Senate majority leader Harry Reid is really fed up with the new republicans in congress (those pesky tea partiers). After the most recent impasse Reid stated he hopes those new members have learned their lesson, i.e. they must learn to compromise. That sounds logical and practical as a necessary part of democracy, however, according to the Bible democracy will fail in the future after running its course.
One of the ongoing issues debated in Washington is excess spending by the government. Spending in excess of revenues generated results in debt which in turn requires borrowing. The consequences of excess spending and borrowing are clearly spelled out in the Bible. If those warnings had been heeded we would not be in the present debtor/subservient relationship with China.
So if certain representatives stood their ground on a political issue which in the present case was backed by scriptural teachings, are they to be demeaned for not compromising? Recall that King Saul lost his kingship because he compromised God’s instructions.
“…I have sinned…because I feared the people and obeyed their voice.”
I Samuel 15:24
The prophet Samuel responded:
“…for you have rejected the word of the LORD, and the LORD has rejected you from being king over Israel.” I Samuel 15:26
In the present example with freshmen representatives, compromising meant not only to agree to anti-scriptural legislation but also to break their promise to their constituents. Man’s logical thinking that the end justifies the means is not scriptural. God’s realm is perfection and nothing less can satisfy a Holy and just God. Inasmuch as man is created in God’s image, perfection is also required of man.
“Therefore, you shall be perfect, just as your Father in heaven is perfect.” Matthew 5:48
Perfect in the scriptures has several synonyms including sinless and completed for the purpose intended. The Bible states that all have sinned, therefore, the need for a perfect sinless substitute, i.e. Christ.
Now if our ultimate future depends solely on the merits and perfection of Christ, what would have been the consequences if He had given in to compromise? That’s exactly what Satan tried to accomplish.
At the beginning of Christ’s earthly ministry Satan tempted Him to avoid the cross.
“Then the devil, taking Him up on a high mountain, showed Him all the kingdoms of the world…And… said to Him, ‘All this authority I will give You…for this has been delivered to me, and I give it to whomever I wish. Therefore, if You will worship before me, all will be Yours.’” Luke 4:5-7
Satan knew all the kingdoms of the world would be given to Christ anyway. He offered Christ the reward without having to pay the price. Christ would not compromise God’s word.
Then near the end of Christ’s earthly ministry in the Garden of Gethsemane there arose again the issue of paying the price.
“He went a little farther, and fell on the ground, and prayed that if it were possible, the hour might pass from Him. And He said, ‘Abba, Father, all things are possible for You. Take this cup away from Me; nevertheless, not what I will, but what You will.’” Mark 14:35-36
And again we saw that Christ would not compromise. Imagine the consequences for us if He had.
And then in the early church there is a great example of taking a stand for the truth and rejecting the easy way out. Peter and John were told not to speak nor teach in the name of Jesus. Their response was quick and decisive.
“But Peter and John answered and said to them, ‘Whether it is right in the sight of God to listen to you more than to God, you judge. For we cannot but speak the things which we have seen and heard.’” Acts 4:19-20
Compromise is but another form of age old hypocrisy called political correctness.
There will be those who think Biblical principles have no place in government. This is America and everyone is free to have and express their opinion. In the mean time, however, should those who will not compromise Biblical principles in all aspects of life be ostracized for their stand?