Please turn in your Bibles to 2 Samuel chapter 24, and even though I'm only going to preach on the first nine verses, I'm going to read up through verse 17. Again, the anger of the Lord was aroused against Israel, and he moved David against them to say, go, number Israel and Judah. So the king said to Joab, the commander of the army who was with him, now go there Now go throughout all the tribes of Israel from Dan to Beersheba and count the people that I may know the number of the people. And Joab said to the king, now may the Lord your God add to the people a hundred times more than there are. And may the eyes of my Lord, the King see it. But why does my Lord, the King desire this thing? Nevertheless, the King's word prevailed against Joab and against the captains of the army. Therefore Joab and the captains of the army went out from the presence of the king to count the people of Israel. And they crossed over the Jordan and camped in Aror on the right side of the town, which is in the midst of the ravine of Gad and toward Jazer. And they came to Gilead. and to the land of Tatim-Hodshi, they came to Danja'an and around to Sidon. And they came to the stronghold of Tyre and to all the cities of the Hivites and the Canaanites. Then they went out to south Judah as far as Beersheba. So when they had gone through all the land, they came to Jerusalem at the end of nine months and 20 days. Then Joab gave the sum of the number of the people to the king. And there were in Israel 800,000 valiant men who drew the sword, and the men of Judah were 500,000 men. And David's heart condemned him after he had numbered the people. So David said to the Lord, I have sinned greatly in what I have done. But now I pray, O Lord, take away the iniquity of your servant, for I have done very foolishly. Now when David arose in the morning, the word of the Lord came to the prophet Gad, David's seer, saying, Go and tell David, thus says the Lord, I offer you three things. Choose one of them for yourself that I may do it to you. So Gad came to David and told him, and he said to him, shall seven years of famine come to you in your land or shall you flee three months before your enemies while they pursue you? Or shall there be three days plague in your land? Now consider and see what answer I should take back to him who sent me. And David said to Gad, I am in great distress. Please, let us fall into the hand of the Lord, for his mercies are great, but do not let me fall into the hand of man. So the Lord sent a plague upon Israel from the morning till the appointed time. From Dan to Beersheba, 70,000 men of the people died. And when the angel stretched out his hand over Jerusalem to destroy it, the Lord relented from the destruction and said to the angel who was destroying the people, it is enough, now restrain your hand. And the angel of the Lord was by the threshing floor of Araunah the Jebusite. Then David spoke to the Lord when he saw the angel who was striking the people and said, Surely I have sinned and I have done wickedly, but these sheep, what have they done? Let your hand, I pray, be against me and against my father's house. Amen. Father, we thank You for Your Word and we pray as we study it that You would open the eyes of our understanding and help us to apply it in an appropriate manner. We pray that Your Spirit would take and quicken these scriptures to our hearts. In Jesus' name we pray, amen. I hold in my hand here this year's edition of the American Community Survey, and those of you who have already gotten this, I think will really appreciate the passage and the other scriptures that we're going to be looking at. The whole chapter actually, chapter 24, is a scathing denunciation of exactly what's going on in this community survey. And for those of you who have not yet had the joy of filling this out or having ACS agents at your door pestering you, let me fill you in what has been happening before we dive into the passage. Article 1, Section 2 of the Constitution allows for the enumeration of citizens, period. Nothing more, just the enumeration of citizens. And according to Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson, it cannot be an estimate. It has to be, as it's worded here, an exact enumeration, an actual enumeration. When you read the fierce debates that went on in the discussions of this clause in the Constitution, you realize that they feared the federal government a great deal more than moderns do, and they feared manipulation by the federal government on even the power that they were going to grant them of enumeration. It took a lot of discussion for them to agree to even that, but there is not the slightest evidence that they would have authorized anything more than enumeration. Original intent, I think, is pretty clear. I've got 50 pages of small print big pages that record the discussions back at those days on exactly what this meant. So we don't have to guess about original intent. A great deal of discussion. Now, if you tell that to an ACS agent, they will likely tell you that the courts have said that the Constitution allows them to collect more than enumeration. And when you point to original intent, they will say, ah, yes. But since the Constitution requires that they not do a counting of untaxed Indians. And since it allows a counting, but it has to be proportional, a different proportional representation of slaves, That means that there's more than enumeration that is allowed, because you have to ask a person if he's an Indian or an untaxed Indian, and you have to ask a person if he's a slave or not. And if it allows those non-enumeration issues, it allows for any questions we want to ask, even if they don't relate to enumeration. So voila, the door is wide open. Well, the problem is that such an interpretation flies in the face of the literal language that says that the sole purpose of the enumeration was to determine representation. In other words, how many congressmen does each state have? Well, it depends on the populations. You've got to count that population, and it has to be an actual enumeration. So a second argument that they give is that the Constitution says that this census shall be, quote, in such manner as they shall by law direct. I say, see, they just left it up to us. We can do the census any way that we want. And what you need to point out is that that clause can't be separated from the rest of the sentence, which talks about the timing within 10 years. So there is flexibility on when in that 10 years it happens. And the whole phrase says the actual enumeration shall be made and then it gives this timing issue in such manner as they shall by law direct. So it's still an enumeration of citizens, not a gathering of information on the number of TVs you have and flush toilets and other information. But the fact of the matter is that there was more than was authorized by the Constitution in that first census, that law in 1790. And it was never resisted. That's the problem. The 1790 law added the provision of noting the number of males 16 years old and above and the number of males under 16, and then females. And it makes perfectly logical sense why they would do that because they're trying to anticipate for another portion of this document as to who is currently part of the militia and who is going to be part of the militia over the next 10 years before the next census happens. But they added in the age of these people that they're going to do. But I would still point out it was still an enumeration. In any case, from 1790 to the year 2000, the number of questions to determine this enumeration have ranged anywhere from 5 to 10 questions. You don't need more than 10 questions to figure out what the size of your population is. But in the year 2000 under Bill Clinton, the official census became a very intrusive multi-page questionnaire that asked all kinds of questions utterly irrelevant to the issue of enumeration. In 2010, under Obama, the census was trimmed down to 10 questions and then they added this American Community Survey that had a lot of the other questions plus a few more. And so we now have two census forms. We've got the short one and we've got the long one. Now if you flip through this American Community Survey, you will see that they want to know when your house was built. how many bedrooms are in your house, flush toilets, stoves, how many refrigerators you have. They ask whether you have a computer, a notebook, a netbook. They ask you to specify if you've got a smartphone, and if not, if there's any other kind of computer device that's not been listed there. They have seven questions on the kind of Internet service you have. The kind of fuel most use to heat your home, including questions on gas, LP, kerosene, wood, solar, etc. Then they ask the cost of your electricity, gas, water, sewage, how much money you have spent on coal, oil, kerosene. This 2014 form wants to know your level of education. Eight questions on your health care. Questions on whether anybody in your home wears glasses or has hearing aids. I mean, what does that, you know, make any difference to them? But anyway, they want to know that. They want to know who in your home has emotional disabilities. That's a really creepy question. Whether anybody in the home has difficulty dressing or has difficulty climbing stairs. What are they going to do with that? Are they going to be sending people to check caring for the elderly in your home. They ask where you work, and this is a weird one, what time you leave for work every day. Just imagine if the material got compromised and burglars knew what time everybody in the nation, you know, went to work and were not at home. They ask what kind of transportation you use to get to work. And there's a whole bunch of other creepy questions that are really none of the federal government's business. And it is impossible to read through this form and not believe that really Orwell's book is true. We got big brother looking over our shoulders. Now, what's worse is even after you've been such a compliant citizen, you've completely filled out every question on that form and you have sent it in, they still call you on the phone to verify certain questions. Then they send people to your home and they want to actually get inside of your home to verify the questions and to do a walkthrough. And if you refuse to let them in, they threaten you with penalties for noncompliance and insist that you are breaking the law. Now, if you insist that they are the ones that are breaking constitutional law to get off your property, things don't go really well. And you can win this one, actually, if you drag your feet long enough, because these guys get paid based on bonuses. They're not going to waste their time, probably, on you. But they can still make life miserable for you. Almost anyone who has suffered through the relentless harassment of these ACS agents knows that something isn't right. It just doesn't seem right to any of the citizens who have had to go through this. And having read through the materials that were debated at the time that the Constitution was written, I can guarantee you that every man including Alexander Hamilton, would have said that what is going on in this document here is an abomination and is absolute tyranny. I can guarantee you that even Alexander Hamilton would have believed that. Well, the passage we're going to look at today calls for such limited government on the national level that it makes even the 1790 American census seem tyrannical. By biblical standards, the American Community Survey ought to cause Americans to rise up in heated resistance to it. And the fact that they don't just shows that it is the population that is largely at fault. And that's where I want to begin this morning. And the reason that this survey came along under David is that God was angry at the population. And today, he's not wringing his hands as if things are falling out of control, no. I believe the reason that we've got an American Community Survey is that God is angry at the American population for their idolatry and for the ways in which they have abandoned Him. And so let's start at verse 1, chapter 24, verse 1. It says, again, the anger of the Lord was aroused against Israel and He moved David against them to say, go number Israel and Judah. Now, let's break this down a bit. The word, again, clues us into the fact that this is the second sin mentioned in this unit that has brought Israel under judgment. Just to remind you of the structure, we have seen that all of chapters 21 through 24 is one big chiasm, and you've got the chiasm in your outlines there. And the sin of chapter 21 is parallel with the sin of chapter 24. Now that by itself shows the seriousness of this sin. Many commentators are so statist that they wonder what the big deal is. What's so wrong with David's census? I mean, you can read the commentaries and see people scratching their head over this. And one of the questions is how in the world does the author using this chiasm make the census in any way parallel to the attempted genocide in chapter 21? People are mystified as to why this is a big deal. But I will say this morning and try to prove that a national census is a big deal to God. It is a major indicator that tyranny is afoot. And you can test your own biblical civics, your view, your philosophy of civics by whether you think it's a big deal. If you don't, you really need to restudy civics. Okay? It must be a big deal to you. It should be a big deal to you. And the first proof is the parallelism of this sin with the serious sin of attempted genocide in chapter 21. The second thing that this verse shows has already been stated, and that is that the census was a direct result of God's anger against the general population. Again, The anger of the Lord was aroused against Israel and he moved David against them to say, go number Israel and Judah. So this means that the focus of this chapter is not just on David pointing the finger at David. It does point the finger at David. He was involved in sin, but the text is just as clear that the suffering of the citizens was because God was angry with them. He was upset with them. Verse 1 says he was angry with the general population. Verses 11 through 25 shows the punishment that flowed from that anger. Those 70,000 men who died are not innocents. They suffered under God's anger. So don't ever think that the tyrannical actions of a civil government, first of all, are a surprise to God, or are utterly unrelated to the state of the people. We have such a tendency to always be pointing the finger of blame at Washington, D.C., and yet this passage reminds us that God uses those kinds of civil governments to wake citizens up to their own idolatry, to make them hate idolatry. to turn them away from that and bring them to citizen. And to me it's no wonder that the prophets spoke so much against statism. I think that Bojidar Marinov is absolutely correct that the biggest idol in America is the idol of statism. It's a constant temptation for citizens to be looking to the state to do everything for them. Now, I'm going to emphasize this point because the answer to political tyranny is not conservative politics. Verses 18 through 25 show that the only answer to the culture problems in America is the gospel of Jesus Christ. Okay, the gospel must be applied to politics. God allows the fruits of humanism to percolate and to make the stomach of a culture become so bitter they want to vomit up statism and they are motivated then to embrace, by God's grace, to embrace the perfect law of liberty. And that's what verses 18 through 25 are going to be talking about. We won't have time to get to that today, but the whole trajectory of this section is toward the gospel that Christ's kingship, His temple, and these sacrifices relate to politics. In fact, that's the whole trajectory of 1 and 2 Samuel is this last chapter. That's why we're going to spend three sermons digging into it. Okay, the third thing that is crystal clear from verse 1 is that this census was under God's sovereign control. God moved David to do this sinful act. Now that really puzzles some people as well. I want you to notice, first of all, it doesn't say he tempted David or he forced David to do this. He did not. In fact, the chapter makes it quite clear. God is very upset with David when he did this. James 1, 13 through 14 is quite clear. It says, let no one say when he is tempted, I am tempted by God, for God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he himself tempt anyone. But each one is tempted when he is drawn away by his own desires and enticed. So why does it say God moved David? If God can't tempt anyone, why does it say God moved David to do this? Well, I believe it says it this way, to make it crystal clear, there's no way of getting around the language, to make it crystal clear that even sin and tyranny is not outside of God's control. Even though God cannot tempt anyone to evil, to sin, sin is somehow still under his providential control. And the question is, how can that be? And I want you to turn with me over to 1 Chronicles chapter 21. And you might as well put a bookmark in there, because we're going to be flipping back and forth between these passages here. They help to interpret each other. But if you take a look at chapter 21 and verse 1. Oh, I'm in the wrong book here. 1 Chronicles 21, verse 1, it says, Now Satan stood up against Israel and moved David to number Israel. So which is it? Is it God who moved David to this sin or is it Satan who moved David to this sin? And the answer is both. Both passages are inspired. And God, I want to emphasize, did not directly tempt David, but by allowing Satan to be unleashed on David. You know, Satan's wanting to go after his people, and usually they've got a hedge around them, but by allowing Satan to go after David, God guarantees that he's setting in place a chain of events that will guarantee that David will do the census. And it doesn't let David off the hook of responsibility either, because even Satan cannot move David if David's heart was not already set to do evil in that way. It had to be inclined that way. But this is the mystery of providence, that God can control the truly free actions of men in history, including the most horrible sin of all, the crucifixion of Jesus, totally under control, every aspect of it, without in any way tempting anyone to sin, without in any way being the immediate cause of sin. And I've shared A.W. Pink's illustration with you a number of times, but I think that it bears repeating. If I hold this program up, this booklet here, up and keep it from falling to the ground. That booklet cannot boast that it's holding itself up of its own accord. The only reason it's not falling to the ground is because I am holding it up. Now, if my hand represents God's grace and this represents me, Even when I resist God's grace, and my resistance can be the gravity that is in there, God can hold me up. He can prevent me from sinning. But if I continue to resist God's grace, God does not owe grace to us. It's very definition, it's undeserved favor. He doesn't owe His grace to me. So if I persist in resisting grace, and God merely removes His grace in one area of my life, it is guaranteed that I will fall in that one area of my life just as surely as that book fell when I let it go. Now, was it me who was willing that book to fall? Yes. I did not have to slam that book down in order for that book to fall to the ground. And in the same way, God does not have to tempt me to fall, ask me to fall, force me to fall, cause me to fall in any immediate sense for me to fall. All He has to do is remove grace I don't deserve anyway when I am resisting Him, it is guaranteed. He has willed that I will fall. He's not the author of sin. I'm the author of sin. I'm the one who's choosing to sin. Okay? Satan, on the other hand, does push, does seek to convince us to do wrong, but even he cannot force my will. So God moved David by allowing the second cause of Satan to get involved. Now, I think just using that illustration, you can see I'm fully responsible for my choice to fall into sin. and can be held accountable by God. I can't blame Satan, I can't blame God, but God is still sovereign. And I believe that God is using Satan as a pawn to promote his purposes. And though Satan has moved bureaucrats to come up with the American Community Survey, God is using that survey to accomplish his own purposes. And it's my hope and prayer that as more and more tyrannies like this begin to arise, that it will drive people to repentance, back to the gospel of Jesus Christ. But I do want to demonstrate that this census was indeed a great sin, because there are many Christians who deny it. So back to 1 Chronicles 21. And I'm going to emphasize this point, because it would be very easy to assume that there must have been something else sinful going on. Otherwise, God wouldn't have gotten angry with David. But as many commentators have pointed out, you cannot get around the grammar of these two passages. It's the census itself that is evil. And let me give you several indicators that this is true. First indicator that this was really a bad idea is that verse 1 says, the idea for the census was satanic in origin. Now Satan stood up against Israel and moved David to number Israel. Now I want you to notice what is being called satanic. It's not a bad attitude. It's not what David's going to do with this information. What is satanic is the numbering of Israel. And if a census can be proved to be demonic, we cannot treat it as something trivial. The second indicator is in verse 3. And Joab answered, may the Lord make his people a hundred times more than they are, but my Lord, the King, are they not all my Lord's servants? Why then does my Lord require this thing? Why should he be a cause of guilt in Israel? Now guilt deals with sin. And Joab was absolutely convinced that if we go ahead with this, this census, it's going to involve guilt on Israel. And he proved to be exactly right. It was great guilt. And the death toll by way of abortions and adult murders and disease and disaster is much more staggering in America than the 70,000 people that were