American Dream – Thinking Accurately Education

Do you desire a better country?

The Bible, Christianity & American Government, Chapter 6:

The Embarkation of the Pilgrims

In 1532, Niccolo Machiavelli published his famous work on political theory, called “The Prince.” He had used Spain’s King Ferdinand (the same one who sent out Christopher Columbus) as a model for perfect governance.

Unfortunately, his model included brutality and ambition, and always endeavoring, “above all things,” to gain “the reputation of being a great and remarkable man” (like Nimrod at the Tower of Babel [see Genesis 10:10 and 11:1-9]), and to always keep “the minds of his people in suspense and admiration” of King Ferdinand and his ambitious pursuit of gold and glory.

Statue of Ferdinand in Greek/Roman style

Therefore, it should not surprise anyone that the Spanish Conquistadores who colonized America brought with them Machiavelli’s views that in politics, the end justifies the means and that political and public morality are unnecessary, and even to be avoided.

It is important that we understand that these are the fundamental ideas that the “Spanish Golden Age” was built on.

The Spanish Golden Age (the 1500s-1600s) may be considered to have been contemporaneous with what we often call the Renaissance, and its accompanying zeitgeist.

zeitgeist = "the defining spirit or mood of a particular period of history as shown by the ideas and beliefs of the time." (Bing)

The defining spirit of the Renaissance was “Rebirth,“ which sounds good… But it was actually only the rebirth of pagan Greek and Roman values and ideas that stood in direct contrast to those of Christianity, upon which Medieval Western Civilization had been built.

And interestingly–but not surprisingly–it was (this same) Ferdinand’s grandson, King Charles I of Spain, who later, as Holy Roman Emperor Charles V, would condemn the Christian reformer Martin Luther as a heretic, ban him as a political outlaw, and order his writings to be burned.

Yet, soon afterward, Luther working in hiding, translated the Bible into the common language of the German people, inspiring a young Englishman named William Tyndale who just happened to be living in exile in Luther’s hometown in Germany at the time. Tyndale then translated the Bible into English, and had it smuggled back into his home country in England.

60 years later, Charles’ son, Phillip II (Ferdinand’s great-grandson) became the champion of what became known as the Counter-Reformation.

The Counter Reformation was an all-out cultural, religious, and even military war intended to reverse the the work of Luther and Tyndale.

Philip II sent the Spanish Armada (the largest fleet ever seen in Europe up to that time) to attack England, and to restore the religious and political status quo of what had been Spain’s Golden Age. The Armada was destroyed by a storm.

In fact, the Spanish Armada was sent three times to destroy England–in 1588, 1596, and 1597–but it was destroyed three times, each time by bad weather!

Providentially, then, William Tyndale’s Bible seems to have ended up making its way into the hands of a generation of common Englishmen, just as their King Henry VIII was making himself the head of a whole new church in England, and just as England was preparing to replace Spain as a world power.

And it was these same Englishmen who brought that same Bible–and its ideas–to the New World.

In 1607, Captain John Smith was among 100 colonists who planted Jamestown in Virginia. In 1608, Smith became the leader of the community, and established measures to save it from ruin, including an instruction from the Bible.

“If anyone will not work, neither shall he eat”
2nd Thessalonians 3:10

This is not to say that Captain John Smith was, necessarily, a Christian–only that the Bible was already starting to affect the way that everyday people chose to live their lives.

But soon after (in 1620) a group of Christian people established Plymouth Plantation as a Christian community–based on the example of the early church (in the book of Acts).

Their Governor, William Bradford (in his book, Of Plimouth Plantation), called the Plymouth settlers pilgrims, referring to the New Testament book of Hebrews, chapter 11, verse 13.

The chapter goes on to say:

“…Those who say such things (calling themselves pilgrims) declare plainly that they seek a homeland. And truly if they had called to mind that country from which they had come out, they would have had opportunity to return. But now they desire a better, that is, a heavenly country...”
Hebrews 11:14-16

And that’s the way they lived. They left behind all that England was, and whatever comfort it had been for them, and looked forward to life in this New England, and what they dreamed would be a better world for them and their families.

Other Christians followed them to New England, setting up what they called the Massachusetts Bay Colony, Rhode Island, and Connecticut. The Governor of the Massachusetts colony, John Winthrop, saw New England prophetically, quoting from Matthew 5:14.

“For, we must consider (he wrote) that we shall be like a City upon a Hill; the eyes of all people are on us.”
John Winthrop, “A Model of Christian Charity,” 1630

And just a few years later, in 1639, Christians from the (then) small towns of Windsor, Hartford, and Wethersfield in Connecticut drew up “the first written constitution known to history...” The “Fundamental Orders” (as they called them) were based on a sermon by Reverend Thomas Hooker on May 31, 1638. The text for his sermon had been Deuteronomy 1:13.

“Choose wise, understanding, and knowledgeable men from among your tribes, and I will make them heads over you…”
Deuteronomy 1:13

In his sermon, Hooker asserted that based on the Old Testament example of the ancient Israelites (which was imitated by early Christians in the New Testament book of Acts), “the foundation of authority is laid in the free consent of the people…”

That idea could not have come out of the Spanish Golden Age. It could not have come out of the Renaissance, or the thought of Machiavelli.

The Bible says that:

“Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.”
2 Corinthians 3:17

But the Bible also says that:

“The whole creation groans and labors with birth pangs (because it has been subjected to corruption) …”
Romans 8:20

That is why the American experience has not matched up with the prophetic voices of Winthrop and Hooker, or all their hopes and dreams for America.

But one day,

America and “the creation itself…will be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the (revelation of the) children of God…”
Romans 8:19, 21

It is time for the children of God in America to shake off the chains of corruption, to step out of the grave-clothes of past experience, and to walk in what has been prophesied over this land.

