WHY ROGUE DISTRICT JUDGES ARE IN VIOLATION OF BOTH SCRIPTURE AND THE CONSTITUTION

The current constitutional crisis, in which district judges are grabbing power not allotted to them in the  Constitution, is an outright attack on the Founders' division of governmental powers. The Founders created this division because they held the Christian view of the flawed nature of humanity because of original sin.

The Moral Basis of the American Republic

They believed that because of fallen human nature, no person or group of persons can be trusted with absolute power. The Founders would all agree with Sir John Dalberg-Acton who said, “Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” They, therefore, divided the powers of government into three branches: the legislative, the executive, and the judicial.

As another check on power, the Founders, in Section 1, Article 9 of the Constitution, forbade the government from issuing honorific titles of nobility and they forbade any government employee from receiving such a title from a foreign state apart from an act of Congress. In Section 10, they forbade the states from issuing honorific titles of nobility. In other words, they outlawed aristocracy in America.

The Founders envisioned a government wherein power resides with the people, not a king, monarch or unelected judges. This is why the U.S. Constitution begins with the words, “We the people . . ..” Abraham Lincoln described America’s government as being “of the people, by the people and for the people.”

Since power is to reside with the people, laws are to be passed by the representatives of the people in Congress—the legislative branch. The president—the executive branch—is to execute and enforce those laws passed by the representatives of the people. Judges—the judiciary branch—are to interpret and apply those same laws to individual cases that come before them.

Judges were never meant to make rulings that apply across the board to the entire country. However, that is exactly what is happening as unelected judges legislate from the bench and overturn the will of “we the people.” 

C. S. Lewis expressed the view of America's Founders when he said, “Mankind is so fallen that no man can be trusted with unchecked power over his fellows." We must, therefore, remind these unelected judges and every government official that they are flawed individuals, and while they must do their duty, they must reject the temptation to grab more power than has been allotted to them by both Scripture and the Constitution.

The Church’s Role in this Crisis

The church in America played a primary role in electing Donald Trump and we must pray daily for him. He too is flawed and needs God’s wisdom and protection as he decides how to respond to this onslaught of lawsuits against the will of the people, and a host of other issues he faces daily.

We must also educate this generation concerning the nature of our Constitutional Republic and the fact that it emerged out of the First Great Awakening, whose proponents rejected the abuse of power in both the church and state (Hyatt Apostolic Leadership: Recovering the Spirit-Empowered Servant Leadership of Jesus and the New Testament, 79-81). 

This Awakening was rooted in the theology of the Dissenting Protestants who rejected the use of force in matters of faith, which had been a part of Christianity in Europe since the time of Constantine. This led to the founding generation abhorring tyranny and guaranteed that America would be founded on Biblical values of individual and religious liberty.

It was for this reason that the Founders saw a direct link between Christian morality and political freedom. George Washington made this clear in his Farewell Address in which he exhorted the young nation to cling to "religion [Christianity] and morality," which he called “indispensable supports” for political prosperity. Notice he did not say religion and morality should be “tolerated;” but that they are “indispensable” for a stable and prosperous society.

Because of his firm belief that Christian values are necessarily linked to political freedom and human happiness, Washington was not hesitant to share this belief with anyone. For example, in a meeting with Delaware Indian chiefs, Washington said to them, “You do well to wish to learn our arts and our ways of life and above all, the religion of Jesus Christ. These will make you a greater and happier people than you are” (Hyatt, 1726: The Year that Defined America, 172).

John Adams, who succeeded Washington as our second president, agreed and declared, “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious [Christian] people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other” (Hyatt, 1726: The Year that Defined America, 168).

It was because of the plethora of statements such as these by America’s Founders that the late, Dr. Michael Novak, wrote,

Far from having a hostility toward religion, the Founders counted on religion [Christianity] for the underlying philosophy of the republic, its supporting ethic, and its reliable source of rejuvenation (Hyatt, 1726: The Year that Defined America, 171).

Concluding Word

This political power struggle going on in America actually reflects the erosion of the Christian principles and values on which America was founded. This is serious for all the Founders believed that a loss of Christian morality would lead to a loss of societal peace and political freedom. 

This is why we, as the church, must be about our primary calling of being “salt” and “light” to this generation, calling the nation back to God, rebuking the ungodly pursuits of power, and directing the people to pray and expect another Great Awakening to revive and renew the nation.

This article is derived from Dr. Eddie Hyatt's books 1726: The Year that Defined America and Apostolic Leadership: Recovering the Spirit-Empowered Servant Leadership of Jesus and the New Testament. He is the founder of the "1726 Project" whose purpose is to educate America, beginning with the church, of America's overt Christian birth out of the First Great Awakening.

ARE YOU PREPARED FOR YOUR APOSTOLIC ASSIGNMENT?

In Acts 9:10-16, a “disciple” named Ananias is instructed by God in a vision to go and lay his hands on Saul of Tarsus that he might receive his sight and be filled with the Holy Spirit. He is given the exact address where Saul is residing and is told that Saul is praying.

Ananias obeys and when he enters the house, he makes clear to Saul that this is no social call or friendly visit. He does this by his use of the word apostello, which is the verb form of apostolos. He said to Saul, The Lord Jesus who appeared to you on the road as you came has sent (apostello) me that you may receive your sight and be filled with the Holy Spirit (Acts 9:17).

Apostello is distinguished from pempo, the more general term for “send,” in that, like apostolos, it emphasizes the authorization of the sent one by the sender. By using apostello, Ananias made clear to Saul that he was there on an apostolic assignment from the risen Lord who had just appeared to Saul.

Ananias’s obedience to that one apostolic assignment changed world history. It also reveals the very fluid and functional nature of apostolic ministry, for there is no evidence that Ananias functioned in apostolic ministry apart from this one situation.

Apostolic Ministry is an Assignment from the Risen Lord

There is also no evidence that Ananias occupied a church office. He is only described as a “disciple.” All apostles are disciples. It is disciples—committed learners and followers—who receive apostolic assignments.

For example, the twelve disciples of Matthew 10:1 become the twelve apostles of Matthew 10:2 by virtue of the apostolic assignment they they are given by Jesus. They are given exousia by the Lord to preach, to cast out demons and to heal the sick in His name. They are then sent forth by Jesus as His authorized representatives to speak and act in His name. These twelve disciples are now also apostles by virtue of the commission they have received from the Lord.

The Twelve did not cease to be disciples after they became apostles. Interestingly, after 10:2 Matthew drops the word “apostle” and uses the word “disciple” for the Twelve throughout the remainder of his gospel. This would indicate that apostolos was not seen as a permanent office or position into which one was placed, but a specific work to which one was called or a particular assignment that one was given.

This also indicates that genuine discipleship is a prerequisite for authentic apostolic ministry.

The Hebrew Background for the Greek Apostolos

It is best to see the apostolic in terms of “Divine assignment” rather than church office, for it seems clear that apostles in the New Testament do not derive their authority from an office but from the Lord Himself. Commenting on this, the monumental Theological Dictionary of the New Testament says,

We are thus prevented by the sayings of Jesus Himself from trying to deduce from His authorization for word and action an official congregational office fulfilled in terms of law. To be precise, we should not use the word “office” at all in this context; we should speak of commission in the sense of authorization which is limited in time and space, and which is conditioned materially rather than personally, as in the Jewish concept of saliah. (Hyatt, Apostolic Leadership, 28).

The Hebrew word saliah, mentioned above, is most likely the word used by Jesus and those first apostles. They would not have used apostolos for they were not Greek-speaking Jews. Being natives of Israel, they would have spoken both Aramaic and Hebrew, for the Hebrew Scriptures were read in the synagogues every Sabbath. They would have been very familiar with this term, saliah, which was later transformed into apostolos for a Greek-speaking audience.

In first century Judaism, the saliah was a legal, commissioned representative of another, acting in a sort of “power of attorney.” A saliah could even represent a bridegroom in a marriage ceremony and the one who had sent the saliah would, thereby, become legally married. To receive or shame the saliah was to receive or shame the one who had sent him. The rabbis summed up the basis of the saliah in the oft-quoted statement, “The one sent by a man is as the man himself.” (Hyatt, Apostolic Leadership, 25).

Like the saliah, the one distinguishing characteristic of the New Testament apostle is the authorization of the “sent one” by the sender. When Jesus sent out the Twelve in Matthew 10:1, He assured them that, He who receives you receives Me, and he who receives Me receives Him who sent me (Matt. 10:40). The commissioning of the Twelve in this passage has obvious parallels with that of the saliah

The saliah was often a trusted slave who had no personal agenda of his own. His only purpose in life was to please the master who had sent him and to carry out his will. The institution of the saliah was well in place by the first century and most certainly provided the background for the apostolos of the Greek New Testament.

An Apostle is a Disciple on Assignment

So, even though an apostle will exercise authority and influence, it is a mistake to relegate apostles to being CEO type leaders of churches and denominations. An apostle is a disciple who has received an assignment from the risen Christ. It may be an assignment to go and minister the word of God to one individual, as in the case of Ananias; or it may be to bring a neglected truth to the attention of the entire body of Christ, as in the case of Martin Luther; or to establish and raise up new outreaches and congregations, as in the case of Paul.

Whatever the assignment may be, the focus will be on the One doing the sending and His assignment, not on the one who has received the assignment. John G. Lake, whom many consider to have been an apostle to South Africa, got it right when he said,

The modern conception of an apostle is usually that he is a big church boss, but that is not the conception Jesus left. An apostle was not to be a big boss, he was to be like his Lord—a servant of all (Hyatt, Apostolic Leadership, 22.

This article is derived from Dr. Eddie Hyatt's latest book, Apostolic Leadership, which the late Dr. Vinson Synan called, "A great macro history."

 

COME DOWN OFF YOUR THRONES

God's Word to the American Church 

“You need to come down off your thrones” was the word I heard as I sat on the platform with other staff and faculty members of the Institute where I taught courses in Bible and Theology. It was a Day of Prayer and as I quietly prayed, I was drawn to observe the height of the platform on which we sat and how high we were above those seated in the auditorium. I sensed it was the Holy Spirit highlighting this contrast and then I heard those words in my heart, “You need to come down off your thrones.”

Unbeknownst to me there were, at that very moment, individuals on that platform who were secretly plotting to oust the leadership that had founded that ministry and led it, at great sacrifice, for more than fifty years. It was an attempted “power grab” by Christians who believed they were better equipped than the present leaders to guide and govern that ministry.

The ouster failed but caused much hurt and painful separation. I now realize that “Come down off your thrones” was a timely word, not only for that situation, but for the church worldwide where divisive power struggles are all too common.

Love and Power Do Not Mix

The well-known sociologist, Willard Waller, discovered that there seems to be an inverse relationship between love and power. He noted that in interpersonal relationships as love increases, power decreases; and as power decreases, love increases. He coined the term “principle of least interest” to describe the phenomenon, revealed by his studies, that power lies in the hands of the person who cares the least about the relationship (Hyatt, Apostolic Leadership, 8).

For example, a husband and wife go to a counselor to try and save their crumbling marriage. The counselor can immediately tell which one loves the least. It is the one in the power seat and making the demands. The one willing to make any sacrifice to save the marriage is the one that truly loves. Love and power, it seems, cannot coexist, at least in this world.

To Show His Love, God Let Go of Power

It is, therefore, not surprising that in the Incarnation, Jesus let go of the power He had eternally known with the Father (Philippians 2:7). Instead of being born in a place of power–a castle or palace--He was born in a lowly stable to a poor family who offered up two doves or two pigeons in the temple, an alternative offering allowed by Scripture for poor families who could not afford a lamb (Lev. 12:8; Luke 2:22-24).

He grew up in Nazareth, an insignificant and despised village, well away from the power centers of Jerusalem and Rome. And when He began His ministry at the age of 30, He did not seek either power or approval from the civil and religious institutions of His day.

We, therefore, should not be surprised that Jesus directed his disciples away from visions of “power” to thoughts of “service” regarding His kingdom. When, for example, James and John requested the two most prominent seats in His kingdom, Jesus rebuked them for their preoccupation with “power” and told them they were thinking like Gentiles, i.e., like people who did not know God.

He then presented to them a new and radical model of leadership that would be characterized, He said, not by power, but by humble service (Mark 10:35-45). They must have been shocked when He told these original apostles they were to function as diakonoi, a Greek word meaning “servant,” with no connotations of status, importance, or power. 

Jesus made clear that the “apostolic” was to be characterized by “love” and “service” to others rather than “power “over others. John G. Lake, whom many consider to have been an apostle to South Africa, understood this and wrote,

The modern conception of an apostle is usually that he is a big church boss, but that was not the conception Jesus left. An apostle was not to be a big boss; he was to be like his Lord-a servant of all (Hyatt, Apostolic Leadership, 22).

We Must Let Go of Power

I believe in present day apostles, but my issue with so much of the modern “apostolic” is that it is wrapped in visions of power and control rather than humility and service. In an article entitled, “The Marks of a Genuine Apostle,” J. Lee Grady wrote, “No matter what continent I visit these days, a genuine apostolic movement is being challenged by foolish wannabe apostles who are drunk on power and position.”

This preoccupation with power is a sharp departure from what Jesus taught about the apostolic. It is also a departure from what Paul taught. Diakonos is one of Paul’s favorite words and he often uses it in referring to himself and his own ministry. For example, to the Corinthian believers who were idolizing different apostles and forming factions around them, Paul rhetorically asks, Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but servants (diakonia) through whom you believed.

Paul obviously saw his apostolic ministry in terms of service rather than authority and power. Indeed, the entire New Testament carefully avoids using words that carry connotations of power, authority and office. Words such as archon (ruler), despot (master, boss) and timē (honor, value), are used of secular rulers, but never of leaders of the churches. This is why the Catholic reformer and theologian, Dr. Hans Kung, wrote,

In the New Testament, not only is the word ‘hierarchy’ consistently and deliberately avoided, but so too are all secular words for ‘office’ in connection with church functions, as they express a relationship of power. Instead of this, an all-encompassing term, diakonia, service (really ‘serving at table’), is used, which can nowhere evoke associations with any authority, control or position of dignity and power (Hyatt, Apostolic Leadership, 131).

We Must Come Down Off Our Thrones

If we are to see genuine heaven-sent revival in the churches of America, we must come down off our thrones. There must be a return to the diakonos (servant) model of apostolic leadership taught and modeled by both Jesus and Paul. This is the call and promise of God in II Chronicles 7:14, when he exhorted,

If My people who are called by My name will humble themselves, and pray and seek My face, and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin and heal their land.

 This article was derived from Dr. Eddie Hyatt's latest book, Apostolic Leadership, available from Amazon and his website at www.eddiehyatt.com.