We were told to pursue excellence in all things according to the gifts that we were given for the glory of God.  Leaders today in the church should be identifying such men with unique gifts and encourage them to become leaders not only in the church, but in the world in which we live. Our history is full of great leaders who helped create this blessed nation from which we have benefited so much.  I’m afraid, in a day when we need them most, such men, especially Presbyterians, are missing in action.

The history of Presbyterians who have served in leadership positions in America is rich and ubiquitous; but sadly, it appears now that Presbyterians have left the public square and are missing in action (MIA).
History is replete with examples of the importance of Presbyterians. Rev. John Witherspoon, President of the College of New Jersey (now Princeton University) was a signer of the Declaration of Independence. His influence over many of those at the Constitutional Convention cannot be underestimated. One of his students was James Madison. Horace Walpole, a member of the British Parliament, said of Witherspoon, that America “had run away with a Presbyterian parson.” It is claimed that King George III called the American Revolution “a Presbyterian rebellion.”
At the Battle of Yorktown where General George Washington defeated Cornwallis, it has been noted that all of Washington’s colonels but one were Presbyterian elders.
Whether all of this is true or not, I cannot be sure, but there is no doubt that Presbyterians had a major impact on the Revolutionary War.  Historian Paul R. Carson has estimated that when the number of soldiers in the Revolutionary War included not only Presbyterians, but Puritan English, Dutch and German Reformed, that “two-thirds of our Revolutionary forefathers were trained in the school of Calvin.”
J. Gresham Machen was respected so much as a leading clergyman in the United States that in the early 20th century he was asked to give testimony before a U.S, House and Senate Committee on a proposed Department of Education. John C. Breckinridge, a Presbyterian from Kentucky, who was the uncle of the Princeton scholar Benjamin Breckinridge Warfield, was also Vice-President of the United States under President James Buchanan.
Maybe, the most well-respected Presbyterian in American history was the great Confederate General Stonewall Jackson, who was born in the mountains of what is now West Virginia, my place of birth and childhood home.  His courage and piety in war are unparalleled.
I have not even taken time to speak of the Puritans who settled New England prior to the American Revolution.  Although they were mostly Congregationalists, their theology also reflected the Calvinistic heritage.
Indeed today, I am sure that there are many conservative Presbyterians in leadership positions in every sphere of life in America.  I have known a few of them myself including many in the military, in business, and in the civil government.
However, I am beginning to notice a trend. Presbyterians in such leadership positions are disappearing from public life.  They are becoming very rare.  For example, the United States Supreme Court contains no Presbyterians.  Only 24 members of the United States Congress are listed as Presbyterians, and I doubt that any of them are conservative. You have to go back to Ronald Reagan to find a President who identified as a Presbyterian, at least later in life.
Yes, the capture of the Presbyterian Church by liberalism is part of the problem. Conservative Presbyterians and others from Reformed backgrounds are a small percentage of the American religious scene.
However, we should ask ourselves what has happened in the conservative Reformed and Presbyterian world that changed the landscape of Presbyterians participating in leadership roles outside of the church?
We may not need look any further than our young men in the church. Many of them seem to be confused, aimless, and lacking direction in life.  I hear constant complaints about young Christian men in Presbyterian and Reformed churches who seem to have very little drive to excel. They seem unwilling to work hard.  They often take what I call the easy road to avoid the sweat and tears it takes to succeed and rise to high levels of responsibility in accordance with their abilities.  When they do choose a pathway or calling, they often do not persevere.
God gives different gifts to different men.  For a man in a lawncare business, that is an honorable calling.  For those who drive trucks, that also is an honorable calling.  But for those with skills and gifts which could put them in leadership positions in their communities and even at higher levels, many of our young men, especially Presbyterians, are absent.
What has then happened? Radical Two Kingdom (R2K) theology has fenced up our young men into monastic cells inside the church walls. Pietism has chased away our young men from interacting with the world. Amillennialism has no victorious view of the future here on earth before Christ returns. So, many of our young men think, “What’s the use of fighting?”  That’s what our theology is teaching our young men. In my own experience, I went through a period of despair, and came to believe that Amillennialism is incompatible with a robust Covenantalism which is future-oriented.
The framers of the U.S. Constitution acted to secure the blessings of liberty not only for themselves but for their posterity.  Posterity was an important covenantal word among our early forefathers.  They had a long-term view of their work, knowing they would have an impact on many generations not yet born.
The highest position for young men today seems to be reaching the office of an elder in the church, rather than a mayor in the town or even the Governor of a State.
We don’t look generations ahead and believe that we are responsible for the quality of life for those yet to be born. We have become less than conquers, and this attitude of ordained defeatism has been transmitted to our young men.  Our anticipation of heaven has nullified our responsibility to future generations here on earth.
So, a listless floating and a dreamy drifting attitude without purpose has captured many of our young men. I’m glad I was raised in the previous generation where we knew what real manhood was in that we were expected to use our talents and gifts to the upmost. To fail to do this was shameful and dishonorable.
We were told to pursue excellence in all things according to the gifts that we were given for the glory of God.  Leaders today in the church should be identifying such men with unique gifts and encourage them to become leaders not only in the church, but in the world in which we live. Our history is full of great leaders who helped create this blessed nation from which we have benefited so much.  I’m afraid, in a day when we need them most, such men, especially Presbyterians, are missing in action.
Larry E. Ball is a retired minister in the Presbyterian Church in America and is now a CPA. He lives in Kingsport, Tenn.

Related Posts:

.kb-row-layout-id223392_4ab238-bd > .kt-row-column-wrap{align-content:start;}:where(.kb-row-layout-id223392_4ab238-bd > .kt-row-column-wrap) > .wp-block-kadence-column{justify-content:start;}.kb-row-layout-id223392_4ab238-bd > .kt-row-column-wrap{column-gap:var(–global-kb-gap-md, 2rem);row-gap:var(–global-kb-gap-md, 2rem);padding-top:var(–global-kb-spacing-sm, 1.5rem);padding-bottom:var(–global-kb-spacing-sm, 1.5rem);grid-template-columns:minmax(0, 1fr);}.kb-row-layout-id223392_4ab238-bd{background-color:#dddddd;}.kb-row-layout-id223392_4ab238-bd > .kt-row-layout-overlay{opacity:0.30;}@media all and (max-width: 1024px){.kb-row-layout-id223392_4ab238-bd > .kt-row-column-wrap{grid-template-columns:minmax(0, 1fr);}}@media all and (max-width: 767px){.kb-row-layout-id223392_4ab238-bd > .kt-row-column-wrap{grid-template-columns:minmax(0, 1fr);}}
.kadence-column223392_96a96c-18 > .kt-inside-inner-col,.kadence-column223392_96a96c-18 > .kt-inside-inner-col:before{border-top-left-radius:0px;border-top-right-radius:0px;border-bottom-right-radius:0px;border-bottom-left-radius:0px;}.kadence-column223392_96a96c-18 > .kt-inside-inner-col{column-gap:var(–global-kb-gap-sm, 1rem);}.kadence-column223392_96a96c-18 > .kt-inside-inner-col{flex-direction:column;}.kadence-column223392_96a96c-18 > .kt-inside-inner-col > .aligncenter{width:100%;}.kadence-column223392_96a96c-18 > .kt-inside-inner-col:before{opacity:0.3;}.kadence-column223392_96a96c-18{position:relative;}@media all and (max-width: 1024px){.kadence-column223392_96a96c-18 > .kt-inside-inner-col{flex-direction:column;}}@media all and (max-width: 767px){.kadence-column223392_96a96c-18 > .kt-inside-inner-col{flex-direction:column;}}

Subscribe to Free “Top 10 Stories” Email
Get the top 10 stories from The Aquila Report in your inbox every Tuesday morning.

