Here is a book, published in 1990 by the ICE (Institute for Christian Economics), Gary North’s non-profit publishing house. It consists of fifteen sermons delivered by John Calvin in 1556 on chapters 27 and 28 of the book of Deuteronomy 27 and 28. Edited by James B. Jordan.
The book was published as a definitive answer, fleshed out in 273 pages of Calvin’s own words, to an all-important question posed by Gary during his years of research and writing. It was a question that he addressed in a brief pamphlet he wrote by the same title:
Was John Calvin a theonomist?
Good question!
Hint (and spoiler alert): That question gets answered pretty quickly, explicitly and bluntly in the Preface, written by Dr. North. (You know, Dr. North could be BLUNT at times!) I will let you turn to those opening pages of the book to find out what the answer was.
Here is a link to download the PDF of this book for free. Click here: The Covenant Enforced
Since this PDF does not include what was printed on the flaps and rear side of the original dust jacket, thankfully, that priceless text was preserved on Dr. North’s website in his Free Books section on the description page for the book.
For your reading pleasure, I reprint it below:
(Inside flap)
John Calvin preached through the book of Deuteronomy on weekdays from March, 1555, to July, 1556. In all, he preached 200 sermons, expounding the book in detail and making applications to the social and political life of Geneva, as well as to the personal lives of her citizens.
The fifteen sermons selected here have not been seen in English since they were first translated and published in 1583. In this volume, editor James B. Jordan has revised Arthur Golding’s translation into modern English, making Calvin’s words come alive with renewed impact. These sermons are as timely today as when they were first preached. Cultures that depart from God fall under His judgment. So says the Bible, and so said John Calvin. Cultures that obey God, however, receive His blessing. If there is a message that the Western world needs to hear at the present time, surely this is it.
(Catalog description)
As the Reformation began to consolidate in Geneva, John Calvin preached 200 sermons on the book of Deuteronomy in order to show the people the kind of Christian republic God wanted them to have. Calvin’s sermons were published in English in the 1580’s, and went through three editions. They have been highly influential in the development of English and American Christian culture. This book contains 15 sermons, those on Deuteronomy 27 and 28, which discuss the blessings and curses of the covenant. Rendered into modern English, these sermons are not only valuable in showing the though of one of the most profound shapers of the modern world, but they are also powerful reading, and will be of tremendous value to pastors, seminarians, and teachers.
(Long description on back cover)
Those Who Sow The Wind Will Reap The Whirlwind?
That’s what God told the prophet Hosea to tell Israel in the eighth century B.C. (Hosea 8:7), and that’s what John Calvin told the citizens of Geneva in A.D. 1556. Unlike many Christians in the western world today, Calvin was convinced that God is alive and active in history. Nations that pleased God by faith-filled obedience to His revealed will would be blessed by God, while those who angered God by rebellious disobedience to His laws would receive curses from Him. These blessings and curses are not only spiritual, but are also social, agricultural, political, meteorological, and in fact are manifested in every area of national life. Thus, Calvin called the people of Geneva to walk a straight line before God, so that He might give them peace and not war, prosperity and not famine, life and not death. Calvin showed from the book of Deuteronomy that God has set up a covenant with His people, and that God enforces that covenant. The principles of that covenant are every bit as relevant after the cross as they were before it, Calvin insisted. The Protestant Reformation transformed the western world because it held to a belief in a living, active, covenant-enforcing God. If we want to recover our cultures from ruin, we must return to Biblical principles of life, and to the God of the covenant.
Once again, here is the link to download a free PDF of the book: The Covenant Enforced
I was roaming around inside the vault of ICE newsletters at GaryNorth.com today, when I came across this little jewel — a one-page, two-sided gem.
It is the March/April 1988 issue of the bi-monthly Christian Reconstruction newsletter (vol. XII, no. 2).
The title: STONES AND CORNERSTONES IN CHRISTIAN RECONSTRUCTION
A headline only a copywriter could love!
It grabbed my attention. It got me to start reading the body copy, which, of course, is its purpose. First sentence. Second sentence. I kept going. I never stopped until the words ran out. “Mission accomplished!”
If you ever wanted an easy-peasy, quick-start guide to what “Christian Reconstruction” is about — in a nutshell, as they say — and more importantly, what kind of biblical, theological and scholarly foundation it is built on, this handy essay is the go-to for you.
Gary wrote it four years after a similarly-themed issue whose title was, “THE THREE LEGS OF CHRISTIAN RECONSTRUCTION’S STOOL.” (That was the January/February 1984 issue of the same newsletter. I may republish it here at a later date.)
This one is better, in my not-necessarily humble but fact-checked-to-be-accurate opinion. If you do read that other one, you will see the evolution of thought and the maturing of the movement and its theological and historical distinctives as time went on.
Now, if you want to experience reading this newsletter just as it appeared in 1988 when it was originally published and printed out and mailed directly to your mailbox for you to open and read even before the letter from your grandmother, then click HERE. (Paper and toner not included.)
You can also read it in true 21st-century fashion by simply scrolling below.
Either way, I think you’ll find this newsletter to be a helpful read — especially if you want to know which books you need to read or which ones you haven’t read but should in order to get “up to speed” with what this movement is about, what sort of doctrine it is fundamentally based on, where the movement has been and, by God’s grace, where it is going.
A few decades may seem like a long time. It may seem like progress is slow or not being made.
But when you’re a postmillennialist, you think differently. You know time is on our side. You know we are just getting started.
STONES AND CORNERSTONES IN CHRISTIAN RECONSTRUCTION
By Gary North
The imagery of the cornerstone is found throughout Scripture. Jesus Christ is the cornerstone for Christianity. The cornerstone is the marker by which the other corners of the house are measured before the walls go up. To the extent that any movement reflects this structural arrangement — and I think the analogy is useful for many of them — the best understanding that anyone can attain concerning some movement is to locate the cornerstone and the three other corners.
I think this can be done with the Christian Reconstruction movement. This movement is now divided into two branches, as I think most of the old timers (recruited earlier than 1985) have recognized. With this in mind, let us examine Division One and Division Two in terms of the cornerstone model.
Reconstruction Towers: Division One
There is no question regarding the initial cornerstone. It was R. J. Rushdoony’s Institutes of Biblical Law (Craig Press, 1973; today, Presbyterian & Reformed). I knew it would become just that, so I submitted three essays that I wanted to go into the book as appendixes. I wanted “a piece of the action” when the historians finally figured out what the source of this movement was.
I recognized early that this book would launch a movement and a reformation, so I staked out my claim as early as possible. By including them in the Institutes, Mr. Rushdoony did me his second greatest favor. (The greatest was in letting me marry his daughter, who is worth a lot more than three appendixes, or even rubies.)
Corner two was Greg Bahnsen’s Theonomy in Christian Ethics (Presbyterian & Reformed, 1977), his Master’s thesis at Westminster Seminary. It offers a formidable academic defense of the main thesis of Rushdoony’s Institutes: the continuing validity of Old Testament law.
To gain the respect of scholars — well, anyway, to gain their grudging silence — Bahnsen had to write the book in the arcane language of Theologian, a nearly dead tongue today. (A funny thing happened on the way to the typesetter’s, by the way: all references to the Institutesdisappeared from the text. Peculiar. This was matched by the loss of all references to Bahnsen’s Theonomy in Rushdoony’s post-1977 books. Most peculiar!)
Corner three was my book, The Dominion Covenant: Genesis (Institute for Christian Economics, 1982). It begins with an exposition of Genesis 1, the source of Van Til’s Creator-creature distinction, and also the source of God’s command for men to exercise dominion over the earth.
It offers detailed evidence that Darwinism is a rival religion, and it shows how Darwinism is sustained by a two-step sleight-of-hand operation: first, declare man the Son of Slime; second, declare man God by Default. The book also offers a specific case study of how a uniquely Christian epistemology can and must be used to restructure an academic discipline, in this case economics.
Corner four was David Chilton’s Paradise Restored: Biblical Theology of Dominion (Dominion Press, 1985). This book explains the biblical foundations of postmillennial eschatology as no other book ever has. It introduces readers to biblical symbolism, showing how biblical prophecies are to be interpreted first and foremost in terms of biblical symbols.
For example, when stars are predicted to fall from heaven. civilizations or religious systems are the focus of the prophecy, not giant thermonuclear reactors in the galactic heavens. Its impact has been very great, for it has attracted tens of thousands of people who are becoming increasingly skeptical regarding the various forms of pessimillennialism, a term coined by Dr. Rev. Prof. Francis Nigel Lee, a South African theologian teaching in Australia who agrees with all four books, yet who somehow is not usually identified as a Christian Reconstructionist. I suspect it may be the language barrier. Nic invents his own language as he goes along. “Pessimillennial” is unquestionably his greatest contribution to his native English. (“The case of the missing footnotes” also reappears with Lee, what you might call the “Bermuda Triangle” of Bahnsen, Lee, and Rushdoony — all of their footnotes to each other that fly into it disappear forever.)
Reconstruction Towers: Division Two
There is no doubt that Institutes launched a movement. Rushdoony was able to put together for the first time in history three major ideas: Van Til’s presuppositional apologetic method, biblical law, and postmillennialism. He mentions “covenant” throughout the book, but he does not explain it.
This is understandable; Ray Sutton was the first theologian ever to unravel it. Rushdoony also presupposes but does not emphasize in the Institutes the Calvinist doctrine of the sovereignty of God, meaning absolute predestination. That, of course, is the bedrock presupposition of Van Til’s system, yet he, too, does not devote as much space to this doctrine as he does to, say, the Creator-creature distinction, or the theme of the one and the many, or law and flux, or even continuity-discontinuity.
But Institutes was not enough. it was not the bait that attracted the most fish; it was only the hook, and it has snared relatively few people so far, judging by its total sales (under 1,000 copies per year). Other issues served as bait, most notably his continuing eloquent witness-stand defenses of the Christian school movement, but also such things as political action, survivalism (in the late 1960’s — terminated by the ill-fated “Ranch project” in Paso Robles, California), and most recently his defense of the dietary laws. Thus, Institutes serves only as the second stone of Division Two.
Ray Sutton’s book, That You May Prosper: Dominion By Covenant (Institute for Christian Economics, 1987) is the cornerstone of Division Two. It sets forth the five-point biblical covenant model that must serve as the necessary classification scheme for all orthodox Christian theology. This book will be of greater long-run importance to Christianity than the Institutes, for its model will eventually serve as Christian orthodoxy’s cornerstone, though it may take centuries for everyone else to figure this out. It is more general and more timeless than the institutes. But its content is fully informed by the Reconstructionist breakthroughs made in the Institutes.
That You May Prosper is now the required “cookie cutter” for the Biblical Blueprint Series (Dominion Press). These books demonstrate how effective the Bible’s five-point covenant model is for every aspect of society. Without this model, the series would not be nearly so effective. It was providential that as editor I decided on the ten-and-three chapter structure of the series a few weeks before Sutton had first preached about his discovery: ten chapters on biblical principles and three on applications, meaning (in most books) church, family, and state. These are the covenantal institutions. By adopting a five-and-five structure for the first ten chapters, the writers show that the best way to understand the institutions of this world is by looking to the covenant model. Thus, the Blueprint books reconfirm Sutton’s book, and add to everyone’s confidence in it.
The third stone is David Chilton’s Bible commentary, The Days of Vengeance: An Exposition of the Book of Revelation (Dominion Press, 1987). Chilton’s impressive scholarship offers a case study of the fusion of covenant and symbol that marks Division Two of Christian Reconstructionism. He shows that the Book of Revelation is divided into the five points of the covenant, although he uses the terminology of Meredith Kline’s older five-point model to present Sutton’s concepts, a tactic that has not escaped the attention of Dr. Kline, who is not in the least appreciative — apoplectic is closer to it.
Chilton also demonstrates that the Book of Revelation is both a worship service and a covenant lawsuit against Israel. Chilton’s Days of Vengeance can and should serve as the representative model of what the “new, improved” Christian Reconstruction movement is really all about: the fusion of covenant and symbol. This is the distinctive theological insight of what people (including me) have called Tyler theology. (The distinctive organizational feature is “Tyler’s” emphasis on the sacraments.) This book replaces my Genesis commentary as a representative model; mine is too narrow in focus: one academic discipline, not a way of expositing all of the Bible.
Corner four has not yet been written, but I know what it will have to be: a book on biblical interpretation (hermeneutics). It will have to put into one unit the distinctive features of Sutton’s book and Chilton’s: covenant and symbol. It will have to show readers and expositors how any particular biblical text can in principle be dealt with, especially Old Testament texts, in terms of biblical theology (the increasing light thrown on biblical truths by the biblical writers, Genesis to Revelation), and covenant theology (the integrating five-point structure).
You may have noticed a missing pillar: Bahnsen’s Theonomy. We in Tyler are nervous about its self-conscious separation of theonomy (ethics) from postmillennialism. We argue for postmillennialism in terms of the ethical cause-and-effect system of Gods judgments in history (Deut. 28): righteousness wins, evil loses. We think we hear a time bomb ticking in Theonomy. (Maybe it’s just a metronome.) We also are more interested in pursuing biblical theology and biblical symbolism than he is.
Obviously, there are Reconstructionists who will disagree with me on all this. In effect, I am hereby announcing the theological foundations of the next phase of Christian Reconstruction. I believe that this new arrangement of the stones will characterize the future of the movement. I could be wrong. Maybe the fourth book will not be a book on hermeneutics. I cannot imagine what else it might be, however. So, I am speculating about the construction plans of a future theological edifice that is at present missing a major piece in its foundation. Until this final stone is laid, I doubt that the movement will produce a reformation. On the other hand, when that final stone is laid, I do expect a reformation – bigger than the one Luther began.
Conclusion
The five points of the biblical covenant are:
Transcendence/Presence
Hierarchy/Authority
Ethics/Dominion
Oath/Judgment
Succession/Inheritance
Anyone who doubts that Christian Reconstructionism is a movement had better face up to the fact: we are unquestionably a movement because we now have an acronym: THEOS. Plus, we have newsletters and mailing lists. These are the distinguishing marks of any modern movement. (“No newsletter — no movement!”)
All over America, people are asking this question: “Can I be a Reconstructionist and deny any of these five points?” I have now provided the answer: heaven, no! Admittedly, there will be ceaseless debates over how to fill each point with specific biblical content, and how to apply each of them to real-world problems, but without the five-point covenant model, you are not a Christian Reconstructionist. And if you are not a member in good standing of a local church, you are on the movements fringe.
This is Christian Reconstruction. Accept no substitutes!
(This public service message has been brought to you by the co-founder of Christian Reconstruction. Stay tuned for the next exciting installment of “Christian Reconstruction — the Newsletter!”)
*************************************
An archive of the Christian Reconstruction newsletters is located HERE.
An archive of all ICE newsletters is located HERE.
In 1979, Christian broadcaster Pat Robertson published what he called an “Action Plan for the 1980s.” It really was a detailed ‘call to action’ for Christians. It laid out in brief five fundamental economic, social and political problems that we faced as Americans and especially as Bible-believing Christians back then.
I regret to inform you that, with but one exception, those problems are still with us!
Some of the historical details set forth by Robertson have changed, of course — the fall of the Soviet Union on Christmas Day 1991 being the greatest example of these (hence, communism is no longer on the rise) — and certainly the dollar figures being discussed with regard to currency devaluation and federal government spending per capita have dramatically changed. (He laments that in 1979, it was $2,445 for every man, woman and child. Well, now that figure, adjusted for inflation, is up to $19,434!
As for currency devaluation with respect to the price of gold in 1979, Robertson remarks how the price had shot up to $380 per ounce in seven short years from $42 in 1972, when Nixon used his executive powers to finish what FDR started in 1933. Imagine what his astonishment must have been when he saw gold prices soaring past $1,900 (again) before his death in June 2023!
Anyway, I suppose we should be thankful that after a little more than four decades now, we are only faced with solving four of the five “Critical Problems America Must Face” that he called attention to.
One down. Four to go.
Here are the four remaining CRITICAL PROBLEMS:
Inflation
Currency Devaluation
Productivity
Government
Guess which two you and I have some actual ability to effect change in?
You got it!
Well, Rev. Robertson (he was an ordained Southern Baptist minister) did not just state the problems without also offering targeted solutions for them.
By targeted, I mean those whom he says should be the ones implementing these.
Let me give you a hint as to who that should be…
6 STEPS TO MORAL, ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL RECOVERY
Let me give you another hint… Actually, let me give you six of them:
There must be a profound moral revival in the land.
Those who love God must get involved in the election of strong leaders.
In a moral sense, we must recognize our right to preserve our precious religious heritage.
Christians must take action in education.
Christians must become aware of the awesome power of the media to mold our moral and political consensus.
Christians should seek positions of leadership in major corporations and benevolent foundations.
Get the hints?
These are more than “hints.” They are blueprints. Proposed blueprints for a major project of … wait for it … Christian reconstruction.
Or, as he calls it, a “plan of action.”
And what does Robertson say are the keys to our success in this critical undertaking?
FAITH and DILIGENCE
After all, he reminds us, how did the Communists, espousing a false religion, manage to dominate so much of the world in 60 short years?
They were dedicated to their cause, and they worked at it.
That, by the way, is another hint.
In so many words, he is saying, “Go, and do thou likewise.”
And lest we be disheartened by the daunting scope of this most intimidating task at hand, Rev. Robertson also reminds us,
“The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of His Christ; and He shall reign for ever and ever.”
Rev. 11:15
Dr. Gary North reprinted Pat Robertson’s Christian Action Plan for the 1980s in the Dec. 1979/Jan. 1980 issue of his ICE (Institute for Christian Economics) newsletter, “Biblical Economics Today.”
I am reprinting it here in its entirety as it was originally published by Dr. North in print in 1979, and online on his website in 2014.
I strongly encourage you to read this action plan carefully, take it to heart, pray about it, and consider looking at ways you can begin to implement some of its long-term strategy.
And it is a long-term strategy.
As Rev. Robertson says,
Except for our Lord’s return, we cannot expect our nation or our world to be freed from tyranny in one year or even 10 years. But if we are faithful and diligent, with His blessing, it will be done.
As a postmillennialist filled with certainty and hope for the future of our nation and of our world, I say, Amen to that.
************************************
Retrospective: A Christian Action Plan For The 1980’s
Pat Robertson
October, 1979 marks the 50th anniversary of the Great Depression of 1929–an event which did more to shape the existing framework of U.S. government policy than any other single event in recent history. Out of the Depression came a powerful central government; an imperial presidency; the enormous political power of newspapers, radio, and later television; an anti-business bias in the country, powerful unions; a complexity of federal regulations and agencies designed to control and, in many instances, protect powerful vested interests; and, more importantly, the belief in the economic policy of British scholar John Maynard Keynes, to the end that government spending and government “fine tuning” would guarantee perpetual prosperity.
New Deal Keynesian policies did reverse the economic tragedy of the Depression (with the help of World War II). But many now feel that the “cure” of the ’30’s is the cause of the sickness of the ’70’s. In fact, many knowledgeable observers are contending that forces unleashed in the post-Depression days have so weakened Western civilization, and the United States in particular, that a radical change is on the way. Some feel that 1979 may be the watershed year for the Western nations as we now know them.
5 CRITICAL PROBLEMS AMERICA MUST FACE NOW
As we enter the next decade, here are some of the inherited problems which must be dealt with:
(1) Inflation.
Deficit spending by the federal government, which seemed so appropriate in the Depression and later during World War II, has seized us like a massive narcotic addiction. Presidents Johnson, Nixon, Ford, and Carter could not resist the temptation of the “quick fix.” For 10 years the economy has been on the same cycle: spending, election, monetary contraction, recession, spending, election, etc. During this time the government has printed vast sums of money, thus ensuring both economic turmoil and the consequent rise in prices. As a result the savings of the thrifty have been cut in half, many of the elderly have been beggared, and the Social Security system is approaching bankruptcy. Reckless borrowers gain and the cautious lose. Public and private debt has risen into the trillions. Government has grown so that the load of non-productive governmental interference in the life of every citizen has become insupportable.
(2) Currency devaluation.
As a Depression measure, President Roosevelt took us off the gold standard and made private ownership of gold illegal. President Nixon completed the action when he removed all monetary backing to the dollar and let it float against all other currencies of the world. When Nixon made his move in 1972, the price of gold was $42 per ounce. In September, 1979, the world price of gold topped $380 per ounce and undoubtedly it will go higher. It could also be said that gold as a commodity has gone up in price in seven years. It could also be said that the world now regards the U.S. dollar as worth 1/9 of its 1972 value!
Indeed, in 1919 the dollar is regarded as only about half as valuable against the German merit, the Swiss franc, and the Japanese yen as it was in 1972.
During the last century, the British pound sterling was the reserve currency of the world. It was backed by gold, which was in turn backed by a stable, prosperous empire. In the 1920’s Britain removed the backing from its currency. Consequently, one cause of the U.S. Depression was wild speculation brought on by artificially low interest rates in this country, which our Federal Reserve Board permitted in order to protect the then-weak British pound. When the pound fell as a reserve currency, it was every nation for itself. A wave of protective tariffs set in, turning a financial crash into a worldwide disaster.
After World War II, the U.S. dollar became the reserve currency of the world. The dollar was “as good as gold,” and became for other nations a store of value. The policies of the Johnson, Nixon, and Carter administrations have deliberately destroyed the value of the dollar. Now, instead of currency convertibility and free trade, it becomes again every nation for itself. How do nations protect their dollar reserves, dump unwanted dollars, and protect their own currencies? Once again there is talk of trade wars, tariffs, and other protectionist devices.
Further complicating international finance is the OPEC oil cartel. Oil is priced in terms of dollars. U.S. inflation causes the dollar to drop in value. Whenever this happens, OPEC raises the price of oil to compensate. This causes further in?ation and further dollar decline–then another round of a vicious cycle from which we seem unable or unwilling to extricate ourselves.
(3) Productivity.
The Depression caused market demand to plummet. Prices crashed along with the stock market. Farm surpluses caused untold misery in America’s breadbasket. The New Deal answer was to limit production and competition, kill the little pigs, take acreage out of cultivation, and then stimulate demand by massive government spending. In the ’30’s, it worked.
Now in the ’70’s, a bewildering array of New Deal legislation, coupled with the Great Society programs of Lyndon Johnson, coupled with rigid environmental regulations, has helped shrink U.S. productivity to record lows.
More serious is the liquidation of our major industries enforced by in?ation. Here is how it works. A business desires to show profits to its lenders and stockholders. In order to do this, it allows its capital plan to be depreciated at what it cost 10 or 15 years ago, rather than what it would cost now or in the future. If replacement value depreciation were used, many “profitable” businesses would show substantial losses. Their book “profits” are illusory; nevertheless the businesses pay taxes and dividends on them.
Unfortunately, when replacement time comes, the available funds are vastly inadequate to buy modern equipment and factories. So the business, as in the case of United States Steel Corp., closes the old plants and shrinks its output.
Unless something is done very soon by government, big business, and the financial community to recognize the realities of inflation and to make provision for the enormous sums required to modernize our heavy industry, in the 1980’s we will discover that our steel, machinery, and automotive industries have shrunk to the point where they can no longer compete at home or overseas.
As industries close, the government is forced into additional inflationary spending to care for displaced workers. As productivity drops and government spending accelerates, the pace of inflation speeds up–which in turn further aggravates the plight of industry, which causes a further increase in our trade deficit, causing the dollar to decline again. Dollar decline means we pay more for imported goods and thereby have more domestic inflation.
The cause-and-effect cycle of inflation and industry decline is relatively easy to follow. It is also easy to understand why the “new breed” of economic conservatives is stressing anti-Keynesian policies of stimulating production and supply while balancing the federal budget to cool the ruinously inflationary demand side of the economic equation.
(4) Government.
Until the Depression, the federal government operated largely in keeping with the philosophy attributed to Thomas Jefferson: “That government is best which governs least.”
The anguish of the Depression changed all that. Emergency legislation proposed by President Roosevelt was railroaded through Congress with scarcely a murmur of objection. The Supreme Court objected on the grounds that the Constitution never gave the federal government such power over individual citizens, nor could Congress delegate so much of its authority to the chief executive.
How, for example, could the federal government under our Constitution force a farmer in Iowa to limit his planting of corn and make him kill his little pigs? The Supreme Court struck down item after item of New Deal legislation as unconstitutional. But in effect, Roosevelt said: Either approve my laws and regulations, or I will get Congress to expand the number of justices on the Court and then I will “pack” it with people who will do what I want.
This was dictatorship–but Roosevelt had the votes in Congress, so the Court backed down. They suddenly discovered that the little pigs in Iowa were a factor in “interstate commerce.” Since the federal government had constitutional authority to regulate “commerce,” it could limit the output of little pigs in Iowa if it wanted to. And it could, in decades to come, control how many channels were on TV sets, who could eat in a restaurant, the working conditions in every business, how many acres a farmer could plant, what wages would be paid to whom. Once the dam was broken, it became hard to conceive of many human endeavors outside of the reach of the federal government.
In fact, under activist presidents, Courts and Congresses, the Commerce Clause and the 14th Amendment have become the vehicles whereby government and its regulations have become the dominant factor in our society today. Federal spending amounts to $2,445 this year for every man, woman, and child in the land, and government debt amounts to $3,998 for each. The load on the family of four will be $9,780 in federal spending this fiscal year, and $15,992 in long-term debt, not including Social Security, Civil Service, and other retirement obligations plus collateral guarantees of federal agencies.
(5) Rise of Communism.
The Depression idled nearly one of every four workers in America. Businesses failed, banks collapsed, farmers and home owners were evicted from their property, and the life savings of millions vanished. Financial losses triggered the more serious loss or human dignity and purpose.
With the misery came revelations of abuses and scandals, stock manipulations by leading banks, blatant greed and corruption on the part of some of the most respected financial leaders of the day, and massive deception by Wall Street and government leaders.
Sensitive young intellectuals–men like Alger Hiss–became convinced that our system was wrong. Longing for a utopian society to replace it, they became easy targets for the Communist party and Communist fronts throughout the country. Many of these men and women played a key policy role in education, journalism, religion, labor, foundations, business, and government. They forced a pro-Soviet tilt to U.S. government policy during World War II and in the postwar years.
It is fair to say that the United States created a world favorable to the growth of the Soviet Union and world communism. We gave them money, technology, and trade agreements. We allowed them to subjugate Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Rumania, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Albania, and Manchuria. We permitted a divided Germany and a split Berlin. We established a United Nations charter drafted by Alger Hiss, a reputed Communist party member, which guaranteed the Soviets a veto in the United Nations Security Council.
Our postwar international monetary policy was largely the creation oi Harry Dexter White, another reputed Communist party member. And pro-Communist spies in both the United States and Great Britain gave the Soviets access to virtually all of our highly classified nuclear and defense secrets.
Before the Depression, the Bolsheviks were a slightly ludicrous group of fanatics who held dictatorial power in a poverty-stricken land that was still a part of the Middle Ages. Fifty years later, with our help, they have subjugated one quarter of all the people on earth, and have amassed a war machine that is not equal to but vastly superior to the military capability of the United States and its NATO allies combined.
By1981, the Soviet Union will have such undisputed dominance over the United States that it will be able to move at will against any territory on earth.
This would never have been possible had it not been for the Depression-inspired flirtation with Marxism on the part of the U.S. intellectual community–which, unfortunately, in some quarters still continues to this day.
6 STEPS TO MORAL, POLITICAL, AND ECONOMIC RECOVERY
As 1979 draws to a close, we are left with a 50-year legacy which should cause alarm. Our domestic strength has been weakened by government excesses and mismanagement; our capacity for national sacrifice and resolute action may have been reduced to a level of ineffectiveness; vital raw materials necessary to our economic and military survival are in the hands of others; and we are confronted by a powerful adversary with both the capability and the desire to destroy us.
We urgently need two things. First, that God will hold our external enemies at bay while confusing their counsels against us. Second, we need a bold, dynamic plan baled on practical reality which will permit our nation to turn around and begin the slow road to moral, political, and economic recovery.
A national strategy for the ’80’s must be formulated. Each individual needs a similar plan. Here are some suggestions intended to stimulate thought.
(1) There must be a profound moral revival in the land.
Not only increased evangelism; not a glib confession of faith, but a profound commitment to Jesus Christ and biblical Christianity. There must be true repentance, fasting, prayer, and calling upon God. The “people who are called by His name” need to beseech God with all humility on behalf of our nation and our world. A miracle is needed and we must ask for one.
(2) Those who love God must get involved in the election of strong leaders.
Men and women of God across the land must join together to ensure the election of strong leaders who are beholden to no special interest group; who are pledged to reduce the size of government, eliminate federal deficits, free our productive capacity, ensure sound currency; who are pledged to strong national defense, and do not confuse peace with surrender; who recognize the anti-Christ nature oi Marxism and will refuse to permit innocent people to fail victim to Marxist tyranny; who support programs which encourage godliness while resisting programs which result in the triumph of humanism and atheism in our land.
More than anything we need leaders who are not afraid to demand necessary sacrifices of our people in order to free us from bondage–whether it comes from the OPEC cartel, from crushing debt, from nuclear blackmail, or from the poverty and helplessness oi a portion of our people.
To accomplish this takes work. Christians must register to vote, work within parties, attend caucuses, mass meetings, and conventions. They need to be informed on Issues and know what each candidate stands for. They must be willing to hold public office and, where appropriate, should prepare for government service. They must be willing to write letters, make telephone calls, lobby for legislation, and pray for their leaders. In short, they must be good citizens. In the Book of Proverbs we read, “The diligent will bear rule, but the slothful will be put to forced labor.” If Christians want to rule, they must be diligent. There is no magic shortcut.
(3) In a moral sense, we must recognize our right to preserve our precious religious heritage.
Supreme Court decisions are not holy writ. The damage to our spiritual and moral heritage that has been brought on by the Supreme Court school prayer decisions is beyond calculation. President Roosevelt did not hesitate to use power to force the Supreme Court to acquiesce to New Deal legislation. Christians should not hesitate to use the lawful power at their disposal to secure reversal of onerous Supreme Court decisions.
(4) Christians must take action in education.
The courts and ill-advised federal regulations have often made a mockery of education. Eliminating prayer removed moral restraints; busing tends to remove neighborhood restraints. Many schools have become undisciplined jungles.
Textbooks used in public schools often tend to destroy long-established moral values. Parents have every right to insist on quality moral education for their children. They should fight for it In public schools, and If good public education is denied them, they must do everything possible to establish an alternative private system of education where Christian values can be taught.
(5) Christians must become aware of the awesome power of the media to mold our moral and political consensus.
Christians need to do everything in their power to get involved in media (radio, television, newspapers, magazines). Where possible, Christians should seek to establish or purchase newspapers, magazines, radio stations, and television stations.
Christians should learn motion picture techniques, produce drama, write music, publish books–anything to produce a climate of righteousness and godliness. They must dispel the sense of nihilism and lack of meaning that is so evident in much that passes for art these days.
(6) Christians should seek positions of leadership in major corporations and benevolent foundations.
It has been said that money is the “mother’s milk” of politics. It also is the essential nourishment of education, entrance into media, the arts, and wide-scale evangelism. Christians should learn the ways of finance: stocks, bonds, banking, commodities, real estate, taxes. More than anything, they should learn and apply the principles of God’s kingdom dealing with the acquisition and use of wealth. When they have accumulated material resources, they should recognize the enormous good they can accomplish with that wealth in unity with other members of the body of Christ throughout the world.
THE KEYS TO SUCCESS: FAITH AND DILIGENCE
The Communists, who espouse a false religion, now dominate the world after only 60 years. The reason is simple–they were dedicated to their cause and they worked at it. Except for our Lord’s return, we cannot expect our nation or our world to be treed from tyranny in one year or even 10 years. But if we are faithful and diligent, with His blessing, it will be done. “The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of His Christ; and He shall reign for ever and ever.” (Rev. 11:15)
*****************************************
Read this article as published on Gary North’s website by clicking here.
Read a PDF of the original ICE newsletter by clicking here.
Here is the number one assertion that Dr. Gary North devoted his entire professional life to proving:
“The Bible mandates free market capitalism. It is anti-socialist.”
That was the basis of his lifelong argument, what his calling was based on, spanning six decades of prolific writing, researching, editing and publishing. Namely, that Christian economics is the only type of economics that fully and accurately explains and delineates all of the elements of “human action” involved in a man-made economy. Also, that it is the only type of economics that fully, accurately and faithfully explains and delineates the elements of divine action that are also involved. God as the original owner… of everything. Everything else flows from that.
Gary considered socialism to be the antithesis of this view — a thoroughly atheistic system that inevitably leads to poverty for the masses, not prosperity. He even went so far as to say that democratic socialism is nothing more than a rewritten version of God’s commandment:
“Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote.”
If you read many of Gary’s articles (let alone his books and commentaries), you know this was always one of his favorite mantras exposing the true nature of socialism — and for that matter, the true nature of modern-day political and economic systems found in western nations (and eastern nations) around the world.
He spared not Christians who embraced and adopted (and defended) such systems:
“Christian socialists and defenders of economic planning by state bureaucrats deeply resent this interpretation of their ethical position. They resent it because it’s accurate.”
He was crystal clear as to the antidote:
“When Christianity adheres to the judicial specifics of the Bible, it produces free market capitalism.”
No ambiguity there.
None here, either:
“On the other hand, when Christianity rejects the judicial specifics of the Bible, it produces socialism or some politically run hybrid ‘middle way’ between capitalism and socialism, where politicians and bureaucrats make the big decisions about how people’s wealth will be allocated. Economic growth then slows or is reversed. Always.”
The bottom line is, if you want a system that produces long-term economic growth, you don’t promote a system that has been deceptively re-named economic democracy.
There is no better definition of what “economic democracy” really is than this one:
“Economic democracy” is the system whereby two wolves and a sheep vote on what to have for dinner.
In contrast to such a system of predatory economics,…
“Free market capitalism produces long-term economic growth. Socialism and middle-way economic interventionism by the state produce poverty and bureaucracy. If your goal is to keep poor people poor, generation after generation, you should promote socialism. But be sure to call it economic democracy in order to fool the voters.”
He offers this challenge to defenders of “Bible-based” socialism:
“Socialist propagandists for over four centuries have claimed that the Bible teaches socialism, but we have yet to see a single Bible commentary written by a socialist. If the Bible teaches socialism, where is the expository evidence?”
Speaking of “expository evidence,” Gary says he has plenty of that:
“When I say that the Bible mandates a moral and legal social order that inevitably produces free market capitalism, I have the evidence to back up my position. My critics — critics of capitalism — do not.”
And just in case you weren’t clear on his position as to what the Bible does and does not teach,…
“Fact: There has never been an expository Bible commentary that shows that the Bible teaches anything other than free market capitalism.”
Another fact, of which the overwhelming majority of Bible-reading, Bible-believing Christians are unaware with respect to Gary’s embarking on an economic commentary of the Bible:
“An economic commentary on the Bible had never been attempted before. I discuss only those passages that relate to economics.”
And if that were not unique enough, he reminds his readers of this highly relevant, related fact:
“No one before me had ever attempted to write a Bible commentary on a specific academic discipline. I hope mine becomes a model for others.”
Here is how the project began:
“Beginning in April, 1973, I began writing a verse-by-verse commentary on the economics of the Bible. The first essay, on Genesis 1:26-28, appeared in the May, 1973 issue of the Chalcedon Report.”
He labored for the next four decades. He approached it from the standpoint of achieving measured “inputs” as opposed to achieving goals of “outputs”. This made more sense to him. It was a more realistic approach to tackling such a mammoth, long-term project of somewhat uncertain outcome.
“I have continued working on this project ever since. I limited my writing to one essay per month from 1973 to 1976. Beginning in the summer of 1977, I began working 10 hours per week, 50 weeks per year on this project.”
He admits to the necessity as well as the scarcity of the time spent: “I needed every minute.”
And so, by diligently and continuously “sticking to his knitting”, week after week, month after month, year after year, eventually, he got ‘er done:
“I completed the posting of the entire series, 31 volumes, in August 2012. Because I had to cease writing it for six months in 1998, when I did not have access to my library, I added six months to the deadline. I met my August 1977 deadline to the month: February plus six months = August.”
The entire commentary series is, along with his other economics-related books, posted here:
Several of his other books that he mentions, he considers to be “in effect extended appendixes to one or more of these commentaries.”
Those titles are:
Dominion and Common Grace (1987) Is the World Running Down? (1988) Political Polytheism (1989) Millennialism and Social Theory (1990) Victim’s Rights (1990) The Judeo-Christian Tradition (1990) The Coase Theorem (1991)
But before you embark on reading any of his massive, 31-volume set, or even any of the “extended appendices” that he wrote and published as separate books, Gary recommends that you first read his “brief, easy-to-read introduction to biblical economics,” Inherit the Earth.
Doctor’s orders.
It’s strong but effective medicine. And you had better plan on taking it for the rest of your life! Especially if you want to “immunize” yourself” against all of the unbiblical ideas both Christians and non-Christians have gotten over the years (centuries, millennia) about what the Bible does and does not teach about economics and particularly about what is now called free market capitalism.
That is my advice to you on this warm Sunday afternoon in late June 2023.
Today, June 25th is my wife’s birthday. So here endeth my writing of this post.
Ta, ta for now.
To read the original page where all of this incomparably useful, practical and incisive biblical and theological thought-treasure is contained, go here:
P.S. Consider subscribing to Gary North’s website. All of the invaluable wisdom he sought to impart over the years is still there in its entirety. Much of that invaluable wisdom — as he emphatically stated again and again — is found in the online discussion/Q&A forums, in addition to the more than twenty thousand articles!
[Yes, I know it’s been eons since I posted an article here on the CR site. If you will forgive my negligence, I will resume writing posts just a wee bit more frequently than once a year. Agreed?-PR]
Here is today’s installment for your Sunday reading pleasure:
There is a GaryNorth.com subscriber who goes by the name of “thetypesetter.” He has been busy doing just what his log-in name implies: type-setting books. Mainly, books by Dr. Gary North and others, which were either out-of-print or never made it into print because they were published as free PDFs.
As you may know, Gary stopped publishing physical books right about the time we were all getting used to calling it the “21st century”. After all, he figured, ‘Why spend thousands of dollars on printing and publishing costs for physical inventory — for each book — when you can spend a fraction of that and publish to your heart’s content all of your books online for free?“
Good question. And with an (almost) infinite number of downloads possible. This was the proverbial no-brainer. “Let the reader bear the printing costs! I’m just the author.” This became Gary’s new book-writing mantra.
Once an economist, always an economist.
What’s Wrong with ‘Free’?
Free PDFs are nice. You can download an entire book in just seconds. In the case of free PDFs, you don’t even have to pull out your credit card. You just click a couple of buttons on the screen and presto! The book is yours. Forever.
Problem: reading a PDF book that is hundreds of pages long — or, in the case of Gary’s 31-volume commentaries or his multi-volume Christian Economics series, THOUSANDS of pages of typeset text with footnotes, indexes, the whole enchilada — this is a problem.
I suppose there are folks who don’t mind this chronic, eye-straining arrangement. After all, free is free. “Save money. Live better.”
I prefer to spend a few dollars and buy a hard copy, printed with physical paper and ink. Much easier on the eyes and, frankly, more practical and efficient for those extra-long reads.
“Spend money. See better.”
Enter the typesetter.
I won’t divulge his real name. Suffice to acknowledge his literary handiwork. It speaks for itself.
I will divulge the name of his publishing venture: Axehead Press.
Axehead Press
Clever name, no?
Makes you want to go find the nearest river and go swimming in it. Or, name your next man-child, Elijah.
I suggest you go find his website and put your name on his mailing list.
Christian Economics in One Lesson – This short volume (by Gary’s standards), written as a Bible-based, Christian compliment to Henry Hazlitt’s classic, carries a subtitle worthy of the Puritans:
An introduction to economics based on the conviction that the shortest and surest way to an understanding of this science is through an analysis of God’s covenant.
The list of titles will continue to grow, God willing. This little publishing concern is just getting started.
Sign up for Axehead’s e-mails. That way, Mr. Axehead can notify you whenever a new title is coming available and, by golly, he will even include a discount coupon code to use for your purchase!
By the way, what you are reading here is not a paid advertisement. There aren’t even any affiiliate links for you to click through! (Although, hmmm, that’s not a bad idea…) No, it’s just another article written by Yours Truly.
I am exceedingly grateful for “thetypesetter” and all the hard work and time he is pouring into this worthwhile and much-needed enterprise. He is not just printing stuff to read. His mission is to provide “Kingdom people” with “kingdom books”. Equipping disciples to go out and make disciples.
At least he lived long enough to celebrate his 80th birthday.
At least he lived long enough to celebrate his 50th wedding anniversary with his wife Sharon.
At least he was able to fulfill his vow and complete his life’s work–and then some–before he died.
But the sad, harsh reality is… last Thursday, February 24th, he died.
I am going to miss him. I already do. So do a lot of people. His departure has left an intellectual and theological void that no other living person can fill. Plain and simple.
Dr. Gary North, Ph.D. has exited the planet.
But only temporarily.
His eschatology says he’ll back at a later date for an extended stay once the renovations are completed.
That may take a couple of thousand years, give or take.
