Most of our elected representatives these days won=t do the right thing if it simply means they won=t be re-elected. It is that kind of cowardice which is largely responsible for many of the problems we face in our country today.Even after sending the cowards home, God wasn
=t through sifting Gideon=s army. They went down to the local watering hole and there God sorted out those who were diligent and watchful from those who were there just to satisfy themselves. Those who would serve must be constantly on the alert. Those who are distracted by their own concerns are not fit to serve. If you think I=m pointing out the problems with those who are elected to serve the special interests which put them in office, you are right on target. We need servants who are committed to seeking the good of everyone with equality. Those who allow themselves to be manipulated to serve one group at the expense of others are not worthy of consideration.Of course, demanding that those who serve us exhibit these traits, among others, means we should possess them as well. They are, after all, our servants, and the master should not expect more from his servants than he does himself. We often hear people complain about someone they voted for who, once in office, voted against the very things they promised to support during their campaign. The truth is, when we vote for someone whom we know (or by due diligence should know) votes against the things we hold inviolate, we lose the moral authority to object to their compromises because we compromised when we voted for them.
I pray we will not cede that authority this November.
Consequences of Compromise
Perhaps your first reaction to this title is like mine,
AIs it really necessary to talk about this?@ Obviously, I believe it is. Being very familiar with making inappropriate compromises, I am qualified to say that when one is caught up in the practice, it is easy to become blinded to our condition and the problems it brings. In fact, that insensitivity is one of the first consequences and the more we compromise, the harder it becomes for us to realize just how far we have slipped.We
=ve already mentioned that compromise robs us of the moral authority to challenge others who compromise, but that is a only the beginning. When we are compromised, we may speak against others who do the same, but doing so amounts to hypocrisy. In time we can become desensitized to that too, but usually we exercise a more dangerous option; we cease to speak out against what we know violates the principles we profess.It is sad enough when this happens to us as individuals but it is tragic when it happens to a large segment of the culture. In the context of governance, the impact has been devastating to our country. In his
AFarewell Address,@George Washington addressed the problem of party spirit at length and warned:The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries, which result, gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of Public Liberty.
Is there even a need to comment on how these words are prophetic in our own time? Though our system at this juncture requires organizing as a party in order to have any hope of attracting public attention, it is essential that parties focus on principle and practice, not party. Sadly, the vast majority of Americans determine how they will cast their vote on the basis of party affiliation rather than diligently investigating candidates. For some time now, I have said it would be interesting to remove party affiliation from our ballots (as well as the ability to vote a straight ticket) and see what consternation it would cause among voters. You see, that affiliation is the single most important determinant in making a decision and without it, most voters would be lost, and terrified they might support the opposition.
It is essential for us to focus on principle, not party. Who stands for the principles we believe in? Again, the question is not who professes those principles but how has the candidate demonstrated a commitment to them? Or, in the case of a newcomer, have they been faithful to their convictions in other areas of their life? Yes, it takes effort to discover these things but that is part of the diligence which is required of those who would govern themselves. It is our heritage, and duty. Are we up to the job? Do we even want it? We need to answer that question honestly and then give ourselves to the task with a new zeal.
That means it may be necessary for us to repent of past action and admit we
=ve been wrong in our choices. Recognizing previous error and being able to admit it, is usually the biggest obstacle to change. Taking a different direction is at least a tacit admission we were previously wrong. Many factors come into play at this point. Pride is at the heart of most of them.Though it isn
=t pleasant to admit our previous error to ourselves, it is even harder to admit it to others; especially if our error is a popular or common one. The fact that we choose a different path can be seen by family and friends as an affront to our relationships because we no longer share the same beliefs. Nevertheless, our path must be dictated by principle, not popularity. We should do all we can to disagree without being disagreeable and most of us could benefit from learning more about that skill.Depending on the issues in question, changes in thinking could mean changing jobs or altering social involvements. In the political arena, those already involved may hold positions of authority and power. Relinquishing such positions to align oneself with others is no small challenge. The pressure from peers with whom we may have labored for years is real. They will be passionate in their appeal for us not to jump ship. Because they know and respect us, our departure is seen as a tacit judgment against them and their opinion.
It doesn
=t matter what arena we make changes in, we experience problems of this nature and most of us have made changes which put us in this uncomfortable position. Having had that experience should make us 1) cautious in how we make the change, 2) considerate in the way we communicate the change, and 3) patient with those who, in spite of our best efforts otherwise, are offended by our conscientious actions.Is it hard? Sure, but things of value are seldom easy. Our actions and beliefs should not be shaped by what is easiest or most comfortable. The most glorious vistas are often those afforded by steepest paths with the greatest obstacles. Let us not be afraid of the journey.
What Will We Do This November?
By virtue of being born in this country, we have a sacred trust from God to choose those who will serve us by upholding the law of our land. It should not be necessary to say those we choose must be committed to upholding the law, but it is. We live in a time where the vast majority of our population no longer knows the law (i.e. the Constitution) and consequently, they have no idea whether a candidate
=s position on issues is even lawful. Diligence demands more and those who will not be diligent should not vote.So, read the Constitution or better yet take a good course on the Constitution. Then see if what a candidate promises to do is even authorized by the law of the land. In virtually every case, candidates will promise to do what they have no authority to do.
