Ministers Who Say Judge Moore Acted Improperly Need To Tear Daniel Six Out Of Their Bibles!

Food For Thought From The Chuck Wagon ^ | Aug 29, 2003 | Chuck Baldwin

[xzins]

Those Ministers Who Say Judge Moore Acted Improperly Need To Tear Daniel Chapter Six Out Of Their Bibles!

By Chuck Baldwin

Food For Thought From The Chuck Wagon August 29, 2003 I have listened to minister after minister publicly rebuke Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore saying, as a Christian, he should have obeyed federal judge Myron Thompson's unlawful order to remove a Ten Commandments monument from the Alabama Judicial Building. Those ministers need to reread Daniel chapter six.

Daniel was a government official in the court of King Darius. In fact, Daniel was the second-in-command answering only to the king. Yet, when Darius issued his command that everyone in the kingdom not pray to God for thirty days, Daniel openly and defiantly disobeyed.

I've heard ministers say Judge Moore was wrong not to take down the monument and wait for his appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court to be decided. However, if this logic would have prevailed in the mind and heart of Daniel, the great story of Daniel in the lion's den would not appear in Scripture. After all, Darius' order against prayer was only for thirty days. Using the logic of today's ministers, Daniel should have merely suspended his prayers for thirty days, and everything would have been all right.

Instead, Daniel immediately went home, threw open his windows, and prayed to God as he always had done. He would not postpone his convictions for even thirty days!

Like Judge Roy Moore, Daniel believed that there is a higher authority than the king. Furthermore, he believed that human governments do not have the right to interfere with religious conscience, in or out of the public square.

Also take into account that Daniel lived under a monarchy. Darius' word was the law of the land. However, Americans do not live (yet) under a monarchy. A federal judge is not king; his word is not automatically law. Under our constitutional republic, whenever a federal judge, or any other government official, rules outside his constitutional authority, his ruling must be considered unlawful and irrelevant.

When Daniel disobeyed the law of King Darius, he had only the law of moral conscience behind him. Judge Moore has, not only the law of moral conscience, but the supreme law of the land (the U.S. Constitution) behind him!

Of all people, Christian ministers should flock to Judge Moore's assistance! That they aren't proves they are either ignorant of the lawlessness of this federal judge's actions, or they do not have the courage of their convictions.

One thing is sure: those ministers who condemn Judge Roy Moore's actions should tear the story of Daniel out of their Bibles, and never teach it again. If Daniel was right, Roy Moore is right!

© Chuck Baldwin

NOTE: These commentaries are copyrighted and may be reposted or republished without charge providing the publication does not charge for subscriptions or advertising and providing the publication reposts the column intact with full credit given including Chuck's web site: www.chuckbaldwinlive.com. If the publication charges for subscriptions or advertising, the publication must contact chuck@chuckbaldwinlive.com for permission to use this column.

[takenoprisoner]

I've had my head buried in the sand for 52 years?

[P-Marlowe]

You know there were a lot of politically incorrect mascots when I was growing up. I know a lot of schools have had to change mascots because they "offended" the INDIANS. There was one school that I recall that had a mascot of the CRUSADERS and the school emblem had a 12th century crusader complete with a sword and a CROSS on the shield and on the battle uniform. I believe they even had shields with crosses on their football helmets. Can you imagine that today?

Geez back then nobody complained at all. My wife went to a school whose mascot was "The Saints" and their school theme song was "When the saints go marching in."

It was an innocent time and nobody complained. Now everyone is offended at everything.

[takenoprisoner]

That is what is being suggested in Alabama. G-d must be removed.

[xzins]

It was an innocent time and nobody complained. Now everyone is offended at everything.

Yep, wouldn't it be nice if everyone grew up and realized there are a lot of differences out there and it's ok?

They're solution is to "hide" the differences so no one will be offended at the world that is actually full of differences.

Our solution is to be open about the differences and just let everyone act out their differences. (Elsewhere known as 'freedom.')

But you gotta be a secure with yourself adult to let a buddhist pray on a street corner or a judge post a 10C display.

[takenoprisoner]

You mean like Judge Moore's oath of office?

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion, and that I will well and truthfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.

[nmh]

I was thinking about President Bush with his hand on the Bible swearing into office. But I'll certainly accept the swearing in of a Judge - "so help me God".

[nmh]

I respect Judge Moore since he did nothing illegal. It's the anti-god people trying to distort the entire situation do God can be put in a back room.

Me thinks that these opponents hate ANY kind of authority much less the Authority over all of us.

[takenoprisoner]

I was not aware the presidential oath required the president to swear "so help me God" like others do.

[P-Marlowe]

I have occasion to be in front of a Buddhist Judge. His office is used to discuss cases and is a public place. He has the room decorated with Buddhist stuff and he has this budhist music and chanting on a CD playing softly in the background along with pictures with buddhist sayings on them and he's got his ying and yang stuff everyhwere. It is like entering into a buddhist temple to do business.

As a Christian I am not the least bit offended. I respect his right to decorate his office and his chambers in any way that suits him. I am also cognizant of the fact that I'd better not tell any Buddhist jokes in his presence. Not because I can't. But because I am smart enough not to.

[takenoprisoner]

The "in God we trust" on our money ain't allah.

[takenoprisoner]

Confusious asks why does woman fly upside down?

[takenoprisoner]

Confusious asks, why does the price of gas go up when an oil man is president?

[Cvengr]

IMHO, if any religion is being promoted by this entire affair it is either agnosticism or atheism.

With respect to Christianity, the entire affair is a Catch-22. The Church Age surpasses the Mosaic Law. As a believer in Christ, it's a bit foolish to get too miffed over the entire issue as it tends to communicate the wrong news to those not yet informed of the Gospel. Conversely, implications that the 10 Commandments have no place in jurisprudence is equally as absurd.

I suspect the entire affair is like so many satanicly contrived arguments reminescent of the Clinton years. If one falls for advocating either side of the argument, one has already missed more important issues.

[MissAmericanPie]

That is rather the point isn't it. They are spanking your kids without authority and totally outside the limits of their authority.

A federal judge raised taxes, just as they did in the 60's to pay for busing, to fund a project he favors. There is not a dimes worth of difference between "law" and "judicial edict". Both have the same effect.

[Thane_Banquo]

A judge's order is legally binding, enforced by the police power of the state, making it de facto law. If it were not so, we could ignore judge's orders at our pleasure, and we would descend into chaos.

[Thane_Banquo]

So if a judge ordered you to jump off a cliff you would do it.

False analogy. Nice red herring.

[jwalsh07]

Court orders are not laws, they are court orders.I fthey were laws Judges would issue 'laws' not court orders.

Of course the federales see no difference because since they actually think they, rather than Moses, are the law-givers.

[Chancellor Palpatine]

Toxic and pharisaic Evangelicalism, for starters.

[bmwcyle]

The last generation that will see the end of this age are the people who will witness the rebuilding of the temple. The cornerstone is ready to be put into place. Sit back it won't be long now.

[Thane_Banquo]

Court orders are not laws, they are court orders.I fthey were laws Judges would issue 'laws' not court orders.

Now you're arguing semantics.

Of course the federales see no difference because since they actually think they, rather than Moses, are the law-givers.

What is it the Bible says about obeying the ruling authorities? Further, are you arguing that court orders shouldn't be legally binding? Do you honestly want to live in a nation where we can ignore any court order simply because we don't agree with it?