Let me say on the onset, the purpose of this teaching is not to be provocative, nor is it to be incendiary. The purpose of it is to honor God by helping Christians apply a Christian worldview to present day politics in the United States of America. If you read through the books of 1st and 2nd Kings and 1st and 2nd Chronicles in the Old Testament, you know that all administrations were not equally righteous or equally unrighteous. Some brought about reformation and others hastened the nation's descent towards judgment. And as Christians living in a constitutional republic, we have a unique opportunity to either potentially accelerate evil and societal decay or to slow it. James Madison in the Federalist Papers, he wrote the following, we may define a republic to be, or at least bestow that name on, a government which derives all its powers directly or indirectly from the great body of the people. Now what many Christians in the United States of America do not realize is that in God's providence, they, we, have been entrusted with a kind of societal shared authority. Just like in God's design, fathers have authority in the homes. Just like in God's design, pastors have authority within a local church. Just like in God's design, governing officials have authority within a land and certain jurisdictions and so on. God has given authority in his design to citizens a kind of shared authority for those who live in a constitutional republic. Now just like fathers or pastors or government officials can misuse or abuse or abdicate that authority, so can citizens. And my hope is that as you hear the message today, you will not abdicate that responsibility. You see, Jesus called his followers the salt of the earth, Matthew 5, verse 13. And salt is not only a flavor enhancer, it is a preservative. Christians, by God's providence, are sprinkled throughout society. And among the reasons why God has sprinkled Christians throughout society, among the reasons, and there are many, one of them is so that they would be a kind of preservative, a kind of means of slowing societal decay. Let me apply that concept to our current consideration this morning. If in recent years, and if in previous decades, all true gospel-believing Christians voted and voted in accordance with biblical principles and said, I'm going to vote in the primaries and I'm going to vote in the general, I'm gonna vote top ballot, I'm gonna vote down ballot. I'm voting on the propositions. And if Christians said, as one body, we are just going to vote, it's just part of our stewardship as citizens, and we're gonna vote for the candidates in the primaries, and then in the general election, top ballot, down ballot, propositions, don't you think that the society in which we live would likely look different today? I think that's inspiring. I think the nation would look very different right now if the whole body of believers said, we're just gonna exercise that stewardship. Currently, however, according to a recent study that was released by George Barna, 104 million, quote unquote, people of faith, but including 32 million Christian regular churchgoers, at least according to this survey, are planning not to vote this November. Now if just say 75% of them, I know it's a big number, but say 75%, 24 million of the 32 million regular churchgoers were encouraged by their pastors to exercise that civic authority and responsibility in the manner that befits the scriptures, selecting candidates whose policies are most aligned or more aligned in alignment with God's word, it would stand to reason that society would be helped, societal decay would be slowed, and one political party's pursuit of a culture of Death would be impeded. See, God has decided the exact time and place in which you live. Acts 17 verse 26, and you happen in his providence to live in a constitutional republic where the ultimate source of authority, of course under the auspices of his sovereign authority, is the people. and the people are to exercise that authority through voting and civic engagement. So there's a sense in which you could say that the citizens of the United States of America bear a kind of Romans 13 type of responsibility to help direct governmental policy which will affect the lives of millions of people. I think the principle that Jesus articulated in Luke chapter 12 verse 48 is applicable. To whom much is given, much is required. I mean, we can either be complicit in the wickedness that is enabled through legislation, by voting for a certain party, or by not voting, or our vote can be a proverbial brick in the wall that is attempting to hold back further wickedness. To borrow and then build upon an analogy by Doug Wilson, all the citizens of our nation are in a proverbial canoe. Some are going to paddle via their votes in the direction of eroding parental rights, proliferating and funding baby killing, and life-altering, God-defying procedures in the name of gender transitioning. Some will paddle in that direction still. to see inflation increased, open borders, and much more. But there will be others who will paddle in the other direction, hoping to see Planned Parenthood defunding, the stopping of gender-affirming care for minors, stopping the lawlessness at the border, and so on. But then there will be some who will sit in the boat and refuse to paddle. Now, considering the destructive destination to which people are paddling on the left, I lovingly ask dear Christians who are considering to sit on the sidelines, how could you not use that paddle in your hand and paddle in the opposite direction? I just say that in love. I want to encourage you to paddle. I want to encourage you to vote. With that said, the question becomes, who should a Christian vote for? Now, I told you in 2020, despite the surprising and saddening conclusions of some prominent and well-known evangelical Christians, that matter was not difficult to discern. The Democratic Party has adopted position after position in steadfast disobedience to God's word, advocating things that God hates to the point where it was and still