¿Qué podemos aprender de las elecciones pasadas?

Visión America Latina

¿Qué podemos aprender de las elecciones pasadas?

Ricardo G. Ojeda

27 / 08 / 2018

El pasado 1 de julio de 2018 en México se vivió lo que a muchos les gusta llamar “una fiesta democrática”, donde el pueblo eligió a sus futuros gobernantes. En ésta ocasión el pueblo votó para elegir presidente de la república. Desde meses atrás se empezó a suscitar entre los cristianos un fenómeno bastante interesante, y necesario quiero pensar, donde a través de artículos, videos y en redes sociales principalmente los cristianos dieron evidencia de su cosmovisión, dejaron ver hasta qué punto están siendo  verdaderamente consistentes con la religión que dicen profesar. Mientras se acercaban las votaciones este fenómeno empezó a intensificarse más y más, las publicaciones comenzaron a volverse cien por ciento humanistas, y que decir después de las votaciones, peor aún, un becerro de oro fue levantado y adorado, si bien éste becerro de oro ya había sido fundido, ahora abiertamente es adorado. R.C Sproul dijo:

“El estatismo es el enemigo natural y definitivo del cristianismo porque implica una usurpación del Reino de Dios”

Desgraciadamente al pueblo de Dios le cuesta reconocer a su verdadero enemigo y esto es porque ni siquiera puede distinguir claridosamente entre lo que es lo bueno y lo que es malo delante de Dios. Imagina esto, naciste con dolor de muela, pero si nunca nadie te dice que lo sientes es un dolor de muela vivirás pensando que es normal y tal vez nunca visites al dentista, de la misma manera si nacimos con el estatismo y se ha vuelto tan natural y necesario como el aire que respiramos, nunca le reconoceremos como una amenaza a nuestra libertad. Algunos cristianos reconocen que hay algo mal con el Estado pero no terminan por identificar el problema, buscan la solución a la inseguridad, a la falta de justicia, a la pobreza, pero acuden al Estado para que éste les resuelva estos problemas, pensando que algún gobernante con buenas intenciones logrará el éxito anhelado. Desafortunadamente esto no es cosa de pagar un buen anuncio de televisión o algún espectacular en alguna avenida principal en la que hablemos a los cristianos diciéndoles que el Estado es el enemigo más peligroso del cristianismo, simplemente no funciona de ésa manera. El problema va más adentro, el problema tiene que ver con nuestras presuposiciones. Una cosmovisión es una red de presuposiciones que determinan la manera en la que vemos el mundo a nuestro alrededor. Así que si nuestras presuposiciones no están cimentadas en la palabra de Dios, nuestra cosmovisión será una cosmovisión pagana. Recordemos el pasaje en Mateo 7:24-27 donde Jesús dice:

“Cualquiera, pues, que me oye estas palabras, y las hace, le compararé a un hombre prudente, que edificó su casa sobre la roca. Descendió lluvia, y vinieron ríos, y soplaron vientos, y golpearon contra aquella casa; y no cayó, porque estaba fundada sobre la roca. Pero cualquiera que me oye estas palabras y no las hace, le compararé a un hombre insensato, que edificó su casa sobre la arena; y descendió lluvia, y vinieron ríos, y soplaron vientos, y dieron con ímpetu contra aquella casa; y cayó, y fue grande su ruina.”

Si nuestro pensamiento no parte del hecho de que la Palabra-Ley de Dios es verdad y aplicable a toda esfera de nuestras vidas, seremos como ese hombre insensato que edificó su casa sobre la arena. Una cosa es decir que la Palabra de Dios es verdad y otra muy diferente es el llevarlo a la práctica. ¿Qué cosmovisión piensas que tenían los Israelitas del capítulo 8 del primer libro de Samuel al pedir rey como las demás naciones? Evidentemente una cosmovisión pagana. No les importó la advertencia por parte de Samuel de volver a ser esclavos. Lo mismo sucede con el cristiano moderno, no le importan las sanciones que Dios impone a las naciones que le rechazan, no aprende de la historia, porque sus presuposiciones están tan cimentadas en el paganismo que su “cristianismo” es meramente “dominguero” si acaso. A través de la historia cuando el Estado se ha visto incomodado y doblegado ha sido porque hombres y mujeres fueron consistentes con su fe, poniendo su obediencia a Cristo Rey y a su pacto incluso por encima de sus vidas. Tenemos el ejemplo de Sadrac, Mesac y Abed-Nego en el capitulo 3 del libro de Daniel, donde se negaron a adorar la estatua que el Rey Nabucodonosor había levantado, se negaron porque reconocían que había un solo Rey el cual era el único que merecía adoración y el único que podía librarlos. A diferencia de ellos, los cristianos modernos dirán “Dios puso a Nabucodonosor como rey, así que hay que obedecerle en todo lo que éste mande”. El fenómeno que mencioné al inicio, en el que los cristianos dejan ver sus presuposiciones ya sean humanistas o bíblicas, pienso es algo necesario y útil porque así por fin podemos caer en cuenta de qué tan necesitados estamos de la enseñanza de la Ley bíblica y de las implicaciones por obedecer y desobedecer a ésta. Y sí, debe enseñarse desde los pulpitos, pero es responsabilidad principalmente de los padres de familia el tomar también ésta responsabilidad de instruir a los hijos en la Ley de Dios para que puedan discernir sabiamente entre el bien y el mal, entre la tiranía y la libertad. El cristiano debe de poner lo místico y lo sentimental de lado y empezar a juzgar todas las cosas según la Palabra-Ley de Dios. Para algunos, el pedirles evaluar a los candidatos desde la Escritura fue tomado a mal, el mencionar que todo gobierno debe someterse a Cristo, una utopía, algo fuera de la realidad. Lo verdaderamente irreal y utópico es el querer las bendiciones del cristianismo (justicia, libertad, prosperidad, salud, etc.) sin el Dios del cristianismo.

Here’s to your health!

Por: Roger Oliver December 27th, 2016

“Or do you not know that your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and you are not your own? For you were bought at a price. Therefore glorify God with your body.” 1 Corinthians 6:19,20

They say you can tell your out to breakfast with your old, literally old, buds if everyone is checking out how many pills the other guys are taking and you are comparing PSA scores. Ha! If I’d known I was going to live this long, I’d have taken better care of myself. Probably more accurate to say, if I had not grown up a pietist and a premillennialist I would have had a healthier more holistic view of what it means that my body is the temple of the Holy Spirit.

When I was a young soldier, I thought I’d either be raptured or go out in a blaze of gunfire by the time I was 30. Not very fair to my lovely and faithful wife and my children, I know, but such is the folly of youth. I was a bit of an adrenaline junkie. My mother said I had two guardian angles and they were exhausted at the end of each day. I’m still here because I have lived a life drenched by the mercy of God’s. He has not benched me. He still has something for me to do.

Inevitably, I’ve been thinking about diet and health and wanting to live to 110. I’d like to live to see the grandchildren of the children in the Learning Center as students and their parents running the school.

Now, I’m not big on New Year’s resolutions but things slow down a bit this time of year and you get a chance to think about stuff you tend to miss in the noise and busyness of daily life the rest of the year. It is a good time to give a shot at resetting bad habits. So I have been studying the dietary laws in the Bible, specifically Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14. From R.J. Rushdoony’s commentary on Leviticus, specifically Leviticus 11:1-8. Something to think about.

“Returning again to the Biblical view of man, we must remember that uncleanness is a religious fact which affects man totally. Socrates could give a discourse on virtue while engaged in homosexuality because the Greek view located virtue in the spirit and depreciated the body. No such thinking is permitted by Scripture. The careful Biblical legislation of things physical is offensive to the Greek mentality, which believes at times that a man’s life is as noble and virtuous as a man thinks himself to be. Thus, these laws are religious, moral, hygienic and more, because God gave them.” p. 109

If the careful Biblical legislation of things physical is offensive or bothersome, can I expect God to bless me with many years of life to advance his Kingdom? Me thinks not. Rushdoony continues,

“Diet is very personal, and, in a sense, very private, no matter how publicly we may dine. At the same time, it is the fact of eating, or nourishing ourselves, which is made central to our worship of God, the communion service. The very private act is made a public sacrament, because we are required to serve God with all our heart, mind, and being, i.e., from the privacy of our lives to the most public of acts, we must be totally the Lord’s.” p. 109-110

“Because ours is a total faith, and because of the unity of our being as mind and body, we must recognize that the law is a unity which speaks to our lives as a unity. These laws thus speak for our physical health, but, above all, for our necessary holiness before God.” p. 113

And finally this: “With the modern emphasis on health foods, it is a remarkable fact of human perversity that God’s proven dietary laws are so commonly bypassed.” p. 117

God has blessed me with good health. I’m more active than most men my age, or so I’m told. I am slowing down and feeling the years but there is no such thing as retirement in the Bible. I plan to die with my boots on. Besides, If I weren’t busy I’d be underfoot and driving my wife crazy. And if statistics mean anything, I’d be dead within three years of quitting work anyway.

I’m still going pretty strong for being within two years of 7 decades, nevertheless, I can improve. At age 99, the comedian, George Burns, said the secret to longevity is to keep breathing. He had is ever present lit cigar between his fingers. He didn’t make it to 100. As long as you’re still breathing, you can learn and change. Maybe better to give up the cigars though.

What is most important is obeying the command to, “Be holy as I am holy.” That includes taking care of your physical body which is fearfully and wonderfully made. So I am studying, taking good advice from trustworthy and knowledgeable friends, getting more exercise, all that and more that is simply part of a faith for all of life. Hope you do too.

Here’s to your health!

The US Presidential Election is a Dumpster Fire

Roger Oliver for Visión America Latina

“This year’s presidential election is a Dumpster fire,” says WSJ journalist, Gerald F. Seib. Well said. Today the same author said the problem with this year’s election is the lack of a mandate for the winners. He pointed out that, according to the numbers crunches at the Tax Foundation, the difference between the two candidates tax plans is an estimated $6 trillion of expected revenue to the Federal Government. That’s a big deal but it is rarely discussed. That, according to Seib, is an example of the lack of any serious debate about policy in this election which, he concludes, will leave the winners with no clear mandate by which to govern. There are two problems with his analysis as I see it.

  1. Politicians don’t pay attention to what the people want anyway. Representation has come to mean the elite telling the people what’s good for them whether they want it or not. The ruling class pushes positive rights which always mean less freedom and more oppression through regulation, licensing and redistributive taxes. There is no free lunch. Someone has to pay. Whoever it is, it is never the politicians who make the promises.
  2. There is a mandate but neither the people nor the ruling elite are interested. God commissions civil magistrates to punish wrongdoers and praise those who do good. (1 Peter 2:14) Of course, good and evil are defined by God’s Law. That is not a mandate to redistribute wealth, to bail out banks, to collect taxes, to control the economy, to provide for widows, orphans, old people and foreigners, to pave roads, to provide health care or a myriad of other positive rights. It is certainly not a mandate to sacrifice our children to the god of state, Moloch, by approving of and funding abortion with the people’s tithes. Even without the mandate from God, what ever happened to the political wisdom that he who governs least governs best?

We the people have chosen Moloch for our god. We have no one to blame but ourselves for the dumpster fire. Conservative and liberal have no meaning. The only difference is how best to worship the god of state. The WSJ article is just a call to get clear on who or what will be sacrificed. That would be a mandate not for how to govern but for how to oppress a people who apparently no longer want to be free. So there really is a mandate, just from another god made in our image.

A quote from “Conspiracy in Philadelphia” by Gary North

From the wall of Roger Oliver

Concerning the recently revealed horror of selling aborted baby parts and the Supreme Court decision concerning same-sex marriage, an interesting quote from Conspiracy in Philadelphia by Gary North, p. 96

“Ever since the early 1940s, the Supreme Court has been unwilling to protect private property from all kinds of confiscation and control by local, state, and federal governments. 57 Post-Darwinian liberalism has been victorious over Lockean liberalism. In 1973, the Supreme Court determined that lives in the womb are not under this protection because of a Court-invented Constitutional guarantee of privacy: woman and physician. State civil sanctions could no longer be brought against this class of murderers who had successfully conspired to deprive another person of life. 58 Post-Darwinian liberalism won again. Human life can now be legally sacrificed on the altar of convenience. The hope of the Framers—to place judicial limits on the worst decisions of the legislature—did not succeed, although this fact took a century and a half to become clear to everyone. If anything, the Supreme Court, insulated from direct public opinion, proved in 1973 that it was the worse offender as an agent of the formally sovereign People.”

Thoughts and notes of Institutes of Biblical Law: regarding loans to the poor

Regarding loans to the poor:
The law here has been subjected to extensive attack by socialism and every form of totalitarianism. Statism assumes that its law rather than God’s regenerating power is the principle of freedom. As a result, it legislates against Biblical law. Modern “civil liberty” and “civil rights” “civil rights” legislation requires an equalizing of all men, so that an employer cannot hire or favor his fellow believers in distinction from unbelievers. The end result is the enslavement to the state of all men; the need for charity remains, but the state now makes itself the source of charity and the judge as to who shall receive it. An impersonal and political test replaces the test of faith.”

Interesting. Rushdoony, Institutes of Biblical Law chapter 8 thou shalt not steal, p. 481

Thoughts and notes of Institutes of Biblical Law

“Many of the goals sought by modern liberals are a part of the Mosaic law, but with a significant difference. Biblical law required the just treatment of the laborer; it forbad fraud in foods, measures, money, and drugs. It required soil conservation, and much else, but not by administrative agencies. The criminal law forbad murder and theft, and all harmful drugs and foods were forbidden as destructive of life; fraudulent foods and goods were theft, and so on. In modern society, these offenses are too often the jurisdiction of arbitrary administrative agencies, as are labor problems, with the result that the criminal law is subverted and the very purpose of this law, the prevention of oppression, nullified. Moreover, because civil statute law has replaced Biblical law, men can be harmed and their lives shortened by dangerous drugs and sprays, and no crime exists unless a statute covers the specific offense. The combination of statute law and administrative law has created oppression, whereas the common law of Scripture gives man a principle of justice and a basis for a public understanding of law.”

RJ Rushdoony, Institutes of Biblical Law p. 497