Beginning with Home Schooling (2)

God be gracious to us and bless us, and cause His face to shine upon us-Selah. That your way may be known on the earth, Your salvation among all nations. Let the peoples praise you, O God; let all the peoples praise You. Let the nations be glad and sing for joy; for You will judge the peoples with uprightness and guide the nations on the earth. Selah. Let the peoples praise You, O God; let all the peoples praise You. The earth has yielded its produce; God, our God, blesses us. God blesses us, that all the ends of the earth may fear Him (Ps.67).

Over the years, I’ve witnessed hundreds of Christian families pull their children out of different schools, and decide to home school them. I rejoice in their choice, and I believe they are doing something that will be of great importance for their children in the long-term, and indirectly, the church.

I’ve also witnessed many families who commence the education of their children, through home schooling. They’ve concluded that there is no institution like their family, that can accomplish the task of education, as well.

This is a confident move, and it doesn’t automatically denote arrogance. More commonly, it’s a sign of a desire to follow the example of many families in scripture and in Christian history who have chosen this mode of education. And in this, I think they should be commended and encouraged in church.

It could tread on toes for churches to encourage families to home school. But that’s what elders are responsible to do. When it comes to the downsides of Public Education, you simply have to call a spade a spade, explaining its impact on the family and church.

Elders should identify the origins, the reasons, and the desired outcomes of Public Education, and then explain why it has been a total disaster for the church and the family, over a century and a half.  Advocating for home schooling may upset some compromising families, but what are faithful elders to do?

What’s more, when the church really embraces home schooling, it’s embracing something that could be the catalyst for true Christian social reform. The example of godly families in  the church in this regard is of great importance. They are saying there is a limit to the role of the State, advocating that the State doesn’t have a role in the education of children, which is to be a family responsibility, only. The implications of this are profound.

If we step forward on the matter of education, what else could we step forward to, also? What about Public Health and Public Welfare, which are plainly, two other inefficient monstrosities that are a huge drain on taxpayers’ wealth.

And that’s just the start. We could keep really start wielding the knife. What if Defence, instead of being centralised in a bureaucratic government department was entirely localised? What if all those lucrative government contracts got torn up, and the defence of the nation became a local responsibility, as it generally was in Israel’s time? We’d no longer need expensive aircraft and airfields, fancy ships and submarines to go rushing about in, or lots of other military hardware, all of which is a massive drain on the taxpayer, not to speak of all the highly paid officers, employed in peacetime to do nothing. There would still be a need for defence, but on a budget of about 3% what it is today. And the efficiency would be far greater, and a militia, a greater deterrent to an invader. This is more like what the Swiss have, and it works.

Who invades them? Even though the Swiss shared a border with Germany, Hitler didn’t invade Switzerland. His generals talked him out of it, because the Swiss, with only a militia, knew how to make invaders pay dearly, and they were prepared for it.

Thus we could very well see over time, some big dominoes which have been pillars of humanism and socialism in the West, collapsing before our eyes.

Exciting and profound as this is, none of this can happen without a major shift: an increase in Christian responsibility. If families understand that an acceptance of much greater scriptural responsibility directed them to home educate their children, it will be a greater sense of Christian responsibility that permits these other idols of destruction to be brought down, too.

Economic realities may not leave us much time for reflection or consideration on these matters, for the inabilities of the modern socialist State when it comes to financial management and its ability to service its debts aren’t going away, but will actually worsen. As the patient riddled with incurable cancer finally succumbs, so the West’s socialist States will inevitably get overtaken by their debts; they are in the process of this, now.

And what will be the socialist’s reluctant commentary then? “It all came tumbling down?” It will have to be, at least if they are honest.

This means only one thing for the Christian family, and the church: we are going to have a lot of work coming our way, because social reconstruction should really begin with us. It will, if we are faithful to scripture.

Conclusion:

As my mentor likes to say, “Power flows to those who takes responsibility.” If you want to get involved in those projects that are gospel related, that the church has ignored for a long time but should have participated in, it’s hard to predict how many will want to join you, right where you are. But that’s a matter for God to have to deal with, not us.

We can only volunteer, pray, and leave the rest with God. He will send the people when He wants to. When Nehemiah wanted to rebuild the walls of Jerusalem, he found some willing workers. And we can be confident that

Your people will volunteer freely in the day of Your power; in holy array, from the womb of the dawn, Your youth are to you as the dew (Ps.110:3).

Are you ready for work?

Beginning with Home Schooling (1)

My wife Sue and I started home schooling our children in 1990, but my interest in Christian education began in 1977. This was when the church we were in built a school and opened it, using the ACE curriculum, firstly for the children of the church, and secondly for others.

That was a big step to take, at the time. But an even bigger step, and probably a more Biblical one, is to home school your children. That way, if anything goes wrong, it’s your fault. You won’t be able to blame a teacher or a Principal.

Sue and I began with the ACE curriculum, too, and if I was starting out in 2019, I’d probably do it again. If you are an evangelical believer, the ACE curriculum will give you at least 80% of what you want. It will give you what you need to teach a child to read, and much more. Then in 2011 I purchased a contract with the Australian importer of ACE curriculum to Australia, so families with us at Hebron Home schoolers can access ACE curriculum at a discount price, compared to retail.

But before you consider curriculums for your children, you have to address more fundamental questions of education. You ought to ask yourself, “Why am I doing this?” Getting the “Why” part right, is more fundamental than the “How?”

If you sort out “Why?” The “How” will fairly logically fall into place, and that leads us straight to scripture. God said concerning Abraham,

For I have chosen him, so that he may command his children and his household after him to keep the way of the Lord by doing righteousness and justice, so that the Lord may bring upon Abraham what He has spoken about him (Gen.18:19).

If God has chosen you, and Jesus made this plain, when He said that “… I chose you…” (Jn.15:16), what permits us to do anything other than accept and put into place, what God expected of Abraham?

This means that the Christian child should understand there are such things as “God’s commands,” and though God gives us lots of choices to make, we need to have it straight in our minds that:

  1. This is God’s world, made by Him miraculously in six days, some 6,000 years ago.
  2. Jesus Christ died to save sinners, just like us, and rose again.
  3. Each of us will have a day of accountability, before Him.
  4. Christian parents are obligated to give their children a Biblical, Christian education.

Sending a child to a public school is not consistent with a Christian education; it’s the very opposite. Sending a child to a school that doesn’t teach a six day creation 6,000 years ago, is not giving them a Christian education, because education has to be consistently Christian, if it’s going to be faithful to God.

So, that means we avoid some forms of “education” with our children, if we want to be faithful to God. We have to think of “…what is pleasing to the Lord” (Eph.5:10), so we take steps with them that are Biblically directed and thus worthwhile, with a view to preparing them for a life of service and dominion, in this world.

When I was fourteen, my farmer father heard from a neighbour that he’d arranged with a veterinarian to perform a Caesarian operation on a cow, one winter’s morning, and my father and I attended. The calf had died inside the cow and was rotting. If left, the cow would soon die. So, the cow had to be opened up, and the pieces of calf removed, one piece at a time. One could say, there was some odour.

It was pretty earthy, but not awful. It was a good, positive experience. The vet disinfected the insides of the cow, sewed up her up, and she lived.

Was I glad I attended this? Yes.

A year later, my father suddenly died. No more life lessons from him.

Twenty one years after that Caesarian observation, married now and with three children, I needed a job, and got one in the best unskilled opportunity around: a sheep abattoir. The prospect of working with freshly slaughtered sheep did not really bother me, though it bothers many. I worked there for seven years, while I completed training to become a teacher.

The lesson?

Be careful how you define “education,” because it’s a broad subject. It includes life experiences that God permits us to have.

Lessons from a Great Man’s Failures (4)

Then Jehoshaphat the king of Judah returned in safety to his house in Jerusalem. Jehu the son of Hanani the seer went out to meet him and said to King Jehoshaphat, “Should you help the wicked and love those who hate the Lord and so bring wrath on yourself from the Lord?” (II Chron.19:2)

One of the mistakes we in the Church have made in the modern era, is that we have tended to view the Bible’s teaching in an intensely personal context, without considering the broader implications beyond ourselves and the Church, to the nation.

How do we know there are “broader implications?”  The Bible is an “all of life” document, because the God Who created us, is an “all of life” Person. No one can say with any legitimacy, “this area of my life is not important to God.”

Jehoshaphat in God’s eyes as Judah’s lawful king, represented Judah. Jehoshaphat had covenanted himself and Judah to an evil king and people who were in rebellion against God, saying “I am as you are, and my people as your people, and we will be with you in the battle” (II Chron.18:3b).

This is something God had expressly forbidden:

Watch that you make no covenant with the inhabitants of the land into which you are going, or it will become a snare in your midst. But rather, you are to tear down their altars and smash their sacred pillars and cut down their Asherim –for you shall not worship any other god, for the Lord, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God- otherwise you might make a covenant with the inhabitants of the land and they would play the harlot with their gods and sacrifice to their gods, and someone might invite you to eat of his sacrifice… (Ex.34:12-15).

Let me make an application of this to our present day, beginning with some historical background:

Immediately after the Second World War, it was obvious to Australia’s political leaders that Great Britain could no longer be relied on to protect Australia in the event of invasion. The British Empire was essentially closing down, and Britain after two world wars, was broke. So our leaders decided to look around for a suitable ally, and they came up with the United States, who had already come to our aid in 1942-1945.

As a result, Australia, New Zealand and the U.S. signed the ANZUS treaty in San Francisco in September 1951. The parties agreed to “consult together whenever in the opinion of any of them the territorial integrity, political independence or security of any of the Parties is threatened in the Pacific.”[1]

Because of ANZUS, Australia has been willing to follow the U.S. into Korea, Viet Nam, Iraq and Afghanistan. We have an extensive military relationship. We wanted to be perceived as a faithful ally, willing to do our bit for the sake of the alliance in case our turn came and we needed someone to do some heavy lifting on our behalf.  As a result, the lives of many hundreds of Australian soldiers overseas have been lost since 1951, and we’re still losing them.

And what’s been achieved?

In 1966, the U.S. President was Lyndon Baines Johnson, and the Australian Prime Minister Harold Holt emphatically declared that as far as he was concerned, it was “all the way with LBJ.” But this was not a foreign policy of independence. It was one of dependence, but worst of all, subservience. Since then successive Australian governments have not used Holt’s language, but the attitude has generally remained the same.

And now there’s another problem. Increasingly since World War II, the U.S. has used threatening behaviour towards other nations. Furthermore, it has interfered in the internal affairs of other nations which have not attacked the U.S. It has utilised bombings, murders and many other acts of violence, through such groups as the CIA, and others.

Can’t think of any examples?

a) The Me Lai massacre in 1968 of hundreds of Vietnamese civilians. The officer responsible (William Calley), was court-martialled and found guilty of the murder of 109 Vietnamese civilians-mainly women, children and old people. What happened to Calley? When found guilty in a court martial, he was pardoned and released by the US President, Richard Nixon.

b) Between 1969-1973, the United States was not even at war with Cambodia, but on Nixon’s directions 600-800,000 Cambodian civilians were killed by indiscriminate U.S. bombing.                 

c) The deliberate destruction of water and sewerage infrastructure by the U.S. in Iraq, leading to the deaths of around half a million Iraqi children from untreated affluent and water carried diseases.

d) The 2007 helicopter gunship attack in Baghdad, shooting 18 peaceable, unarmed, innocent civilians in broad daylight using a .50 calibre machine-gun. (This can be witnessed on U-tube.) What was this? Not “collateral damage,” or “unintended consequences of war.” It was State sanctioned murder.

e) Drone attacks for years in Pakistan and Afghanistan, killing hundreds of innocent people on “suspicion.”

These instances raise a problem for Australians. Do we ignore the murderous behaviour of our ally the U.S., saying “Well, that’s the way they do things sometimes,” or do we say, “That’s awful and evil. We cannot be associated with that kind of behaviour. We won’t continue in this alliance.”

The Bible specifically commands that God’s people are not to make covenants with ungodly people. Why? Because God’s people are bound in covenant to God, through Jesus Christ, and He is a jealous God. He is jealous for the love, affections and the obedience of His people; He wants their hearts. There are many texts dealing with this, such as Deut.7:1-6; 12:1-4; 20:16-18, Num.33:50-56; Judges 2:1-4. Every time God’s people disobeyed him in this context in the Bible, God said the results would be disastrous. (Joshua 23:11-13 is a good example.)

Now this has suddenly gotten very serious, hasn’t it? That’s because God considers covenant to be a very serious issue for His people to contemplate, whether it’s for Jehoshaphat in 900 B.C., or for us today. The Australian Constitution’s Preamble mentions that we are “humbly relying on the blessing of Almighty God…”

Now some would say, “Now Andrew, this is getting a bit too radical for me.” But then, what would you prefer: taking inconvenient and radical steps of obedience to God Almighty, or have Him send an angry prophet to rebuke you for your disobedience, as happened to Jehoshaphat? Or worse, see your nation overrun by an evil nation, sent by God as a means of His judgment?

You may say, “I can’t see that happening,” but consider these statistics: the Australian Army has 30,000 soldiers, with 16,900 reservists, while the Chinese Army has 2.25 million soldiers. That’s a ratio of one Australian to forty-seven Chinese soldiers. I don’t find that to be a particularly reassuring statistic.

The Bible commands us, “Do not be bound together with unbelievers; for what partnership have righteousness and lawlessness, or what fellowship has light with darkness? Or what harmony has Christ with Belial…” (II Cor.6:14-15a). George Washington in his farewell address to the Americans, was right in warning his nation of the potential danger of “entangling alliances.”

Why? Because alliances are like a rope around your neck; they can take you places you never wanted to go.

Does America take any notice of George Washington anymore? Of course not. His wise and godly advice to his fellow Americans has been ignored now for a century.

Conclusion:                                                                                                                              

The Christian capital of the West is rapidly disappearing. Unless it is replenished, the West has no future and has nothing to give the nations other than death.[2]

Let’s learn from Jehoshaphat’s errors, with all the legitimate applications. If Australia is going to follow Jesus Christ in the future, we will have to think carefully about who we are allied to in future.

Our faithfulness to Jesus Christ means a lot of things, including how we think about the defence of our nation, and the influence we will bring to see change come about, in all the affairs of our nation.

Isn’t that what Christians are here for?


[1] Source: Wikipedia.

[2] Rousas Rushdoony, “In His Service,” 2009, p.12.

Who is King? The Total Sacrifice of Humanism

By Dr. Joel McDurmon (American vision.com), Feb 26, 2019  

Kings and Total Sacrifice

In the 1 Samuel 8 passage we just covered, the Hebrew uses the standard word for “king”—mlk, or melech. This common word appears all through the Old Testament, but when referring to a particular practice of neighbouring pagan divine-king States, the Hebrew scribes replaced the vowels with those from the Hebrew word boseth, “shame.” The resulting name “Molech” refers to the pagan total-State, the great tyrannies incurred where the civil State usurped the place of God and worship in society and demanded ultimate sacrifice.

