Loving Your Enemy While Hating God’s Enemies

As we come to the Matthew text we need to begin by clarifying who Jesus is dealing with when He says,

“”Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy” (v. 43).”

44 But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 so that you may prove yourselves to be sons of your Father who is in heaven; for He causes His sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46 For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Even the tax collectors, do they not do the same? 47 And if you greet only your brothers and sisters, what more are you doing than others? Even the Gentiles, do they not do the same? 48 Therefore you shall be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

The question needs be asked here is where has Jesus’ audience heard what is recorded as having been said? Where would they have heard that they were to love their neighbor but hate their enemy?

Is that somewhere in the Old Testament? Does the Law and the Prophets teach that principle?

You can scour the OT and you will not find any command to hate thy enemy. Jesus here, when He says, “You have heard it said,” is not quoting from the Law & the Prophets. He is quoting from the talmud like expostulations that were being said by the teachers of the law that Jesus was dealing with during his incarnation.

And that such was the attitude of Jews during that time is seen readily from chaps like the historian Tacitus who could write of the Jews during this time frame;

“They readily show compassion to their own countrymen, but they bear to all others the hatred of an enemy”

St. Paul describes these same Jews being those who “contrary to all men, forbidding us to speak unto the Gentiles that they might be saved” (1 Thess. 2:15, 16).

Such was he disposition of the Jew. They loved their own which would not be a problem except that they insisted that to love their own they must also hate the Goyim.

A. W. Pink says on this score;

“The Jews have ever been a people marked by strong passions—loving their friends fervently and hating their enemies intensely; and from the Pharisees’ corrupting of the law of God so as to make it square with the prejudices of their disciples, the most evil consequences followed.”

This Jewish mindset wherein all those outside the Jewish circle are hated is what Jesus is speaking against here.

The Pentateuch will be searched in vain for any precept which required the Hebrews to entertain any malignity against their foes: thou shalt “hate thine enemy” was a rabbinical invention pure and simple.

Instead the Old Covenant taught;

Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself: I am the Lord” (Lev. 19:18)

So, the principle here is to determine ahead of time that cunning and wickedness against those outside your clan, people or tribe is perfectly acceptable is contrary to Jesus own words.

Now here the alert person will raise a point of objection and we may say rightly so. The alert person will point to texts like

“Do not I hate them, O Lord, that hate Thee? And am not I grieved with those that rise up against Thee? I hate them with a perfect hatred: I count them mine enemies” (Ps. 139:21, 22).

2 Chronicles 19:2
Jehu son of Hanani the seer went out to confront him and said to King Jehoshaphat, “Should you help the wicked and love those who hate the LORD? Because of this, the wrath of the LORD is upon you.

Psalm 26:5
I hate the mob of evildoers, and refuse to sit with the wicked.

Psalm 31:6
I hate those who cling to worthless idols, but in the LORD I trust.

Psalm 119:158
I look on the faithless with loathing because they do not keep Your word.

Psalm 139:22
I hate them with perfect hatred; I count them as my enemies.

Proverbs 29:27
An unjust man is detestable to the righteous, and one whose way is upright is detestable to the wicked.

And pointing to these texts they will ask how can we at one and the same time love our enemies and hate the wicked.

The answer that resonates from Church history and frankly though not completely satisfying still is the best answer going is that the loving our enemies and hating the wicked must be understood as not being in the same manner or the same sense.

We must make distinctions here between private personal enemies and public enemies of God and His Kingdom.

A private personal enemy may well still be a Christian. They have done you a severe wrong. They have maligned your name or cheated you personally in some manner. Here we are to be like our Father in Heaven who sends His rain on the just and unjust. We must not take vengeance into our own hands. We must live with the promise that God will repay. We’ve all had people like this in our lives at one time or another. You can hardly be in a Church very long and be injured by these people. They are broken people who are babes in sanctification. They spew a cutting word or by some misunderstanding of the meaning of Scripture they are driven to denounce you.

Very well then … we must entrust the matter to our heavenly Father. We must not repay evil for evil. We surely can defend ourselves but the Scripture teaches here that we should return good for evil thus pouring burning coals on their head – thus communicating the idea of bringing burning shame and remorse upon those whose hostility is repaid with kindness. We bring them a meal when they are ill. We visit them in the hospital.

We see Jesus Himself living out this truth in His life.

We read in the Mt. 8 right after finishing the Sermon on the Mt. of the account where Jesus heals the Centurion’s slave. How much more of an enemy can one find than a Gentile Centurion who is part of the hated occupying force of the Nation?

So, in a living illustration of what Jesus himself has called for, Jesus goes to heal the Centurion’s slave. We see the same when Jesus heals the child of the Canaanite woman. These were non-Jews and yet Jesus shows the love to them that He is requiring of those who would be His disciples.

Very well that is how we deal with our personal enemies. But how are we to deal with God’s enemies?

How are we to deal with those who are open and inveterate in their revolt against God, those who are a menace to His cause and His people? The answer from the texts above is we righteously hate them, their cause and their sin. We pray imprecatory prayers that God would arise and cast them off. We plan to put snares before their feet. We do all that we can do to crush the public enemies of God. As the Holy Spirit says in Romans, “We hate that which is evil and we cling to that which is good.” (Romans 12:9)

Now having said this we realize that it is not always easy to distinguish between a personal enemy and a public enemy of God. Sometimes those two can easily and so often do overlap. As such there is a need for discernment here and this is one place where prayer has to come in.

“O Father, you know I am a wicked man and desire nothing more than to call every slight against me a matter of someone being your public enemy. Help me to distinguish properly Father between your public enemies and my personal enemies. Help me to be generous with people and try and think the best of them. Help me also though not to allow my cowardice of public confrontation not make me stand up and denounce the wicked who are your public enemies. Grant me wisdom in these matters please.”

