Election 2008: Theologizing and strategerizing (Part Three)

Conclusion (see part one and part two)

What do we do now?

First, I'd call us all to repentance. It "is time for judgment to begin at the household of God" (1 Peter 4:17). The world doesn't know better. What's our excuse? We'd best get ourselves straight with God. Tough times are coming. We must be prepared for battle.

It'd be an appropriate time to pray a Daniel 9 prayer of repentance. We read of no flaws in Daniel, no sins, no chinks in his character. Yet the prophet heartily said, "I turned my face to the Lord God, seeking him by prayer and pleas for mercy with fasting and sackcloth and ashes" (Daniel 9:3); and "I prayed to the LORD my God and made confession" (v. 4).

And what a confession. Read it all, if you haven't. Here's just a taste:

"...we have sinned and done wrong and acted wickedly and rebelled, turning aside from your commandments and rules. 6 We have not listened to your servants the prophets, who spoke in your name to our kings, our princes, and our fathers, and to all the people of the land. 7 To you, O Lord, belongs righteousness, but to us open shame, as at this day, to the men of Judah, to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and to all Israel, those who are near and those who are far away, in all the lands to which you have driven them, because of the treachery that they have committed against you. "

Second, we should disabuse ourselves of an unreasonable reliance on government or legislation.

Do not trust in nobles,
in man, who cannot save.
...5 Happy is the one whose help is the God of Jacob,
whose hope is in the LORD his God,
6 the Maker of heaven and earth,
the sea and everything in them....
9...He frustrates the ways of the wicked.
10 The LORD reigns forever;
Zion, your God reigns for all generations.
Hallelujah!
(From Psalm 146 CSB; read the whole psalm)

Third, prepare for the worst and hope (and work) for the best.

Judah had an amazing Godsend of a king in Josiah. We read of him, "Before him there was no king like him who turned to the LORD with all his mind and with all his heart and with all his strength according to all the law of Moses, and no one like him arose after him" (2 Kings 23:25).

But note the very next words: "In spite of all that, the LORD did not turn from the fierceness of His great wrath and anger, which burned against Judah because of all the provocations Manasseh had provoked Him with" (v. 26).

Judah had passed the Point of No Return as to Yahweh's judgment. Too much light rejected, too many opportunities refused, too many warnings spurned (cf. Proverbs 1:22-33).

Can anyone say, with any credibility, that America is not in that exact same situation? Let's be absolutely honest: God has every justification for reducing out nation to a smoking crater, right now, without a syllable of further warning. He may well use President Obama towards that end.

We should prepare for the worst.

At the same time, we should hope and strive. Consider Joel 2:12-14 —

Even now-- this is the LORD's declaration-- turn to Me with all your heart, with fasting, weeping, and mourning. 13 Tear your hearts, not just your clothes, and return to the LORD your God. For He is gracious and compassionate, slow to anger, rich in faithful love, and He relents from sending disaster. 14 Who knows? He may turn and relent and leave a blessing behind Him, so you can offer grain and wine to the LORD your God.

"Who knows?", the prophet asks. You don't; I don't. Amos speaks similarly, after some thundering threats and warnings:

Hate evil, and love good, and establish justice in the gate; it may be that the LORD, the God of hosts, will be gracious to the remnant of Joseph (Amos 6:15)

America's turning away has brought it to a sad, bad place. But: "Even now," "Who knows?", and "It may be." The import is clear: we should repent, pray, strive, and hope.

Fourth, have an intelligent grasp of how Romans 13:1-7 applies to the American situation.

Paul teaches that God instituted all authority, and so we are to submit ourselves to the authorities over us. Since God instituted authority, to resist it is to resist God.

Now, before we "welcome our new insect overlords" in an uncritical application of this passage, let's remember a few things.

This is America, not Israel. It is a constitutional republic, not a monarchy (nor a straight democracy). When he takes office, Obama will be in charge of just one of the three branches of our government. He will be neither Messiah nor King.

What is the authority, in our system of government? It is the document that begins:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

The authority is the Constitution, and it was the people who ordained and established it. The Constitution divides power among three branches; it does not invest it in a potentate. The state is not Obama; he is neither Rex, nor Lex, nor the court. He is to execute laws made by another branch. It is an office with a good deal of power; but that power does not include being my sovereign nor my lord.

Further, the men who formed this nation thought it important to guarantee certain rights to me and to all Americans.

And what was the first right they saw fit to guarantee?

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

I'm not Obama's serf, I'm not his subject, I'm not his slave. I have no king but Jesus, nor any Messiah but He. I'm an American citizen, and our ruling document guarantees and assures me the right to express my thoughts — including my dissent — openly and freely. Men fought and died to win me that right, and they still die to preserve it. I'm not giving it up just to be thought a nice, deep, compliant, pliable little evanjellybean creampuff.

This is my right. It not only is not a violation of Romans 13:1-7 but, you could plausibly argue, it is required by Romans 13:1-7.

How "required"? Because, in our system of government, I am part of the governing authority. I would see a failure to voice my views, and exert such influence as I have, as poor citizenship.

In fact — and truly, it embarrasses me to have to say this, but — Chuck Norris makes better contextual sense than some Christianoid flutterings I've seen. I know, I know: Chuck Norris. No, I'm serious.

So, put briefly, resisting what I see as unwise and/or evil designs from one representative of one branch of government not only is not rebelling against the governing authority, but it expresses respect for the established governing authority. Of which I am part.

So fifth, we should resist every foolish or evil thing Obama means to do, by every peaceful, lawful means at our disposal.

Instant Brockman response would be, "Why 'resist'? Shouldn't we welcome our new messianic overlord, and try to help him succeed in doing good things?"

My twofold response is (A) duh, I don't think I need to say everything, do I?; and (B) I don't know any distinctive thing that I believe Obama proposes to do that I don't see as foolish or evil. I mean, for instance, he hasn't proposed completely trashing all laws whatever; so I do support him on that thing he hasn't proposed to do. But radicalizing abortion access? Evil. Heading towards nationalized healthcare? Foolish.

And now finally I put sixth the thing your average evanjellybean (as well as good bro's) would put first: we should pray. Oh yes, pray. How should we pray?

• We should pray for national repentance and genuine revival
• We should pray that men in the pulpit would be bolder than ever and more fierce and fearless and passionate and Spirit-led than ever, in proclaiming the Word of God above all (cf. Daniel 11:32; 2 Thessalonians 3:1).
• We should pray that God convict Barack Obama of his sin, convince him of Christ's Lordship and of his need for Him, open his eyes to the Gospel, and bring him to repentant, saving faith.
• If that happens, we should pray that Barack Obama should be seriously and quickly discipled in the Word of God, that he would instantly begin putting off his corrupt and evil worldview, and replacing it with convictions that reflect the mind of God.
• Until then, we should pray for his safety, as he gives every sign of being a man who cannot afford to die. Also until then:
• We should pray that God frustrate all his evil plans and defeat every foolish, rapacious, harmful thing he means to visit on our nation (cf. 2 Samuel 15:31; Psalm 3:7; 9:16; 10:15; Proverbs 21:1; etc.);
• We should pray that God protect the innocent from Obama's designs further to expose them to heartless murder (Psalm 10:14b)
• We should pray that God raise up good, godly, responsible, wise, winsome leaders (cf. 1 Samuel 13:14).
  

That's for starters.

So, in short, you could say I won't be going Kent Brockman on you.

Surprised?

Now comments are open, but do note: all rules (especially rule 1) are in effect.

Election 2008: Theologizing and strategerizing (Part Two)

(Continued from part one)

How did we get here?

As I mentioned, my reading for the morning of November 4 included 2 Kings 17. It seemed portentous, though I hoped it wasn't!

Israel: going, going.... The first six verses detail the political crumbling and collapse of Israel. The inspired historian immediately reveals why disaster struck:

And this occurred because the people of Israel had sinned against the LORD their God, who had brought them up out of the land of Egypt from under the hand of Pharaoh king of Egypt, and had feared other gods and walked in the customs of the nations whom the LORD drove out before the people of Israel, and in the customs that the kings of Israel had practiced. And the people of Israel did secretly against the LORD their God things that were not right. They built for themselves high places in all their towns, from watchtower to fortified city. They set up for themselves pillars and Asherim on every high hill and under every green tree, and there they made offerings on all the high places, as the nations did whom the LORD carried away before them. And they did wicked things, provoking the LORD to anger, and they served idols, of which the LORD had said to them, "You shall not do this." (2 Kings 17:7-12)

I hasten to say two things: first, America isn't Israel; second, the parallels can only be overlooked by sheer willpower.

America: not the same. God has no national covenant with America. The Pilgrims were certainly themselves Christians, and made a Christian covenant on their arrival here. Certainly the nation's foundation was laid by Christians, and by men whose thought reflected a Biblical framework, though scholars debate the exact extent.

But for all that, there is no direct analogy to God acting by prophetic revelation and miracle to establish a nation bound to Him through a bilateral covenant, as He did with Israel.

America: worse. Having said that, the pan-canonical principle obtains: greater privilege means greater responsibility. "Everyone to whom much was given, of him much will be required, and from him to whom they entrusted much, they will demand the more" (Luke 12:48b). This is true both individually (James 3:1), and nationally (Amos 3:2).

As far as I know, no nation in history has enjoyed greater freedom and ability to read and study the Word of God, nor greater liberty to preach and practice what we find therein. Bibles, study guides, helps of all sorts, scholars, pastors, churches — we have them all in unprecedented abundance. If I can locate a place and gather some people, I can preach the Word to them, and the government won't say "Boo."

At present.

What we've done with what we had. Yet what have we done with it? What have we done with all that? Every reader of this blog — the high school students, the moms, the unemployed, the lawyers, the truck drivers, the security guards, the cooks — every one of you has instant access to Biblical resources that Augustine, Chrysostom, Anselm, Aquinas, Wycliffe, Tyndale, Hus, Calvin, Luther, Knox, Zwingli, Charnock, Owen, Edwards, Whitfield, Spurgeon, Ryle, the Hodges, Warfield, Machen and all the rest could not even dream of.

And what have we done with it, as a nation? What have we to show for it? Is our Biblical knowledge correspondingly deeper than our forebears'? Is our holiness correspondingly richer? Our spiritual life more dynamic? Our spiritual fruit more abundant? Our achievements in terms of mission and evangelism and discipleship broader and deeper and more profound, in due measure to the superiority of our resources?