To pursue this objective the word nation was replaced by the word ethnicity. But it won’t work!  It may have some success in Christian families, in the church were members of various nations all change their allegiance to Christ, and it may have some success within a common geographical boundary where the Ten Commandments of the Christian Faith still have the force of law, but outside of these, I believe it is ultimately a recipe for disaster. 
America is no longer a nation in the biblical sense.  It is an empire.  A nation has the four boundary markers I have just mentioned, but an empire is a combination of nations living under one authority, usually under some type of tyranny.

When I was a young minister, I never heard of the word “ethnicity,” but today it is as common as pumpkins in the Fall.  My contention is that this word is relatively new, and that it was intentionally created by modern America to replace the concept of a “nation” as it is used in the Bible.  It has become a popular word in the church too.  The word ethnicity is not used in the King James Version of the Bible.  Not that I am a KJV-only person, but the more ancient language translations do give us the mindset of the past.  For example, in the typical English translation of the Greek language, Jesus told his disciples to make disciples of all the nations, not of all the ethnicities. The word “ethnicity” comes from the Greek term “ethnos” which is generally translated as nation in the English Bible.
The English word “nation” is derived from the same word as “nativity” which reminds us of the birth of Christ.  The word nation was chosen in older translations because it describes a people group with the same birth or ancestry.  In the distant past there existed patriarchs (like Abraham), and from such men came forth generations to follow.  This created a nation.  The most common element of a nation was being of the same birth.  Later, the word “race” was used in other translations, but again, this is a relatively new word that was not used in the old KJV (except as in running in a race).
In the New Testament the Apostle Paul adds to this definition of a nation, when preaching on Mars Hill, he said that God created the nations and defined them by borders as well as birth.  “He made from one man every nation of mankind to live on the face of the earth, having determined their appointed times and the boundaries of their habitation” (Acts 17:26).
Luke tells us of another common attribute of nations when he describes the nations gathered at Pentecost in Acts 2:5-6 as having a common language: “Now there were Jews living in Jerusalem, devout men from every nation under heaven.  And when this sound occurred, the crowd came together, and were bewildered because each one of them was hearing them speak in his own language.”
The Bible obviously includes one more marker in the concept of a nation, and that is a common religion which produces a common culture with common traditions and customs such as the celebration of Christmas and Easter. The great commission (Matt. 28: 18-20) is a command to change the religion of each nation by the preaching of the gospel and by the power of the Holy Spirit. This assumes that a nation, as defined in the Bible, still remained a nation even after receiving the gospel, but the God it worshipped was changed (like in Ninevah).
Nations as defined in the Bible are here to stay.  Actually, nations even as defined by these markers will appear before God in heaven. Heaven is described as a place where, “The nations will walk by its light, and the kings of the earth will bring their glory into it” (Rev. 21:24).
Thus, the four common marks of a biblical nation are a common birth, a common border, a common language, and a common religion.
We still think of nations with these markers when we think of the Japanese, the Chinese, the Dutch, and even such nations as Israel.  They are typically nations with a common border, a common language, a common ancestry, and a common religion (communism in China).
This was true of the United States in its earliest days.  America for much of its early existence consisted of mostly White Evangelical Protestants who spoke the English language. The nation had borders (that eventually covered the land from the Atlantic to the Pacific oceans). Blacks came to America under compulsion via the institution of slavery and eventually became part of the sinews of our nation, even though they were of a different birth and ancestry.  Indians (native-Americans) were incorporated into the United States by force under the doctrine of Manifest Destiny.  Ellis Island opened this nation to other European descendants. Jews and Muslims would follow.
Why has the word ethnicity replaced the word nation?  Because it aligns more with the American notion of a nation, which is contrary to the biblical view of a nation. The word ethnicity empties the word nation of three of its major markers—a common ancestry, a common language, and a common religion.  Like all generations, we tend to read the Scriptures through the lens of our culture rather than read the culture through the lens of the Scriptures.  America prides itself on the diversity of nations living within a common geographical boundary with different languages and religions where democracy guarantees freedom and peace for all eternity.  Democracy has become our new god.
To pursue this objective the word nation was replaced by the word ethnicity. But it won’t work!  It may have some success in Christian families, in the church were members of various nations all change their allegiance to Christ, and it may have some success within a common geographical boundary where the Ten Commandments of the Christian Faith still have the force of law, but outside of these, I believe it is ultimately a recipe for disaster.
America is no longer a nation in the biblical sense.  It is an empire.  A nation has the four boundary markers I have just mentioned, but an empire is a combination of nations living under one authority, usually under some type of tyranny.
Protestant pluralism is waning as a significant force in America.  We now live under a secular polytheism.  The United States Constitution was created for a Christian people, and not for a muti-cultural conglomeration of various nations with their different ancestors and different religions living within one geographical border.
America has been balkanized and there is no longer unity under the banner of Christ.  This is one reason why there is so much political upheaval. One good example of this is the hatred now seen on college campuses where there is a verbal war between Jews and Hamas-sympathizers (who represent Muslims). The Middle East has been imported to our American geographical boundaries, and the result is the seed of hatred between these various nations living within our country.  As other nations are imported into America (some in the middle of the night by airplanes), the danger of the demise of this great nation is at hand.
Somewhere along this timeline the word ethnicity replaced the word nation to accomplish a goal contrary to the Bible. Never in the history of man since Adam and Eve have different nations with different religions lived in peace within the same boundaries, except by the force of war.
However, America, in its arrogance and its belief in the goodness of man, thought she could ignore the biblical concept of a nation and create a new tower of Babel where a multitude of nations could live together within the same border in a peaceful existence without a common religion. The goal was a melting pot, but we have created a boiling pot. The word ethnicity was a means to this end. That’s why I don’t use the word.
Larry E. Ball is a retired minister in the Presbyterian Church in America and is now a CPA. He lives in Kingsport, Tenn.
Related Posts:

The evangelical world still holds a powerful weapon in its hands.  Because of the electoral college, what really matters in elections is what happens in each states.  In 2020 Biden beat Trump in Arizona by 10,935 votes.  In Georgia, Biden won by 14,152 votes.  In Wisconsin, Biden won by 20,546 votes.  That’s a total of around 46,000 votes in an election where the total number of votes cast was over 150 million.

David French is at it again.  In the New York Times he recently pinned an opinion piece entitled To Save Conservativism from Itself, I Am Voting for Harris. Now he is making his rounds on anti-Christian platforms like MSNBC.  He is also part of a movement called “Evangelicals for Kamala.”  French was blocked from a round-table discussion at the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA) this past summer, but he is welcomed with open arms by those who hate Christianity.  You can tell a lot about a man by who his friends are.
I voted for Donald Trump in the last two presidential elections and I will be voting for him again.  See the reasons for my vote four years ago in an article on the Aquila Report: Why I Am Voting for President Trump – Again!.
My goal here is not to discuss all of the political issues surrounding this presidential election.  If you have not made up your mind on these issues, then you are probably sinking in spiritual quicksand. I simply want to remind the reader of two things—how critical this election is, and what part evangelicals must play in it. Elections have consequences.
The great battle in America in this election is not between personalities, or even between political parties.  There is a war going on in this nation between Christianity and Marxism (I prefer the term Neo-Marxism). Neo-Marxism has captured all of the major institutions in this country including the federal government, the educational institutions, the media, and even the military.  Now, it is infiltrating the church.  See Megan Basham’s book on Shepherds for Sale. The Church was sleeping while the enemy sowed his seeds.
Kamala Harris is a puppet for the power behind her campaign which is Neo-Marxism.  Trump with all his failures, sins, inconsistencies, and fiascos holds some hope for Christianity, or at least the last flicker of what is left of Christianity in this nation.  Trump is no savior.  Some of his positions are anti-Christian, but he may be able to buy us a little more time to fight for biblical liberty and freedom in America.
Four more years of Neo-Marxist insanity will either make America a third world country or bring about a civil war.  Our foreign adversaries are ready to take advantage of our weakness and to shame us.  Kamala Harris with lipstick and high-heals cannot negotiate with the likes of men as Putin or Xi Jinping.
The evangelical world still holds a powerful weapon in its hands.  Because of the electoral college, what really matters in elections is what happens in each states.  In 2020 Biden beat Trump in Arizona by 10,935 votes.  In Georgia, Biden won by 14,152 votes.  In Wisconsin, Biden won by 20,546 votes.  That’s a total of around 46,000 votes in an election where the total number of votes cast was over 150 million. Probably, if evangelicals had turned out in full force and voted for Trump, the results of the election (even discounting fraud) would have been different.  That’s a lot of power in the hands of evangelicals.
The bottom line is that if movements like “Evangelicals for Kamala” have only a minimal influence over evangelicals, then it may push the election in the favor of Kamala Harris and her coterie of Neo-Marxists. According to a Gallup Poll, the Trump vote by white evangelicals declined from 2016 to 2020 by about 4%.  With all the anti-Trump rhetoric that came out of evangelical networks, that sounds about right.  This 4% decline in the white evangelical vote was probably enough to defeat Trump in 2020.
I hope evangelicals will rise up and choose to have a major impact in this election. We do live in a democracy.  We are not living in the New Testament age where Christians had no freedom or responsibility to vote.
If need be, hold your nose, and vote for Trump.  “Evangelicals for Harris” will have a tremendous influence with their purity claims and their guilt manipulation. All they need is a small incremental change for Kamala to win.  Remember, too, that refusing to vote for Trump guarantees a victory for Harris.
Will the influence of men like David French carry the day in the evangelical church by switching the votes of just few thousand evangelicals for Harris, or will the evangelicals that I know turn out and vote for a future that will restrain Neo-Marxism?  I hope I will not be disappointed in the evangelical church again in 2024 as I was in 2020.
Yes, God is sovereign.  In the end we all have to learn to live with his will, even in presidential elections.  However, God has given to each of us both responsibility and accountability, and we need to be faithful in all things.
Larry E. Ball is a retired minister in the Presbyterian Church in America and is now a CPA. He lives in Kingsport, Tenn.
Related Posts:

The major controversy that surrounds the book is that it contradicts the narrative of identity politics presently dominant in this country. We are told that racial injustice is only a problem with minority groups who are non-white.  White men are, by definition, oppressors.  That is the standard presupposition of identity politics.  Because the book portrays many white people who came from poor and uneducated backgrounds, the book betrays the current narrative of social justice. The book indirectly tells us that whites can be the victims of so-called inequality too.
[Editor’s Note: This book (and movie) review of the Hillbilly Elegy first ran on The Aquila Report on December 29, 2020. Since its author, J.D. Vance, has been chosen as the Republican candidate for Vice-President, we thought it would be timely to post it again.]
Among upper middle-class white suburbanites, at least in their circles, the book Hillbilly Elegy has become a must-read.  As a result, some of them may view it as the standard for understanding the Appalachian culture.  During its early release the popularity among its readers was reinforced by its rise to the top of the New York Times best-sellers list.
While the book may have minimal interest among many Christians, its narrative and especially the modern public reaction to the caricature of poor white Americans in Appalachia should arouse interest in those who seek to apply the Christian faith to the culture in which we live. It is especially important in our days of critical race theory and identity politics. I will discuss this more below.
Recently, it has been made into a Netflix movie directed by Ron Howard.  It is rated R for the language; however, it is void of the typical Netflix nudity and on-screen sexual immorality. The movie review geeks of “Rotten Tomatoes” gave it a 26% favorable rating while it garnered an 86% favorability rating among the average public audience.
If you are offended by hearing bad language, then this is not the movie for you.  However, if you are able to handle the language while seeking to understand the cultural nuances in the movie, then it may be worth reading the book or watching the movie.
The movie traces the life of J.D. Vance as he was raised in an industrial city in Ohio.  His family had its origins in the hill country of Appalachia (Kentucky), and as many industrial workers did back in the latter part of the 20th century, they had to move out of the hill country to find jobs.  Many of them lived in Ohio during the week and drove home (hundreds of miles) every weekend.  Some purchased homes in Ohio.  J.D.’s mother was a drug addict, and his strong-willed, cussing grandmother (Glenn Close) was the stability factor in his family.  In spite of his difficulties of being raised in a highly dysfunctional family, Mr. Vance eventually went off to Yale and became a successful lawyer.  This is partially his autobiography.
The book derives its title from the stereotypical name of “hillbilly” given to those who were raised in Appalachia.  It is also called an elegy (a lament about the past).  Mr. Vance’s life was very hard and he had to endure much stress and embarrassment in regard to his family. He certainly has an interesting and heart-warming story to tell.
There are several take-aways from the book.  First, in my view, it is really not so much a book or movie about Appalachia and its culture, but more about the consequences of sin in any culture. One could take the same story-line and transfer it to any geographic part of the country and there would not be much difference.  However, curiosity about Appalachian culture gives the book an inviting and magnetic drawing power for outsiders (and insiders, too).
Being raised in Appalachia myself (about 40 years before Mr. Vance), I could identify with some of the tidbits in the movie (like pronouncing the word syrup as “surp,” and not knowing which eating utensils to use at a fancy dinner).  I can attest that there was grave poverty among both whites and blacks in the mountains, especially in the coal fields.  I know of both black and white men walking the railroad tracks looking for lumps of coal that may have fallen off the coal trains.  Coal provided heat for the family in the winter time.  This was before the welfare system and EBT food-stamps.  There were no free-loaders, only survivors. In the early 20th century, miners were often treated like slaves by the mine-owners.  Some of them worse than slaves.
Secondly, it is obvious that in Mr. Vance’s immediate family, there was little influence of the Christian faith.  It seems that no one ever goes to church, except for weddings and funerals. Such Christianity may be more harmful and dangerous than an outright denial of the Christian faith.  Nominal Christianity is deceitful and a harmful curse.  It gives a false assurance of being a Christian with little evidence of the new birth.
Contrary to the portrayal of this family, I can attest that there were many dedicated Christians in those hills and valleys.  The Bible had a major impact on the people and its culture.  It permeated the life and morals of the people as a whole.  Marriage between a man and a woman was held in high esteem.  Adultery was scandalous. At least, that was the Appalachia I knew.
Thirdly, as I noted above, the major controversy that surrounds the book is that it contradicts the narrative of identity politics presently dominant in this country. We are told that racial injustice is only a problem with minority groups who are non-white.  White men are, by definition, oppressors.  That is the standard presupposition of identity politics.  Because the book portrays many white people who came from poor and uneducated backgrounds, the book betrays the current narrative of social justice. The book indirectly tells us that whites can be the victims of so-called inequality too.
The idea of a white family being poor and being treated as the outcast in society is not acceptable among the modern purveyors of critical race theory, thus the low rating by “Rotten Tomatoes.”  A coal miner who was treated like an animal in days past does not fit their narrative. White children raised in poverty who made their way out of their circumstances without government aid or help do not fit their narrative either.
The people in Appalachia that I knew would rather die than take a hand-out from some government welfare system or from some redistribution-of-wealth scheme.  They were proud men whose work defined who they were.  They wanted to be independent, and any hand-outs were associated with degradation and shame.  This was part of their Christian culture.
Again, the book is much more than a story about Appalachian culture.  The book and the movie do not pass the evil white man smell-test of modern cultural warriors.  It does not fit their narrative and it challenges their presuppositions.  Therefore, it is a threat to them.
Christians today need to be aware of the philosophies of the world.  Reading books like Hillbilly Elegy can be profitable, not only in seeing how hard life was in days past even for white people, but also in recognizing how our cultural elites react to narratives that do not fit their political hegemony.
Larry E. Ball is a retired minister in the Presbyterian Church in America and is now a CPA. He lives in Kingsport, Tenn.
Related Posts:

The Bible is very clear that the elderly are due respect.  “You shall rise up before the gray-headed and honor the aged, and you shall revere your God; I am the Lord” (Lev. 19:32). Respect for aged parents is the way we give respect to God himself.  It’s probably more telling than worship on Sunday mornings.  Jesus, even on the cross, remembered how important it was for someone to take care of his mother after his death (John 19:26-27).  Your parents gave their lives to raise you, and they deserve respect for that. They deserve honor and not denigration.

No, this is not about politics; it’s about growing old.  Thanks to Joe Biden the image of the elderly in this country has taken a major hit.  Old people have become the target of abrasive comedians and callous television pundits. The elderly are now funny people, and even sometimes hilarious. They do silly things. That’s the persona of old people. They are entertaining at best and a nuisance at worst.  They are people to be tolerated, viewed as buffoons, and avoided as much as possible.
With aging comes a loss of memory, the inability to speak fluidly, and a dangerous gait in moving from place to place—and yes, there is much more that can’t be mentioned.  We cannot do what we used to do, and it’s difficult to admit it. Sometimes we do indeed embarrass ourselves.
My wife and I have had the privilege (and yes it was a privilege) of caring for an aging parent when the parent was unable to take care of herself. It was much more demanding than raising three children and sending them off to college. The physical exigencies were sometimes overwhelming, and it took a mental toll that at times put us on the edge of despair.  Sometimes we were tempted to be angry with God, but our faith kept us from doing that. When you bring an elderly parent into your home needing constant care, everything changes, especially when they are still mobile and yet unable to take care of themselves.
Thank God that on occasion there is a little humor that can be found in it all. I remember my mother who had dementia enjoying a visit from my son with his new fiancé. This was her first time being introduced to the family.  Since his fiancé resembled my daughter, Mom said to my son, with some embarrassment to us all, “So, you married your sister, did you!”  Then, later on that same day, as my son’s fiancé was introduced to my wife’s mother, who had Alzheimer’s disease, my wife’s mother pointed to the picture of a child mounted on the wall of her living room, and boasted to my son’s fiancé how proud she was that this was my son’s child, that is, the child of her soon-to-be-husband.  After explaining everything to her, she married my son anyway.
The Bible is very clear that the elderly are due respect.  “You shall rise up before the gray-headed and honor the aged, and you shall revere your God; I am the Lord” (Lev. 19:32). Respect for aged parents is the way we give respect to God himself.  It’s probably more telling than worship on Sunday mornings.  Jesus, even on the cross, remembered how important it was for someone to take care of his mother after his death (John 19:26-27).  Your parents gave their lives to raise you, and they deserve respect for that. They deserve honor and not denigration.
Now, on the other hand, as people do grow old, they need to realize their limitations.  I think most of us can see decline in ourselves.  It’s a wise old man who knows when to quit. Decline often comes slowly but we can see and feel it.
However, our pride sometimes prevents us from recognizing this fact.  We want to do things we did when we were young, but we should know better.  When we are unwilling to change with our age, then it is not pleasing to God and it’s not fair to others.  It can be humiliating.  It’s a little like taking Grandma to the beach and she still thinks she can wear a bikini, or like Grandpa who still thinks he can still jump over a four-foot fence.
When old people refuse to admit the limitations of their age they disappoint us.  They can become angry and dangerous.  So can we!  I remember when it was time to take my mother’s car keys away from her.  Everywhere she drove in the car she always came home with dents in the car (which she covered with duct-tape). She was a danger to others on the road and we children had to recognize that. She was furious with us.
Now the problem with Joe Biden, regardless of his politics, is that he is too old to be President of the United States.  He has become an embarrassment.   He is not up to the job. He is dangerous.
When some large corporations require retirement of management at 55 years of age, what does this say about the man in the White House?  What is needed is humility on the part of the man himself to step aside.  But it appears that he does not have either the wisdom or the humility to do what is needed.  Therefore, rather than hiding his shortcomings from the public, as a loving family would do, he is paraded around as an oddity out of a circus.
Too, he is now the prototype for old people.  Rather than honoring old people as the Bible demands, we (I’m including myself) are now the butt of humor as just silly old people. Sometimes we can laugh at ourselves along with others who are laughing at us, and sometimes we can’t.
It’s time for Biden to step aside, not only for his own sake, but for the sake of our country.  And not only for the sake of the country, but for sake of the image of old people in this nation.  Being old is now a joke thanks to Joe Biden.  It should not be that way.
Larry E. Ball is a retired minister in the Presbyterian Church in America and is now a CPA. He lives in Kingsport, Tenn.
Related Posts:

One purpose of the present language [on Article VI, Clause 3 on no religious tests] is to avoid a national church like the Church of England. All the states are opposed to a national church but not to a public recognition that this is a Christian nation. No denomination of the Christian Faith must rule over others, but our common Trinitarian Christianity must be publicly proclaimed throughout all the world. In the name of the true God, we must seek his blessings by professing in our official documents his claim over us.

