Biblical Landmarks

Archive for the ‘Politics’ Category

If a Thief Hands You Stolen Money, What Should You Do?

Returning to Australia for my son’s wedding, it did not take long to be reminded of many of the issues that dropped out of sight while living in America.

At the top of the list is the Australian concept of socialism. Socialism is the idea that the government takes control of all resources within the nation and allocates them in some fashion. Frederick Hayek drew the distinction between communism and socialism when he observed that in communism, the government owns everything and allocates according to government plan. Under socialism, ownership remains in the hands of individuals, but the government determines the allocation of the privately-held resources. The Australian government pretends it is neither socialistic nor communistic. But as Ludwig von Mises argued so clearly, the middle-of-the-road policy is the road to full socialism. You cannot control part of the economy without controlling all of it.

The key issue here is one of ownership and the meaning of the idea of ownership. “Thou shalt not steal” establishes the right of private ownership, ownership being the right of dispossession. This is the key. If you cannot dispose the things you own in the manner in which you would like, you don’t own the thing. Whoever controls the dispossession is the real owner, even though there may be official papers giving title to the individual.

In the modern world, it is taxation, perhaps more than anything else, that determines the biblical framework of ownership. The government not only takes for itself the right to tax, but it also allocates to itself the right to determine how much tax it might be entitled to. This is important because it raises the question of property ownership in money. It doesn’t exist any more. But it did exist at one time, when the Bible provided the prevailing philosophy.

Read the rest of this entry »

When Is It Time To Disobey?

Almost everyone knows the story of Daniel and the lion’s den. What is not so well understood is the specific reason why Daniel came into conflict with king Darius.

Darius had appointed a number of officials to assist in ruling his kingdom. These officials became jealous of Daniel, who had distinguished himself in the service of the monarch. They sought his downfall, but could find nothing in his work habits that would give them cause to complain to the king.

These officials, however, knew that Daniel was a religious man. And they knew enough about his religion to be able to devise a trap that would ensnare Daniel and bring about his political downfall. They were certain that they could only destroy him if they brought some issue to the fore concerning the law of God, forcing Daniel to choose between the law of his God and the law of the king.

Appealing to the political philosophy of the time which put the king’s law above everything else, they suggested that he should pass a law forbidding any person in the realm from making a petition to any other god or man for thirty days. On the surface this did not seem such a harsh law. Only thirty days. These advisers were not greedy men. All they wanted was enough rope for Daniel to hang himself. And it would be a good test of the king’s ultimate authority. So this suggestion had some ego appeal for the king.

Read the rest of this entry »

Ten Commandments and Limited Government

I keep thinking of my time with Buddy and Sandy in Alabama earlier this year. Both attorneys at law, helping people in bankruptcy.

But Alabama is also famous for another lawman, Judge Roy Moore. Now there are not too many people who like getting fired from their job. But Judge Roy Moore of Alabama seems to have accepted his firing with some enthusiasm. And a challenge.

Now the challenge, he says, goes something like this. In his attempts to honor both his Christian convictions and the laws of the state of Alabama, he had placed in the State courthouse the Ten Commandments. Some say he did it sneakily under the cover of darkness, but Judge Moore says the timing was determined by the installers — who were running late. Anyway, that is not a real issue.

One of the real issues is the ability of federal judges to intervene in state affairs. According to some, the whole purpose of a Constitution is to limit the federal government. One only needs to read the wording of the U.S. Constitution and look at the Constitutional debates to see there is strong evidence for this approach to the Constitution and the powers of the federal government.
Read the rest of this entry »

I’ve just returned from the movies: Russel Crowe and Cate Blanchett in “Robin Hood.” Alright, I confess, I’m a Russel Crowe fan, and Jessie and I are in Boulder, Colorado, celebrating our 36th wedding anniversary. Both Australians give what I consider a great performance.

But there is a scene at the end of the movie that is provocative. King John declares he is appointed by Divine Right, and he’s not about to let a bunch of barons tell him what to do.
Read the rest of this entry »

A Mark of Sovereignty

From time to time there are news items explaining why some people find it necessary to leave home. Taxes — property taxes to be precise.

In a period of rising house prices, it is easy to forget that with rises in prices come increasing property taxes. And property taxes can mean financial ruin for many whose income cannot rise to meet the increased tax burden.

One resident in Massachusetts some time ago was suffering when her tax bill increased from $2,200 to $3,500, while income remained fixed at $12,000 a year. The result? Sell the family home, with all its sweat and tears (it was built by the current owner and her late husband) and memories.

While the stock market may be on the move up again and there is little evidence that the real estate market is out of the doldrums, the banking fiasco in the US, together with fevered home buying, indicated personal debt was on the increase. So, too, were home prices, since a good portion of the debt went into home buying. Property prices were bound to increase — and property taxes along with them.
Read the rest of this entry »

When William the Conqueror established himself on the throne of England he was left with an expensive exercise. Since he could not count on the allegiance of conquered peoples, it was necessary to maintain his military forces in England. This was not popular, because his troops had burned houses during his coronation ceremony and earned an even greater hatred by the English.

This only serves to illustrate that when you desire to rule, you can expect it is necessary to find some way to enforce that rule upon an unwilling group of people.

At least since 1688, it is evident that Parliament, not the king rules. Since Americans have broken the link between the English Parliament and themselves, Congress rules. Any talk about liberty and freedom needs to be seen in that context: freedom circumscribed by whatever Congress happens to dictate.
Read the rest of this entry »

“No authoritarian state can tolerate those who have an absolute standard by which to judge its activities” Dr. Francis Schaeffer, in “How Should We Then Live?”

Just when you think the economy is bad enough, forcing people out of work, a new danger emerges forcing people not only from their jobs but in some cases from their houses as well.

It has become an accepted belief around the world that the government–local, state and federal–can do whatever it likes. Unfortunately, it is not just a belief, but it happens in practice as well.

As a result people have been served condemnation notices on their properties in order that the properties might become available to other businesses in the community. Under the guise of better planning, people have had to give up the right to their land and home, and often their livelihood, as the law has been used to evict them off their property in order to make way for someone else.

Under the mistaken notion of eminent domain, authorities around the world treat property as if it were their own, thus making the idea of property ownership an impossible goal for many.
Read the rest of this entry »

“Lying is to democracy what manure is to rhubarb.”

Can you believe someone actually said that?

Sometimes you wonder what depths highly paid academics will go to in offering the public the latest in academic research.

In 2003, a Reader in Politics at a British University claimed to have discovered something the ordinary citizen has known all along.
Read the rest of this entry »