Author: harry.rockefeller@gmail.com

My Oklahoma house representative has proposed a bill to allow a privately funded 10-Commandments granite monument be placed on the state capitol grounds. Even in a red state like Oklahoma it has drawn vocal opposition crying “separation of church and state”. The press has been fair in its reporting. No taxpayer money is involved. Representative Dr. Mike Ritze said he wants Oklahomans to be reminded of our historical roots but is their more of a motive? Several have asked that in their letters to our local papers. I wondered too. Here is my letter to our local paper, The Broken Arrow Ledger.

What is it that directs our actions?

If you remember _Braveheart_ and Mel Gibson’s character, William Wallace, shouting “FREEDOM” with his last breath as he was tortured to death you get my meaning. What is this inner part, conscience, heart, or sole, of a person which dictates nearly every action he takes? Actions of one rise up in opposition to what is strongly believed evil or at least wrong action in others. As the napkin fell out of Mel’s hand, we understood William Wallace’s action in opposition to the English because of their rape and murder of not just any innocent victim but his own wife. To William this wasn’t just a crime of English people, but a crime of civil English law which said such action was legal. Mel, as director, got his point across. Righteous indignation leading to action opposing civil evil was worth fighting, and yes even dying, for.

Why does House Congressman Dr. Ritze want to place a 10-Commandments monument outside the State Capitol building? I think his intent is fairly presented by our media. But why would he want this reminder of the Christian history of our state and nation so close to civil courtrooms? He freely admits there is no *legal* civil relevance today. Is he out to get a reaction from those who disagree? Is he simply wanting some kind of public debate on this?

I say, let’s go. Righteous indignation against this proposed law is deserved. The state (capitol building) needs to remain separated from the church (God’s 10 Commandments). History was then. Today is now and now people behave civilly one toward another not because of God’s 10 Commandments but because of — something else.

All is not lost if Ritze’s bill becomes law and passes judicial muster. The path will have been cleared. One may propose other granite monuments at no taxpayer expense of one’s own version of the 10 Commandments, or whatever else one believes defines (or should define) the civil conscience of a people.

In the process, one may come to believe True Christianity has no reasonable rivals. Perhaps this is Dr. Ritze’s real intent?

My wife and I attended the Radio City Rockettes Christmas
Spectacular here in Tulsa December 23rd. It was a good show.
It’s been a while since I took advantage of a top-notch
production such as this. It was rather sad that the BOK Center
was less than half full. It was definitely a ‘Christmas’
production and not merely a ‘holiday’ thing. Any doubt that
Christ was the center of Christmas was removed when the Santa
story gave way to Scripture reading, nativity scenes, and the
tunes and lyrics of familiar Christmas Carols such as the last
verse of ‘Joy to the World’:

He rules the world with truth and grace,
And makes the nations prove
The glories of His righteousness,
And wonders of His love,
And wonders of His love,
And wonders, wonders, of His love.

My wife and I have been studying the Bible book of Daniel. The
author of the study series, Beth Moore, relayed the historical
event Daniel foretold about Greece conquering the world. The
most important book to ever be assembled, was done during the
Greek empire: the Septuigent. This was the most common form of
the Old Testament during Christ’s lifetime on earth. The
ubiquitous Greek language was important in the spread of the
Gospel since all of the New Testament writers used Greek as the
language for, what were to become, the books of the New
Testament.

Much of the Greek empire ignored the “Most High God”. Even
Alexander the Great was cut down in his prime for his sin of
pride. Whether or not the high-kicking Rockettes appealed to
prurient interests the Christmas spectacular was successful in
Truth-telling that night; just as God used the Greek language to
spread His gospel.

This blog has been inactive for some time. I have had, at times, a lively discussion with others at the Ethics and Religious Liberty web site of the Southern Baptists (http://erlc.com/article/how-do-you-separate-church-and-state) where I’ve been discussing the idea of putting our Federal government back on the same foundation as our Declaration of Independence as well as most of the 13 State Constitutionss. This foundation, the God of the Bible, is not the same governmental foundation that Southern Baptists are proud of, i.e., American leaders such as Roger Williams and John LeLand. From their own writings these two believed political government was to be secular, not under the authority of the God of the Bible. This discussion had several posters come and go in the over-200 posts. Most simply gave their opinions politely rejecting mine. Truthfully, I don’t know what to say anymore. I have shared my opinion and tied it to exegesis of Scripture using citations and materials by Dr. Greg Bahnsen, and Dr. Gary North. I have asked for the Southern Baptist exegesis to justify a secular civil government and all that has been offered was “Harry’s vision of this stuff ignores large swathes of the New Testament and completely misrepresents the Gospel” by the ERLC moderator, Matt.

I keep asking for God’s mind in the matter as I pray for Matt and other posters in this situation. The answer seems to be that the lack of love within the body of Christ, which includes submitting to one another as Scripture reveals error, is simply missing. God’s Word says the world, non-believer, will be convinced Christians literally are who they say they are from their love one for each other. Maybe the sad state of Christianity in the Western world, including here in the USA, is for this very reason?

Are Southern Baptist political positions as voiced at erlc.com just another special intrest group pushing their opinions? Is it just another type of humanism because the authority of Jesus Christ over politics is denied in spite of the obvious Biblical source for these positions?

I attended the Republican District Convention yesterday. The convention began with a prayer offered in Jesus’ name. The enemy hasn’t taken all things – yet. Many candidates for delegate to the national republican convention were given time (1-3 minutes) to speak. I remember several stating they were a Christian. This was well and good but really didn’t offer much help in itself as to how they would behave as a national delegate. I actually respected the candidates who mentioned they would behave as a delegate according to the “rule of law” better. I don’t think I’ll soon forget the one candidate who started his speech by holding his Bible up high and saying in a loud voice “I believe in this”. I can’t say this is not relevant, but what is to prevent ‘red flags’ from going up in listener’s ears? “Does he believe the Bible as *I* do” one might ask? “Would he squash state’s rights in an effort to cram his view of biblical ethics down our throats at the federal level” another may ask?

Most Christian clergy don’t have a biblical political philosophy. How can we expect their members to have anything better? Yet, there is no avoiding it. Our opponents have a political philosophy and are carrying it out. A Christian must have an exegesis of political philosophy otherwise when Sally Kern says things like she did, who among us Christians have enough biblical understanding to either confirm or deny what she has said?

A fat person may still be healthy and may live to an age where obesity is not a cause of death. Maybe they know it is inherently wrong to be obese and thus set limits over themselves? Maybe the diets they call failures have actually been successes to keep them from becoming an unhealthy obese person? I have seen at least one obese person literally eat themselves to an early grave because they tossed aside doctor’s and other’s warnings. As a society we would silence ones evil enough to call obesity good, who desire to teach its benefit of ‘all the candy a child would want’. The evidence is in the much higher medical costs and mortality rates of the obesity proponents. So it is with sexual fornication and homosexuality in particular.

God goes even further. His law/history book is full of instruction as well as example of what happens to societies who condone this evil behavior.

But, does our society’s “rule of law” even permit sodomy, etc. to be enforcible any more?

In a conclusion of a long discussion with a Christian brother concerning the subject of political moral philosophy I resorted to name-calling. I called him both a pietist and antinomian with regard to this subject. His response: “Why do you insist on applying labels to me that you know I am not familiar with?” How does his response betray both his pietism and his antinomian belief?

Hints: from mirriamwebster.com:
pietism
1 capitalized : a 17th century religious movement originating in Germany in reaction to formalism and intellectualism and stressing Bible study and personal religious experience.
2 a: emphasis on devotional experience and practices b: affectation of devotion

antinomian
1 : one who holds that under the gospel dispensation of grace the moral law is of no use or obligation because faith alone is necessary to salvation.
2 : one who rejects a socially established morality

Jonathan V. Last wrote a column in the opinion section of the November 25th edition of the _Sunday Tulsa World_ newspaper. In “Morality: The only real legal argument” he presents an opinion of why a conservative should abolish the death penalty for most murderers.

I agree that of the three reasons given as to why the United States should or should not have capital punishment the one which applies is the moral issue. Constitutionality, or practicality hold no argument. I also agree with Jonathan that the moral question involves the state taking “divine authority unto itself”. His conclusion of this argument is true. “The enactment of capital punishment is something like the establishment of a state religion.”

Jonathan does a good job in a short amount of space to narrow the subject down to these valid points. Richard Land, of the Southern Baptist National Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission or Dr. James Dobson would be forced to take a different logical argument than I am about to make because they, in agreement with most of the Christian ethics experts, believe in a non-Christian pluralistic civil government.

Jonathan mentions “justice and mercy are necessarily in conflict” to say “society [should] choose mercy over justice”. Where he goes wrong is to hint that justice may simply go away. In a legal system where mercy is encouraged, justice is always served. Well, at least “justice” as defined by humans. Mercy involves voluntary behavior. Where is the “justice” in forcing taxpayers, maybe even close members of the victim’s family, to pay the cost of life-time imprisonment for the murderer? Isn’t this a perversion of Justice itself, i.e., “the state arrogates divine authority unto itself”? So logic says for the state to either enact or abolish capital punishment is something like the establishment of a state religion. Yes, the state must make moral and ethical decisions. There is no avoiding the fact, it is God-like activity.

The Bible is full of examples discussing capital punishment, and in some cases the murderer is not put to death. Consider King David. He committed adultery with Bathsheba then manipulated things to get her husband murdered. He thought he got away with it until he was confronted by Nathan, a prophet. Israel under King David arguably was the most obedient to the national civil law given in Torah. David knew that if any other person were King he would have been stoned to death. Psalm 51:4 gives David’s confession “against you, you only, have I sinned and done what is evil in your sight.” David realized that God placed the civil government and civil law and punishment as His vehicle for civil justice. This idea is repeated through the Old Testament where God judges nations, and not just Israel, for not following his standard of Righteousness and Justice. It is also confirmed in the New Testament in Romans 13 where the civil servant is described as God’s servant.

Although there may be argument about the mode of capital punishment, stoning vs more modern methods, capital punishment for first degree murder is wholly in line with God’s standard of Justice given in the Bible. In fact, wherever our civil government deviates from His Justice, we need to repent and resubmit to Scripture.

If 75% of Americans say they believe Jesus Christ was resurrected from the dead but only 25% believe the Bible is without error and useful for discerning good from evil then there are roughly 50% in the middle. When Americans were asked if they would describe themselves as being a “Christian”, 75% agreed it fits, but when actions are tested against a biblical worldview less than 5% of Americans line up. There’s even a bigger gap here.

Our company allows us Christians to gather at lunch time for a Bible study once a week. The latest chatter was astounding to me. One blurted out “It looks like Hillary is unstoppable”. Another said he was leaning toward Gulliani in spite of his bleak pro-life stand, but hoped Fred Thompson would turn into a viable candidate because he had a slightly better pro-life plank. These fellows had already dismissed Mike Huckabee for some reason (not viable?) and dismissed Ron Paul as an unelectable libertarian. One even told me his main source of news is National Public Radio (NPR) and he believed it to be relatively unbiased. What’s the point? Just as what a person eats affects a person’s growth, health, strength, energy, etc. so it is with information. If we accept information from ungodly sources it will be tainted with non-biblical worldviews which are difficult to discover or filter. As a result thinking will be non-biblical too. Hebrews, in chapter 5 verses 12-14, speaks to this using a similar food analogy. Why not read it?

Paul K. Blair wrote an essay on Article VI of the
U.S. Constitution titled _Original Intent?_. It may be found
here: http://www.reclaimoklahoma.org/OriginalIntentContents.htm.
Since he draws a different conclusion from what I believe the
facts – of today – present I shall address some of these facts
here.

I don’t dispute that the US was a Christian nation in the past.
In many respects it still is a Christian nation. I also don’t
dispute that there are some judges and Constitutional lawyers who
agree with Paul about the Christian (biblical) legal tenants still
continuing with legal force in our nation. Herb Titus is one.

In Paul’s introduction he does recognize that Islam doesn’t mix
with Christianity even in the subject of civil government. I
give him credit for that. I shudder to think of what worldview a
“Christian” legislator has who says a civil pledge on a Koran has
it’s legal place in the United States and has absolutely no plans
to change this legality! Thus, at least Paul has taken the first
step and admits that there is no religious philosophical
neutrality in government.

Paul says the meaning of the word “religion” has changed.
“Religion” to Paul today means any god-believing religion as well
as atheistic and various humanist philosophies. I agree.
However, when James Madison wrote the constitution stating “No
religious oath shall be required” Paul claims “religious” meant
religious sect or denomination [of the Christian faith].
However, John Leland, a contemporary of James Madison, pressed
him hard to add amendment 1 to the constitution. When James
Madison agreed John Leland rejoiced that it would be possible for
a “Pagan, Turk, Jew or Christian” to be eligible for any post or
office in the government. [The Writings of John Leland,
ed. L.F.Greene. New York: Arno Press, 1969, p.191.] The meaning
of “religion” was obvious to Leland and apparently also Madison,
the author of the document.

Does the Bible hold any authoritative jurisdiction in our civil
government today? A look at the two recent
10-Commandment-public-display Supreme Court cases will give an
answer. In both cases the defenders of public display argued
that the history of the 10-Commandments should be enough to
permit public displays to stand. The court made a distinction by
agreeing with these defendants in the Texas case permitting that
display to remain publicly displayed. Having God’s Commandments
displayed inside a courtroom in Pennsylvania was a different
matter. The U.S. Supreme Court ordered them removed.

Paul concludes his essay with a discussion about the Islamic
threat to our nation and proposes several ideas to overcome this
threat. Instead, I believe we need to answer this threat the way
the Bible teaches. Bible believing Christians who know civil
government must be placed under God’s authority need to first
repent. Then get with God’s program by pushing for passage of a
U.S. Constitutional amendment placing the Bible as the civil
backbone of our federal government. In the process of teaching
what Jesus has said “All authority in heaven and on earth has
been given unto me” ample opportunity to present the gospel will
surface. The Holy Spirit will do His job of drawing in all of
God’s elect. Then II Chronicles 7:14’s blessing will fall once
again on our nation.

Salvation starts a person on the road to heaven.
After salvation, sanctification, the process of
becoming holy or set apart for God's use, should
consume our remaining physical life-time.  When I
think of my past, perhaps one of the biggest earliest
milestones I remember was my desire to raise my sons
under God.  Since my own earthly father had died
years before I had had a bumpy road recognizing and
accepting my heavenly Father in every way as simply
"my father".  I can recall that prayer over 25 years
ago when I asked my heavenly Father for help; for
instructions in child rearing.  I reminded Him of his
promise "I will be a father to the fatherless".
In my sprit He answered: the instructions are in the
Bible.  He also instructed me that my sons would see
and develop an understanding of Him in proportion to
my own heavenly Father/son example. This task had not
just become a righteous responsibility but had become
my calling for the next 20 years or so. Was I a perfect
father?  no.  For example, I knew that when my action
was motivated by evil I needed to quickly confess and
ask for forgiveness, and yes even from my own sons.
I wanted to become "mature ... [one of those] who have
their powers of discernment trained by constant practice
to distinguish good from evil" [Hebrews 5:14].

About 15 years ago I prayed regularly and enjoyed reading the
Bible. I thought I was a good husband and father. I was
satisfied with my sanctification process but God was about to
replace my comfort with some thorns. Suddenly, I found that the
public schools began sex education for my 5th grade son.
I had learned from the Bible that education was my responsibility
and the kind of sex education the government would teach my
son would at worst be contradictory to my own teaching and at
best be sterilized of any biblical truths. When I asked why this
was happening I got the usual runaround: “My hands are tied,
in order to get [state/federal] money some bureaucrat you can’t
get to talk to right now decided this had to be done.” The
answer was a political one and it bothered me.

A fellow believer at my work helped me get started in political
research. He was shocked to find out that I only voted during
presidential elections. I knew little or nothing about the other
candidates or issues. He never accused me of sin but asked me to
consider taking the role of voting seriously. God brought
several verses to mind which worked conviction followed by
confession of sin, and a new desire to do my Lord’s will in this
area.

Luke 20:25 told me to give to our government those things which
it demanded, and to God those things that He demands. That this
command went beyond taxes to include my vote, however, were due
to other Scriptures. Romans 13:4 and 13:6 state 3 times that the
civil servant is God’s servant. The realization that the
U.S. government was not set up like the old Roman (Emperor)
monarchy sunk in. Christians designed our civil governments with
its citizens as the human civil authority (via the vote) under
God. I, Harry Rockefeller, am a civil servant here in the U.S.A.
To whom God has given much, much is required. To him that knows
to do good and doesn’t do it sins. I could no longer neglect
voting with a clear conscience.