That is our legacy (and America’s legacy), and (as John Winthrop wrote) “the eyes of all people (shall be) upon us.”

Christianity, Christmas & Capitalism

The Bible, Christianity & American Government, Chapter 5:

“Then Pharaoh said to Joseph: ‘Behold, in my dream I stood on the bank of the river. Suddenly seven cows came up out of the river, fine looking and fat; and they fed in the meadow. Then behold, seven other cows came up after them, poor and very ugly and gaunt, such ugliness as I have never seen in all the land of Egypt. And the gaunt and ugly cows ate up the first seven, the fat cows. When they had eaten them up, no one would have known that they had eaten them, for they were just as ugly as at the beginning. So I awoke. Also I saw in my dream, and suddenly seven heads came up on one stalk, full and good. Then behold, seven heads, withered, thin, and blighted by the east wind, sprang up after them. And the thin heads devoured the seven good heads. So I told this to the magicians, but there was no one who could explain it to me.'”
Genesis 41:17-24

“Then Joseph said to Pharaoh, ‘The dreams of Pharaoh are one; God has shown Pharaoh what He is about to do…'” (Genesis 41:25)

“The seven good cows are seven years, and the seven good heads are seven years; the dreams are one. And the seven thin and ugly cows which came up after them are seven years, and the seven empty heads blighted by the east wind are seven years of famine. This is the thing which I have spoken to Pharaoh. God has shown Pharaoh what He is about to do. Indeed seven years of great plenty will come throughout all the land of Egypt; but after them seven years of famine will arise, and all the plenty will be forgotten in the land of Egypt; and the famine will deplete the land. So the plenty will not be known in the land because of the famine following, for it will be very severe. And the dream was repeated to Pharaoh twice because the thing is established by God, and God will shortly bring it to pass.“
Genesis 41:26-32

God knew that a famine was coming upon Egypt, and God warned Pharaoh ahead of time.

Why do you think He did that?

In the New Testament–in 2 Peter 3:9–God tells us that He is “not willing that any should perish…”

In fact, in another place, it tells us:

“Look at the birds of the air, for they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not of more value than they?”
Matthew 6:26

And the apostle Paul, quoting from a classic Greek poem, Phaenomena, by the Greek poet Aratus, alluded to the “Father-heart” of God:

“For we are also His offspring.”
Acts 17:28

The Bible characterizes the relationship between our Father in heaven and Economic Theory here on earth in this way:

“God is our refuge and strength,
A very present help in trouble.”
Psalm 46:1

And as we have illustrated in previous chapters, this was the Economic worldview of William Penn, Benjamin Franklin, and Thomas Jefferson–in fact it was part of the Judeo-Christian tradition that our country was built on (see our book, Let’s Think Together [available on Amazon], p. 14).

Moses on the U.S. Supreme Court building

Yet, today, some people are trying to move our country away from this tradition. Today, some people want to move, instead, toward creating a Secular State. And they want to build this Secular State upon the Doctrine of Socialism, which may be considered–like the movements that led to it (Unitarianism and Transcendentalism)–to be a Christian heresy.

heresy = "belief or opinion contrary to orthodox religious  doctrine (especially Christian)." (Bing)

Some people today claim that, “The ideas of early American socialism evolved out of Christian thought.” But that is very much a misunderstanding of Biblical Teaching.

There is no question that Jesus cared about the poor. He began His earthly ministry by quoting from the book of the Old Testament prophet Isaiah:

“The Spirit of the LORD is upon Me, because He has anointed Me to preach the gospel to the poor; He has sent Me to heal the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives and recovery of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed…”
Luke 4:18

And later, He taught:

“Blessed are the poor in spirit,
For theirs is the kingdom of heaven.”
Matthew 5:3

And:

‘“When you give a dinner or a supper, do not ask your friends, your brothers, your relatives, nor rich neighbors, lest they also invite you back, and you be repaid. But when you give a feast, invite the poor, the maimed, the lame, the blind. And you will be blessed, because they cannot repay you; for you shall be repaid at the resurrection of the just.”
Luke 14:12-14

Jesus obviously taught that we should take care of the least among us (Matthew 25:40).

But nowhere did He indicate that we are under some kind of compulsion–religious or governmental–to give to others. In fact, He taught the opposite:

“Is it not lawful for me to do what I wish with my own things?”
Matthew 20:15

And the apostle Paul confirmed this:

“So let each one give as he purposes in his heart, not grudgingly or of necessity; for God loves a cheerful giver.”
Second Corinthians 9:7

A wonderful illustration of this is found in Charles Dickens’ A Christmas Carol.

At first, Ebenezer Scrooge is described as:

“A tight-fisted hand at the grindstone… A squeezing, wrenching, grasping, scraping, clutching, covetous, old sinner!
A Christmas Carol, Charles Dickens, 1843, 165th Anniversary Edition, p. 3

And when two philanthropic business men stop by his office to ask for a charitable donation for the poor and destitute, Scrooge responds:

“Are there no prisons? …And the Union workhouses? …Are they still in operation?

And when they they reluctantly agree that they are, Scrooge goes on to say:

…Oh! I was afraid, from what you said at first, that something had occurred to stop them in their useful course… I am very glad to hear it.”
A Christmas Carol, Charles Dickens, 1843, 165th Anniversary Edition, p. 3

There is no question that Scrooge started out as a hard man. Yet at the end of the story, the much-changed Scrooge is described this way:

“To Tiny Tim, who did NOT die, he was a second father. He became as good a friend, as good a master, and as good a man as the good old City knew, or any other good old city, town, or borough in the good old world… And it was always said of him that he knew how to keep Christmas well, if any man alive possessed the knowledge…”
A Christmas Carol, Charles Dickens, 1843, 165th Anniversary Edition, p. 11

Did a government program change Scrooge? Did the Home Office or the Metropolitan Police have to force him to change his ways?

Take a look at another, similar example from the Bible:

“Then Jesus entered and passed through Jericho. Now behold, there was a man named Zacchaeus who was a chief tax collector, and he was rich.”
Luke 19:1-2

And when he met Jesus, he changed–very much like Ebenezer Scrooge.

The Bible says:

“Then Zacchaeus stood and said to the Lord, ‘Look, Lord, I give half of my goods to the poor; and if I have taken anything from anyone by false accusation, I restore fourfold.'”
Luke 19:8

No one had to coerce Zacchaeus. An experience with Jesus changed his heart. And he didn’t need a government to “redistribute” his wealth. He did it himself, and he did it willingly.

About three hundred years ago, a minister named Jonathan Edwards, commonly referred to as “America’s greatest theologian,” preached his way through the “Great Awakening” in colonial America. His preaching is known to have resulted in “faintings, uncontrollable weeping, and screaming,” and a number of people reacted against it by separating themselves from what they called “revivalist emotionalism.” Alternatively, they established what became “the liberal wing of Christianity,” which morphed, first, into Unitarianism, and then, Transcendentalism. This is where the modern understanding of “Political Liberalism” (in the sense of social reform) began.

Early socialist experiments were Brook Farm (1841), New Harmony (1825), The Rappite Community (1815), and the Oneida Community (1841). All failed. But the Utopian Socialist dream is still alive, and Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez are representatives of it.

American citizens are free to support their ideas if they so choose. But, let us not try to justify it with any half-baked nonsense about attributing such notions to the Bible or to Christ Himself. That they are not free to do.

Also available as a podcast at Apple Podcasts or Podbean.

Also available on YouTube.

See our book on Worldviews.

The Bible, Christianity & American Government

Chapter 3: God’s Plan for Self-Government

Genesis 3 details the historical account of the “fall” of Adam & Eve, and how they were turned out of paradise (the Garden of Eden). Adam became a farmer, and later, in Genesis 5:28-29, we see that Adam’s descendants, the children of his son Seth, even hundred of years later, were still farmers.

Each man was commanded (in Genesis 2:24) to “leave his father and mother” and “cleave to his wife.” These were new commands, added to the earlier ones (back in Genesis 1:28-29). So each family was to establish a new, independent household, just as people do today.

Think of “Little House on the Prairie” or the 1991 movie, “Sarah, Plain and Tall“–homesteads spread out from each other, several hours, or perhaps a day’s travel, but not totally isolated from each other. Though always honoring their parents, the new couple would no longer be subject to them.

subject = "Being under the power and dominion of another." (Webster's 1828 Dictionary)

In taking on the responsibilities of managing this new, independent household, they became–for all intents and purposes–their parents’ equals. It became the man’s responsibility to provide for and build a home for his wife and their children. The wife was his companion and helpmate (see Genesis 2:18). The husband/father answered directly to God, and was directly responsible to Him for how he lived, how he treated his wife, and they were both responsible for how they raised their children.

They were to owe no man anything, and they were totally free to enjoy their God-given rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Each family tilled their own land, tended their own field, garden, and orchard–though they were also free to pursue their individual gifts and talents. One man, who lived by a stream, might build and operate a mill. A person might choose to operate a loom, or a forge.

But if a miller, or weaver, or smith did not do the work he had promised to do, his customers had no government to go to for satisfaction. Business dealings were done by covenant, an agreement between the two parties that was considered to be enforced, when necessary, by God Himself.

Thomas Jefferson once wrote that:

“Those who labor on the earth are the chosen people of God…whose breasts He has made His peculiar deposit for substantial and genuine virtue.”
Thomas Jefferson, 1787, Notes on the State of Virginia

That well describes the culture of the early patriarchs. But it wasn’t easy to be a farmer. You had to get up early in the morning to begin a long day of work; and you had many responsibilities. If you don’t milk the cow, it will stop giving milk. If you don’t feed the chickens, they will stop laying eggs. If you don’t plant your crops, you will have no harvest. In short, if you don’t work, you don’t eat.

And if you’re a day’s travel from your neighbors’ house, you have to learn how to do a lot of things yourself. Think of that Mel Gibson movie from 1984, The River. If your roof leaks, you learn to mend it yourself. If your equipment needs repair, you learn to repair it yourself. In other words, you become self-reliant (see Proverbs 6:6-11).

Many of Seth’s descendants were the kind of people that Jefferson would later say possessed “substantial and genuine virtue”

Yet, at the same time, another culture also existed, the descendants of Adam’s other son Cain, which began with the building of the first city (Genesis 4:16-17). Contrast their lifestyle to Seth’s farming community. If your roof leaks, you call the landlord. If something needs to be repaired, you take it to the repairmen. If your tools need sharpening, you go the hardware store. If you need bread, you buy it at the bakery. In other words, you become dependent.

In his same Notes on the State of Virginia, Thomas Jefferson wrote:

“Dependence begets subservience and venality, suffocates the germ of virtue, and prepares fit tools for the designs of ambition.”
Thomas Jefferson, 1787, Notes on the State of Virginia

And in the Bible, we find this:

“For I have seen violence and strife in the city. Day and night they go around on its walls; iniquity and trouble are also in the midst of it.”
Psalm 55:9

But Seth’s descendants looked at the glitter of urban life–the beautiful starlets and the famous personalities. And they traded away what they now saw as their simple, unsophisticated farms. But at what cost? They chose not to see the difference in the values of the culture they were becoming part of.