The symbols of these tyrannies are perpetual servitude to the State in both person and property, and the unforgettable legacy of child sacrifice. For this reason the Hebrew scribes distinguished between “kings” (melech) and “king-mandated human sacrifice” (molech). The commands forbidding child-sacrifice appear in Leviticus 18:2120:1–5, and in Deuteronomy 12:29–3218:9–10. These commands appear among sections of God’s law that forbid divination, false prophecy, and other attempts to control the future. In other words, God’s law recognized the propensity of kings and the State to attempt total control of its people, capital, environment, and future (as a god would do), and that same law condemned these actions. “The Moloch state simply represents the supreme effort of man to command the future, to predestine the world, and to be as God.… Moloch worship was thus state worship. The state was the true and ultimate order.… The state claimed total jurisdiction over man; it was therefore entitled to total sacrifice.”1

And sacrifice it was: The “Molech sacrifices” of children were widespread in Mediterranean culture.2  Archeologists have uncovered—from Tyre in the Middle East to Carthage in North Africa, and even in Italy and Sicily—thousands of urns and burials containing the charred remains of infants and small children. One find notably uncovered inscriptions of mlk ’mr and mlk ’dm—“molech amar” and “molech adam”—meaning “king-sacrifices of lamb,” and “king-sacrifices of man.” Ancient historians as well attest to pagan rituals of rolling children into an idol-furnace shaped like a god with horns, whose hollowed midsection belched fire—sacrifices by the hundreds, even thousands.3  A fairly recent site near modern-day Tyre uncovered so many cinerary jars and urns that the number “cannot even be approximated.”4

Despite a clear mandate from God Almighty, the community of the “faithful” could not refrain from acting “like all the nations.” It was not immune from even these barbarous practices. We find Judah’s kings Ahaz and Manasseh leading the country in pagan worship and even in the fires of Molech (2 Kings 16:321:6), and we see the people of Israel following right along (2 Kings 17:17). Historian Vaux comments,

The sacrifice of children, then, by burning them to death probably made its way into Israel from Phoenicia during a period of religious syncretism. The Bible mentions only two specific instances, and they were motivated by the same exceptional circumstances as the Phoenician sacrifices [see 2 Kings 16:321:6].5

“Exceptional circumstances” allegedly being the portents of invasion and war, for which the sacrifice of children expected to gain the pagan god’s favour for salvation and victory. Whatever the circumstance may have been, the fact of human sacrifice is what concerns us. Formerly faithful people adopted the practice, following the God-denying, State-worshiping cultures around them.

During this time of social decline, the Valley of Hinnom—just outside the city of Jerusalem—became a center of such worship, including the erection of a “tophet,” or furnace for sacrifice. Jeremiah decried judgment upon the “tophet” which the children of Judah had built in order “to burn their sons and their daughters in the fire” (Jer. 7:31–32). It took the reform efforts under good king Josiah (contemporary with Jeremiah) to destroy the shrine-furnace “that no man might make his son or his daughter pass through the fire to Molech” (2 Kings 23:10). In other words, it took a return to God’s word, and correction of the doctrine of God, a concurrent correction of the doctrine of king, and civil action in society to overcome the total sacrifice demanded by a pagan view of society and State.

Consent of the Civilized

Do not make the mistake of believing this total sacrifice existed only among ancient primitive peoples or particularly bloodthirsty tribes. The aforementioned Tyre was part of ancient Phoenicia, the people who pioneered maritime trading across the Mediterranean and who also invented the alphabet. The Phoenician colony Carthage practiced child sacrifice extensively, while growing rich through international trade, and requiring three Punic Wars before finally succumbing to the power of Rome. And Rome! The great civilizer of the known world, the paver of Europe, and the benevolent dictator behind the Pax Romana! Even great civilized Rome sacrificed humans in order to control her State gods. Despite the fact that early Rome had “officially” outlawed human sacrifice for the people, the State practiced it widely. The great historian Lord Acton elaborates:

But in Rome, where religion was more real, the awe of the gods greater, the view of life more earnest and gloomy, the morals more severe, human sacrifice was less hateful to the popular mind. . . . The deification of the State made every sacrifice which it exacted seem as nothing in comparison to the fortune of Rome; and the perils which menaced it from Carthage or Gaul, Epirus or Pontus, Parthia, Spain, or Germany, each demanded its human victims. . . .

In every generation of the four centuries from the fall of the Republic to the establishment of Christianity, human victims were sacrificed by the emperors. In the year 46 B.C. Julius Caesar, after suppressing a mutiny, caused one soldier to be executed, while at the same time two others were sacrificed by the flamen of Mars on the altar in the Campus Martius. . . . Five years later, when Perugia was taken, Octavian sacrificed three hundred senators and knights to his deified predecessor; and the altars of Perugia became a proverb. In the same age Sextus Pompeius flung captives into the sea, as a sacrifice to his father Neptune. . . . When Germanicus died, his house was found to be lined with charms, images, and bones of men whom Tiberius had sacrificed to the infernal gods to hasten his end.… Nero, by the advice of the astrologers, put many nobles to death, to avert himself from the evils with which a comet threatened him. . . . Didus Julianus offered sacrifices of children. . . . At the beginning of the fourth century Maxentius divined the future by sacrificing infants, and opening the bodies of pregnant women. . . . Children were publicly sacrificed to Moloch in [Roman] Africa until the middle of the second century. . . .6

I have omitted many of the instances Acton lists. The practice was widespread, and accepted by many if not most of the most civilized nations in the world. It took the advance of Christianity to end it for the most part (it still survived in some small pockets). The reader should see now what even the most civilized and well-intentioned States can do when made complete arbiters of life and death. The cradle-to-grave Nanny State is the replacement of God, and will just as easily end your life as sustain it when it so deems it beneficial to its agenda, or “the whole.”

The sacrifice of children and humans in general can only occur where an earthly power has total control, and (excepting the possibility of kidnapping, which does not appear to be in play) where parents are brainwashed into handing their children over to an earthly king for some ungodly cause, even to the point of mindless murder in case of “national emergency” or for “the common good.”

Human Sacrifice Today

What goes unstated or unnoticed is that human sacrifice continues openly today despite the advance of every measure of religion, science, and reason. In fact, we could say that the butchery is often aided and promoted by the march of both science and what passes as science. Likewise, human sacrifice in the “open society” is carried out by the most prosperous and self-appointed rational people on earth: most of Western Civilization. The massacres continue under two main guises: abortion and unnecessary war.

The practice of abortion, from a pro-life perspective anyway, stands as an obvious modern counterpart to the ancient Moloch worship of sacrificing infants, only today done for human convenience, money, or social status, rather than religion. But don’t assume the difference is so great. The ancient pagans ritually killed infants as propitiation of a false god that didn’t exist. Today, it is done for the propitiation of a false god called man, humanity, society, woman’s rights, choice—this demon is legion. As a result, nothing has changed but the object of worship: society has exchanged a non-existent false god, Moloch, for an existent false god, man.

The case of war is no less controversial, but no less clear. Without any intended reference to current wars (though it may apply), it should be obvious that if any war is waged unjustly, and troops are killed in that battle for an ungodly cause, then the perpetrators of that war have offered human blood as an agent of social change, rather than relying on godly principles. This is human sacrifice pure and simple. Christians should not be afraid to oppose war, to oppose it vigorously, and to oppose hasty wars especially. Well does the Anglican prayer book include in its military prayer, “Ever spare them from being ordered into a war of aggression or oppression.”7

Even when modern States do not engage in blood sacrifice outright, they nevertheless call for total sacrifice—the full offering of one’s all to its mandates. When the State makes claim to your service, your children’s service, your property, your wealth, and meddles in the medical and “end of life” care you get, then there is no other name for it than total sacrifice.

On top of this, most Christian parents today unquestioningly pass their children through the fire of Molech education; they have offered their children up to the tophet-furnace of the king’s public schools, funded by the God-rejecting State’s property taxes and divine-State multiple-tithes. These arms of the State’s power teach—at every opportunity, for hours per day, from every angle—every idea that contradicts the law of God and supports the State’s power. It is child sacrifice to the gods of the State, and a rejection of God’s command for families, not the State, to educate their children in the ways of God (Deut. 6:6–9Eph. 6:4).

In this matter, Christians have failed, and secular humanists (who believe the State is the highest expression and guardian of man, and thus god) have consciously accepted Christian children as sacrifices toward advancing their social agenda. This was their plan from early on, as Charles Potter, as signer of the first Humanist Manifesto clearly stated:

Education is thus a most powerful ally of Humanism, and every American public school is a school of Humanism. What can the theistic Sunday-school, meeting for an hour once a week, and teaching only a fraction of the children, do to stem the tide of a five-day program of humanistic teaching?8

The schools are humanistic because the system of socialism in which the State taxes other people to pay for other people’s kids’ education is humanistic and deifies the State. The secular Molech has increased his power, and the Christians have fed the beast!

