Archive through August 27, 2003 Log Out | Topics | Search
Moderators | Edit Profile

Former Adventist Fellowship Forum » ARCHIVED DISCUSSIONS 2 » Law Mongers Unite » Archive through August 27, 2003 « Previous Next »

Author Message
Doug222 (Doug222)
Posted on Thursday, August 14, 2003 - 1:05 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Don't know if you guys have read about this or not. I am sure Adventists must be torn over this, not knowing whether to lament or rejoice. To me, it is a sad commentary and shows the degree of toxic beliefs that are espoused in the name of the Gospel:


Quote:

Ala. justice defies federal court order
Associated Press


The chief justice of the Alabama Supreme Court said Thursday he will not remove a Ten Commandments monument from the state judicial building, defying a federal court order to remove the granite monument.

"I HAVE NO intention of removing the monument," Roy Moore said at a news conference. "This I cannot and will not do."
Moore said he will appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court to stop any removal.

His decision came six days before the Aug. 20 deadline for the 5,300-pound monument to be removed from the building's rotunda, where it is in clear sight of visitors coming in the main entrance.

U.S. District Judge Myron Thompson of Montgomery, who ruled the monument violates the Constitution's ban on government promotion of religion, had said fines of about $5,000 a day would be imposed against the state after the deadline if the monument were not removed.

Moore accused Thompson of a "callous disregard for the people of Alabama" and their tax dollars.

In Pennsylvania on Wednesday, a federal appeals court refused to reconsider a ruling that allowed a decades-old Ten Commandments plaque to remain on the facade of a courthouse in suburban Philadelphia.

A three-judge panel of the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel had ruled in June that the 1920 plaque did not constitute an official endorsement of religion because county commissioners who wanted to keep it were motivated by historic preservation. The full court on Wednesday unanimously refused to reconsider that ruling.




It is amazing to me that this Judge Roy Moore is not only still in office, but is revered by many from the religious right.

Doug
Chris (Chris)
Posted on Thursday, August 14, 2003 - 4:30 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Doug,
Strangely enough, I find myself torn by this case (and others like it as well). On the one hand, I do NOT believe that the decalogue is God's ultimate law. To the contrary I believe it was the basis of the covenant made with the Israelites which has now been fulfilled by Christ and surpassed by the New Covenant. On the other hand, I find myself wanting to root for anyone who will stand up for what (to the best of their understanding) they believe to be the precepts of God and the teaching of the Bible. In an increasingly secular society, which is ever more hostile to Christianity, I can't help but admire someone who says, "This is what I stand for. I cannot do otherwise". It's just too bad that to root for someone with a backbone rooted in Judeo-Christian tradition we would also have to root for the preservation of a fulfilled law. I really have mixed feelings.
Chris
Colleentinker (Colleentinker)
Posted on Thursday, August 14, 2003 - 4:58 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I share your mixed feelings, Chris. I also see the SDA dilemma Doug mentioned. It's almost funny, in a wry sort of way. Adventists uphold the law, but they also champion "separation of church and state" to the extent that they will defend the rights of wiccans, Buddhists, or any other special interest group to teach their beliefs in schools as a means of protecting their OWN freedom to speak and worship.

I so well remember the mental gymnastics I used to go through when I felt outraged at certain groups gaining more and more public voice while simultaneously feeling I had to defend them so I could defend my Sabbath worship if it came to a show down.

Isn't it odd how relative right and wrong looked from the other side of the Adventist fence? We thought we were very clear on right and wrong: Sabbath is right, Sunday is wrong. Yet we could defend freedom for homosexual agendas, new age philosophies, etc. while defending the "rights" of government to ban prayer in schools, nativity scenes in public places, etc--all for the purpose of protecting Sabbath in the case of Sunday laws!

One thing I've noticed about knowing Jesus and taking the Bible seriously is that it's much easier to make moral judgments and not to fear public opinion.

I really am so thankful for Jesus!

Colleen
Cindy (Cindy)
Posted on Thursday, August 14, 2003 - 5:08 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I guess to me it's just not enough to push "The 10 Commandments" without pointing to Jesus Christ as its' ONLY hope of actually living it out...

LAW only just brings rebelliousness or despair.

JESUS needs to be proclaimed as well and that is something the public posting of "The 10 Commandments" makes me very wary of...

Can't some additional words of Christs' work for us be included?

How about John 3:16?

or "Come to Me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest....."

or "and Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life".

At least some synopsis of our utter inability to keep the 10 Commandments without the Holy Spirit given to us in accepting Jesus. And then, of course, they are never again our focal point.

Grace always,
Cindy
Doug222 (Doug222)
Posted on Thursday, August 14, 2003 - 5:36 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Cindy,
you said:

Quote:

I guess to me it's just not enough to push "The 10 Commandments" without pointing to Jesus Christ as its' ONLY hope of actually living it out...

LAW only just brings rebelliousness or despair.




That is just the problem that I have with the posting of the ten commandments--and more specifically those who push for the posting of the commandments in public places. The underlying statement that adherence to these 10 precepts will cure society's ills. The problem is that these precepts have the ability to produce nothing but death. Even if one were able to order their life in complete conformity with them, they would be morally alive, but still spiritually dead. The problem is not our external behaviors, it is the condition of our hearts. Lawkeeping without a change of heart is still rooted in the same selfish motives that caused us to be lawbreakers in the first place. Its a false Gospel.

As you said, Christ needs to be proclaimed, and it is not the state's role to do that. The church (the unversal body)has abdigated far too many of its responsibilities to the state, now it wants to place this responsibility there too.

My biggest concern is with the false premise that Christians have been called to condemn all that is sinful and unrightous in our society. That mindset produces self-righteous angry Christians. The world does not need more angry Christians. What it needs is Christians who, having become aware of their utter sinfulness are willing to offer life, not condemnation.

That's what grace is all about, and is why I term any other gospel (no matter how well intended) a toxic faith.

Doug
Cindy (Cindy)
Posted on Thursday, August 14, 2003 - 8:36 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I'm definitely on your wave length, Doug!

Why such a push for a public proclamation (banners, statues, etc.) of the Ministry Of Death?

And yes, weren't those great "Law-keepers", the Pharisees, quite morally upright?

And yet they repeatedly remained spiritually dead to Jesus' claims to come to HIM for rest, believe in HIM for eternal life, and to follow HIM always to gain their true identity...a child of God!

Grace always,
Cindy
Gatororeo7 (Gatororeo7)
Posted on Friday, August 15, 2003 - 7:00 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Cindy,

Your comments hit right on with my thinking from the past few days.

Adventism is a system which in my opinion robs true believers in Jesus Christ of the wonderful inheritance promised to them. Regardless of what the Bible says about believers, Adventism tells believers that this identity in Christ is impossible apart from lawkeeping (perfect lawkeeping at that).

I could probably elaborate at great length concerning this, but think about it this way. In the investigative judgment, Adventists teach that Christ is examining our records to see if we are worthy of salvation. Salvation is not a done deal according to this theory. In addition, the forgiveness of our sins cannot be completed in the IJ until the completion of the investigation. So forgiveness is denied the believer as well.

The believer's plight in Adventism is that regardless of how much he believes in Christ, Adventism will always tell him that isn't enough. Adventism will always tell a person that until he keeps the law perfectly, his very salvation, and in turn his identity, is in jeopardy.
Colleentinker (Colleentinker)
Posted on Friday, August 15, 2003 - 8:47 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

So true, Joel.

No matter how many "right words" we say about Jesus, if we twist the meaning of Scripture we believe falsehood about God. I think this is the subtlety that most Christians don't understand about Adventism and even about other systems of belief as well. (Catholocism, for instance, also twists scripture.)

We can say Jesus is the only way to God, accept Jesus and you will be saved, Jesus is God, etc., but if you reinterpret scripture and rob the gospel of its power and truth, you end up believing falsehood about God.

Two of the major marks of a cult are the denial of Jesus' divinity and salvation depending on something other than Jesus' finished work. Adventists (for example) say Jesus is fully God, and belief in Jesus is the only thing necessary for salvation. Consequently, they convince the Christian world that they have orthodox beliefs.

Privately, however, they link all sorts of things to their stated beliefs including lawkeeping and the quiet but powerful view that Jesus and Satan are somehow on a level playing field fighting to win. This belief (commonly called the Great Controversy!) diminishes Jesus' identity as fully God and Lord over all created beings. He becomes, essentially, less powerful than the Father and a sort-of demi-god instead of Lord of all.

In practice, Adventists have truly cultic beliefs about Jesus and salvation, but because they say the right words, outsiders have trouble seeing that fact. This reality makes it hard for "formers" when they go into many Christian churches because their new brothers and sisters in Christ don't understand Adventists' deep need to learn to study the Bible and to re-learn the doctrines which were tainted.

I believe that God wants to work through those of us who have left deceptive churches or have had intimate association with such beliefs. We are sensitive in ways that others are not to the subtle perversions of doctrine and faith that people from many different religious backgrounds face. We know how words can mean things to people that are not obvious to the uninitiated listener.

The farther I get from Adventism, the more dangerous it looks. Anywhere that scripture is not honored as God's inerreant word, people develop beliefs and practices that are immoral and false, and those churches lose the blessing and power of the Spirit.

I praise God for giving us his word.

Colleen
Cindy (Cindy)
Posted on Monday, August 18, 2003 - 8:27 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Did anyone see the rally on the Alabama State House steps Saturday? ... very much in favor of the "Ten Commandment" Judge Roy Moore? My husband and I just saw it on the "C-Span" channel. Jerry Falwell & Alan Keyes also speaking along with the Judge. Very interesting.

Are there ANY Christian leaders out there speaking of JESUS' fullfillment of these commandments and Christians now being led by the Holy Spirit and NOT under the LAW?

The current time and issue at hand would be a great opportunity for the true gospel to be preached. Preach the LAW, only more strongly! More far-reaching into ones' heart and even motives...

Then proclaim JESUS as our ONLY hope for ever living as righteous children of God.

Grace always,
Cindy
Freeatlast (Freeatlast)
Posted on Tuesday, August 19, 2003 - 8:52 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

AMEN! The only real solution to America's (and the world's) problems is for each individual to be renewed in heart and mind by Jesus Christ who is the living, breathing Law.

I applaud Judge Moore's stubbornness, but I fear his zeal is not based on knowledge. Does he "remember to keep the Sabbath day holy"??? Doubtful any of the folks at the rally do either (although I suspect this is a cause the SDA's would enthusiastically back - perhaps there were a few of them there. No WAIT! It was the Sabbath day...)

To the backers of the Ten Commandments in schools, courthouses, and other public places: Put up or shut up. Either keep the ten yourself (along with all the Law of Moses), or acknowledge that they were fulfilled in Jesus Christ. Take down the monument and put up a statue of the bleeding, suffering, crucified Christ - along with a plaque giving the gospel in a paragraph.

I can't help but wonder how many of us would show up to rally against the removal of that...?

Our country needs Jesus! Our world needs Jesus! Always has, always will...
Doug222 (Doug222)
Posted on Tuesday, August 19, 2003 - 9:00 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Amen Freeatlast. Now that's the kind of stubborness that I could applaud. Funny thing, I have not heard one mention of the Gospel in all of this furor over the commandment plaque. I think that is very telling. Even if an angel from heaven (or an old stubborn Judge) should preach a Gospel other than that which the Apostles preached (which is really no gospel at all), let him be accursed.

Doug
Thomas1 (Thomas1)
Posted on Tuesday, August 19, 2003 - 9:34 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Allow me to take a different approach. Paul stated that the purpose of the law was to lead us to Jesus. That it is indeed the "tutor" until faith should come. In order to tutor, it needs to be known.

I say support the judge. Keep the momuments and displays. Fight to keep them, even. Then when we are asked "what's the big deal?", tell them the "rest of the story". Explain the perfection of God and the demands of His law. Explain our helplessness in keeping it. Then explain HOW we cn receive the gift of perfect law keeping, in Jesus and through Him alone.

This may as close as we will ever come to the "world" giving us an opportunity. Although I agree completely wih the thoughts expressed, they have been my thoughts through this controversy, I just began to see that there really is another side of the story. The Church has never been successful when it has been "aided" by the state. This is a golden opportunity, presented by the very people who want to deny us the opportunity, to preach the Gospel in the light of current events.

Just another thought, as I stand awe struck, gazing at the cross!

In His Grace!
<><
Thomas
Freeatlast (Freeatlast)
Posted on Tuesday, August 19, 2003 - 9:47 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Thomas, you're right. Whatever it takes to get the message of Jesus out! I just fear that the zealots are misguided, I don't expect to hear much about Jesus in the fray to come...
Doug222 (Doug222)
Posted on Tuesday, August 19, 2003 - 9:51 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I understand your point Thomas, but I would have to wonder how many people would never hear, "the rest of the story." It leaves people with a distorted picture of our awesome God--the same one I was provided for over 40 years. I just can't support putting anyone else under that same bondage. It is for freedom that I was set free. I refuse to allow my self (or anyone else) to be placed back under a yoke of salvery. I say give them the whole Gospel uncut and undiluted.

Doug
Thomas1 (Thomas1)
Posted on Tuesday, August 19, 2003 - 12:06 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Then it is OUR business to present "the rest of the story" to everyone around us. Fact is without these types of stories in the news almost daily, there really is little else that we can usee so clearly to tell the good old story of Jesus and His love. There are Christian symbols everywhere. Crosses on most churches, Crosses on necklaces, I wear one on the collar of my shirt. Fish on cars all over the roads. One can scarcely go anywhere without seeing a Christian symbol. People see them and never even realize what they are looking at. They blend into the background because they are so commonplace. This is something that the MEDIA is talking about. The ACLU and all the liberal machinery is talking about it and damning it as an infringement of "civil rights". Many who have never heard of a bible or recognized the significance of the Cross are listening and wondering "what's the big deal?"

Once in a while, God gives us a burst of opportunity. Could this be such an opportunity? Maybe instead of pointing thumbs down, we should be looking for ways to exploit it for Jesus!

<><]
Thomas
Colleentinker (Colleentinker)
Posted on Tuesday, August 19, 2003 - 6:59 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I'm quite convinced that Christianity today resembles 1st centruy Judaism quite a lot. Either "Christians" are liberal and "inclusive" (which translates into being practically not Christian), or they are quite narrow and rigid in their demands of how people should live and of what's right for society.

Standing for Jesus and being known by him are unpopular positions because it's neiher tolerant in the current sense of the word not is it rigid. It does, however, have a strong drive for accountability and truth. Those things transcend "rights". In fact, the Bible never says God's people have any rights at all--except the right to become children of God. (John 1:13)

In fighting for their religious rights, people often lose sight of the God behind their religion. The Ten Commandments becomes another divisive focal point much like abortion and prayer in public places. I think when we fight for our right to practice something instead of fighting the fight of faith and letting our personal rights be God's business, we lose the power Jesus promised his people. In a way, we become what we hate.

I do believe that times like this should be incentives to proclaim Jesus. It is so unfortunate when Christians beome embroiled in legal fights for their rights instead of surrendering their rights to God and allowing Him to reveal himself through their lives.

Colleen
Doug222 (Doug222)
Posted on Thursday, August 21, 2003 - 3:01 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Here is the latest update. I find this so ironic, because the very momument that Judge Moore and his supporters are defending has the following inscribed on it:


Quote:

Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth




Do not be deceived. This has nothing to do with edifying or lifting up God. Read some of the quotes that I have boldfaced in the following article. Colleen is so right when she says that "in fighting for their religious rights, people often lose sight of the God behind their religion."

What is the scriptural principle that supporters are being asked to lay down their life for? This is getting scary.


Quote:

Alabama justices order removal of monument
MSNBC staff and wire reports


The eight associate justices of the Alabama Supreme Court on Thursday overruled Chief Justice Roy Moore and directed that a Ten Commandments monument be removed from the public area of the state Judicial Building in compliance with a federal court order. But Moore's supporters vowed to prevent workers from removing the 5,300-pound granite marker and called on all "Christian people who love God" to come to Montgomery and join their blockade.

DESPITE THE ORDER, issued Thursday morning by the associate justices, the monument remained on view inside the building, and it remained unclear how the escalating dispute over whether the monument violates the U.S. Constitution's ban on government promotion of religion would play out.
The associate justices' order instructed the building's manager to "take all steps necessary to comply (with the federal court order) ... as soon as practicable," said Senior Associate Justice Gorman Houston.

Alabama Attorney General Bill Pryor indicated that the court might try to avoid a confrontation with the protesters by moving it to a private room rather than taking it out of the building.

But the protesters said they would block access to the building to prevent workers from bringing in tools necessary to move the slab.

PROTESTERS VOW TO BLOCK ACCESS
"We are committed to peacefully and prayerfully seeing that this monument is not taken out," said the Rev. Patrick Mahoney of the Washington, D.C.-based Christian Defense Coalition.

Mahoney also called for others who support the public display of the commandments to join the approximately three dozen protesters on the steps of the courthouse early Thursday.

"We are calling for Christian people who love God ... to come to Montgomery, Ala.," Mahoney said.

"As long as we are here this monument is not coming out."

At issue in the case is U.S. District Judge Myron Thompson's ruling that the monument violates the constitution's ban on government establishment of religion and must be removed from its public place in the rotunda. He had set Thursday as his deadline, but Moore said he would not have the monument moved.

The U.S. Supreme Court rejected Moore's emergency plea for a stay late Wednesday afternoon, declining for the time being to be drawn into the dispute.

In the seven-page order calling for the monument to be moved, the court's associate justices wrote that they were "bound by solemn oath to follow the law, whether they agree or disagree with it."

The monument was walled off from public view from 6:30 to 9:30 a.m. -- apparently on the order of the associate justices -- as Thompson's deadline passed for the marker to be out of public sight, but the plywood partition was then removed without explanation.

The associate justices' order was issued about 10 a.m.

Moore's spokesman, Tom Parker, said the chief justice was out of town for a family funeral but decided to return to Montgomery when he learned the monument had been walled from public view. Moore scheduled a 3:30 p.m. ET news conference to discuss Thursday's turn of events.

CHIEF JUSTICE ISSUES STATEMENT
Beforehand, in a statement issued by Parker, he said, "This is an example of what is happening in this country: the acknowledgment of God as the moral foundation of law in this nation is being hidden from us."

Attorney Ayesha Khan, an attorney for the plaintiffs fighting to get the monument removed, said the associate justices' decision "just shows what an extremist Roy Moore is, that all eight of the other justices are refusing to stand with him."

Earlier, another plaintiffs' attorney, Richard Cohen, said a motion was filed with Thompson asking that Moore be held in contempt. It was not immediately clear if the associate justices' action would make the motion moot. Thompson, who had threatened to fine the state $5,000 a day, had not been expected to take up the matter until Friday.

Pryor, the Alabama attorney general, said he filed notice with Thompson indicating that the monument would be moved under the associate justices' order, and expressed hope that the action would dissuade the federal judge from imposing fines.

Moore's supporters have been on the steps of the building since Wednesday, singing and praying. Some who entered the rotunda and refused to leave voluntarily were were removed in handcuffs.

21 PROTESTERS ARRESTED
A total of 21 protesters were arrested and taken to the Montgomery County Jail, where they were charged with trespassing. Most were released on their recognizance.

Earlier Wednesday evening, Patrick Mahoney, director of the Christian Defense Coalition, asked who was willing to lay down in front of the doors to keep the monument inside. Most raised their hands.

Former presidential candidate Alan Keyes then delivered a fiery speech, saying the efforts of courts and government to stifle religion must end.

"This must end or freedom will end with it," Keyes said. "No longer can we tolerate this crime that is being done against our movement for almighty God."

It remained unclear when or if the monument would be removed.

Thompson was not expected to take action before Friday. He has threatened $5,000-a-day fines against the state if his deadline was ignored. Those fines could double after the first week.

Attorneys who sued to remove the monument said they expect to file a contempt of court petition against Moore that Thompson may consider in a conference call Friday, setting the stage for fines.

"It's time for Roy's rock to roll," said Ayesha Khan, an attorney for Americans United for Separation of Church and State, one of the groups.

Moore, who installed the monument in the rotunda of the judicial building two years ago in the middle of the night, said in a statement that he does not consider the case over and pointed out that he still plans to appeal to the Supreme Court on the merits of the case.

JUDGE VOWED TO FIGHT ON
"The U.S. Supreme Court's denial of a stay today will not deter me from continuing to fight for the right of our state to acknowledge God as the moral foundation of our law," Moore said in a statement read by his spokesman hours before the deadline to remove the monument.

Moore's statement, read to reporters outside after the court building closed, said he would next ask the U.S. high court "for an appeal on the merits" in the case.

"I expect that the court will vindicate the rule of law regarding the acknowledgment of God in our state," it added.

Moore, the elected chief justice of Alabama's highest court, has said he regards the Commandments as a symbol of the Judeo-Christian foundation of U.S. law.

The Supreme Court has never ruled on the constitutionality of such indoor and outdoor government displays. In 1980, the court barred Ten Commandments from classroom walls in public schools.

The justices' refusal to intervene was not a surprise. An appeals court had twice refused to give Moore a stay.

"It's not like somebody's about to face execution, if the court doesn't enter a stay the person will be dead and the appeal will be moot," said David Frederick, a Washington attorney who specializes in Supreme Court practice. "If the Supreme Court were to decide it's constitutional, it can always be put back."


Cindy (Cindy)
Posted on Thursday, August 21, 2003 - 9:20 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Doug,
It is as you say, very ironic the way Judge Roy and his supporters are going to such lengths with this monument!

And I agree with you that is is rather scary as to what they are really pushing...

Maybe I've missed it, but I haven't heard the message of the cross in this...the message Paul told the Corinthians he received and passed on to them

"as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day..."

It's not that the "Ten Commandments" are faulty...the world needs to know its' sinful condition and hopelesness without God...but it is that they are INCOMPLETE without an explanation of CHRIST CRUCIFIED for us!

Have you heard anyone give an explanation of the 4th Commandment of "remembering the Sabbath Day"?

Its' meaning and wonderful symbolism of our REST in JESUS' work for us?

The "sign" of the Old Covenant that has now been fulfilled in the "sign" of the New Covenant, Jesus!

And where in all of this is the most important "commandment" of all?

...to "believe on the Lord Jesus Christ".

I'm thinking this may be showing even more the significance of JESUS as the One who, as Simeons' blessing to Mary prophesied, was destined

"to be a sign that will be spoken against, so that the thoughts of many hearts will be revealed"..(Luke 2:34 & 35).

It seems that "Christ crucified" is still a "stumbling block" to Jews and "foolishness" to Gentiles..." (I Corinthians 1:23)

Grace always,
Cindy
Colleentinker (Colleentinker)
Posted on Friday, August 22, 2003 - 2:13 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Cindy, what a great post! You're absolutely right; Jesus is still a stumbling block and foolishness to those whose hearts are veiled.

Doug, the quotes above sound like the second chapter in a book of "morality" gone awry; it reminds me of people killing doctors to protest abortion.

I think it's dangerous to have any "cause" except Jesus. He can give us the work He wants to do through us, and he can make sure it happens the way he wants it to happen. But if we're trying to "push" anything besides knowing Christ, we're dancing with idolatry.

Colleen
Thomas1 (Thomas1)
Posted on Wednesday, August 27, 2003 - 6:09 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I just ran accross this editorial on the "Commandments" issue. It has been discussed brfore, but I thought another look might be of interest. Rather long, but worth a read. This was released in the Baptist Press News Service, so is the view of Southern Baptists. This view is from a "legal/Religious Liberty" viewpoint, not one of theology.

The Battle of Montgomery:
Where should Christians stand?
By R. Albert Mohler Jr.


LOUISVILLE, Ky. (BP)--Judge Roy Moore, Alabama's now-suspended chief justice, has at least two major weapons in his arsenal as he fights the
Battle of Montgomery -- a set of powerful arguments and all the right enemies. What began as a skirmish in the nation's culture war has now
expanded into a full-blown battle, with both sides seemingly prepared to dig trenches and fight to the finish.

The controversy began long before Moore was elected the state's chief jurist in 2000. During his days as a circuit court judge in Gadsden,
Moore had placed a plaque listing the Ten Commandments in his courtroom. A legal challenge led to a court order requiring Judge Moore to remove the Ten Commandments. The judge refused and only the intervention of the governor prevented further action.

Alabamians knew Judge Moore and his intentions when they elected him to the state's highest judicial office three years ago. As the judge told Fox News' Sean Hannity, "They knew what they were electing." Two years ago, Chief Justice Moore had a 5,300-pound monument featuring the Ten Commandments placed in the rotunda of the state's judicial building. Predictably, groups promoting the secular agenda sued to have the
monument removed.

Nine months ago, the Federal District Court ordered the removal of the monument. Judge Myron Thompson ruled that the monument is "nothing more
than an obtrusive year-round religious display." After months of legal maneuvering and appeals, the order now has been enforced.

Anticipating this showdown, Chief Justice Moore declared that he would not -- indeed could not -- remove the monument or comply with the judge's order, because to do so would be to violate Alabama's state constitution, which acknowledges "Almighty God." On Aug. 22, the
state's Judicial Inquiry Commission suspended the chief justice from his duties, finding him guilty of disobeying a lawful order from the federal court. Unless the state's Court of the Judiciary finds otherwise, Chief Justice Moore is almost certain to be removed from office.

The state -- with the whole nation watching -- is locked in a showdown between the judge's supporters and the authority responsible for
removing the monument. The chief's fellow justices and the state's attorney general did not defy the order. Several prominent Christian
leaders have jumped to Judge Moore's defense. Some, like Focus on the Family founder Dr. James Dobson, warn that the nation stands at "a
turning point, a pivotal point in the history of this country." Furthermore, he said, "There are times when you have to respond to a higher law."

Others, including Dr. Richard D. Land of the Southern Baptist Convention's Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission and Jay Sekulow of the American Center for Law and Justice, argue that Chief Justice Moore is harming the cause of religious liberty and the rule of law by having
defied a lawful court order. As Land explains, "If we disagree with a judicial interpretation of the law [which makes it the law until it is changed] ... then we must change the judges and, if necessary, change the laws."

Given the media frenzy and public confusion over this controversy, serious Christians had better think hard and think fast before we find ourselves in a very public debacle. We had also better pay close attention to our arguments, for they are sure to be turned against us if we are careless. With so much at stake, let's try to think carefully as we review the critical issues.

First, Chief Justice Moore is certainly correct in his insistence that the Ten Commandments monument is fully constitutional. Nothing in the
First Amendment touches even remotely on this issue, and the founders would certainly be flabbergasted to think that a federal judge would
find such a display unconstitutional. Judge Moore is absolutely right in asserting that the Ten Commandments have long been acknowledged --
even by the courts -- as the foundation of our legal system and its moral precepts. After all, the Ten Commandments are inscribed on the wall of the U.S. Supreme Court -- at least for now.

Second, the groups behind the federal lawsuit are a rogue's gallery of secularists, including the American Civil Liberties Union (Alabama chapter) and Americans United for Separation of Church and State. The ACLU is notorious for its determination to purge the public square of
any Christian reference. The Americans United organization is, if anything, perhaps more extreme in its secularist agenda. Both groups
are zealously committed to a secular vision for America and oppose everything from voluntary student-led prayer at school sporting events
to the presence of any religious symbol on public property. A quick look at these opponents tilts the argument significantly in Judge
Moore's favor.

Third, James Dobson's warning that we stand at a crucially important moment is well taken. The secular tide threatens to deny history, distort the laws, rob believers of their freedoms, and push the nation into a brave new world of secularism -- with all vestiges of authentic
Christianity removed from public view and safely restricted to private settings. Let's call this what it is. The secularists hate the Ten
Commandments because the authority of the law eventually depends upon a divine authority, or all morality is absolutely relative and endlessly
negotiable. The Ten Commandments remind us that morality is not relative. This explains the secularists' hatred of the monument.

Fourth, Richard Land and Jay Sekulow have the rule of law on their side, and years of experience defending Christian liberty under their belts. Christians cannot turn to the courts when we want rescue and then disobey the same courts when we lose. Chief Justice Moore is not
helping his case -- or the cause of religious liberty -- by having refused to obey a lawful order of the court. His arguments fail to
sustain his refusal to obey the order. It is by no means clear that his obedience of this order would in any way imply that he, or the state of
Alabama, is failing to recognize the authority of Almighty God. Did the state fail in this acknowledgment for all those years before Judge
Moore established his monument? Land and Sekulow have put themselves in the line of fire in this controversy -- and they are right.

Fifth, Judge Moore has not yet exhausted all the legal avenues of appeal open to him. He would be in a much stronger legal and moral position if he had obeyed the order of the federal court and then appealed by every means available. Then -- and only then -- would Christian civil disobedience be justified. Even then, civil
disobedience would not be automatic.

Sixth, Chief Justice Moore and his stalwart defenders had better think long and hard about the justification for Christian civil disobedience. The Apostle Paul points to the Christian's responsibility to obey the
magistrate as a critical function of Christian witness (see Romans 13). Similarly, Peter called for Christians to "Keep your behavior excellent
among the Gentiles, so that in the thing in which they slander you as evildoers, they may on account of your good deeds, as they observe
them, glorify God in the day of visitation" (1 Peter 2:12). Let's remember that Peter and Paul addressed their admonitions to Christians
living under the pagan rule of Rome. We cannot possibly wiggle out of these words in the context of contemporary America. Or can we?

For centuries, Christians have argued that civil disobedience is lawful only in defense of human life, Christian witness and Christian ministry. Christians were willing to die -- and countless Christians have been martyred -- because they would not bend the knee to Caesar (or Stalin, or Mao, or Castro, or the Taliban) and deny Christ.
Christians in Nazi Germany risked their lives to save Jews. Christian pastors languish in jails around the world even today because they will
not cease preaching the Gospel. No serious Christian would doubt their justification to resist the regime and disobey its laws. We do follow a higher law than the laws of men -- but only when to do otherwise is to deny the faith or allow the innocent to die.

We must support and defend the right of the State of Alabama -- or any other state -- to erect a monument featuring the Ten Commandments. Judge Moore is right in his insistence that his monument is lawful. He should press that case in every court until all appeals have been exhausted. But he should also obey lawful orders of the federal courts until that point is reached. Even if he ultimately loses at the U.S.
Supreme Court, we should work through the democratic process to remove the judges and reassert legal sanity.

Otherwise, we are effectively arguing that the American system of government is completely corrupted, and that no remedy can be found
through the legitimate political process. Those who are ready to make that case should take full measure of what they are proposing. I know of no responsible Christian leader who is even close to making that argument. We are indeed living in a season of peril for our nation. The federal courts have twisted the Constitution to push a radical social and moral revolution. This is why concerned Christians should push for the confirmation of federal judges who will uphold the rule of law -- and the original meaning of the Constitution. But we cannot simultaneously deny the courts' authority and seek to correct their direction.

Seventh, we must learn to choose our battles wisely. The court-ordered removal of Alabama's Ten Commandments monument is a national tragedy
and a travesty of law. But thoughtful and responsible Christian leaders must ponder whether this is the place to take our stand in a court-
defying, go-for-broke effort. The recovery of a culture requires the stewardship of strategy as well as firmness of conviction.

Eighth, we should seize this moment as an opportunity to awaken the conscience of the American people to the peril we face. Unless the
direction of the federal courts is corrected, religious liberty will be negotiated into nothingness. Courts and legislative bodies at every level threaten basic religious liberties and precious freedoms. The secularists really do want to expunge Christianity from the public
square. We must educate Christians to engage the culture and the political system, or it will one day be too late.

Ninth, Christians of deep conviction must learn that we will at times disagree over tactics while standing united in a strategy to defend religious liberty and Christian witness. No one has motivated more Christians to engage these issues than has James Dobson. We all stand in his debt. Richard Land has transformed the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission of the SBC into a trusted and powerful voice for righteousness. Jay Sekulow has represented us all before the highest
courts of the land as he has won many of the most important victories for religious liberty and the sanctity of human life in our times. This
is not a time for division, but for unity.

Last, we must pray for Chief Justice Roy Moore as he sets the course for how he will deal with this crisis in the future. He brought this case to national prominence because he is a man of deep Christian character, conviction and principles. May God grant him wisdom to lead us out of this crisis in keeping with those same principles.

R. Albert Mohler Jr. is president of Southern Baptist Theological
Seminary in Louisville, Ky.

Topics | Last Day | Last Week | Tree View | Search | Help/Instructions | Program Credits Administration