is, in my conception, inconceivable that a Christian would vote Democrat unless Somehow, they were oblivious to the party's many, many, many demonic positions. And though, sadly, the divide between the two parties has lessened in the last four years, there is still a vast divide between many positions of Democratic candidates and Republican candidates, so much so that I would argue that you have an opportunity to advance things that honor God and help people and stop things that God hates and hurts people. So I will not be vague. I will provide you with a series of evaluations of policies and positions set against the backdrop of God's word in the hope that you will embrace the stewardship that you've been entrusted with and that you will exercise it well. But first, before I do that, some important biblical teaching slash qualifiers. First, let me say this. Make no mistake, the most important issue today and every day, before, during, and after election cycles, is trusting in Jesus Christ alone for salvation. Nations rise and nations fall. Our lives are but a vapor. And the main issue is whether or not you have, by the grace of God, believed in Jesus Christ alone for the forgiveness of sins. Everybody who voted in the 1860 presidential election is somewhere right now. They are either absent from the body and present with the Lord, having believed the gospel, or they are in Hades, awaiting the resurrection of the unjust, where they will be sentenced to the lake of fire. Voting in alignment with biblical principles will not save a person's soul. Only believing in Jesus Christ as Messiah, that He died for your sins and rose from the grave according to the scriptures, that He is the way, the truth, and the life, and no one comes to the Father except through Him. He is God's appointed means of salvation, God's eternally begotten Son, who took on flesh and lived a perfect life and died in our place so that all who believe in Him would not perish but have everlasting life. Now secondly, let me say this. A vote is not an endorsement for the entirety of a person's character, history, or positions. Now many Christians know that a Kamala Harris victory will lead to further and greater lawlessness, baby killing, further erosion of parental rights, the appointment of activist judges who will judge partially, and so on. Yet they are reticent to vote for President Trump because they feel as though they are endorsing everything about him. I just want to remind you, that's not what a vote is. It is an exercise of stewardship. That's what it is. Knowing that a country will, a country will appoint people into positions of authority, a Christian just says, by exercising the stewardship, I am seeking to slow societal decay and advance societal good, if possible, by voting for candidates whose policies and positions most closely or more closely align with biblical values. Third, a few clarifications. You can vote and still make living for Christ your main priority. You can vote and not have your hope be in your vote or in a candidate. You can vote and not be consumed with politics and neglect your Christian duties. I mean, the scripture says, Psalm 146, verse three, do not put your trust in princes, in human beings who cannot save. The Scripture says in Psalm 118 verses 8 and 9, It is better to trust in the Lord than to put confidence in man. It is better to trust in the Lord than to put confidence in princes. The Scripture says in Jeremiah 17 verse 5, Cursed is the man who trusts in man and makes flesh his strength, whose heart departs from the Lord. You can vote and not have your hope be in man. Again, it is simply a stewardship, an exercise of authority that you've been given as a citizen living in a constitutional republic where you seek to restrain evil and further good. You can seek first the kingdom of God and his righteousness, Matthew 6, verse 33, and have your vote be a component of how you are seeking to do that. Fourth, some Christians will say that they will not vote due to their conscience. And I just want to remind you that consciences can be tuned rightly or wrongly. Remember, there were those in the church in Romans 14, verse two, for instance, Paul described this way. For one believes he may eat all things, but he who is weak eats only vegetables. Now the latter was described as weak because their consciences were tuned wrongly. They were thinking that they couldn't eat certain meat if it was unclean, or maybe had previously been offered to idols, and their conscience was tuned wrongly, and then they didn't want to sin against their conscience, and they shouldn't have, so they didn't eat meat, they only ate vegetables, but the idea was that at the end of the day, all Christians should pursue having their conscience tuned rightly. So it's not just enough to say, my conscience won't let me vote. Is your conscience tuned rightly? And I hope that today's message, some of what, maybe much of what I've already said will be helpful to that end, yet alone what is coming in the message. Fifth, you can fulfill a civic duty to an earthly government and not have it encroach upon your allegiance, your ultimate allegiance to God. Remember Jesus told his disciples to render unto Caesar what was Caesar's. That was a civic responsibility. His followers were to fulfill that, even though the government of Rome didn't worship the one true God, had immoral elements to it, and had fallen people leading it. In like manner, you can vote seeking to direct society towards greater alignment with God's word, an act of doing good and seeking the peace of the land in which you find yourself, to use language from Jeremiah 29 verse seven, and you could still be able to say like Jesus said in John 18, 36, my kingdom is not of this world. You can still say there is coming a day when the kingdoms of this world will become the kingdoms of our Lord and of his Christ, Revelation 11, 15. And in the meantime, I am simply desiring to be salt and light, doing good while I am here. And sixth, I will not be able to address every issue that could be addressed. The message that I shared with you all in 2020, can a Christian vote Democrat, as well as the cultural apologetic series, speaks to some issues that I won't address directly here. Democratic socialism versus the scriptures view of an economic system that aligns with the scriptures. DEI initiatives and what anti-racist racism does to a society and so on, how it's the endorsement, the establishing of the sin of partiality. You can look at those messages for further information on topics that I won't address here today. But with that being said, let's get to some issues. We're going to address three of them together today. Issue number one, abortion. With that being said, this was the clearest divide between the Democratic Party and the Republican Party. Now that has changed this election cycle, and this divide is shorter than it was, but make no mistake, The issue of abortion is the number one issue, in my estimation, of the Democratic Party, and the divide, as you will see, is still rather large. The Democratic Party so loves abortion, the sin of baby killing, that some of you might remember or some of you might know that at the Democratic National Convention, there were mobile abortion clinics on site providing free abortions. Vice President Kamala Harris's commitment to abortion at any point in the pregnancy has been longstanding. In 2020, when Kamala Harris was a senator in California, she voted against the pain-capable Unborn Child Protection Act, which would have protected the lives of unborn children that were 20 weeks or older in the womb. Now it's interesting because if you actually look at the bill, and you can see that it would make it a crime, it would have made it a crime, for an abortion to be performed on a child that was 20 weeks or older in the womb. But even in the bill, exceptions were provided. Exceptions for the life of a mother. Exceptions were provided in the result of pregnancy resulting in the case of rape or incest. And the woman who sought the abortion, even though it was prohibited, was not to be charged with any kind of wrongdoing. So those were in there. And I say that to say, not as an endorsement of some of those things, I say that to say, even with those exceptions, Kamala Harris was so committed to abortion and the sin of baby killing that she voted no against that act. Now I know for some people that the sin of abortion could be kind of theoretical. It could be kind of abstract. But let me tell you, if you've ever seen the images of a sonogram with a little child that is putting his or her hands towards the forceps that are coming his or her way, as though to push it away, and then all of a sudden that motioning stops when the spine is snapped at the neck, it doesn't become so much of an abstract issue anymore. When you see the images of what it looks like when a child is dismembered in the womb, it's not just an abstract issue anymore. It's a legitimate issue. It's a serious issue. God tells us in his word that he hates the shedding of innocent blood. Proverbs 6, verse 17. And not to mention, leading into the 2020 election when then Senator Kamala Harris was seeking to be the vice presidential candidate for the Democratic Party, she went to Virginia to stump at Springfield, Virginia for Kathy Tran and to support her re-election. Kathy Tran, some of you may know, she was the candidate who supported the third trimester abortion bill that was backed by then governor, Democratic Virginia Governor Ralph Northam. When asked about how late in a pregnancy a physician could choose to perform an abortion for the sake of a woman's mental health, she responded, Kathy Tran, through the third trimester. The third trimester goes all the way up to 40 weeks, end quote. In response to further questioning, she went on to state that according to her bill, a physician could choose to perform an abortion even if a woman was dilating and showing signs that she was about to give birth. Now, according to one online newsletter of the Fairfax County Democratic Committee, Kamala Harris praised Tran for the huge fights she undertook for the women of Virginia, quote, likely referring to Tran's work to loosen restrictions on late-term abortions last session, close quote. I say that to say, so even if Kamala Harris does not state a position in this election cycle on abortion, but kind of hints at it and doesn't get too explicit and so on, and even if she were to voice restrictions on abortion, and to my knowledge, she has not, she has clearly showed what her positions are in what she has voted for. You could say that actions have spoken very loudly. She's even called pro-life pregnancy centers predatory practices. On top of that, Governor Tim Walz, running for the office of vice president, has publicly stated, quote, and my record is so pro-choice, Nancy Pelosi asked me if I should tone it down. I stand with Planned Parenthood and we won, close quote. One writer wrote in an August 2024 article, under Governor Tim Walz, babies born alive and botched abortions were left to die, then he removed reporting requirements. That was the headline for that article. The article goes on to outline instances and context and so on, and there's more examples that I could give. There's plenty more. Suffice it to say, when people have shown their disregard for life at this level, do you think that such individuals should be rewarded with more authority? Do you think that that bodes well for a land, for the culture, for people, for the unborn if these individuals enter into a position of power desiring to use taxpayer funds to further abortion, desiring to be advocates for abortion not only domestically but internationally, more about that in a moment, seeking to have this enshrined in all 50 states via the Congress and so on? Do you think that's a good thing for society? Now to be sure, President Trump's move to the quote unquote center on the subject of abortion is wrong. And I will address that. But first let me provide a little bit more historical context. I know that during his time as president, his administration was pro-life. Now, usually the pro-life aspect of that administration is tied to the appointing of judges to the Supreme Court who would eventually be part of overturning Roe versus Wade. But there were at least, at least two other considerable actions that were taken during his administration that I think we should be aware of. When Joe Biden was running for the office as president, part of the case he made for the presidency on the Biden and Harris website was that he would, quote, restore, note the word restore, federal funding for Planned Parenthood. That clearly attests to the fact that during the previous administration, during President Trump's administration, federal funding for Planned Parenthood was taken away, and indeed it was. An ABC News article noted on October 4th, 2021, quote, the Biden administration on Monday formally reverses a Trump-era rule that barred reproductive healthcare clinics that provide abortion referrals and services from receiving federal funds. Close quote. Also, when Joe Biden was running for the presidency, the Biden-Harris website said that their administration would, open quote, rescind the Mexico City policy. It goes on to say that President Trump reinstated and expanded, close quote. Well, per the National Right to Life, the Mexico City policy prevented tax funds from being given to organizations that perform abortions or lobby to change abortion laws of host countries. And he later expanded the policy to prevent $9 billion in foreign aid from being used to fund the global abortion industry, close quote. President Trump's administration did that via a presidential memorandum on January 23rd, 2017, and the Biden administration revoked it on January 28th, 2021. Now, will a second Trump administration install that again so that foreign aid is not given to further the cause of abortion? I mean, we're not even just talking about abortion being supported here domestically, but having our government using federal taxpayer funds to fund it internationally. I would hope that a second Trump administration would take that away and reinstitute the Mexico City policy. Positively, J.D. Vance has stated recently that a Trump-Vance administration would defund Planned Parenthood, a remark that leftist media outlets have seized upon. That's one of the reasons why I think it's imprudent at a minimum when pro-lifers are thinking of sitting on the sidelines due to President Trump's words when the actions of a prospective administration would lessen the use of taxpayer funds towards abortions. Now, quick word, quick word about President Trump's remarks. President Trump's initial remarks regarding Proposition 4 in Florida were reprehensible. But thanks be to God, shortly after making them, likely in conjunction with pro-lifers calling attention to how ghastly that proposition was, he changed course and he said he couldn't support it because after looking at it, he essentially saw it as executing a baby in the womb. So President Trump is not voting to repeal the six-week abortion ban in Florida. President Trump's remarks and messaging that some abortion laws are too tough and would be redone is wrong. I know he wants to leave it up to the states, but if there is any political blowback, the 15-week remarks are still wrong and they need to be repented of. Any disparaging of states that have taken steps to protect life needs to be repented of. Any bit of that in the past or the present in the future is wrong. It is wicked. And it needs to be repented of. Life is to be protected at all stages. But again, I want to make this clear. A non-vote puts Kamala Harris and Tim Walz closer to the presidency and the vice presidency. And that means greater use of funds all over the US and internationally to fund baby killing. It means putting people in positions of power who would seek to make it legal in all 50 states. It would mean an administration staffed with about, say, 4,000 political appointees that would no doubt be used to a large degree to use federal law and, where they can, state law, in the words of Andrew Walker, to bring about an abortion regime. And as a Christian who believes that God is the author of life and that abortion is murder, a vote against the Democratic Party is one way to take a stand for life. Now that's a lot of context, but I don't know how much of that you know. And a lot of people make decisions with a kind of paltry amount of information. So I know that's a lot of information, but I want you to be informed. Now set that against the backdrop of what the Bible says on abortion. The Bible clearly calls murder wrong. Genesis chapter nine, six, Matthew 15, 19, and other passages could be referenced. And the Bible clearly identifies unborn children as persons. Remember, Elizabeth said that John the Baptist leaped for joy in the womb, Luke 1, verse 44, witnessing to John as a baby in the womb, experiencing joy even while he was there. Furthermore, John is identified as a baby, a brephos in Luke 1, verse 44, and Luke 1, verse 41. It's the same word that is used in Luke 2 twice to describe Jesus when he is outside of the womb. So the clear teaching of scripture is a brephos is a brephos, a baby is a baby inside of the womb, Luke chapter 1, and outside of the womb, Luke chapter 2. Furthermore, there are Old Testament texts like Jeremiah chapter 1 verse 5, Isaiah 49 verse 1, Psalm 139 verses 13 through 16 that show that God is the one who forms a child in the womb. He calls individuals from the womb. And human beings do not have the right to stretch forth their hands to stop what God's hand is knitting together in the womb. Under the Mosaic law, if men fought, and as a result of their fighting, a woman gave birth to a child prematurely, resulting in the child's death, the death penalty was the punishment for the offending party in light of the life-for-life principle, Exodus chapter 21, verses 22 through 23. And the Bible also teaches that life begins at conception. In addition to how the previous verses can bear on this, let me call your attention to 2 Samuel 11, verse five, where David, after he had committed adultery with Bathsheba, after that, we are told, and the woman conceived. And so she sent and told David and said, I am with child. Look at the clear connection that the Bible makes in that verse. The woman conceived and was with child. To conceive was to be with child. David himself said in Psalm 51 verse five, behold I was brought forth in iniquity, in sin my mother conceived me. He didn't say, in sin, my mother conceived something that would eventually, like the fifth week or the 15th week, would become me. No, in sin, my mother conceived me. All that to say, the scriptures, God's word, the God of the universe, in numerous ways, has regarded those within the womb as persons, as babies, as infants capable of emotion, as individuals deserving of legal protection, and so on. It should be the prerogative of Christians to see that the shedding of innocent blood, which God hates, Proverbs 6, verse 17, is mitigated and or stopped, and I would argue that a vote against the Democratic Party in the current climate in which we live, when the divisions are still as broad as they are, is a way to do that. Issue number two, border security and Romans 13 responsibilities. In a letter from the ICE Deputy Director to Representative Tony Gonzalez, he set forth the following statistics. That of those who have entered this country illegally, 425,431 of them are convicted criminals. 15,811 of them have been convicted of sexual assault. 13,099 of them have been convicted of homicide. He also noted in this letter that there were pending criminal charges, so in addition to the figures I just gave you, pending criminal charges for 222,141 of them, including 1,845 with respect to homicide, 4,250 pending sexual assault. Is that not astounding and disturbing? Wouldn't that in itself disqualify someone from a promotion from the vice presidency to the presidency? A king in the Old Testament was likened to a shepherd. You can see that in 2 Samuel 5, verse two. And shepherds had the responsibility of protecting the flock under their care. Well, the current administration has woefully, woefully failed in guarding the citizenship and the citizenry of this country from wolves with criminal records and or evil intentions. I just say, just even in light of that, before I go on, wouldn't that, wouldn't that be a tremendous motivation to go to prayer and the polls to see that such leaders, if it be God's will, be replaced with ones that would guard the borders? The House of Representatives Judiciary Committee released a report that was headlined, The Biden-Harris Border Crisis, At Least 1.7 Million Potential National Security Threats. On September 18th, 2024, there was an article by Elizabeth Elkind, and the headline of it read, 158 Dems Vote Against Bill to Deport Illegal Immigrants Who Commit Sex Crimes. I'll read that again, just in case you didn't realize what I just read, because it's so startling. 158 Dems vote against the bill to deport illegal immigrants who commit sex crimes. Very strange and wicked, isn't it, that anyone would vote against such a bill? Why am I telling you this? Because I don't want it just to be abstract and ethereal. This is affecting people, right? We can't just play in our minds and think, like, nobody's affected. People are affected. Many examples could be cited. Three Honduran illegals let in during the Biden-Harris administration were arrested in Florida for molesting a 12-year-old girl. In Connecticut, a 57-year-old man was robbed and murdered by two illegal immigrants from Venezuela. In Texas, four Venezuelan migrants tied up a woman in her home, beat her, and robbed her, according to the New York Post. Bill Malugan reported, quote, Close quote. The examples could keep going. The open border policy has already led to abuse, loss of life, lawlessness in itself, and doubtless it has made our nation more vulnerable to a 9-11 scale attack or 9-11 scale attacks from those who would seize the opportunity to plant individuals, terrorists, or foreign nationals in our country waiting until their number is called. Now, simply put, I won't belabor this, but simply put, in contrast to the current administration, the Republican platform has devoted a large amount of text to this issue, a large amount. Committing to secure the border, enforcing immigration laws, deporting those who have violated the United States laws, strict vetting, and more. It's no wonder that the Border Patrol counsel stated, open quote, we strongly support and endorse Donald J. Trump for the President of the United States, close quote. I think it's abundantly clear, given what went on during his first term, that there's a clear contrast between border security, between the Republican ticket and the Democratic ticket. See, biblically, governmental leaders have a fundamental responsibility to punish evil and by doing so, protect citizens. Romans chapter 13 verse three shows what rulers are to be. They aren't always this, but this is what they are to be. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil. That's what a ruler is to be, not an enabler of evil. but somebody who punishes evil. Paul goes on to say in verse four, So when those who enter this country illegally, and according to the ICE director's report, many of whom are convicted criminals, and there's a whole list of crimes in his report, not just the two I mentioned to you, and many have pending criminal charges, and our country does what? Welcomes them with open arms, funds them, gives them money regularly, cell phones and so on, puts them up in hotels and in houses and so on. That's an enablement of evil in many cases, and that is putting the lives of many people in this country at jeopardy when the fundamental responsibility is to punish evil and by doing so protect, protect those that are under your jurisdiction. You're not supposed to reward lawlessness. As an additional point, let me just make this as a quick supplementary point. A Harris-Walz administration would have the opportunity to appoint judges, speaking of Romans 13 responsibilities, to appoint judges like the one who sentenced a mother recently who blocked the entrance of an abortion clinic and was sentenced to three and a half years under the category distinction, at least according to her testimony, of unlawful assembly. Can you imagine that? So you can have people coming into this country, and the ICE director knows many of them are committed criminals, or those who've committed criminals. You can have even many criminals who commit such atrocities released. But a woman who is at an abortion clinic, who's a professing Christian, she goes to jail for three and a half years, and is not gonna be able to see her daughter and husband outside of visitation. She said in the video that she had posted, you have to vote. It's a reminder to us of what happens when people enter positions of power who will practice the sin of partiality with the law and not judge impartially. God's not indifferent to that kind of thing, right? We can't just sit back and say, oh, God doesn't care because he's sovereign whether or not people judge impartially. Look at what the scripture says. He who justifies the wicked and he who condemns the just, both of them alike are an abomination to the Lord. That word abomination speaks of something that is detestable in his sight. Proverbs 17, 15. Proverbs 18, 5. It is not good to be partial to the wicked or to deprive the righteous of justice. See, these are not like small issues. They're big deals in God's Word. Second, let me just tell you, just in case you don't know, the Bible does not encourage a borderless world. According to the Bible, borders are not unnecessary fences that the Bible would instruct us to do without. Boundary markers and national borders are God's design. Deuteronomy 32, verse 8. Acts 17, verses 26 and 27. When God gave the promised land to the children of Israel. Remember Numbers 34? He gave it with specific land allotments that they were to respect. As a matter of fact, in Deuteronomy chapter two, God told the Israelites through Moses, do not meddle with, and he's speaking of the inhabitants of Seir, do not meddle with the inhabitants of Seir, for I will not give you any of their land. No, not so much as one footstep, because I have given Mount Seir to Esau as a possession. Israel themselves had been given the promised land and they didn't have the right to take the land that belonged to the inhabitants of Seir. In fact, they couldn't take any food or drink from Seir without money. Deuteronomy chapter 2 verse 5. And although Israel would be an instrument of God's judgment against the inhabitants of Canaan, God was displacing the inhabitants of Canaan for all of their wickedness, as outlined in Deuteronomy, and he was bringing the Israelites in, but that didn't mean they were entitled to anything they wanted. The Bible says more about this, to be sure. The Bible clearly teaches us, as God's people, that we are to have compassion towards sojourners, towards those who are foreigners. The Bible is clear about that. But as it concerns a nation's right and responsibility to enforce its laws, for the moment, the point is simple. The existence and establishment of borders are not opposed to God's will, they are clearly a part of his design and plan. So with that being said, let me move to the last issue we'll consider today, issue number three. One woman had posted on Twitter, On X, she said, I am genuinely baffled that more Christians and pastors aren't passionately speaking out against gender ideology. Children are losing body parts and fertility. Parents are losing their kids. So issue number three is the protection of children and the family. I would just say how can those, so I would echo those who have said this and I would join in saying this, how can those in the body of Christ or pastors see this as an issue that's quote unquote too political to speak about? See, a Harris-Waltz administration would continue to further the agenda of the Biden-Harris administration, assaulting parental rights, using governmental funds to fund the mutilation of an individual's body parts, wanting men who think they are women engaging in women's sports, and examples could go on. Just to provide a little bit of data for you, for example, on whitehouse.gov, there is a fact sheet that states how the Biden-Harris administration has advanced transgender issues. One bullet point reads, advancing gender-affirming care as an essential health benefit. Another bullet point states, advancing research to address the harms of so-called conversion therapy. So you have an administration in power right now, and you have a prospective presidential, someone who will serve in the office of the president, saying, I wouldn't do anything different. And part of what they have done is that they have sought to use taxpayer funds to fund this kind of thing, and they have sought to oppose trying to counsel and talk people out of their gender dysphoria, trying to help them. This shouldn't be surprising. A little more context for you, a little bit more data. When Kamala Harris was running for the presidency, she filled out an ACLU questionnaire that included providing the response of yes to the following question. As president, will you use your executive authority to ensure that transgender and non-binary people who rely on the state for medical care, including those in prison and immigration detention, will have access to comprehensive treatment associated with gender transition, including all necessary surgical care? And she said yes. In the additional response, because you can include a little bit more than just saying yes, she included the following. Transition treatment is a medical necessity, and I will direct all federal agencies responsible for providing essential medical care to deliver transition treatment. To try to undo, hormonally, but you can't do it via chromosomes, but to undo, cosmetically, what God has rooted in a person. To try to undo that, and in the process, do great harm, and cause individuals to become infertile, and so on. Then there's what Tim Walz has done in Minnesota, and there could be a lot that could be said about this, signing what's been referred to, I think he's referred to it as that, or at least people around him, as trans-refuge legislation, which according to one writer, can separate kids from loving parents' custody. Now on the other hand, just so you're aware of the contrasts here, according to NBC News, so by no means a conservative political outlet at all, There was a headline that read, Trump vows to stop gender-affirming care for minors if re-elected president. And then under that, the sub-headline reads, Trump says he would also push to promote positive education about the nuclear family and the roles of mothers and fathers. The Republican platform says, we will keep men out of women's sports, ban taxpayer funding for sex change surgeries, and stop taxpayer-funded schools from promoting gender transition, reverse Biden's radical rewrite of Title IX education regulations, and restore protections for women and girls. I just say that so you have the data. That's it. Just, there you go. There's a pretty severe contrast there. And now you set that against the backdrop of what God's word says on these issues. What does God's word say about this issue? About parental authority? About, you know, a person being a specific sex and then having a specific gender that is inextricably linked to that sex? The scripture says this. God created human beings as man and woman, male and female, made in his image. Genesis chapter one, verses 26 and 27. This is reinforced by Jesus in Matthew chapter 19, verse four, and in Mark chapter 10, verse six. But to quote Jesus from Matthew 19, verse four, have you not read that he who made them at the beginning made them male and female? A person's biological sexuality corresponds to their gender. I mean, for many of us, that concept is just synonymous, right? Because if a person is biologically one thing, their gender is that thing. If you're biologically male, your gender is male. Now, I know people try to splice it and nuance it and speak about one being a more cultural expression and so on, but at the end of the day, they are essentially synonymous because they're both linked. A person's biology is telling you what they are. Right, if a person's a male, he has a Y chromosome. Even if there are other issues, even if there are congenital issues of one kind or another, at the end of the day, the presence of a Y chromosome is what makes or witnesses to the fact that a boy is a boy, a male is a male. You can't undo that. This biological distinction is a beautiful thing in God's eyes. When God said that it was not good for man to be alone, he didn't create another man. He created a woman. And in God's design, the man and the woman would each have a unique capability to contribute to the procreation and the formation of a new life. Now that's the beginning of an argument against the sin of homosexuality, but it also speaks to the beauty of the distinction between two genders. It was a beautiful part of God's design. It's how procreation would happen. It was part of God's good plan. This biological distinction becomes the basis for the fulfillment of specific responsibilities within the local church and the home. You just go through Ephesians 5, you go through 1 Timothy 2, and you see that if you understand who God's made you to be, if you are a man, you're going to have certain responsibilities that a woman won't have. And if you're a woman, you're gonna have certain responsibilities that a man won't have. Because there's a beauty in these distinctions. Now I just wanna tell you, everybody in this room, this is God's design for you that you would see and recognize that you didn't make yourself. He knitted you together in your mother's womb. Psalm 139 verse 13. You are fearfully and wonderfully made. Psalm 139 verse 14. He has given you the body that you have. And I know for a lot of people, the beginning of going down that route is social media pressure, cultural pressure, but then there's also the kind of dysphoria they have with how they look and so on. And that could be the beginning of somebody going down that track, but I want to tell you that God has given you your body. Now I know some of us may say, you know, hey, I wish I could lose some weight, or I wish I could put on some muscle, or I wish I could do this or that. I understand that, but at the end of the day, your body has been given to you by God and you're called to steward it. You're called to glorify God in your body. 1 Corinthians 6, verse 20. You are not to envy and say, well, you know, I want that person's gender. You are to be content with how God has made you. And please make no mistake, so everybody knows, transgenderism, I know it's on the upswing in recent decades in the West, but it's not a new issue. This is something that God speaks to in his word in the book of Deuteronomy. He said that men who dressed like women and women who dressed like men, that that sin was an abomination to him. And that such individuals who did that were doing abominable things and were in themselves abominable for doing that. Didn't mean that there wasn't a place for forgiveness. Didn't mean that they didn't have inherent dignity being made in the image of God. It just meant that that sin is very wrong. God's will for all of us is that we live in accordance with the biology that he's given us. with the chromosomes that he's put inside of us. Look, there's more to who you are than just male or female. But who you are is inextricably tied to that. At the resurrection of the dead, when you get your glorified body, you will still be male or female. This is part of who you are. And to undertake medical procedures to undo what is inextricably laced into the fabric of a person's chromosomes, or to be complicit in someone's lie about their gender, right, calling a man a she or a her when he is a he, or the government enforcement of catering to such lies are all examples of sin and rebellion against the God who created and assigned human gender according to his good purpose and for the good of men and women. So I ask you, why would citizens who