David takes the issue of abortion pending before the Supreme Court in Iowa and contrasts the way in which the pro-life cause was argued by the state’s attorney general to the way he presented the argument in a brief he wrote filed on behalf of pro-family organizations in 32 states. You’ll see the difference between just trying to win and trying to win in a way that restores the cosmology that produces a right to life.

In today’s episode, David uses a lawsuit pending in the Iowa Supreme Court testing its judicially created state “constitutional” right to abortion to show what the breaking of that de facto covenant by the judicial branch looks like. The Court’s high sounding but meaningless words hide what amounts to a road to tyranny our founding fathers would have recognized and resisted.

David responds to a listener’s question about how to restore in our law the Biblical cosmology on which the Western Legal Tradition was grounded, and how such an effort would inform and shape “Christian nationalism.”

Today, David offers his thoughts and analysis on comments and questions he received by email from an astute listener. This episode will provide a great overview of recent topics leading to a challenging observation by Jeff Shafer, director of the Hale Institute, about the way the cosmos was once conceived by lawyers vis-à-vis the cosmos the U.S. Supreme Court has foisted on us all.

Today, David brings together past episodes on the “law of faith” and the eternal covenant to evaluate the justification for laws protecting minors from “gender transition procedures” that was given in a national op-ed written by a Christian state legislator. He will look at how to evaluate the legislator’s labor—was it “in the Lord” or “in vain”?

The outbreak of war in the Middle East provides the perfect context for today's episode as David provides the scriptural support for why the biblical covenants need to fit into our cosmology and, therefore, into our engagement with law and public policy. The material David covers today challenged the way he had been taught over the years to think about conflict in the Middle East. 

David uses A.W. Pink, noted 20th century theologian, to look at whether we can know what we should be doing—in our lives and our politics—if we do not understand the various covenants in the Bible.  As Pink notes, the temporal covenants reveal to us “the divine side” of what God planned to do with his creation, from beginning to the end, even before He created.

Today David notes a pervasive aspect of social order and law that seems to be wholly missing from the Christian worldview or, more broadly, Christian cosmology. He uses Herman Bavinck, A.W. Pink, William Blackstone, the U.S. Constitution, and a familiar 1992 SCOTUS decision to demonstrate his point. Faithful politics must begin to deal with this forgotten cosmological reality.

Today, David reports on a meeting in Washington, DC featuring remarks by four Christian conservative members of Congress and one former member. God, Jesus, faith, and Bible verses were referenced easily during the evening, with one prominent leader saying he would continue to “contend for the faith.” But was he doing that? Find out why David ended the evening saying, “I just can’t do this kind of thing anymore.”

If Christians are to live “by the law of faith” what does that look like as a practical matter? Today, David uses two real-life examples to demonstrate the difference and then gives his thoughts, drawn from his own failure and from Luke 18, on the principle from which faith-filled politics should spring.