I hope I have cleared that up as much as possible.

We obviously have to try and make these kinds of distinctions between personal enemies and God’s public enemies. To just say that we must love everyone unconditionally is to turn Christianity into a suicide pact. Are we to love unconditionally the men and women of the New World Order who would sink the globe into the social order of Hell? Are we to love unconditionally the unrepentant pedophile and rapist? Are we to love unconditionally the minister sending people to hell by preaching Cultural Marxism from the pulpit thus representing Christianity to be something that it is not? Surely, to ask the questions is to answer the question. The Christian life does not require one to be a pacifist in order to serve in the Kingdom of God.

“Unconditional love is a more revolutionary concept than any other doctrine of revolution. Unconditional love means the end of discrimination between good and evil, right and wrong, better and worse, friend and enemy, and all things else. Whenever anyone asks you to love unconditionally, they are asking you to surrender unconditionally to the enemy.”~~RJR

So the Scripture does not teach unconditional love is the sense we lose the ability to hate they who are evil.

Now we need to continue to consider this requirement of our Lord Christ to love our enemy – our personal enemy. We must ask what to love our enemy concretely means.

And here we run into how the word “love” has been redefined thus leading us astray in these matters. As all of you know love has become a word that really means nothing precisely because it means everything. Our English word love has come to mean something that is entirely emotional. We measure the definition of love as only against our un-sanctified emotions.

However, that is the not the Biblical use of the word “love.” In the Scripture love is not emotive before it is juridical. That is to say that love is defined as dealing with one’s neighbor justly according to God’s standard. If you love someone you treat them lawfully according to God’s law.

So, to love our enemy means to keep the law in relationship to them. Thou shalt not kill, commit adultery, bear false witness, steal, or covet or defraud your enemy. You will treat him as you would be yourself treated. You do not reason that since one is my enemy I no longer have to deal justly according to God’s law with them.

We must understand that love is defined as the fulfillment of God’s law towards one another. So, the command to love our enemies is the command to treat them consistent with God’s law. One doesn’t even have to have warm emotive fuzzies while doing so.

Secondly on the meaning of loving our enemy and so treating them consistent with God’s law, this means that there will be times when we are loving our enemy and our enemy is going to be screaming at us that we are not being very loving.

For example, when a minister preaches God’s law and by doing so exposes the wickedness of the wicked the wicked are typically going to screaming “you’re not being very loving.” Every time we lift us God’s standard for right and wrong someone is going to hurl at us the charge that we are not being loving to our enemy and to God’s enemies.

But as you know, speaking in such a way is the very essence of loving our enemy and showing God’s love to our enemy. It is not love to not warn someone standing on a railroad track that a train is bearing down on them and that they need to get their blankety blank tush off the tracks. Similarly it is not love to not warn the wicked that God is a just God who will by no means clear the wicked for their wickedness… to not warn them that they are sinners in the hands of an angry God…. to not warn them that God hates workers of iniquity. To not warn the wicked – family members, friends, and acquaintances – to not warn them and so speak frankly is not love but the very essence of hate and so we are compelled to speak in a way that the wicked will insist is not being loving.

Yet in speaking this way we are of all people loving our enemies.

All this came to the fore some years ago when a Pastor wrote me about the very matter we are examining this morning. Allow me to share that letter with you;

Dear Pastor,


Sodomites, then, are your enemy, and the enemy of your family, no? In such a situation, what does Christ command? “Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you.” He presses his case even further: “…love your enemies, do good to them, and lend to them without expecting to get anything back.” Then he points out that such behavior will bring us great reward from the “…Most High, because he is kind to the ungrateful and wicked. Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful.”

I don’t see much wiggle room there, or any exegetical tricks that allows for Orwellian twists of phrase like, “…my hating is an expression of my love for the Lord.”

I would be willing to wager that, if you pray with just a bit of persistence and ask God to grant you the ability to love sodomites, that he will grant you that ability, because he is a God of mercy who keeps his promises, and surely if he has commanded you to love your enemies, he will grant you the ability to do that. Not that it won’t be difficult: with God all things may be possible, but that doesn’t mean they are easy. No, usually the process is so difficult that it feels like your heart will break and you will likely just die before it’s over.

Best Regards,


Bret responds,

Dear Brad,

Your problem is that you are defining love differently than how God and I define love. We define love as acting towards others consistent with what God’s law teaches. God’s law teaches that sodomy requires the death penalty. You are defining love consistent with some kind of sentimental warm fuzzy. We are in different worlds and will not agree. You don’t think I’m being loving. I think my disposition towards the Christ hating sodomite to be the marrow of love. I also think your love is really hatred. I think it is hatred because you are not considering your hatred towards all those children who will be entrapped into the same lifestyle because sodomy was not criminalized. Your “love” for the sodomite, is hatred for the judicially innocent.

Of course you have completely ignored the command of Scripture to “hate that which is evil and to cling to that which is good.”

You also have to deal with the Psalmist who said…”21 Do not I hate them, O Lord, that hate thee? and am not I grieved with those that rise up against thee?

22 I hate them with perfect hatred: I count them mine enemies.”

Now keep in mind that if this is a Messianic Psalm then this is Christ saying this.

You accuse me of exegetical tricks and Orwellian twists. Allow me to return service and accuse you of reading the Scripture through your postmodern emotions.

Throughout the Scripture we find love being expressed by hatred. we see it in Jesus attacking His enemies. You remember those times … “White washed sepulchers full of dead men’s bones,” and “You are of your Father the devil,” and “brood of vipers.” Are you really going to tell me that Jesus was not being loving here?

And what of St. Paul who told his enemies to go castrate themselves?

Yours is an effeminate Christianity. I want nothing to do with it.

I would be willing to wager that, if you pray to the God who is and not the god of your imagination and ask the God who is to open your eyes and give you wisdom and the ability to have a love that hates that which is opposed to your love, the God of the Bible who is angular and will never be made smooth, will grant you the ability to understand how a biblical hate serves biblical love.

Praying that the Spirit of Christ will grant you repentance Brad.

Respectfully yours,

Pastor Bret

And so we agree with RJR on this matter when he wrote,

Unconditional love is contrary to the Bible. The charge of the young prophet Jehu, the son of Hanani, to King Jehoshaphat was blunt: “Shouldest thou help the ungodly, and love them that hate the Lord? therefore is wrath upon thee from before the Lord” (II Chronicles 19:2). The commandment is “Ye that love the Lord, hate evil” (Psalm 97:10), and the prophet Amos repeated it: “Hate the evil, and love the good, and establish judgment in the gate” (Amos 5:15)….

The enemy of God’s justice and God’s law, of fundamental law and order, must not be loved. To love them is to condone their evil. The accusation of the psalmist is to the point: “18 When thou sawest a thief, thou consentedst with him, And hast been partaker with adulterers” (Psalm 50:18). What we condone morally, we also approve of or delight in. Those who preach unconditional love are simply trying to disarm godly people in order that that evil may triumph.



ROOTS — pg. 626

So what succinct principles can we take from this survey of loving our enemies?

1. We are to love *our* enemies, not God’s enemies. To love God’s enemies is to seek the destruction of Christianity. We certainly may and must hate God’s enemies with a holy hatred. A man *cannot* love good if he does not hate evil.

2.) Love is not unconditional in the sense that one is required to open themselves to harm in the name of Love.

(Not even God’s love is unconditional. Remember, Jesus Christ met the conditions of God’s Holiness in order that we might have peace with God.)

3.) Love for Christians in their relation to others is defined as operating in terms of God’s law towards others — neighbors or enemies.

4.) Loving one’s people (neighbor) does not require hating those who are not one’s people or neighbor. This was the Jews mistake as Jesus handles the problem in the Sermon on the Mount.

An implication of #1 above when we think about hating God’s enemies we have to be done with the “Hate the sin love the sinner” mentality. While it might work as an abstraction in can never work in the concrete because one cannot artificially divorce actor and action. God does not throw sins into Hell, He throws sinners into Hell. There is no murder without a murderer or theft without a thief. Nowhere does the Bible teach “hate the sin, not the sinner” because, indeed, such is impossible. This is just a liberal bromide that’s been used, quite effectively, to undermine Christianity.

Considering Tyranny

“Woe to those who decree unrighteous decrees, Who write misfortune (violence), Which they have prescribed. To rob the needy of justice, And to take what is right from the poor of My people, That widows may be their prey, And that they may rob the fatherless.” 3. And what will ye do in the day of visitation, and in the desolation which shall come from far? to whom will ye flee for help? and where will ye leave your glory?

Isaiah 10:1-3

Here in Isaiah, the Prophet picks up a sub-theme he had begun in chapter 1.

Hear the word of the Lord,
    you rulers of Sodom;
listen to the instruction of our God,
    you people of Gomorrah!

Your rulers are rebels,
    partners with thieves;
they all love bribes
    and chase after gifts.
They do not defend the cause of the fatherless;
    the widow’s case does not come before them.

Isaiah 1:10, 23

Woe to those who call evil good
and good evil,
who put darkness for light
and light for darkness,
who put bitter for sweet
and sweet for bitter….

23 who acquit the guilty for a bribe,
but deny justice to the innocent.

Isaiah’s complaint here is about the ruling class in Judah – likely what we call legislators – were continually writing laws that today we would describe as anarcho-tyranny. That is laws were being passed that were manifestly unjust towards the needy, poor and have nots and so tyrannical while at the same time the lawless were exempt from law and so were allowed to be anarchistic. They were in short perpetrating the most egregious wrong under legal forms. It is the perversion from the seat of judgment that is being rebuked by the Prophet.

It is the same old story where God is cast out of consideration among the high born and among the political sock puppets of the high born. They who rise to these positions of political power and influence eventually think themselves as exempted from the ordinary lot of the little people even eventually concluding that they are not answerable to any God.
However, Isaiah tells them in vs. 3 that they will be the first to be visited with God’s judgment. Where will they turn in their day of Desolation? What good will all their power be in that day of visitation?

Isaiah brings back the reality of the God who remembers all before the potentates and sovereigns of Judah. He reminds them there is a God who sits in heaven and sees and who will mete out the whirlwind of divine justice in repayment for that wind of graft and injustice the Kings, Princes, and Leaders did sow.

In this warning Isaiah reminds his listeners and us today that there are many things which God appears to pass by in this life but which in point of fact is merely being set aside till that final day of visitation. How many have been the godly righteous through the centuries who counted on this reality. How many Christians suffered under the rule of a Nero or a Bishop Laud, or a Catherine Medici or Julian the Apostate or a King Charles I counting on the reality that God would not forget to bring a day of visitation upon wicked tyrants who would not repent.

Calvin offers here,

Accordingly, visitation must here be understood to mean the judgment by which God, in opposition to the waywardness and insolence of the ungodly, will bring them back like deserters. But if the judgments of God be so dreadful in this life, how dreadful will he be when he shall come at last to judge the world! All the instances of punishment that now produce fear or terror, are nothing more than preparations for that final vengeance with which he will thunder against the reprobate, and many things which he appears to pass by, he purposely reserves and delays till that last day. And if the ungodly are not able to bear these chastisements, how much less will they be capable of enduring his glorious and inconceivable majesty, when he shall ascend that awful tribunal, before which the angels themselves tremble! (Calvin)

So what this passage is dealing with is the reality of Tyranny and tyrants … of usurpation and Usurpers. The Prophet makes the case that God will by no means acquit the tyrant. God will have His way with the wicked who have oppressed His people and who have overthrown His law in favor of a completely subjective law that serves their own purposes and feathers their own nests. By this passage we can authoritatively say that “God Hates Tyrants,” and promises that there will be a payday some day unless they repent now.

And so today as we take up this matter we want to hold out again to the tyrants who might stumble across this message that will receive them as His own if they will but repent and trust Jesus Christ. If they will but end with their Tyranny and usurpation against God and His just law they can be assured that they will be received but should they spurn this offer from the Sovereign of the universe then they this warning will for eternity ringing in their ears.

Webster 1828 Dictionary defines TYR’ANNY as

1. Arbitrary or despotic exercise of power; the exercise of power over subjects and others with a rigor not authorized by law or justice, or not requisite for the purposes of government. Hence tyranny is often synonymous with cruelty and oppression.
We learn from this just what we read in the passage from Isaiah. Here as in Isaiah the point is that authority and power are be exercised in a illegitimate fashion inasmuch as they are exercised as inconsistent with God’s law revelation.

This is possibility of tyranny is a reality whether or not one holds that God’s law is revealed via natural law or whether one holds that God’s law is to be considered as being revealed via Holy Writ. In both of these positions there is the conviction that Tyranny and tyrants are possible and as such the governing rule of such men has no legal or moral legitimacy. There is nothing in their rule that compels or requires obedience.

Of course tyranny and the tyrant remains a problem for modern man. Indeed, we live right now under circumstances not completely different from Israel experience during Isaiah’s time. Americans likewise have those in leadership who decree unrighteous decrees and who write misfortune. The West is covered with tyrants and here in this country we have been living under tyranny of one degree or another for 150 years with each passing year finding the tyranny ever increasing in degree and substance.

There was a time when the Reformed Church above all other churches would lift its voice regarding tyrants, tyranny and Usurpers and Usurpation. There was a time when ministers would mount their pulpit and cause the walls to shake with their voices raised to heaven decrying tyranny. Such days have long since passed as the church as been declawed, defanged and tamed. Today we are told from seemingly every quarter that we must not raise our voices against tyrants and tyranny. We must “keep in our lane” we are told, completely ignoring the driving habits of our Fathers who joined with Isaiah and said things like we hear from the Divine Samuel Rutherford in his Lex Rex;

“Tyranny being a work of Satan, is not from God, because sin, either habitual or actual, is not from God: the power that is, must be from God; the magistrate, as magistrate, is good in nature of office, and the intrinsic end of his office, (Romans 13:4) for he is the minister of God for thy good; and, therefore, a power ethical, politic, or moral, to oppress, is not from God, and is not a power, but a licentious deviation of a power; and is no more from God…”

Samuel Rutherford- Lex Rex. p. 34

Or from

Calvinist Francis Hotman who posed this rhetorical question,

If a state was once free, but later was conquered by a tyrant, was it not lawful to overthrow the tyrant and revert to that ancient Independence?”

The nature of wicked princes is much like to warthogs, which if they be suffered to have their snouts in the ground, and be not forthwith expelled, will suddenly have their snouts in all the body; So they if they be obeyed in any evil thing be it ever so little will be obeyed in all at length.”

John Ponet

Magisterial Reformer

When therefore the supreme ruler has become a tyrant, he must be deemed by his own perjury (as against the covenant document with the people) to have freed people from their oath, and not to the contrary, when the people assert their rights against him.”

Vindiciae Contra Tyrannos

(Thought to have been written by a one of two men … both of whom were Calvinists)

As often as the Magistrate commands anything that is repugnant EITHER to the worship which we owe unto God OR to the love which we owe unto our neighbor, we cannot yield thereunto with a safe conscience. For as often as the commandment of God and men are directly opposed one against another, this rule is to be perpetually observed; that it is better to obey GOD than men.”

Theodore Beza

Calvin’s Successor in Geneva

Resistance to tyrannical governors was, according to (Calvinist Pierre) Viret, a legitimate act of self defense. He even endorsed the use of disinformation if the tyrant were persecuting as analogous to resisting a band of robbers. If the political leader acted like a criminal, Viret thought he should be treated like a one, and the citizens were justified in resisting him.”

The Political Ideas of Pierre Viret

Robert Dean Linder — p. 131

The Calvinist Peter Martyr stipulated that others in the public weal, who were in ‘place and dignity lower than princes’ and yet in positions of responsibility to ‘elect the superiors,’ have power by existing laws to govern the commonwealth. If, therefore, a prince does not preform his covenant as promised, ‘it is lawful to constrain and bring him into order and by force compel him to fulfill the conditions and covenant which he had promised, and that by war when it cannot be otherwise done.’

And who does Martyr include in his list of “others in the public weal’ who had a responsibility to keep an eye on wandering Magistrates?

Why Peter Martyr includes “Ministers of the Churches,” as those who had a responsibility to keep an eye on wandering Magistrates.

Loyal shoulders should sustain the power of the ruler so long as it is exercised in subjection to God and follows His ordinances; but if it resists and opposes the divine commandments, and wishes to make me share in its war against God, then with unrestrained voice, I answer back that God must be preferred before any man on earth.”

-John of Salisbury, Policraticus, 1159

“The Lord does not give Kings the right to use their power to subject the people to tyranny. Indeed when Liberty to resist tyranny seems to be taken away by princes who have taken over, one can justly ask this question; since kings and princes are bound by covenant to the people, to administer law in truest equality, sincerity and integrity; if they break faith and usurp tyrannical power by which they allow themselves everything they want: is it not possible for the people to consider together taking measures in order to remedy the evil?”

John Calvin

Sermon I Samuel Chapter 8

“…when constitutional limited government is abandoned, tyranny is a result. And citizens have a right to resist tyranny.”

– Robert Godfrey

(2010 Ligonier Regional Conference)

“When Tyranny is abroad, submission is a crime.”

Rev. Andrew Elliot

Election Sermon, 1765

Coming in the context of the English “Stamp Act”

Today that kind of preaching is largely considered “out of place.”

And my friends … my family in Christ, Tyranny is abroad and I for one will not submit. For almost 50 years we have put up with the work of the Tyrants who have tortured and killed the judicially innocent while inhabiting their sanctuaries of life. It has seemingly ended but our tyrant in chief of this country stands before God man and laments that it is a dark day in our history that this small portion of tyranny has come to an end.

But for every one portion of tyranny that seemingly passes us by our Luciferian tyrants prepare for us another crown of illegitimate and immoral law to press down upon our brows by passing legislation that overturns our political covenant as a people.

In the typical fashion of the Usurper and Tyrant our rulers pass an omnibus like legislation this week attacking our political covenant that was arrived upon in the darkness of hidden counsels and presented and passed without the opportunity to even fully read and dissect the legislation that has no passed the US Senate. No amendments were allowed to be offered to this legislation which had more the character of a drive by shooting in Chicago then well thought out and crafted legislation And all of it is fouled with the smell of control that the tyrant so much loves and which the Christ lover hates.

Tyranny now covers what has been called our charter of negative privileges. That document growing out of English common law that was itself so influenced by Biblical law. That document that was committed to explaining what the Federal Government could NOT do to the people in their states organized. That document that is commonly called our Bill of rights but perhaps should be more properly called the Bill of Prohibitions.”

What happened this week is just the kind of thing that Isaiah was seeing in his time. Legislators who decree unrighteous decrees, and those who write misfortune (violence), Which they have prescribed. To rob the needy of justice.

With the tyrants work this week the Federal Government has broadened its ability to infringe the God ordained assignment to keep and bear arms. With the tyrants work this week all that is left of the Due Process guaranteed in the 5th amendment is the Cheshire’s cat’s smile. With the tyrants work this week the Federal Government has weakened your 6th amendment right to face your accuser. Let’s not even talk about the 9th and 10th amendments.

With the voice of Patrick Henry from long ago; I ask friends, what means this legislative action, if its purpose be not to force us into submission?

All of this, if allowed to stand, is the State once again seeking to arise to the position of the most high with the goal of being God walking on the earth. It is the state’s play for divinity … for the right to control the way only God does control. It is this aspect of all of this tyranny that should give the Biblical Christian unrest and cause Him to call out to the God of War. It is this that should energize the clergy across the land to lift their voice to decry wickedness and tyranny in high places. Why should the clergy of all people sit by and remain silent in the face of the State’s attempt to be a god that ranks itself before the only one God? God people can never acquiesce to being controlled by and so serving a God besides the God of the Bible.

Our voices remain mute and our actions are not concentrated because we have lived under long term incremental tyranny and we have adjusted ourselves to the increments of tyranny so that one no longer even notices the next ratcheting up of the tyranny. This gun bill that is being shoved down our throats is just the next instantiation in a long line of tyranny but very few people are screaming ruddy murder. We have become inured to the reality that the FEDS are usurpers and now we just roll with whatever the most recent punch is that they deliver in our direction.

This is so because we have become a Christless people. Having abandoned our great King we no longer have a King to whom we owe a allegiance which would provide us with the solid grand upon which to stand in order to defy Tyrants and Usurpers. We have become so malleable and weak that we even gladly surrender our own seed to the maw of the God-State that we are currently living under.

I am so weary of this Christ-less tyranny. So weary of having to adjust in order to find a way to accommodate it. So weary of having to bow my knee to jackanapes, mountebanks, and blaggards when it should be the tyrants who are the ones bowing their knees to the King of Kings and Lord of Lords.

From Abraham Lincoln to Woodrow Wilson to FDR and nearly every President since then the tyranny has continued to inflate so that the intolerance of it all screams to the heavens.

And the Church? The Church is like C. S. Lewis’ Lady of the green kirtle who casts spells in order to put people to sleep when they begin to become aroused about the nature of their peril in living under her tyranny. The visible Church is largely useless in this hour having herself decided to now be a servant of the Tyrant that at least a few of us so despise.

If we wish to be free—if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which our Christian Fathers and we have been so long contending—if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained, we must prepare to fight! I repeat it, sir, we must prepare to fight! An appeal to arms and to the God of Hosts is all that is left us!

Patrick Henry

Sermonic Tidbits — 27 July, 2014

Now, why is this Pauline Eschatological impulse that we have noted here important?

Simply because the nowness of the “age to come” has been so long buried and continues to be buried underneath the flotsam and jetsam of those in the Church who would rather overemphasize the “not yetness” of the age to come. They accuse us who preach this nowness of an “over-realized” eschatology, by which they mean that our expectations of what Christ intends to accomplish before His return is too high to the point of being dangerous. They cast their eyes upon the landscape and they see how Christians are marginalized and they say, “Thus it has ever been, thus it is now, thus it will ever be. Amen,” completely ignoring the triumph of the Gospel and of Christianity in periods throughout history.

They thus make a virtue out of the expectation that the gates of Hell shall prevail. Their theology is all Crucifixion and no Resurrection and Ascension. They see the “not yet” of our Reformed Hermeneutic as corporeally incarnating itself into all of reality and all of our living but the “now” victory of our Reformed Hermeneutic in their sermons, books, and tours is all “spiritual,” which is to say not only that it has no present tactile reality anyplace beyond the Church, but that it never will have any present tactile reality anyplace beyond the Church.