This failure repeats the sad, recurring legacy of people of faith—a pattern we see in 1 Samuel as well. The priesthood grew corrupt (1 Sam. 2:12–36), and a generation arose without proper education in the ways of God. Even Samuel’s two sons departed from God’s ways even though Samuel had appointed them to judge over Israel (1 Sam. 8:1–3). As Samuel grew old the people sensed his decline and began to fret about leadership. Instead of falling back on God’s word and trusting in God, they appealed to Samuel to give them their king “like all the nations.” This was a failure of national faith. It led to the national tyranny outlined above.

The cycle repeats itself today. Christians have accepted humanistic ways of doing things “like all the nations.” In the health care debate, in education, in other public programs, and in economics, Christians have sacrificed their lives and the lives of their children in exchange for the protection and security offered promised by the humanistic State. Unless we return quickly to God’s ways, we will enter the period of God refusing to hear our prayers for some time.

Conclusion

Some Christians ask me why I write so much about “politics.” The answer goes far beyond the simple idea that we should apply God’s Word to every area of life. The answer must include the fact that if we don’t apply God’s Word to every area of life, the forces of darkness will push their word in the neglected areas. There is no neutrality. Either God reigns and His law is honoured, or the enemy rules and humanists carry out their will in law, politics, and ethics. The reason for Christians in politics—and all other areas—begins with the answer to question, “Who is King?”

Most, if not all, of the problems we face in society stem from the State’s transgression of Christ’s Kingship. This does not mean that Christ ceases to rule in these areas; rather, the State interferes in areas Christ has not decreed for it to manage. As a result, the State sets itself up in the place of God in these areas. This is false kingship, and with it comes judgment for idolatry and for worshiping a false god. Society progresses into the judgment of its own making.

The progression into a sin-dominated culture happens slowly, and Christians tend to accept the drift unless sudden changes drastically strike at obvious issues. Thus, Christians speak out against abortion and homosexual marriage. Meanwhile, more subtle things creep in: Social Security, public education, Medicare, welfare, multiple taxes, etc, and possibly compulsory national service. Each of these programs violate biblical principles of property and life, and strike just as severely at the biblical idea of family as do homosexual marriage and abortion, yet Christians accept and even applaud them. The applause comes for many reasons—apparent benefits, self-interest, the programs appear moral, sustainable, and they are already established by our parents and grandparents. What gets lost in the whole process is a consistent, biblical assessment of the God-determined boundaries for Family, Church, and State.

We must constantly return to Scripture and ask “Who is King?” over these areas. To the extent that Christians let the State usurp the God-given roles of family and church, we have accepted the legitimacy of a false god. The fires of Molech will continue to consume and grow until Christians lose the ability to withdraw. Withdraw from your interest in the tophet schools and the false-prophet State systems of Molech while you still can. Ask yourself the question “Who is King?”

A lot depends on your answer.

Get the full book at God versus Socialism: A Biblical Critique of the New Social Gospel.

Notes:

↩

Rushdoony, Institutes, 35, 33.()

↩
  1. Roland de Vaux, Ancient Israel: Its Life and Institutions, trans. John McHugh (New York, Toronto, and London: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1961), 445.()
↩
  • Vaux, Ancient Israel, 445.()
↩
  • Helga Seeden, “A Tophet In Tyre?,” BERYTUS 39 (1991); (accessed August 26, 2009). Despite acknowledging that “probable human bone” was found among the urns’ contents, and that some of these fragments “consisted of shaft bone a few millimeters of diameter,” the report naïvely concludes that “their size was not consistent with them being remains of small infants.”()
↩
  • Vaux, Ancient Israel, 446.()
↩
  • J. E. E. D. Acton, “Human Sacrifice,”Essays in Religion, Politics, and Morality: Selected Writings of Lord Acton, 3 vols. ed. J. Rufus Fears (Indianapolis: Liberty Classics, 1988), 3:413, 415–7.()
↩
  • The Book of Common Prayer (Reformed Episcopal Church of North America, Third Edition, 2003) 63.()

Charles Francis Potter, Humanism: A New Religion (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1930), 128. Quoted in David A. Noebel, J.F. Baldwin, and Kevin Bywater, Clergy in the Classroom: The Religion of Secular Humanism (Manitou Springs, CO: Summit Press, 1995), vi. I have taken this from Gary DeMar, “Why Creation and Prophecy Can’t Be Separated,” (accessed August 27, 2009).(

↩

)

Lessons From a Great Man’s Failures (3)

The naive believes everything, but the sensible man considers his steps (Prov.14:15).

The Bible tells us that after Jehoshaphat had allied himself by marriage with Ahab, “some years later he went down to visit Ahab in Samaria” (II Chron.18:2). Ahab prepared a feast for him and those with him.

What is happening here? It is a foolish person indeed who thinks Ahab is being neighbourly. Ahab is an idolater and political manipulator, giving his godly neighbour a very warm welcome, for a reason. Having taken advantage of Jehoshaphat’s naivete once before by shrewdly arranging a political marriage, Ahab now says to himself, “Let’s go one step further with this dumb bunny.”

He puts on a feast for Jehoshaphat, and “slaughtered many sheep and oxen for him and the people who were with him…” This must be understood religiously too. Paul’s instruction that “you cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons; you cannot partake of the table of the Lord and the table of demons (I Cor.11:21), is a challenge to us that all of life is religious. Jehoshaphat should have known this too. The feast he was participating in may not have seemed to him to be a table of demons, but that only reveals how gullible he was.

Jehoshaphat ignores Solomon’s directions:

When you sit down to dine with a ruler, consider carefully what is before you, and put a knife to your throat if you are a man of great appetite. Do not desire his delicacies, for it is deceptive food (Prov.23:1-3).

The modern Church too, is gullible and naive. It doesn’t see the scriptural writing on the wall, doesn’t take note of the fact that there are many modern political manipulators just like Ahab, and it has ignored Paul’s comments about Satan, that “…we are not ignorant of his schemes” (II Cor.2:11). So, the Church wants to “improve” State education with tax-payer funded Chaplains, and today many well-meaning Christians in Australia have fought a High Court challenge to show that Christians mean business. They want to Christianise things that God never wanted Christianised.

But there’s more. When the Federal government decides to fund Moslem education and “Moslem awareness” programs, Christians get upset about this, saying “We don’t want this sort of thing happening.”  But what’s good for the goose is good for the gander. If we can put the hard word on the Federal government and get monies for chaplains and for Christian schools, why can’t Moslems as well? If we want it, and get it, why can’t they? We should never have gone to governments for money in the first place for education, one hundred and fifty years ago.

Ahab knows what he wants. He’d know that Jehoshaphat had hundreds of thousands of soldiers (Jehoshaphat actually had over 1.1 million under arms- see II Chron.17:12-19) who could be a great resource for Ahab in a time of war.

Jehoshaphat is hooked: line and sinker. Having set him up with a sumptuous feast, Ahab now puts the hard word on him. He invites him to join him in making aggressive war against Ramoth-gilead (II Chron.18:1-3). Jehoshaphat has been softened up by Ahab, and now he is thoroughly seduced. His reply is most illuminating:“I am as you are, and my people as your people, and we will be with you in the battle” (II Chron.18:3).

This is the language of covenant and marriage, reflected in Adam’s initial description of his relationship with Eve (Gen.2:23-24) and in Ruth’s commitment to Naomi (Ruth 1:16-17).  Jehoshaphat knows this. He covenants for Judah to go into battle alongside an evil king against a pagan king, failing to realise that “a man who flatters his neighbour is spreading a net for his steps” (Prov.29:5), and “…deceitful are the kisses of an enemy” (Prov.27:6).

Ahab says the Jehoshaphat, “I will disguise myself and go into battle, but you put on your robes”  (II Chron.18:29). It looks as though Ahab had a plan. If he can entice Jehoshaphat into battle and he is killed, Ahab will be able to indirectly control events in Judah through his daughter Athaliah, and his foolish, evil son in law, Jehoram (II Chron.21:1-6), Jehoshaphat’s son.

Mercifully, Ahab’s devious scheme blows up in his face and he is killed, and Jehoshaphat is only saved from battlefield death by a miracle (II Chron.18:30-31). When he returns to Jerusalem, Jehu the son of Hanani the seer went out to meet him.

