Participants:
Series Code: LI
Program Code: LI200461B
|
00:01 Welcome back to the Liberty Insider.
00:02 Before the break, I read some words 00:05 that have appeared in Liberty magazine 00:07 as an editorial. 00:09 And I was trying to personalize them more 00:11 for this program, 00:12 which, of course, is piggybacked 00:15 on what we are putting in Liberty magazine, 00:18 which is, I think, 00:19 arguably the largest religious liberty publication, 00:23 probably in the world, certainly in the United States. 00:26 These are interesting times as I was trying to point out, 00:29 and I'll start from the front and work to the back. 00:33 Most recently, the US administration 00:38 and the president in particular, 00:40 with a lot of hoopla announced a peace plan 00:44 or the final peace plan for the Mideast problem 00:48 between the Palestinians and Israel. 00:51 And a number of us that are more than teenagers 00:54 have seen these come and go, 00:56 a lot of hope at the time 00:57 and things seem to revert to the worst case. 01:00 But there's something a little different 01:02 about this one. 01:03 This didn't even have much pretence, 01:07 in fact no pretence of prior discussion 01:09 with the both parties, certainly not the Palestinians. 01:13 It confirms what Israel has been doing 01:16 for some time having a de facto rule 01:20 and promised annexation of lands taken by conquest. 01:24 And the Prime Minister Begin, 01:28 the late Prime Minister Begin of Israel 01:30 used to say the lands of Sumeria 01:33 that are theirs by biblical mandate. 01:35 You know, it's one thing to have a heritage 01:40 that you appeal to a holy book for but in the modern world, 01:43 where not everyone believes a certain faith, 01:46 there have to be solid parameters 01:49 to a claim upon a country. 01:51 And if we went back 2000 years, in many cases, 01:57 we certainly wouldn't be... 02:00 Even here in this location, 02:01 I'd probably be in a teepee somewhere, 02:04 because the modern history is quite rough and ready, 02:09 and then the justice is all along the line. 02:12 And in the modern world, 02:14 trying to settle the Middle East 02:16 does require some balancing act. 02:19 But instead, the US presented 02:21 what amounts to an ultimatum to these warring parties. 02:25 And where did this come from? 02:27 The answer is not hard to come by. 02:29 This was under the influence 02:32 of the so called evangelical right, 02:37 who have an interpretation of prophecy 02:40 that I might not quite share. 02:42 It's an apocalyptic end 02:43 where there's going to be a literal Armageddon 02:45 in the Middle East. 02:47 And the powers including Iran 02:48 are going to come up against Israel 02:50 and be totally destroyed. 02:52 Once you understand that religious expectation, 02:56 by significant and increasingly influential 03:00 religious faction in the US, 03:02 you see why the rush to, 03:04 you know, to take it or leave it 03:06 because there's an expectation 03:08 that this conflict is going to come, 03:10 the other side of that Christ' kingdom. 03:12 So let's get there quick. 03:14 Let's deal with the archenemy of truth, 03:17 you know, Gorgon enemies of truth, Gog and Magog, 03:19 let's deal with Iran, 03:21 you know, let's, 03:22 "Let the blood run to the horses' bridles" 03:24 as the Bible says. 03:29 You know, prophecy is prophecy 03:31 but we cannot work to self-fulfilling prophecies 03:34 or allow religionists 03:36 that we may not share our interpretation 03:39 or even our religion allow them free rein 03:42 to make their religious vision true. 03:44 Unfortunately, there has been a hijacking 03:47 of American public policy by a religious expectation 03:51 and it's not good. 03:53 Further, going back a little bit further, 03:56 the capital of Israel, 04:00 or Israel's capital was recognized 04:02 by the US as Jerusalem. 04:05 But that's not the way 04:07 the UN has treated it in the past. 04:09 That's not the way 04:12 the international community have allowed it. 04:14 That's sort of where it's been heading 04:16 but they know that that's an incendiary determination. 04:19 But again, the US moved its embassy to Jerusalem 04:25 and stated that they recognize this as the capital. 04:28 It's not that we don't have the right to do so. 04:30 But it's an irresponsible act informed almost totally 04:34 by a particular religious vision in a country 04:39 that while it was at its founding, 04:41 made up overwhelmingly of Protestants, 04:47 Christian Protestants, 04:49 was never an adjunct to church theology 04:53 or church prophecy. 04:55 And in fact, it's been a certain protection 04:57 against religious visionaries. 05:00 And ironically, it facilitated a vibrant, 05:04 dynamic religious life 05:05 for any number of religious factions, 05:07 because they know 05:09 that the government's not tilting 05:10 one way or the other, 05:12 or as the Baptist write in to Jefferson 05:18 were a little afraid that if they weren't protected, 05:22 you know, another religious group would harass them. 05:25 And that's when Thomas Jefferson explained, 05:28 "Oh, no, wait, this is secular. 