So, a very prominent manifestation of blatant unbelief in the Evangelical churches today is to allow the “not yet” to “eat up” or gut/overrule/obliterate the “already” in terms of it having any practical reality in the faith of believers. Such unbelief has got to stop for it invites the divine curse upon that unbelief. The “not yet” perspective indeed has a role to play in the eschatological orientation as the Bible defines it, but absolutely NOT one that is to the denial of the “already”. The Biblical orientation from the get-go is to live by faith, not by sight. Abraham and his family believed themselves to be possessors of the promised land of Canaan long before the actual historical arrival of Joshua and his army of conquest. In terms of the world/cosmos as a whole, we Christians are called today to stand in the same sort of shoes of faith that Abraham himself did. Everything rides on the fact of the “already”. The resurrection, ascension, and enthronement of Christ mark the definitive advent — the “already” — of the “new creation”.

Sermonic Tidbit From 2020

Thou Shalt Not Bear False Witness  Against Your Neighbor — Exodus 20:16

Do you see why not participating in this false witness impressed upon you by the lying State is so important? It is not “just a mask,” it is the camel’s nose under the tent unto the next breach of the Christ-hating tyrant state.

Masks are supporting the lie of a social order that is amped up on fear. This fear juice throughout history has been used upon the public to support Marxist Revolution. Whether it was the constant lies of the Duc d’Orleans of the French Revolution or whether it was the constant lies of the Bolsheviks before the Russian revolution or whether it was the lies of the abolitionists and Jacobins of our own Revolution of 1861 fear is ginned up in order to drive people to support the Christ-hating Revolution.

Christians … do not bear false witness. Live not by lies.

Masks are supporting a social order controlled by the State. A state that can make you put on a clown mask can make you accept a vaccine, can make you give up your currency, can make you tell on your neighbor for the silliest of reasons.

Fear and control … do not bear false witness. Live not by lies.

From the pulpit, in my teaching, in my writing, and even on the radio platform God has opened up I have tried to warn people that our biggest enemy right now is the Tyrant State. It was the case through Scripture and it remains the case now. Government is fire and while it can be a fine servant it always needs to remain under the control of a Christian people.
And right now the State is seeking to control you through fear by having you wear the worthless mask. Do not bear false witness. Live not by lies.

Let us close by quote Solzhenitsyn one more time. Of course, Solzhenitsyn knew what it was to live under a state tyranny that required its people to live by lies if they desired to survive. How long until we are living under that same kind of tyranny? We are well on our way there. We can avoid paying the cost that the Russian people paid if we will just stand fast now… at this point. If we will just refuse to bear false witness with these masks… if we will just live not by lies.

Solzhenitsyn speaking in 1978 said,

“Truth seldom is pleasant; it is almost invariably bitter. A loss of courage may be the most striking feature, which an outside observer notices in the West in our days…Such a decline in courage is particularly noticeable among the ruling groups and the intellectual elite, causing an impression of loss of courage by the entire society. Of course, there are many courageous individuals, but they have no determining influence on public life.”

Sermon Teaser
Charlotte Christ the King Reformed Church — AM service
26 July 2020

Humanism — Nebuchadnezzar & Ours

Daniel 4:28-37
This morning we consider this dream of Nebuchadnezzar, its fulfillment, and its result and we do so in light of seeing in it the worldview of Humanism that continues to this day.
Daniel 4 starts as a retrospective. Nebuchadnezzar has come through his ordeal and now he writes stating what he has learned as a result of God’s chastisements. As we will learn he comes out of this madness tamed and now God-centered in his thinking… the direct opposite disposition as he portrayed going into this period of insanity.
Chapter 4 recounts Nebuchadnezzar’s great dream of the mighty tree in the midst of the earth that was visible to the whole globe and was the source of nutrition for all the known world and provided sanctuary to all the beasts of the field. In the dream Nebuchadnezzar sees a Holy Watcher (Angel) descend and pronounce judgment upon this arboreal wonder commanding that it be cut down w/ its stump bound by iron and bronze till the judgment time is fulfilled. The purpose of this humbling was
In order that the living may know
That the Most High rules in the kingdom of men,
Gives it to whomever He will,
And sets over it the lowest of men.’
The purpose of this dream pulls back the curtain on the meaning that Daniel will give. If the purpose of these prophesied events is to communicate that God rules and is sovereign over who rises and falls in terms of the kingdoms of men then it is a pretty good guess that what Nebuchadnezzar is seeing in his vision of the magnificent arboreal is the Kingdom of Babylon with himself as the incarnation of Babylon ruling mightily over the affairs of men.
Given the grandeur of it all, it is easy to see what is going on in Nebuchadnezzar’s dream is a re-instantiation of the Genesis 11 Babel project. In Gen. 11 we have a ziggurat reaching into the heavens and here we have a tree reaching into the heavens. Daniel identifies this cosmic tree as Nebuchadnezzar – the center and pivotal point of the universe. In the ancient world, pagan kings were the state and the state was represented in the pagan king. Again, this is all very Babel-like in its description. You have this great society, in this dream, that is ruling the world without any recourse to the God who is. As we will see Nebuchadnezzar understands that he indeed is the center of all this glory.
Here we have the humanist state and humanism once again perfectly defined. Man sees himself as the center of his own reality. There is no God to parley with. No divinity to consider for man as god to reckon with.
Nebuchadnezzar could have said along with Invictus author Wm. Earnest Henley
It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishments the scroll,
I am the master of my fate,
I am the captain of my soul.
However, Nebuchadnezzar is given an opportunity to repent after he is tetched with madness.
 Seven times shall pass over you, till you know that the Most High rules in the kingdom of men, and gives it to whomever He chooses. (25)
At the end of his insanity, Nebuchadnezzar will give up his humanism and acknowledge the supremacy of God.
Apparently, Nebuchadnezzar missed Daniel’s warning, refused the offer to repent (27), and continued on in his anthropocentric reality. He saw all reality in terms of the glory of his majesty (30).
Friends, Babylon would have been something to behold. Her walls for defense were wide enough to allow for four chariots abreast pulled each by four horses to pass one another on the walls. Numerous ornate Temples speckled the city. One of the seven wonders of the ancient world – the famous hanging gardens – that Nebuchadnezzar built for one of his wives was there. All the wealth of the known world flowed into Babylon.
All of this Nebuchadnezzar chalked up to his mighty power without a thought of the God of the Bible.
There is another pointer in this text to the humanism that was pursued in Babylon by Nebuchadnezzar as a world and life view in this text and that is where Daniel says in offering repentance,
27 Therefore, O king, let my advice be acceptable to you; break off your sins by being righteous, and your iniquities by showing mercy to the poor. Perhaps there may be a lengthening of your prosperity.”
This appeal to repentance implies that there were moral standards outside of Nebuchadnezzar that Nebuchadnezzar was to conform to. In other words, there was objective right and wrong that Nebuchadnezzar was responsible to. There was a moral authority above His authority that Nebuchadnezzar was to bow to. Implied here is that Nebuchadnezzar is acting as his own standard quite apart from considering God’s law-word. Again, this is humanism.
Doubtless morality and truth then, like today, were the consequence of process philosophy where truth evolves over time so that one can only speak of truth as a temporary phenomenon. And for Nebuchadnezzar, the process philosophy of his time found its high point in Nebuchadnezzar and his Babylonian Empire. Truth was Nebuchadnezzar and Nebuchadnezzar was truth.
So, for Nebuchadnezzar, there were no absolute absolutes – only process — no absolute law, no absolute justice, no absolute truth beyond himself. This was his humanist faith when he confronted Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, and he declared, “Who is that God who is able to deliver you out of my hand?
He could say that because in his humanist faith he was God. Who do these lowly Hebrews think they are? What kind of myth do they believe in? Don’t they know I am the high point of history, the high point of process, and there is no greater power than I?
So, we see Nebuchadnezzar’s humanism in his self-aggrandizement, in his “man the measure morality,” in his self-centeredness. Nebuchadnezzar viewed himself as god.
Epistemologically he was the source of his own truth. There was no appeal beyond him.

Axiologically he was his own highest value. There was nothing to seek beyond him.

his Kingdom was the ultimate end. History had found its completion in Neb.

he viewed himself as god. And as god he could dictate any reality he like.
This is humanism and we see it just as clearly now in the 21st century as Nebuchadnezzar embraced it in the ancient world and as Babel incarnated in Genesis 11. Man the measure of all things. Man the center of all things.
We pause here to spend some time examining some of the basic convictions of humanism that is always a part of all humanism when you stumble across it.
1.) Man is basically good. And man will decide what good is.
Man left to himself, apart from evil influence, will choose what is good.
Of course this is contrary to Scripture which teaches that man is fallen and so sinful. Evangelism requires that we communicate to fallen men that they are fallen and are not basically good. The religion of humanism must be punctured and man must see that he is fallen and that all his actions stem from a sinful nature.
2.) Man’s environment accounts for evil.
Humanism, believing man is basically good must account for the presence of evil somewhere and so humanists insist that it is man’s environment that accounts for evil and so if evil is to be finally conquered then man’s environment must be turned into a Utopia. As such social engineering is pursued in order to make men conform to a redemptive environment.
3.) From this belief that man’s environment accounts for evil arises the myth of the noble savage.
If man is evil because of an evil artificial civilization environment then the man who is noblest is found where civilization has left man untouched and so walking in terms of his inbred goodness and “innocence.” And so we get the Romanticist nonsense about men untouched by the evil influence of civilization.
The Noble savage myth continues to this day as we are bombarded with the evils of the civilized Christian white man.
Whiteness and white racialized identity refer to the way that white people, their customs, culture, and beliefs operate as the standard by which all other groups are compared. “
This is humanism on parade under the auspices of the Noble savage. What the complaint here is actually is a complaint against is Christianity. The noble savages have not been afflicted with the customs, culture, and beliefs of Christian white people, and because they have not been afflicted with the Christianity of white people therefore they can arise to accuse the Christian white man as being the heart of all that is evil.
You see this noble savage humanism is not so much attacking Christian white people as it is attacking the beliefs and the God who made the Christian white man what the Christian white man is. This is a humanist attack on Jesus Christ… a backdoor humanism attempt to roll him off his throne.
4.) The agency whereby man discovers his goodness is Church & State
The church in Revolutionary Humanism is the government school as controlled by the State. Of course over the course of time as the “Christian” church begins to reflect the Government schools as Government school graduates bring their humanism into the Church. Church and State teach basically good man that it is his role to use any means necessary to change the environment in order to serve the “good.”
5.) The abstraction of mathematical equality is applied to men in their social relations. Humanism leads to egalitarianism and egalitarianism here is defined in such a way so that no man is allowed to excel above another. All men being equal results in “all men being the same.” So, whether it is 700 million Chinese wearing the Maoist suit or whether it is men and women sharing public bathrooms, equality is now the order of the day. This is humanism. As all men together are god no god-man can be allowed to rise above another god-man. All of this is merely the logical outworking of man the center.
6.) Man, being absolutized, is his own God
And man being God there is a movement towards Social Order uniformitarianism. All gods have unity in the godhood and so as collective man is god collective man builds social order where there is very little margin for differentiation among the particular men.
7.) All other mediating Institutions (Family, Church, School, Guild, etc.) are eliminated.
Humanism does not allow for pluralistic jurisdictions (See #5). Everything is for the State and nothing is outside the State. We are seeing this increasingly in our culture. Teachers have long been agents for the State. Soon Doctors will be agents for the State with Obamacare. Ministers are often Defacto ministers of the State.
The demand of humanism (and of its child, socialism) is for a universal ethics. In universal ethics, we are told that, even as the family gave way to the tribe, and the tribe to the nation, so the nation must give way to a one-world order. All men must treat all other men equally. Partiality to our family, nation, or race, represents a lower morality, we are told, and must be replaced by a ‘higher’ morality of a universal ethics.”
Rousas John Rushdoony
8.) Man as God, thus can be assured of the inevitability of progress
Since God can not fail, Man as God calls whatever is “progress.”
All of this you would have found in Nebuchadnezzar’s Babylon. You would have found it in Babel society in Genesis 11. You find all of it in the French Revolution. The Revolutions of 1848. The Socialist experimental communities in America from John Humphrey Noyes Oneida community to Robert Owen’s New Harmony Indiana Utopia community to Mother Anne Lee’s Shaker community, to Joseph Smith’s original Mormonism. From Lenin’s Bolshevik Revolution to Mao’s Cultural Revolution to the ongoing work here now to level all of us in the humanist Utopian gulag.
All of these expressions of humanism find the above characteristics and they are all singed by hell’s fire and they all smell of sulfur and their all adherents – whether clergy or laymen – need to repent and be warned if they will not repent of this self-centered Christ-attacking humanism they will eternally die.
Only faith in Jesus Christ …. only the embrace of Biblical Christianity can overturn all of this. Only by the overturning of humanism that Nebuchadnezzar experienced accompanying by a humble bowing before God and His truth can deliver us from this death spiral we are in called humanism. Only by ceasing to exalt ourselves at the expense of everyone else and turning to exalt the triune God can we be rescued. Only by living by every law-word of God can we be delivered from the enchanting death word of fallen man.
If Nebuchadnezzar was in need of repentance as warned by Daniel Western man is in need of a repentance of sackcloth and ashes. Only the triune God can rescue us out of the depths of the wormhole of Humanism that we find ourselves down.
Note here that it is the Christianity of our the Bible and our Reformed Fathers alone which can provide deliverance. Away with the Christianities of Pentecostalism, Holiness, Lutheran, and Baptist. Only a Christianity that is totalistic in its belief armament can overturn the armaments of humanism. As Van Til used to say,
The Christian faith as a whole, as a unit, must be set over against the non-Christian faith as a whole. Piecemeal apologetics is inadequate, especially for our time. A Christian totality picture requires a Christian view of the methodology of science and philosophy, as well as a Christian view of theology.”
The humanism we face is a humanism that can only be met by a totalistic worldview Christianity. Nebuchadnezzar will not be overthrown without a Calvinism that reaches beyond what is today called “Calvinism,” back to when Calvinism filled men with testosterone and women with grit.
We learn in this passage that Nebuchadnezzar was healed of his humanism.
Nebuchadnezzar tells us that, after a long period of insanity, when he lifted up his eyes unto Heaven, he says, “Mine understanding returned unto me, and I blessed the most high and I praised and honored him that liveth forever, whose dominion is an everlasting dominion and his kingdom is from generation to generation.”
Nebuchadnezzar who had earlier declared his own presumption of godhood, and who taken himself as the Archimedian leverage point of all reality – that is as god walking on the earth, and who had declared that there was no higher point in all of creation than himself, now acknowledges the dominion and the sovereignty of God, and declares that “all the inhabitants of the earth are reputed as nothing and he doeth according to his will in the army of heaven and among the inhabitants of the earth, and none can stay his hand or say unto him, ‘What doest thou?’”
Nebuchadnezzar, in order to understand any country he was waging war against, studied their religion, and so it is not unreasonable to believe that before this event that Daniel 4 tells of, years before, he had read the scriptures. It is not unreasonable to assume that Nebuchadnezzar learned some of the Hebrews Scriptures from his Hebrew captives including Daniel and his friends. We say it is not unreasonable because the words falling out of Nebuchadnezzar’s mouth here echoes other passages in Scripture.
Nebuchadnezzar says;
I blessed the Most High and praised and honored Him who lives forever:
For His dominion is an everlasting dominion,
And His kingdom is from generation to generation.
35 All the inhabitants of the earth are reputed as nothing;
He does according to His will in the army of heaven
And among the inhabitants of the earth.
No one can restrain His hand
Or say to Him, “What have You done?”
Listen to other Scripture for an echo effect,
Psalm 145:13, “Thy kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and thy dominion endureth through all generations.”
Isaiah 40:17, “All nations before him are as nothing, and they are counted to him less than nothing, and vanity.”
Isaiah 43:13, “Yea, before the day while I am he and there is none that can deliver out of my hand, I will work and who shall let it?”
Isaiah 43:21, “This people have I formed for myself. They shall show forth my praise.”
Nebuchadnezzar thus echoes scripture as he has come to the end of himself as all humanists must and commit himself to the sovereignty of God.
Nebuchadnezzar concludes, “Now I Nebuchadnezzar praise and extol and honor the King of heaven, all whose works are truth, and his ways judgment: and those that walk in pride he is able to abase.”
This is a very telling confession and a very profound one because here Nebuchadnezzar is confessing a creator God that transcends man the creature. Nebuchadnezzar is confessing the righteousness of all God’s works. Nebuchadnezzar is confessing that
Luke 1:52 God brings  down the mighty from their thrones
land exalts those of humble estate;
In all this Nebuchadnezzar strikes out at that which is the heart of humanism in every age, in which the existentialist and pomo philosophers in our time have formulated as their faith. Nebuchadnezzar declares of God that all his works are truth because God is truth, and his ways, justice.
At this point, Nebuchadnezzar has left behind his humanism and now sounds very much like a God-fearing King.
Humanism is awash in the Church
CRT in the Church is humanism
We are learning in the evening service in our reading that Christianity is being reinterpreted through the lens of CRT.
R2K is public square humanism inasmuch as it denies that the Church has the responsibility to articulate a “thus saith the Lord” for public square social order issue. When it denies a thus saith the Lord it creates a public square religious vacuum that will be filled by some form of humanism.
We would do well to repent now so we are chastised by 7 years of animal madness.