Alas, you know the answer to that, too well.

Sad state of affairs. David Wells and Iain Murray have documented the decline and failure of evangelicalism in America. You don't have to read them; read the meta at various good Christian blogs. I have several in mind. Some of the very best posts available, with some of the most clueless, muddled, arrogantly misled commenters. We get them at Pyro and here, though not as frequently, since we (unlike some) moderate our meta's fairly closely.

But all around, you find "evangelicals" enamored with trying as hard as they can to sell off their birthright to be more acceptable to the world — the kin of Tony Campolo and Brian Maclaren and Jim Wallis and the like.

What we see, all too often, are professed Christians with an unclear, edgeless Gospel, little or no clue as to how to apply the Bible to life — but a burning desire to fit in with the Christ-hating world.

Moral nadir: babies for Molech. The quintessence of our ethical blindness is seen in the issue of abortion. Here, perhaps, is the defining moral issue of our time. I happen to believe that no Bible-believing Christian ever had reason to be fuzzy on the issue. Now in addition to that, science has triple-underscored and bolded the humanity of the victims of this modern Holocaust, and the inhumanity of their sacrifice on the altar of license and selfishness.

Yet, while the apostate Roman Catholic church is fairly consistent on the issue, "evangelicals" can't figure out whether there's a moral aspect to aiming Barack Obama — the most viciously pro-abort candidate ever to seek the White House — at the unborn, and pulling the trigger by pulling the lever.

Whence? So how did we get here?

We loved the world, and the things of the world. We loved fitting in. We were desperate to be liked, accepted, respected, both institutionally and individually. We let ourselves get caught up in the Zeitgeist of consumerism, emotionalism, radical introversion and subjectivity. We tolerated watery preaching and weak pulpits, doctrinal drift and apostasy, and produced spineless non-leaders. Whole "Christian" movements grew and prospered that practically demoted the Word of God to ancillary status.

And as we read in 2 Kings 17:13, "Yet the LORD warned Israel and Judah by every prophet and every seer, saying, 'Turn from your evil ways and keep my commandments and my statutes, in accordance with all the Law that I commanded your fathers, and that I sent to you by my servants the prophets.'"

And so indeed God prepared and sent J. Gresham Machen, Carl F. H. Henry, Francis Schaeffer and a host of others, reasoning and warning and pleading.

"But they would not listen, but were stubborn, as their fathers had been, who did not believe in the LORD their God" (2 Kings 17:14).

So what does God do in such cases?

Judgment by abandonment. Well, sometimes God allows outer judgment; but always He imposes inner consequences. We read that those who refuse to listen "shall eat the fruit of their way, and have their fill of their own devices" (Proverbs 1:31), and that "the simple are killed by their turning away, and the complacency of fools destroys them" (v. 32). This is that same pattern we see in Romans 1:18-32. God punishes sin with sin. Apart from repentance, sin snowballs. God "delivers over" apostates to further apostasy.

And so it is with our country. Tragedy of tragedies, evangelicals have lost the evangel, the Gospel. They do not see the Cross as their only glory, nor the world as crucified to them thereby, and they to the world (Galatians 6:14). So they compromise, they kiss up, they declare peace — and their children, more consistent than they, simply fall away.

Now we have those with (at best) a form of religion, but no power to it, no inner reality (2 Timothy 3:5). Arrogant, unteachable, self-filled, bloated Christianoids without the touch of the Cross to convert them, regenerate them, humble their pride, and yoke them to Christ to learn of His word.

And that's how we got here. "Evangelicalism" is filled with Laodiceans who imagine themselves full and rich, but are actually "wretched, pitiable, poor, blind, and naked" (Revelation 3:17). We should be holding the Gospel out to the nation, and we barely know it ourselves.

So God has given us our way. We didn't see fit to do it by the Book; so our own blind, chaotic, lost way has come back on us.

And now a hollow suit, a cool man marinated in Marxism and liberation theology and racist hatred, perfectly happy to let babies pass through the fire to the Molech of sexual license and convenience, is about to take the most powerful seat in the land.

So... what's the plan?

Next time, Lord willing. Then I plan to open Comments.

This way to Part Three.

Election 2008: Theologizing and strategerizing (Part One)

All right, we've seen and further reflected on the appropriateness of taking time to mourn and lament over our great nation in this troubling hour. But now let's think, analyze, theologize, strategerize.

We shall ask and mull over five questions:

1. Where are we?
2. Where was (and is) God?
3. So...everything's OK, then, and we should relax?
4. How did we get here?
5. What do we do now?

I'll look at questions 1-3 in this post, and then (Lord willing) questions 4-5 as the conclusion.

Comments will be closed for this post and the next, open for Part Two Three.

Where are we?

Tho sum up over a month's worth of posts, the outcome of our last election was disgraceful in many regards, with ominous implications. Voters evidently made their decisions largely on emotion, image, and skin-color. That's not a good thing, and we should admit it.

Almost more worrisome are the flood of professed evangelicals of the Kent Brockman persuasion, patting hands and heads and assuring everyone that it wasn't a bad thing to elect the eminently-unaccomplished 99th most junior member of the Senate as President — a man whose background remains a muddy enigma except that we know Obama allied himself with terrorists, Marxists, and racists, that he and his family enthusiastically supported a hatemongering ministry for twenty years, and that he never once stood up against the leftmost fringe of his party. All that, plus we know that President-elect Barack Obama proudly puts the radicalization of abortion at the top of his agenda.

So when we're told "We don't know whether he'll be a bad president" — well yes, of course, we really do. If Obama keeps his first promise, he's a bad president. If all Obama's bad promises were deliberate lies intended to deceive the populace, he's a dishonest president. Our brightest hope is that President Obama will either break many of candidate Obama's promises, or that he will find himself prevented from fulfilling them.

Where was (and is) God?

God is, of course, where He has always been: He is enthroned in the heavens as king forever (Psalm 9:7; 29:10; 102:12; 123:1). His providential kingdom rules over all Psalm 103:19), and there is none — none! — who can stay His hand or thwart His purposes (Daniel 4:35). He has established all authority in general, and the bearers of authority in particular (Romans 13:1-7). It is particularly germane for us to note that He "rules the kingdom of men and gives it to whom he will and sets over it the lowliest of men" (Daniel 4:17). Indeed He does.

So even in the situation of a disgraceful turn of events as this election, God remains sovereign. No part of it occurred apart from His eternal and sovereign decree (Ephesians 1:11). God's purposes for believers, in particular, are absolutely undefeatable. All things work together for their eternal good, and they are certain to spend eternity with Him in glory — for no created thing can separate us from His love (Romans 8:28-39). We will see His face, and serve Him forever (Revelation 22:4).

So... everything's OK, then, and we should "just relax"?

Sure, if you want to disgrace the name of Christ in general, and Calvinism in particular, as well as fail your generation and your children.

Let's think for a moment, friends. Is that OK? While everyone else is emoting, singing kum-ba-ya, and welcoming our insect overlords, can we think?

God is sovereign, so we shouldn't be alarmed and energized and engaged? Where does that come from?

Look, everything I just said? All that about God's sovereignty? It is true in EVERY situation, 24/7/365. Have you thought about that?

When you get a headache, it was God's sovereign decree that you get a headache. But do you not take Ibuprofen? When some idiot in a white car cuts in front of you without signaling, that was God's will. But don't you slam on your brakes and honk? When the cashier short-changes you, that was God's sovereign will, too — but don't you correct him, and request correct change? When you get a package with a damaged item, that too was God's sovereign will. But don't you return it, and demand a refund?

It is so in small things; it is so in larger events.

What that means is that when you hear a scream from your bedroom, and a rapist is assaulting your wife, that is God's sovereign decree.

It is true when you feel your child's forehead, and it's hotter than a frying pan, that is God's sovereign decree.

It is true when you see smoke coming from the kitchen, and you know it's not just your son making toast again, that is God's sovereign decree.

It is true when you notice a lump that just seems to get bigger and bigger, and not go away, that is God's sovereign decree.

It is true when members of the church you pastor starts passing The Shack around, or Your Best Life, Now!, or A Generous Orthodoxy, that is God's sovereign decree.

In all those situations, in every situation, God is sovereign, wise, and good, and in full control.

Ah, but we? What is our part? Passive, trusting resignation to the inevitable? Is that a godly, wise, Biblical response?

Well, Paul believed all those things. When he heard about the incursion of false doctrine in Galatia, did he say "Oh well, we must simply pray and trust God"? Did he tell Titus and Timothy, "False teachers will try to infest your churches like termites — but oh well! God is sovereign! Just pray and trust and wait on God!"?

In fact, if Paul was as the super-Calvinists, he would not have highly praised Timothy for being "torn up with anxiety" (Philippians 2:20) over the churches. No, he would have rebuked Timothy, told him to take a chill pill, because God is sovereign, doncha know, and it will all work out.

Proactive response to carping. Now, I wish I could believe it wouldn't be necessary to anticipate a dodge here... but sadly, I can't.

Someone would pop off, "But those are all churches, and about doctrine. This is about neither!"

Since nobody said it yet, I can say, without being rude, that that is a singularly dense response. What is the difference? Is God sovereign in one realm, but not another? If a pastor must be hands-on and engaged over his charge, then does the same principle not apply for a parent, a spouse, a friend, an employee... a citizen?

After all, we all are to seek to serve and glorify God in all walks of life, are we not (1 Corinthians 10:31)? It is true, is it not, that in God's eyes there are no secular ghettoes roped off from His concern (Psalm 24:1)? Are we not always to seek to do good, not only to fellow-Christians, but also to all men (Jeremiah 29:1-9; Galatians 6:10)?

To apply the truth of God's sovereignty in such a way as to become a little nodding China doll, an easily-assimilated little Borgling, is to pervert the truth so badly as to bring shame on it and God. We should rather hear that book written against such a situation as ours, the book of Esther. As in our day, in Esther's day there were no miracles, there were no prophets. All believers had was the word of God. God himself was deus absconditus at this moment.

So what did Mordecai tell Esther when crisis struck? Did he say, "Oh well. Yahweh is king. He'll do... whatever"? No. You know what he said: "Who knows whether you have not come to the kingdom for such a time as this?"(Esther 4:14b) He called Esther to do what she could. And she did. And God used her wise, considered, sacrificial, risky actions to preserve His people alive and avert disaster from them.