Should you help the wicked and love those who hate the Lord and so bring wrath on yourself from the Lord? But there is some good in you, for you have removed the Asheroth from the land and you have set your heart to seek God (II Chron.19:1-4).

Now it’s no shame to be reproved; we all need reproof from time to time. The Bible tells us that “…reproofs for discipline are the way of life…” (Prov.6:23). But has Jehoshaphat learnt anything?

He goes back to what he does best, and what he is called to: reforming the nation, appointing judges, and turning the people back to the God of their fathers.

But before too long, there is another incident. Jehoshaphat “…allied himself with Ahaziah king of Israel. He acted wickedly in so doing” (II Chron.20:35). This seems to have been a commercial proposition that Jehoshaphat was engaging in, and once again he is confronted by a prophet: “‘because you have allied yourself with Ahaziah, the Lord has destroyed your works.’ So, the ships were broken and could not go to Tarshish” (II Chron.20:37).

Jehoshaphat has gone back to his old routine, and once again God sends a prophet to confront him.

His error?

A propensity to trust in, and make covenant with evil people or institutions.

God blows on the idea, again.

Conclusion:                                                                                                                                         We stand in the midst of many generations. If we are indifferent to those who went before us and actually existed, how can we expect to be concerned for the well-being of those who come after us and only potentially exist?[1]

What is evident from the life of Jehoshaphat is that God’s enemies try to ensnare believers into covenanting with them. As Solomon warned us around 950 BC, their seduction comes in this form: “Throw in your lot with us, we shall all have one purse” (Prov.1:14).

Every one of us can be as gullible as Jehoshaphat, and we need to be guided by the scriptures, so that people of a hostile religious faith do not deceive and take advantage of us. This danger is especially in the area of education.

Why could this happen? Because we in the Church have often underestimated the religious intentions of our enemies, and our naivete has cost us dearly over the centuries.

The tragic consequences of Jehoshaphat’s initial errors in his family were not all evident for at least thirty years. May we learn from his errors, and make better choices based on God’s Word, His wisdom and understanding.

My son, if sinners entice you, do not consent (Prov.1:10).


[1] David R. Carlin, Church History, 9:1, February 1990, quoted in George Grant, “The Third Time,” 1991, p.174-5.

Lessons from a Great Man’s Failures (2)

What was Jehoshaphat’s first error, in dealing with Ahab?

 He failed to understand that his enemy (Ahab) was a deeply religious person.

This is the predominant mistake we make today. We have failed to grasp that all of life is religious. We have also failed to grasp that education and law are profoundly religious issues, and that the Bible speaks a lot about them.

Let me give you an example. Everyone generally accepts that education is important in society.  We also generally accept that education is generally based on values. But whose values are we considering: God’s or man’s? That is what polarises people.

Western Christians for six generations have ignored this: then they have witnessed the fact that their government confiscates their money through taxation, giving them compulsory but “free” education in return. So Christians say to themselves:

  1. “My taxes go towards State schools.” True.
  2. “I’m paying for it, whether I like it or not.” True.
  3. “My children need educating.” True.
  4. “I may as well get my monies’ worth for my children.” False.
  5. “I guess I’ll put the children in the State system.” False.

Why should points d) and e) be rejected?

They are decisions based on economic expediency, not Biblical conviction. It was expediency that led to Caiaphas directing the chief priests and Pharisees to get rid of Jesus (Jn.11:47-53), and it was Judas’ economic expediency to betray Jesus for thirty pieces of silver. But God requires moral convictions based on His Word, not expediency.

Now there are some who say, “We should try and reform the system.”

Now doesn’t that sound like a good idea? It sounds very laudable, but that’s not the answer. It’s like trying to reform Baal worship. You will spend a lot of time and money trying to reform an institution that doesn’t want your reformation. The best you will get in any reform attempt, is the equivalent of putting lipstick on a pig.

Most of the church today doesn’t want to know about Jehoshaphat’s error, when in fact the vast majority of the Church is making the same mistake that he did. We sign up and send our children off to the West’s predominant pagan institution-the State school. And as far as the Bible is concerned, there simply is no justification for placing our children under the control of pagans.

One far-seeing believer saw what was happening, nearly a century ago. In 1923, the American J. Gresham Macham wrote

[P]lace the lives of children in their formative years, despite the best convictions of their parents, under the intimate control of experts appointed by the state, force them to attend schools where the higher aspirations of humanity are crushed out, and where the mind is filled with the materialism of the day, and it is difficult to see how even the remnants of liberty can subsist. Such a tyranny … used as the instrument of destroying human souls, is certainly far more dangerous than the crude tyrannies of the past.[1]                                                                                                                    

The State educational system is self-serving. It is kept afloat by our taxes. It has no time for a sovereign God, the Bible and Jesus Christ, for a six-day Creation, for absolute moral statements like the Ten Commandments, or for the authority of parents. The children get twelve years of humanistic indoctrination. Is that what Christian parents are supposed to give their children?

Money is the Trojan horse that government uses to infiltrate and infect organizations. Funding that, on the outset, is designed to strengthen and support, will bureaucratize and regulate in the end.[2]

All education is religious, and the State schools do a wonderful job of teaching humanism to their students. Is it any wonder that 80% of the children of Christian families sent to Public Schools in the U.S. deny the faith in their twenties?

But that’s not all.

In the early years of the 20th century, the Fabian Society of England came out strongly in favour of state aid to independent Christian schools. When a board member resigned in protest, George Bernard Shaw rebuked him strongly. Nothing, Shaw held, would more quickly destroy these schools than state aid; their freedom and independence would soon be compromised, and, before long, their faith. Events soon proved Shaw to be right.[3]

The enemies of God know how to compromise foolish Christians. They go for the points where we (like Jehoshaphat) have weak or undeveloped convictions. This has been easy for them of late, because the modern Church has generally struggled to decide what it really believes about many fundamental issues.

We have to look elsewhere in scripture to find out what Jehoshaphat’s marriage alliance actually was. Jehoshaphat’s firstborn son Jehoram, married the daughter of Ahab and Jezebel, Athaliah. It seems that while Jehoshaphat lived Athaliah kept a low profile, but as soon as he died her true colours were really seen. When Jehoram became king, Athaliah conspired with him to kill his six  brothers, Jehoshaphat’s sons (II Chron.21:4). How did they feel about their father’s choice, then?

Thus Jehoram “walked in the way of the kings of Israel, just as the house of Ahab did (for Ahab’s daughter was his wife), and he did evil in the sight of the Lord” (II Chron.21:6). This was just the start of Athaliah’s evil. Her son Ahaziah “also walked in the ways of the house of Ahab, for his mother was his counselor to do wickedly” (II Chron.22:3), and when he was subsequently executed by Jehu through the judgment of God, she killed all but one of her grandchildren (v.10).

What led Jehoshaphat to his original error? Perhaps he was influenced by the example of his father Asa who earlier, when Judah was besieged by Israel, had said to Ben-hadad king of Aram, “Let there be a treaty between you and me…” (II Chron.16:3).

Or, perhaps he simply deceived himself into thinking, “I know what I’m doing. This is a good idea. Now, Ahab and Israel will be no threat to us.”

Conclusion:                                                                                                                         Undoubtedly, Jehoshaphat was a godly man. But godliness today doesn’t mean that tomorrow I am somehow exempted from error. “Let him who thinks he stands take heed that he does not fall” (I Cor.10:12). We’re all human and are prone to sin.

Jehoshaphat’s frightening error in trying to play power politics while setting up his son with a pagan wife, is a warning of the long-term implications of our choices today. As one man I respect once said, “If you marry someone who is not a Christian, you get the devil as your father-in-law.”

Be careful who you marry, who your children choose to marry, who you sign contracts with, and consider carefully the values of those who are influencing your children.

God commands parents to be responsible for the education of their children: (see Deut.6 and 11). There is no other legitimate option that honours God.

The Bible commands us not to be unequally yoked with unbelievers, for we have been bought with a price.  We do not get a chance to re-wind the tape of life, and God will ultimately face each of us in judgment.

