Politics

I grew up in a conservative home with parents who nearly always vote Republican. And so, I followed suit when I first began to vote. In fact I am still registered as a Republican voter. However, in more recent years I have been more inclined toward the Libertarian point of view, which is also known to some as "classical liberalism". For the most part I agree with the idea that one group of people should not have the power of coercion over another group. 

For example, I am a Christian; but I do not believe in forcing people, against their will, to practice Christianity. It is only God who has the right to pronounce judgement on the wicked and unbelieving who refuse His salvation. And indeed He will; in due time. On the other hand, I believe I should be able to practice Christianity through both public and private observance; giving praise to God at all times. And indeed, that is what God has called His people to do, whether or not we meet with any resistance from the wicked. 

But I have come to the point now, in my life, at which I place absolutely no confidence in any human government or political system. The Kingdom of God is all I trust. And the Kingdom of God does not come by means of human politicking. Whether or not I should even continue to vote, I'm not sure. But one thing I am certain of; no human government or political system is ever going to bring about the righteousness of God in the hearts of human beings.

Basically what it comes down to is that all systems of human government are flawed, and ultimately will falter and fail. That is because the human flaw of sin is deeper than politics. It is a spiritual condition from which only Jesus can save us. Only He can bring about reconciliation with God (Romans 5:10, 2 Corinthians 5:20, 1 Timothy 2:5). The history of Israel in the Old Testament bares out this truth pretty well. 

At the start, God was their only King. Their only human rulers were judges who settled disputes, gave spiritual guidance, and served as military leaders when necessary. But because of the human flaw of sin, there was constant turmoil. Later, the people clamored for a human king. In their unfaithfulness, they wanted to be like the other nations. It was their desire to be like the pagan nations that also often drove them to commit idolatry. But God granted them their request for a king. And He issued a warning through the prophet Samuel, that their king would take advantage of them, and abuse his authority (1 Samuel 8). 

God gave Saul to be their king. And because of Saul's failures and sin, he was replaced by David. David had his own moral and spiritual failures, but through a covenant of grace, God made him to be the ancestor and foreshadow of the Messiah who would provide salvation from sin. That Messiah, Jesus the Son of God, will come again to establish His Kingdom. 

The prophet Isaiah foretold:

"For unto us a Child is born,
Unto us a Son is given;
And the government will be upon His shoulder.
And His name will be called
Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
Of the increase of His government and peace
There will be no end,
Upon the throne of David and over His kingdom,
To order it and establish it with judgment and justice
From that time forward, even forever.The zeal of the Lord of hosts will perform this.
(Isaiah 9:6-7).

I place no confidence in any human government or political system. There is no lasting hope in any worldly king, president, congress or parliament. But my citizenship is in heaven. And as a citizen of heaven, I eagerly look forward to the day when the King, Jesus the Lord, will return to establish His everlasting and perfect Kingdom (Philippians 3:20, Revelation 11:15). 

Galileo vs. Darwin - the Psalms vs. Genesis

Introduction

Often times, supporters of evolutionism will call to our remembrance the trial of Galileo. To the evolutionist this is an illustration of the more contemporary debate between creation and evolutionism. But there are two key differences between these two controversies.

Galileo vs. Darwin

One key difference is that Galileo made use of observational science to show that the solar system is heliocentric instead of geocentric. His finding was not interpretive, it was based on observable facts.

In contrast, Charles Darwin's work was interpretive. His view of origins is based on deductive reasoning, not science. 

Darwin wrote: "No other work of mine was begun in so deductive a spirit as this; for the whole theory was thought out on the west coast of South America, before I had seen a true coral reef." 

Operational science is characterized by inductive observation, not deductive reasoning.

Darwin also wrote "In fact, the a priori reasoning is so entirely satisfactory to me that if the facts won't fit, why so much the worse for the facts, in my feeling."

Darwin never observed humans evolving from molecules. He imagined that scenario before hand. And than he, and others since him, interpreted the data within that preconceived framework.

The evolutionary worldview is not science. It is not an observed fact. It involves the use of patently naturalistic, atheistic assumptions about the past to interpret scientific data in the present.

The Psalms vs. Genesis

Another key difference is that those who controverted Galileo relied on a verse from the book of Psalms to argue their case.

Psalm 104:5 reads: "You who laid the foundations of the earth, so that it should not be moved forever."

However, the book of Psalms is admittedly a collection of poetic literature. And the cited verse is not meant to describe the earth as being fixed in space. It is meant to describe the earth as being a generally stable place for its inhabitants to live.

In contrast, we who controvert Darwin point to scientific data, interpreted within the framework of the book of Genesis.

Genesis is very clearly written to be understood as a literal historical narrative. It belongs to a completely different class of literature from the Psalms. 

The genealogical passages in Genesis clearly place the named persons and related events in the context of human history. And the genealogies of Jesus, recorded in Matthew and Luke, further connect the history of Genesis to New Testament history.

So not only do we consider Genesis by itself, but also its relation to the rest of Scripture. This includes the gospel of salvation by grace, through faith in the death, and resurrection of Jesus the Messiah.

To interpret the narrative of Genesis as non-literal is to completely disregard the context of the Scriptures as a whole. If Genesis were not a literal historical narrative, then the literal life, death, and resurrection Jesus the Messiah would have been completely unnecessary.