Favorite Sermon Add to Playlist
Photo of Brian Hindman

For a Gift From God

Brian Hindman


Brian Hindman

History and Bible Teacher, Mount Pisgah Academy


  • February 3, 2018
    11:45 AM
Logo of Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 3.0 (US)

Copyright ©2018 AudioVerse.

Free sharing permitted under the Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 3.0 (US) license.

The ideas in this recording are those of its contributors and may not necessarily reflect the views of AudioVerse.


Audio Downloads

This transcript may be automatically generated

Religious liberty a subject that is very dear to me but let's study together this morning what we're going to see today with this topic I'm going to put together things that I have learned in world history as a teacher of world history American history in U.S. government as a teacher of government and as a Bible teacher and putting it all together but I hope that it will be meaningful and valuable and impressionable to you as we study this eternal gift from God religious liberty the Bible says instead of printing is $317.00 now the Lord is that spirit and where the spirit of the Lord is there is what there is freedom liberty that only the only true liberty that comes from God and that is a gift that he has given I believe to all of his intelligent created beings throughout all eternity from the turn of the past to eternity in the future the intelligent ability with our conscience to choose what we will do who we will serve choose you this day whom you will serve Joshua's as but as for me and my house we will serve the Lord so it is a choice and as we begin our study though if you would just buy your heads with me and let's seek the Lord in prayer our gracious Father in Heaven Lord we have come to church to worship you we've come to learn from you and sit at the feet of Jesus and Lord I just prayed that you would hide me behind your cross you would speak through me to share an important truth and important eternal truth that you have committed to all of us but especially to your people in these last days I pray that you would bless us as we study diligently your word as you've asked us to do it's like a time of the 215 and I pray this in Jesus' name amen All right go back with me 800 years to the Middle Ages the high middle ages and there was a king of England named King John King John got in a little bit of a squabble with a religious leader and was actually excommunicated not only was he excommunicated which means you are separated from the church you cannot receive the sacraments you cannot receive a Christian burial and so on the religious. A leader who happened to be Pope Innocent the 3rd at this time placed England and the territory that John ruled over under something called the interdict Now what is an inner dick that's one of the 1st question an interdict is actually excommunicating an entire city town village or even a kingdom by whose authority by the authority and power of the pope who would dare to do such a thing to completely excommunicate so that no one can go to church put chains on the church no one can go no one can receive any any worship services at all until the king would submit to the pope now King John valiantly held out for 6 years but eventually as his kingdom is undermined and his authority is undermined because his subjects are mad because they are not able to experience what they believed were the channels for receiving salvation through the sacraments with enough pressure put on him after saying he was sorry the pope gave him back England as a thief and if you know the Middle Ages at all you have the time period of Lords and castles and fiefs and vassals and so on a thief is a grant of land that's given to you by the Lord here is the king of England submitting to the pope so that he can receive his territory back and be the interdict in excommunication be lifted so that they can all you know continue to worship God will why did this happen in the 1st place well it had to do with the relatively seemingly minor issue of who would appoint and select the person to be in office of the Archbishop of Canterbury is a significant prominent position the king wanted one person and the pope wanted another they disagreed and when the king did not follow the pope's wishes the pope says I will place your entire kingdom under the interdict Well that seems like a pretty high handed heavy thing to do doesn't it and it begs the question Did Jesus ever compel people to do right and try to use some type of force to make people bowel and give concede to his. Issues or his will you have your Bibles Let's take a look here at Luke Chapter 9 did Jesus ever compel people to do right I think you know the answer but beginning in verse 51 of Luke Chapter 9 the Bible says that it came to pass when the time was come that he should be received up he steadfastly set his face to go to Jerusalem and sent messengers verse 52 before his face and they went an intern into a village of the Samaritans to make ready for him Samaritans you might recall they were a mixture of the old Northern Kingdom of Israel the 10 tribes that had been defeated by the Assyrians and had become assimilated amongst other nations and heathen tribes around them and they had a form of godliness but they did not have the true practice that the southern kingdom of Judah had followed so the Samaritans were hated by the Jews the Jews were hated by the Samaritans and vice versa as says the Samaritans verse 53 did not receive Him now should the Samaritans have received Jesus yes or no