One of Cain’s descendants said this, admiring and wanting to imitate his famous ancestor:

“…I have killed a man for wounding me, even a young man for hurting me. If Cain shall be avenged sevenfold, then Lamech seventy-sevenfold.”
Genesis 4:23-24

Even though Cain had murdered his own brother, his descendants still thought of him as a great man, and tried to follow in his footsteps. And Seth’s descendants closed their eyes to the violence and strife, and closed their ears to to the cries of the oppressed, even though they knew it was wrong. And when the Great Flood came, both cultures were destroyed, except for 8 people–the family of Noah. And after the flood, Noah went back to farming.

However, the people–Noah’s descendants–began again to build a city–known as Babel (see Genesis 11).

William Penn, a wise man, and the founder of the state of Pennsylvania once said:

“Those people who will not be governed by God will be ruled by tyrants.”
William Penn, 1668, “The Sandy Foundation Shaken“

And the Bible–in Genesis 10:8-12–tells us about the world’s first tyrant, Nimrod.

Why do you think the Bible tells us that Nimrod was a mighty hunter? What do you think that has to do with his rise to power?

In any case, he was what the King James version of the Bible calls a man of renown (see Genesis 6:4).

And the Bible quotes Jesus as saying something about men of renown:

“The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them, and those who exercise authority over them are called ‘benefactors.’”
Luke 22:25

Here’s a quote from John Locke, a famous English philosopher who is often called the “Father of Liberalism.”:

“A man may owe honor and respect to an ancient, or wise man…and gratitude to a benefactor…but all these give no authority, no right to any one, of making laws over him from who they are owing.”
John Locke, 1689, SECOND TREATISE OF GOVERNMENT

It sounds like Locke was agreeing with Jesus’ criticism of the great men of His time. And later, Alexis de Tocqueville, from whom we have quoted before, gave this warning to his friends in America:

“It would seem that if despotism were to be established among the democratic nations of our days, it might assume a different character; it would be more extensive and more mild; it would degrade men without tormenting them…”
Alexis de Tocqueville, 1840, Democracy in America

despotism = "The exercise of absolute power, especially in a cruel and oppressive way." (Bing)

Remember that de Tocqueville was a Frenchman, and he was writing in the 1800’s:

He went on to say:

“It would be like the authority of a parent if, like that authority, its object was to prepare men for manhood; but it seeks, on the contrary, to keep them in perpetual childhood… For their happiness such a government willingly labors, but it chooses to be the sole agent and the only arbiter of that happiness; it provides for their security, foresees and supplies their necessities, facilitates their pleasures, manages their principal concerns, directs their industry, regulates the descent of property, and subdivides their inheritances: What remains, but to spare them all the care of thinking and all the trouble of living?
“…Thus it every day renders the exercise of the free agency of man less useful and less frequent; it circumscribes the will within a narrower range and gradually robs a man of all the uses of himself. The principle of equality has prepared men for these things; it has predisposed men to endure them and to often look on them as benefits.
“After having thus successively taken each member of the community in its powerful grasp and fashioned him at will, the supreme power then extends its arm over the whole community. It covers the surface of society with a network of small complicated rules, minute and uniform, through which the most original minds and most energetic characters cannot penetrate, to rise above the crowd. The will of man is not shattered, but softened, bent, and guided; men are seldom forced by it to act, but they are constantly restrained from acting. Such a power does not destroy, but it prevents existence; it does not tyrannize, but it compresses, enervates, extinguishes, and stupefies a people, till each nation is reduced to nothing better than a flock of timid and industrious animals, of which the government is the shepherd.”
Alexis de Tocqueville, 1840, Democracy in America

The Bible says this:

“Wisdom is better than strength… Words of the wise, spoken quietly, should be heard rather than the shout of a ruler of fools. Wisdom is better than weapons of war…”
Ecclesiastes 9:16-18

And it says this:

“The wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, willing to yield, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality and without hypocrisy.”
James 3:17

What can we do to gain such wisdom? We can listen to the words of those who have gone before us, and learn from their experience. Maybe Thomas Jefferson, Alexis de Tocqueville, and William Penn have something they can teach us–even us, in the 21st century.

Available on podcast and YouTube:

Also, see our book on Worldviews:

“Wait for It…” (“What are you waiting for?”)

“Wait for It”

By now, most of us have seen the musical, “Hamilton.” (If not, I recommend you do!) The musical centers around the relationship between founding fathers Alexander Hamilton and “Aaron Burr, Sir.“

The men, Hamilton and Burr, remind one of several famous several pairs of counterparts in the Bible, such as Abraham and Lot, Jacob and Esau, and even Moses and the Pharaoh of Egypt.

First, let’s look at Abraham and Lot–the differences between them. Abraham is often referred to as a man of faith, though he screwed up a number times.

Genesis 12:1, God says to Abraham (then known as Abram), “Go…to the land that I will show you…”
Genesis 12:4 tells us, “So Abram went…”
Verse 7 “He built an altar to the Lord…”
Verse 8, he built another altar.
Genesis 13:8-9, there’s quarreling between Abram’s men, and his nephew, Lot’s.
The two men choose to separate.
Abram lets Lot choose west or east.
Verse 10, Lot chooses the east–the “better” land (the Jordan Valley).
Verse 12-13, that includes the city of Sodom.
Genesis 13:14-17, God’s promise to Abraham (not including Lot):

“Lift up thy eyes, and look from the place wherein thou now art, to the north and to the south, to the east and to the west. All the land which thou seest, I will give to thee, and to thy seed for ever.”
Genesis 13:14-17

Verse 18, Abram built another altar to the Lord.
Genesis 15:6 “(Abram, now called Abraham) believed the Lord, and He credited it to him as righteousness. In other words, despite Abraham’s failures, God considered him to be a righteous man.

righteousness = "the quality or state of being just or rightful." (Dictionary.com)

We’ve all got to have something to believe in.