We must learn from Jehoshaphat, because as Solzhenitsyn said,                                                                                      

If we don’t know our own history, we will simply have to endure all the same mistakes, sacrifices, and absurdities all over again.[4]

(To be continued)


[1] J. Gresham Macham, “Christianity and Liberalism,” 1923.

[2] Ron Paul, “Freedom from Government,” Lew Rockwell website, 10/2/2009.

[3] Rousas Rushdoony, “Roots of Reconstruction,”1991, p.446.

[4] Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, quoted in George Grant, “The Third Time,” 1991, p.177.

Lessons from a Great Man’s Failures (I)

Introduction:                                                                                                                                The Bible tells us that Biblical history is very important for us to learn from. Speaking about the judgments upon the children of Israel under Moses, Paul tells us that “these things happened to them as an example, and they were written for our instruction, upon whom the ends of the ages have come. Therefore let him who thinks he stands take heed that he does not fall” (I Cor.10:11-12).

The Bible shows us that we are all sinners, and that “we all stumble in many ways” (James 3:2). Because we have such short memories and so readily sin, we are commanded to learn from history through examining the lives of Biblical people, learning from their example. It was Hilaire Belloc who said that

time after time mankind is driven against the rocks of the horrid reality of a fallen creation. And time after time mankind must learn the hard lessons of history; the lessons that for some dangerous and awful reason we can’t seem to keep in our collative memory.

Four chapters of the Bible detail the 25 year reign of Jehoshaphat in Judah (II Chron.17-20). He came to the throne of Judah around 900 B.C., and the scripture is initially quite positive about him. It tells us that

the Lord was with Jehoshaphat because he followed the example of David’s earlier days and did not seek the Baals, but sought the God of his father, followed His commandments, and did not act as Israel did. So the Lord established the kingdom in his control, and all Judah brought tribute to Jehoshaphat, and he had great riches and honour (II Chron.17:3-5).

So Jehoshaphat starts off well, and the Bible acknowledges this. But as Derek Prince used to say, “The greatest test of all, is success.” At the start of chapter 18, the scripture tells us that “Jehoshaphat had great riches and honour, and he allied himself by marriage with Ahab.”

What had happened here?

Three generations earlier, God had judged Solomon’s arrogant son Rehoboam and divided his kingdom, so that out of the twelve tribes of Israel, he only retained the oversight of Judah (see II Chron. 10). As a result, Judah was generally governed by godly kings, but Israel was not.

By the time of Jehoshaphat’s reign in Judah, Ahab reigned in Israel, but Ahab was both an idol worshipper and a murderer (I Kings 21). God had commanded Israel even before they entered the promised land that in relation to the inhabitants of that land,

…you shall utterly destroy them. You shall make no covenant with them, and show no favour to them. Furthermore, you shall not intermarry with them; you shall not give your daughters to their sons, nor shall you take their daughters for your sons. For they will turn your sons away from following Me to serve other gods… (Deut.7:2-4).

Why this emphasis on covenant? Because that is how God deals with people. It’s not “easy come, easy go” with Him. He chooses the individuals, and signs them up. Forget all this free-will nonsense that the Church has taught for centuries, because man’s will is fallen, like every other aspect of his being. God does it all.

Jesus said, “You did not choose Me, but I chose you, and appointed you…” (Jn.15:16). From the first, He has always dealt with people on the basis of His covenant. It was the covenant that Adam and Eve transgressed in the garden, bringing them into judgment. It was the covenant that Israel repeatedly transgressed under Moses, also bringing the nation into judgment.

One aspect of God’s character we don’t speak about much today, is His jealousy. His jealousy is because of His covenant. Heard any sermons on God’s jealousy in your time? I haven’t, but God’s jealousy is mentioned about 30 times in the Bible. Perhaps our lack of understanding of His jealousy today, says something about the state of the Church today.

God doesn’t take kindly to it when His people form alliances with ungodly people. He views it as a form of treason, because it is spiritual adultery-unfaithfulness to Him. The First Commandment was “You shall have no other gods before Me” (Ex.20:3), and God will bring His people into judgment for this kind of behaviour. If Christians think they can be believers in Christ and yet sleep around (either literally or spiritually), they should expect God’s judgment. This was where Jehoshaphat fell down.

From the viewpoint of a foreign king seeking to undermine Israel, an alliance through his daughter’s marriage to an Israelite king was ideal. This was a low-cost strategy of subversion. The Israelite king’s polytheistic example could undermine Israel in all four covenants: personal, ecclesiastical, civil and familial.[1]

The New Testament reiterates the Old Testament prohibition. We are commanded “do not be bound together with unbelievers; for what partnership have righteousness and lawlessness, or what fellowship has light with darkness? Or what harmony has Christ with Belial, or what has a believer in common with an unbeliever?” (II Cor.6:14-15)

(To be continued)


[1] Gary North, “Inheritance and Dominion,” 1999, ch.40.

When Sinners Seem to Rule the World

From 2016.

In short, the outlook is not good enough: the political class, Liberal and Labor, is failing the nation. Australia is slowly sinking into a debt risk situation. New spending commitments remain an addiction with public expectations divorced from reality.[1]

Anyone today has to be careful how much they let the news (either national or international) affect them.

Why? There is a constant stream of information from everywhere, which indicates we are ruled by idiots, who have no idea when it comes to personal ethics, responsibility, sound economic management or other fundamental issues.

This is certainly the case in Australia, but it applies all over the world. What matters increasingly is shadow, not substance; appearance, not reality.

Treasury secretary John Fraser has warned the Turnbull government its prized AAA-credit rating is in jeopardy unless urgent efforts are made to cut spending, raising the spectre of a federal interest bill of more than $2 billion a month within a ­decade.

In a landmark speech in Sydney last night, the government’s top economic adviser sounded the alarm about Australia chronic fiscal malaise, arguing that weaker-than-expected revenues, falling commodity prices and forecasting errors were no excuse for not taking tough decisions about the nation’s budget deficit.

Mr Fraser called for further cuts to the government’s ballooning welfare bill and spending promises to be offset with new savings. He also signalled that federal government spending of more than 25 per cent of national income was unacceptable.[2]

Not to be outdone by the government’s ineptitude, the Australian Leader of the Opposition, Bill Shorten, has promised to implement all the recommendations of the Gonski Report, which called for massive increases in government spending on education. After all, increasing government spending will surely improve the education standards of Australian children, won’t it?

Well if it would, why are standards dropping, with all the extra billions we’ve been spending now, for years?

Political leaders of all persuasions disappoint when their promises and performance radically differ, but also the standards of law and policing. As William Norman Grigg has repeatedly shown, if you are an American citizen and a SWAT team decides they have “evidence” your home could be a drug dealer’s den, you could simply be dead. They ask few questions (if any), before they smash through your front door in the middle of the night and start shooting.

Well, it’s all about the War on Drugs, you know. Of course.

And are they ever held to account? They are a law unto themselves.

Get pulled over by the police in the U.S, and forget about this “innocent till proven guilty” nonsense. Anything could happen to you, such as a “full body search” (which is code for examining body cavities like the rectum and vagina) having drugs planted in your car, or just getting shot. This happens regularly, and there is no recourse when the police are effectively above the law.

Here in Australia, the Independent Commission against Corruption (ICAC) in NSW has gone after individuals, and rejected evidence that might favour the person, that didn’t suit ICAC’s relentless pursuit.

Why would they do that? Because they wanted to.

Now we have an Australian person who happens to be transgender, being awarded Queenslander of the Year, though she hasn’t lived in Queensland for 40 years.

The Bible speaks about these circumstances. It says,

Do not fret because of evildoers, be not envious towards wrongdoers. For they will wither quickly like the grass and fade like the green herb. Trust in the Lord and do good; dwell in the land and cultivate faithfulness (Ps.37:1-2).

It also says,

…The churning of anger produces strife (Prov.30:33).

I cannot change 99% of the foolish and evil things that are done in my society. They are other people’s choices. What I can do, is commit them to the judge of all the earth, who sees and knows all. Then, I can continue pursuing my calling and career, and being a faithful family and church member, and a builder for the future.

I also believe that the circumstances in the world will change, though it will probably require a massive economic crisis to precipitate it. When the welfare cheques start bouncing (as authors like David Stockman are suggesting), and all the promises of Big Government to fund everything, do everything and solve all our problems are shown to be without any substance, people will see through the pathetic veneer. It very well could be the collapse of the Messianic State. Hallelujah! That will be excruciating for millions of vulnerable, dependent people, but absolutely necessary.

Despite all their promises, governments cannot be our providers; only God can truly provide. And if a radical, lengthy and very painful shakeup is required internationally, so be it. It may be a great opportunity to preach the Gospel to very disillusioned sinners.

Then they’ll find out Who truly is the Saviour of the world.


[1] Paul Kelly, “Turnbull and Morrison daring to be Brave,’ “The Australian,” 30/1/2016

[2] Adam Creighton, ‘PM Warned AAA Rating in Jeopardy,’ “The Australian,” 29/1/2016.

Father in the House (4) The Protector

In his shade I took great delight and sat down (Song of Sol.2:3).

Introduction:

The Bible tells us to“be of sober spirit, be on the alert. Your adversary, the devil, prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour. But resist him…”(I Pet.5:8-9). The Christian husband must be able to defend what God has given him, and the weapons listed for the Christian’s spiritual protection in Eph.6:10-17, are almost all defensive ones.  Adam’s original error in the Garden, was the sin of omission. Because of his error, Eve was defenceless.

The picture of Jesus in the gospels is not a meek teacher of non-violence…To be sure, Jesus is supremely kind and gentle. But the Jesus pictured in the gospels is much more a warrior than a benign guru.[1]

How must a man protect his family?

Firstly, he must begin with himself. The Bible warns us, to “pay close attention to yourself and your teaching…”(I Tim.4:16). There is no sense in a father having great plans for the protection of his household, spiritual or otherwise, if he neglects his own preservation. Thus we are to “watch over our heart with all diligence, for from it flow the springs of life”(Prov.4:23). This means first of all, that we must guard ourselves against a wandering mind, a fantasising mind, a lustful mind, or a covetous mind.

The helmet of salvation is a critical component in the Christian’s armour; the mind is a battleground. But the promise of God is that “the steadfast of mind You will keep in perfect peace, because he trusts in You”(Isa.26:3). If the leader of the family is right with God and walking in his integrity, he can then lead the way in defending his family.

Secondly, a husband must protect his wife from abusive, overbearing or interfering family and friends. A newly married couple do not need unsolicited advice from well-meaning people, including family members. The Biblical command is that a man should “leave his father and mother, and be joined to his wife”(Gen.2:24). While honouring their parents, the new couple should live independently of them after marriage.

Jacob is a case in point. Laban was clearly abusive of his son in law Jacob. Under God’s direction (Gen.31:1-3), Jacob fled to protect himself and his family from Laban, who sought to enslave and abuse him.[2]

Thirdly, a man must protect his wife from evil attack. The tragic example of Nicholas I (the last Czar of Russia) and Alexandra, should be a warning to every husband. The Russian armies had suffered heavy defeats at the hands of the Germans early in World War I. Nicholas, a quiet, shy man, uncomfortable with leadership and with no experience or aptitude for the military, decided nevertheless to go off to the distant front to personally lead the fight in 1915. He left his wife Alexandra, burdened with the fragile health of their son Alexis (who would have inherited the throne, but was a haemophiliac), along with the rapidly deteriorating state of their nation.

But Alexandra and Nicholas had been heavily influenced for years by a mystic monk, Gregory Rasputin. They foolishly believed Rasputin possessed the supernatural ability to save Alexis’ life.

The Tsar’s sister wrote in her diary that she was disturbed by the

attitude of Alix [Alexandra] and the children to that sinister Gregory (whom they consider to be almost a saint…). He’s always there, goes into the nursery, visits Olga [aged 20] and Tatiana [18] while they are getting ready for bed, sits there talking to them and caressing them…it’s quite unbelievable and beyond understanding.[3]

Rasputin was already infamous at the Russian court for his womanising. Nicholas’ negligence as a husband, in failing to protect his wife and family from the evil, immoral and destructive influence of Rasputin (along with the associated gossip and innuendo), was one of the many factors that contributed to the demise of his regime, and the subsequent murder of his whole family by the Communists.[4]

Nicholas failed to put the welfare of his wife and family before the apparent needs of the nation, and ended up losing his throne, his family and his life. The Bible warns us, “Like a trampled spring and a polluted well is a righteous man who gives way before the wicked”(Prov.25:26).

Fourth, what should happen if criminals seek to attack an individual or a family? The Bible is not a pacifist document, and firearms and other means of family protection are perfectly legitimate.[5] The Sermon on the Mount must be seen in context; it was given at a time when Israel was under the judgment of God, and Roman occupation. This gives us the context of Jesus’ command, “do not resist an evil person” (Mat.5:39). He does not expect parents to stand by and watch evil people harm their family.

When Nehemiah was troubled by the threats of those who conspired against Jerusalem, he said to the men of Jerusalem, “…do not be afraid of them; remember the Lord who is great and awesome, and fight for your brothers, your sons, your daughters, your wives and your houses” (Neh. 2:14).

“If you were a male believer around the time of Moses and Joshua, your job was to fight.”[6] If an unprotected woman is threatened at home by a male intruder, a firearm in her hands (which she has become competent to use) suddenly tips the scales heavily in her favour, and the Bible teaches (Ex.22:2-3) that anybody may use necessary force to protect themselves or their family against violent people.

Some will say, “Well, we’ll trust God for the protection of the family.” I agree. But trusting God does not preclude taking preparatory action for this vital task. Oliver Cromwell, a leading Puritan during the English Revolution, was reputed to have instructed his men as they went into battle, “Trust God, and keep your powder dry.”

Fifth, attacks on a wife can be in the form of discouragement, depression, or unbelief. “What’s going to become of us?” a wife may say. She needs to be encouraged from God’s Word. The scripture required that a newly married man be exempted from military duties for a year, so that he could be at home to encourage his wife (Deut.24:5). An encouragedwife who knows Jesus Christ, and knows that her husband loves and cherishes her, will be more able to function in her God-given role. “When Biblical law is read thoughtfully and carefully, it is plain that a wall of protection is built around women.”[7]

Sixth, a man must protect his wife from internal family challenges, such as unruly sons. They must understand that it is a Biblical command to “Honour thy Mother,” just as much as the scripture requires that they “Honour thy Father”(Ex.20:12), and that God attaches promises to this form of honour.

Young men without sufficient training (especially in their teen years), can be arrogant, rude and foolhardy. Fathers would do well to point out and teach that the Fifth Commandment requires that children honour their father and mother. Furthermore, the parental relationship verses of Proverbs (and there are many, such as Prov.20:20; 23:22; 30:17) reinforce this. Fathers must require their sons whatever age they are to honour their mother, if they want to stay in the home.

Seventh, a husband must protect his wife from rude, intimidating people. This can be in the form of telephone sales people, or it can be people coming to the front door, who want to sell something, who endeavour to manipulate or bully. This is evil, and no wife should have to put up with that nonsense. Sometimes, retail staff must be reminded of the need for good manners, and of legitimate discounts or deals that they must to take into consideration in their service of customers.

Once when Sue had returned from shopping, she found she had been overcharged for an item, but couldn’t prove it, and so was reluctant to do anything about it. I rang the store and they were happy to provide a refund. Women may do this, but if their husband will take the lead, it will help them.

Eighth, a father must defend his daughters from interlopers and fornicators.[8]  The Christian father of a teenage daughter I once knew, unwisely permitted her to attend a party, unprotected. A young man there, deliberately got her drunk so he could be intimate with her, and she fell pregnant. If she hadn’t attended that party without her family, things would have been different.

Males have testosterone, which is fine and God-given, but we know that if the sexual drives are not appropriately harnessed, evil can ensue. Jacob discovered to his lasting grief what can happen to an unprotected daughter, when she is exposed to ungodly men (Gen.34), as did David (II Sam.13). The attack, abuse, seduction and rape of females has been a sad fact of human history since the book of Genesis. Why do we need a repeat of the lesson with our daughters today?  Voddie Baucham is right: “There is an epidemic of unprotected women in our society.”

Prudence dictates protection of daughters, in the company of trustworthy people who will protect them. They are a trust to fathers, from God. Fathers must take every precaution, with a view to presenting their daughter to their future husband, as a chaste virgin.

A father (with his wife) needs to help his daughters in how they dress. Some young women are absolutely ignorant about the impact of what they wear on males. Some fathers are embarrassed to discuss this issue, because they are indirectly revealing what can be a weakness to them. Nevertheless, it must be dealt with, for their daughters’ sake. Fathers don’t want their daughters to be “dressed as a harlot”(Prov.7:10).

Explain to them what this means, and how men are aroused visually. Explain how girls can be dressed attractively but modestly, not drawing attention to their bodies. Immodesty will attract some men, but the wrong kind, and for the wrong reasons. Evil men are wicked in relation to sexual intent, and Christian men may be weak, struggling with their temptations. Whatever the situation, daughters need to aware of these issues, in relation to how they dress. As one author has recently noted, “never in the history of fashion has so little material been raised so high to reveal so much that needs to be covered so badly.”[9]

Ninth, a father (and his wife) must defend their children, through intercession. The example of Job is important in this. When his children were enjoying feast times together, Job would offer sacrifices on their behalf, in case they had sinned:

When Job offered a sacrifice for his children, he was claiming the benefits of the sacrifice on their behalf. That is a picture of intercession: claiming the benefits of a sacrifice on behalf of those for whom you are praying. Our sacrifice at this point in history, of course, is the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross. Intercession for our children, then, involves claiming the benefits of Christ’s death on their behalf…every father is responsible before God, therefore, to maintain day-to-day intercession for his whole household.[10]

It is easy for Christian parents to assure each other, “We’ll pray for the children, if they get into some difficulties.” But why not be praying for them, beforehand? What is the most sensible: the safety rail being erected at the top of the pass, or an ambulance being sent to the bottom? I am not suggesting that prayer will prevent our children getting into difficulties, for some difficulties are necessary for their growth. But praying parents may prevent their children facing challenges that may lead them into sin, and that is never pleasing to God.

Conclusion:                                                                                                           

What God has given us in our families, the devil will try to “steal, kill and destroy” (Jn.10:10). That is his nature. We must be prepared as godly warriors to jealously and fiercely defend what God has given to us, knowing to whom we will give an account. May God give us grace for this essential task!


[1] Gary Demar, “The Reduction of Christianity,” 1990, p.211.

[2] God’s deliverance of His bride from Egyptian “rape” is the theme of Exodus. (Ex. 1:16, 22. Compare the previous exoduses of Abraham from Egypt and Philistia, and of Isaac from Philistia: In each case, the bride was under attack; Gen. 12, 20, 26.) James Jordan, “Covenant Sequence in Leviticus and Deuteronomy,” 1989, p.12.

[3] Quoted in C. Clay, “King, Kaiser, Czar,” 2006, p.290.

[4] Alexandra on one occasion wrote to Nicholas addressing his indecisiveness, saying, “How I wish I could pour my will into your veins.” He signed his reply to her, “…your poor little weak-willed Hubby.” (Quoted in E. Crankshaw, “The Shadow of the Winter Palace,” 1976, p.362.)

[5] “The same God who was incarnate in Jesus Christ ordered the Hebrews to annihilate the Canaanites. Any discussion by God-fearing people of the legitimacy of warfare from a Biblical standpoint must begin with a consideration and moral acceptance of Deut.7:1-6.” Gary North, “Moses and Pharoah,” 1986, p.134.

[6] Gary Thomas, “Sacred Marriage,” 2000, p.39.

[7] Douglas Wilson, “Fidelity,”1999, p.86.

[8] See Appendix 3, “The Importance of the Dowry,” in A. McColl, “The Significance of the Godly Family,” 2009.

[9] Unknown author, quoted in R. Spinney, “Too Much, Too Little, Too Tight,” in “Modest Apparel,” 2012.

[10] Derek Prince, “Husbands & Fathers,” 2000, p.71-2.

Father in the House (3)

These are some of the things I put into practice with our children.

1. Lead the family daily in devotions and prayer. This is the responsibility of every Christian father. “…a father tells his sons about Your faithfulness” (Isa.38:19.)

2. Take a child or children with you when you are doing something out of the house. “And he went up on the mountain and summoned those whom he Himself wanted, and they came to Him. And He appointed twelve, so that they would be with Him…” (Mk.3:13-14).

My father had a saying: “Me and Thee…” (My Grandmother was a devout Christian. I assume she was familiar with the King James Version).

In February 1969, my father took me to watch Australia play against the West Indies at the SCG in Sydney. I was 13, and Australia was batting. I can still recall the scores, and who was playing. There was Wes Hall, Charlie Griffiths and Gary Sobers from the West Indies, and Bill Lawry and Doug Walters for Australia, who scored 151 and 224 respectively.

Two years later my father was dead. That day at the cricket is still a happy memory.

3. Do things with children individually, including playing with them. They will remember this, and they’ll know that this was important to you. “He who walks with wise men will be wise, but the companion of fools will suffer harm” (Prov.13:20).

4. Value your time with them, and engage them in conversation/discussion. What do they think? Speak of natural things and spiritual things. “These words, which I am commanding you today, shall be on your heart. You shall teach them diligently to your sons and shall talk of them when you sit in your house and when you walk by the way and when you lie down and when you rise up” (Deut.6:6-7).

5. Find out their interests. There might be a career or calling in there somewhere that should be followed up.

6. Pray with each child at bedtime. This can be a time of one-on-one each evening, when the child has the opportunity to share something with Dad. That way, the child understands that “this is important enough for Dad.” Once, when I went to my son’s bedroom to pray with him, he was unhappy with me because I had upset him earlier in the day about something. I needed to apologise to him, and I did. He was then at peace with me. “The child that goes to bed happy, wakes up happy.”

7. Take them to your work-place where possible, so they can see and understand what you do. It may be of interest to them.

                                                                        4

8. Talk positively about your parents. This is a way of honouring them. What you do for your parents, your children will learn to do for you.

9. Take an interest in their sporting activities, and if possible teach them some skills. This is important to a child. My father was a competent sportsman, playing cricket, tennis and table tennis, and I learnt to play these games.

Teach children how to win graciously, and lose politely, with good manners. (They will need to handle both winning and losing, right throughout life.) Encouragements in these kinds of abilities can assist a child in many ways in adulthood. Some sporting abilities pass from parents to children, and sporting opportunities that they have in adulthood should not be new for them.

10. Take an interest in what they are learning, daily.                                                              

11. Teach them how they can learn, using books, the internet and other people.

12. Teach them the things that you can do, and how to do things (like cooking on the B-B-Q, changing a car’s wheel, or growing vegetables), when they are ready. “…the Father loves the Son, and shows Him all things that He Himself is doing” (Jn.5:20).

13. Every father should teach his children to respect their mother, and ensure that they do so! This is an aspect of the Fifth Commandment. We do this for our wife’s sake, our own sake, but also for our children’s sakes too. It is for their good, “…that your days may be prolonged in the land…” (Ex. 20:12).

14. Be careful who they are interacting with, and who are their friends. I know of one father who unwittingly let an adult “friend” be alone with his sons, only to find out many years later that this man had been intent on their sexual abuse.

Sometimes, “Christian” friends are not what they appear to be. I know another family, where the father’s authority and reputation was quietly undermined for years by a teenage son’s “friend,” who consistently made accusations against him behind his back. It took years to restore the father/son relationship.  “…the companion of fools will suffer harm” (Prov.13:20).

Conclusion:                                                                                                                           Being a father is an exciting opportunity, along with an important responsibility. We are to represent God to our children, and the Bible says “who is a teacher like Him?” (Job 36:22) Finally,The most important issue for a child’s education is their parents’ example.