Meantime, the good doctor (History, University of California, Riverside) left us with a literary and spiritual legacy that could and should fill a library: his Bible commentaries, books, articles, videos, homeschool courses on economics, history, government, literature. His vision for an online Christian curriculum.
All of this comprises our vast, rich inheritance.
Of course, being the academic that he was, this also means that he left us with a lot of homework.
Lots to read. Lots to learn. Lots to do. With an emphasis on do.
His stern, grandfatherly advice: “Get busy!”
An Obituary Like No Other
If you have not already read it, here is Craig Bulkeley’s excellent article that he wrote. It was posted on the front page of Gary North’s website yesterday. I think you should read it.
Since there will come a day when that page will no longer be available online (my expectation is that WordPress will outlast Membergate), I repost it here in its entirety.
Before you read it, I want to propose an alternate meaning to the customary initials, R.I.P.
Especially in Dr. North’s case…
From now on, “R.I.P.” shall mean:
*Reconstruction In Progress*
Prayers for consolation in the LORD to the family of Dr. North. God bless and be with you.
Gary North, RIP
Craig Bulkeley – February 26, 2022
When Gary Kilgore North passed away on February 24, 2022, at the age of 80, he left behind a massive storehouse of Christian scholarship without parallel in the modern church. For nearly fifty-five straight and solid years he applied himself as a craftsman with single-mind devotion to researching, writing, and speaking about God’s world from the perspective of God’s Word. While he lived his work benefited his large readership around the world. For generations to come it will be of great use to the Church of his Lord Jesus Christ.
The Formative Years
North was born in 1942 to Peggy North, a homemaker, and Sam W. North, a World War II veteran and FBI Special Agent. In the idyllic “American Graffiti” era of 1950’s southern California, he excelled in high school and developed skills in research, writing, public speaking, and photography. He served as president of the school’s California Scholarship Federation chapter and was elected to the statewide office of “Superintendent of Public Instruction” at California’s prestigious Boys State. In his senior year he was elected president of the student body of 2000 students. He also learned business and music working at the local record store. Under his father’s influence, he developed a healthy sense of discipline and responsibility that he carried throughout life. North’s experiences in his youth helped develop in him a sense of self-confidence. At the age of 18 he came to faith in Jesus Christ which led him at the age of 21 to devote his career to the development of biblical economics.
While a student at the University of California, Riverside, North became increasingly more aware of the essential connection between various social and academic ideologies and their foundational philosophical and theological principles. In the spring of 1962 he read R. J. Rushdoony’s Intellectual Schizophrenia: Culture, Crisis, and Education (1961). It was a penetrating critique of public education and a systematic dismantling of the notion of academic neutrality. After corresponding they later met at an academic conference where Rushdoony was teaching on economics. The following year Rushdoony hired him as a summer intern with the newly formed Center for American Studies. North lived that summer and the next with the Rushdoony family. His job, for a good salary, was to read full-time. He read Murray Rothbard’s Man, Economy, and State (Fall 1962), The Panic of 1819 (1962), and America’s Great Depression (Spring 1963). He learned the monetary and free market theory of Ludwig von Mises and Austrian economics. He also attended a conference that year where Mises was teaching.
Having completed his undergraduate work in history North did a year of graduate work at Westminster Seminary in Philadelphia. There he studied under Cornelius Van Til, the godfather of anti-neutrality. Rushdoony had shaped his books on education from Van Til’s early essays on education.
North returned to UCLA in the fall of 1964 but within a month became disillusioned with the prevailing Keynesianism and Chicago School economics. In the spring of 1965 he transferred back to the University of California, Riverside, to study history, specializing in economic history and Puritan New England. His summer reading had prepared him for the work. He also studied Western intellectual history and social theory under Robert Nisbet who later held a distinguished chair at Columbia University. He completed his dissertation, The Concept of Property in Puritan New England, 1630-1720, and in 1972 received his Ph.D.
The Cultural Crisis
But North can be rightly understood only by understanding the times in which he lived. By the mid-1970’s, now in his thirties, North saw clearly that America was far down the fast track of radical transformation and on its way to ruin. The tranquil 1950’s had given way to the turbulent 1960’s and been transformed into the full-blown chaos of the 1970’s. Vietnam raged. Decades of Keynesianism and Socialism were crippling the economy. Nixon resigned in disgrace in 1974. While the U.S. Supreme Court had banned Bible reading and prayer from public schools in the early 1960’s, in 1973 it doubled down, overturned state laws across the country, and legalized the killing of babies in the womb. Organizations like the National and the World Council of Churches were promoting “situational ethics” and an apostate “Christianity” throughout America’s mainline churches. Having been taught not to bother polishing brass on a sinking ship, Bible-believing Christians and conservatives were watching the world they took for granted be dismantled before their eyes as they waited for the Rapture. Society’s bedrock foundations were crumbling and the whole social structure with it. The rot was going to the roots and it was bearing very bad fruit.
North (and Rushdoony) saw and understood the crisis and were on the leading edge of working not only to expose the unbiblical ideologies driving this transformation but, more importantly, to articulate the biblical foundations, principles and blueprints necessary for a revived social order. Rushdoony had already established the Chalcedon Foundation in 1965. In February 1967 North published his first article for pay. It appeared in The Freeman, the monthly magazine of the Foundation for Economic Education (FEE), the only libertarian think tank at the time. The Freeman was mailed to some 25,000 readers. It was the first of literally thousands and thousands of articles he would write over his career.
Other organizations were beginning to emerge in an effort to stand against the onslaught of the antagonist atheism. In 1972 Phyllis Schlafly founded Eagle Forum. In 1973 The Heritage Foundation was established by Ed Fuelner and Paul Weyrich. In 1974 Howard Phillips founded the Conservative Caucus and Weyrich started the Committee for the Survival of a Free Congress, later called the Free Congress Foundation. In 1976 Bill Richardson founded the Gun Owners of America and in 1977 the near century-old NRA redirected its focus to politics. In 1977 Pat Robertson launched the CBN cable network. In 1978, Beverly LaHaye established Concerned Women for America (10 plus years behind the National Organization of Women, founded in 1966). In 1979 Falwell and Weyrich founded the Moral Majority. Not to be overlooked, in June of 1974 the remnant of Austrian school economists, including North, Rothbard, Henry Hazlitt, Milton Friedman and many others, met in Vermont. In the face of a relentless humanism, conservatives and Christians were beginning to organize and take action.
But the Christians had some limitations. Generally they had a common goal: live as lights in a dark world and pray “Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done.” They also generally shared a common motive: love of God and your fellow man, particularly by sharing the gospel of salvation in Jesus Christ. But in the area of content or standards they had little of real substance to offer. “The Bible has the answers for all of life,” was the common refrain. But other than the general command to “love,” the Christians had few if any specific biblical answers and solutions to offer for the myriad of specific problems facing society on so many fronts. Christians – the Church – had come to take for granted the predominantly Christian character of their culture and were almost wholly ignorant of the biblical principles on which it was built. More rigorous analysis and deeper study of the Bible had to be done in order to set forth those truths.
Rebuilding on Biblical Foundations
In September 1971, North joined the senior staff of FEE. When Leonard Reed, FEE’s founder, informed him that any money he made writing or speaking would have to go to FEE, North decided he would not stay long.
In 1972 he married R. J. Rushdoony’s daughter, Sharon. He would say that if it were not for her, “you probably would never have heard of me” and “the only reason that I was successful was that my wife was patient with this lifestyle.” Understanding her father’s intense academic lifestyle, she could adapt to and support North in his. In addition to being committed to their children and providing an excellent family environment, she was an excellent accountant and operations manager.
In March of 1973 Sharon suggested he write an economic commentary on the Bible, verse by verse. After 4 years of work on the project and believing the pace to be inadequate, he took a vow. To complete the work he would devote 10 hours a week, 50 weeks a year, until his 70th birthday. He was then 35 years old.
In the spring of 1974 he and Sharon also began publishing a newsletter at the suggestion of someone who heard him speak at a conference. They named it Remnant Review, a testimony to be faithful in the calling and trust in the promises of God. Around 1976 North founded the Institute for Christian Economics and began publishing through it. He handled the writing. Sharon handled production (subscriptions, printing, filling envelopes, mailing, and even running the mechanical dog tag stamping device for addresses). She did it until the mailing list approached 2,000 subscribers. She also kept track of the money, never losing a dime.
In 1977 North published his first direct-mail book. It was based on a compilation of Remnant Review issues. His ad for the book led to the sale of some 20,000-30,000 copies from 1977-79 at $10 each ($40 in 2022). Those sales led to 2,000 subscribers. In 1979 he wrote another ad. It grew the list from 2,000 to 22,000, at $60 ($245 in 2022) per subscriber. He had become one of the few economists (and historians) actually making “real money” from his knowledge of economics and history.
His newsletter led to a job in Washington on the staff of one of his subscribers, a medical doctor from Texas named Dr. Ron Paul who had been elected to Congress. He hired North. Later in 1976 Paul lost reelection by 268 votes out of 192,802. North helped close down his office at the end of what would be just the first of Dr. Paul’s many terms in Congress.
North continued to produce. At the core were his convictions concerning certain fundamental truths.
First, man is God’s creation and inescapably subject to his authority. He is in a covenantal relationship with his Creator and, therefore, the status of that relationship is of absolute and paramount importance. As a consequence of his sin, he became an enemy of God and a stranger in God’s world. But based on Jesus’s perfect life and on his death, burial and resurrection, God brought redemption to anyone who would call upon him in repentance and faith. Based on the finished work of Jesus Christ alone, God would declare a condemned sinner forgiven and righteous and renew his relationship with his Maker.
Second, God had made man free and designed him to fulfill the Creation Mandate: subdue the earth and have dominion over it. Though the “first Adam” and his posterity failed because of sin, the “second Adam,” Jesus, would succeed. He would redeem his people, restore them to their created calling, and empower them by his Spirit to fulfill that mandate throughout the world on his behalf and to his glory (“Dominionism”).
Third, North believed that Jesus gave his disciples the Great Commission to make disciples and teach throughout the world all that God had revealed. Jesus declared that he had “all authority” in heaven and earth and that he would build his church and even the gates of hell could not stop it. Based on his Word and promise, despite the conflicts and troubles in the world, the nations of the earth would eventually bow before the King of kings, and his kingdom would be realized in history in significant measure and on a vast scale before his return (“Postmillenialism”).
Fourth, North believed that God’s Word governed all of life and that mankind would either suffer or be blessed in rejecting or following it. Whether it concerned man in his psychology, sociology, economics, philosophy, history, science or any other area, the Bible was the absolute standard. No professor, politician or “public intellectual” knew better than the Bible. This applied even in the areas of the political order and the law (“Theonomy” – God’s law).
Based on these truths, man was called to engage in the great task of working to see the fallen world reconstructed to God’s glory according to the Bible (“Christian Reconstruction”). North was committed to this calling.
As North would work out these principles in his writing, chief among his influences were Cornelius VanTil (philosophy/theology), Rushdoony (law), Ludwig von Mises (economics), John Calvin and John Murray (theology), and Robert Nisbet (social theory). Each was an exceptional scholar and produced critical writings with tremendous insight. North would follow in their train and his production would be nothing less than astounding.
It is noteworthy that among those influences, neither Mises nor Nisbet were professing Christians. What concerned North was not whether one claimed to be a Christian; there was no shortage of ministers and so-called Christian academics promoting unbiblical teaching like evolution, Keynesianism, and socialism. What was critical was the quality of the scholarship and whether the ideas the individual taught were consistent with the Bible or provided valuable information and insight to help understand it. In so many areas the writings of Mises and Nisbet did this. The same could be said for scholars like Rothbard, Harold Berman, Jacques Barzun, Martin van Creveld, James Billington, Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams, and so many others whose work North admired.
North made great strides in laying out the biblical foundations, principles and blueprints for a revived social order.
As Marxism was becoming entrenched in American universities in the 1960’s, North wrote Marx’s Religion of Revolution in 1968. In 1972 he began to consolidate his views on economics and published An Introduction to Christian Economics. In 1976 he published and edited The Foundations of Christian Scholarship: Essays in the Van Til Perspective. It was a groundbreaking collection of essays by PhDs and experts in a variety of disciplines: economics, psychology, sociology, history, education, political science, mathematics, theology, and philosophy. Each had as its central focus the truth that the Bible, God’s revelation, was the ultimate standard for understanding each field. No field was “neutral.” None, ultimately, was even understandable apart from that revelation. Even when they did function in some measure, they had in fact borrowed and presumed biblical truths despite their formal antagonism to Christianity.
North continued to produce Remnant Review and eventually brought it under his website GaryNorth.com which he began in 2005. Over its 17 years North published four articles a day, six days a week, every week. The range of topics was encyclopedic and topics were treated in depth and detail. With his 23,000+ articles he was constantly trying to encourage his readers to excel in their jobs and callings, provide insights and tools to help them do it, and give them a greater understanding of their relationship to the movement of history. His website also had active and robust forums where subscribers could and would engage with him and each other on how to apply the information to their individual circumstances.
Amazon’s Alexa service ranks the popularity of websites, of which there are estimated to be over 200,600,000 that are active. The lower the number the more popular the website. Ranked lower than 500,000 (top .25%), the website has some influence. Lower than 200,000 (top .1%), it is significant. Lower than 100,000 (top .05%), it is widely read and influential. Before North’s illness bore down on him, his website ranked around 36,000 (top .018%). No website for any evangelical news magazine, news site, theological seminary, church denomination, or publisher was even close. Only John McArthur and John Piper, now established in well-staffed and promoted organizations (Grace to You and Desiring God), had similar web traffic. Among web magazines, only the 66-year old socially liberal and marginally evangelical Christianity Today had similar web traffic. Ligonier Ministries ranked around 80,000. Few were ranked lower than 150,000, and most, far higher, some near 2,000,000. As to time spent by visitors on the websites, the numbers are not even close. Readers of North’s website spent five to seven times more time on his than readers did on any of the others.