yes I mean that's an obvious answer right to me certainly Jesus is inviting and asking to come and be prepared to be served in your town certainly the right thing to do I think we all can agree would be they would receive him and welcome him into their midst but we keep reading and it says because his face was as though he would go to Jerusalem in other words that he would pass through some area and not stay by they got jealous they got bitter and upset and decided to reject allowing Jesus to come verse 54 and when his disciples James and John saw this they said Lord will file that we command fire to come down from heaven and consumed him even as the Elias that is it did you want to call down fire and destroy them because they should have accepted you they should have allowed you to come in and welcome you into their home in their midst Notice Jesus response in verse $55.00 but he turned and rebuked them and said ye know not what manner of spirit Ye are of and then he says for the Son of Man is not come to destroy men's lives but to save them and they went to another village Jesus. Honored their request and continued on on his way to Jerusalem even though he had designed to stop by and for a brief time give a blessing there to the Samaritans Jesus does not compel he only desires the freedom of choice from the beings that he created in their response to a relationship with him he only wants them to choose because they have an intelligent understanding of who he is he respects our power of choice and that choice is a dangerous gift because you can see how it's resulted in led to the great controversy and the entrance of sin into this universe because of allowing choice with angels allowing choice with humans but God respects that gift and freedom so much that he himself will not interfere with that now religious liberty worldwide we live in a country that values and has historically valued from our inception religious liberty and the freedom of conscience founded on the principles of religious freedom which will look at a little bit later involving religion $105.00 countries worldwide 53 percent of those that were surveyed experienced widespread government harassment of religious groups over half of the countries in the world that exists today experience religious harassment because of their beliefs by the government that they live in it is a gift from God that our country was founded and originated based on an understanding that God desires people to have the freedom to choose who they will worship how they will worship what they will worship when they will worship and so I'm thankful for that in the book the great controversy we're told this freedom of religious faith was also granted describing the early days of the United States every man being permitted to worship God according to the dictates of his conscience Republicanism and Protestantism became the fundamental principles of the nation these principles are the secret of its power and prosperity those 2 principles they are in a sense Republicanism is a state without a king. As many states or countries back in further distant Times had a type of monarchy or dictatorship for a government so a country that would be founded based on there's no king telling people what to do with some kind of an absolute power arrangement it was was really a rarity and a unique government that was created by the United States so Republicanism in a sense is civil liberty religious liberty is a key core principle of the power and prosperity of this country and its origin Now also it says Protestantism what is Protestantism Well it's a church without a pope for hundreds and hundreds of years essentially there was just one main church that existed across Europe and that is of course the Roman Catholic Church and of course the true church in the wilderness in Revelation 12 that was in relative obscurity but the main dominant church is the Roman Catholic church that existed at that time and so a church that did not have a pope that would allow religious liberty was truly unique did you know though that there have been efforts and inroads made to try and undermine and to take away religious liberty in our very own country a dialogue between a member of the 7th Day Adventist church named 80 Jones and the United States Senate committee which he appeared before because of a Sunday law that was submitted and I'm going to talk about that in just a minute I'm going to be sharing today with you some of the incredible arguments and principles that were outlined by 80 JONES In this book this begin with a senator from New Hampshire whose name was Henry Blair Hillary Blair himself had studied law before joining and getting involved in politics had served in the the legislature National House of Representatives before being elected to the Senate in 1989 and he worked his way up to become chairman of a powerful committee called the Senate Committee on Education and Labor now the position of chairman is important in government because they determine what bills will be discussed by that committee and they determine when that will be discussed and how much time will be given to that discussion the chairman have the. And it's a powerful position of course the chairman comes from the majority party so they have the majority of the votes in order to get their way essentially But they they work together of the parties to determine these things but the chairman of the powerful position and he introduced a bill in 1900 There's over 100 years ago called The Blair Sunday rest bill on May 21888 and this is what