slain in Israel. You add to that disease and the cultural rot and other things that are happening, what you can see is God's hand of protection is being withdrawn from America. Third indicator is in verse 6. But he did not count Levi and Benjamin among them, for the king's word was abominable to Joab." Now, the margin has it the king's command was abominable to Joab because this is administrative law. It was nothing constitutional about it, just like most of the laws that we have in America are administrative law. They're not laws that are legitimate. This was administrative law by David. But think about the word abominable. for this census to be abominable to Joab, who is not himself a lily white saint, a lily white angel. That means there's something very significant about censuses that we moderns just don't think about. His point is, when he's doing this, is, hey, if even Joab thinks this is an abominable thing, then we've got to take this seriously. That's his point. It's not a trivial thing. In fact, it was so abominable to Joab that he was willing to stand up to the king on this issue. So it's a lot more serious than we tend to think. And the reason is that the Bible is a lot more libertarian than most Christians think. The Bible does not authorize the massive programs that our government is involved in. Verse 7 gives another indicator. It says, God himself was displeased. and God was displeased with this thing, therefore He struck Israel." Okay, now flip back to 2 Samuel chapter 24, and we'll continue looking at indicators that the census really is a bad deal. Okay, verse 4, indicates that it was more than simply Joab who thought this was bad. All the captains of David's army that we looked at last week resisted this census, at least the ones who were alive. And I think that's very significant. Verse four, nevertheless, the King's word prevailed against Joab and against the captains of the army. Therefore, Joab and the captains of the army went out from the presence of the king to count the people of Israel." Now, we saw last week that one of the good leadership qualities in a person who's a godly leader is the ability to stand up to superiors when they're involved in unethical actions. They all stood up to David. Are you getting the picture here? The tyranny of the American Community Survey is not something that we should just ignore. All leaders on the county and the state levels and on the national levels should stand up against things like this. They have a responsibility to resist it. Now, verse 10 gives three more indicators that this census was very bad. And David's heart condemned him after he had numbered the people. So David obviously recognized that it was a sin. And I want you to notice, it's not just his attitude that was sinful. It's not what he's going to do with the census. No, it's the census itself that was a sin. Continuing to read in verse 10, we see other clear expressions. So David said to the Lord, I have sinned greatly in what I have done. Notice it's not, I have sinned greatly with my attitude or what I'm going to be doing with this material. No, I have sinned greatly in what I have done, but now I pray, oh Lord, take away the iniquity of your servant for I have done very foolishly. And then in verse 17, he calls his action evil. So again, do not think that the American Community Survey is a minor issue. It is not. It is a great sin. It is very foolish. It is evil before God. And when you realize what tyrants can do with surveys like this, you begin to realize why God considers it to be so evil, because the information that is gathered in these kinds of documents can be used for total totalitarian control of a population. You know, they could be. They don't in here ask how many guns you have, but they could. They don't ask what your sexual proclivities are or what your attitudes are, but they could. They could use this to absolutely control everything. And if we do not resist what's unconstitutional here, Don't be surprised if they keep adding to this survey down the road. And it makes me wonder, you know, how long it's going to take before the American population stands up against this. At this point, most of them are just quietly enduring. But this is an offense to God, and it should be an offense to every liberty-loving citizen. Now, there are two more indicators that this was an exceedingly serious sin. First, God gives David a choice of three horrible punishments in verse 13. Now keep in mind, God always makes the punishment match the seriousness of the sin. He's not arbitrary on this. He would not do this if this was a trivial issue. Also keep in mind that Gad is an inspired prophet who is speaking directly for God. So verse 13, so Gad came to David and told him and he said to him, shall seven years of famine come to you in your land or shall you flee three months before your enemies while they pursue you? Or shall there be three days' plague in your land? Now consider and see what answer I should take back to Him who sent me." Now think of that. If God thinks The sin of that census was worthy of seven years of famine, or three months of military defeat, or a major three-day plague, which we find out in verses 15 through 16 killed 70,000 people. What do you think? He's going to think of the American Community Survey, which is a whole lot worse than anything that David did. What does it deserve? In any case, the choices of punishment give you a little perspective, I think, on America's Deaths due to war, calamity, health issues, abortion, and other things. Do not minimize or ignore the issue. or think that it does not need to be resisted. When you look at the disasters that have hit America since 1790, I think God's trying to get our attention. Now, obviously, there's a whole bunch of other things going on along with it, but this is symptomatic of the whole problem. It's symptomatic of the whole problem. Now, the last indicator is something we're going to look at when we get to the last part of the chapter. Even though God overlooks many, maybe even most of the sins of a nation, this census was considered to be so evil by God that in verses 21 through 25 he says he was not going to overlook it. In fact, We didn't read that far in the chapter. He goes on to say he's going to continue to kill people after those 70,000 have died if there was not an atonement that was made. So God's wrath needed a propitiation. Now, weirdly, despite the overwhelming evidence that the census itself is wrong, there are people who still think there is nothing wrong with what David did. It had to be his attitudes. Even though there's nothing stated about his attitudes, it can't be the census itself. And the only reason that they can come up with as to why this is the case is they say, well, God himself commands a census in Numbers 1 through 2. If God commanded a census there, it can't be the census itself, which is wrong. So I'm going to have you turn with me to Numbers chapter one, and we're going to be seeing that they are flat out wrong in their interpretation of Numbers chapter one. There are eight requirements that God gave in these two chapters before a census could be considered to be a godly census. And technically, I don't even think it should be called a census, something I don't believe God authorizes anywhere in the Bible. For sure, the American Community Survey fails miserably against these requirements. And it's