In addition to his newsletter and website, North published almost 100 books, half of which he wrote. Most he financed with his own money. The vast majority of what he published he has provided to the public free of charge at Free Christian Educational Resources, https://www.garynorth.com/freebooks/.
In 2012, after nearly 40 years, North fulfilled the vow he had taken in 1972 and completed his 31 volume economic commentary on the Bible. It was a remarkable achievement, accomplished only with resolute commitment. He then synthesized his years of economic study into six volumes: The Covenantal Structure of Christian Economics (2015, 2018), and a four volume series titled Christian Economics: Vol. 1: Student Edition (2017, 2020), Vol. 2: Teacher’s Edition (2017, 2020), Vol. 3: Activist’s Edition (2017, 2020), and Vol. 4 (in 2 volumes): Scholar’s Edition (2020). His books just on economics can be found here: https://www.garynorth.com/public/department180.cfm.
North also wrote extensively on history. Among his many books was the masterpiece Crossed Fingers (1996), a 1000-page detailed account of deceit used by theological liberals to capture the northern Presbyterian Church during the 20th Century. Ever a lover of footnotes North provides over 900 in just the first 300 pages.
To beat it all, North was a superb writer in every respect and a treat to read.
With his practical understanding of Austrian and Keynesian economics, North also knew how to interpret and benefit from market conditions. Just one example will suffice. When between 1999 and 2002 England’s worst Chancellor of the Exchequer in a thousand years persuaded the nation to systematically sell off 401 tonnes of its 715-tonne gold supply for an average price of $275 per ounce, North told his subscribers to buy. They bought. By the time of his death, gold was over $1,900.
North was also a frequent contributor to the two primary organizations that promoted Austrian economics and libertarian ideas. He provided many articles for the popular website LewRockwell.com and was a frequent speaker at the Mises Institute, particularly for its gathering of young scholars. His lectures on Mises, Keynes, and Rothbard alone were exceptional. The increasingly higher profile of the Mises Institute and Lew Rockwell’s website encouraged North that it was only a matter of time before defective ideas would fail and sound ideas would prevail.
Aware of the dismal condition of public education, North was also concerned that young people have access to top quality curriculum. After Ron Paul ended his service in government and his final campaign for President of the United States, he and North reunited to establish The Ron Paul Curriculum. Paul had spoken to massive crowds and received over 2,000,000 votes in the 2012 presidential primary. Families across the country would be eager to have their children educated consistent with the fundamental biblical principles Paul was articulating. North could create the material and organization to provide that education. Recruiting the teachers, preparing his own courses, and running the institution, North created an online K-12 school that has trained thousands of students across the county.
North’s interest in educational curriculum was not limited to grade school. Even up to his final months, he was working on plans to create a free seminary curriculum designed particularly for pastors working in Latin America and sub-Saharan Africa.
North was also concerned about evangelism. His 2005 website Sustained Revival: A Comprehensive Plan for a Comprehensive Christian Revival, provided material focusing on that work. https://www.garynorth.com/public/department132.cfm.
North was also concerned to help those in financial trouble. For people wanting to get out from under the weight of debt he developed the website Deliverance from Debt, https://deliverancefromdebt.wordpress.com/. While he lived in the areas of Tyler, Texas and Memphis, Tennessee, he worked with Kairos Prison Ministry International. Some prisoners were soon to be released. Others would never be released. He taught them the gospel and that wherever they might be God had valuable work for them to do and they could serve him anywhere. During that same period he worked with a ministry that helped people learn how to get and keep a job.
Advice for the Future
North followed some important principles that enabled him to stick to his knitting, stay out of trouble, and be as productive as he was. At least 11 are worth mentioning. They are applicable to everyone.
First, a person must know his life’s calling: the most important thing he can do in which he would be most difficult to replace. North settled on his early: developing the field of biblical economics.
Second, remember the prophets. Isaiah’s job was to speak even when people would not listen and the work appeared fruitless. Elijah’s job was to speak even when he seemed to be the only one left. Jeremiah’s job was to speak but still conduct business (buy the land) knowing God’s plan for the future will prevail.
Third, forget trying to be in the “Inner Ring,” as C.S. Lewis called it. Do not yearn to be in the “in” group. There really isn’t any inner ring. Fourth, stick to your knitting. Do not get sidetracked. Press on.
Fifth, work to serve. Meet a need. Provide or do something useful. If someone will pay you for it, better still. Provide it for free if needs be, particularly if it’s consistent with your calling.
Sixth, discipline your time. It is the one resource that cannot be replaced. Once it’s gone, it cannot be recovered.
Seventh, strive to be the best, but don’t worry if you are not No. 1. There is plenty of room at the top for success and every expectation that you will surpass your peers if you simply apply yourself wisely and stick to your knitting.
Eighth, understand that you can’t fight something with nothing. Christians cannot just curse the darkness. They must pursue a positive biblical understanding and plan. When the world, suffering and at its wits end, asks Christians for help, they should be able to give biblical answers of substance.
Ninth, don’t pay too much attention to your critics. Some of North’s critics accused him over the years of having a poison pen, of being uncharitable, sharp and harsh. North’s piercing critiques, however, were usually reserved for those who held themselves out to be experts in a field, “teachers of the law,” so to speak. As they sought to persuade and lead others, he would challenge them if he thought they were leading people into error and trouble. If their work was shoddy or suspect, North was likely to expose it and in colorful terms. Some took the lead and criticized his work first. In addition to lacking depth and rigor in general, his opponents were generally short on historical background and real world understanding. When the exchange ended they were likely to find themselves on the losing side and unable to respond; they slipped quietly away. His most disingenuous critics simply misrepresented his positions and raised straw man arguments, the most uncharitable kind of all.
Tenth, be confident in God’s power and his plan to change the world. God’s kingdom would not likely come in a single generation. Nor would it come from some sudden political takeover, a centralized government, or vigilante violence. It would not come from the top down. But it would come. It would come gradually, over time, from the bottom up, as God moved in people’s hearts and they embraced a biblical worldview and system of law.
Eleventh, pay your tithe. It reminds a person that he owes everything to God.
Finally, North hoped his work would help lay a solid foundation, not be the final answer. He hoped others would take up where he left off and improve on his work. As he concluded his Christian Economics: Scholar’s Edition (2020), he wrote: “Finally, count the cost. If you then decide to become a Christian economics scholar as a calling, I offer this strategy. Correct my errors, extend my breakthroughs, write several monographs, produce videos, recruit and train followers, and do not become sidetracked. It is easy to become sidetracked, especially by money. Also, if someone asks you what kind of economist you are, never say ‘Northian.’ ‘Northist’ is even worse. Say that you are a covenantalist. Now, find your calling and get to work.” https://www.garynorth.com/public/20635.cfm
May there be many who will pursue their own callings as North did his. The world will be a better place for it.
His work is done. His rest has begun.
North was preceded in death by his son Caleb who suffered from a rare illness. He is survived by Sharon, his wife of 50 years, and their other children Darcy North, Scott North and his wife, Angela, and Lori McDurmon and her husband, Joel, and eight grandchildren.
I am not a regular reader of Doug’s Blog and Mablog, so some folks in an online discussion forum where a felllow subscriber had posted a link to it had to set me straight on the meaning of the title.
Proof that I am also not a regular reader of J.R.R. Tolkien!
It turns out to be a reference to the elf queen in one of Tolkien’s middle earth fantasy novels, and a reference to an incident involving a drunken chimpanzee who thinks he sees Galadriel when he looks in the mirror.
Well, okay.
To make sense out of that title, and also to make sense out of my blog post today, you really ought to take a few minutes to go and read “Galadriel and the Chimp”. Click here. I’ll wait…
Doug Wilson and the Reconstructionists
I want to discuss Wilson’s Galadriel post because I think it illustrates quite well the problem that many Christians have with being identified and associated with a particular “school of thought” within the church that preaches and practices a certain “hardcore” brand of biblical Christianity.
I’m speaking, of course, about Christian reconstructionism.
You know. The Bible-based world-and-life-view that dares not speak its name.
The anti-reconstructionists, both inside and outside the church, have done a marvelous job for over half a century of slandering and misrepresenting reconstructionists and their theological distinctives and perspectives with regard to advancing the Kingdom of God and of His Christ on earth and in history through the propagation of the law of God and the transformational, regenerative power of the Holy Spirit working through the Gospel and God’s people as His law, truth and grace permeate every human institution progressively until Christ returns.
It’s almost like they don’t want us to succeed!
Well, I’m happy to report that I do not count Pastor Wilson among these ill-informed naysayers.
I am equally unhappy to report that I find his aversion to being lumped together with us Gospel-centered, Christ-centered, Bible-centered, eschatologically optimistic, theonomically inclined folks more than a little puzzling.
I also find it to be par-for-the-course among Reformed Christians.
And that’s the problem.
Galadriel and the Card-Carrying Recons
If you’ve read Tolkien’s books and are familiar with the elf queen that Doug is referencing, then maybe you see more clearly than I do the application he is making and the connection he is inferring with his chimpanzee/Galadriel metaphor.
But I’ll take a stab at it.
He is calling out all those end-times-obsessed, prophecy-intoxicated Christians who hanker for a Gospel-centered, Christ-centered kingdom to come, but who don’t want the hard work and awesome, comprehensive, long-term responsibility that the Great Commission imposes on them — the real Great Commission given by Jesus, not the attenuated, pietistic, present-oriented version adopted by most Christians.
They just want to throw a little paint on the old barn and, voila!–Christian culture!
Such a shallow perspective is not worthy of those who name the name of Christ. Agreed.
On the other hand, what is to be accomplished by distancing yourself from those “hardcore”, card-carrying, Bible-centered, Christ-centered recons, who are doing exactly what you say Christians should be doing?
Where is the consistency and coherence in applauding recons and agreeing with them on virtually everything they say and do and have been saying and doing for at least the last 40 years (“If only we had listened to Rushdoony and Bahnsen!”) — even recommending to others that they should go and do likewise — only to deny any association with them.
“I’m not one of them. Stop accusing me of being one of them!”
First, Wilson recalls:
“Many years ago I had a conversation with Greg Bahnsen, in which I told him that I was not a reconstructionist.”
But, once Bahnsen clarified for him the difference between a “movement” and a “school of thought”, Wilson found relief. No more guilt-by-association.
“Whew! I can adopt the thinking of a reconstructionist, without having to suffer the indignity of being called a reconstructionist!”
Thus, all these years later, he now confidently proclaims:
“I believe that every Kuyperian Christian is now a part of the reconstructionist school of thought. If you believe, as we do, in “all of Christ for all of life,” then in principle that means that the entire conservative Reformed evangelical world is now reconstructionist or reconstructionist lite…”
See how painless this is? No more stigma!
He then adds, triumphantly:
“And if you are postmillennial, then that makes you self-consciously reconstructionist.”
Amen, brother Doug.
To drive the point home, he asks, emphatically, rhetorically:
“Does the authority of Jesus Christ, does the lordship of Christ, extend in practical ways over every field of human endeavor?”
He answers, non-rhetorically:
“If you say yes, you are some kind of a reconstructionist.”
What kind are you?
Well, if you are Gary North, then you are the “hard-core” kind. So hard core, in fact, that you are like a wind chime playing lightly in the breezes — sorry, the zephyrs — of a small-town in Idaho. Such a sweet sound as you sip your morning coffee!
Alas, Wilson senses that winds of change are blowing. In the wrong direction.
“We are going to see a barrage of accusations that we here in Moscow are trying to establish a theocratic republic, and that we are, wait for it, reconstructionists.”
Heaven forbid!
So, in the end, even though Doug admits that the recons have been right about just about everything they’ve warned Christians about “since the eighties” — Rushdoony on the public schools, Bahsen on defending the faith, North on schools and Critical Race Theory — he wants to be very clear about something.
“I am not a card-carrying reconstructionist.”
And don’t you forget it.
But wait. Pastor WIlson would like to leave you with this one final thought and another rhetorical question.
First,
“To point out the obvious, the old America is currently being dismantled. That means that somebody is going to rebuild it, someone is going to reconstruct it.”
And who should be the ones to do the rebuilding?
WE should, of course. Because…
“We are all reconstructionists now.”
Like he said near the beginning of his post, arguing most straightforwardly, “all” means “all”.
He says our choice is simple. And he is right. Who will be the ones to ultimately succeed in rebuilding the new America?
“Will that reconstruction be conducted by the totalitarians who tore the old one down?
Or will it be done by Christians who think like Christians should?”
Will you let the enemies of God plant their fields of thistles? Or will God’s people plant their dreamed-of fields of barley?
Think it over. Maybe even sleep on it. You decide.
But be forewarned. If you “think like a Christian should” about this all-encompassing, long-term, kingdom-building project,…
That of retired (and now deceased) California state senator W.H. “Bill” Richardson.
Richardson died this past January at the age of 92. He was a prominent gun rights advocate and also a Bible-believing Christian and ardent defender of the U.S. Constitution. He was known in California politics for his sophisticated and highly effective approach to gaining victory at the ballot box by practicing the fine art of what he called ‘confrontational politics’.
In the 1960s, 70s, 80s and into the 21st century, he perfected his rigorous, systematic, direct-marketing-based approach to local political action. It struck fear and loathing — and frequently disgruntled changes of votes — in the hearts of the opposition.
Richardson’s proven system of confrontational politics hinged on what he called “positive confrontation”, which he describes, as opposed to the kind of negative confrontation that usually ended in failure and defeat at the ballot box.
Time and again his tactics worked, and his no-fear approach proved highly successful — whenever and wherever it was tried.
Predictably, whenever and wherever it wasn’t tried, the results were failure and defeat.
Case in point: Judge Robert Bork’s nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court, which went down in a blaze of disingenuous infamy in July 1987.
That humiliating (and in Richardson’s opinion, supremely avoidable) historic defeat is the occasion of the article I am reposting today.
Gary North has written numerous times over the years about his friend Bill Richardson. You can do a search of Gary’s website and find dozens of references to him, all having to do with emulating Richardson’s proven tactics of organized resistance and an advanced strategy of successful positive confrontation, particularly in the area of politics.
Yesterday, Gary posted an article he found that was written by Richardson sometime after the Bork debacle.
Gary says this article deserves ‘wide distribution’.
Well, okay,…
In this case, Gary will have to settle for my two cents’ worth of narrow and shallow distribution.
With an equal or lesser value of positive confrontational remarks and subheadings (mine, bold italic) inserted along the way.
Enjoy.
____________________________________
Remnant Review
California State Senator Bill Richardson was a friend of mine. We worked on projects in the late 1960’s. He brought me to Sacramento to testify to a Senate subcommittee in 1969.
He had been in advertising before he went into politics. He became the first California state senator to use direct mail to inflict pain on the Left. He knew his business.
In 1975, he founded Gun Owners of America.
Bill died last January. His Wikipedia entry is here.
I am not sure when he wrote this. I have a photocopy. It was not dated. It was written in response to the failure of the nomination of Robert Bork to the U.S. Supreme Court. That was in July 1987.
A decade later, he wrote a book: Confrontational Politics. You can buy a Kindle edition for about $4. Order here.
********************************************
The Bork nomination could have been a slam dunk, but instead, it was another example of Republican retreat when victory could have been easily achieved. Why do Republicans constantly get their political posteriors plummeted? The reason is the Republican membership from top to bottom has little technical knowledge of confrontational politics and its dynamics. It isn’t enough to be right on issues alone. Victory or defeat is embodied not only in the efficacy of the concept, but within the methodology of implementation as well. To put it more bluntly, the idea might be dynamite, but unless someone is smart enough to light the fuse nothing happens. Republicans do not understand confrontational politics. Up to this time, they don’t even own a match.
Confrontational politics. What is it? If one does not know, one better find out! Conservatives and Republicans have been getting their backsides chewed up politically because they have not understood the dynamics of confrontation or the techniques applied. They have been engaged in a karate fight while adhering to the Marquis of Queensberry Rules and have been kicked where a gentleman never contemplates.
Nothing could prove the point better than to witness the confirmation hearings on Judge Bork. While the Reagan Administration was trying to be rational “nice guys” and play by the old rules, the opposition wanted Judge Bork defeated, as well as coerce the Administration to nominate a more Leftist member to the Court. The Administration’s “nice guy” posture was predictable, thus attackable. The Left was given the field advantage, the offensive, the stadium, and use it, they did. First, they framed the nature of the debate by inferring that Judge Bork was a racist. Since truth is situational to the Leftist United States Senate leadership, and to their comrades on the outside, all they needed to accomplish was to level the charge and wait for the predictable response out of the Administration. How predictable and brilliant it was: “No, he is not a racist.” The Reagan Administration then spent valuable time trying to convince people Bork was not a bigot, but all they did was elevate the issue of racism in the minds of the public. Deny something long enough and a number of people will wonder–if there’s smoke, there’s fire! Once on the defensive, it is hard to get off of it; the Administration never did.
Before we go much farther into this article, it is important for the reader to understand confrontational politics and what it means. It requires pondering the subject matter. Time well spent, if one is to understand contemporary confrontational politics, and thus what is happening in Washington.
Here, Richardson gives his EPISTEMOLOGICAL argument for the basis of the conflict:
There are two diametrically opposing views over the nature of man which prevail in contemporary American politics, two fundamental concepts totally alien one to the other.
Each of these premises serve as the genesis for political action, followed, mimicked and repeated over and over with most of the political actors playing out each scenario without the slightest idea of the epistemological foundation or the authorship of the drama.
Our behavior originates in our perceptions of reality and our relationships with each other. When these fundamental beliefs vary among people, clashes and conflict occur. Compatible beliefs formulate cultures and whenever radical, differences of beliefs appear within an established culture, division and dissention arises.
Let me be more specific. Western culture has its genesis in Judeo-Christian beliefs. Six thousand years of recorded history and experience has shaped contemporary Western man’s perception of the character and nature of the human being. This understanding formulates his actions and reactions to his fellow citizen. Based upon this knowledge, Western man perceives himself and others as singularly unique, individual, spirit worthy, created in the image of the Creator. He has been taught to: “Do to others as you would have them do to you”, “Be respectful of other’s opinions”, “Recognize one’s own fallibilities”, and “Be not quick to judge”. We are taught to love one another, even our enemies. Scripture tells the believer to love is to obey His commandments, and to live the law in dealing with each other. We are to honor our parents; we are to respect the property of others; we are told not to lie or be deceitful to our fellow man–friends and enemies alike.
We are raised believing these and other fundamental truths from childhood. They are ingrained in us by family, friends and the society which owes its origin to these ideas. We are told in Scripture that God instilled in everyone the knowledge of right and wrong. The fundamental desire then is to work harmoniously with each other. Whenever differences occur, they should be amicably treated, and if necessary, compromises met when men of good will differ.
If Christian love is the basis of negotiation, and shared by both parties, usually differences can be resolved. The goal is harmony and mutual compatibility, any other behavior other than this triggers negative vibes. Harmony then is the answer, disharmony is perceived as bad, unhealthy, and unproductive behavior. But, what happens when someone rejects these fundamental premises and is trained to think that man’s origins are different? What happens when someone believes all valuers are variable and changeable, and thus, situational? What is the result of man’s premise that man is but a graduate animal, nothing but matter in motion? What is the result from the rejection of God and the immutable laws that emanate from a creator?
Let me highlight that last question:
What is the result from the rejection of God and the immutable laws that emanate from a creator?
What do you suppose the result of this is, hmm? You don’t have to look very far, the results are all around us!
He continues…
What actions evolve from one who believes the world is a dog eat dog place, or survival of the fittest, or might makes right? What is the logical argumentative posture of one who believes that conflict and confrontation is the nature of human development and unless confrontation and conflict exists, advancement cannot be made?
One third of the world’s land surface and 1.7 billion people are controlled by a philosophy that adheres to the conflict and confrontation theory of human progress. It’s called Marxist-Leninist, scientific dialectical materialism. This philosophy, at this very moment, is being taught to millions of children worldwide as contemporary gospel. It has permeated Eastern Europe, most of Asia, over half of Africa, South America and is the dominate philosophy of behavior taught all over the world. More people are taught dialectical materialism than are taught Christianity. This ideology-has permeated segments of American politics and has been now exerting an influence on our national policy, both ideologically and methodologically.
Marxism: two steps forward, one step back.
Let me be more specific. Leftist dialectical action espouses direct confrontation as necessary in order to gain any social objective, so success is not possible without conflict and the predictable reaction from those attacked. When serious reaction is met and the debate or conflict becomes heated, the opposition generated is perceived as a good sign, as confirmation of the righteousness of the program. The Left then looks upon conflict and resistance as a positive, a necessary ingredient in advancement. The Left also believes that dialectical confrontation can be carried only to a certain point because resistance can sometimes become so overpowering as to negate the overall objective. So, when resistance becomes formidable, it then becomes practical to back off, step back, compromise, but never retreat far enough to negate a net gain. The Marxists refer to it as two steps forward, one step back. They even teach their children to march that way as to inculcate the principle into their youthful minds. Two steps forward, one back, net gain, one step.
The Art of War and the wisdom of Sun-Tsu: “Leave ’em an out!”
Sun Tsu stated over 2500 years ago, “Never surround an enemy so completely that he has no means of retreat.” Even a mouse will fight if it has no escape route. Sun Tsu concluded, one must always give a back door, an escape route to the opposition because when cornered, they will usually avail themselves of the escape route in order to avoid more conflict. In dialectics, the step backward creates the back door for the opposition to escape further punishment, and, as is often the case, the opposition will take this “compromise” sometimes even offering the compromise in anticipation of attack.
Let us now put this in perspective; Leftism program, status, quo opposition. The Left designs a new social program replete with new revenue, increased bureaucracy, more governmental control, more socialism. They have formulated and structured the program, complete with positive arguments, couched in terms designed to evoke sympathies out of segments of the population. They introduce legislation then push aggressively ahead until opposition is met.
Conservatism = conserve the STATUS QUO?
At this point, one must remember what the term conservative implies both factually and politically. It usually means to conserve the status quo, to keep things as they are, to preserve existing institutions.
Momentum, planning, and opportunity are on the side of the offensive, plus they know in advance where they want to go. The Leftists march straight ahead implementing aggressively, awaiting opposition, expecting opposition.
Conservatives react. They oppose and organize to stop the Leftist thrust. All the time hating the conflict that has occurred. Confrontation is an affront to their fundamental nature, conflict is unpleasant and gut wrenching, especially since they have been categorized as old fashioned, non progressive, hard-hearted tight wads. The conservative cannot wait until the controversy ends, however, fighting for preservation of the status quo is a matter of principle and so, unwillingly, begrudgingly he fights on. When he reaches a level of successful opposition, he is usually presented with a compromise, the backward dialectic step. Usually someone in the conservative rank is all too willing to accept the compromised as a means of stopping the controversy. The sum and total is net gain for the Left and a moving of the status quo farther and farther to the Left. Incrementally, the Left achieves its purpose. They wait until their program is institutionalized, then they begin expanding it bit by bit. These programs are now accepted as part of American institutional fabric. Socialized medicine, Social Security, food stamps, OSHA, federal participation in public education, so-called equal opportunity employment practices, the list goes on and on.
What is our plan? Do we have a plan? Or even a consistent WORLDVIEW?
Let us now analyze the differences. The hard Left has a long range program, socializing the world and the elimination of capitalism. What is our plan? There is none, except protecting the status quo. Protecting the status quo is not a plan, it is a precursor to disaster. One hundred years ago Americans had a world view. We were willing participants in exporting Christian Judaic ethics. We set up missionaries around the world to bring the Gospel of Christ to the heathen. Those were the days we called people heathens, and, those were the days we knew the difference between a heathen and a civilized man. Our intention was to bring truth, freedom, and civilization to the world’s misguided and oppressed. It was our Christian duty to do so. We judged our culture and ethics to be superior. We, as an example, judged cannibalism, witch doctors, and cow worshippers as inferior, not just another value system. We-believed they were, in need of redemption and salvation and it was our duty to see they were exposed to God’s Word. Today Christians rest comfortably in their pews, forgiving everyone and everything, holding no one accountable for the crimes against God’s laws, and taking dominion over nothing, when there is much over which to take dominion.
That last, stinging rebuke against so-called Bible-believing Christians bears repeating:
Today Christians rest comfortably in their pews, forgiving everyone and everything, holding no one accountable for the crimes against God’s laws, and taking dominion over nothing, when there is much over which to take dominion.
Taking dominion… Hmm. Where have we heard that before?
He goes on…
By their programs and actions, the Left creates hostilities and antagonisms to their schemes. They afford us many opportunities to attack them successfully. Socialism is a failure when applied and creates ample constituency who can be organized and led. The Left rubs against the grain of history and civilized man.
His theological assessment of the Left (shades of Isaiah):
The Left gives lip service to belief in God but their actions deny His existence or His laws. The hard Left is openly atheistic to the degree of open antagonism to all of God’s people as well as His ordinances.
They believe the “thou shall nots” of the Ten Commandments are nothing but constrictions placed upon mankind by the ruling capitalist classes to hold the people in line, giving them verbalistic placebos to placate their desires for a better life. All laws and/or rules, are then man-made, thus all rules can and may be broken if the situation dictates.
We must recognize this contemporary nihilistic philosophy has been around most of this century. The followers of Nietzsche, Rousseau, Saint Simon, Sartre, are permanent fixtures in our colleges and universities and the disciples of Darwin and John Dewey abound. Pumped full of this nihilistic nonsense, our young people are ready fodder for the dialectic methodology-promulgated by the campus resident Marxist.
During the 20s and 30s, Norman Thomas’ Socialist nirvana became the intellectual fodder on our campuses and the Democratic Party became its political vehicle of implementation. The Republicans, once the majority party, defenders of the status quo, found themselves under attack and for the past half a century have compromised themselves into a whining, retreating, gutless minority. The contemporary liberal Democrat makes Norman Thomas look moderate by comparison; Democratic leadership is permeated by such people. A former California State Chairman of the Democratic Party was an identified communist. They all knew it, but no Democrat activist voiced any complaints.
The hard Left has gravitated to, or either substantially influenced leadership within, the Democratic national structure. Moral and ethical standards based on Judeo-Christian premises are not in evidence either in commentary or actions of their elected leadership. Their blatant support of abortion and homosexual causes and their tolerance to the Ted Kennedys, the Metzenbaums, Bidens, and the Harts, knows no bounds.
Since ethics are dictated by the situation, then half truths, innuendoes, threats, intimidation, coercion, propaganda, character assassination, even pretense of religious beliefs become successful behavior if it achieves the desired ends. Situational ethics reigns in political leaderships so recognize it as such and recognize that those who are in leadership are able practitioners of the act.
Whenever any kind of behavior is rewarded, there will be more of it. If situational ethics succeeds in politics, More will engage in it. It also stands to reason that when unethical, immoral conduct is punished, there will be less of it. When morality is rewarded, the same is true, whether morality is believed or not, it will be practiced in politics if it is the ingredient that elects.
Read this next section VERY carefully.
First, conservatives must understand the nature of the confrontational Left and the genesis of their actions. The hard Left is the driving force behind the leftward slant of the world, both in ideology and methodology. Their goals are unchangeable, which is total socialization of the world. They use dialectic techniques to ascribe these goals and glory in them. Why not, they have been immensely successful so far. These confrontational techniques must be recognized for what they are and understood. One need not like dialectical confrontation to understand it. One need not like conflict to use it, understand it or master it. I do not.
Richardson’s confession of faith:
I am a Christian and I do not enjoy confrontational politics at all. I am, however, embroiled in combat with the heathen and knowledge of their methodology is key to defeating them. I receive great satisfaction from throwing their plans out of kilter and cutting into the territory they have consolidated.