A song in the “Hamilton” musical says: Hamilton doesn’t hesitate.” Hamilton held strong beliefs, and acted on them. But the song points out that Burr was, instead, “lying in wait.” Burr was what the Bible calls “double-minded”

The Greek word originally used in the Bible to describe that is dipsos, which is G1373 in Stong’s Concordance: “wavering, uncertain, divided in interest, vacillating.”

Abraham’s nephew, Lot, was like that.

Genesis 19: 7, Lot calls the wicked men of Sodom, “my brothers.”
Verse 8, he offers his own daughters to the men of Sodom.
Verse 9, the men of Sodom treat him like a hypocrite, saying, “he’s acting like a judge!”

In the Hebrew, the word that’s used is shaphat, H8199 (to act as law-giver).

Verse 14, When Lot advises them to flee the city for safety, “his sons-in-law thought he was joking”
Verse 18 When the angels tell Lot to flee to the mountains, Lot replies, “No, my lords—please…I can’t run to the mountains…I will die. Look, this town is close…Please let me go there…”
Verses 30-36, It didn’t turn out well.

But 2 Peter 2:8 calls Lot:

“The just soul…”
Douay-Rheims Bible

Other translations call him:

“That righteous man”
King James Version

How can that be?

Is it possible that right-standing with God is based on our beliefs (despite our less-than-virtuous behavior)?

In Genesis 25:34, we find the statement, “Esau despised his birthright.”

despise = "feel contempt or a deep repugnance for." (Bing)

The Hebrew word the Bible uses is bazah, which is H959 in Stong’s Concordance: “to despise, hold in contempt, disdain.”

Even a cursory look at the book of Genesis shows that Jacob did not have sterling character, but there was a difference between he and Esau, just as we will see that there was between Hamilton and Burr.

To begin with, as we said before, Esau revealed his character, see Gen 25:31).

This seems reminiscent to Shakespeare’s:

“This above all- to thine own self be true…”
Hamlet, Act I, Scene 3

Peoples’ choices–often made when under pressure, quite often end up determining their destinies.

From this perspective, let’s look at Alexander Hamilton and Aaron Burr’s early lives.

Their love stories and the births of their children could have been an opportunity for both men to turn their hearts in God’s direction.

In the song, “Dear Theodosia,” Burr says, “When you cried, you broke my heart.” Hamilton says, “When you smile I am undone… I fall apart, and I thought I was so smart.“

The Bible says:

“The Lord is near to the broken-hearted…”
Psalm 34:18

And:

“The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit; a broken and contrite heart…”
Psalm 51:17

This reminds one of David, the man who committed adultery with Bathsheba and had her husband Uriah killed.

But in the New Testament he is called:

“A man after mine own heart…”
Acts 13:22

So what did happen to Hamilton and Burr?

In the song, “It’s Quiet Uptown,” Alexander Hamilton says, ““I take the children to church on Sunday / A sign of the cross at the door / And I pray / That never used to happen before.” In Ron Chernow’s biography of Hamilton, which was the inspiration for the musical, he writes: “It is striking how religion preoccupied Hamilton during his final years.”

♫“Forgiveness, can you imagine?”♫

The grace of God was available to both Hamilton and Burr’s lives, just as it had been to both Jacob and Esau. Yet, their legacies are the result of their choices.

The New Testament, looking back on Esau’s life in hindsight, calls him:

“(An) ‘immoral (and) godless person…who sold his own birthright for a single meal…though he sought for (the blessing) with tears.”
Hebrews 12:16-17

Under pressure–when “push came to shove“–Esau revealed his true nature by his choices. And this was the case with Hamilton and Burr.

In 1800, Aaron Burr had been elected Vice-President under Jefferson, but Jefferson said of him:

“[H]is conduct very soon inspired me with distrust…I habitually cautioned Mr. Madison against trusting him too much.”
Thomas Jefferson (Notes on a Conversation with Aaron Burr, January 26, 1804)

“I have a tender reliance on the mercy of the Almighty, through the merits of the Lord Jesus Christ.” and “I am a sinner. I look to His mercy.”
Alexander Hamilton

“On that subject I am coy.”
Last words of Aaron Burr

Burr’s enigmatic legacy, once considered a patriot hero, but later a rogue and probably, a conspirator in a “treasonable scheme” to take up arms against the government and seize land in the frontier of the Louisiana Purchase.

Burr’s is a notorious case. But was he outside the reach of God’s grace? That is a not only a profound question, but also a very practical one, that has ramifications for all of us. One might say that it (God’s grace) “doesn’t discriminate between the sinners and the saints.“

In fact, the Bible distinctly says that:

“The Lord does not delay His promise, as some understand delay, but is patient with you, not wanting any to perish but all to come to repentance.”
2 Peter 3:9

Does that mean that God’s promises are for everybody–that God’s “salvation” is universal?

No, but it is available to all who accept it, in spite of anything they may have done, in the same way that Hamilton seems to have done.

But is it possible to resist God’s grace?

Yes, we know that Esau must have rejected it (Hebrews 12:16-17).

Lot, though he seems to be a lot like Esau, did not. How do we know? (2 Peter 2:7).

Hamilton seems to have not.

“It is striking how religion preoccupied Hamilton during his final years.”
Ron Chernow

This apparent mystery is made clear in the story of Moses and Pharaoh, king of Egypt. Why? The Bible tells us that Pharaoh, like Esau, despised God.

despise = "feel contempt or a deep repugnance for." (Bing)

“Pharaoh said, ‘Who is the LORD, that I should obey his voice…?'”
Exodus 5:2

God was aware that Pharaoh held him in low esteem. But God did not react to Pharaoh in indignation.

indignation = "anger or annoyance provoked by what is perceived as unfair treatment."