05:30 It's for freedom of religion for all people, 05:32 separation of church and state." 05:35 From the very beginning, 05:36 this administration more than most, 05:38 and there's no question without, 05:41 not trying to pick on this administration, 05:44 it's always been a temptation in American life 05:46 to mix religious sensibility with civil government, 05:50 but it was a little more marked than usual. 05:53 With this one, the Jeff Sessions, 05:56 the first Attorney General, 05:58 within hours of him being named as Attorney General 06:02 said, publicly and boldly, 06:04 he did not believe 06:06 in a separation of church and state. 06:09 Well, you know, like I said in the editorial, 06:11 they dance around it 06:12 but the dynamic of a separation of church and state 06:15 is exactly 06:17 what the First Amendment is talking about. 06:19 So I mean, where have we come 06:21 if a top law and order official is put in 06:27 and first thing he says, 06:28 he doesn't believe in part of the Constitution. 06:32 And that has been repeated over and over, 06:34 and the way I describe it, what we're living through now, 06:37 and certainly we're not living through persecution, 06:40 America remains, United States remains, 06:43 practically speaking, 06:46 easily one of the most free 06:49 and enabling countries in the world 06:54 for religious practice, 06:55 but what we're seeing right now is a clear shift 06:59 from a generalized religious freedom, 07:02 where every... 07:04 It's not the groups, it's the individual, 07:06 every individual is free 07:10 to choose their faith commitment 07:12 or none at all. 07:14 Change it as they want, speak about it, 07:16 it's their own business. 07:17 We're moving from that to a dynamic, 07:20 where certain faith groups 07:22 are actually under a certain frown, 07:25 and certain groups are under a special smile of favor 07:30 and I would call it religious entitlement. 07:34 A certain religious viewpoint is entitled and empowered 07:38 and as the framers of the Constitution 07:41 pointed out, 07:43 and more than one of them that if we do that, 07:45 it's not a long process to where those not so favored 07:51 will be persecuted. 07:52 That's the present threat we face. 07:55 Something else that is not often spoken about, 07:59 it's gone, 08:00 the discussion's gone very quiet. 08:02 But this administration came into power. 08:05 As I said in the editorial 08:06 with a very high principal purpose, 08:09 I believe, to support religious freedom. 08:12 But since this administration generally hasn't seen, 08:17 fit to inquire deeply into it, 08:19 they've accepted the views of a religious coalition 08:23 that they're enabling. 08:24 And so, you know, 08:27 it could work badly. 08:30 But very early on, they made the statement 08:33 that they would change the Johnson Amendment. 08:37 I don't believe it's been changed yet. 08:40 The political gain from such a stance 08:43 has been had and maybe nothing will come from it. 08:46 But still, the mere claim is dangerous. 08:49 The Johnson Amendment was put into action as a result, 08:54 it's called Johnson because it arose 08:57 after Lyndon Johnson in a reelection bid 08:59 was offended that certain political factions 09:03 and religious factions opposed him, 09:06 and he... 09:08 When nonprofits and religious organizations opposed him, 09:11 and so there was an amendment added to a bill 09:14 that said the churches and nonprofits 09:17 are not to involve themselves in political activity, 09:21 very reasonable 09:22 under a separation of church and state. 09:25 Unfortunately, it was put into place in a, 09:29 you know, tit for tat political situation, 09:32 but now there's a claim made 09:34 that this must be swept away as soon as possible 09:36 and allow the churches to be politically active. 09:40 That is the worst sin that a state can ever allow. 09:45 In the Medieval Ages, the Medieval Church, 09:49 Catholic Church, but it was the singular Medieval Church. 09:52 It was empowered politically to the ends degree 09:56 and persecution, 09:57 and political horrors eventuated from that. 10:03 So to do away with the Johnson Amendment, 10:05 even though it was flawed in its beginning, 10:07 its root concept is exactly right. 10:10 There should be a separation of church and state, 10:13 but it's going to be swept away to believe public statements. 10:16 It was added to a bill recently and then at midnight, 10:22 surreptitiously removed, and I don't know why, maybe, 10:26 you know, a little caution at the last minute. 10:30 But again, the intent has not been revoked. 10:32 It seems to be an empowerment 10:34 of politically active religious factions. 10:37 And all I could say to those factions, 10:39 which is the root issue. 10:42 Don't seek solutions through political action, 10:45 seek spiritual solutions, seek personal godliness, 10:49 seek evangelization of the people again, 10:51 and as many religious right people 10:54 that I used to work with used to pray, 10:56 "Lord, please heal our nation." |
Revised 2020-05-21