The key to winning is positive confrontation… Confrontation is INEVITABLE.
Is it possible to move them back farther and give up the protection of the status quo as the conservative position? The answer is yes. Of course we can, but first we need to understand that our lot must be participation in the use of positive confrontation. What then is positive confrontation? It is the methodology that must be used by conservatives to turn the tide of socialism. It would be impossible to go into all of the ramifications of positive confrontation at this time, but we can cover the high points.
Recognizing confrontation is inevitable when dealing with the Left. They have no intention of stopping their worldwide goals. Let us give them more confrontation, let us joyfully give it to them, but, joyfully or not, let us give them more conflict than they can handle.
Perseverance and Persistence will INEVITABLY win!
Leftists will always step backward when the pressure grows intense. It is part of dialectics. They play hardball until it is to their advantage to retreat to save ground already gained. Perseverance under confrontation bodes for our side, persistence will inevitably win.
Every confrontation builds a constituency of followers. The Left organizes these constituencies as a residual and uses these people in future confrontation. We rarely do. We have been happy just to conclude the combat and forget about it. However, we have at our disposal a great potential residual constituency if we would think in terms of long range conflict rather than singular battles.
A Real-World Example of Success
Let me give an example. In the 1970s, the Left organized a major drive to confiscate all handguns and control registration of all firearms. They successfully passed the 1968 Gun Control Act and were busy in some states with gun confiscations legislation. The normal course of conservative action would be to resist such legislation but such resistance failed to stop the anti-gun control act that was implemented in 1968.
I founded Gun Owners of America and Gun Owners of California in 1975. I had positive confrontation in mind. I believed the pro-gunners could be organized into a positive political force by taking advantage of the rampant anti-gun sentiment voiced by the media and the Leftists organizing the anti-gun movement. We formed a political action committee committed to electing pro-gun candidates to office and defeating anti-gun legislators.
The gun owners enthusiastically accepted this single positive purpose we proposed. We hired qualified experts in political operations and raised millions of dollars which we funneled into campaigns. It didn’t take the incumbent long to figure out the dynamics of what we were doing. We didn’t fight the gun issue as much as we leveraged politicians. We won a number of races where we were the dominate financial contributor. In fact, by 1980 Gun Owners of California gave more to candidates than the State Republican Party. G.O.P. became Gun Owners Party.
Gun Owners computerized all pro-gunner names so they could be retrieved according to political districts; we gave our membership advice on how to vote. We sustained and maintained these lists communicating to the gunner around issues with which he identifies.
Proactive Instead of Reactive
Instead of reacting, we acted. We engaged in positive confrontation on our battleground and knew, we were being successful whenever we were vociferously attacked by the Left. We have even been able to cut back on the federal 1968 Gun Control Act. The gun community is organized far better than it was in the 1960s, and with continued sophistication, we will be able to do more good work.
The Left has dialectically retreated in their direct attack upon firearms ownership due to the positive confrontational efforts of Gun Owners both state and nationally. This acquired computer knowledge and direct mail skills allowed us to set up other positive confrontational organizations.
We were smart politically. We didn’t fight one campaign on the gun issue, but the gun community financed successful political campaigns using issues germane to the races. We became the cutting edge in a number of races. We were given credit for being the deciding edge in the election of the Governor in 1982. Today, the Left cannot get an anti-gun Mother’s Day resolution through the California Legislature.
It’s about much more than just GUNS.
What are other positive places to organize?
Take examples of legislative immorality and rally those who find it reprehensible. Turn this into a confrontational body and train them in the ways of contemporary politics by elevating positive issues around which they can work.
Let’s legislate MORALITY for a change!
Example: Parental consent for abortion. Until recently a minor could get an abortion in California without her parents knowledge. Children need parental consent to take an aspirin or go on a field trip, but not to receive an abortion.
The pro-family lobby saw this as an important issue and rallied the fundamental churches, religious T.V. and radio, and antiabortion groups and introduced legislation to change the law. The pro-abortion, Planned Parenthood incumbency, is powerful and entrenched. Their influence on the California Assembly Speaker has kept this legislation from succeeding by sending it to a controlled committee which would kill the bill.
The pro-family lobby knew they had a good issue with substantial populace support so instead of backing off, they applied positive confrontation.
No Pain, No Gain.
Some leaders in the pro-family lobby, notably Barbara Alby, recognized that pain is a part of confrontation. One of the legislators needed for a vote in the Senate had rarely ever voted for the pro-family lobby; his constituency was quite liberal. The efforts to turn on Christian pressure in his district was extremely successful and over 10,000 phone calls were generated to his district office. That’s real pain.
The Senator was enraged. He ranted and raved over the pressure received. He even confronted Barbara Alby in the legislative halls and verbally abused her with vulgar obscenities, creating a great deal of emotional stress for Barbara. Some of the pro-life lobby crumbled under his ranting and raving and thought we had gone too far, they were willing to back off. Not Barbara. She understood the Senator was a Leftist and a practitioner of situational ethics. His protesting was painful and very intimidating but a good sign. The pressure was maintained even though some of our people were peeling off due to the conciliatory and non-combative nature of Christian activists. The Senator in question sat sullenly through the committee and then voted affirmatively for the bill. He translated these phone calls into votes in the next election and he did not want to be the Senator who was credited with killing the pro-family bill. He perceived it was better to vote for the bill (take a dialectic step backward) than to loose his seat. The bill passed to the Senate floor; there were other confrontational moves necessary before the final vote was taken. The entire success of the legislation was confrontation all of the way. Hard, gut wrenching, head to head, battles with the Leftists, cutting into their territory, forcing them to retreat, causing them a net loss.
Is the fight over? Of course not. We can expect the next battle in some Leftist superior court where they will try to claim the bill is “unconstitutional”. We are now in the process of building and reinforcing the residuals we gained from this battle. We are gathering our forces for a fight in the courts. We are raising the money, putting our supporters names on computer file, elevating a populous issue, attacking the liberal courts while putting the State Attorney General on the line. We have a great issue in which to rally the people as well as the leadership who understands positive confrontation. To capsulize, what is positive confrontation?
Positive Confrontation: a Quick-Start Guide
1. First, we must recognize the difference between positive and negative confrontation. Negative confrontation means reaction to a program promoted by the Leftists where the fight is strictly to preserve the status quo. They advocate a program, we try to defeat it. These battles are over ground we already hold. Our posture is strictly defensive. It is worthy to note that even when the liberals are totally defeated, the fight is debilitating for the conservative. No territory is gained by either side, but the Left usually amasses a residual for a future engagement on the same grounds. They have framed the debate in such a manner as to build some popular support. They have also recruited some new advocates for the next assault. Again the liberal views each conflict as a positive opportunity for advancement and recruitment. In negative confrontations the conservative inevitably loses some ground no matter how well fought.
2. Positive confrontation is emotionally painful, but, properly applied, it is more painful for the Left. When the other side starts to react and complain, it is confirmation the program is working.
Positive confrontation is controversial because any change in the status quo will affect some incumbent group that will suffer if the change is effected. If there is no controversy, there is no opportunity.
3. Positive conservative confrontation rejects situational ethics and dialectical behavior as morally corrupt but does not deny its existence as a Leftist mind set and integrals to his methodology.
4. Positive confrontation requires persistence and patience and a tranquil mind in the face of hostility. Righteousness is never born in anger. There is a difference between anger and righteous indignation; the first is destructive, the second can be organized.
5. Positive confrontation is hardball politics. Head to head uncompromising opposition unless compromise is on our terms and involves the loss of territory for the Left.
6. Positive confrontation sometimes ends in momentary defeat, but if a residual is built for future fights, the defeat becomes a strategic step in a protracted conflict.
7. Positive confrontation requires proper framing of issues to present the debate in the best light, while causing the opposition to debate on our ground.
8. Positive confrontation embodies the following:
A. People organized to achieve a singular purpose.
B. Networking with other groups.
C. Raising funds to professionalize the effort.
D. People are trained in the act of confrontation and recognize it as necessary tactics.
E. A residual of committed people gathered for a future fight on correlative issues.
F. New leadership emerges to fight on other fronts or to advance a long range program.
In conclusion, positive confrontation has worked and will work again. Our politicians must be evaluated in terms of how they act in terms of confrontational ability, either positive or negative, when faced with Leftist pressure.
Here is what it all boils down to: O-R-I-G-I-N-S
We have two opposing philosophies at work in American politics. It is not Democratic or Republican, it is not a classical liberal or conservative view of constitutional government. Both liberal and conservative adhere to the belief in a constitutional government and the dignity of the individual American. The battle is between those who differ over the origin of man and the extension of programs that each of these views implies. Are we just matter in motion. And, if so, then God is dead and has no relevance in the course of human action. All laws are then man constructed and changeable. Ethics are then situational. On the other hand, if this cosmos in which we live is organized and sensible, the product of a wisdom beyond our finite grasp, and if this world and all of its inhabitants are a part of this infinite wisdom, then it is reasonable to conclude we live in a world of cause and effect, marvelously conceived and miraculous to behold. It is also fair to conclude that such a God would reveal His wisdom to us about the nature of His creation. I believe He has. It is called the Holy Writ, Scripture. Is not the battle in which we are waging the fundamental fight between good and evil, right and wrong and choosing by whose laws we shall live, God or mammon?
NOW HEAR THIS:
We are called upon to take dominion over this earth and no where does it state that it will be an easy task. Dominion requires knowledge of ourselves and those who oppose us.
AND THIS:
Confrontation in politics is a fact of life.
Let us now reflect on what has happened in relationship to the Bork confirmation. Let me quote from the press:
“By the time the Senate convened yesterday morning, only three senators had not announced their positions: John Warner, R-Va., William Proxmire, D-Wis., and John Stennis, D-Miss. All three voted against Bork.
“The biggest surprise was Warner, who had been openly agonizing for weeks over the decision. The ranking Republican on the Armed Services Committee, Warner is almost unfailingly loyal to the Administration.
“But in a brief speech on the Senate floor, he said, Reagan’s recent statement that the opposition to Bork was a “lynch mob” was unbecoming the office of the presidency.”
It is obvious Senator Warner hasn’t got a glimmer of what he is doing. The comments of the Left against Bork was inflammatory compared with the more accurate “lynch mob” statement of a frustrated President Reagan.
Let us see what Senator Ed Kennedy said:
“If we receive a nominee who thinks like Judge Bork, who acts like Judge Bork, who opposes civil rights and civil liberties like Judge Bork, he will be rejected like Judge Bork, just like that!”
Kennedy was already framing the issue on the next Supreme Court nominee! Kennedy is an able practitioner of confrontational politics.
Now, let us see what Senator Strom Thurmond, Senior Republican from South Carolina, stated: “I would recommend they not send someone as controversial.” Strom Thurman is already caving in on the next fight before it has even begun! Senator Thurman is already preparing to retreat before the first shot is fired. Thurman’s knowledge of confrontational politics is abysmal at best, dangerous at worst.
The moral (“take-away”) of the Bork debacle:
There were no residual benefits gained from the entire Bork hearing. All that remained were scars and a retreating Republican Party. Our conservative politicians must understand confrontational politics and be able practitioners of its more positive nature. If they cannot or will not understand, then we better elect some politicians on our side who do.
Enough said. Now, let us end this article with a BANG!…
We cannot afford the luxury of elected representatives who are either unaware or incapable of meeting the Left head on. We need to recapture territory lost. If those in office cannot do it, and show no signs of practicing positive confrontation, then we should remove them post haste. A Republican who just takes up space is worse than no one at all.
*************************************************
Did this article grab you? The whole idea grabbed NPR. On October 20, NPR devoted a series of articles to covering disciples of Richardson. It took NPR over 30 years to figure out who was behind what is going on politically in the heartland. NPR is appalled. See for yourself here.
Pass this article along. Or post it on your blog. Or post a link to it on Facebook. Use this link: https://bit.ly/ConfrontationalPolitics. It deserves wide distribution.
____________________________________
Thanks for reading! I hope you have enjoyed this non-confrontational message of motivation and exhortation for local Christian political action. A word to the wise is MORE than sufficient.
Gary North had persuaded Chalcedon’s founder, R.J. Rushdoony, that after years of cranking out articles and books and sermons designed to blow up the dikes of humanism with Bible-based truth-charges, it was time to get serious with the message of Christian reconstruction and publish a scholarly journal.
Not for scholars exactly. Not even college professors. No, this was to be written for “intelligent laymen, working pastors, and others who are interested in the reconstruction of all spheres of human existence in terms of the standards of the Old and New Testaments.”
Its mission: to boldly go where no semi-scholarly journal had gone before.
The ambitious project was coming on the heels of Rushdoony’s magnum opus in Christian casuistry, The Institutes of Biblical Law. The die had been cast. Now it was time to get the assembly line moving.
“Igor! Flip the switch!”
Rushdoony said yes to the proposal. On one condition: North had to do the editing. North, in a season of youthful exuberance, agreed to accept the challenge. “Sure thing, boss. I’ll do it. I like herding cats!”
And so began the hopeful publication of The Journal of Christian Reconstruction, vol. 1, no. 1.
Decades later (actually, the next century), North would ruefully reflect, recording this about that:
Scholarly journals sit on library shelves, gathering dust. Anyway, they did before online publishing. On average, according to Nobel Prize-winning economist Richard Thayer, the typical journal article is read by no more than a hundred people. He might have added this: 80% of these are read in the first month after publication. After that, they are forgotten unless an article gets cited by other authors. Very few articles are ever cited by other authors, and then hardly anyone reads these authors’ articles.
To which he added:
Except for getting tenure, publishing articles in scholarly journals is a waste of time. I did not know this in 1973.
Hmm. “A waste of time”?
I don’t know. Maybe in hindsight it was. But, GOLLY, it sure seemed like a good idea at the time!
Gentle Reader
And who was the intended audience for this new journal?