We then have a choice, will we support those who pledge to break the law by usurping the power of their office, or will we insist on a candidate committed to upholding the law? If no candidate is so committed, are we prepared not to vote in that race, or will we compromise and support those who we know will break the law? This is a serious matter before God and not one to be taken lightly.
Eight years ago, I was confronted with these issues. I looked at the major parties and knew that neither one was obeying the law. During my adult life, I had always voted for the person I thought would do the least damage and, with only one exception, I always went with a major party. In 1996, I was confronted with facts which brought an end to my compromise in the political arena (I wish I could say it ended all improper compromises in my life).
Although, I had been vocal about the direction our civil servants were taking our country, it had never occurred to me that I was in part responsible for the decline because I supported the people who were causing it. My error seems so obvious now but it was utterly shocking then; by my vote I was sending the message I wanted what I said I abhorred. The impact of that realization was both devastating and energizing. It was particularly energizing because I quickly learned I was not the only one who was awakening from political slumber and, thanks to the efforts of folks far more vigilant than me, I had a choice.
The Carpenter
=s Apprentice began in January 2000, a presidential election year, and I determined early on I would make others aware of the choice they had to make a difference in that election. I offer that option to readers again this year.There are three possible views of civil government: 1) God is sovereign, 2) man is sovereign, or 3) government is sovereign. My convictions affirm that God is sovereign and compel me to support those who confessions and actions demonstrate they share that view. Both major parties have long histories which demonstrate they believe government is sovereign.
President Bush forcefully expressed this view when, dealing with the war on terrorism, he said,
A...either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists.@ Think about that statement for a moment.Do you grasp how ominous that message is? Either you subscribe to what the government is doing in regard to terrorism, or you are a terrorist. If you believe in the liberty which is our heritage in this country, that ought to send chills down your spine regardless of your position on the
Awar against terrorism.@ It sends the clear message, government is sovereign and you will support our policies, or else.Folks who know me, know that I am, by far, more
Aconservative@ than most of the people who receive this newsletter. I also happen to be opposed to the present war on terror. That aligns me with a lot of Aliberals@ on this issue but, for the most part, my reasons are vastly different from theirs . Still, considering the proclamation of our president, how are we viewed? There can be no doubt, we are enemies of the state and the sovereign state is committed to prevailing.You must ask yourself if you are willing to support a candidate who believes the state is sovereign? This is a serious question at a very serious time in the history of this country. Do not answer casually. Your answer has serious consequences.
Most alternate parties share the view that government is sovereign and each wants to use it to shape the country into the thing they would like it to become. There are two exceptions.
The Libertarian Party believes man is sovereign and that government should not stand in the way of people doing what they want. If women wish to have abortions, they believe the federal government has no authority or duty to protect that innocent life. There are other issues, but this alone should be sufficient evidence that the
Aman is sovereign@ pattern just is not acceptable. That leaves us with the other exception and my recommendation: The Constitution Party (CP) and its presidential candidate Michael Peroutka.The Constitution Party agrees with those who founded this country: God is Sovereign and His will is Law. It cherishes our heritage established on biblical principles and seeks to return our civil servant to its constitutional limits. You can learn more at www.constitutionparty.com or by calling 1-800-2-VETO-IRS.
The Apprentice
=s JournalI realize this has been quite a departure from the usual fare here, but these are things I am convinced must be said. We each are responsible to those whom God brings in our path and that is a duty I try to take seriously. I make no apology for these observations which I hold with great conviction.
It has not been my intention to offend or belittle others who hold different views, yet I know that what you
=ve read may strike you in ways I did not intend. My sole purpose in sharing these things has been to encourage you to stop, think and reconsider where you spend your vote. This country is in a free fall. If we are to avoid a tragic end, we must act now by taking a different course. Our actions do matter. If you would like to visit about this serious issue, write me. There are many, many reasons you should not give your vote to the Aobvious@ choices: far too many to detail here, but I will give you bullet points next month.So as not to disappoint those who look forward to the backyard report, here are the headlines. Lots of Okra! ... New Snake Species Found ... Bluebirds Return ... Hummers Are Swarming! ... Confused Deer Gets Trapped in Backyard ... First Signs of Fall Evident ... more next time!
As the seasons change, it is encouraging to remember that little stays the same. God is the only Constant and our joy is found in living out the faith He has granted us day by day. It is a proven fact in history that the darkest times are those in which the next step forward for mankind is forged in the furnace of the Refiner. The assurance of His control over His creation fills us with bright hope for the future, even when current conditions are less than optimistic. The kingdom of God grows daily and its glorious view has touched every continent of the globe. The day is coming when righteousness finally covers the earth and I long for it. It may not be in this body, but I will see it and rejoice together with you.
Kingdom Blessings ~ Jim