This week David shares four statements by Jonathan Burnside, Professor of Biblical Law at the University of Bristol (England) Law School, about how the Bible presents “Biblical law” that came flooding back to his mind when, last week, he read a conversation God said Jeremiah would have with those of God’s people who did not like his prophecies. Would we, like them, say, “How have we forgotten your law?”

At a recent gathering of political and legal advocates from around the nation, most of whom were Christians, these questions were asked: “What keeps you up at night?” and “What is most urgent to you?” David uses an excerpt from C.S. Lewis’s The Weight of Glory, an excerpt from John Owen’s Christologia, and Hebrews Chapter 4, to provide insight into what the questions and the way they were framed says about our understanding of the Gospel.

This week’s episode will spring from the relationship between Dionysius’s table depicted at the Olympics and common Christian wisdom about political engagement. David will apply thoughts drawn from observations made by Abraham Kuyper, John Owen, Jeff Shafer, Jason Farley, and the prophet Jeremiah to offer what he thinks should be the first step in a truly Christian response to the Republican Party’s Platform and future political engagement.

After the events of the last 10 days, some Christian policy organizations are circling back to how Christians should respond to the new Republican Party Platform. Today, David uses Isaiah and John Owen to probe whether observations made by one prominent national organization go deeply enough in explaining how 45 years of work were, in its words, “wiped out in hours.”

Changes in the Republican Party’s platform’s planks regarding abortion and marriage riled Christian political advocates who actively sought a minority report with different language. But did they read the Preamble? Today, David explains why he thinks its provisions represent the best of humanistic hubris and explain why abortion and marriage were left to walk the proverbial plank.

In his discussion of the ruler’s function, Peter tells persecuted Christians to “do good.” Is that limited to doing good deeds, or can his exhortation apply to how one does politics and drafts legislation? David says it includes the latter and gives real life examples from the last few years to demonstrate what the “good” is and isn’t in relation to a Biblical anthropology.

As noted last week, the metaphysics of law and sin are first seen in the opening chapters of Genesis and more clearly revealed in Romans. But what are we to make of the exhortations by both Paul and Peter to overcome evil rulers by doing good? Are these exhortations the eternal word of God or mere artifacts of a different time in history? In other words, now we need organized political effort that give us the power to enact better laws.

The Apostle Peter gives us description of rulers that helps us evaluate those who hold office in all three branches of our civil government. The result isn’t pretty. But his recommendation for how to respond to “ignorant fools” in public office seems wrong and is at odds with what we think and do today. But if God’s word is true and eternal, does that mean we’re missing something? Is it in our understanding of how the Bible speaks of law and sin?

Dr. Al Mohler said this week that there will be  “two rival understandings of reality facing off” in the November elections. Is that true?  David asks and answers several questions about the nature of law that probe the accuracy of Mohler’s assessment. More importantly, is there evidence that evangelical Christianity doesn’t even present a rival understanding of reality to that held by the Democratic and Republican parties.

The conviction of former President Donald Trump generated lots of comments about the rule of law. Some said it was the end of the rule of law and others said it was demonstrative of the rule of law. What if neither observation is correct? David uses the thoughts of Lord Henry deBracton, the father of the common law, to examine rule of law and in what sense, if any, it exists today.