July 4 & Independence

While no mere political bookmark in the calendar, the Fourth of July, for me, is certainly not in a class of God's acts in history which are marked by His people the world over. That is to say, first and foremost, I am a Christian. Second, I am an American. It reminds of the statements made recently by my pastor about various national flags being up in the sanctuary of various churches in which he has served over the years--not a good idea (they were removed).

The Fourth, however, stands out as something to be honored beyond even the typical national dates that various nations choose, Cinco de Mayo, or June 2 for the Italians, for example. The 4th is the best date to mark our nation's birth, even if we didn't win independence on July 4, 1776, but later, because of the Declaration itself, not the acheivement. "We hold these truths to be self-evident...." and the proclamation of rights that are God-given, not given by the state. In fact, they are rights the recognition of which is the standard by which any government may be judged to be in line with the will of the Creator or not.

Abraham Lincoln spoke as President of a divided nation; he recognized that it stood under the judgment of this creed: that all men are created equal, with inalienable rights to life and liberty. So, in a sense, the nation "conceived in liberty" and its Founders spoke better than they knew on July 4, 1776. In the Civil War that nation reaped the fruit of its injustice, which it could not simply wish away.

They did not create a right to liberty, but they saw it, even if they couldn't embrace it entirely for the slave, they, like Saul found themselves among the prophets, or Balaam who spoke only what was true of Israel Rising.

There are immutable divine laws, the right to life among them. It is not something our Founders just made up and something we can just amend or ignore without consequences. We ignore the right to liberty for a time, but it would not go away. We can ignore the right to life; will it just go away?

It is one thing to declare independence from what one believes is tyranny; it is another to declare independence from divine law itself. We may be a nation of lawyers and judges, but that does not mean that we are under the rule of just laws.

The Declaration of Independence, I understand, held legal status in our legal system for a long time, but it does not seem to be included when discussions of legality, specifically "constitutionality," arise these days. That is my impression. To the extent that my impression is correct, and also true, I fear, for many of my fellow citizens, the Fourth has become, well, our peculiar national political bookmark in the calendar, not so different from any others. And that is a loss. There needs to be national recovery act aimed at the Declaration. Our growing independence from it will be our undoing.

Comments

[Gordon Davis]

Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God. Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves. (Rom. 13:1-2, NKJV)

I just can't bring myself to believe that the rebellion of the British colonists in this land from 1776-1783 was godly (because of the above verses and a couple of others). It was part of God's decretive will,certainly, but it was not according to God's moral will. I do believe in civil disobedience, in limited instances, for example, when the authority requires one to do what God has commanded us not to do, or when the authority has forbidden us to do what God has commanded us to do (Acts 4:19-20). But, I do not believe we should ever try to overthrow the authorities God has put in place. This is not a commentary on whether God has used America for good (whether in the life of Americans or in the lives of other countries). I simply don't believe that man is meant to rebel against those in authority.

While I admit to being quite ignorant of colonial times, my understanding is that the arguments for the revolution included complaints about taxes, lack of representation in the decision making body of the government, forced housing of soliders in people's houses, etc. None of these, except, possibly the last (if the soliders were badly behaved and were injurious to their hosts' families), constitutes a violation of some fundamental right. The Bible nowhere enumerates a fundamental right to democratic representation, to a voice in government, to freedom from oppressive taxes, etc. It seems the colonists were not willing to accept the will of God for them, in terms of their circumstances.

And, so we have been a rebellious people ever since. No wonder the South rebelled against the North (although, I understand that one is a bit more complicated). No wonder the Texans rebelled against Mexico. We have been rebellious since the latter part of the 18th Century, and today, people think they have a right to do whatever they want to do.

Don't get me wrong, I do believe in the legitimacy of the U.S. Government ever since it consolidated complete control over the territory. After all, God takes down one king and replaces him with another. Also, I do love this country. I certainly criticize it a lot. Sometimes, legitimately, sometimes not so legitimately, perhaps. But I wouldn't really want to live anywhere else long-term. May God have mercy on America, the land that I love, and may He use her for good in this world. Thank you for your work and that of the other editors and authors!

[William Tighe]

What happened in America in 1776 was simply directing against George III (and, in reality, against the British Parliament) the very same principles that the English concocted in 1689 to justify the "abdication" (as it was lieingly termed in the so-called "Bill of Rights") of James II and his supersession by William & Mary, without which George III would have been merely Duke of Hanover.

As far as I have been able to conclude after years of reading on the subject, the legal and constitutional bases for the American Revolution, resting as it did on dubious claims about the status of the British North American colonies vis-a-vis the British "Crown-in-Parliament, was simply nonexistent, and instead has to rest on whatever "authority" those Whig political theories used to justify the events of 1689 may be said to rest.

[Clifford Simon]

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.
In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

[Benighted Savage]

Mr Kushiner wrote:

"The Declaration of Independence, I understand, held legal status in our legal system for a long time, but it does not seem to be included when discussions of legality, specifically "constitutionality," arise these days.

Mr Kushiner, I found your use of the past tense at the beginning of your sentence puzzling. I'm no lawyer, but the last time I looked the Declaration of Independence was still included in the US Statutes at Large and the US Code as part of "the Organic Laws of the United States of America" (along with the Articles of Confederation (1777) and the US Constitution). The DOI has held, and continues to hold, legal status in our legal system. May it ever be so.

That being said, God bless the Spirit of 1776 and God Bless America!