Instead God gave Pharaoh ten opportunities to turn to humble himself before Him. But Pharaoh did not.

Have you ever seen the movie and TV show, Stargate SG-1? They really did an excellent job with their visualizations of the Goa’uld as the rulers of ancient Egypt.

These were wicked, evil, and arrogant people. And, like a lot of people in powerful positions, they were paranoid and petty.

“Ye shall no more give the people straw to make brick, as heretofore: let them go and gather straw for themselves.“
Exodus 5:7

Think of Henry VIII of England.

God brought ten plagues upon the land of Egypt. Why?

The Bible tells us:

“The Egyptians shall know that I am the LORD, when I stretch forth mine hand upon Egypt…”
Exodus 7:5

People will argue that God hardened Pharaoh’s heart. That’s true. But do you not know that God allows all of our hearts to be hardened, if we allow it? It’s true. Each “plague” that life throws in our path is an opportunity for us to harden our hearts, to raise a fist toward the heavens and curse God (Sovereign of the Universe). It may be a mystery, but it’s not a secret.

It’s simple. God wants us to want Him. Why? Is God insecure? No, God only wants authentic believers in His kingdom.

authentic = "not false or imitation" (Mirriam-Webster)

“Now for a little while…you have been grieved by various trials, that the genuineness of your faith…may be found to praise, honor, and glory at the revelation of Jesus Christ.”
1 Peter 1:6-7

“The Father seeketh such to worship Him.”
John 4:23

“I love those who love Me, and those who seek Me find Me.”
Proverbs 8:17

“You will seek me and find me when you seek me with all your heart.”
Jeremiah 29:13

“The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by human hands. And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything. Rather, he himself gives everyone life and breath and everything else. From one man he made all the nations, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he marked out their appointed times in history and the boundaries of their lands. God did this so that they would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from any one of us.”
Acts 17:24-27

That is why the Bible tells us at least three different times:

“Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your heart…”
Psalm 95:6-11; Hebrews 3:7-19; Hebrews 4:1-8 (and see Deuteronomy 1:26-38)

Like Aaron Burr (who lost his wife, grandson, and precious daughter), Pharaoh lost his own son–his heir.

“And Pharaoh rose up in the night, he, and all his servants, and all the Egyptians; and there was a great cry in Egypt; for there was not a house where there was not one dead. And he called for Moses and Aaron by night, and said, Rise up, and get you forth from among my people, both ye and the children of Israel; and go, serve the LORD…”
Exodus 12:30-31

And like Burr, Pharaoh–even at that point, even after all that suffering–turned away from all those opportunities to humble himself, to soften his heart, and to accept God’s grace.

“And it was told the king of Egypt that the people fled: and the heart of Pharaoh and of his servants was turned against the people, and they said, ‘Why have we done this, that we have let Israel go from serving us?’ …And he took six hundred chosen chariots, and all the chariots of Egypt, and captains over every one of them… And the Egyptians pursued, and went in after them to the midst of the sea, even all Pharaoh’s horses, his chariots, and his horsemen… And the waters returned, and covered the chariots, and the horsemen, and all the host of Pharaoh that came into the sea after them; there remained not so much as one of them…. But the children of Israel walked upon dry land in the midst of the sea; and the waters were a wall unto them on their right hand, and on their left.”
Exodus 14:5-29

Grace is always available to those who turn to God. And He, in His mercy redeems our life–our story.

redeem = "to buy back, repurchase;" "to free from captivity by payment of ransom;" "to extricate from or help to overcome something detrimental;" "to release from blame or debt, clear;" "to free from the consequences of sin." (Mirriam-Webster)

So what about you? What are you waiting for?

Will you accept God’s offer of reconciliation and redemption? Will you accept His grace?

Democracy is close to godliness, isn’t it?

The Ox-Bow Incident, 1943

In “The Ox-Bow Incident,” made in 1943, we get a very clear portrayal of democracy in action.

democracy = "comes from two Greek words that mean people (demos) and rule (kratos)." (National Geographic)

democracy = "government by the people, especially : rule of the majority." (Mirriam-Webster)

Genesis 12 begins the story of how God, in much the same way that He had previously chosen the individual man–Noah–to save the human race, selected a particular family of people–a tribe, if you will, to become his chosen people, to be His representatives to the rest of humanity.

We learn later, in the books of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy, that God’s chosen form of government is actually theocracy.

theocracy = "The Jews were under the direct government of God himself. The nation was in all things subject to the will of their invisible King." (Easton's Bible Dictionary)

Is the implication, then, that God wants the whole human race to enter into that type of system of government?

Well, yes, as a matter of fact, except that Jesus (the “Son of God”) will temporarily reign until He turns rule of all things to His Father.

“And Jesus coming, spoke to them, saying: ‘All power is given to Me in heaven and in earth.'”
Matthew 28:18

“For He must reign, until he hath put all his enemies under his feet.”
1 Corinthians 15:25

However, until Christ returns to do that, God has left it to men to rule themselves.

Interestingly, when the American colonists set up their brand-new experiments in self-rule, they did not choose a democracy. The question to carefully consider is why not?

“The founders feared that passions could arouse the public, and national policy could become hostage to these passions. Therefore, they wanted men mediating between public opinion and national policy. They also expected these men to be of substance and property, with much to lose from error and also more difficult to corrupt.”
Huffington Post, 11/17/2016

“Democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and in general have been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths
James Madison, Federalist Papers No. 10

No discussion of governmental systems would be complete, I think, without a glance at King Nebuchadnezzar’s dream, interpreted by Daniel in Daniel 2.

The statue above indicates a series of “world” governments, beginning with the Neo-Babylonian Empire (represented here by the gold head) and including the Persian Empire (silver chest & arms), Macedonian Empire (brass abdomen), and Roman Empire–and all its reiterations (iron legs). The interesting thing about the statue, though, are its feet–a combination of the iron left over from the Roman Empire (think of it’s tyrannical strength) and clay.

What does that make you think of?

The Western Roman Empire fell in about the fifth century. Yet its legacy carried on, most immediately through Emperor Constantine and his cooperation with the Catholic Church, which became the most powerful organization in Europe. Out of that came association eventually came Charlemagne and the “Holy Roman Empire,” which lasted for about 1000 years. This empire was known as “the First Reich.” The “Second Reich” was the German empire that was ruled by Otto von Bismark, William I and II, that led to the First World War. You may remember that William II was known as “the Kaiser.”

kaiser = "Kaiser is the German title meaning "Emperor". Like the Russian Tsar it is directly derived from the Roman Emperors' title of Caesar..." (Definitions.net)

The “Third Reich” as you probably know, was “the official official Nazi designation for the regime in Germany from January 1933 to May 1945…“

There are still ways that the legacy of the Roman Empire lives on in Europe, England and even in the United States of America.

But what about the “iron mixed with clay?”

The main difference today between the governmental systems of most of the statue in Nebuchadnezzar’s dream is that all of the empires mentioned above were ruled by a dictator, while most of the modern countries are considered democracies.

democracy = 'control of an organization or group by the majority of its members;the practice or principles of social equality." (Bing)

That seems to make sense to me, that people would want to rule themselves by democracy, rather than submit to a dictatorship.

dictatorship = "autocracy (a system of government by one person with absolute power), absolute authority in any sphere." (Bing)

Then, let me ask you a question: Why doesn’t the malleable clay REPLACE the iron in Nebuchadnezzar’s dream?

malleable = "easily influenced; pliable" (Bing)

“And whereas thou sawest the iron mixed with miry clay… but they shall not stick fast one to another, as iron cannot be mixed with clay.”
Daniel 2:43

Rather than replace the iron, the clay attempts to mix with it, but it is not possible. Eventually, under enough pressure the weaker, brittle clay will fall off. And only iron will remain.

In the book, How Should We Then Live?, Dr. Francis A. Schaeffer wrote (in 1976):

“Overwhelming pressures are being brought to bear on people who have no absolutes… The pressures are progressively preparing modern people to accept a manipulative, authoritarian government.. If these pressures do continue to mount, which seems probable, do you think people, young or old, will at great cost to themselves, at the cost of their present personal peace and affluence, stand up for liberty or for the individual? …When these outward forms are imposed on (their) wordview (which) would never have produced freedom without chaos in the first place, people will not stand when the pressures increase… As the memory of the Christian base grows ever dimmer, freedom will disintegrate…”
Dr. Francis A. Schaeffer, “How Should We Then Live,” 1976

Is that the future you want?

Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness

“I will require the blood of your lives… at the hand of every man, and of his brother, will I require the life of man.
Genesis 9:5

This is a verse of the Bible that can probably be easily overlooked, but it really is quite foundational to the world you probably want to live in.

In other words, God was letting mankind know that He was going to hold individuals accountable for how they treated their fellow man. This was the beginning of a foundation for civil law.

Later, when Moses wrote what is known as the Pentateuch (the first five books of the Old Testament), he included what is known as the Mosaic Law. However, in the New Testament, Paul (the apostle) gave us a new understanding of each individual’s moral responsibility for his own actions:

“The law is not made for the just man, but for the unjust and disobedient, for the ungodly, and for sinners, for the wicked and defiled, for murderers of fathers, and murderers of mothers, for manslayers…”
1 Timothy 1:9

In the French Revolution that began in 1789, and the “Reign of Terror” that followed it, people died. The king, Louis XVI, died. His queen, Marie-Antoinette, died. In fact, 40, 000 people died before it was said and done, including the Rebellion’s architect, Maximilien Robespierre.

In that same year, 1789, the U.S. Constitution was ratified.

And (wisely) founding father John Adams wrote this about it:

“Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”
in a speech to the military in 1798

The American government was not designed–and not really equipped–to control the behavior of people who habitually choose to do wrong things.

Years later, Abraham Lincoln (the President who issued the Emancipation Proclamation–freeing American slaves) would quote from the Bible–quoting Proverbs 25:11–when he wrote that the Constitution acted as a “picture of silver” framed around an “apple of gold” (the Declaration of Independence).

And many years after that, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. spoke these words:

“It wouldn’t take us long to discover the substance of (the American) dream. It is found in those majestic words of the Declaration of Independence, words lifted to cosmic proportions: ‘We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by God, Creator, with certain inalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.’ This is a dream. It’s a great dream….”
from A Knock at Midnight: Inspiration from the Great Sermons of Reverend Martin, Peter Holloran, et al. | Jan 1, 2000

Dr. King went on to say, “..That dream goes on to say another thing that ultimately distinguishes our nation and our form of government from any totalitarian system in the world. It says that each of us has certain basic rights that are neither derived from or conferred by the state. In order to discover where they came from, it is necessary to move back behind the dim mist of eternity. They are God-given, gifts from His hands. Never before in the history of the world has a sociopolitical document expressed in such profound, eloquent, and unequivocal language the dignity and the worth of human personality. The American dream reminds us, and we should think about it anew on this Independence Day, that every man is an heir of the legacy of dignity and worth…”

Then he said:

“Now ever since the founding fathers of our nation dreamed this dream in all of its magnificence…America has been something of a schizophrenic personality, tragically divided against herself. On the one hand we have proudly professed the great principles of democracy, but on the other hand we have sadly practiced the very opposite of those principles.
Dr. Martin Luther King, on “The American Dream”

And on July 4, 1965, when he spoke those words in Atlanta, Dr. King was 100 percent right.