it says in the 50th Congress of the United States is not very long but it said the following a bill to secure to the people the enjoyment of the 1st day of the week commonly known as The Lord's Day which by the way that's the misunderstanding that the Lord's day if you study the Bible carefully without a doubt is the Sabbath the 7th day Exodus 2058 And Jesus in Matthew and Mark in the Gospels talks about the Sabbath is the Lord's day bored of the Sabbath as a day of rest and then notice it says and to promote its observance as a day of religious worship this is a bill that's introduced into the Senate to be discussed and debated upon and potentially passed as a law in our country at the time there was a young man in his late thirty's at this time this is 888889 named 80 Alonzo trivia Jones 80 Jones had been baptized as a young man at the age of 23 after he had been serving a stint in the Army for several years he became a diligent student of history and the Bible and went on to become a Bible and history teacher kind of partial to that that's what I used to do for many years and I think it's an awareness of those 2 pieces together that really gave him a tremendous advantage as he was asked by our church to appear before the Senate committee and speak against the measure to propose this law for Sunday worship or keeping the day as a day of religious worship and he also became editor of signs of the times in 1905 so he based his position on 3 key areas we're going to try to look at those briefly hopefully the principles upon which we stand number one number 2 the historical argument or basis from history and the number 3. The practical aspect or matter of the questions are those 3 areas in which he spoke to and presented before a chairman a group of senators and I tell you the Holy Spirit when you read this this is just a copy of the transcript of what they said back and forth he was the 18th person to speak at this committee hearing on that day and all the people before him had spoken for maybe 2 hours or so they grilled him for an hour and I have and he was interrupted Yeah I think 169 times while he's trying to speak he's interrupted by senators who are trying to challenge and question what he was saying in terms of speaking against a bill that would compromise religious liberty is just the Holy Spirit was clearly with this man so here's the foundational principle he said upon which we stand civil government is civil and has nothing to do in the matter of legislation with religious observances in any way and then he articulated this and found the basis for this from Jesus Himself in Matthew 22 verses 152224 the sake of time I'm not going to read that but it's where Jesus was asked to he was asked should we pay taxes or not and he said Bring me a don't Arius again Arius was a coin a silver coin that was approximately worth a value of one day's wages so it's significant how much money you would earn working for a day that's what an area says and he says show me again areas and he says who's inscription or picture is on it and I actually have up here this is a picture of various Caesar who would have been the Roman emperor at the very time Jesus ministry was happening so probably looked just like this with his picture on it and then even then he makes the famous friends of color outlines render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's and to God the things that are gods so Jesus just separated there are things that belong to Caesar which represents the civil government and there are things that belong to God which of course is God's government and the civil government does not have the right to ask for what belongs to God So then he follows that up and says Show me the. Sabbath whose inscription is on it the Sabbath commandment Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy 60 shout the labor and do all the work but the 7th day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God and he goes on and shows the inscription that's on the Sabbath is actually of course the creator Jesus Christ and he says the Sabbath belongs to the creator and it's only something you give to the Creator in terms of your worship of the Sabbath you don't give that worship to a man you give that worship to God and no man however mighty or powerful the king president Emperor prime minister might be has the right or Parag it is to interfere and take the worship or command the worship that belongs to God and say you have to give it to man otherwise you'll be punished in some kind of a manner so Jesus separates the legitimate function of church and state there's nothing wrong with the state but it is in its in its sphere of where God has intended for it to operate but it has no right to receive that which belongs to God and then articulate 80 Jones based on the commandments themselves there are how many tables of stone 2 tables if you notice carefully on the 1st table the 1st 4 commandments relate to our relationship to God There is no government that has the right to legislate in any manner in regard to that 1st table because it belongs to God our worship all of those things on the 2nd table in our relationship with each other the civil government has the right or progressives to legislate in those matters if I steal the government has the right to punish me if I murder the government has the right to punish as it is it relates to our relationship with one another but you have to be careful because even in the relationship with man to man the civil laws only punish someone for being uncivil or insulin civil not the morality of the matter even though these matters do relate to morality if I'm punished for stealing I'm not punished by the civil government for the morality immorality of stealing I'm punished because I did something that was uncivil in taking something from so. One else that belonged to them and taking it for myself I'm not punished for the immorality of the thing I'm punished for the incivility of the action and so in that area the government the civil government does have the right to legislate So Professor Jones actually went on and said that 70 AD us would oppose the bill with equal force even if it was in favor of enforcing the true Sabbath day we would oppose it just as much because you don't want to require people in any regard to go against their conscience and give something to May in which belongs to God or any to keep moving on George Washington Jones noted before the Senate committee he says I don't know how George Washington is regarded amongst others but among Seventh-Day Adventists we still hold George Washington in fairly high regard and so which if you look at the story or the biography of George Washington I mean he wasn't perfect but he certainly had a tremendous man of character and principle and then George Washington actually said and wrote this in 79 before becoming president he said every man who conducts himself as a good citizen is accountable alone to God for his religious faith that he understand the separation of church and state and religious liberty Absolutely and is to be protected in worshipping God according to the dictates of his own conscience the conscience is to be in inviolable is not to be violated in any way by laws of man forcing him to do what man says he should do number 2 the 2nd principle upon which we stand here is where Jones correctly I believe went in and said this proposed Sunday law is unconstitutional it flies in the face of the very foundational principles of our Constitution the U.S. Constitution was actually drafted over a period of about 4 months in 787 and this document a constitution is the framework and guidelines for how the government and everything underneath it will operate the press. Didn't is subordinate to the Constitution because the Constitution creates the president and likewise with Congress is created their positions as Senators and Representatives is created by the Constitution so it's subordinate to what the Constitution itself outlines as what is right and wrong and at the very beginning the Constitution says here this is article there are 7 articles in the Constitution that is just major statements or areas of of interest and it says no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States as Article 6 clause 3 and further Now these amendments that were added the constitution later or amendments are they so are they lower than the original Constitution are they equal to the original Constitution or they above the original Constitution above equal or lower their equal to the Constitution although there are added later they have the same weight and force as the original Constitution in what they're saying so we have had 27 amendments which have been added to our Constitution since it was 1st drafted and approved and the very 1st amendment and by the way some people say why did they put the Bill of Rights in which is the 1st 10 amendments right away as I've read the story of the Constitution and forming it itself they spent so much time creating the presidency and the Congress and the Supreme Court and the courts all those details that by the time they got finished with that and they thought about putting together a bill of rights to guarantee rights the delegates at that convention said this is just we're exhausted after 4 months of all of continuous focusing and trying to build and create this let's just take what we have and we'll work on a bill of rights later and so was it they didn't care about it is just that they were exhausted from putting the original Constitution I think together that they came back very shortly and added what we call or no as the Bill of Rights the 1st 10 amendments and in the 1st Amendment the very 1st part of that it actually says. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof that 1st a minute was added just very shortly after the constitution itself so there's 2 key clauses in that statement it is called the establishment clause the federal government cannot establish a religion based on what the 1st Amendment says and then it cannot prevent the freedom to exercise that religious belief at all unless it interferes with someone else's rights or freedoms all of our freedoms are relative to a degree there was a Supreme Court justice named Oliver Wendell Holmes that was known for saying the right to swing my fist in where the other man's nose begins and I can swing my fist all day long but whenever it interferes and the other man or persons nose begins if I'm in violating their rights then I don't have the right to do that even if I claim that is part of my worship freedom to worship that is interfering with someone else's rights so they're relative to the rights of other people the constitution and this effort and attempt at trying to change it it's so important and it's very interesting because the North Carolina State Constitution says you have to believe in God in order to be elected to an office in the state of North Carolina any office within the state of North Carolina you have to be you have to acknowledge and be a believer in God Now when that was drafted back in the 17th seventies it seems maybe harmless enough but that's that's not as a bad idea how is it that he was elected and was able to take office it's because of if you look at the top right the Constitution establishes and sets up a ladder of supremacy and the highest law of the land civil law is our constitution there is the laws of Congress are actually subordinate to the Constitution and you might say what happens if they pass a law and it disagrees with the Constitution the court system is set up in such a way they have the power to judicial review review the laws the Supreme Court and they have declared laws passed by states laws passed by the national government to be unconstitutional it doesn't. Happen at the national level very often the last I checked in the 200 years plus of our existence or only about $160.00 federal laws have been declared unconstitutional the power of the Supreme Court to do that means that law is nullified it's no longer in effect because the national government which I just read to you says that there is no religious test that shall ever be required of anyone to serve in an office that is higher than the state constitution North Carolina and so therefore he was able to be elected the principle of our government is that government and its officers are always subject to the law they are not above the law well would you believe that Henry Blair as his proposed law began to falter in committee he decided to propose an amendment to change the Constitution which is the highest form of law and is it possible to do that the answer is yes that is there's actually 4 ways that that can be done and it is a process that involves both the national government and the state governments and this is happened 27 times I think what I'll just mention in passing is the 26th Amendment was passed in 3 years and 10 days from start to finish and so things at a fundamental level can change and I'll also mention this the freedoms that we have enjoy and they're in the Constitution it seems like they're they're in stone they're in granite they can all be changed and the Bible Prophecy tells us in Revelation that it will be changed and do we even have we already have on record a precedent for a a law that's been passed prohibition which was the 18th Amendment in 180919 that was cancelled by the 21st Amendment which basically just canceled and said we're not going to do that anymore we're not going to have prohibition in prohibit you know manufacture sale of alcoholic beverages and so is it possible that the very freedoms in the 1st amendment can be changed freedom of religion the answer is yes and the Bible tells us that it will in fact happen continuing on with Jones's arguments Sunday laws are. Not for the good of anybody and hell just mentioned several reasons he says for the state to compel men the government to do no work is to enforce idleness you're requiring people to be idle and not allowing them to work what is the command of God say 6 days shout the labor and do all the work but you are allowed to work on 6 days but the 7th day is that special holy day when we are asked and commanded by God not to work so that we would not miss the time with him he also says any attempt to enforce religious observances only enforces hypocrisy and multiplies sin if you force someone to do something and their heart is not in it you're forcing people to be hypocrites and Jesus God they have no interest in hypocrisy at all so a law that would require people to worship in a sense would be a law requiring people to be hypocrites the historical argument going back in history why does it matter I have a few verses up here Ecclesiastes $19315.00 It basically says the thing which hath been it is that which shall be and that which is done is that which shall be done and there is no new thing under the sun so God is saying that which hath been is that which shall be we have from these verses the principle that history can repeat itself and going back in early times the Roman emperor Constantine established by the power of the state and the government with the influence of the political religious leaders the 1st Sunday law in $321.00 A.D. and out of this power of the state to enforce the will of the church we have the rise of the papacy which officially rose to power in $538.00 A.D. which basically was able to control the state to do its bidding so the history of this man made attempt at a theocracy shows widespread persecution and intolerance of those who disagree so the question came up before the Senate committee what's wrong with a theocracy today what's what's the matter with having at the ocracy a government based on religious principles wrong with Ed Well listen to the logic and the reasoning what is. A theocracy the debt by definition a theocracy is a government of a state this run and administered by immediate divine guidance that is by God himself or by officials who are regarded as being divinely guided and led by God Himself so it's a direct channel from God to the state to do and say and enforce what God Himself is warning people to do going back to the Bible in the Old Testament the government of Israel was a true theocracy which means it really was a government of got God himself was leading and calling Moses' at the burning bush to lead his people out of Egypt in Exodus 3 direct communication from God to Moses' to go and lead his people then as Moses led the people out through the wilderness it continues through the time of Joshua after Moses died and down through the ages of the judges the book of Judges gives this account a judge was both a civil and religious leader led by God continuing now fast forward to the days of Samuel in the days of Samuel who is considered to be the last judge that people pleaded with God to have a king they wanted to be like the other nations give us a king for Samuel verse 8 talks are sorry chapter 8 talks about that and so the Lord allowed them to have a king and Samuel who was directly led by God anointed 1st Saul and then later David to be king after Saul rejected God and turned away from him then David was chosen and established as King and God says in 2nd Samuel 7 verse 13 that he would establish David's throne how long he would establish it forever so notice now as we're we're just following in tracing history together this is Bible history when Solomon succeeded to the kingdom in place of David his father the record in the Scriptures is that Solomon sat on the throne of the Lord as king instead of David his father Notice it says the throne of the Lord so the throne that Saul and that David and that Solomon and all the successor set on was actually the throne or position of the Lord that God allowed and gave to. Him to rule and reign on earth in his stead that was the allowance that God provided after Solomon died there are 21 Kings all the way down from David to the last king of Juda who was then a coyote remember the promise that David's line would always the king would always be through David's line is that a Kaya was taken to captivity and he turned away he made a covenant with the king of Babylon never can as Or that he would follow and do his ways and he would rule Judah under the authority of never Knesset or will he broke that contract and King Nebuchadnezzar came and took him captive killed his sons before his eyes before having his own eyes gouged out you know in the Bible records that itself is exactly what happened and he was carried blindfolded or rather blinded rather after seeing his sons killed away to Babylon Well when Zedekiah broke the covenant that God said to him there is a significant piece 21 in verse 25 this is the Lord speaking is that a Kaya who is the last king of Judah and he says and now profane wicked prince of Israel whose day is calm when iniquity shall have an end thus saith the Lord God remove the diadem and take off the crown this shall not be the same exalt him that is low in a base Him That is why did you notice remove the what remove the diadem and take off the what Remember that the kings of Juda were really sitting on the throne of the Lord and then God says Notice especially verse $27.00 I will overturn overturn overturned it and it shall be no more until he comes whose right it is and I will give it him what is this referring to remove the diadem and take off the crown while under is that it the kingdom of Judah had been subjected to Babylon and when God said it he would overturn overturn overturn it when Babylon fell to the meat and Persians the kingdom was overturned the 1st time that's in 539 B.C. when Mido Persia fell and was succeeded by Greece it was overturned the 2nd time that's in 331 B.C.. And then when the Greek empire gave way to Rome it was overturned the 3rd time or that said it would be overturned 3 times so that brings us all the way down I just have on the right that picture of the statue of Daniel which traces the prophetic history of the key nations of history all the way down to Rome and then what does it say I will give it to him Who's right it is Whose right is the kingdom of God Luke one verse 31333 and behold I shall conceive in the womb an angel speaking to to Mary and bring forth a son and shall call his name Jesus he shall be great and shall be called the Son of the highest and the Lord God shall give unto him what does it say the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David is Jesus a descendant of David yes or no yes he is so Jesus is the one who rightfully is the king that should sit on David's throne in a theocracy certainly Jesus should be the ruler but notice at the end of his earthly life and ministry while he was on trial with pilot Jesus speaking to pilot at his trial just before his crucifixion said to him in John 836 My kingdom is not where my kingdom is not of this world my kingdom is not of this world interesting there are civil governments that want to establish God's kingdom on Earth but Jesus they are contradicting Jesus himself who says My kingdom is not of this world if it were of this world as my servants would fight that I should not be delivered to the Jews and the authorities but he says but now is my kingdom not from him the throne of God and the Kingdom of God with Jesus Christ being the rightful one to sit on the throne has been removed from this earth until the 2nd coming of Jesus there can be no theocracy on earth that falls within the guidelines of what God has given himself it cannot be so it's not in the all the wisdom and the plans of God until and I will take the time to read that but in Matthew 25 or 31 it says when the Son of Man Jesus shall come in his glory. And all the holy angels with him then shall he set upon the throne of His glory and a throne presupposes a kingdom and when he sits on the throne of His glory that will be at that time when a true theocracy is established again on this earth and it will be at the 2nd coming of Jesus so that is just an incredible sweep through history to see how that shows there can be no truth the ocracy on earth today by the order of God What are some of the practical arguments in a practical sense opposed to having this bill proposed Sunday law passed these are just