Thank God for the Rule of Law
Image
Man-made laws are a mixed bag. Motivations range from desire to build a better society to desire to pander to a constituency, increase personal power, settle a score, or cover up wrongdoing. Even when well meant, laws often bring unintended consequences.
Rule of law, though, is better. As an alternative to the rule of mere men, it’s a rare and precious blessing. A portion of the Oxford English Dictionary definition captures what I mean by the term.
… the principle whereby all members of a society (including those in government) are considered equally subject to publicly disclosed legal codes and processes.
Events of the past four years, especially the last four weeks, have exposed the fact that many who ought to be the most devoted and disciplined in support of the rule of law have lost sight of its value and importance.
Rule of law is God’s invention.
When God organized ancient Israel into a nation, He chose to do more than put Moses in charge and rule through him. He provided words etched in stone (Exodus 32:16). Eventually He provided the entire Torah (Pentateuch), and Moses and later rulers were expected to apply it to the needs of the nation—and also obey it themselves.
We might argue that Hammurabi introduced the rule of law first. Regardless, its invention was an act of God’s gracious providence in the world (James 1:17). By providing a written law to Israel, God made that clear.
Rule of law points to greater realities.
Decrees from autocrats and oligarchies inspire people to look no further than the arbitrary will of humans. They’re the ones in control and we do what they want.
Rule of law separates authority from personality, basing it outside the people in charge. But it does even more: it appeals to moral principles that are bigger than us—even all of us collectively.
In Israel’s case, those principles included “you shall be holy” (Exod. 22:32; Lev. 11:44, 19:2, 20:26) as well as principles such as the rightness of being kind to foreigners (Lev. 19:34, Deut. 10:19), respecting other people’s property (Exod. 20:15), and taking responsibility for unintended harm (Exod. 21:33, Deut. 22:4).
From a natural law perspective, the rule of law points to a transcendent order built into creation itself. From a biblical perspective, it points to the Transcendent Orderer who created. Either way, though secularists may try to deny it, law points beyond the merely human.
Of all people, Christians should treasure and zealously uphold the rule of law!
Rule of law seeks wisdom.
Legal proceedings privilege facts and reasoning over the passions of the moment, and it’s a blessing to all of us that they do. Scripture reveals that this elevation of careful though over emotion is characteristic of wisdom.
- Whoever is slow to anger has great understanding, but he who has a hasty temper exalts folly. (Prov. 14:29)
- Whoever trusts in his own mind is a fool, but he who walks in wisdom will be delivered. (Prov. 28:26)
- An intelligent heart acquires knowledge, and the ear of the wise seeks knowledge. (Prov. 18:15)
- If one gives an answer before he hears, it is his folly and shame. (Prov. 18:13)
- The one who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him. (Prov. 18:17)
- The heart of the righteous ponders how to answer, but the mouth of the wicked pours out evil things. (Prov. 15:28)
- But the wisdom from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, open to reason, full of mercy and good fruits, impartial and sincere. (James 3:17)
- By me [wisdom] kings reign, and rulers decree what is just; (Prov. 8:15)
The conflict over the 2020 presidential election result boils down to one question: Will the political right honor the rule of law—in most cases, long-standing state laws—or will we be ruled by our passions? The latter is the path of folly but also the path of instability and oppression. The fact that the left demonstrated the same tendencies (though on a far smaller scale) in 2016 only underscores the point. If the right doesn’t champion the rule of law, who do we think we should leave that job to?
Many conservatives believe claims of large scale election fraud and efforts to keep Donald Trump in power are honoring the rule of law. But there’s a fundamental problem with that view: the rule of law includes due process and the burden of proof placed on accusers. Accusers are required to prove that their accusations are true using credible evidence (which is not the same as “someone saying what we want to hear;” see Prov. 19:28).
Any attempt to shift the burden of proof from “innocent until proven guilty” to “guilty until proven innocent” is a direct assault on the rule of law. It’s not how we do law in America—and that reality is a blessing to all of us every day we live here.
Rule of law resists idolatry.