my thesis that even the 1790 census, even the Constitution's provision, is defined as tyrannical by the Bible. Now, you may find that hard, but by the end of the sermon, I think you'll agree with me. So let's examine the requirements that God lays out. Take a look, Numbers chapter 1 and verse 2. Take a census of all the congregation of the children of Israel by their families. In other words, it's not individually, but by covenantal units. The family is the smallest covenantal unit of the state, not the individual. Okay. If you get any smaller, you get into totalitarianism. So by their families, by their father's houses, according to the number of names, every male individually. And as you look at the number totals from the various tribes in these two chapters, it lists only males. They're the only ones counted. Why? Because they are the representatives of their families. Now this too is insulting to modern man. God is not in favor of universal suffrage, which inevitably leads to socialism. He gives votes only to male heads of households. Only male heads of households were part of the military and only male heads of households were counted. Now our denomination, thankfully, takes a very strong stand against any national draft and against any selective service for women or a draft of women. It's unlawful. So even though our Constitution's pretty good because it only calls for an enumeration, it's still unbiblical in that it calls for an enumeration of women of all men, not just those over 20, and of slaves. But anyway, the first requirement is males. Second requirement was that the census could only count males who were 20 years old or above. So it's not all males who are counted, it's adult males. First part of verse 3, from 20 years old and above. That's pretty clear. Now, the 1790 census went beyond this. They numbered those who were 16 and above and those males who were under 16. They didn't care about the age of the women. The Constitution didn't authorize that, but they did it anyway. But I would point out that even the Constitution was unbiblical in allowing all males, all females, and all slaves to be counted. Now, there are other restrictions of the government. Third requirement is that the census could only record those who were able to go to war. And I've listed 1 Chronicles 5.18, 2 Chronicles 25, verse 5, and possibly this may be implied in the 14 times in this chapter where it has the phrase, all who are able to go to war in Israel. Now that's not the literal Hebrew, and I'll deal with that in my next point, but in any case, it's a true restriction, and you can see that in other passages. From various census data points in the Bible, R.E. Gingrich notes, quote, the women, children, old men, disabled men and Levitical men were not numbered. And that is undeniably true. So again, America cannot justify its census from the Bible, and not even the Constitution can justify its enumeration from the Bible. As good as it is, and I love the Constitution, I carry this thing around with me all the time, I love it, but it's not a perfect document. Only the Bible is perfect. So it should be amendable, and they thought it was amendable as well, right? There's a process for that. Now the literal Hebrew of that Phrase, all who are able to go to war, actually hints at the fourth requirement that we certainly see elsewhere, that the census information was simply the listing of volunteers who had already signed up for their local militias. Now this is an incredibly critical point for you to understand. If you're to make sense out of the limited biblical government, how incredibly limited it is. What I'm saying is that this enumeration of soldiers is not the federal government going into every home trying to see who they can draft into the army. This is simply adding up the number of people who have already volunteered in every local militia. Otherwise, it could not happen in one day. Well, actually, that's getting ahead of me. That's a later point. But let me try to show there is no other exegetical way of interpreting all of the data in this chapter than my interpretation that this was a gathering of already available statistics from volunteers who had signed up. Let me start with a quote. Lange, Schaff, Lowry and Gozeman have done a study on the biblical census information and they summarize the evidence by saying this. They were not passively pressed into service, but took it upon them voluntarily, like the volunteers of Deborah and Judges, and the volunteers of the Messianic king in Psalm 110. And there are four lines of evidence that support this interpretation. The first is the literal Hebrew for every single time that this phrase occurs in the Bible. For example, in verse three, you will notice that the words are able to are in italics. See that there? You'll see that 13 other times in this passage. When words are in the italics in the New King James Version, it means that those words don't occur in the Hebrew. What's happening is the translators are trying to make a stab at helping you to understand what the passage means, but they're not doing it word for word. They're adding something to it. So there's interpretation going on, which is legitimate. Even translation has interpretation, but their interpretation could be wrong. Well, in my books here, I think it's undeniable that their interpretation is wrong. The Hebrew is literally those who are going to war. In terms of grammar, it's the Kel stem indicating the people are acting rather than being acted upon, and that's a very critical point. And it's a participle indicating that this class of people who are actively going out to war is a class already in existence, already in place. Now, if that's the case, then it means that the only role that the national government had to play in the census was gathering information from all of the tribal leaders, which is exactly what verses four through 17 talk about. That's exactly what the passage goes on to say. And those tribal heads are responsible to gather the information from the volunteer armies that are in every county. And that would mean it's not a draft. In fact, it's not an invasion of privacy on any level. It's voluntary. It's simply the listing of those who are already going up to fight. In other words, they're already in the militias. They've already signed up. The second line of evidence that confirms this interpretation, in other words, that you really ought to take a pencil and cross out those words, are able to, is that verse 18 indicates that this entire census took one day to accomplish. Now that would be absolutely impossible on a census gathering type of a mission where you're going into the various homes and you're trying to figure out how many people are there. Absolutely impossible. Now, verse 18 is crystal clear in the Hebrew. In a commentary on numbers, W. Thomas said, the natural meaning is that the census was completed in one day. If so, the census papers, the pedigrees and family lists must have been ready beforehand. Matthew Henry says the same thing. He says, it was but one day's work for many other things were done between this and the 20th day of this month when they removed their camp in chapter 10, verse 11. So there was absolutely no time to take the census. Now on our interpretation, no problem. If all that numbers is authorizing is the collection of statistics from each local militia of the people who are willing to fight, it could easily be accomplished in part of a day. You don't even need a full day. The third line of evidence is the difference in the Hebrew between numbers and the passages dealing with the David's census. There's a lot of debate on the meaning and the usage of those terms. There's debate on the meaning and significance of the brand new term that's used in 2 Samuel 24 verse 1 that does not occur in numbers. It's the word mana, and I can't get into the technical Hebrew, but it does seem that numbers is having Moses' focus on getting a final total, whereas the words used in 2 Samuel 24 deal with the active gathering of the numbers that will constitute a final total. In other words, the Hebrew of numbers indicates that the federal government is not involved in the actual gathering of the numbers. but only in the receiving of the final total. In contrast, in 2 Samuel 24, Joab is involved in every detail of the actual gathering of the numbers. Now, I can't get into all the technical details of the Hebrew, but it does seem to bear out. Fourth line of evidence that supports voluntarism is that other scriptures make fighting a voluntary issue. passages like Deuteronomy 20 verses 5 through 9. Now there's certainly shame in not fighting for the freedoms of your country. So it is a moral issue. People ought to fight for their country, but it is not a legal issue that can be enforced by the civil government. And that's why Deborah's inspired song in Judges 5 twice speaks of leaders who lead and people who volunteer to fight in that war. That's Judges 5 verses 2 and 9. That's the norm. It's a voluntary army defending their own territory. And even though Judges 5 goes on to criticize people who didn't volunteer, And you can see that in verses 15 through 17 and verse 23, she criticizes them. Why did you guys not volunteer? There's entire states that didn't do so, entire counties that didn't do so. Yet there was no mechanism that the civil government had to force people to fight. It was not a legal issue. And the passage right there in Judges 5 indicates that. They could recruit, that's the word that's used in Judges 5, but they could not draft. Okay? And there's a huge difference between recruiting and drafting. The draft is tyrannical. Recruitment is lawful. Psalm 110 speaks of the people being volunteers in battle. And as we'll see, that's quite different from what David was doing. Now be patient with me. I know this is heavy stuff, but I'm giving a thorough biblical theological background to this because Christians are so used to statism, they just have a hard time believing that the government could be so hands-off, but it really is. It's supposed to be. So moving on, the fifth requirement in Numbers is that the census would only take place during a time of war. And the literal Hebrew again says, all who go to war. 14 times, or the participle, all the ones who are going to war. They were about to battle, and the term war occurs 14 times, the word army occurs 22 times, and this census occurred right before they were going to invade Canaan and go into battle. Now that means that this is not a census during a time of peace, and thus it is quite logical in the book of Numbers when these people sin and God says, okay, you're not going into the land of Canaan, In other words, they're going to be wandering for 40 years in the wilderness that there are no more censuses that take place. The next census that takes place on the book of Numbers, and all commentators are agreed on this, some say 38 years, it looks like 40 years later, it happens right before they are then going to go into the land of Canaan to take the conquest. So, 40-year gap between censuses. Now, statists won't put up with that. You can't be numbering soldiers every 40 years, right? But anyway, this is clearly a failure on the part of David. He gathered information during a time of peace. The sixth requirement in Numbers 1 was that there needed to be checks and balances so as to not allow the abuse of power on the part of the federal government. In the book of Numbers, The federal government did not use their own agents to collect any of the information at the local level. None. And that's a very important distinction to understand. In the book of Numbers, Aaron as the representative of the church, Moses as a representative of the federal government received their information from where? They received their information from the state representatives that are listed in verses 5 through 16, okay? where we have yet another check and balance. And so the evidence is that the state representatives gathered their information then from the local militias. It was a state's rights issue. But don't think that we should, it's okay to have states going into your home. We can't trade in federal tyranny for state tyranny. We don't want the federal government going into homes at all. Remember, all of this was gathered in one day. That's all implied in Numbers 1. Anyway, verses 3 through 4, and let's start reading at the second clause of verse 3. You and Aaron shall number them by their armies, and with you there shall be a man from every tribe, each one the head of his father's house. So it's not Moses using an army to number. But it's a balancing of federal, state, and church powers, and David completely ignored that. Seventh requirement was that it had to be a simple enumeration, not a massive information-gathering program. Verse 19 of Numbers 1 says that these men were numbered. And the word number or numbered occurs 54 times in this enumeration. It's not a massive information grab. It's simply the statistics of the soldiers who are already available. The eighth requirement was that the clergy and their families were exempted from the census. So this is a negative prohibition. Look at verses 47 through 49. But the Levites were not numbered among them by their father's tribe, for the Lord had spoken to Moses, saying, Only the tribe of Levi you shall not number, nor take a census of them among the children of Israel." Okay, well, with that background, let's go over to chapter 24 of 2 Samuel again. And let's see the ways that David went way beyond the provision allowed in numbers. And let's read verse 2 first. So the king said to Joab the commander of the army who was with him, now go throughout all the tribes of Israel from Dan to Beersheba and count the people that I may know the number of the people. Notice that this verse is describing a top-down gathering of information rather than a bottom-up gathering of information. It's totally different from what God authorized in the law. In Numbers 1, It's not the federal government that's on the search at the local level. They are gaining the information from the various states. So it's no wonder that Numbers' census, if you want to call it a census, took only one day, whereas David's census took nine and a half months. The two are not identical. They are actually polar opposites of doing this. Numbers did things God's way. David was doing things the pagan way. Second thing we see in verse two is that it was an intrusion of the federal government into local communities because he's commanded to go throughout all the tribes. And then if you look over in verses five through eight, it shows that the army would camp in one area, collect the information, go to another area, collect the information. They are traveling all throughout. the communities