Today David uses apparently contradictory verses in Proverbs to demonstrate how easy it is to read the Bible according to the legal positivism of Jeremy Bentham. Then he applies the wisdom hidden in that apparent contradiction to how we should argue in federal court in support of the constitutionality of state laws prohibiting the application of transgender procedures to minors. Today’s episode may tell you if you’re really a legal positivist.

Today David explains how America transitioned from the biblical conception of law espoused by Bracton and Blackstone from the 13th through the 18th centuries to Jeremy Bentham’s positivistic, utilitarian conception of law embraced by Oliver Wendell Holmes who changed the conception of law held today by most Christian lawyers. The applicability in our day of quotes from Holmes over a century ago will be eye-opening. To paraphrase Dorothy’s comment to Toto, you don’t live in a Christian cosmos anymore.

Today David uses the remarks of Dr. Jonathan Burnside, Professor of Biblical Law at a law school (believe it or not) but in the United Kingdom to demonstrate how the Christian’s conception of law may be more shaped by Jeremy Bentham than the way the Bible presents law to us. It explains why common law makes little sense to people today.

Having previously explained what law is and that common law is real law, David takes audio clips from remarks made by a Representative in Tennessee who is a lawyer to demonstrate what you should not believe and yet so many, including Christian lawyers, believe. If you want insight into what is wrong in our legal and political system, this episode is for you.

Everybody has a conception of law. So, what is the Christian’s conception of law today? Does it align with a biblical conception of law? What might be a sign that we do or don’t have a biblical conception of law? To answer these questions over the next few weeks, David begins with a short primer on what common law is and the modern conception of it invented by Oliver Wendell Holmes.

Do Christians abandon a biblical cosmology and conception of law to form alliances with those who reject those things for the sake of enacting legislation?  Yes. But why would they do that? The answer explains the recent actions of the “Tennessee Three” and this week’s disruption of the Montana’s legislature by transgender activists.

Today David considers why he and others have thought that it was necessary for the enactment of good laws and public polices to develop alliances with influential persons and organizations who essentially mock God by treating Him as irrelevant. You may find surprising the fundamental reason his thinking in that regard changed.

Conversations and controversies about transgenderism and the two biological sexes heat up by the week. But what is the connection between the image of God and the two biological sexes? Animals have two sexes and God is pure spirit, non-corporeal. So, what is the essential about being made in the image of God, and is it being overlooked?

Following the Covenant School shooting in Nashville, the conversation about transgenderism seemed to turn up another notch. A particular news story caught my eye that made we wonder if evangelicals are prepared to engage in the conversation in a meaningful way that goes beyond mere behavior or biology.

“There is nothing new under the sun,” and, indeed, that is true of transgenderism. It answers three great philosophical questions raised by the ancient Greeks. Today David explains the questions and how they are answered by transgenderism, on the one hand, and, on the other, the triune God of creation.