Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword or section
Like this
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1


Ratings: (0)|Views: 32|Likes:

More info:

Published by: Chalcedon Foundation on Apr 26, 2010
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





Publisher & Chalcedon President
Rev. Mark R. Rushdoony
Chalcedon Vice-President
Martin Selbrede
Rev. Christopher J. Ortiz
Managing Editor
Susan Burns
Contributing Editors
Lee DuigonKathy Leonard
Chalcedon Founder
Rev. R. J. Rushdoony(1916-2001)was the founder of Chalcedonand a leading theologian, church/state expert, and author of numer-ous works on the application of Biblical Law to society.
Faith for All of Life:
Thismagazine will be sent to those whorequest it. At least once a year we ask that you return a response card if youwish to remain on the mailing list.Contributors are kept on our mailinglist.
Suggested Donation:
$35 peryear ($45 for all foreign — U.S. fundsonly). Tax-deductible contributionsmay be made out to Chalcedon andmailed to P.O. Box 158, Vallecito, CA95251 USA.Chalcedon may want to contact itsreaders quickly by means of e-mail.If you have an e-mail address, pleasesend an e-mail message includingyour full postal address to our office:chaloffi@goldrush.com.
For circulation and datamanagement contact RebeccaRouse at (209) 736-4365 ext. 10or chaloffi@goldrush.com
Faith for All of Life
Sept/Oct 2007
Faith for All of Life,
published bi-monthly by Chalcedon, a tax-exempt Christian foundation, is sent to all who requestit. All editorial correspondence should be sent to the managing editor, P.O. Box 569, Cedar Bluff, VA 24609-0569.Laser-print hard copy and electronic disk submissions firmly encouraged. All submissions subject to editorial revi-sion. Email: susan@chalcedon.edu. The editors are not responsible for the return of unsolicited manuscripts whichbecome the property of Chalcedon unless other arrangements are made. Opinions expressed in this magazinedo not necessarily reflect the views of Chalcedon. It provides a forum for views in accord with a relevant, active,historic Christianity, though those views may on occasion differ somewhat from Chalcedon’s and from each other.Chalcedon depends on the contributions of its readers, and all gifts to Chalcedon are tax-deductible. ©2007Chalcedon. All rights reserved. Permission to reprint granted on written request only. Editorial Board: Rev. Mark R. Rushdoony, President/Editor-in-Chief; Chris Ortiz, Editor; Susan Burns, Managing Editor and Executive Assistant.Chalcedon, P.O. Box 158, Vallecito, CA 95251, Telephone Circulation (9:00a.m. - 5:00p.m., Pacific): (209) 736-4365 orFax (209) 736-0536; email: chaloffi@goldrush.com; www.chalcedon.edu; Circulation:Rebecca Rouse.
From the Founder
Special Editorial
Brothers Under the Skin Martin G. Selbrede 
The First Promise Keeper
Christopher J. Ortiz 
Partial Birth Abortion EndsEven as We AwaitConstitutional Restoration
Louis F. Sette 
Answering ToughQuestions AboutChristian Reconstruction
Martin G. Selbrede 
The Biblical Dutyof the Militia
1st Lt. Judd A. Wilson
The Importance of Friendships:Stonewall Jackson and John Blair Lyle
Richard G. Williams, Jr.
How Can a Christian PriestBe a Muslim?
Lee Duigon
Book Review
Review of 
The Divided States of America
Lee Duigon
Catalog Insert
Faith for All of Life |
September/October 2007 www.chalcedon.edu
eviticus 19:16–17 isusually cited as thatinstance where
 is condemned by thelaw, and is oten readas a denunciation o gossip rather than court-related law. Anexamination o the text makes clear that, while gossip is condemned, the court-room is in view:
Thou shalt not go up and down as atalebearer among thy people: neither shalt thou stand against the blood o they neigh-bour: I am the LORD. Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thine heart: thou shalt in any wise rebuke thy neighbour, and not suer sin upon him.
The rst part o verse 16 can berendered, “Thou shalt not go aboutslandering …” The word is translatedas
in Jeremiah 6:28, 9:4, and inEzekiel 22:9 marginal note. True witnessmust be given both in and out o court:the circulation o slander anywhere isprohibited. According to Ginsburg,
This dangerous habit, which has ruinedthe character and destroyed the lie o many an innocent person (I Sam. xxii.9; Ezek. xxii. 9, &c.), was denouncedby the spiritual authorities in the timeo Christ as the greatest sin. Threethings they declare remove a man romthis world, and deprive him o happi-ness in the world to come—idolatry, in-cest, and murder, but slander surpassesthem all. It kills three persons withone act, the person who slanders, theperson who is slandered, and the person who listens to the slander. Hence theancient Chaldee Version o Jonathantranslates this clause: “Thou shalt notollow the thrice accursed tongue, orit is more atal than the double-edgeddevouring sword.”
(Reprinted rom
The Institutes of Biblical Law 
, Vol. 1 [Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reormed Publishing Co., 1973], 594–598.)
Ben Sirach spoke strongly againstslander, declaring,
Curse the whisperer and double-tongues: or such have destroyed many that were at peace. A backbiting tonguehath disquieted many, and driven themrom nation to nation: strong citieshath it pulled down, and overthrownthe houses o great men. A backbitingtongue hath cast out virtuous women,and deprived them o their labours. Whoso hearkeneth unto it shall nevernd rest, and never dwell quietly. Thestroke o the whip maketh marks in thefesh: but the stroke o the tongue brea-keth the bones. Many have allen by the edge o the sword: but not so many as have allen by the tongue. Well is hethat is deended rom it, and hath notpassed through the venom thereo; whohath not drawn the yoke thereo, norhath been bound in her bands. For theyoke thereo is a yoke o iron, and thebands thereo are bands o brass. Thedeath thereo is an evil death, the gravethereo were better than it. It burned with the fame thereo. Such as orsakethe Lord shall all into it; and it shallburn in them, and not be quenched; itshall be sent upon them as a lion, withthorns, and devour them as a leopard.Look that thou hedge thy possessionabout with thorn, and make a door andbar or thy mouth. Beware thou slidenot by it, lest thou all beore him thatlieth in wait (Ecclus. 28:13–16).
 A olk proverb once popular withchildren has it that, while sticks andstones may break our bones,
cannever hurt us. This is mere bravado: words do hurt us; it is only because weare so scarred by the malice o gossipthat it provokes only a sad and wry humor.But the law o God
sees gossipas an
matter: hence the concern o the law with all slander. Verse 16 states“neither shall thou stand against theblood o thy neighbour.” Accordingto Micklem, this means “to seek to gethim put to death (c. Exod. 23:7).”
 Ginsburg commented on the variety o implications o this statement:
This part o the verse is evidently designed to express another line o conduct whereby our neighbour’s liemight be endangered. In the ormerclause, “the going about” with slander-ous reports imperiled the lie o theslandered person, here “the standingstill” is prohibited when it involvesatal consequences. The administratorso the law during the second Templetranslating this clause literally,
thou shalt not stand still by the blood, &c 
., drown-ing, attacked by robbers or wild beasts,&c., we are not to stand still by it whilsthis blood is being shed, but are torender him assistance at the peril o ourown lie. Or i we know that a man hasshed the blood o his ellow creature, weare not to stand silently by whilst thecause is beore the tribunal. Hence theChaldee Version o Jonathan renders it,“Thou shalt not keep silent the bloodo thy neighbour when thou knowestthe truth in judgment,” Others, how-ever, take it to denote to come orward,and try to obtain a alse sentence o blood against our neighbours, so thatthis phrase is similar in import to Exod.xxiii, 1, 7.
 All these meanings are certainly implied, but it is better to look at thesimplest sense o the text. There is anobvious parallelism drawn between slan-dering someone and standing against hisblood, i.e., seeking his death. Slander isa orm o murder: it seeks to destroy thereputation and the integrity o a man
From the Founder 
 www.chalcedon.edu September/October 2007 |
Faith for All of Life 
Faith or All o Lie 
by insinuating alsehoods. The reason why the rabbis regarded it as worsethan idolatry, incest, and murder wasbecause its moral consequences are ully as deadly i not worse, and it is a crimeeasily committed and not too readily detected. Moreover, slander, because itpasses rom mouth to mouth quickly,involves ar more people in a very short time than does idolatry, incest, ormurder.Gossip is thus orbidden by law; thisis not merely moral advice; it is criminallaw. Because the Puritans took Biblicallaw seriously, they did punish the gossipby court action. Slander and libel today are matters o civil suit, not normally o criminal action, and the result is the widespread liberty or malicious gossip.Irresponsibility has been given a privi-leged position.In verse 17, the proper course o action is described. I a “brother” or“neighbour” is actually guilty o wrong-doing, we must go to him and seek todissuade him rom his evil course. Oth-erwise, we “suer sin upon him,” or “sothou bear not sin on his account,” i.e., we become an accomplice to his evil by our silence. The “brother” here clearly has reerence to a man o the covenant,not a reprobate who will not respondto godly counsel. We must speak to thebrother; we may, depending on the situ-ation, speak to the ungodly, but we arenot required to do so. This meaning isclearly conrmed by the use o this law in Matthew 18:15–17.Thus, the negative ormulation o this law orbids slander: we must notbear alse witness. The positive ormu-lation, however, clearly requires morethan true witness. Our witness must notonly be true but requires more than true witness. Our witness must not only betrue but responsible. By our speech, wemust not only avoid slander but rebukeand discipline it, and, in a godly society,bring it beore the courts o church andstate. The law positively requires us topromote, not an anarchistic reedomo speech which permits slander, buta responsible speech which works topreserve and urther integrity, industry,and honesty. The commandment hasreerence to social order, not merely per-sonal moral counsel, as Calvin read it.
 It is moral counsel, but it is rst and lastGod’s law or His Kingdom which allmust obey. Calvin took or granted theChristian law structure which Genevahad inherited rom the centuries; hisPuritan ollowers were wiser when they stressed the importance o that law.I God’s absolute law is replaced with anarchistic reedom, then mean-ing is withdrawn rom the world, anda responsible witness ceases, becausethere is no one to be responsible to, noGod who can absolutely require manto be responsible to Himsel and to His world o men. Colin Wilson has statedthe implications o this anarchism: “Ithought I had seen the nal truth that
lie does not lead to anything 
; it is
an es-cape rom something 
, and the ‘something’is a horror that lies on the other side o consciousness.”
I lie becomes “an escape romsomething,” then it is an escape romtruth, because truth is related to real-ity, whereas a lie is related to antasy.Reality is anathema to men interestedin escape, and as a result the “neces-sary” lie is cultivated by such men, asNietzsche evidenced in his own lie andphilosophy.But reedom too is related to reality rather than to antasy, and thus to seek escape rom reality is also to escape romreedom. Thus, or the surrealists, living with the reality is a compromise. Forthem, liberty means denying “the worldand man’s fesh and blood existence.”
 The surrealist preers dreams to reality;he demands a totally man-made world;such a dream cannot be realized in thereal world. The totally man-made worldis thereore sought in dreams. Surrealismbelieves “in the omnipotence o dreams”because this is the area o mans sup-posed power.
It prizes a dream world where “the heart reigns supreme.”
Thisis comparable to mysticism, or, “to amystic, absolute liberty goes hand inhand with the destruction o the contin-gent world.”
There must thereore bea perpetual revolution against the real world in terms o the dream world. A surrealist statement declares that “Notonly must the exploitation o man by man cease, but also that o man by theso-called ‘God,’ o absurd and provok-ing memory … Man, with his armsand equipment, must join the army o Man.”
 Whenever man, institutions, andsocieties orsake God, they orsakereality. They cease to bear true andresponsible witness and begin to live alie because in the world o the lie, they can play god. The church which believesit can live in the world and neglect theproblems o the world is living in arealm o dreams. By ailing to relate thelaw-word o God to the whole world,they are living a lie, however ormally correct their religion. They may boasto being “evangelical” or “orthodox,”but they are in reality irrelevant and areliars, because there is nothing irrelevantabout God. Because God is the Lordand Creator o all things, there is a totalrelevance o all things to God and a totalsubordination o all things to the law- word o God. The church which ails tospeak to the whole o lie in terms o thetotal Word o God will soon be a savageliar with respect to any man who seeksto shake it out o its world o dreams.The truth is not in such a church orsuch men, and we cannot expect thetruth rom them.
Continued on page 6 

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->