It’s easy to idolize a Queen Elizabeth or a Dear Leader Kim Jong-il, or a President Donald… or Ronald, or Barack or Joe. We’re constantly tempted to “put our trust in princes” (Psalm 146:3, 118:8-9).
It’s harder to idolize laws. It can be done (Rom. 10:2-4), but we’re much more prone to idolize people.
Where law is king (see Rutherford and Paine), power is distributed in written codes across regimes and generations. In the U.S., the law embodied in the Constitution spreads power across the legislative, judicial, and executive branches, and also spreads it across states. Though candidates and voters often act as though the President gets all the credit for national accomplishments, that’s not really how it works. U.S. presidents have substantial policy power, strong influence over what happens in Congress, and enormous cultural influence. But the rule of law ensures that achievements are the result of many individuals and groups working together.
It also has a way of throwing a wet blanket on our hero worship. We need that. We should thank God for it.
Rule of law is defining.
Given our national cultural decay, I think this is not overstatement: If we don’t have the rule of law, we don’t—as a nation, have anything. It’s ultimately all that keeps us from becoming Venezuela, Somalia, Russia, or China.
It’s also what makes all our other policy pursuits worthwhile. There’s no point in electing officials who are against murder if those officials are against the rule of law. This remains true if the murder we’re talking about is the killing of human children still in the womb.
This is a major shift in where we are as a nation, and one that many conservatives don’t yet seem to recognize. The rule of law used to be assumed on both the left and the right, but we can no longer take that commitment for granted—on the left or the right. Our first question about any potential president or legislator or judge can no longer be “are they pro-life”? Our first question must now be, are they pro-rule-of-law? Do they contribute to the strength of our national commitment to the rule of law or do they—directly or indirectly, through policy or rhetoric—weaken it?
Other things might be equally important to our national life. Nothing is more important.
Photo: Bill Oxford.
Aaron Blumer 2016 Bio
Aaron Blumer is a Michigan native and graduate of Bob Jones University and Central Baptist Theological Seminary (Plymouth, MN). He and his family live in small-town western Wisconsin, not far from where he pastored Grace Baptist Church for thirteen years. In his full time job, he is content manager for a law-enforcement digital library service.
- 31 views
Bro Barkman wrote:
The integrity of future elections requires confronting all known abuses of election law. Will those who refused to let poll watchers do their job be called to account? Will those who defied state election laws to accept ballots that were not qualified be held accountable? Even if we are talking about only a few hundred ballots, shouldn’t election laws be enforced, and violations punished? And, is it possible that a more careful examination of a few hundred irregularities may turn up a good many more?
I reply:
- You assume there are “known abuses,” but you refuse to identify who committed them, where they were committed, what locality has jurisdiction, and what exactly happened.
- Why do you believe poll watchers were thwarted, where were they thwarted, who thwarted them, and what evidence do you have to substantiate the idea that local officials have done nothing?
- Why do you believe state election laws were thwarted, in which states were they thwarted, who exactly thwarted them, and what evidence do you have to substantiate the idea that local officials have done nothing?
- A lot of things are “possible.” Not many things are probable. What is your predication for continuing to believe there was widespread ballot fraud? All you continue to do is ask rhetorical “what if” questions, assume guilt, and lambast officials for not seeing things your way. Yes, well … it doesn’t work like that in the real world.
You continue:
Maybe, maybe not. But we will never know unless we are willing to do genuine investigation, and not sweep it all under the “it won’t change the outcome” rug.
Have you realized it’s theoretically possible I’m the transgender descendant of Adolf Hitler? It’s true. It is possible. You’ll never know unless you’re willing to do genuine investigation! But, because there is no predication to actually believe that nonsense, it’s not worth investigating. There is no probable cause. No predication. That is how the real world works!
Tyler is a pastor in Olympia, WA and works in State government.
[G. N. Barkman]I’m not sure it would be advantageous. The Democrats probably realized they’d look silly making a big deal out of understandable human errors. The Republicans don’t seem to have a problem with how they are looking in this regard.Wouldn’t it be advantageous to the Democrats to point out voting irregularities that favored Republicans? That would support their contention that all the irregularities are understandable human errors that occur in any election.
For example, are there any precincts where Democrat poll watchers were excluded?Sure, in Detroit. When the room capacity levels were reached, extra poll watchers from both the Democrat and Republican party were denied entry.
Are there any precincts where Republican officials declared the counting would stop for the night, sent everyone home, and then continued counting in the absence of Democrat observers?Are there any precincts where Democrat officials did this?
Are there any precincts where voting machines switched Democrat votes to Republican?Are there any precincts where Republican votes were switched to Democrat?
I know there are some counties in Michigan and Georgia in which accusation have been made, but explanations are easily found for the discrepancies. For example, in one county, the “counting” software and the “reporting” software were not synched up correctly. So the count was correctly made, but the initial report of the count went out incorrectly. That’s not an actual “switch” of votes.
Are there any places where Republican officials allowed ballots to be counted that did not meet the required standard of law?Do you know of a place where Democrats did this? I know that 21 states allow votes to be counted if received after election day as long as the ballots are postmarked by election day. Did one of the other 29 states start counting them when they were received later?
Do you want me to go on?Sure, if you have something more substantial.
On the one hand, there are those who seem willing to believe every rumor and accusation of fraud, no matter how baseless. On the other hand, there are those who seem unwilling to accept any irregularities as possible attempts at fraud, no matter how suspicious.
Surely there must be a reasonable middle ground that recognizes the reality of irregularities, and desires to investigate to understand how and why they occurred. Why are some so determined to accept the assertion that there is nothing to see? Of course there’s nothing to see for those who are unwilling to look. (There was nothing to see with Hunter Biden until the election was over, and it was no longer possible to ignore.)
Irregularities in several large, Democratically controlled cities are reasonably asserted. Hundreds have sworn to witnessing violations of election laws. Poll watchers were excluded in several instances. Shouldn’t rule of law demand that we try to find out why? For those who demand evidence, I have none. Only questions. That’s why I want to see a more thorough investigation. Let the evidence be found, if it exists. If not, then let’s put it behind us and move on. But please, let’s not leave irregularities unresolved. The integrity of future elections require that all poll workers obey existing laws.
G. N. Barkman
If you have questions, read the actual lawsuits filed, then read the court decisions destroying them. You will find your answers there. It won’t be exciting reading, and it’s too boring to be covered in breathless tones by the usual suspects, but your answers will be there. Go to the primary source documents!
Tyler is a pastor in Olympia, WA and works in State government.
It seems likely that many of the assertions were not thoroughly investigated because the remedy requested of the courts was way too big. Something like, “There is evidence of irregularities here, so we petition the court to throw out all the votes and overturn the election.” Trump’s team is focused on reversing the election. Somebody needs to be more narrowly focused on specific cases of irregularity and what to do about those. That’s too small a project for Trump’s attorneys, but not for the integrity of future elections.
G. N. Barkman
“Even if there are irregularities, they are not sufficient to overturn the results” is not sufficient reason to refuse to investigate these irregularities. Is no one to be held responsible for ignoring election laws in many precincts?
What hasn’t been investigated?
Because we’ve been having elections for a long time, and both accuracy and fraud have been a concern for a long time, there are longstanding procedures for all reports and allegations of error or misconduct.
Of course, there are different thresholds of evidence involved. Somebody making statements doesn’t automatically merit a criminal investigation.
In elections, they look for enough evidence to warrant an audit first. If there’s enough to call for that there’s an audit, and depending on what that turns up there might be more investigation to see if there was a process error or negligence, etc. There would have to be even stronger evidence to warrant a fraud investigation.
So, I’ve been seeing “investigation” in the sense of due process being followed, all over in this election, as usual.
Where has it not?
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
[Aaron Blumer]In GA, they have done two recounts, but the SOS refuses to do signature verification. There are many disputes about the validity of ballots in GA that signature verification would help resolve. The Trump team has a petition before the Georgia Supreme Court to address various issues with ballots in GA as well as other problems: https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/12/breaking-trump-legal-team-file…“Even if there are irregularities, they are not sufficient to overturn the results” is not sufficient reason to refuse to investigate these irregularities. Is no one to be held responsible for ignoring election laws in many precincts?
What hasn’t been investigated?
Because we’ve been having elections for a long time, and both accuracy and fraud have been a concern for a long time, there are longstanding procedures for all reports and allegations of error or misconduct.
Of course, there are different thresholds of evidence involved. Somebody making statements doesn’t automatically merit a criminal investigation.
In elections, they look for enough evidence to warrant an audit first. If there’s enough to call for that there’s an audit, and depending on what that turns up there might be more investigation to see if there was a process error or negligence, etc. There would have to be even stronger evidence to warrant a fraud investigation.
So, I’ve been seeing “investigation” in the sense of due process being followed, all over in this election, as usual.
Where has it not?
In MI, a forensic examination of Dominion voting machines is alleged to have produced evidence that votes were not switched by a glitch or by human error but were switched by the computer program. We may know more about that on Monday: https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/12/will-small-county-northern-mi-…
There are several pending cases before SCOTUS concerning the battleground states that have yet to have been heard.
Favorable rulings in one or more of these cases might finally give the Trump team opportunities to have investigated things that have not been investigated by giving forensic access to the ballots, voting machines, etc.
Has anyone seriously investigated why poll watchers were removed from ballot counting in several big city precincts? Similarly, the issue of not allowing poll watchers to monitor ballot drop boxes? (Because, apparently, they were not specifically addressed in election laws. But, of course, they did not exist before this year, and were added because of COVID. Prime opportunity for ballot stuffing with nobody allowed to monitor the precess.) Has anyone addressed the issue of election officials accepting ballots that did not meet the laws of their states? Has anyone investigated the processes designed to assure the integrity of mail-in ballots to assure their legitimacy? Did COVID alterations compromise the integrity of ballot legitimacy? (IOW, is there any way to be sure all the mail in ballots came from legally registered voters, and were submitted by the intended registered voter only, and not someone else?)
It seems to me that there are still a good many questions that have not been satisfactorily answered.
G. N. Barkman
A large segment of the American church has gone mad and worships Trump and the GOP in an idolatrous fashion. I don’t recognize many of you as the otherwise rational, sane men I know you to be.
Tyler is a pastor in Olympia, WA and works in State government.
If things like the exclusion of poll watchers have actually been investigated, I’d expect to see one of the two;
1. If it’s true, I’d expect elections commissioners to put those who excluded poll watchers on a list of people permanently ineligible to work in elections, and possibly even prosecute some of them. Distrust in elections is a big deal.
2. If allegations are false, I’d expect prosecutors to file perjury charges against those filing known false affidavits for the exact same reason as #1.
Having seen neither, my conclusion is that the investigations so far performed are of the sort that the Obama administration did of the IRS scandal—concluding that it was management problems instead of illegal acts, but not taking any concrete actions to prevent those “management problems” from recurring. In other words, pro forma investigations that everybody inside knows are a Potemkin village, but that credulous (or complicit) journalists will accept at face value.
Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.
The lawsuits and investigations have failed, not because the accusations have been investigated and found to not be true. They have been dismissed for other reasons. The SCOTUS said TX did not have standing. They did not say the claim was invalid. In a lot of other ones, and I have not read any of the reports fully, but have scanned the basics of them, have been rejected because the claim was not substantiated by Trump’s team. In other words, the court wanted Trump to do all the investigation, and then report the results. There has been very little deep investigation. Also, the courts have accepted the “recounts” as valid because the election officials say they are. To my knowledge, there has not been a vote audit that verified every absentee or mail in ballot was confirmed to have come from a real voter.
So, this is the reason the Trump supporters are still upset. The claim is that illegal ballots were counted in multiple states, and NO ONE has shown this has not been the case.
That being said, the election is over. Biden will be president. Father, please help us to be better witnesses of you.
Tyler wrote:
A large segment of the American church has gone mad and worships Trump and the GOP in an idolatrous fashion. I don’t recognize many of you as the otherwise rational, sane men I know you to be.
Tyler, I have to wonder if you have been reading the same threads as I have been. Some of us want investigations based on the Biblical teaching about multiple witnesses. Many of us have made it clear that it is not about Trump as much as about the rule of law. Tyler, you have not only slandered your fellow Christians, you have consistently resorted to name calling in these election threads. Your behavior towards those who disagree with you is very much like that of Trump towards those who disagree with him. I must say, however, that I hold pastors to a higher standard than I do presidents in that regard. Still, that is one of the reasons why I have not been overly enthusiastic about Trump as a president- even though I voted for him in 2020 but did not in 2016.
The lawsuits and investigations have failed, not because the accusations have been investigated and found to not be true. They have been dismissed for other reasons.
This is true in some cases. Not even close to all. Multiple local cases have been tossed due to lack of evidence.
About poll watcher claims, lots has been written. This may be of use: some claims have been proven to be plain false… https://www.forbes.com/sites/tommybeer/2020/11/06/trump-and-allies-keep…
As for multiple witnesses etc., no witnesses have been ignored. They’ve simply been found to be either not credible, or hearsay, or to be verifiably counterfactual. Or to have observed what is actually standard procedure. There is widespread ignorance of the actual processes involved.
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
JD Miller wrote:
Tyler, I have to wonder if you have been reading the same threads as I have been.
I doubt I have been! Many Christians today prefer to source their news from dubious hucksters or opinion pundits. They have little to no idea how to find news, an inability to filter it, and prefer to dwell in their echo-chambers of choice. That may or may not be you. But, it reflects the habits of far too many.
Some of us want investigations based on the Biblical teaching about multiple witnesses. Many of us have made it clear that it is not about Trump as much as about the rule of law.
There is no predication for action. Courts have ruled over and over. The process is working. It just isn’t the result you want.
Tyler, you have not only slandered your fellow Christians, you have consistently resorted to name calling in these election threads.
I have not mentioned any specific names at all. I am worried in general at the comments of many people on this thread, and in the greater evangelical world. The conspiracy mindset is inherently dangerous and illogical. It is a sickness.
Your behavior towards those who disagree with you is very much like that of Trump towards those who disagree with him.
If I were the President, I would have taken to Twitter and tossed out expletives, coined juvenile nicknames for my enemies, then fired everyone competent around me. I also would have mocked my opponent’s dead children on national television.
I must say, however, that I hold pastors to a higher standard than I do presidents in that regard.
So do I. It’s precisely why I am so disturbed at the comments and mindset of so many pastors in the evangelical world today.
Still, that is one of the reasons why I have not been overly enthusiastic about Trump as a president- even though I voted for him in 2020 but did not in 2016.
I am glad he lost. He deserved to lose. I did not vote for him in 2016 or 2020.
I am quite worried about our country. Has anyone seen the madness that was the Jericho March, from this past weekend? This is lunacy. Allan West, the Texas GOP Chair, has all but called for secession!
The mindset I see from some people on this thread, and from far too many ordinary Christians to boot, is the fruit from that same poisonous tree. I truly fear this country is headed towards something awful, and the saddest part of it all is that too many Christian Nationalists are just as radicalized in their own echo-chambers as the Leftists they despise so thoroughly. They are part of the problem. Now that’s irony.
Tyler is a pastor in Olympia, WA and works in State government.
Tyler, you have not only slandered your fellow Christians, you have consistently resorted to name calling in these election threads.
I have not mentioned any specific names at all. I am worried in general at the comments of many people on this thread, and in the greater evangelical world. The conspiracy mindset is inherently dangerous and illogical. It is a sickness.
Two Christians you mentioned and named called were Jenna Ellis and Eric Metaxas. Unless you can provide a quote of Metaxas saying “heil Trump” you did slander.
Many are coming from a different perspective then I am and are still responding in a godly manner. Some have crossed the line and I have addressed that when it happens. Aaron has been much more Christlike in his responses since I exhorted him and that speaks to his character. I hope you have the character to take rebuke and grow and learn from it.
Discussion