A robust, Biblical faith in the total sovereignty of God is hard enough for some people to grasp, without its advocates acting like goofy children and bringing it shame.

This way to Part Two.

A Lament for America

By popular demand, public and private, here it is. I wrote it early this morning. Today, a lament. Tomorrow or Monday, I hope to provide further theological reflection, and the start of stategerizing. Delicate (or guilty) souls may want to stay out of the blast zone. Perhaps you shouldn't. And so.....

I had a bad feeling when my Bible reading the morning of the 5th turned out to include 2 Kings 17. I gulped.

If the title gives you the impression that this won't be a happy-face, good-loser post, you are correct. Be warned. I'm in earnest. If you keep reading — which I seriously do not necessarily advise — you'll have that same experience that, to my bafflement, keeps surprising people. That is, you'll find that (oh, no!) I really meant everything I said.

I've mulled and tossed what to write. Some of you are here to gloat and lecture, some just to observe, and some wanting comfort and encouragement. What do I have for you here? You'll find some gallows humor, a wry comment or two. But the theme of this post could not be summarized as, "Ain't life grand right now?"

Wish I had that to give, at the moment. In due time, perhaps. I remember after the horrid election in which Bill Clinton first lied his way to the White House, Rush Limbaugh was very heartening. He observed that conservatism had actually won, because Clinton deceptively positioned himself to the right of Bush, Sr.

You could say that here, to a degree. Obama actually campaigned for cutting taxes and spending. It was a lie, of course, but McCain did not counter it effectively enough. Obama defeated McCain, and the perceived Bush legacy, and the recent GOP. Not conservatism, well and clearly and passionately articulated.

But anyone with two live neurons to rub together could have seen through The One's charade. Obama's mentors and allies are hardcore Marxists, socialists, racists. He marinated in anti-American, racist hatemongering for twenty years. His backers included the worst within America, and enemies outside America. It was all a paint-thin facade.

But, as David Wells has argued convincingly, people like paint. It's all about image.

So what do I write for you today? I think of Jeremiah, looking at the ruin of his beloved nation. Did the prophet write a happy-face booklet about how glorious God's sovereign providence always is? I don't think so. There's a reason that the 25th book in the Canon isn't titled "Happy Giggles," or "Jeremiah's Jolly Jokes."

There is, as Ecclesiastes 3:4 says, "a time to mourn." If you love what America was, what it should be, and what men with a Biblical worldview crafted it to be, this begins such a time.

I'll say one happy horizontal thing: I think it is a good thing that a black man won the presidency. It shows that America has long-since ceased being the country that Obama's bitter, angry, self-absorbed wife imagined.

But most of us already knew that. It is a bad thing that that black man won. I actually think it may well cause long-term harm to other blacks' presidential aspirations, which is a pity. Obama does not have the unsought blessing Bill Clinton had: he will not have robust opposition in Congress. So he may actually do many of the harmful, disastrous things he proposed. And future voters may, if unfairly, look even at totally-different black candidates and think, "Didn't we try that already?"

So who's in the Hall of Shame for this debacle? Too many to name. But here are a few.

Bush. I blame President Bush. Not for what the wingnuts blame him for; he was right about those things. History will view Bush as a visionary, amply-accomplished president.

But where W did miserably fail was as a politician. He did not learn from Bill Clinton, who got right the fact that he needed never to stop campaigning. Bush was like the anti-Clinton in that regard. W focused completely on governing, and did nothing about keeping the American people with him. Bush evidently thought results would speak for themselves, and people would figure things out. He was wrong.

Clinton always had instant-response squads, who overwhelmed all the media with unified, sharp, aggressive responses geared to make sure Clinton's view always prevailed. Bush couldn't be bothered. You can call it arrogance; I actually think it was misplaced modesty. But the net sum was that W left a disastrous political situation for his would-be successor.

Dick Cheney was an excellent VP (— you can tell that simply by the deranged sorts who hate him). But Cheney was never going to succeed Bush. So Bush should have replaced Cheney in his second term, and groomed a presidential replacement.

Bush was right in not being a slave to opinion polls; he was wrong in not trying to bring people along with him. As a consequence, McCain had two bad options. He could try to make up for eight years of Bush's failure to defend himself in his campaign, which he wasn't equipped to do. Or he could distance himself utterly from Bush, which McCain tried but found impossible to do.

And that's largely Bush's fault. It took down McCain, as well as GOP candidates for both houses. W's refusal to defend himself cost others badly.

MSM. Light a candle of mourning for the mainstream media. Obama lied and deceived and hid, true; but he never could have gotten away with it if we'd had a vigilant, ethical, non-partisan press. However, the MSM acted not as the press, but as Obama's press secretary.

The MSM kept the ugly and inconvenient truth out of the spotlight, diverted the public's attention, ran interference, carried water for his lies, and served as Obama's opposition research. Only a fool will trust them ever again. For that matter, only fools trusted them this time 'round.

An aside: I wonder how many Obama revelations will start seeing the light now? Or will they wait until after his first or second inauguration?

Voters. But of course that doesn't give the electorate a pass. Thirty years ago? When there were only CBSABCNBC and The Timeses? Maybe. But now, alternative news and analysis sources are readily available. For now. Look for the new triumvirate to target a free press and all soapboxes, cyber and otherwise. Perhaps even pulpits. Think Canada.

Government reeducation camps. The government school system didn't help, creating uneducated, uninformed, fact-starved glandlings, who mistake emoting for rational thought. These folks have been raised from toddlerhood on the state's teat. The State is a kindly face embodied in Miss Parkins in pre-school; when you're eighteen, you've long-since learned to see The State as your friend and guardian. As designed. And so you vote.

Quislings. But the most disgraceful of all are professedly Christian enablers.

[Last warning: this is going to be brutal.]

These are the hand-wringing, conflicted souls who just can't figure out whether or not it's a good thing to sweep aside thirty-five years of hard-fought, hard-won advances in the pro-life cause. Who just can't agonize themselves into seeing that they have a clear-cut moral obligation to stand athwart the most remorselessly, unrepentantly vicious pro-death advocate ever seriously to seek the White House.

How wretched are such souls?

It's like this. A man comes to attack your wife, or your child. You professed Christians who voted for Obama, you had every reason to know what that man was going to do. And your response was to toss him a knife, and tell him "Have at it, sport; I prayed about this, and I feel good about it. I'll just stand over here being deep and conflicted and nuanced, mocking anyone who tries to stop you, and congratulating myself on my new friends who cheer you on."

Your candidate was charismatic and confident. The people you wanted to accept you and think well of you swarmed after him. He was different, and novel, and exciting.

And when he said that his very first act in office would be to remove all legal restrictions against gassing Jews, and would compel taxpayers to pay for the gassing of Jews in foreign countries? Oh, well. It wasn't as if you would be pulling the lever yourself, right? Besides (you tried to convince yourself), removing all restrictions on Jew-gassing would actually result in fewer Jews being gassed!

This is what you've done. Obama was evasive and inconsistent about a great many things. Not about this. About this, he was emphatic, and crystal-clear: "first act as President."

And you knew it.

You Christians who did not vote or went third-party, you can tell yourselves you did otherwise. You didn't allow the attacker to assault that helpless victim. No, not you. You drew a picture of a devastating raygun, and waved it at him vigorously, yelling "Zap! Zap!", hoping he'd fall over.

Alas, he did not.

To both of you, I offer this: "Whoever conceals his transgressions will not prosper,
but he who confesses and forsakes them will obtain mercy" (Proverbs 28:13).

You want to keep insisting that you did the right thing? Can't help you. Won't try. After January 20, you go to the dumpsters behind abortion clinics and explain to the sad, tragic, forsaken contents just how deep and nuanced you are.

But repentant believers in Christ always find mercy and forgiveness. And that's all the happy I have for you.

And you pastors who could not find it in yourselves even to say, from the pulpit, that life is an important consideration when voting... I don't know what to say to you. I know some very fine men are absolutely convinced that all politics should be kept out of the pulpit. But is life politics? Is the stewardship of one's vote politics? Are we really called to give no guidance whatever for the pressing moral issues of citizenship? Look at Roman Catholics, who deny and pervert the Gospel, who don't cherish the truths you cherish, and yet who managed to speak up for the unborn. Are you sure you did the right thing?

I'm really not.

We have grim days ahead, very grim days. We'll need to look to God more than ever, and that's a good thing. We'll need to cling to the Cross more than ever, and that's a good thing. We'll need to study and practice the Word more than ever, and that's a good thing.

But what President-elect Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid mean to do to our children's America?

That isn't a good thing.

What to do now? We'll talk about that in the future, Lord willing. "Pray for Obama," we're told. Indeed. Pray that Barack Obama be soundly converted to faith in Christ as his Lord and the only Savior. Pray that, evidently for the first time in his life, he'll take on Christ's yoke and learn from him. Pray that he will repent of his false beliefs and values, and embrace God's point of view, learning to think His thoughts after Him. Pray that President-elect Obama will repent of the evil he means to do, before he does it.

Pray for the church, where judgment will begin. Pray for pastors. Pray for America.

Then we'll have to figure out what the Nehemiah pattern of praying plus doing will mean for us.

UPDATE: the theologizing and strategerizing starts HERE.

Don't miss these: 11/5/08

While I'm mulling over my chair-over-the-head post, here are some notes, as well as some particularly good quotations, for your edification. So let's have at it:

• Love the satirical Onion's headline: Black Man Given Nation's Worst Job. Article's not as funny.
• Lisa Schiffren remarks: "Now that Barack Obama is our president, because a majority of Americans of all races voted for to elect him, I hope our leaders will feel free to treat him no differently than any other head of the opposition party. That is what being post-racial means. It's time. Certainly we have had no problem doing that with the women who rise to power."
• Mark Steyn: "Whatever one feels about 'compassionate conservatism', Bush at least wrapped up his departures from orthodoxy into a reasonably coherent worldview. McCain never did. He had a biography but no platform."
• John Hinderaker observes that this win, while considerable, constitutes no landslide.
• Peter Kirsanow says fight. The way he means it, I say he's right.
• I'll Retire To Bedlam Alert: Byron York says that black voters in California supported Proposition 8 (undoing homosexual "marriage) by a ratio of 70% to 30%. Black voters. That would be the voters who supported Obama by a ratio of 493% to 0%. Barack Obama. That would be the man opposed Proposition 8, and who will stack the judiciary with a philosophy of "empathy" over law. Which will, in other words, overturn Prop 8. Which blacks supported, 70% to 30%. Got that?

UPDATES:

• Want to thank Governor Palin, the only one to come out of this debacle smelling like a rose? Click here. I did.

BTW, why am I not making fluffy Calvinist talk about this election?

Conspicuously absent in all our discussions: anything from me that anyone could mistake for

"But oh well, after all, what does it really matter? God is sovereign. We'll get the president He chooses. It's just the kingdom of man, and doesn't really matter. All that matters is the Gospel. The church lived under far worse circumstances, and it could survive worse still, if God wills it. We shouldn't get all upset. Just worry about preaching the Gospel, and let the dead bury the dead."

Why am I not saying all that? Simple.

It's not Biblical.

"What?!" my betters might say. "Not Biblical? You mean you don't believe that...."

Let me clarify: that is not a Biblical way to battle evil.

Silence. Thought-bubbles: "'Battle evil'? What does he think he is - a cartoon character?"

But see, as I may have mentioned a time or four thousand, I do think abortion is evil.

I could go on, but I'll just stop right there. I made my fuller argument here.

But you see, the battle is now, it's today. This is not the time for tut-tutting and yarn-weaving and gauzy philosophizing. This is the time to do battle.

That's what I've been doing, particularly for the last month, to the best of my ability: doing battle. By informing, reasoning, pleading, cajoling, and generally working for what I think is best.

You don't see the men (I stress the word) in the Bible flapping their hands and oh-welling.

Think of Joab, hopelessly outnumbered. Does he tell his brother, "Oh well, this world is fleeting, if Yahweh wants to smash Israel, then Yahweh's will be done"? No. Hear him:

“If the Syrians are too strong for me, then you shall help me, but if the Ammonites are too strong for you, then I will come and help you. 12 Be of good courage, and let us be courageous for our people, and for the cities of our God, and may the LORD do what seems good to him.” (2 Samuel 10:11-12).

Now, there's a man for you. Spiritually, Joab was a mixed bag. But what he says is exactly right: be of courage, fight — and ultimately God will do what God will do. Until then, we fight!

America is not Israel. But it is my country, and I am a light and salt and a witness in it. Like Daniel, I care about it (see what his care even for Nebuchadnezzar, Daniel 4:19). I love it. For what I'm worth, I'll serve it. I'll seek its welfare actively for what I'm worth, and I'll pray for it (Jeremiah 29:7)

Now, today is the time to fight — peacefully, of course. By reasoning, persuading, pleading.

Think about this: if a man's wife were attacked, would he philosophize about the Gospel and the will of God, theorizing that maybe God wanted to teach her something by this experience? Would a man do that? I tell you, he would not. God helping him, he'd wade in and make it someone's very worst day, ever.

So let's talk again tomorrow. Tomorrow, we'll talk about what happened. We'll theologize, and we'll philosophize, and maybe we'll strategize.

But this isn't tomorrow. This is today. This battle still rages.

Participate! Act! Do what's right, to the best of your ability!

Who knows what God's sovereign will is? He'll do what is good in His eyes.

But our part is to fight.

Don't miss these: 11/4/08, election edition

Before the usual, this trumpet-blast:

DO NOT listen to "exit polls"! DO NOT be swayed by early "calls"! WORK and VOTE for McCain!

Dude, you know MSNBC is going to call the election for Obama at 9:30am. Just know that. And ignore it. Operation Inevitability continues. Don't be a casualty!

Now to a few don't-misses:

• Hope this is happening all over the place. I'm certain it is. But often enough?
  
• Obama's energy plans would bankrupt coal mines and cause electricity costs to skyrocket — and that's according to Obama!
• Trying to manipulate the vote to the last, CBS may "call" the election as early as 5pm PT. (Gee... wonder of whose victory they'll try to convince not-yet voters?)
• Mark Steyn warns Florida voters and others not to buy early returns.

UPDATES:

Why I'm voting for... gulp... McCain

Regular readers will know that I have never been a fanboy for McCain. Search his name on this blog, and you'll see some scorching comments. I've never thought that much of him as a Senator, and he was at the bottom of the list of my choices in the GOP primaries.

Yet I'll be voting for him today, unhesitatingly and with great enthusiasm.

Some have been waiting for me to explain why. I think I can be brief and pointed: I really already answered the question.

Some will go to that link and sputter, "But... but that isn't a list of reasons why to vote for McCain! It's a list of reasons why you can't vote third-party, or not vote."

Correct. And so, it is a list of reasons why I'm going to vote for McCain. Because there are only two other options, and they're not wise nor responsible nor rational options, as I argued at length.

Well, there is a third option: I could vote for Obama.

Frankly, I wish I could. Unlike scores of black voters (like the lady on this meta, at 11/03/2008 06:05:00 PM), skin-color has never played a part in my voting choices. But I will say this: were I presented with two candidates of equally acceptable convictions and character and resume, and one were white, the other black — I'd be inclined to the black candidate. Just to put another stake in this country's shameful history of racism, and to realize King's dream.

But Obama is not that candidate. I do not believe a Christian can morally vote for Obama.

Why not? There are scores of reasons, but one is sufficient. Obama's advocacy for child-murder. His position is not inadequate. It is not unacceptable. It is not deficient. It is not regrettable.

Obama's position on abortion is monstrous.

You vote for him, you are complicit. You have no excuse. You can never look back at Hitler's Germany and scold those who assisted his Hellish designs. You're them.

"Okay," you say. "But you still haven't told me why I should vote for McCain."

Again I say, I really have. He's the only other option. McCain is the only one who can stop Obama from turning back all legal advances in restricting abortion as his first act in office, with the stroke of a pen.

So now I'll be very simple: I'm voting for McCain because I know basic math.

I'm not a genius; my dear wife goes more in that direction than I. But I do know one very important mathematical fact:

One is a larger number than zero

"Oh," you say. "Yeah. Deep." Hang on.

What are the chances that McCain will appoint judges who actually read and respect the Constitution? The worst reading you can come up with is "One percent." (Any honest person will put the number far higher.)

What are the chances that Obama will appoint judges who actually read and respect the Constitution? Zero percent.

So what are the chances that McCain will constitute a Supreme Court that will undo the abominations of Roe and Doe? The worst reading you can come up with is "One percent." (Any honest person will put the number far higher.)

So what are the chances that Obama will constitute a Supreme Court that will undo the abominations of Roe and Doe? Zero percent.

McCain has a very good career pro-life voting record. I think his rating with the pro-aborts is zero (a good thing, in this case).

Now, admittedly, McCain is not the hardcore, pedal-to-the-metal, doctrinaire, gung-ho "purist" that I try to be and would prefer.

But he picked one as his running-mate. Now, that gives a clue as to what he might pick for the bench.

Which brings us to Sarah Palin. The abortion issue is why I was going to vote for McCain grudgingly; Obama's complete disqualification to me as a thinking Christian would make it a more enthusiastic choice; Sarah Palin is why I'll do it with joy. And she's why I did the previously-unthinkable: I gave money to McCain. Twice.

I've explained scores of times with scores of links in previous posts why I think she was a brilliant choice. She doubles his credibility on the pro-life issue. Whatever McCain is, Palin is a conviction-politician, someone who has shown strong, principled leadership and decision-making. You know, like Deborah, like Esther, like the Proverbs 31:10-31 woman.

Perfect? No. That would be Jesus, and... well, and nobody.

A tonic for Washington?

You betcha.

So McCain would be better; but even more, VP is a great loading-bay for the next president. This was a failure of W's. He picked an excellent VP for governing; but one who would never follow him. And he groomed no one. In fact, he allowed himself to be unjustly trashed, thus creating a nearly impossible chore for his would-be successor. But that's a topic for another post.

Are those all the reasons I'm voting McCain? Nope. But they're sufficient.

So I will eschew the candidate preferred by our enemies and haters, and vote for the one the worst people fear the most.

Final plea to my readers in contested states

Do you live in Pennsylvania, Ohio, Florida, Colorado, or any other battleground/contested state? Then I'm pleading with you: vote for McCain.

If you want to make a statement, make a sign. Put it on your car, in your yard. Write, "In a better country, Barr (Keyes/Baldwin/Whoever) would have a shot!!!" Put a frowny-face on it. Put an angry frowny-face on it!

But vote for the only man who can can actually prevent Barack Obama from opposing virtually every distinctive value you hold as a Christian, and very possibly your right to express opposition or protect your family; the man who will lurch our country in the direction of child-killing extremism.

I could wish it were otherwise — I do wish it were otherwise.

But the only man who can do that is John McCain.

Postscript: very busy these days, may or may not get to "Don't miss these" today. I have one more essay in mind, it comes first. Also have one at Pyro. Writing two sermons, working. Busy day.

UPDATE: I'd meant to put this in the body. Shaun Marksbury makes a very good case for voting McCain over Obama; read it.

Obama vs. Obama

Obama in an attack ad on...himself!

See also: All Barack Obama Statements Come With an Expiration Date. All Of Them.

Don't miss these: 11/3/08

Election-eve fun and frolic:

• Former Senior aide to Ron Paul and Bob Barr supporter urges everyone to vote for McCain instead of Barr. The issues are too critical, the losses to liberty too immense, to risk enabling an Obama presidency by supporting a candidate who cannot win. (Hunh. Where have you heard that before?)
  
• Barack Obama is a novice, hasn't the political courage to do the right thing, and the existence of phone banks for Obama in Gaza is a huge political issue. The kicker? All that comes from a congressional Obama-supporter! (See further here, here, here, and here.)
• I continue in my one-way admiration for Justin Taylor. He had put up a video with John Piper's thoughts on the election. As I explained at length on that post's meta, I found Piper's remarks muddled and unhelpful. Piper was hand-wringy, and all over the place. It was very disappointing. That meta grew to 70 comments, and Justin closed it — which I don't remember his ever doing before. Today Justin has put up a post of his own interacting with the Piper video. Justin's post, I think, is absolutely brilliant, with no ifs, ands, buts, nor peradventures. Read it.
• Remember ol' O and his "righteous wind"? Interesting: turns out that phrase is found in Chairman Mao. There it's "the righteous wind of socialism." Thing that makes you say, "Hmmmm."
• I'm not saying it's right, I'm not saying it's wrong. I'm just saying here's a guy who builds a case for a McCain/Palin landslide. I will say this: it is conceivable, and (to me) desirable.
  

UPDATES: