Sermon Tone Analysis

| *Political Polytheism* |

|   */ \\ *Brian M. Schwertley*/* |

|    |

 

| */Introduction/* |

| As the second millennium comes to a close the issue of civil government has once again become a matter of serious debate among Christians.

The reasons for this increased interest are manifold.

One reason is the rise of the theonomy or Christian Reconstruction movement in the 1970’s.

The writings of R. J. Rushdoony, Gary North, Greg Bahnsen and others have impacted the small Reformed conservative denominations.

Concurrent with the rise of the theonomic movement has been the rise of the “Christian Right.”

The rise of secular humanism as the dominant worldview among modern nations and the terrifying effects this worldview change have had upon culture and society have awakened many evangelicals from their pietistic slumber.

That many believers are finally fed up with what is going on in society and are willing to do something about it is commendable.

However, the fact that conservative Christians are involved in a type of spiritual-political and cultural warfare raises some important questions.

What exactly is the ultimate goal that Christians are fighting for?

Are they attempting to turn the clock back to 1952,1 or 1789?

If Christians become the majority in society should they establish an explicitly Christian state or should they keep the current system and just remove some of the more repulsive abuses (e.g., abortion, homosexuality, pornography, etc.)?

Should Christians focus on implementing the moral principles of the second table of the law while ignoring the first table?

|

|      The vast majority of evangelicals are basically in favor of keeping the current system of religious pluralism while eliminating some of the disgusting by-products of secular humanism.

They regard the U.S. Constitution as practically on a par with Scripture.

Thus, they want to keep the founding fathers’ idea of religious liberty intact, yet move society away from a 1960’s counter culture paradigm back toward a Lawrence Welk paradigm.

They want the political realm to remain basically secular yet with a strong influence from the second table of the law.

They want a nation that is /vaguely/ Christian.

When it comes to the first table of the law, the civil magistrate should not favor orthodox Christianity over Buddhism, Hinduism, Animism, Romanism, Satanism, Mormonism, and so on.

This concept of religious pluralism has rightly been called “political polytheism.”2

According to this view the State should remain neutral with regard to religion.

It should never favor one religious group or creed above another.

It should seek to the best of its ability to balance all the conflicting viewpoints.

It should teach tolerance toward all religions and all worldviews.

After all, isn’t that what America is all about?

|

|      The purpose of this essay will be to prove that the dominant evangelical position is both irrational and unbiblical.

Professing Christians do not have the biblical option of giving Jesus Christ lip service as King of kings and Lord of lords while at the same time refusing to apply His most foundational laws toward the civil government.

National repentance and reformation must involve all ten commandments.

To think that God will bless a nation that punishes homosexuals yet countenances idolatry and Sabbath desecration is a gross delusion.

To think that a lasting reformation of society can occur on the shifting sand of a vague notion of old-fashioned family values is absurd.

To think that America can be a Christian nation without explicitly acknowledging Christ as King over all kings and Lord over all lords in the constitution, legislatures and courts is ludicrous.

|

|      The Bible teaches that every nation has a moral obligation to submit to the authority of Jesus Christ and His law.

An examination of God’s law, the prophets, the Psalms and the New Testament will prove that political polytheism is immoral.

It is an idea that Christians must reject.

|

 

| \\ */The First Commandment Applies To All Men and All Nations/* |

| The commandment that precedes all other commandments foundationally is the first commandment, “You shall have no other gods before Me” (Ex.

20:3; Dt. 5:7).

The God of Israel is the only God.

He alone is the source of created reality, meaning and ethics.

His declared will is absolutely binding on all men and all nations for all time.

The God who exists demands absolute loyalty, allegiance and obedience.

All men and nations live and function in a universe, not a multiverse.

“God’s order is absolute and absolutely binding on men and nations.”3

To argue that a nation can be a Christian nation while permitting the open worship and propagation of false religions is a repudiation of the first commandment.

There is only one God-Jehovah.

To permit the open worship of Baal, Marduk, Amon-Re, Krishna, etc. is to strike at the very root of God’s law order for society.

The Bible does not teach that God is one among many gods, or, even first among gods, but the only God.

The first commandment was given into a world full of polytheism and idolatry.

“A fundamental purpose of the Mosaic polity was the abolition of idolatrous worship, and the substitution in its place, and the maintenance, of true religion in the world.”4

|

|      Most Christians would object to the statement that religious pluralism is an explicit rejection of the first commandment.

They would argue that first table commandments were given to the covenant people and do not necessarily apply to heathen nations.

It is true that the ten commandments were given to Israel after their deliverance from Egypt.

However, there is abundant evidence that God requires all nations to follow all His moral precepts—especially the first commandment.

|

|      In Deuteronomy 4:5-8 it says that Israel was to be an example to the pagan nations around them.

If Israel was obedient to God’s law, the surrounding nations would acknowledge the wisdom of Israel, Israel’s close relationship to Jehovah, and the superiority of God’s law.

The Israelites were to be salt and light to the surrounding nations.

They were to showcase God’s law to pagan cultures and societies through obedience.

Israel was to serve as a paradigm of covenant faithfulness to the one true God.

The purpose of all this was not just so the heathen nations would see certain social benefits of the second table of the law but that the superiority of the /Lawgiver/ would be clearly set forth.

To argue that heathen nations would acknowledge the justness and superiority of Jehovah’s law and the blessedness of Israel’s close relationship to Jehovah while still rejecting Jehovah and serving idols is absurd.

Although the spiritual transformation of pagan nations would have to wait until the coming of Jesus Christ (because of Israel’s apostasy and Satan’s deceptive power over the nations) the message of Deuteronomy 4:5-8 cannot be ignored.

Pagan nations should acknowledge and obey the one true God—Jehovah.

|

|      Not only is political polytheism a rejection of the first commandment in the political and judicial life of a nation, but it also is an explicit denial of the moral-civil case laws set up to protect a God-honoring nation.

In Deuteronomy 13:1-18, false prophets, seducers to idolatry, and cities given over to idolatry are all condemned to death.

“It should be noted that Deuteronomy 13:5-18 does not call for the death penalty for unbelief or heresy.

It condemns false prophets (vv.

1-5) who seek to lead the people, with signs and wonders, into idolatry.

It does condemn individuals who secretly try to start a movement into idolatry (vv.

6-11).

It does condemn cities which establish another religion and subvert the law-order of the nation (vv.

13-18), and this condemnation must be enforced by man to turn away the judgment of God (vs.

17).”5

A nation that becomes an explicitly Christian nation, that covenants with God and adopts His law-order cannot permit the open, systematic subversion of that law order.

It cannot permit treason toward Jehovah.

When religious leaders in a Christian nation apostatize they must remain silent or perish.

If a city is given over to a false religion or a cult (e.g., Mormonism) that city should be proceeded against according to the law.

|

|      In a Christian nation people are not forced to go to church or to believe in Christ, but, the open practice of idolatry is forbidden.

It is a capital offense (Dt.

17:2-7).

The Bible never accepts the modern concept of neutrality toward religion for the simple reason that neutrality is impossible.

A Christian nation which allows public idolatry and blasphemy is on the road toward social suicide and judgment.

“To assume that men are free to worship or not to worship without radical consequences for society is to negate the very meaning of biblical faith.

The life of a society is its religion, and if that religion be false, then the society is headed for death.”6

Many naive believers in the past accepted neutrality in the political realm.

They placed their faith in the constitution and in religious pluralism while apostates and unbelievers captured the major institutions in society.

The humanists who came into power did everything they could to push Christians into an intellectual ghetto.

The humanists implicitly recognized what most Christians did not—that religious neutrality is a myth.

|

|      The first commandment is the foundation of all subsequent moral and civil law.7 The second table of the law cannot be consistently upheld apart from the first commandment.

When a person is told that theft, rape, homosexuality, adultery and murder are wrong he needs to be told /why/ such activities are immoral.

A society that says that a man, or a court, or a legislature has decided to outlaw certain activities for the greater good of the community without any recognition of God the creator and lawgiver has made /man/ the god of that society.

The implicit message behind this humanistic view of law is that law is arbitrary and that all men are really a law unto themselves.

This viewpoint leads logically to the attitude which says, “Do whatever you want, just don’t get caught, and, if you get caught try to lie your way out of the situation.”

Any society not founded upon the first commandment will eventually decay and be destroyed by God.

All laws flow from a religious foundation or worldview, thus “every state or social order is a religious establishment.”8

The consistent Christian says that we must have the triune God of Scripture as our starting point for knowledge, meaning and ethics.

No other god but Jehovah.

The humanist and many professing Christians say that is not fair to other religious faiths; therefore, we must start with man as “the source of all true reason and morality.”9

The religious pluralists have denounced the first commandment and sided with the humanists against biblical Christianity.

“The pluralist’s approach transgresses the first commandment by countenancing and deferring to different ultimate authorities (gods) in the area of public policy.

Instead of exclusively submitting to Jehovah’s law with fear, and openly following God’s enthroned Son, the pluralist attempts the impossible task of honoring more than one master in civil legislation (Mt.

6:24)—a kind of ‘political polytheism.’”