Skip to content Well Versed - Chapter 19 - The Judiciary Jun 9 · 7 min ...more
Support this leader Liking this video? Support this ministry.
Support this leader
Liking this video? Support this ministry.
Give
Support this leader Liking this video? Support this ministry.
13.6K followers
Dr. Jim Garlow is a lifelong pastor who most recently served in San Diego, California, and now leads Well Versed, a ministry dedicated to bringing biblical
13.6K followers
Comments No comments yet. Start the conversation.
Biblical Standards for Judges 0:00 This is chapter 19 in the book Well Versed, and the topic is the judiciary.0:06 Does the Bible have anything to say about judges, the judiciary? The answer is yes. Judges there in fact, the entire book of judges.0:18 And the judges are to follow the ways of God. They're to be they're they're to be honest. They're not to be in it for their own personal gain. They're not to have their own agenda that that they drive. They're0:30 they're to rule with a high sense of integrity based upon what God sees justice to actually be. How does that square with our current supreme court? Let me0:42 take you back to June the 20 sixth 20 16. A famous case called the Obergefell case, in which in violation0:54 of 5000 years of tradition, the definition of marriage was devastated. Let me take you back years before that in a famous case in 191:06 73 called Roe v Wade, in which legalized killing of babies in the womb came into this nation. What did the judges use to1:18 determine that you could actually kill babies in the womb? That was that was new to have that codified and acceptable in America. And what did they use to1:29 justify the destruction of the definition of marriage that had been followed scripturally and have been followed by virtually every culture for 5000 years? They went to the fourteenth amendment. What1:41 is the fourteenth amendment about? It addresses that slaves should not be denied citizenship. And by taking the fourteenth amendment way beyond its intentionality,1:54 They justified the killing of babies in the womb, and they justified the practice of sodomy or sodomite marriages. Based upon an amendment that had absolutely2:05 nothing to do with marriage, in fact, the states alone define marriage, and had nothing to do with what is conceived in the womb. What on earth happened? Well, we had judges2:18 that wanted dishonest gain or had agendas to be driven. And the result is the culture has been enormously harmed. The judiciary is a noble and high calling,2:30 but it's to follow the justice that God calls for. What went wrong? Well, we have some interesting views in our culture today. We have 1 view of the constitution, strict2:41 constructionism. That basically means that the we apply the text as it was essentially written. Close to that is the meaning of original intent. Now that's not identical2:54 to that 1, but you try to ascertain what is the meaning. These are fairly close in definition. But then you have another view called living document. In other words, it's a living3:06 document and you can translate it however you desire as you see it. It living. It changes. Let's suppose you and I had a contract, and in that contract it said I borrowed from you 100000 dollars.3:17 Let's suppose I was to pay it back over 30 years. Let's suppose we establish an interest rate of 5 percent. We agreed, and I paid you for the first few months, and then I said, you know what? I don't think I wanna pay3:29 you that much. And besides that, I don't like the interest rate of 5 percent. I wanna pay 3 percent. And I don't wanna pay back the whole hundred thousand. I wanna pay back 25000 of it. He said, we have a3:41 contract. I said, no, but it's a living document. You may say that, Jim, has a bit extreme. No. It's not. Words have meaning. And when 2 people enter into an agreement, those words have meaning,3:53 and they should be applied according. The the live the the constitution was interpreted as a living document is a nice way of saying any judge can interpret it any way he or she has based onConstitutional Interpretation: Living Document vs. Original Intent 4:05 his own agenda or what he or she has to gain from it. What should happen when you have dishonest judges or judges that will not follow the jurisprudence? Well, Thomas4:17 Jefferson said, well, maybe we can dismiss them. He talked about that. 1 person running for for presidency said, we ought to defy the court. Some says, we ought to defund the court. There ought to be ways of trying4:29 to address the enormous abuses happening in our nation from the Supreme Court of the United States, which rules in violation of biblical principles, but which rules in violation4:41 of the constitution of the United States. There's a phrase that people use and they say, well, it's the law of the land. So it's the law of the land. No. The supreme4:53 court rulings are not the law of the land. The constitution is. We've had numbers of Supreme Court rulings that have been overturned in later years. 1 of theAddressing Judicial Abuse and the Need for Godly Judges 5:05 classic 1, the Dredstock case, where where blacks were not regarded as fully human, for example. Or you you go back to a case involving chief justice Oliver Wendell Wendell Holmes when they sterilized5:17 forcibly sterilized people and said several generations of imbeciles is is enough. And they the court thought they could go into people's lives and determine who procreate or not. Now those were overturned. They were5:29 terrible. It's not the law of the land. The constitution is the law of the land and the supreme court is to come under that. Does the bible call for judges to apply the law appropriately?5:42 Absolutely. Absolutely, it is. That's why we have an entire book called Judges, and our nation will never be healed from the enormous cancer we have growing until we once5:53 again have judges on the courts across America who will follow and honor existing law.6:04 Yeah. So what doctor Garlow just said is so true. This chapter, the judiciary opens up with this quote from Thomas Jefferson. It says the constitution is a mere thing of wax in the hands of the judiciary,6:16 which they may twist and shape in any form they please.6:19 I totally agree with Thomas Jefferson right here because the fourteenth amendment says free slaves are citizens that vote. And in 19 73, they justified killing babies by you misinterpreting6:31 this fourteenth amendment. And in 2015, they took it and redefined marriage.6:36 Mhmm. And the reality is we need judges who care enough about the constitution that they'll follow strict instruction or the original intent.6:43 Yeah. We have a supreme court guys that is, way out step their bounds, way out of line, and their responsibilities in the in the 3 coequal parts of branch of government. We we might need to take dramatic action. On page6:55 1 73, we might need a president like Thomas Jefferson who once threatened to dismiss a court, or a GOP candidate in this in in a current election, called for the president to defy the court, and others haveCall for Dramatic Action on the Courts 7:07 called to defund the court. We might need to take dramatic7:14 action.In this video 0:00 Biblical Standards for Judges4:00 Constitutional Interpretation: Living Document vs. Original Intent5:00 Addressing Judicial Abuse and the Need for Godly Judges7:00 Call for Dramatic Action on the Courts
Comments
Keep it kind. Comments are public.