of Israel. So in David's census, there was a strong federal presence in every locale, whereas in Numbers 1, there is zero federal presence in any locale. Again, they're quite different things. Third thing we see in the last phrase of verse 2 is that the reason for David's census was not a military need. The only reason cited was so that I may know the number of the people. Joab's remonstrance in verse 3 shows he didn't consider that to be an adequate reason. The fourth difference was that verses 4 through 8 make it crystal clear that David expected Joab to violate the checks and balances that had been put in place in Numbers chapter 1. He violated those checks and balances. How? By using his army to collect the information rather than by appealing to the state representatives or allowing the Levites to be involved. So it was a clear violation of state liberties, clear usurpation of federal power. Fifth violation of the limited government restrictions in Numbers 1 is that David did this census during a time of peace. And the reason I know it was during a time of peace is The whole army is involved in collecting information for nine and a half months. They're not fighting. So it's obviously a time of peace that they're collecting this information at from county to county. So let's go ahead and read verses four through eight. Nevertheless, the king's word prevailed against Joab, against the captains of the army. Therefore, Joab and the captains of the army went out from the presence of the king to count the people of Israel, and they crossed over the Jordan and camped in Arorah on the right side of the town, which is in the midst of the ravine of Gad and towards Jazar. Then they came to Gilead, the land of Tatim-Hodshi, they came to Dan-Ja'an, and round to Sidon, and they came to the stronghold of Tyre and to all the cities of the Hivites and the Canaanites. Then they went out to south Judah as far as Beersheba. So when they had gone through all the land, they came to Jerusalem at the end of nine months and 20 days." It's almost like the army, there's no wars, there's nothing to do. Well, we got to use them for something. Let's take a census. Let's use them in something constructive. But that point implies another violation. It implies that it is the army counting people. If the army is counting people. They're counting people who are not in the army, right? Simple logic. So it's a civilian census, not a military census. So not only was it an unlawful use of the military, but it was also a census that went way beyond military purposes. The military was designed to protect from invasion from without. It was not designed to be taking care of Ebola situations or nation building or gathering information. God never designed an army to intrude into the lives of its own citizens. The seventh violation of the restrictions in Numbers 1 was that David apparently wanted Joab to number the Levites. And we can see that not only in his command, but also in 1 Chronicles 21 and verse 6. Where Joab's passive resistance is listed here, it says, but he did not count Levi and Benjamin among them, for the king's word was abominable to Joab. Now that clearly implies David had commanded him to number Levi and Benjamin, but he disobeyed. Yet Numbers explicitly forbids the numbering of Levi. And that's yet another evidence. It was a civilian census rather than the lawful military census. Clearly a violation and so on many levels God made sure that the state could not intrude into church life by gathering statistics from the church. I think that was the purpose in numbers and commentators believe there are hints that the Levites stiffly resisted giving information to Joab. The last violation was that this was involuntary. Joab didn't want to do it in verse 3. Captains didn't want to do it in verse 4. And the fact that David would have to use the novelty of using an army to collect the information implies he realized these guys aren't going to give us information unless we got forced to back it up. Okay? They were going to be met with resistance from the population. And the fact that it took nine and a half months also hints that there may have been some passive resistance on the part of the people. They were maybe not making the job easy for Joab. All of this shows there was nothing voluntary about it. So I think you can see on several levels that both numbers and Samuel, uh, indicate that there is no biblical support whatsoever for the American community survey or for any other intrusive census. Even the 1790 survey went beyond the Bible, even though it restricted itself to enumeration. So in conclusion, what do we do? What do we do with this information? Well, I'll leave it up to you on what you want to do, but I think there are hints in the passage on the options you have before you. First of all, first hint is that if the kind of senses David engaged in needed resistance, I think it hints that the American Community Survey requires serious resistance. We ought to at least resist on the level of the resistance that Joab engaged in in verses 3 through 4. We ought to at least complain about it, right? You can complain to the agent who's collecting the information. You can complain to Congress. You can ask your congressman to read the debates on the Enumeration Clause, 50 pages, big pages, you know, of debates on the Enumeration Clause. And by the way, the founders Constitution, I think is the name of it, it's a multi-volume set that is absolutely fabulous. If you want to own something that gives you original intent, they go through every phrase of the Constitution, and then they collect all of the debates and the discussions that various founders had about that, and they put it in, in the order that the Constitution, it's wonderful, it's an amazing Amazing document. And as you read through that, it's interesting that they are nervous about even giving the federal government the power to enumerate, merely enumerate. That seemed dangerous to them. And the rhetoric you're reading in there makes it crystal clear they would have considered the American community service to be an abomination, absolute tyranny. So, if you know your congressman, complain that the American Community Survey violates the original intent of the Constitution and it violates the plain, literal reading of the text as well. If he says, well, that can't be, the courts allow it, and the courts know what the Constitution means, I think you need to point out to them that every branch of government needs to study the Constitution for themselves. Otherwise, you are doing away with one of the checks and balances of having three branches of government. They can counter each other and say, no, you're wrong. in that, and just one illustration, say, don't you as a congressman oppose the court's suggestion that abortion is a hidden right in the Constitution? Of course you do. Well, if he's a good congressman, right? You're not going to say just because the court said that that is in the Constitution that it's in there. You've got to interpret it for yourself. So encourage them to do that. The most recent Hillsdale College Imprimis newsletter, and I've posted it on my Facebook account, has a fantastic article dealing with administrative law, the difference between that and true law. And most of the laws that are out there are administrative law. And he points out how the founding fathers to a man were trying to oppose administrative law. They hated it. That's what King George was engaged in. And Article 1, Section 1 of the Constitution specifically outlaws administrative law. But even if they don't buy that, read the next two paragraphs of Article 1, Section 1, and ask how the American Community Survey can in any way be construed to be an enumeration of people in order to determine representation. It goes way beyond what is constitutional. So you don't need to know the number of flush toilets or whether I'm wearing hearing aids or eyeglasses to know how many representatives Nebraska ought to have. Okay, that's the point. And since the Constitution is the highest man-made law of the land, the Congress has de facto passed an unlawful statute. And the Supreme Court has said that if a statute is unconstitutional, it is unlawful the moment it is written, not simply when the court says it is unlawful. Or we can ask the congressman why your Sixth Amendment right has been abridged. Sixth Amendment says, the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated. No warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized. This is an unreasonable search for information that is none of the federal government's business, and it is giving information that could clearly be used against you by our current administration. And if they think it is their business, ask them to prove it from the Constitution. Now, ACS on their website says, well, we have to have this information to be able to run our numerous federal programs. Well, you say, the federal programs are unconstitutional. You got to keep bringing them back to what the Constitution says. Okay, the second thing that at least Joe Abbott and his captains did was to implement the mandate in a very slow and a very uncooperative manner. Don't make it easy. And some commentators believe that the population itself was dragging their feet. Can you imagine what would happen if 20% of the population said, eh, we're not doing this, or at least be slow about it, dragging their feet on it? Third thing that Joab did, somewhat belatedly, was to disobey the unlawful order. Seems that at least some people are disobeying this order to fill out the mandate nowadays. Now I'm not saying you should do that, I'm just giving hints as to what Joab and all of his men did. In 1 Chronicles 21 16 it says, but he did not count Levi and Benjamin among them, for the king's word was abominable to Joab. First of all, he did not count Levi. Numbers 1 explicitly forbade Joab from numbering Levi. So on that one, he may have had the attitude, this is so clearly a violation of the law of God, I have to obey God rather than man. And some commentators believe it's not that, it's just Levi and Benjamin. If it was just Levi, yeah, you could take that interpretation, but because he didn't number either one, they believe that the stout, stiff resistance from Levi and Benjamin to being numbered made him throw up his hands and say, this is not worth it. We're not going to follow through on this. We don't know for sure, but he did finally come to the place where he was willing to engage in civil disobedience. And three commentators suggest that the Levites and the Benjamites were engaging in civil disobedience, and they absolutely were not going to be counted. And I think that they may be right, even though it's only a hint of that. The point is, David's administrative law was unlawful, therefore it was not binding. And you could think of it this way. Over and over in American history, an unconstitutional statute has been declared by the courts to never be binding in the first place. For example, the Supreme Court said, an unconstitutional act is not a law. It confers no rights. It imposes no duties. It affords no protection. It creates no office. It is in legal contemplation as inoperative as though it had never been passed. And I think the American Community Survey totally fits that definition. It is not law. According to that Supreme Court's definition, it is inoperative. And I want to point out that the American Organic Law says the same thing. 16, American jurisprudence says, the general misconception is that any statute passed by legislators bearing the appearance of law constitutes the law of the land. The U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and any statute to be valid must be in agreement. It is impossible for both the Constitution and a law violating it to be valid. One must prevail. This is succinctly stated as follows. The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute Though having the form and name of law is in reality no law but is wholly void and ineffective for any purpose since unconstitutionality dates from the time of its enactment and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it. An unconstitutional law in legal contemplation is as inoperative as if it had never been passed. Such a statute leaves the question that it purports to settle just as it would be had the statute not been enacted. Since an unconstitutional law is void, the general principles follow that it imposes no duties, confers no rights, creates no office, bestows no power or authority on anyone, affords no protection, justifies no acts performed under it. A void act cannot be legally consistent with a valid one. An unconstitutional law cannot operate to supersede any existing valid law. Indeed, insofar as a statute runs counter to the fundamental law of the land, it is superseded thereby. No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it. And that's the end of the quote from our national law, American jurisprudence. Now, I'm not saying you should take that direction of just ignoring this and telling them to take a hide. I'm not saying that you should do that. This passage hints at other options, but it does at least show that Joab was totally within his rights in not numbering Levi and Benjamin. Now, I've laid out the evidence before you. I'm going to leave it to you to apply this, but let's at least now pray that God would cause our nation to repent, even as God caused David to repent in 2 Samuel chapter 24. Let's pray. Father, we do plead the blood of Christ on behalf of our nation, even as David used the blood of animals to symbolically plead the blood of Christ on behalf of his nation. We know that it's not simply our leaders who are guilty of treason against you, but so is the population. We have spurned your laws. We have loved the benefits that the government can give. And in general, we have been apathetic about resisting tyranny or pursuing liberty. Please forgive us. Please cause a reformation to happen in the church and for the church to take its place as salt and light in society. Please restore this nation to your son's kingdom. and cause righteousness and peace to once again triumph. We realize that the census is simply the tip of the iceberg of the problems with our Orwellian state, but we ask that you would cause such ungodly statutes as this to be overturned. And we pray that you would bring about whatever repentance is necessary within our nation to turn away your wrath from us. Cause your face to shine, and we will be saved. We pray for righteousness within the church and righteousness within the state. Give us wisdom to know how to govern our own affairs and be pleased to protect your people from ungodly incursions of liberty from Behemoth. And we pray this in the strong name of Jesus. Amen.