Today, America stands at the crossroad of mercy and judgment. To choose the right road, we need to understand the details of the biblical ideas that our Founding Fathers understood, such as, our rights come from God and not from the government. Now, these ideas are fixed in our Constitution and are difficult to change so that it safeguards our liberty and the rights of the individual. Today, it's under attack because it restrains those who want to fundamentally change America.
As Christians, we have a responsibility of stewardship over our nation so that we can live, worship, and preach the gospel in freedom. Why? Because the Church is the reason our nation has been referred to as a City on a Hill. Revival is the only answer. ♪ In every generation, there have been revivals, massive moves of the Spirit that changed the course of history. In every revival, there were believers like you who chose to answer the call to become the one in their generation.
Discover your call to be the one in your generation. ♪ Welcome to Revival Radio TV. I'm Gene Bailey. Glad you're here. Today, we're going to talk about American government. Greg, thanks for coming - Thank you. - and being a part. Ladies and gentlemen, get ready. Here we go. As we dive into the ideas of government, the complex world of how we run things and we think about what actually makes a good government, one thing becomes clear.
Greg, we must have a solid system that lets everyone have a say. Having a government where people can freely participate is crucial, and that means setting some rules, a way for everyone to have their say and make things happen. Now, for those of you at home, we both have copies of the Constitution, Declaration of Independence, and the Bill of Rights here. So, when we think about great examples of governance in the scope of history, it's hard to overlook the Constitution.
It's a shining example of how to do things right. Standing strong still through all these kinds of challenges over the years, governments have come and gone throughout history, each trying to find the right balance between power and freedom, but none have stuck around quite like the American Constitution. So, Greg, what are some of the things that make the Constitution such an esteemed document? - Well, for one, it's the bedrock. It is the foundation that everything is built upon.
It's the guiding force that shapes our collective efforts, but really and truly, before you could have the Constitution, you had to have this one, the Declaration of Independence, right alongside it. As you read through the Declaration, and we've done that before, we see a narrative that moves from broad ideas to specific complaints, and it mirrors the process of moral decision-making, starting with the big principles, moving toward a practical application.
So, the Declaration showcases humanity's ability to reason morally, key to the Declaration's story is the idea of a divine providence, the acknowledgement of God as our source of moral authority, binding all of the signers to this document, a commitment to each other and to God. Gene, they covenanted together. It's a partnership. The Declaration is a call for action, a rallying cry for people from different walks of life, united by a shared goal.
Partnership breaks down when we don't have the same goal anymore. So, from the halls of Philadelphia to the battlefields of the Revolution, these individuals risk everything for the cause of liberty, driven by a common vision of a more fair and more just society. ♪ The fundamental principle that separating the legislative, executive, and judicial powers is essential to preserving liberty and preventing tyranny.
♪ The Constitution clearly states the formal structure of our governing principles that have shaped who we are as a nation. It worked because of the checks and balances. One of these checks and balances is the separation of powers. So, how does that really work, Greg? - Here's how it worked. The founding generation believed that the separation of powers, it was absolute. It was so vital because it prevents one person, example, the president, from gaining too much control.
Remember, they had just come out of a monarchy of a king, a tyranny of a king. Here's the breakdown. The Constitution splits powers among three branches, Congress, the president, and the Supreme Court. All that was taken from the Bible. This prevents any one branch from dominating. Each branch has the ability to check the others, maintaining a balance. Why was this complex system so crucial? Because it safeguards the rights promised in the Declaration of Independence.
It stops a president from becoming a dictator. And where did they get the idea? Like I said a moment ago, three texts are key. The Spirit of Laws, John Adams' The Thoughts of Government, and John Madison's Federalist 51. A French philosopher residing in England was greatly influenced by English political system and separation of powers in ancient Rome, leading him to advocate for a similar system of government in its work, the Spirit of the Laws.
He emphasized the need to separate powers to prevent tyranny. And he argued that power should be a check on power. Listen to that. With distinctive legislative, executive, and judicial branches. Now Adams will echo this, warning against putting all power in just one body. He proposed a system of check and balances, including an independent judiciary. Madison then, in Federalist 51, outlined how the Constitution's structure prevents abuse of power.
He stressed the importance of competing branches and checks on government. For Washington and our founders, the separation of powers was crucial to safeguarding our liberty. It ensures that no one person or branch holds too much control, maintaining a government of laws, not of men. A pure democracy holds within it the dangers of Mob Rule, whereas in a republic, the representatives act as a throttle on the whims of the Mob and can protect life, liberty, and property.
♪ What did we do, Greg, as a fledgling nation to preserve our precious liberty in the hands of those governing to keep it from slipping back into sovereign rule? - Okay, well, central to that conversation is the concept of representation as a foundation of legitimate authority. In stark contrast to the idea of divine right of kings to rule, the American idea sets up the idea of the consent of the people. Gene, it's right here on this page. You can see it. We the people in bold face.
In other words, the government only rules with the consent of people it governs. In England, after the successful English Civil War in the 17th century that was led, by the way, by the Puritans in order to establish a godly government, they agreed to make the power of the people in the parliament as a form of representative government. They gave parliament the power of the purse and taxation, but the king still had too much power.
So the executive branch of the Georgian England had the Arab representative government, but it wasn't written in a constitution. It wasn't written, which reminds me, Gene, of Habakkuk. Write the vision. Make it plain so that everybody can read it. We have a copy of it today. And when we talk about the English constitution, no written document was ever penned in more of an oral agreement that this is how we do things. But it was too dangerous for our founders.
They wanted a fixed set of written laws with a Bill of Rights that can only be amended by the lengthy due process with a majority agreement. At the heart of the American constitution lies the ethics of representation, a safeguard against the encroachment of despotism or tyranny. In the hallowed halls of the Constitutional Convention, the framers' collective wisdom gave birth to a novel concept of elected representatives endowed with the sacred trust of their own constituents.
- And it lasted for 250 years. - It has lasted that long. On the flip side of the argument is the tyranny of the masses. The founders were concerned with the majority rule or mob rule. That's why we have a representative minority and not a majority, rather, representing majority, not a pure democracy. You hear people say that all the time, that we're a democracy. We're not. We're a representative republic.
The small states like Rhode Island were worried about the large states like New York having a monopoly of rule simply because of population. So the genius idea was to separate the Congress into two houses. The Congress would grow as the population grew, and they would add representatives. And then the balance to that would be that the Senate would be limited to two senators from each state so that small states would have an equal voice in the representative process.
In essence, the constitutional compact embodies the very idea that people are sovereign but do not govern, but the government governs the people at the permission of the people, because the people are represented by elected representatives. The constitutional document, holding my hands right here, a copy of it, enshrines liberty of the individual in the Bill of Rights. It's a Bastion of Liberty, a protection against the excess of authority.
It stands as a testament to the idea of liberty and, as they said, inalienable rights not granted by a king or by Washington, D.C., or a government, but given to us by only one, given to us by God. We do not have government by the majority. We have government by the majority who participate. ♪ So, Greg, how can we uphold the democratic principles of participation in this transition of power as it was written in the Constitution in this election year?
- Well, to truly grasp the significance of elections, the peaceful transition of power, you need to rewind the critical moments in American history. Take the first real election of 1800 between Adams and Jefferson, a game-changer for the American democracy. It marked a shift where ballots, not bullets, became the tool for political change. It ushered in an era of governance defined by popular will and electoral choice.
Abraham Lincoln's remarks in 1861 that ballots had replaced bullets captured how participation reshaped our government. But getting to this point wasn't very easy. The Revolutionary War was a test for our young nation's strength. With soldiers facing immense challenges and odds, despite the chaos, leaders like George Washington rallied the nation to victory. So, after the war, a whole new set of problems now arises.
Madison's critique of the political system shed light on the young republic's vulnerabilities. Here's where we were weak. States struggled to support the federal government, and economic uncertainty threatened the nation's stability. So, against that backdrop, the Constitutional Convention of 1787 was the ray of hope, a chance to salvage this American experience. Led by visionaries like Madison and Hamilton, the delegates worked tirelessly to create a Constitution that would unite our nation.
The road to ratification, it was not smooth. It was very bumpy. Some states like New York and Massachusetts resisted, revealing deep divisions within our own republic. Remember when they said, "Unite or die"? Well, we were having to now unite to be a country. But through compromise and collective effort, delegates eventually ratified a groundbreaking document that shaped our future. Comparing the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution gives you insight into our nation building.
The Declaration has lofty ideals. It's a rallying cry. It's a cause for us to fight for. It's a cause against tyranny. In contrast, the Constitution is a practical guide for governance. It's a blueprint to turn ideas now into reality. [Narrator] If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, no external nor internal controls on government would be necessary.
But in a government which is to be administered by men over men, you must first enable the government to control itself. ♪ All right, so Greg, how does the Constitution promote limited government for our best interest? - Okay, in thinking about the Constitution's significance, you have a profound question here. What is the true extent of its authority and how far does it reach into the realm of governments? Let me give you some examples.
The Food and Drug Administration or the FDA, the National Institutes of Health, NIH, while serving critical roles in public health and safety, pose a real constitutional dilemma. We lived through it in 2020. By a strict interpretation of the Constitution, these federal agencies appear unconstitutional.
In Alexander Hamilton's perspective, he argued in favor of the agency, citing, quote, the General Welfare Clause, ensuring public welfare is a noble pursuit, one that resonates with the core tenets of governance. However, if the Constitution intended to grant boundless authority for the pursuit of a general welfare, why list specific powers for the federal government? The complexities of modern society present compelling arguments for expansive government intervention.
You cannot ignore the pressing need for food safety regulations, public health initiatives, and environmental protections. Yet, you also have to grapple with the tension between addressing society's needs and preserving constitutional integrity. - And not creating a bureaucratic monster at the same time. - And I think we've experienced, to be honest with you, a bureaucratic monster. The historical context of our nation's founding offers insight into the debate.
Now, the framers, the people who signed the bottom of this document, of the Constitution, they envisioned a government constrained by powers that were delegated out, safeguarding individual liberties against encroachment. While the complexities of modern governance necessitated adaptation, you hear that this all the time, that this is a living document, it has to grow, it has to breathe. We must remain vigilant in preserving the essence of constitutional order.
♪ [Narrator] Religion in America takes no direct part in the government of society, but it must be regarded as the first of their political institutions. But I'm certain that they hold it to be indispensable to the maintenance of republican institutions. ♪ The Constitution is the foundation of our liberty, but the founders understood it would only work to maintain liberty if the population was virtuous.
The founders discussed as they used the word "licentious" a lot, based on the root of license. They wrote using this word because they were concerned that an unruly population would use their liberty as a license to go do bad. So they knew a virtuous population would use their liberty as a license to do good. So if a government is to survive, it needs to promote a virtuous citizen. - Gene, I am struck by the biblical perspective that our founders had on human nature.
That's what you just described. There's a prevailing notion that the Framers understood the inherent selfishness of individuals and devised a system to mitigate its impact. This assertion is based on the fallen nature of man. It's a deeper aspect of the constitutional design, its profound concern for fostering these virtuous citizens you talked about. At its core, the purpose of the United States government is to safeguard our rights and freedoms.
Yet it also aspires to shape our character and nurture our moral fiber. Let me give you some examples. George Washington, echoing the sentiments penned by James Madison in his inaugural address, highlighted the intimate connection between civic virtue and individual happiness. For the founders who had emerged from this war against the Superpower, virtue was not just a lofty ideal, it was a necessity. The visionary leaders revealed a profound truth.
Is man basically good, and can he be trusted to do the right thing? Or does man have a fallen nature and need to be governed and judged by a set of laws while respecting our fundamental rights? - And they also discussed civic duty, a free and equal society that has to have virtuous citizens who are willing to perform civic duty. Of course, this is the citizen's responsibility, not the government responsibility. - That sounds a lot like Kennedy.
"That's not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country," your civic duty. Here's a remarkable example of how groundbreaking that concept was. Now, legend has it that King George III grappled with the loss of the New World. He couldn't comprehend George Washington's decision to step down from power. In the monarch's eyes, conquest typically led to kingship.
Yet Washington's selfless act left a lasting impression, reminding us that true greatness lies in service to others, much like Jesus, who served all of humanity, all of mankind. Crafting the Constitution fell on individuals like Washington. They had this selfless, they were humble. Despite his initial reluctance to attend the Constitutional Convention due to concerns about elitism, Madison's persuasive appeals won out.
Washington's leadership was crucial in establishing an executive branch, a robust executive branch, a key element to this new government. Madison and his thoughts on the Constitution stress the importance of ambition and counteracting ambition. Now, this clever mechanism embedded in our governmental framework prevents anyone or any person or any group from gaining unchecked power. By channeling human ambitions through rational discussions, the Constitution fosters a balanced mix of interests.
The governmental structure, with its intricate system of checks and balances, mirrors the order of our own human soul. Just as reason tempers passion, the separation of powers prevents majority tyranny. It's a delicate balance, but it is a balance between self-interest and common good, designed to promote civic virtue and moral excellence. As I delve into the deep roots of American government, I'm reminded of a Frenchman named Alexis de Tocqueville.
He's an astute observations that he made during the early years in Democracy in America. He keenly noted, America is great because America is good. This profound statement captures the essence of our exceptionalism, what we call American exceptionalism. It's the belief that our nation's greatness stems from its moral character and its civic virtue. Now, his insights offer a compelling perspective on American society.
He marveled at the spirit of self-reliance and community engagement that defined the American landscape, particularly striking in his portrayal of Americans as proactive problem-solvers rather than waiting for government aid. Isn't that interesting? Because now, it seems like when we describe America, it's almost always the opposite now, isn't it?
In his eyes, the typical American isn't someone who sits back and waits for solutions from the government, but an active participant in shaping their destiny. This sense of empowerment fosters a culture of innovation and resilience, where individuals take charge of their own community, and they collaborate with one another to overcome challenges. By embracing our role as active participants in this process, we uphold the values that have truly made America great.
- Yes, and the biblical insights into ethics offer a framework for understanding the virtues that are in our Constitution. Courage, moderation, justice form the bedrock of civic virtue, guiding individuals in their pursuit of the good life. The virtuous citizen, driven by a harmonious blend of reason and passion, upholds the ideals upon which our nation was founded.
♪ [Narrator] "Governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed," meaning the legitimacy and moral right of the government is only lawful to the extent consented to by society. [Gene Bailey] Greg, we're taught in school about the idea of social contract, which is defined as the consent of the governed that influenced our founding documents. - Yeah, consent. Now, there's a radical idea. If you like radical ideas, that was a radical idea.
It's not just about agreeing to some terms and conditions. It's about a fundamental contract. Let me maybe say it this way. Not just a contract, let's say a covenant. Let's say a partnership between those who govern and those who are governed. We the people allow those in power to oversee and provide security so that we can pursue our happiness. But let's break it down further. If we're equal, then you wouldn't have the authority to do something to me unless I say so.
That's the essence of consent. But did you know that the king of England had a different take on it? During the times leading up to the American Revolution, the king addressed the Declaration of Independence with a rounding assertion of his divine right to rule. He believed that he was born to be king, and we were born to be his subjects. He saw that it was his duty to take care of us, but in return, we're required to do what he says.
However, when the Continental Army received word of the king's proclamation, they were so angry at this that their enlistment went up. And many were ready, they were ready to return home, but upon reading the king's words, they were galvanized into action. The idea that they were born with obligations imposed from above clashed with the principles of equality outlined in the Declaration of Independence.
This sentiment gave rise to the symbol of the rattlesnake with the motto, don't tread on me, symbolizing the American belief in their inherent rights and equality. The notion of consent rooted in equality is ingrained in the American psyche. It's what drives us to believe that with hard work, you can achieve anything. That's the American dream. In the end, the revolutionary idea that consent forms the basis of legitimate government prevailed.
It's a watershed moment in human history, Gene, challenging the way age-old notion of hierarchical rule, paving the way for a new area of Republican government. ♪ [Narrator] We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
♪ Before we leave, I want to revisit the Declaration because this idea of equality has always been woven into the principles we've enshrined into the Constitution. I love the way Dr. Martin Luther King put it in his famous, "I have a dream" speech. He said, "America has given black people a bad check, a check which has come back marked 'insufficient funds'."
Now, he put pressure on the Constitution and its legal principles that were put there 200 years ago, America was not founded on racist principles. It was founded on equality and a society that had to catch up morally. The Declaration of Independence asserts something truly profound and revolutionary, a concept rarely found in this ancient world, that all men are created equal. Yet, as we look around, it's evident how different we all really are.
So, Greg, what does it actually mean when it says "All men are created equal"? - Let me tell you what it doesn't mean. It doesn't mean equity. It doesn't mean that we're all the same in every aspect. Rather, it speaks to the equal dignity inherent in all human beings, irrespective of our differences. We are created in the image of God. Therefore, that makes you valuable and precious.
The fact that we are created in the image of God with His inherent capacity for speech, for reason, it underscores the essence of equality among all humans as imagers of God. Whether you're a king riding in a golden carriage or just an ordinary person, we all share a common origin, a shared humanity. Our ability to speak, to reason, to learn defines us. It sets us apart from all other creatures.
This profound realization that every human being possesses dignity, regardless of social status or background, is a cornerstone of our nation's founding principles. It forms the bedrock of the Declaration of Independence and is enshrined in the Constitution and in our Bill of Rights. - And that's a great note to end on. In conclusion, the principle of equality articulated in the Declaration of Independence is not merely a lofty ideal. It's a biblical foundation which our nation was built.
It's important to remember that. It's a testament to the belief that every individual deserves respect, dignity, and the opportunity to pursue their own happiness. Not a mob rule, not a pure democracy, or an oligarchy, but a republic that respects the rights of the individual. Before we go, I want to talk to you about Revival Radio TV. This program, Greg, has hundreds of programs now, and I hear all the time from people that go back and re-watch and re-watch and re-watch.
And this program is definitely one that you can take and re-watch it again and give it to your kids and homeschoolers. But that's the beauty of Revival Radio TV. We don't just investigate what's happened last week in Revival, but back to the history of Revival and digging up wells that have gone before us. If you'd like to be a part of this great move of God right here on the Victory Channel, I want to open it up for you to make a donation. Tax-deductible donation.
If you want to mail it, it's very simple. You can mail it to Fort Worth, Texas, 76192. Make your check payable to RRTV. That's just Revival Radio TV. RRTV. Put it in the mail. If you want to text your gift, that's the quickest, is text RRTV to the number 36609 and the dollar amount, and that'll get to us right away. Or you can call 877-281-6297, and you can listen to a phone operator and they will give you all the information you need.
And as always, you can always go to our website, govictory.com/RRTV, and you can make your donation online. Greg, it's a treasure trove of programs with Revival Radio TV now online. - And I hear all the time, like you do, people that show it to their children, and they go back. It's a great resource for you. Thank you for doing this. - Yeah, thank you. Thank you for being here, and thank you for watching. We'll see you next time right here on Revival Radio TV. ♪