God's Spirit, Life and Liberty

In the words of our Declaration of Independence, "We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."

If we apply what we learned from our study of Genesis 1:2 "The Spirit of God," we see that the above declaration is very wrong, and that it contains the seeds of its own destruction.  First, the truths quoted are not "self evident;" they are revealed in the Bible by God's Spirit.  Second, they are not "rights," but they are sovereign gifts of God's Spirit. 

It would seem to me that this is why we have lost the import of this document.  If it had stated the terms and conditions correctly, then we would understand and be able to countermand the attacks on it.

The God who gave us life, gave us liberty at the same time; the hand of force may destroy, but cannot disjoin them.

- Thomas Jefferson

What we learn from the Bible is that these gifts are neither "self-evident" nor "rights"; they are from God's Spirit. When we leave him out, we lose both life and liberty, together.

"The hand of force may destroy, but cannot disjoin them."

Ken McElreath

Comments

Good point Ken. I've thought they seemed quite alienable as well. Even as they penned these words, surely there were some in their midst who knew this idealism was neither achievable by human strength nor real in the land already. Black "men" were recategorized as subhuman in order to justify their alienable rights. I imagine Wisdom as personified by Solomon in Provebs mocking, to some degree, this Constitution before the ink was even dry. Or perhaps Wisdom is now mocking our 'indivisible Union with liberty and justice for all' (Proverbs 1:20-33).
Russ

I loved studying that era of history where leading thinkers were trying to describe the ideal relationship between government and its citizens, but their conclusions were rife with compromise and "wisdom" of the day. One serious implication that occured at that time was the separation of justice from "natural law." When the framers decided to describe justice from a rights-based perspective, vs a natural law perspective, the fate was sealed. And the compromise that described justice as "natural law" versus God's law started the slipper slope.

So today we have a "natural rights" based justice rather than the God's law or more politically correct "natural law" based justice. How one should treat animals is a perfect example of how once we leave God's law we humans come up with plain silly justifications: we must assign rights to animals--the popular "animals rights"--in order to ensure just behavior.

Arguments about our founding "fathers" and original documents become red herrings, because even if we "win" every argument and get everything restored to how our founding fathers intended...we still fall woefully short and save not a single soul.

1 Why do the nations rage
and the peoples plot in vain?
2 The kings of the earth set themselves,
and the rulers take counsel together,
against the Lord and against his Anointed, saying,
3 “Let us burst their bonds apart
and cast away their cords from us.”

4 He who sits in the heavens laughs;
the Lord holds them in derision.
5 Then he will speak to them in his wrath,
and terrify them in his fury, saying,
6 “As for me, I have set my King
on Zion, my holy hill.”

7 I will tell of the decree:
The Lord said to me, “You are my Son;
today I have begotten you.
8 Ask of me, and I will make the nations your heritage,
and the ends of the earth your possession.
9 You shall break them with a rod of iron
and dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel.”

10 Now therefore, O kings, be wise;
be warned, O rulers of the earth.
11 Serve the Lord with fear,
and rejoice with trembling.
12 Kiss the Son,
lest he be angry, and you perish in the way,
for his wrath is quickly kindled.
Blessed are all who take refuge in him.