Why? Why was the “dream” of America out of reach for so many black-skinned people?

“You see, the founding fathers were really influenced by the Bible. The whole concept of the imago dei, as it is expressed in Latin, the ‘image of God,’ is the idea that all men have something within them that God injected. Not that they have substantial unity with God, but that every man has a capacity to have fellowship with God. And this gives him a uniqueness, it gives him worth, it gives him dignity. And we must never forget this as a nation: there are no gradations in the image of God. Every man from a treble white to a bass black is significant on God’s keyboard, precisely because every man is made in the image of God. One day we will learn that. We will know one day that God made us to live together as brothers and to respect the dignity and worth of every man.”
Dr. King, “The American Dream (continued)

It sounds like Dr. King’s “dream,” was filled with hope for the future.

The story of human relations through time is an interesting one.

And it starts in an unusual place.

“Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the earth.”
Genesis 9:1

Seemingly–for a while–they did just that.

In Genesis, chapters 9-10, we see a description of a culture wherein people had small family property holdings, and when children were born, grew to adulthood, married, and had children of their own, they would spread out (scatter), build their own homes, and raise their own families. Each household would have enough land to support themselves. There were no “rich” people or “poor” people. There were no “lords” or “serfs.” There were no “masters” or slaves.”

Yet in Genesis 11, we read:

“And when they removed from the east, they found a plain in the land of Sennaar, and dwelt in it. And each one said to his neighbour… ‘Come, let us make a city and a tower, the top whereof may reach to heaven: and let us make our name famous before we be scattered abroad into all lands.'”
Genesis 11:2-4

Let’s unpack that:

God told them to fill the earth (scatter).
They conspired to build a city (and a tower) instead.
Their motive was to reach to heaven (to bring God down to their level?) and to make a name for themselves.

Making a Name for Yourself

What’s your understanding of “the American Dream?” Is it all about making a name for yourself?

Or is it about something else?

What’s this imago dei thing that Dr. King was talking about?

One article interestingly claims:

“(Following the Civil War) many black leaders argued against special privileges and requested for blacks only ‘the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness’ specified in the Declaration of Independence.”
The Mackinac Center for Public Policy

Frederick Douglass was a former slave himself, and he rejected special treatment of former slaves.

“Everybody has asked the question, … ‘What shall we do with the Negro?’ I have had but one answer from the beginning. Do nothing with us! Your doing with us has already played the mischief with us. Do nothing with us!”
Frederick Douglass, “What the Black Man Wants,” 1863

Listen carefully to an excerpt from a book about Frederick Douglass:

“It was (‘an elderly, partially literate, and intensively devout black man, whom Douglass would later refer to as Uncle Lawson‘) who imparted to the impressionable young Frederick a strong sense of self-esteem, convincing the youth that he had an important mission to fulfill.”
David B. Chesebrough, Frederick Douglass: Oratory from Slavery, 1998

Do you have a strong sense of self-esteem?

Are you convinced that you have an important mission to fulfill?

Back in Genesis 9-10, everyone had a purpose. Each family had to own a cow or a goat (milk for the children, and perhaps cheese), and chickens (for eggs and meat). Children often fed, cleaned up after them, milked them, and collected eggs from them. Each family had a small farm, and a small orchard. Each family had a garden. Often, children tended it. Mothers made clothes for their children. Fathers tanned hides. Children picked fruit. Mothers made jam, baked pies, fermented vegetables, milled wheat, baked bread, made elderberry syrup for dealing with illnesses. Fathers hunted, fished, made repairs, built homes and constructed needed tools and equipment. Parents taught children to read, write, and do arithmetic. Children submitted to parents. Families helped each other when necessary.

But a fellow named Nimrod came along:

“Now (Cush) begot N(i)mrod: he began to be mighty on the earth. And he was a stout hunter before the Lord. Hence came a proverb: Even as N(i)mrod the stout hunter before the Lord. And the beginning of his kingdom was Babylon, and Arach, and Achad, and Chalanne in the land of Sennaar.’A stout hunter’: Not of beasts but of men: whom by violence and tyranny he brought under his dominion. And such he was, not only in the opinion of men, but before the Lord, that is, in his sight who cannot be deceived.”
Genesis 10:8-10

In context of the world that had heretofore existed, Nimrod should be considered a sociopath. He tore down the culture, the society, of the world of Noah and his sons, and he restructured a new society, one which included “haves” and “have-nots,” “suzerains” and “vassals”, those who “dominate” their fellows and the unfortunate fellows that they dominate.

This new re-structured, re-imagined world is one of specialization, mechanization, and centralization. This is an urban world, filled with soot, smoke and sweat-shops.

This was not God’s plan. It was built by Nimrod–for his own benefit. This dude was strictly in in for himself.

“The mainstays of his empire were Babel (Babylon), Erech and Accad, all of them in the land of Shinar. From this country came Asshur (Assyria), and he built Nineveh, Rehoboth-Ir, Calah,and Resen between Nineveh and Calah (this being the capital).”
Genesis 10:10-12 (New Jerusalem Bible)

Be careful that someone is not using you as a pawn on the chessboard of their agenda–that someone is not using you.

A while back, Bob Dylan sang:

The Bible says:

“You know well that if you undertake to be somebody’s slave and obey him, you are the slave of him you obey…”
Romans 6:16

Don’t you think that it’s time to stop and re-evaluate some things?