As the editors’ preface puts it:
The editors are convinced that the Christian world is in need of a serious publication that bridges the gap between the newsletter-magazine and the scholarly academic journal. The editors are committed to Christian scholarship, but the journal is aimed at intelligent laymen, working pastors, and others who are interested in the reconstruction of all spheres of human existence in terms of the standards of the Old and New Testaments. It is not intended to be another outlet for professors to professors, but rather a forum for serious discussion within Christian circles.
A noble undertaking, indeed.
The editors agreed with the Marxists that “theory must be united with practice”. But they made it clear that they believed regeneration “through God’s grace in Jesus Christ and in the extension of God’s kingdom” was the way to do it, not violent revolution.
Reconstructionists place their hope in the shedding of one Man’s blood. Marxists placed their hope in the shedding of LOTS of men’s blood!
They ended on a note of optimism:
In the long run, it is the kingdom of God, not Marx’s “kingdom of freedom,” which shall reign triumphant. Christianity will emerge victorious, for only in Christ and His revelation can men find both the principles of conduct and the means of subduing the earth—the principles of Biblical law.
I’m all for optimism. Especially the biblically warranted kind!
And on that victorious note, the maiden voyage of the JCR was launched.
And the evening and the morning were the first day.
I. Symposium on Creation
Six-Day Creation, that is.
That is the central theme of JCR volume 1, number 1. Gary North in his introduction spells out the “Basic Implications of the Six-Day Creation”. He says that the biblical doctrine of a literal six-day creation is crucial and fundamental to everything. It is the bedrock upon which all the disciplines of the arts and sciences must be built. All other ground is … well, you know the hymn.
If you don’t read anything else in this book, read North’s Introduction! That and his article on Economics: Magical or Creationist.
But I’m sure you will find other articles that are worth turning to.
Remember, these were written especially for you if you are:
An intelligent layman
A working pastor
Someone interested in what Christian Reconstruction is all about based on the application of Old and New Testament principles
Otherwise, there are plenty of periodicals and lots of literature out there aimed at unintelligent laymen, distracted pastors and others who are NOT interested in learning how to rebuild a crumbling civilization and a fallen world according to the infallible, transformational standards of God’s Word the Bible.
“That’s too much like works. We believe in pure grace. No law but love. No creed but the Bible. Speaking of that, biblical prophecy says that Satan has to burn the place down first so Jesus will show up with His heavenly fire extinguisher and rescue us!”
But, I digress.
Apologetics, Mathematics and More
A few years have passed since publication, so you might not recognize some of the authors named in this volume. No worries.
You might appreciate the fact that the article on The Doctrine of Creation and Christian Apologetics was written by Cornelius Van Til.
Or that the article (one of the longest) on Worshipping the Creature Rather Than the Creator was authored by Greg Bahnsen.
Or that the article on Creation and Mathematics: What Does God Have to Do with Numbers? was written by the one, the only Vern Poythress!
Or that the article on Contemporary Issues was penned (literally) by R.J. Rushdoony, from which we pull this salient observation:
The modern era is thus in trouble and is deathly sick. Its inability to create a tenable image for man to live by, to understand himself, and to find a purpose for living, is very much in evidence. Only as man sees himself as a sinner, one made in the image of God but in rebellion against his Maker, and then returns to the Lord whose image he bears, can man find a meaning to life, a purpose for living, and, in Christ, the true image of power, truth, and life.
Go ahead. Browse the table of contents. Thumb through… make that, scroll through the pages and chapter titles. See what interests you. Slow down, read some. Read some more. Rediscover the roots of reconstruction!
After all, these things were written that you might believe.
True, hardly anybody read the original volumes. And, true, hardly anybody has (or will) read the digital PDFs of them.
But that shouldn’t stop any of us who care deeply about these things from reading them ourselves and appreciating them for what they really are: groundbreaking intellectual and theological forays into the uncharted waters of modern-day application of God’s laws and God’s Word in EVERY area of life and every sphere of influence, in pursuit of fulfilling the biblical mission of Gospel reformation of all things to the glory of God and the advancement of Christ’s kingdom!
And with that eschatological wind blowing and filling your sails, go forth and make disciples… start with YOU, your family and friends.
Bon voyage!
Start at the very beginning. (A very good place to start, to quote Julie Andrews.)
Gentlemen, start your downloads!
For a free PDF of this historic first edition, first volume of the Journal of Christian Reconstruction, click HERE.
For a list of the first 14 volumes (1974 – 1981) of JCR, all available as free PDFs, click HERE.
Before I get into today’s article, I wanted to refer briefly to last year’s article on biblical law (‘harsh on criminals, soft on victims’). That was an experiment of sorts. It was on a critical subject (biblical law and civil justice) but it was also written, admittedly, in the voice of one Ben Settle. Ben Settle? Yes. The undisputed heavyweight champion of e-mail marketing and 7-figure, intrepid, take-no-prisoners-give-no-quarter, “goo-roo” copywriting. That Ben Settle.
So much so, in fact, that I feel I should add his name to the byline of that article. Co-authored by… You know, give credit where credit is doo. (There he goes again. STOP IT, Ben!) Anyway, thanks for the inspiration, Mr. Settle. It was a fun joy ride. It ran its course, and it ran it, well, to the finish line.
Now that that’s settled…
Onward, Christian Readers.
Buckle up and get your helmet on because today’s article is fixin’ to hit you right between the ayes.
Today’s Article
It, too, is co-authored. By this lowly blogger and by the eminent Reconstructionist historian and biblical commentator, Dr. Gary North. Only this time, you’ll know where my incoherent dribblings end and our guest author’s inestimable intellect and erudition begins.
Today’s topic comes from Dr. North’s The Sinai Strategy: Economics and the Ten Commandments.
It comes from Chapter 6 in the book (“God’s Monopoly of Execution”), which focuses on the Sixth Commandment: Thou shalt not kill (Exod. 20:13).
The first part of the chapter lays out the biblical arguments for and against “killing” — when it is prohibited, why it is prohibited, when it is justified and allowed, and even when it is required: capital punishment.
Since man is made in the image of God, murder is a direct assault on that image.
Murder is rebellion against God. It is man taking vengeance against man when, we are told repeatedly in Scripture, that vengeance belongs to God (Deut. 32:35; Rom. 12:19; Heb. 10:30). Vengeance, as North puts it, “is His monopoly.” (p. 117)
God avenges the blood of His servants. Individual men do not have this right. Except… where God delegates it to them. As He does in the case of civil government prosecuting capital crimes. North gets into this (“Delegated Monopoly”). He also gets into the argument for (and against) capital punishment as a deterrent against crime (“The Question of Deterrence”).
And once he is done with presenting these arguments in the biblical case for capital punishment, North then moves on to a discussion of the mode of execution.
Capital Punishment: Death By–?
You may ask, “Does it really matter HOW we execute a criminal convicted of a capital crime, just as long as it gets done… and it gets done humanely?”
YES, North says, it does matter.
And as far as a “humane” form of execution? Well, that’s where the humanists have got even the Christians thinking humanistically and apologizing for what the Bible plainly says.
Remember, it was humanist, anti-biblical thinking that redefined “humane” punishment for crime and gave us a “criminal justice” system that abolishes restitution, spares the perpetrator’s life and locks him up for years and decades and even a lifetime, with myriad fringe benefits — all paid for at taxpayer expense — while leaving the victim uncompensated, re-victimized and wholly unavenged.
If we ever get back to capital punishment and public executions being carried out the way God has prescribed them and not the way depraved, unregenerate, self-preserving, “compassionate” men think they ought to, we will begin to truly see the redemptive, transformative power of biblical law even in this seemingly obscure and narrow regard.
That may seem hard to believe.
That’s because you haven’t read what you are about to read.
So, I’ll let Dr. North take over from here and make his case. I rest mine.
In Defense of Stoning
Consider the mode of execution. The Old Testament specifies stoning as the proper mode in most cases (Lev. 20:2; Deut. 17:5). In the case of the sabbath-breaking gatherer of sticks, the whole congregation stoned him to death (Num. 15:36). Presumably, the phrase “whole congregation” refers to representatives of the twelve tribes, and not millions of people. Even the killer ox is to be stoned to death (Ex. 21:29). Witnesses of the capital crime are to cast the first stones (Deut. 17:7; Acts 7:58). But the whole community is to be involved. Adult males of the city are all to participate (Deut. 21:21). If the city is too populous, then it would appear to be legitimate to select repre- sentatives, but only because of the logistical problem.
Why stoning? There are many reasons. First, the implements of execution are available to everyone at virtually no cost. Second, no one blow can be traced to any person. In other words, no one citizen can regard himself as “the executioner,” the sole cause of another man’s death. Psychologically, this is important; it relieves potential guilt problems in the mind of a sensitive person. The fact that public executioners in Western history wore masks indicates another problem: the threat of social ostracism (and socially imposed guilt) against a lone individual who does the community’s “dirty business.” Those who abstain from the “dirty business” of enforcing God’s law have a tendency to elevate their behavior as being more moral than the ex- ecutioner’s, where in point of fact such abstention is itself immoral.
Third, public stoning makes it clear to everyone that the whole community is responsible for the prevention of criminal behavior. God holds the city responsible, which is why representatives of the city in Old Testament times had to offer a slain heifer as a covering if the criminal could not be found. “And all the elders of that city, that are next unto the slain man, shall wash their hands over the heifer that is beheaded in the valley: And they shall answer and say, Our hands have not shed this blood, neither have our eyes seen it. Be merciful, O Lord, unto thy people Israel, whom thou hast redeemed, and lay not innocent blood unto thy people of Israel’s charge. And the blood shall be forgiven them” (Deut. 21:6-8). There is a collective responsibility in biblical law in several instances. Execution of criminals is therefore to be collective.
Fourth, executions are to be personal, not impersonal. The condemned man has the right to confront his executioners face to face. He does not die in seclusion, a faceless entity who dies at the hand of a faceless entity. He receives justice in a public, personal fashion.
The fifth and by far the most important reason is that stoning is literally a means of crushing the murderer’s head by means of a rock, which is symbolic of God. This is analogous to the crushing of the head of the serpent in Genesis 3:15. This symbolism testifies to the final victory of God over all the hosts of Satan.
Stoning is therefore integral to the commandment against murder. It allows men to execute God’s justice, but not in a way that might lead an individual to believe that he, and he alone, has the right to take justice into his own hands. Executions are community projects– not with spectators who watch a professional executioner do “his” duty, but rather with actual participants. Execution is not to become a profession. It is not to be performed by a callous professional in a mask, who sees his job as just an occupation. The hangman, the masked expert at beheading men, or the official who throws the switch on the electric chair, or the man who releases the cyanide capsules: all are to be avoided by a consistently biblical social order. No man is to view himself as the community’s hired “angel of death.” Every citizen, beginning with the witnesses, is to set; himself as a lawful agent of execution, if and when a criminal is convicted of a capital crime.
Western civilization has been marked by an increasing depersonalization in the area of capital punishment. Criminals were executed for centuries in public squares by masked axemen. They were hanged, sometimes after anti-biblical torture, in public squares. These events were almost sporting events, and pickpockets always did a lively business, even at the hangings of other pickpockets. Toward the end of the nineteenth century, the executions began to go indoors. By the early twentieth century, modern technology combined with modern jurisprudence to produce the indoor execution, where only a handful of observers attended. Often, they would become sick at the sight. By the latter decades, this impersonalism finally collapsed. The death penalty was seen as “inhumane ,” and the advent of “lifetime” sentences with paroles displaced the death penalty in most instances of capital crimes. A steady progression toward greater impersonalism finally led to repulsion on the part of political leaders and moral spokesman for humanism, leaving defenders of capital punishment to defend a long-corrupted imitation of biblical execution.
The grim reality is that personalism has been retained in such lawless acts as gangland murders and hangings by vigilante groups. In these cases, private citizens “take the law into their own hands,” which is to say that they deny the legitimacy of the existing civil government. They execute vengeance apart from the sanction of the civil government. They arrogate to themselves God’s monopoly of execution – a monopoly that he has placed into the hands of civil magistrates.
That modern Christians never consider the possibility of the re-introduction of stoning for capital crimes indicates how thoroughly humanistic concepts of punishment have influenced the thinking of Christians. If humanistic concepts of punishment have persuaded Christians that there was something sinister about the Old Testament’s specified mode of execution, then we should not be surprised to discover that humanistic concepts of Justice, including economic justice, have also become influential in the thinking of Christians. Christians have voluntarily transferred their allegiance from the infallible Old Testament to contemporary God-hating and God-denying criminologists and economists. They have traded their birthright for a mess of pottage — or, given the nature of modern criminology’s propaganda, for a pot of message.
Conclusion
That God has delegated this right to execute to the civil government indicates that this institution has legitimate power. It can protect men from kidnapping, a capital crime (Ex. 21:16). It can also protect men from the spread of disease, especially killer diseases, by means of imposing a quarantine (Num. 5:1-4; Lev. 13-15). The police power of the State is to serve as one of the foundations of social stability. It thereby permits men to apply time and capital to their callings. It offers legal predictability, which is vital to the flourishing of personal freedom and economic development. Most important, the right of the civil government to take a man’s life under specified conditions is apt to remind men of the ultimate Judge who gives the gift of life, but who also retains the right to remove life from those who rebel against Him. The civil government’s monopoly of execution testifies to God’s absolute hostility against sin, especially the sin of striking out against God’s own image.
This is an extremely important point. Man’s life is to be protected, not because each man possesses a hypothetical absolute and original right of ownership over his own person (the fundamental assertion of most libertarian and anarcho-capitalist theoreticians), but because God is absolutely sovereign and the absolute owner of all things, including men. He will not permit His image, man, to be mortally wounded without imposing a form of judgment which, in time and on earth, is analogous to that final judgment beyond the grave. Peter speaks of “the grace of life” (I Pet. 3:7); to destroy human life is to reject grace. Murderers have no place in God’s in- heritance (Gal. 5:21; Rev. 21:8).