a few of the things that he said that I thought were were significant to enforce upon me in the laws of Christian morality is nothing else than to attempt to compel them to be Christians and doesn't fact compel them to be hypocrites to force them to follow the the law while their hearts are not in it unless it's from the heart it's all heart work with us in how God relates to us it starts with the heart and the motives and desires of the heart if preachers and church members will not keep the Sabbath in obedience to what they say is the commandment of God He asked this very very powerful question will they keep it in obedience to the command of the state if you're not going to keep the Sabbath and you believe that it's God who want you to keep the Sabbath what's going to motivate you to keep the Sabbath more if the state comes in and tells you to keep the Sabbath if you won't do it because God is asking you to do it what added boost is it going to give for the state to step in and try to bully and make people to worship and keep this day holy I mean that's just that's just so practical and reasonable to me in response to this was something they were offered they offered the Adventists an exemption clause you know what will since you've got so upset about this we'll offer you these are the senators and exemptions so that you and your people can be exempted from this law and you can just continue to worship and you don't have to worry about keeping Sunday Well Jones responded and said there should be no exemption from a just law if the law is right it is wrong to exempt but I. Obviously if the law is wrong then it's just so clear and practical if they truly a good law for everyone then no one should need to be exempted from it it must be a bad law if you have to offer exemptions because the law itself cannot stand for everybody it's just an exemption clause he said is only a toleration clause in disguise will tolerate you until we can get enough of a majority or support or whatever to then force you into our position that is not in the design and the will of God but the genealogy of Sunday laws of the United States goes all the way back to the colonies which goes back to England and the Church of England which is the church and state which goes back to England separating from the papacy in 1534 and declaring their right under King Henry the 8th to be the head of the church and going back to before the king of England you have the papacy which is in fact a joining of church and state together and so all the way back to Constantine itself the Sunday blue laws that exist in our country today many states still have these on the books they're not often enforced but they really trace all the way back from the colonies to England to the papacy back to the very beginning of the very 1st Sunday law which is Constantine himself in an attempt to control and compel the conscience of people just amazing to see the connections there so ultimately what happened this Sunday rest bill died in committee that is the fate of most bills in Congress you'd be amazed at how many thousands of bills are proposed in the Congress every year every term but it died in committee and Senator Blair not to be undone though the very next year he reintroduced another bill that had the same purpose but he tried to change the wording around and see if that would help and Jones went back to the committee and said it's still the same thing in disguise you're trying to enforce religious worship as a civil government and it cannot be so actually in the news Poland over in Europe signs into law an anti Sunday shopping legislation for the purpose and the aims to give families more time together. Very interesting so here it comes again it's the same idea in the same principle you know Poland was significant back several decades ago with some of the Solidarity movement and some of the uprisings in Europe so it's going to be interesting to keep an eye on them as they inforce this law which is slowly by its by slowly requiring stores to shut down on Sunday interesting to notice that 88 percent of the people in Poland are Roman Catholic or what are the Bible principles upon which we stand the Bible principles I think a key verse in my mind is Acts 529 when Peter and the Apostles were hauled in before the Sanhedrin and they were told to stop preaching and teaching and sharing Jesus and they were commanded to stop it don't do that anymore by the highest ruling authorities in the Jewish nation the Sanhedrin the 70 Council of leaders the religious leaders of the people and Peter and the other apostles and Acts 529 answered and said we ought to obey God rather than main That is the principle that we stand on now God expects us if you read the Bible carefully to obey man so far is it does not infringe on what God asked us to do but when man interferes and intervenes with something that is thing that only belongs to God He is out of line and we ought to a big God rather than man God declares the person innocent who violates the law that interferes with man's relationship to Him For example Shadrach Meshach and Abednego a golden image was set up violating the 2nd commandment they were ordered to bow down and worship to it they did not follow the laws of the state and what happened when they were thrown in the fiery furnace Jesus himself visited them and rescued him delivered them from the fiery furnace they violated man's law to uphold God's law when there was a conflict also Daniel Chapter 6 Daniel in the Lion's Den there was a decree that went out under a different kingdom the Persians you can only pray to the king for 30 days what is the 1st commandment say Thou shalt have no other gods before me and Daniel true to God Do not pray to the king but can. To pray to the true God as we all should and was hauled in and accused of violating man's law through the Lion's Den And we know that he was rescued and delivered from that well the Bible speaks of a revival of tyranny and intolerance a revival of tyranny and intolerance notice Revelation Chapter 13 versus $1112.00 and I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth and he had 2 horns like a lamb this is a picture of the United States and he spake as a dragon the speaking of a of a nation or kingdom is through its laws and through its courts that's how a nation talks and communicates is the last that are passed and the judicial decisions that reinforce those laws it says and he exercises all the power of the 1st beast before him and causes or make it rather the earth and them which drove there in to worship the 1st beast whose Deadly Wound was healed yes a revival of religious to tyranny and religious liberty will be denying continuing Revelation 13 it says and he had power to give life into the image of the beast that the image of the bee should both speak and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed wait should what if they do not follow and comply they should be killed according to man's laws but we have the principle that we ought to obey God rather than man regardless of the consequences taking the same attitude as Shadrach Meshach and Abednego in Daniel 3 verse 17 when they said our God whom we serve is able to deliver us from the burning fiery furnace and he will deliver us out of the one hand OK but then they said these words but if not be it known to the Oking that we will not serve the gods nor worship the golden image which thou has set up we're not going to follow and disobey God even if he doesn't save us or rescue us in this instance we're going to trust him with our lives and it says and he caused it all notice the all of their both small and great rich and poor free and bond to receive a mark in their right hand or in their foreheads and that. No man might buy or sell save he that had the mark or the name of the beast or the number of his name God never compels obedience this is the character of our God He never compels forces obedience prophets and King speaking of the story of Shadrach Meshach and Abednego says God never compels the obedience of man he leaves all free to choose whom they will serve all means all you and me every single one everyone around us God leaves all free to choose without any force who they will serve Now this is also interesting the last resort of every false religion is guess what it is force compliance and coersion of the will force is the last resort of every false religion at 1st it tries attraction as the king of Babylon tried the power of music and outward show if these attractions invented by min inspired by Satan fail to make man worship the image the hungry flames of the furnace were ready to consume them and then it says and finishes the paragraph so it will be now so it will be now the last resort of every false religion is force Christ does not use force or compulsion in drawing meant to him 16 manuscript released page $95.00 Christ does not use force in drawing meant to Him The Bible tells us plainly in Romans 2 verse 4 it is the goodness of God that leads us to repentance it's not the force of God that leads us to repentance it is the goodness and the grace and the mercy of God that leads us to repentance God desires only the service of love desire of ages page $22.00 paragraph one that the gloomy shadows might be lightened that the world might be brought back to God same deceptive power was to be broken this could not be done by what you cannot do that by force you cannot it cannot be done by force the exercise of force is contrary to the principles of God's government a minute the principles of God's government he. Desires only the service of love love springs from the heart it springs from an appreciation for who God is and it says and love cannot be commanded it cannot be won by force or authority you cannot force someone to love you with your authority you cannot make them love you and it's the same with God only by love is love awakened to know God is to what to know God is to love him or love God I love God I know you do too I want to love him more and more each and every day his character must be manifested in contrast to the character of Satan it is Satan's character that forces to compel and force people to do what he wants them to do let us strive with all of our God given talents and capabilities to know God and to make him known in our hearts in our homes in Hendersonville and everywhere the Lord might lead us oh Father in Heaven Lord we want to trust you more we know that trying times are ahead of us but may our faith in our confidence and our strength in you not waver or may we do all that we can to stand for the principles of right for truth for the freedom of every man every woman's conscience as you would have us to do strengthen us and bless us to carry on your Will this coming week is our prayer in Jesus' name let all of God's people say Amen and Amen this media was brought to you by audio for years a website dedicated to spreading God's word through free sermon audio and much more if you would like to know more about the universe or if you would like to listen to more service leave to visit W W W audio or.


Embed Code

Short URL