Arise&Build

AABi-Monthly
Bi-MonthlyNewsletter
Newsletterof
ofthe
theChalcedon
ChalcedonFoundation | September
Foundation® 2018
| March 2021

CONFRONTING THE NEW CRITICS

OF CHRISTIAN RECONSTRUCTION
BY MARTIN G. SELBREDE

W
hile Arise & Build THE AIRING OF INCENDIARY CLAIMS
focuses on build- In his most recent post, Dr. Gribben
ing, the trowel isn’t challenges Gab founder Andrew Torba,
sufficient of itself: the asking “What exactly does Gab stand for?
sword comes into play1 And is its commitment to free speech un-
to defend the workers equivocal?”7 He grants that spiritual war
(Neh. 4:17). While “they that are far off “has a history in Christian theology that
shall come and build” (Zech. 6:15a), stretches back to the New Testament”8
many would rather see the work derailed, but is discomfited by Torba’s juxtaposi-
some with prominent credentials.2 tion of a picture of Michael J. McVicar’s
Dr. Crawford Gribben, writing for book Christian Reconstruction with a
The Critic, has penned a criticism of quote from a 1950 essay by non-Chris-
Christian Reconstruction that deserves a tian fascist philosopher Julius Evola. The
response. “Why conservatives shouldn’t specter of fascism is self-explanatory, but
migrate to Gab” bears the subheading, not as incendiary as the article’s two pull
“If Gab’s ideal of freedom is defined by quotes:
Christian Reconstructionists and fascist In the Christian state Rushdoony
philosophers, then free speech will be idealised, blasphemy would be punished
the means, rather than the end, of the by death
reconstruction of social media.”3 Perhaps
If Christian Reconstruction were to
the subhead has a typo in it, for Dr. succeed, Evola’s freedom of speech would
Gribben warns that free speech extended be violently denied
to Christian Reconstructionists spells the
Dr. Gribben stirs in a David Chilton
destruction of social media and freedom
quote to bemoan the projected applica-
of speech.
tion of “Old Testament laws about blas-
Dr. Gribben has written for The
phemy, which by definition9 exclude any
Critic 4 before, and has a book appearing
defence of freedom of expression.” His
in print on March 23, 2021 entitled
earlier post for The Critic doesn’t mention
Survival and Resistance in Evangelical
blasphemy, nor does his new book. He
America: Christian Reconstruction in the
has struck out on his own here, relying
Pacific Northwest.5 The Kindle version
on a prefab definition of blasphemy and
was released on February 23, 2021,
laying his projected dystopia at Rushdoo-
allowing me to read it entirely before
ny’s feet.
responding. Given that one of his books
on John Owen6 was endorsed by no less RESEARCH AND SCHOLARSHIP
a scholar than Dr. Joel R. Beeke, this We’re fairly thin on scholars do-
academic courtesy was appropriate. ing creditable spadework in studying

