Newsweek magazine has published its first 2015 issue with the lead article “The Bible: So Misunderstood It’s a Sin” written by Kurt Eichenwald. The question is, however, who is misunderstanding the Bible? Could it be that Mr. Eichenwald is the one doing the misunderstanding? Certainly a lot of people do misunderstand the Bible. Much of […]
The doctrine of interposition is based on the biblical truth that the powers that be, the rulers of civil government, are ordained by God and are His ministers (see Romans 13:1-10 for this and the discussion which follows). As God’s ministers they are to serve Him – not anyone else. They are to serve Him by protecting and giving praise to those who do good, and by punishing, and therefore restraining, those who do evil. As God’s ministers they must follow, obey, and apply His definitions or standards of what is good and what is evil: not their own, nor anyone else’s definitions or standards of good and evil.
Our early state constitutions were our first constitutions. They were the fundamental laws of their states, in most states replacing the colonial charters. (Connecticut retained its colonial charter as its constitution until 1818; Rhode Island, until 1842.) They grew out of more than 140 years of their separate histories which gave them distinctly different, deeply rooted cultural and governmental traditions. They were products of the collective worldviews and values, the histories and corporate identities of the people of each of our states which were striving to win their independence, or had won their independence, from Great Britain.
No fundamental provision of the Constitution or the Bill of Rights is more neglected – or thoroughly violated – today than the Tenth Amendment. It is violated in spirit and in practice. Its violation is advocated implicitly and explicitly: in the teaching of American history and government, in legal theory, in what passes for “Constitutional Law,” and in the functioning of everyday American politics and government.
I offer a Modest Proposal
Hermeneutics, the science and skill of interpretation, is most often applied to the Bible. But hermeneutics can be applied to any written document. For example, the Constitution is a piece of literature that requires interpretive skill to determine its meaning. I was reminded of this when I read a letter to the editor that appeared in The Wall Street Journal.
I received the following email in reference to a statement that I made on my radio show that taxation is stealing.
One of the arguments made by yesterday’s Tar-Baby emailer that while the words separation of church and state do not appear in the Constitution the concept clearly does.
As you can imagine, I get lots of emails. I try to answer most of them as soon as I get them. Some emails take a little more time. Every once in a while I get what I call a Tar-Baby
This Tuesday’s forecast called for yet another week of bone dry weather for the Southeastern United States. Since American Vision’s headquarters are just 30 miles west of Atlanta, the continual lack of rain has hit really close to home.
Thankfully, I’ve never had to hire a lawyer except to close several real estate deals. But if I ever need a lawyer, I will do a lot of background checking. The first thing I would look for is how well he knows his subject matter.
The First Amendment to the Constitution is one of the most foundational pieces of legislation and succinctly outlines key freedoms that belong to each and every American. As a corollary, it is also one of the most debated and interpreted collections of words and ideas that have ever been put to paper (or parchment).
A recent USA Today article reported that most Americans believe the nation’s founders wrote Christianity into the Constitution.
You’ve heard it said that the First Amendment gives us the right to free speech, but it doesn’t give us the right to yell “Fire” in a crowded theater. In other words, with rights come certain responsibilities.
A judge and his court have spoken. Intelligent Design is not science. Science classes cannot mention God as the Creator of life. U.S. District Judge John E. Jones III made the following ruling in the Dover, Pennsylvania, school board case regarding teaching Intelligent Design as a competing theory to Darwinism: