Prison Reform
The Tender Mercies of the Wicked
Yes and Amen! This is one of my takeaways from reading Rushdoony’s ‘Institutes of Biblical Law.’
“The nearly complete elimination of capital punishment was accompanied by a change in the purpose of punishment for civil crimes. Initially man bore the responsibility for his actions—as stipulated by God. He could atone for his transgressions to the Creator through the sacrificial system, as offending God is the root of all harms done to another Image-bearer. And he still had the consequences of his actions to make his victims whole (or close to it).
Today the penal system is stuffed full of the secular lie that man is basically good, so all he simply needs is to be rehabilitated. Now he can atone for his transgressions to the State through a prison sentence, because the State is who was wronged. He has a roof over his head and gets three squares a day—thanks to the taxpayer. Then he spends his remaining time in graduate-level training on how to do far worse upon his release. The icing on the cake? He faces no meaningful consequences—such as restitution—for his original crime. The victims get nothing.”
This area of our society is in dire need of a reformation. Thanks for shedding some light on it.Jeff
Jeff, thanks.
On our system of injustice:
Good start, and something I’ve advocated for quite some time. “Debtors prison” has always made good sense to me. I mean, where do you think license plates come from?
I would add in the optional possibility of someone working off his debt directly, as in actual servitude for the victim. Call it enslavement if you like; I’m not afraid. But I can also see many people being quite uncomfortable with bringing a thief into their household as a slave . . . so debtor’s prison it is!
There are a few other Biblical forms of justice that continue to make sense to me. It’s as if God had some pretty good ideas and everything else we keep trying is patently inferior. Stoning? Yep . . . from thirty yards, with high-powered stone throwers and tiny, brass stones that tend to spiral as they sail through the air. But here’s the key—the victim and/or his next of kin pull the triggers, not some Corps of Cadets. Eye-for-an-eye? Yep . . . not only do we obtain a crucial penal principle from this—the punishment fits the crime—but sometimes the punishment, in God’s view of things, ought to fit the crime with eerie precision. Did you wreck that guy’s car? You lose your car. Simple, clean, efficient . . . and Biblical.
I could continue, but honestly, I think I’m in enough hot water as it is.Andy
Andy, a little “yeah, but” on one point. The old school debtor’s prison just threw them in there, and left them no way to make restitution. There has to be productive work attached.
A Child Discipline Case
I have 5 young children, and the two youngest boys (3 and 4) refuse to go to bed before getting many rounds of spankings for various tomfoolery. Our older kids had the same issue for a very brief time, but these two seem uninterested in learning from the discipline, which makes me think we are doing something wrong. Any suggestions are appreciated.Matthew
Matthew, it is difficult to tell from this distance, but the first thing I would check is whether you need to adjust their bedtimes. When we faced challenges at nap time, one of the things that might have been signaling was that they were outgrowing the need for naps. So we went to “reading rests.” Go into your bedroom for a time, and read books in bed. And if they needed a nap, they would conk out.
Fiction Catch Up
Last year, at age 56, I read, for the first time, the Lord of the Rings (including The Hobbit). And I thoroughly enjoyed it. I’m not much of a fiction reader, but would like to develop that more. I’m now reading again the Chronicles of Narnia, which I read to my children years ago. And of course enjoying it once again.
What might you recommend as my next sizable fiction book that would strike the kind of enjoyment and edification, similar to LOTR and Narnia.
Thank you,Rick
Rick, I would recommend my son’s books—The Cupboards trilogy, The Ashtown Burials series, Boys of Blur, Leepike Ridge.
The Bad God
FAO: Doug Wilson
I (rhetorically) wonder how the faithful can explain why an ethical god would create men to lust after women, but make women vulnerable to men, and without having the ability to prevent unwanted impregnations? This would mean their god-fella created women such that they have much less functional free will than men, and suffer much more physical and emotional abuse.
There’s also the consideration that the god-fella could easily prevent oftentimes deadly, inter-religious conflict by making an appearance and telling us which sect of which religion is the true one, or failing that, how “he” wants to be worshiped.
As a supposedly moral agent, it would be “his” duty to do so. But this god-fella, if “he” were real, would be a depraved evil sadist, unworthy of worship. Apparently, Christians etc. suspend critical thinking to support their wishful thinking.Richard
Richard, the short answer to all your questions is that the world is the way it is because of two factors. One is the creative work of God, which is entirely good. The other is the destructive and rebellious sin of man, of the sort that your letter displays. The awful things you describe are the result of sin. But let me turn this around for you. Suppose with me for a moment that there is no God. That would mean that there is nothing wrong with any of the things you describe.
Covenant of Grace
Apologies for long comment. Whenever you Reformed guys use the phrase “covenant of grace,” it’s never really quite clear what you mean by it. WCF (VII, IV) sets us up to think it’s just another name for the New Testament, but then it takes that interpretation away by presenting the New Testament as one of the administrations of the CoG and not the CoG itself. That seems to be your position in the article, and I agree that you seem to be adhering to the WCF.
Now, I can find the Old Covenant explicitly laid out in the Bible, and then Jeremiah tells me where to find the new one. But where do I find the Covenant of Grace? What are its terms and conditions, and where does it say who’s in and who’s out? As for the Old Covenant, we have it on good authority in both Romans and Hebrews that it’s been superseded by the New.
As for the Old Covenant being an administration of the Covenant of Grace, Paul seems to give us a hard nope on that. “As many as are of the works of the law are under a curse.” Our Jewish friends still stand right here—under the law and under the curse—along with all who reject the Savior. If you seek to be justified through the Old Covenant, “ye are fallen from grace” (Ga 5:4). The Old Covenant is missing something vital: “If there could have been a law given which could have given life . . .” So, the law cannot give life, and seeking justification under it is definitely outside any state of grace. Hence, it makes no sense to call the Old and New Testaments different administrations of the same Covenant of Grace.
Which brings me back to the original question. Exactly what is the Covenant of Grace, what does the covenant say, and how do I know who’s in and who’s not?
Your friend in Christ,Bro. Steve
Bro. Steve, when you look at the Old Covenant, you see two approaches to God, not just one. There is path of condemnation, being under the law and unable to fulfill it, a point hammered home by Paul in Galatians and Romans. But we also have a chapter filled with Old Covenant saints (Hebrews 11), who were saved by faith. Jesus told His enemies that the Old Testament required mercy, not sacrifice. But the Old Testament did require sacrifice. So those who understood this in the Old Covenant, and who received God’s grace by faith, are my brothers and sisters in this covenant of grace.
Tithing Question
I understand the principal of not ‘needing’ to tithe on the increase portion that the locusts devoured, and this is straightforward when it comes to W-2 workers where the locusts devour before the worker receives his paycheck. What is your advice when it comes to tithing on capital gains? For example, we will be selling our primary residence this year and will receive a capital gain (which is overstated since the govt does not allow inflation adjustments to the basis!). I will be redeploying the gain into productive assets (i.e. not consuming it). My thinking on capital gains has been that any amounts that are used for personal consumption, I will at a minimum tithe on, but gains that my family does not immediately benefit from because I reinvest the gain, I was not planning to tithe on.
Similarly, if an asset I continue to own kicks off some cash, should I tithe on that dividend even if the full amount of it is immediately reinvested? I’ve heard it said that it’s okay to defer tithing in this scenario (if one did not ‘take’ any increase, just reinvested it). Of course, there may be opportunities for giving that we feel moved to cheerfully participate in above and beyond a tithe, I’m just wanting to make sure that I am not off base in my thinking (and robbing God) regarding capital gains.
Lastly, regarding an inheritance from parents (or financial gifts from parents while they are still living), should the receiver tithe on the economic value of the gift/inheritance when it’s received, or is that the ‘basis’ for figuring out future giving? In our case, gifts/inheritance from our godly parents will have been assets that were built up over many years, post-taxes and post tithing during their lifetimes.
What think you?Scott
Scott, I agree with your approach. I would tithe on the increase, and would do so when the increase is appropriated or realized by you. If you plow capital gains back into another property, I don’t think that needs to be tithed (yet). On inheritance, I don’t believe that needs to be tithed (on the assumption that your parents are believers and tithers). At the same time, that would be a good occasion for a gratitude offering.
What About the Arabs?
Hi, and thank you for your time in reading my question. My husband and I were watching your reply on the Tucker Carlson interview with Mr. Huckabee and we were wondering how come you did not address the Arabs. In Genesis 15 it reads “offspring.” At the time that God made the promise it was to Abram and his offspring. Would that not make the land to all peoples, the Jews and the Arabs? Aren’t the Jewish people and the Arabs really genetically related? I look forward to your setting my “mind” right.Lisa
Lisa, I think it is quite possible that the Arabs are descended from Ishmael, but the birthright was not a matter of mere biological descent. Isaac was the child of promise, and Ishmael was put away. But I do think there is a genetic relationship back there a ways.
Glory of the Man—When?
You’ve been crazy busy lately. Thank you for your continued, and faithful work in so many areas, for the Church’s benefit. Question: I know that the woman is the glory of the man, and the man is the glory of God. This is most evident in marriage; I assume that daughters, pre-marriage, are the glory of their father in a unique way, along with their mother. But what about widows, especially younger ones who opt to not remarry? To whom are they the glory at that point?Ben
Ben, I would say that they are still the glory of their husbands, and are a living memorial.
Another Calvinism Question
I greatly respect your viewpoints, although I am not as Calvinist as you are—I perceive God as much more of a grand chess master declaring that His will is unstoppable by our petty machinations rather than as a being who already knows outside of time our every decision before we make it.
I’m curious what you think of the whole situation with David at Keilah in Samuel 23. David asked God whether Saul would pursue David to Keilah and whether Keilah would deliver David to Saul, God said, “Yes, they would”—and so David fled Keilah and neither of the things God said would happen came to pass. God is not a liar, so in the non-predestination camp this is seen as proof that divine foreknowledge is separate from divine predestination. How do you read it?
Thank you,Ian
Ian, I think the situation at Keilah is a simple one to explain. David is not asking for a prophetic word about what will inexorably happen according to the decrees of God. Rather, he is asking questions that ride upon certain conditions. “If Saul comes down, and if I am still here, are the citizens of Keilah the type of people who will show their gratitude to me by turning me over to Saul?” And God said, “Yes, they are just like that. They would turn you over. If you are still here.” And so David leaves.
Matthew, watch the boys’ sugar intake times.
Lewis’ space trilogy for Rick?
Put them in front of the big screen tv watching kid movies…and possibly nice calm music…with scripture verse’s…😳 Warm milk and a vitamin supplement for kids.
Rick, you would probably enjoy CS Lewis’s space trilogy.
Richard, do you equally wonder why an “ethical god” would have made have made eating actually enjoyable, knowing that some humans would undoubtedly overdo it, get fat, and die of a heart attack? Or would you take a second’s thought and reflect that people who find eating a mere duty, let alone actually unpleasant, tend to stop doing it–which is why malnutrition and ultimately wasting are major risks for elderly people who have lost their sense of taste. So, what should an “ethical deity” have chosen? Do you ponder the plight of female sea otters, at the mercy of gangs… Read more »
I don’t think many ponder the plight of the sea otters and their sexuality…sea otters aren’t people, but since you made the comparison, what about homosexuality within the animal kingdom ( you know, like same-sex sex between animals), or the fact that MALE seahorses carry and have babies? Do you think an “ethical” deity would have allowed for these discrepancies/variances if she made the world “just one way”? Everything always leads back to sex in evangelical circles. From Doug’s himself: In other words, however we try, the sexual act cannot be made into an egalitarian pleasuring party. A man penetrates,… Read more »
Sea otters are necrophiliacs because, after gang raping their victims and then drowning them, they like to come back for seconds. I am not an Evangelical; I’m Catholic which means I don’t think the existence of homosexual behavior in animals allows us to draw any meaningful conclusions about God’s ethics. Yes, male seahorses carry and give birth to their young–and, for reasons I have never bothered to research, that adaptation must somehow be necessary for the survival of that species within its particular ecosystem or it wouldn’t have evolved. I don’t much like Doug Wilson’s now notorious statement but, honesty… Read more »
Well spoken in both posts Jill, and I would add to them with deference. First, the claim that it is natural, therefore it is good, is not only contrary to Catholic natural law theory (though you know I am not a Catholic), its also a formally recognized logical fallacy. The naturalistic fallacy is fundamentally irrational, and even if it weren’t, can be used to justify virtually anything, as you can find an example of virtually anything in nature. The sun slowly destroys what it shines upon with radiation, therefore radiation is morally good. Slaver ants kidnap the young of competing… Read more »
Excellent. I once asked my biologist ex-husband what would be lost if humans managed to wipe out cockroaches overnight. I think I had just had to remove one from the mouth of a cat and I was feeling a bit disgruntled. He patiently explained that, while it would be survivable, there would be grave implications that might even affect the human food supply. I think I stopped listening half way through but he made his point. You can’t change one thing without inadvertently changing everything else. Which makes talk about how nature might have been better if in some way… Read more »
You know, I’ve pressed the same case with mosquitos, and I feel pretty confident we could make the post-mosquito world work with an apocalypse.
Hi Justin, On the natural law question, I agree with what you wrote; I would just add one point of nuance. Because we live in a broken world, corrupted by sin (Rom.8:20-22), it’s true that we can’t look out our window at “nature” and conclude that this is ethical. That would be the is-ought fallacy in many natural law arguments. However, I do think there is still something of a natural law argument that can/should be made (if I am understanding what is meant by “natural law” correctly). When God created the world, he created it “very good.” The “is”… Read more »
Blessed be the goddess and mother of our lady Jessie Christ is not what Eph 1 says. The very notion of a female deity is to my mind idolatry pure and simple, is frequently the mark of pagan religion, and is outside the boundaries of Christian orthodoxy.
God has no gender, so…
we, ALL people, were made in Gods image, so wouldn’t that mean both genders are encapsulated in Gods being?
The is one HUGE difference between a formal war and the use of War Powers. If we enter3ed a formal war, then every LEGAL immigrant from Iran would have had their immigration status changed from whatever it is now, to civilian alien enemy. They could be restricted or deported for any reason. Title 50 Chapter 3 Section 21-24 US Code. The caselaw is Ludecke v. Watkins. With war powers, these restrictions do not go into play.
Doug “I’m a friend of pedophiles” still yet to discuss the Epstein files further when it implicates people the Heritage Foundation likes. Coincidence?
No, he only mentions the Clinton’s…easy targets.
Not much to discuss. I’ve found the Epstein files to be a wonderful IQ test. “What do you have to say about this photo of……. someone standing vaguely close to EPSTEIN!!!! Clearly the reason this hasn’t gone to trial is a massive conspiracy!” Well no, it hasn’t gone to trial because its only evidence of standing near someone, which isn’t illegal. Associating with Epstein wasn’t illegal. Giving him money wasn’t illegal. Getting references to other celebrities from him isn’t illegal. That’s what very nearly all the released Epstein files are. Things that LOOK really bad, but tell you nothing of… Read more »
So the investigations into individuals in Norway and the UK mean nothing? The torture videos mean nothing? The redactions of coconspirators and unredaction of victims mean nothing? Links to Iran-Contra mean nothing? You are either too timid or too illiterate to do any actual reading of what’s in there yourself. Or you are cool with it which wouldn’t surprise me in this lot.