GREAT SAVINGS ON CHALCEDON BOOKS • CHALCEDONSTORE.COM

Rushdoony’s work and influence. Dr. principles.18 Who then is really promot-
Michael McVicar’s efforts were the most ing the state as an engine of coercion?19
comprehensive to date, with his book’s11
strengths outweighing its flaws.12 We DR. CRAWFORD GRIBBEN
published Dr. McVicar’s interim results VERSUS DR. JULIE J. INGERSOLL
in a series of articles in Faith for All of In most cases, Dr. Gribben is in
Life (2007 to 2011) though he is not a accord with Dr. Ingersoll’s Building God’s
Reconstructionist. Kingdom: Inside the World of Christian
Dr. Gribben also contacted Reconstruction. Dr. Ingersoll has attended
Chalcedon seeking access to research Christian Reconstruction conferences
data. The emails to Mark Rushdoony to conduct her comparative religion re-
(May-June 2019) reflected his interest in search. Chalcedon has attended anti-Re-
R. J. Rushdoony’s long out-of-print 1966 construction conferences20 so this is a
pamphlet Preparation for the Future. He two-way street.21
also sought the date(s) when Rushdoony Where these two critics diverge, Dr.
spoke at Hal Lindsey’s Jesus Christ Light Ingersoll is often closer to the truth (by
& Power Co., when Rushdoony visited observing distinctions her colleague tends
London, and correspondence with Iain to dismiss).
Murray. Dr. Ingersoll takes pains to disen-
That does not mean Dr. Gribben’s tangle what R. J. Rushdoony and other
book is sparsely documented, for he used Reconstructionists mean by the word
7 archives, 158 primary sources, and democracy, exhorting readers “to pay
205 secondary sources, generating 744 careful attention to their definitions.”22
footnotes. “When Reconstructionist writers claim
that democracy is unbiblical, they are
THE FIVE BLIND MEN AND THE ELEPHANT using a precise (and technically accurate)
Dr. Gribben’s focus on Moscow, Ida- meaning of ‘democracy’ rather than the
ho and its American Redoubt commu- one Americans tend to use in public
nity parallels the image of the five blind discourse.”23
men assessing an elephant. Each man While Dr. Gribben24 follows Dr. In-
studies a different part, yet the elephant gersoll’s fairly judicious path25 in dealing
isn’t a snake, spear, wall, fan, or rope: the with the Holocaust denial allegation, he
men don’t realize they lack the whole declines to adopt “careful attention” on
picture. Drilling down to one aspect of the democracy question: “My reading
a thing has obvious but limited value. of Rushdoony is that his opposition to
The alleged high-water mark of Christian democracy was less nuanced than Inger-
Reconstruction in Idaho13 represents the soll has suggested.”26 But Dr. Gribben’s
tip of an iceberg, not the iceberg itself, “reading of Rushdoony” is overly narrow.
due to use of the wrong yardstick.14 He needn’t mine Rushdoony as deeply as
Dr. Gribben’s choice of works by R. Dr. Joseph Boot,27 but a wider net reveals
J. Rushdoony is fairly truncated. This more about the ocean you’re fishing in.
creates no problems in education but
skews results elsewhere in a way that a BLASPHEMY: AN INESCAPABLE CONCEPT
wider reading might have mitigated (even When men erect substitute gods
beyond Rushdoony15). Ben Carson’s (e.g., Schlossberg’s idols of power28),
10% flat tax is attributed to Rushdoony, those gods absorb the attributes of the
whereas Rushdoony uses the vastly small- true God. As R. J. Rushdoony says of
er poll tax16 to fund civil government.17 infallibility, it is “a prerogative of God …
By shoehorning Rushdoony into an alien appropriated by the state.”29 Predestina-
statist mold, Dr. Gribben fails to grasp tion then follows:
that America’s civil government would Because the modern state, in all its vari-
be 11,000 times smaller on Rushdoony’s ations, is based on Rousseau’s concept

GREAT SAVINGS ON CHALCEDON BOOKS DURING OUR STOREWIDE SALE!

 of the infallible general will, it is moving MAKING A MAN AN OFFENDER FOR A WORD
steadily towards totalitarianism, seeking Isaiah 29:21 lists various oppressions
total power over man. Marxism openly that will ultimately be terminated. The
gives us the dictatorship of the prole-
translation of this text becomes import-
tariat, plus total planning and control.
ant to our purposes here, because some
Total planning is the statist version of
predestination.30 modern scholars deviate from the text as
it is normally understood (e.g., Oswalt,35
Every attribute of God eventually Motyer,36 and Young37). Here it is in
transfers to human institutions. For context:
humanism, man is ultimate. There is a
The meek also shall increase their joy in
humanistic version of every theological
the Lord, and the poor among men shall
doctrine, including the concept of rejoice in the Holy One of Israel. For the
blasphemy. terrible one is brought to nought, and
When modern man objects to the scorner is consumed, and all that
various divine attributes—infallibility, watch for iniquity are cut off: That make
predestination, etc.—he is objecting a man an offender for a word, and lay a
to the Christian version, not his own snare for him that reproveth in the gate,
humanistic substitutes. When blasphemy and turn aside the just for a thing of
nought. (Isa. 29:19-21)
is criticized by humanists, it is blasphemy
against God that is targeted. But human- George Rawlinson approved of the
ism zealously guards its own doctrine “authorized rendering, which condemns
of blasphemy by way of language,31 as one form of oppression—the severe pun-
Orwell noted, but reality czars are on the ishment of mere words.”38 A.R. Fausset
horizon. Conformity and allegiance are explains the passage this way:
mandated. This mindset drives the ongo- That make a man an offender for a word
ing scorched-earth removal of Christian (Hebrew, be-dabar)—Who arraign a
content.32 man for a word which he hath spoken,
and which they were watching for to
RECONSTRUCTIONISTS—A NEST OF THEM make it a plea for accusing him. This
Dr. Gribben casts his analytic gaze accords with v. 20, “that watch for iniq-
toward the Pacific Northwest at the uity.” So “the Pharisees took counsel how
they might entangle Jesus in His talk.”39
survivalist-oriented communities he
regards as derived from Dr. Rushdoony’s Plumptre concurs with this treatment:
positions. He admits that “Rushdoony’s That make a man an offender for a word
arguments have been repurposed and … Isaiah had been accused, as Jeremiah
revived” there.33 was afterwards (Jer. 37:13), of being
It’s intriguing to write about rugged unpatriotic, because he had rebuked the
souls carving a community out of a sins of Israel and its rulers … The “snare”
was laid for the “righteous man,” precise-
wilderness, buoyed by a spirit of “survival
ly because he “reproved in the gate”: i.e.,
and resistance” against the grain of mod- preached in the open air in the places of
ern society. Rushdoony says little about public concourse, even in the presence of
survivalism, which explains Dr. Gribben’s the rulers and judges ...40
interest in the out-of-print Preparation Dr. Rev. Moore says this translation
for the Future. Digging into Rushdoony’s “is justly preferred by Ewald, Alexander,
actual position on blasphemy to avoid cre- and Delitzsch.”41 Alexander concurs:
ating a straw man comparatively boring.
Ewald, however, takes the Hebrew
“If it bleeds, it leads,” so a town in
term in the same sense with the English
Idaho with Reconstructionists—a nest of and many other early versions, which
them—is irresistible. Rushdoony’s schol- explain the clause to mean accusing or
arly works can’t compete against short condemning men for a mere error of the
attention spans.34 tongue or lips.42

VISIT CHALCEDONSTORE.COM TODAY!

 Matthew Henry’s exposition of Isa- condemned for as little as a single word.
iah 29:21 falls along the same lines: This, the Bible regards as oppression.
They took advantage against them for RUSHDOONY AND BLASPHEMY
the least slip of the tongue; and, if a
Where should Dr. Gribben have
thing were ever so little said amiss, it
looked to discern Dr. Rushdoony’s views
served them to ground an indictment
upon. They made a man, though he were
on blasphemy? To his Institutes of Biblical
a man of God, an offender for a word, Law and Leviticus (published posthu-
a word mischosen or misplaced, when mously). A careful scholar will extract the
they could not but know that it was well actual position of his subject by going to
meant, v. 21 … They put the worst con- the source, not by running afoul of the
struction upon what was said, and made indictments of Isaiah 29:21. As things
it criminal by strained innuendos.43 stand, Rushdoony has been made an
They use these tactics against a man so offender for a word, blasphemy, but his
“that they might have something to lay treatment of it is absent. The chapter on
to his charge which might render him blasphemy in his commentary (ex-
odious to the people or obnoxious to pounding Lev. 24:10-16) is particularly
the government. So persecuted they the illuminating:
prophets; and it is next to impossible for The question at stake is authority. Blas-
the most cautious to place their words phemy is forbidden in Exodus 22:28,
so warily as to escape such snares.”44 (Do “Thou shalt not revile (or, blaspheme)
the gods (or, judges), nor curse the ruler
you suppose Rushdoony is similarly
of thy people.” There is no penalty stated
being rendered odious to the people?) in Exodus, and perhaps this meant that
Matthew Poole45 confirms this ren- the penalty was determined by the situ-
dering, as does John Calvin: ation and case. In this instance, the man
Such persons, desiring to have unbound- was held in custody so “that the mind of
ed license … did not calmly submit the LORD might be shewed them” (v.
to be restrained. On this account they 12). J.R. Porter held that the case was
carefully observed and watched for their further complicated by the fact that the
words, that they might take them by man was half Egyptian … There was
surprise, or give a false construction. I something unusual about this episode,
have no doubt that he reproves wicked and perhaps the rabbinic report gives us
men, who complained of the liberty used the background …
by the prophets ...46 We are not given any specific data about
the nature of the blasphemy, because it
This objection to the “liberty” used by
is not necessary for us to know them. It
those speaking in public is mirrored in was, clearly, a flagrant offense, and one
Franz Delitzsch’s translation, “who lay that struck at the authority and majesty
snares for him that is free-spoken in the of the covenant Lord … In some way,
gate.”47 the blasphemer had denied that God had
Matthew Henry characterizes such jurisdiction over him, and this may be
indictments in his exposition of the final the reason why Moses consulted God.
clause of Isaiah 29:21: The word blasphemy in the Hebrew
They condemn him … upon no evi- is naqab, to curse, revile, puncture, or
dence, no colour or pretence whatsoever. pierce. It means to seek to destroy. It is
They run a man down, and misrepresent warfare against God and His covenant
him, by all the little arts and tricks they law. This tells us something about the
can devise, as they did our Saviour. We man’s offense. This incident is set in the
must not think it strange if we see the midst of laws; it tells us that, even as
best of men thus treated; the disciple is the law was being given, this man was
not greater than his Master.48 expressing his contempt for God and
His law … Peake saw the blasphemy as a
Isaiah 29:21 is alive and well in all complete renunciation of any allegiance
its particulars: people even now are being to or regard for the covenant Lord.49

GREAT SAVINGS ON CHALCEDON BOOKS DURING OUR STOREWIDE SALE!

 Aside from pointing out the unusual opinions; yet revolution does not
nature of this case, Rushdoony agrees necessarily spell disaster for a people,
with John Owen, who points out the whereas a loss of reverence for the name
violent piercing intrinsic to blasphemy: of God can only lead to the dissolution
of society and in the end to death. We
The word here used to express his sin … should understand blasphemy in these
signifies also to pierce, and is twice so verses of Leviticus to mean no mere
rendered, Isa. 36:6, Hab. 3:14. Desper- casual expression, but a deliberate and
ate expressions, piercing the honour and determined denial of the rights of God
glory of the Most High willingly and to obedience and loyalty. Blasphemy
willfully, were doubtless his death-de- laws may be a mistake; of the blasphemy
serving crime … A resolved piercing of itself it is impossible to take too serious
the name and glory of God, with cursed a view.55
reproaches, is the crime here sentenced
to death.50 Lange’s commentary on Lev. 24:10-23
mirrors Micklem and Rushdoony: “A
In 1939, Dutch scholar Klaas
community which suffers the reviling of
Schilder, commenting on Christ’s
the principle of their community without
condemnation for blasphemy at Matt.
reaction, is morally fallen to pieces.”56
26:65-66, observes that “All human
George Adam Smith, commenting on
words are measured by the standards
Hosea in 1896, proved that “moral decay
of this one Word … no human speech
means political decay.”57
after this last session of the Sanhedrin
Rushdoony illustrates the positive
can declare its independence of the Word
implications for liberty this law entails:
which was in the beginning. No longer
are there idle words.”51 Schilder thus held Where respect for the authority of God
and His word is gone, then soon all
that “Blasphemy was held to be a more
authority is eroded. Scripture declares
serious transgression than idolatry; the blasphemy to be a very serious offense
blasphemer, it was maintained, sinned because any society which begins by
not only against the commands of God profaning God and His authority will
but also directly against God Himself and soon profane all things. The alternative
against His honor.”52 to authority is total terror by the power
Rushdoony in his Institutes asserts state. Where there is no authority, there
that Lev. 24:10-16 refers to conduct is soon no justice, because men no
better understood as “an offense which longer speak the same moral language of
law and authority. The respect for God’s
denies the validity of all law and order,
authority establishes communication
of all courts and offices, and … is an and healthy dissent. The kind of dissent
act of anarchy and revolution.”53 Of the which thrives in an anarchic situation is
accused, he wrote: the dissent of increasing evil, violence,
He denied the entire structure of Israelite and destruction. Godly dissent is con-
society and law, the very principle of structive, not destructive, and its goal is
order. As a result, the sentence of death justice and holiness.58
was passed for blasphemy. His offense The question then is, Whose system
was in effect that he affirmed total
maximizes freedom? For humanists to
revolution, absolute secession from any
society which denied him his wishes. No
criticize anyone concerning free speech in
society can long exist which permits such 2021 is the height of hypocrisy.
subversion.54
OPPOSITION TO CHRISTIAN CULTURAL VICTORY
Even Micklem in the liberal Interpreter’s Dr. Gribben expresses antipathy
Bible sees the matter as a serious toward the advance of Christian civi-
one despite reservations concerning lization, supposing Christian Recon-
enforcement: structionists to have taken a dangerously
Generally the state is not expected to wrong turn. But Rushdoony’s position is
tolerate the expression of seditious no novelty. Purging the world of Rush-

VISIT CHALCEDONSTORE.COM TODAY!

doony by making him “an offender for a Oxford Studies in Historical Theology, as well
word” will not suffice. as The Puritan Millennium (2000), Writing the
Rapture (2009), and Evangelical Millennialism
In 1943, Dr. John Murray penned
(2010), among others.
“The Christian World Order” in which 7. Gribben, Why Conservatives Shouldn’t Migrate
“the whole of life will be brought into to Gab.
willing captivity to the obedience of 8. ibid.
Christ.”59 He argues that even if that isn’t 9. The original reads “which by definitive ex-
perchance attainable, we must still try to clude any defence” which looks to be a typo.
10. ibid.
achieve it. “We must be bold to say that
11. Michael J. McVicar, Christian Reconstruc-
the Christian revelation does not allow us tion: R. J. Rushdoony and American Religious
to do anything less than to formulate and Conservatism (Chapel Hill, NC: University of
work towards a Christian world order in North Carolina Press, 2015).
the life that we now live.”60 He even re- 12. https://chalcedon.edu/magazine/first-major-
gards the Bible as “the only infallible rule book-about-r-j-rushdoony
13. Verna Hall warned that such covenantal
of conduct for the civil magistrate in the
efforts would be premature until Christian char-
discharge of his magistracy.”61 According- acter had matured enough to undertake them.
ly, “the civil magistrate” must “recognize 14. https://chalcedon.edu/magazine/breaking-
and obey the authority of God and of his the-yardstick-by-which-we-measure-success
Christ and thus bring all of its functions 15. E.g., Dr. Gribben criticizes Gordan Runyan’s
into accord with the revealed will of God book Resistance to Tyrants as if it counseled a
new and seditious approach to government, but
as contained in his Word,” which Murray
Pastor Runyan was popularizing an 1853 work,
regards as a “stupendous responsibility.”62 namely James M. Willson, The Establishment
Ultimately, Dr. Gribben appears and Limits of Civil Government (Powder Springs,
to traffic in fear, perhaps thereby GA: American Vision Press, 2009 [1853]).
playing to his perceived base. Christian 16. https://chalcedon.edu/magazine/reinvent-
Reconstructionists serve a God beyond ing-leadership
17. https://chalcedon.edu/magazine/the-head-
human control, and humanism cannot
tax-the-only-god-endorsed-civil-tax, https://
approve of a God who confounds the chalcedon.edu/magazine/a-critique-of-jordans-
strong with the weak, or catches the wise norths-view-of-the-head-tax-part-2-of-3, https://
in their own conceits. John Howe said chalcedon.edu/magazine/a-critique-of-jordans-
that “an arm of flesh signifieth a great and-norths-view-of-the-head-tax-part-3-of-3
deal, when the power of an Almighty 18. In contrast, see Gribben, Survival and Re-
sistance, p. xii & 8 on “massive extension of the
Spirit is reckoned as nothing.” If you only
death penalty.”
have an arm of flesh63 to use, then that is 19. Restoring full liability renders the regulato-
all you will see. ry apparatus superfluous, while the poor tithe
would eradicate poverty as happened under the
1. https://chalcedon.edu/magazine/the-em- Maccabees.
perors-continued-nudity-jeff-sharlets-cri- 19. https://chalcedon.edu/magazine/examin-
tique-of-christian-historiography-examined ing-the-agenda-of-secularism
2. https://chalcedon.edu/magazine/the-prob- 21. https://chalcedon.edu/resources/articles/
lem-that-chalcedon-poses an-unwelcome-import-from-our-neighbours-to-
3. https://thecritic.co.uk/why-conserva- the-south
tives-shouldnt-migrate-to-gab/ 22. Julie J. Ingersoll, Building God’s Kingdom:
4. https://thecritic.co.uk/building-a-new-jerusa- Inside the World of Christian Reconstruction (Ox-
lem-in-idaho/ ford, England: Oxford University Press, 2015),
5. Crawford Gribben, Survival and Resistance in p. 67. An analysis of Dr. Ingersoll’s work from
Evangelical America: Christian Reconstruction in within the Christian Reconstruction community
the Pacific Northwest (Oxford, England: Oxford is called for, as well as Katherine Stewart’s The
University Press, 2021). Power Worshippers: Inside the Dangerous Rise of
6. Crawford Gribben, An Introduction to John Religious Nationalism.
Owen: A Christian Vision for Every Stage of Life 23. ibid.
(Chicago, IL: Crossway, 2020). Dr. Gribben had 24. Gribben, Survival and Resistance, chapter 2,
earlier written John Owen and English Puritan- note 4 (on Kindle Notes page 164).
ism: Experiences of Defeat in 2017 as part of the 25. Ingersoll, op. cit., p. 218. The 2015 edition

GREAT SAVINGS ON CHALCEDON BOOKS DURING OUR STOREWIDE SALE!

of Dr. Ingersoll’s book erroneously speaks of “the 45. Matthew Poole, A Commentary on the Whole
eighth commandment’s prohibition on bearing Bible (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers,
false witness,” given that it is the ninth com- n.d.), vol. 2, p. 394.
mandment that deals with the matter. We qual- 46. John Calvin, Calvin’s Commentaries (Grand
ify “judicious” given Dr. Ingersoll’s insistence Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1979 reprint),
that Reconstructionists want to impose “biblical vol. 7, part 2, pp. 334-335.
law, with violence if necessary …” (p. 216). 47. C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch, Commentary on
26. Gribben, Survival and Resistance, chapter 3, the Old Testament in Ten Volumes: Volume VII,
note 37 (on Kindle Notes page 172) Isaiah (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1975
27. Joseph Boot, The Mission of God: A Mani- [1861 in German, 1890 in English]), Section
festo of Hope for Society (Toronto, Canada: Ezra 2, p. 24.
Press, 2016), esp. pp. 664-666. 48. Matthew Henry, op. cit., p. 164.
28. Herbert Schlossberg, Idols for Destruction 49. R. J. Rushdoony, Leviticus (Vallecito, CA:
(Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 1990), esp. pp. Ross House Books, 2005), pp. 335-337.
178-191. 50. John Owen, The Works of John Owen
29. R. J. Rushdoony, Systematic Theology (Edinburgh: The Banner of Truth, [1850-53]
(Vallecito, CA: Ross House Books, 1994), vol. 1991), vol. 8, p. 166. So also Baruch A. Levine,
1, p. 12. Leviticus (Philadelphia, PA: Jewish Publication
30. ibid, p. 6. Society, 1989), p. 166; Adam Clarke, loc. cit.;
31. https://chalcedon.edu/magazine/world- Ephraim Radner, Leviticus (Grand Rapids, MI:
view-contamination-crucial-case-study-no-1-hu- Brazos Press, 2008), p. 261; Mark F. Rooker, Le-
man-language viticus (Nashville, TN: B&H Publishing, 2000),
32. https://www.movieguide.org/news-articles/ p. 296, n. 290, etc.
youtube-bans-pro-life-news-organization-re- 51. Klaas Schilder, Christ on Trial (Grand
moves-thousands-of-videos.html Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, [1939] 1979),
33. Gribben, Building a New Jerusalem in Idaho. p. 170.
34. https://chalcedon.edu/magazine/the-perpet- 52. ibid, p. 158.
ual-kindergarten 53. R. J. Rushdoony, The Institutes of Biblical
35. John Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah: Chapters Law (Vallecito, CA: Chalcedon/Ross House
1-39 (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1986), p. Books, [1973] 2020), p. 114.
539. 54. ibid, p. 115.
36. J. Alec Motyer, The Prophecy of Isaiah 55. Nathaniel Micklem in The Interpreter’s Bible
(Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 1993), p. (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1953), vol. 2,
242. p. 119.
37. Edward J. Young, The Book of Isaiah (Grand 56. John Philip Lange, Commentary on the Holy
Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1969), vol. 2, p. 328. Scriptures: Exodus & Leviticus (Grand Rapids,
Note footnote 30 where the word is conceded to MI: Zondervan, reprint of 1878 original), sect.
possibly come from the oppressed rather than 2, p. 184.
his oppressor. 57. George Adam Smith, The Book of the Twelve
38. H.D.M. Spence and Joseph S. Exell, The Prophets (New York, NY: Harper & Brothers,
Pulpit Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerd- [1900, 1896] 1928), vol. 1, p. 290. He deals
mans, 1950), vol. 10, p. 475. with “A People in Decay: 1. Morally” on pp.
39. Jamieson, Fausset & Brown, Commentary 271-289 and “A People in Decay: 2. Politically”
on the Old and New Testaments (Grand Rapids, on pp. 290-315.
MI: Eerdmans, 1982 reprint), part one, p. 654. 58. Rushdoony, Leviticus, pp. 337-338.
40. Charles John Ellicott, ed., Ellicott’s Com- 59. John Murray, Collected Writings of John
mentary on the Whole Bible (Grand Rapids, Murray (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth, 1976),
MI: Zondervan, n.d.), vol. 4, p. 496. vol. 1, p. 356.
41. John Philip Lange, Commentary on the Holy 60. ibid, p. 357.
Scriptures: Isaiah (Grand Rapids, MI: Zonder- 61. ibid, p. 364.
van, reprint of 1878 original), p. 323. Moore 62. ibid, p. 365.
served as translator and editor for this portion of 63. Cf. Jeremiah 17:5.
the commentary.
42. Joseph Addison Alexander, Commentary
on the Prophecies of Isaiah (Grand Rapids, MI:
Zondervan, 1978 [1846]), p. 469.
43. Matthew Henry, Matthew Henry’s Commen-
tary on the Whole Bible (McLean, VA: MacDon-
ald Publishing Co., n.d.), vol. 4, p. 163.
44. ibid, p. 164.

VISIT CHALCEDONSTORE.COM TODAY!

 Non-Profit
U.S. Postage
PAID
CHALCEDON Sacramento, CA
FOUNDATION Permit No. 316

P.O. Box 158 • Vallecito, CA 95251-9989

Phone: (209) 736-4365
Fax: (209) 736-0536
email: info@chalcedon.edu
www.chalcedon.edu
CHALCEDON NEEDS YOUR SUPPORT
ince 1965, the Chalcedon gained significant ground through
Foundation has served as the helping to restore Christian edu-
S founding and leading minis- cation, but it’s time to move into
try for the message of Christian other spheres by God’s grace, law,
Reconstruction, which is simply and power.
the mission of advancing the We desperately need your
Kingdom of God in every area of help to continue this mission,
life. Now, this many years later, the so please take a few moments
need for this message and ministry today to prayerfully consider
is greater. supporting Chalcedon with your
Our objective is to help equip tax-deductible giving. We’ve
Christians to “take back” govern- enclosed a self-addressed, postage-
ment from the state by means of paid envelope to make it easy, and
Biblical self-government and to you can also donate online at:
apply their faith to every sphere Chalcedon.edu/Give
of life and thought. We’ve already