have a shared stewardship in the society sit idly by while tax dollars are being used to fund something that is so sinful? Are you to have compassion on people who go through these things? Of course. Of course. Loving on, ministering to such a one. We are all sinners. We've all fallen short from the glory of God. Whether it's the sin of abortion, whether it's the sin of homosexuality, whether it's the sin of gender dysphoria and taking actual steps to try to live in accordance with a different gender than what you have, we are all sinners and there is to be compassion levied towards all sinners and there's the good news of forgiveness for everyone who is a sinner and we're all sinners. We've all got different issues. But at the same time, it's not compassionate to enable a person's pursuit of self-harm. If a person was, say, anorexic or bulimic, would we, open quote, affirm their anorexia or bulimia in order to protect them from despondency? Would helping them include lovingly confronting the destructive lies that were leading to self-harm? That's what it really would look like. It wouldn't be the allowance of one kind of harm to protect from another. Quick point on parental authority. The Bible clearly teaches that children are to obey their parents. Parents have authority over their children. Ephesians chapter six, verse one, Colossians 3.20 teaches that children are to obey their parents. God enshrined this in the Ten Commandments. Honor your father and your mother. So I just say that to say, if you're just looking at the issues and saying, well, how can I stewardship this authority that's been entrusted to me? I would say as relates to this issue, a vote against the democratic party is a vote for religious liberty and parental rights. It is a vote for protections of women and girls in restrooms, dressing rooms, shelters, prisons, and sports. It is a vote against taxpayer funding for gender transitioning surgeries. It's a vote against the indoctrination of children in public schools. with such anti-biblical gender ideology, at least to some degree? Now there's more that I could say. But I could speak about DEI initiatives. I could speak about inflation. I could speak about the weaponization of governmental agencies like the FBI, CIA, FBI agents showing up at the homes of pro-lifers. There's a lot more that I could speak about. A lot more. But I simply close with saying this. I would call you, as the body of Christ, to pray. I would call you to fast. I welcome you, if you wanted to fast this upcoming Wednesday, leading into our time at prayer meeting, to come to prayer meeting and to fast and pray for our nation. Because you see that at the end of the day, this is not just a matter of abstract political concepts, but people's lives will be affected. And I would encourage you, in light of the scriptures and the authority that you have been given in this time, to vote. Again, I say to you what I said at the beginning. Could you imagine if in previous years and in previous decades, all the body of Christ who loved the gospel and loved sound doctrine said, you know what? I'm going to follow Jesus. I'm going to love others. I'm going to serve others. I'm going to get the gospel out. And part of my civic stewardship is going to be that I'm going to vote. Maybe others show up at school board meetings. Maybe others run for different positions in their county or in their state and so on. But all the body of Christ says, you know what? we're going to exercise our stewardship in the primaries, in the general election, down ballot, down ballot, top ballot, propositions. Imagine what our society would look like right now. And it's not making it the main thing. We're not saying, all right, everybody, we're going to try to create heaven on earth. No, it's just realizing that we're salt. It's just one part of our stewardship. It's not even saying that we have our hope in men, not at all. Look, platforms can say one thing and they can change, which is all the more reason why you want Christians mobilized to be saying, look, we are saying certain things wrong. We're gonna call it out on both sides. You heard me do that today. And at the end of the day, our priority is going to be the gospel. Our priority is going to be serving the Lord Jesus Christ, but again, I see no incongruence with this simple exercise of your authority that you've been given as a citizen to just say, I wanna be salt, I wanna slow the decay to whatever degree I can, I wanna further societal good, and I wanna push back those things that are going to hurt or harm people and are things that God hates. That being said, let's pray. Father, thank you for the times and the places in which we live. Thank you that this is under your design, and we pray, Heavenly Father, for our land, that you might, by your grace, in more ways than simply a vote, but Father, in that way, yet alone other ways, that you would mobilize the blessed body of Christ, our brothers and sisters all over this nation, to walk as light and to be that salt that you've called us to be. In all the different ways that you've called us to be, that Father, help us to live up to that beautiful calling. We thank you, Heavenly Father, for the opportunity to exercise the stewardship that you've given us, knowing that we don't even deserve that. Our sin has earned us and merited us your judgment, but your grace has given us forgiveness through the gospel, through Jesus dying for our sins and rising from the grave so that this earth, at least not in its present form, would be our home. We know that this world is passing away, and we know that our kingdom is not of this world. And we know one day there's coming a new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells. But Father, help us to do good to the land in which we live. Help us to get the gospel out. And Father, in so much as it be according to your will, may you mobilize the body of Christ to be salt. And know how exciting it will be just to see how you use your people in one way or another in the days in which we live. In Jesus' name we pray, amen.