Honorable fathers and brethren of this august body, I thank you for the privilege of speaking to you here today on this hot July afternoon in Philadelphia. Let me state my point immediately at the very beginning. This union of states you are seeking to create as a nation must be recognized in this Constitution as a Christian nation.  I submit this speech in order to prevent you from choosing any other option, and in order to save this nation from self-destruction in years to come, long after each of you are gone.
I plead with this body to delete the portion of the words in Article VI, Clause 3, which says that “no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.” The majority of the states do already require a religious test for officeholders to the Trinitarian God of the Bible. The new Constitution should replicate the standards reflected in the state constitutions.  Thus, please realize that this new article is contrary to the practice of the states.
And yes, one purpose of the present language is to avoid a national church like the Church of England. All the states are opposed to a national church but not to a public recognition that this is a Christian nation. No denomination of the Christian Faith must rule over others, but our common Trinitarian Christianity must be publicly proclaimed throughout all the world. In the name of the true God, we must seek his blessings by professing in our official documents his claim over us.
Article VI.3 will be interpreted as a clause to ensure neutrality, which we all should know is impossible. Protestant pluralism has worked well for us among the states thus far, but it must be codified in our national document.  This is a Christian nation as is evident in the individual states and as documented in their constitutions. This is further proved to be true by the multitude of churches that cover the landscape of our nation. Being Christian men, or those who have the highest regard for the Bible, the Word of God, I urge you to adopt a religious test that declares every officer in the United States government must take an oath of allegiance to the Trinitarian God of the Bible before he takes office.

If you follow any other pathway, you will guarantee the self-destruction of this nation in years to come. This nation will become a collaboration of religions of which all of them are considered equal.  Every religion has its own law system and every religion wishes to see its laws instituted in society as a whole. This can only lead to civil strife and chaos. Even those who claim no religion profess a religion.  They are not neutral.  Jesus said that we are either for him or against him. Such people may be the greatest threat of all to the Christian Faith in this country.
This concept is based upon the paradigm of the national government in Old Testament Israel. In the Old Testament, Israel worshiped the one true God and him alone.  This pleased God.  Foreigners and aliens (legally admitted) were welcome to live in Israel and to participate in its wealth, but they could not build public houses of worship to their false gods.  Likewise, only Christian churches should cover the landscape of this county.
Both foreigners and aliens in Israel had the privilege of being protected in both their persons and property by the Law of God, just as any citizen of Israel. They were to be treated with kindness and love, since Israel itself was once an alien in a foreign land.  Even atheists would be allowed to enjoy the blessings of this new nation.  However, temples to false idols were not allowed under the Old Covenant.
Likewise, America should welcome others to enjoy the blessings that God may give to this land, but, like Israel of old, these men of other religions must not participate in the legislation or administration of the law of this Christian nation. With many gods publicly worshiped in the land, it will become a polytheistic nation which will not long endure. It will eventually become nothing but religious and political tribes fighting against each other for power to rule according to its respective religious beliefs.
This restriction would apply to Islam, Judaism, and all eastern religions. Consider how the United States, if blessed by the Triune God, will become a magnet to draw others from all other religions to see us as “shining city upon a hill” and how these unbelievers will be attracted to the God who has blessed us so much.  It will be a great means of evangelism.  Even jealousy can be a motive for conversion of unbelievers to Christ.  The Apostle Paul was passionate about this in regard to the Israelites in Romans 14:11 where he says “that I may move to jealousy my fellow countrymen and save some of them.”
I fear the day when God’s law does not reign in the land. It is either God’s law or chaos.  If the Ten Commandments are not a standard for society as well as the church, then this land will turn into something equal to Sodom and Gomorrah, where sexual perversion will be sanctioned—everything from sodomite marriage, men trying to become women, and even adults seeking to change the sex of their own children.  Abortion will be legalized as the right of a mother to kill her own child.
I know this is difficult to believe, and I am no prophet, but any Christian man with the knowledge of the nature of man can only conclude that the sins I have listed will become normalized and often legalized in this nation.
I realize that ink on paper does not guarantee the blessing of the Lord. I might say that neither does the ink on the Bible itself guarantee the blessing of God.  All Christians know that without the power of the Holy Spirit there will be no blessing on any nation.  However, neither does this fact deny the necessity of recognizing publicly that we will serve the only true and living God.  Yes, unless the church remains the salt of the earth, then God will not give us his gracious promises.  Let us pray that the men of God called to preach in our churches will fulfill their duty by calling the people of this new nation to holiness, and that the civil magistrate will respect and honor the law of God revealed in the Holy Scriptures as a guide for justice in the land.

Rev. Larry E. BallLancaster County, VirginiaJuly 4, 1787
Larry E. Ball is a retired minister in the Presbyterian Church in America and is now a CPA. He lives in Kingsport, Tenn.
Related Posts:

Jesus came preaching the centrality of the kingdom, and not the centrality of worship, not the centrality of the sacraments, not the centrality of prayer, and not even the centrality of justification by faith alone.  All these are critical parts but they must never become a substitute for the kingdom itself.

I have three adult Christian children (who each have their own children) and I love them all equally.  I make no distinction in the amount of time and fondness in my commitment to them. Each of them is extremely important to me.  I love them because they are my family.  If one child became more important to me than another, then that would be a threat to the unity and the strength of my family.  We would become dysfunctional.
In I Corinthians 12, Paul tells us how each of us in the church are part of the same body, and thus we each have great value as we perform our functions.  The faithfulness of each part produces a whole that honors God.  If one part seeks to become more important than another, then the whole body becomes hampered. Any one part elevated above its place can become a threat to the health of the body as a whole.
My point here is that Christ came into the world to bring the Kingdom of God on earth, and therefore the Kingdom of God is like my family above or is like the physical body in the example of the church.  All the parts of the kingdom are critical, but God forbid that any part seek to supplant the whole.
In the Bible the fulfillment of kingdom of God is the goal of all things.  Christ ascended to the right hand of God the Father and is now ruler over all.  When he ascended into heaven, he sat down at the right hand of God the Father and will remain there until his Father makes “your enemies a footstool for your feet (Acts 2:35).”  We live in those days.  Jesus Christ is “the ruler of the kings of the earth” (Rev. 1:5). It is all about his kingdom!  All the other parts under his kingship are tributaries that feed that kingdom.
The other parts include elements like worship, the sacraments, prayer, and even justification by faith alone.  They are critical to the prosperity of the kingdom. They are streams that feed the whole. However, if any part of the whole, or any tributary becomes the focus above the whole, then we have a wounded kingdom and a misplaced priority.  When the hen identifies as the rooster, there is trouble in the henhouse.
Jesus came preaching the centrality of the kingdom, and not the centrality of worship, not the centrality of the sacraments, not the centrality of prayer, and not even the centrality of justification by faith alone.  All these are critical parts but they must never become a substitute for the kingdom itself.
I think most of us need to reread our Bibles with a new paradigm, one that sees the kingdom of God as the focal point.  It is a tough shift, but one that is needed, especially in our day. The word and concept of kingdom that Jesus preached has fallen into disuse.
“The time is fulfilled and the Kingdom of God is at hand, repent and believe in the gospel (Mark 1:15).” “Jesus was going through all the cities and villages, teaching in their synagogues and proclaiming the kingdom of God, and healing every kind of disease and every kind of sickness (Mt. 9:35).”
Jesus taught us to pray “Thy kingdom come; thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven (Mt. 6:9-10).” When we see God’s will being done on all the earth in every area of life, then we will see the kingdom present here on earth. The last words about the Apostle Paul in the Book of Acts are given to us by Luke, “And he stayed two full years in his own rented quarters and was welcoming all who came to him, preaching the kingdom of God and teaching concerning the Lord Jesus Christ with all openness, unhindered (Acts 28: 30-31).”
The Bible is the story of the kingdom of God.  The kingdom is the house that contains all the parts.  The parts give sustenance to the body, but they are not the body, no more than the digestive tract in the body, as important as it is, defines the physical body.  When the parts of the body like worship, sacraments, prayer, and even the doctrine of justification by faith alone supplant the kingdom, we have a problem. And today, in modern America, the church has a big problem.
Worship is critical to a healthy church.  The sabbath day focuses on the glory of God as God’s people gather as one people, and it should be a joy for every Christian.  Without worship, we wither on the vine!  Yet, the purpose of worship is not a mere existential experience that ends with the benediction.  The purpose of worship is to prepare us to fight the battle for extending the kingdom of God over all the earth.
The sacraments have been given to us by God as a means of grace.  According to the Westminster Confession, grace is conveyed through the sacraments. The sacraments are signs and seals of the covenant of grace given to bless us with assurance in the promises of God.  However, the sacraments are not an end in themselves.  As we feed upon Christ, they give us confidence and remove doubt about our salvation so that we can go out into the world and fight with confidence for the extension of the Kingdom. Men in doubt make poor warriors.
Prayer is part of the amour of God.  Kingdoms rise and fall because of the prayers of godly men.  Prayer can change the world.  God loves to hear us pray and he loves to answer our prayers. There is no prayer too big or too small for God.  Yet how does Christ tell us to pray?  What is the ultimate purpose of prayer?   Pray that the kingdom of a holy God will come down from heaven and become the kingdom of God on earth.
The doctrine of justification by faith alone is a matter of life and death.  Without the imputed righteousness of Christ which comes by faith alone, we have no hope.  Trust in both the active and passive obedience of Christ is salvation itself.  However, the doctrine of justification by faith alone is not an end in itself.  It is a means to an end.  It is like the doorway to the house.  It is not the house.  It is the entryway.  Justification by faith alone puts us in a right position with God through the work of Christ alone, and this frees us to move forward in the expansion of kingdom work.  When justification by faith alone becomes more important than the kingdom itself, then we have a dysfunctional body.
The church in America (and in the world) has lost its savor.  We have become introverted and irrelevant to the world in which we live.  We have become navel-gazers, looking at the parts of the kingdom without seeing the wonder of the kingdom itself.  We cannot see the forest for the trees.  Somewhere we lost the vision of Christ siting on his throne where he is putting all things under his feet. The instruments of grace have become the central focus of the Christian Faith in many churches, and we leave church each Sunday not to fight for the advancement of the kingdom of God over all the earth, but to simply wait and repeat in another week.
So, we have lost the reality that Christ sits on his throne today and that we have a mandate to capture all the nations and teach them how to love and serve him. Our goal is to bring the nations (defined by borders, language, and a common religion) into the kingdom of God. Christ has guaranteed our success because he sits on his throne (Mt. 28: 19-20).
The kingdom of God is not of this world.  In other words, the power of the kingdom is not worldly.  Its power finds its source in the elements of the kingdom like worship, sacraments, prayer, and justification by faith alone. We are not to depend on worldly weapons to advance the Kingdom of God.  It is a “spiritual kingdom,” but not in the mystical, neo-platonic sense of negating the physical body, but in the sense that its success depends on the power of the third person of the Trinity—the Holy Spirit.
We lost this vision in the modern evangelical church, partly because we have substituted these and other important parts for the whole, i.e., for the kingdom of God. “And the seventh angel sounded, and there were great voices in heaven saying, ‘The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord and of Christ, and he shall reign for ever and ever’” (Rev. 11:15).
Larry E. Ball is a retired minister in the Presbyterian Church in America and is now a CPA. He lives in Kingsport, Tenn.
Related Posts:

The world could care less about how you define terms in your Christian circles. Just don’t take your views into the public square. If they choose to define Christian Nationalism as a nation influenced by Christians that promote Christian morality because they believe in the God of the Bible, then we will have to live with their definition, and we will have to live with any consequences that come from that definition.

One of the interesting dynamics in the debate over Christian Nationalism is that there has been no acceptable definition of what it would look like if it were implemented in our nation.  Various evangelical and reformed protagonists in this debate have framed various scenarios of Christian Nationalism from a time-capsule approach of merely returning to the Eisenhower era to the portrait approach of monarchial tyrants in high places of the civil government.  How about a Chrisitan Prince?
The worst-case fear is that religious persecution would rise again as it did in Europe just a few hundred years ago.  Some Baptists today are afraid they might be put in jail under a Presbyterian ruler; and the first amendment, the right to free speech, would cease to exist. Theonomists would be in charge, and some young children would be put to death by stoning. As a theonomist and a clergyman in the PCA who follows both sides of this debate, I am aghast at the ridiculous characterizations of proponents of Christian Nationalism, on both sides.
Listen up! It would appear now that we evangelicals do not need to define Christian Nationalism anymore.  There is no need for any more books or articles on the topic.  Our enemies in the world have done it for us.  In speaking of Christian Nationalists, Heidi Przybyla, a journalist with the popular Politico has said “that they [Christian Nationalists] believe that our rights as Americans, as all human beings, don’t come from any earthly authority.”  She went on to say that Christian Nationalists believe that our “rights don’t come from Congress, they don’t come from the Supreme Court, they come from God.”  Well, there you go—a definition of Christian Nationalism without all the minutia of what one would look like in detail. We Reformed guys are into the details too much anyway.
My first reaction to this new definition of Christian Nationalism is that maybe Ms. Przybyla forgot to read the Declaration of Independence where our forefathers declared that “all men are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” Our rights do come from God and not from man.
The Creator God of America in 1776 was the Trinitarian God of the Bible. At one time America was a Christian nation.  Christian nationalism gave rise to both a robust freedom of religion and the freedom of the press—two fundamental bullworks of what has been called American exceptionalism.  American Christian Nationalism even protected the right of free speech of men who were atheists.
So, to put it simply, Christian Nationalists believe in a nation where the rights and responsibilities of the people are derived from God himself, and not simply from a Congress that has become irrelevant, or a Supreme Court gone rogue, or even a neutral Constitution that can be interpreted according to the fleeting ideas of autonomous men.
What am I trying to say to evangelical and reformed Christians?  We’re all Christian Nationalists now!  If you believe that the laws of our nation-state should reflect, at a minimum, the last six of the ten commandments of the Bible, then you are a Christian Nationalist. If you vote for any candidate for public office who shares your views, then you are a Christian Nationalist.
For example, if you believe that abortion is the unlawful taking of human life because the Bible says so, then you are a Christian Nationalist.  If you believe that homosexual marriage is sinful because the Bible says so, then you are a Christian Nationalist. If you believe that God created mankind as male and female, and the Bible forbids a multi-binary identity, then you are a Christian Nationalist.  If you believe it is your right to say publicly that “Christ is King,” then you are a Christian Nationalist.
Now, maybe you disagree with this definition.  Maybe you don’t like it.  Maybe you think it is too simple.  Well, it really does not matter what you believe, or what you like, or what you think.  We evangelicals don’t make the rules anymore nor do we have the authority to create definitions in the public square.  Write all the books you want and publish all the articles you want.  You will add nothing to the public debate.  In the mind of the world, you are no longer a contributor to the public dialogue. You are only a threat to them.
Just remember that the world controls the definitions and what is allowed to be spoken in the public conversation.  You are safe within the walls of your church sanctuary. They could care less about how you define terms in your Christian circles. Just don’t take your views into the public square. If they choose to define Christian Nationalism as a nation influenced by Christians that promote Christian morality because they believe in the God of the Bible, then we will have to live with their definition, and we will have to live with any consequences that come from that definition.
Larry E. Ball is a retired minister in the Presbyterian Church in America and is now a CPA. He lives in Kingsport, Tenn.
Related Posts:

God created man to first work, not to worship.  Work was the beginning of his worship. Work must not be viewed as a utilitarian instrument (for example, a means to give more to the church), but work itself is a holy ministry toward others in that work is producing goods and services that provide for the needs, comfort, and joy of others.  Again, in my opinion, if the first half of the 4th commandment (working six days) received as much attention as the second half (resting one day), then the kingdom of God would be greatly advanced.

David Bahnsen in his latest book Full-Time: Work and The Meaning of Life challenges a few theological presuppositions prominent in the modern evangelical and reformed world regarding the relationship between faith and work. This also includes an interesting chapter on the rather new concept (over the course of history) of retirement.
David is the son of the late Dr. Greg Bahnsen, well known in reformed circles as a scholar, and who is often associated with the theological views of Theonomy.  After David’s father died at a young age, David tells the reader in the book that he lost his best friend while just a young college student. This was a very difficult time in his life, and maybe the most helpful therapy, besides his faith, in dealing with his loss was work.  And work he did!
David is today the founder, Managing Partner, and Chief Investment Officer of the Bahnsen Group, a private wealth management firm managing over $4.5 billion in client assets.  For those familiar with the financial world, he is a regular guest on several national media outlets such as Fox Business, CNBC, Bloomberg, and Fox News.
Because of his love for Christ’s Church, especially as it is expressed in the reformed faith, he deals with some suspect theological assumptions that come from modern pulpits (often unawares) regarding the place of work and retirement in the life of every Christian.
David is very balanced in his book.  By balanced I mean he is always predicting potential objections to his statements and qualifying them so as not to be misinterpreted as one who is rushing off into some extreme view.  I call this the “However Rule.”  I have written enough to know that some of the most important terms in writing are words like however, but, or on the other hand.
Readers can quickly draw errant deductions from a written statement, and a good writer will know when and how to neutralize those false deductions. He will then add qualifying statements.  In other words [yes, I am a writer too], David is very balanced in the book, qualifying his stated views where there might be a temptation to mis-understand him.
So, what are some of the errant suppositions about work that are so prevalent today in the reformed and evangelical world?  I think in answering these questions, it should be noted that he begins in the Book of Genesis and not in the New Testament.  He has what some have termed a Creational Worldview (see Creational Worldview – An Introduction by P. Andrew Sandlin). Let me cover just a few of his themes in the book.

The Prodigal Son in the Basement Playing Video Games

He offers several reasons for this phenomenon including the societal characteristics of a decline in family values, and an increase in both loneliness and isolation. Later, he looks at the labor-participation rate today as compared to that of many years ago.  The conclusion is heart-shattering.
In my own opinion, I believe what the modern church may be missing is that work with purpose may be the best medicine to prevent depression. It may be the best antidote, far exceeding anti-depressants and therapy.  Certainly, work is not the answer to every problem, but we need to reevaluate its critical importance in the arena of mental health. I think the modern church has relegated work to a material necessity which is juxtaposed to what is considered the higher realm of true spirituality. This is contradictory to the purpose of the creation of man in Genesis which was to work in a material world.

Work is Not the Curse in Genesis

After the Fall, childbearing for the woman became very difficult, however, children were not the curse of God but the pain in labor was the curse.  Children are a blessing.  Likewise, after the Fall work became accompanied by the sweat of the brow, thorns, and thistles.  However, work itself was not a curse, but rather the sweat, the thorns, and the thistles were the curse.  Work was given to provide man with purpose, identity, and dignity.  Redemption in Christ restores that purpose given before the Fall.
God created man to first work, not to worship.  Work was the beginning of his worship. Work must not be viewed as a utilitarian instrument (for example, a means to give more to the church), but work itself is a holy ministry toward others in that work is producing goods and services that provide for the needs, comfort, and joy of others.  Again, in my opinion, if the first half of the 4th commandment (working six days) received as much attention as the second half (resting one day), then the kingdom of God would be greatly advanced.

What About the Clergy Work Ethic?

I will not say much about this theme.  Indeed, most pastors are hard-working men, but in some circles, slackness is becoming a problem. The change in church structure often leaves men preaching almost half the time during the week as compared to their ministerial forefathers. The larger the church the greater the temptation.  The title of this chapter in his book is “Pouting Pulpits & Part-time Pastors.”

The Retirement Disaster

David calls retirement a 30-year vacation. For some of us who could not retire until age 65, it could be viewed more as 10-year to15-year vacation. Yes, people do need to slow down as they get older, but to stop working can be a bad as death itself. I could never stop working.  I think I work as much today (in my late 70’s) as I ever did.
Many years ago, there were no retirement plans.  You retire when you died.  Today, work is for the purpose of “getting to the point you do not have to work.” Although the modern world has created many blessings that allow us to live longer and heathier, the loss of older men in the workforce is also the loss of wisdom and mentorship in the workforce.  David believes this is a great loss.

The Problem with the Virtual (Home) Workplace

Although this topic is included as an appendix in the Book, David’s views on working from home as opposed to going to the office are interesting.  He is against it.  You may not agree with him on this, but he makes several good points.
In conclusion, I have only covered a few parts of the main points in his Book. I have not even touched on his excellent analysis of how successful Chirstian men deal with the envy of others, or how a Christian man of wealth may be tempted to wallow in guilt because of his success.  My goal is to just give you enough bait to catch your attention.
To get the rest of the story, I do highly recommend this book.  It would be an excellent source for a Bible Study, especially for men.  Our view of work is very important since we do so much of it.  The book contains much wisdom which David himself has gained over the years as he went from working in a movie theatre at 15 years of age to a multi-billion-dollar financial advisor.  Being raised in the home of a preacher and scholar who was shunned by so many of his own colleagues teaches a son a great deal too. You need to buy the book and work at reading it.
Larry E. Ball is a retired minister in the Presbyterian Church in America and is now a CPA. He lives in Kingsport, Tenn.
Related Posts:

The religion of Americanism teaches us that God’s law is not valid outside of the church; maybe the last six of the Ten Commandments are valid (and even that is considered debatable), but certainly not the first four.  Modern theologians like to divide the ten commandments into parts, as if God has two minds.  We are told that the Law was only given to Israel, and thus today it is only for the visible church.  This comes from both evangelical pulpits and from Civics 101 in public education. There is not much difference between the two.

Americanism is the name I have given to a new dominant religion in our beloved nation.  It is a final reference point for almost every moral and political issue, and it has the endorsement of most all conservative pastors in this country. To challenge this new religion means a quick cancellation, especially in evangelical circles.
This new religion is mostly derived from the First Amendment to the United States Constitution which says that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
The religion of Americanism interprets the First Amendment as guaranteeing the right of every American citizen to say anything they want to say (except a few things like shouting fire in a public place, or racial slurs), to turn art into blasphemy (Christ in a bottle of urine), or to worship any god of their own choosing (including Allah).
It also protects the right of men to express themselves physically as women, the right of BLM to destroy private property in public protests, the right to produce and distribute pornography, and the right for university students to call for genocide.  It protects the right of anyone to burn the American flag.  It protects the right to erect Satanic idols in state capitol buildings.  It protects the rights of Drag Queens to read stories to children in public libraries.  It protects debauchery.  And yet, in this new religion of Americanism, the First Amendment is still considered sacred even by leading evangelicals.
The protection of debauchery was never the intent of our founding fathers. The First Amendment was created to limit the power of the Congress, and not the power of the individual States.  At the time of the adoption of the First Amendment, most states had either officially or unofficially adopted the Christian Faith as the State religion. State legislators could establish an official religion, but Congress could not.  State churches were legal, but a national church was not.  There would be no Church of the United States as there was a Church of England across the pond. Thus, Congress was prohibited from establishing a national church, but States had every right to establish a State Church.  States were respected as sovereign entities. This was a long time ago, but it demonstrates the value of studying history.
The Church of England was the official church in the State of Virginia.  State taxes were used to pay the Anglican clergymen, who alone were allowed to preach in the Commonwealth.  Soon, however, both Baptists and Presbyterians were given the freedom to preach (without going to jail).  The First Amendment became a basis for guaranteeing free speech to all Christian Protestants (not all religions).  The First Amendment was still rightly understood.
However, things have changed.  The First Amendment may soon be used to curtail the free speech of Christians because Christian morals are in direct opposition to the public morals of the day. This is already happening in universities and corporations. Outside the safety of the visible church, employees of both colleges and businesses are walking around on eggshells afraid that they might use the wrong pronoun and put their jobs in jeopardy with a visit from the DEI police.
The problem with the First Amendment as presently interpreted is that it contradicts the First Commandment.  The First Commandment says, “Thou shalt have no other gods before me.” God does not tolerate competition.  A First Amendment that allows for gods other than the God of the Bible to be worshiped is contrary to the First Commandment. The First Commandment also summarizes the other nine Commandments.  Neither does God tolerate decadence.  Under the First Commandment, not only are the worship of all other gods forbidden, but derivative events like gay-pride parades would be prohibited. The riotous destruction of private or public property would be forbidden.  Drag Queens in public would be forbidden. And on and on!
Baptists give strong devotion to the First Amendment because they identify themselves with a history of persecution.  They believe that the First Amendment protects their rights to believe and preach according to their own consciences.  They are big supporters of Americanism.  However, I believe they need to get beyond the Munster cages of the 16th century and realize that with their large numbers in America today, the roles would be reversed in a hypothetical theocracy. The vision of a Baptist Prince is more realistic in our day than a Presbyterian Prince.  However, to be more sensible, I think all of us are all in the same boat now.
More broadly speaking Americanism finds its hope in the United States Constitution.  The only problem with this is that the meaning of the Constitution cannot be predicted anymore.  Whoever thought just fifty years ago that the rights to abortion and homosexual marriage would be discovered in the Constitution?  The Constitution only means what five Supreme Court judges in black robes say what it means. Even as frightening, the United States Congress no longer has any realistic function.  Civil power is now in the hands of either a sitting President or a bureaucracy of unelected college graduates from elite and secular universities. Christians are expected to leave the public square and wait for either death or the rapture, whichever comes first.
Americanism also puts a great amount of faith in democracy, where the people vote to decide who will hold office and thus, and consequently, what will be considered publicly right and wrong in our nation.  However, even that hope now is teetering.  So many people have lost their confidence in the integrity of elections that this tenet of Americanism is dying.
Americanism believes in American exceptionalism. Indeed, we have seen our glory days, but many other nations in the world now view America as the great whore. We are still building on the capital from the past, but decadent immorality has painted us as a prostitute on the world stage. We lost admiration a long time ago. Putin’s Russia or Mao’s China may both be a holy step above us because they have banned homosexual marriage and transgenderism.  Militarism for the sake of securing democracy around the world is now viewed as a failure.  It was a recipe for death, and has only created more enemies than friends.
The religion of Americanism teaches us that God’s law is not valid outside of the church; maybe the last six of the Ten Commandments are valid (and even that is considered debatable), but certainly not the first four.  Modern theologians like to divide the ten commandments into parts, as if God has two minds.  We are told that the Law was only given to Israel, and thus today it is only for the visible church.  This comes from both evangelical pulpits and from Civics 101 in public education. There is not much difference between the two.
The only problem with this is that it is not true.  Paul in Romans 13 says plainly that the civil magistrate is a servant of God and is to promote good and restrain evil.  Paul wrote this while living under a Roman hegemony, looking forward to the day when all nations would be Christianized through the preaching of a gospel that would teach them to obey God’s law, as Jesus had spoken.  Good and evil can only be defined by God’s law—all of it, including the first four commandments.
Our forefathers understood this. They knew that the United Sates would not survive apart from being a Christian nation.  John Adams reflected this when he said that “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people.  It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”  By the word religious, he was referring to Christianity.  Although I believe that the Enlightenment had a major impact on our founding forefathers, they still maintained enough Christian heritage to understand that Christianity must be the foundation of this nation or this nation will perish.
In a Christian nation, foreigners from other nations are welcome to enjoy the blessings of God with us, but they would not be allowed to worship their gods in public within the boundaries of our country. God’s goodness to us might be an avenue for their conversion. What a blessing it would be to preach the gospel to them in such a context.
What am I saying?  I am saying that the First Amendment to the United States Constitution as presently interpreted by most institutions including the church is in direct opposition to the First Commandment.  Yes, this is a radical statement, but we live in radical times when our presuppositions must be reexamined. Yes, it is revolutionary.  But is it true?  That is the question.
Since the dominant religion of America moved from Christianity to Americanism, we are watching the demise of this nation. We are under attack by Cultural Marxism, and the religion of Americanism will not protect Christians.  As a matter of fact, it will be used against them.
Under the guise of the Constitution, we have brought the Middle East and her wars to America.  We dilute our heritage with illegal immigration.  We have substituted a constitutional republic with tyranny.  We have declared that all gods are equal, contrary to the First Commandment of God. We once had a Christian nation, but now we have sanctioned polytheism. God hates polytheism.  He always has.
I know it is too late to do anything about it, save for a biblical revival and reformation, but I do pray that the America I knew as a child will survive.  I’m not calling for a revolution.  I’m only identifying the problems. When future generations ask what went wrong with the American Experiment, I hope they will learn from our mistakes.
Larry E. Ball is a retired minister in the Presbyterian Church in America and is now a CPA. He lives in Kingsport, Tenn.
Related Posts: