The Senators are back from their much-needed vacation. They work so hard that they needed a good two weeks off. Is the sarcasm thick enough? Why are Republican Senators the worst? They can't pass obvious legislation like the SAVE Act or even pass a funding bill. It's because they haven't followed Jesus' message in Mathew 5:38
Welcome to Politics by Faith. This is where we take the news of the day and we bring it to the Bible so we can walk away with peace and perspective. New headlines every day, but Ecclesiastes says it's not the new under the sun. So thanks for being here to get the true story. The true story today is Republican senators are the worst. They're just, there's, I know, I'm sorry.
I mean, uh, uh, the news of the day is reconciliation bills and DHS ICE funding and the SAVE Act and filibuster. The story of the day is these Republican senators are just Awful. I know it's not much of a news flash, perhaps, but I would just like to, it's a little commiserating here about how absolutely frustrating these people are. They pretend like they're on your side. They hide, they hide behind the fact they're like, Oh, we really want to do this conservative thing that we said we want to do. And you elected us for, but we need seven Democrats.
And then we say, well, there's actually a way where you don't need seven Democrats. Can't do it that way. Nah, I'm against, I'm against that, but oh man, just, oh, I'm with you. You're like, definitely not with us. The analogy I used to say was if there's a mountain, right? You need 60 votes to pass a bill.
There's this big mountain. Oh, we got to cross that mountain. We're not going to be able to do it. I'm like, okay. Um, but there's also this Valley. You can just walk right through this Valley right here to pass the SAVE Act too.
Nah, I'm not going to do that. Because this mountain is so hard to climb. We can't get seven Democrats. Yeah, you don't need seven Democrats. Just do this thing. Just get rid of the filibuster.
No, I can't do that. Guys, see how demoralizing this is? The reason this is on my mind is because we talked to Senator Rick Scott from Florida. He's one of the
good guys.
But, gosh, it's so annoying. Someone called in and said, because the word frustrated isn't quite it. And someone called in and said, Slater, I think you're looking for disenfranchised. And that's part of it, sure. But I'm trying to find more of an emotional state. And my emotional state is one of seething disdain.
I'm full of disdain. Let me look up Webster's Dictionary here. Got to use Webster's Dictionary 1828 .
com.
Dane.
That's a good word.
To think unworthy.
That's right. I think these senators are unworthy of the positions they hold. To deem worthless, for sure. They're worthless. To consider to be unworthy of notice, care, regard, esteem. Unworthy of one's character.
To scorn. To condemn. The man of elevated mind disdains a mean action. Yeah, that's right. He disdains a society of worthless men. He disdains to corrupt the innocent or insult the weak.
Yeah. I'm full of disdain. They can't get anything done. And they like it that way. There was a CNN story we shared a couple weeks ago, I don't know if we played it here, of a woman who was planning on seeking asylum. She was in the process of seeking asylum using the CBP One app.
And then Trump canceled all appointments made for asylum hearings made through the app. So CNN did the story on this woman. who's she's from i think guatemala and she's still in mexico she was on her way to america now she's in mexico and the the funny part of the story she's like i'm gonna wait until trump's gone to apply for asylum and you're like well that's not what asylum is you can't like if you're fine here which clearly you are she owns like a little restaurant that you can't just And she said the question was, why did you leave Guatemala? She's like, there's no jobs. Like, well, that's not asylum.
Right now, the CBP one app was created in 2020 to streamline trucking cargo going across the border. It was made to make crossing the border for cargo more efficient. But the Biden administration took the CBP one app and they turned it into something totally different for people where they could claim asylum anywhere in the world. That's not what it was intended to be, of course. So. That's what Biden did.
And there are 50 ,000 people a month for two years who use this to claim asylum and made it across our borders. 50 ,000 a month for two months straight. So Trump wins and he says, we're not doing that anymore. We're canceling all of it. There are 900 ,000 claims for asylum and Trump canceled them all. Well, a federal judge, Alison Burroughs, says you can't do that.
Trump can't do that. So one point of frustration is you can have a president, Biden, who says, we're going to completely recreate this app to let in a million aliens, million foreigners legally. And the president can do that. And Allison says, that's great. But then the next president comes in and says, you can't do that anymore. We're not doing that.
Oh, Allison is against it.
Allison thinks it's terrible. Okay. Well, well, what? So that's frustrating. But what could solve this very quickly is if the legislative branch passed a bill, but they don't ever, they could pass a bill. about all this defining citizenship and defining birthright citizenship.
They could define all these things properly and pass these, but they just don't. And what's broken about this scenario is we have a legislative branch that doesn't get anything done. They can't even pass the budget, which is the fundamental thing to do, right? We have a judicial branch full of Alisons who are going way beyond their scope and authority. All we're left with is the executive branch.
So if we ever want anything to get done, it's going to have to happen through a more powerful executive branch, which I don't care for ideally, but it's obviously the direction we're going. And I put most of the blame on Congress for being pathetic. So someone called into the show today and said, Slater, the reason why Congress people, senators, especially are like this is because, and then the members of the unit party is because they just want to stay there and get rich and be comfortable. And that's true. Of course, it's a cushy job. If you're a narcissist who likes that sort of thing, it's not terrible to me, but if you're wired for that, then this is like a great job.
In the past, you were reluctant to take this position before the 17th amendment, the directional direct election of senators, the state houses. voted for senators to go to DC and represent the state legislature. That's what the senators were. And when we got rid of that process and went to direct election of senators, it jacked up the whole system because the senator's allegiance is now focused on DC. It used to be on their own state assemblies. That's who they were beholden to because that's who put them in office.
That's who voted for them. It was the state legislatures. And the people voted for the state legislatures, but the state legislators voted on the senators to go represent them. Now they don't have that. So now the senators are there to represent DC. They're there to represent the national government.
And And that's not what it is. The gravitational pull is now to D . C. and all the lobbying and all the fame and power and comfort that comes from D . C.
is now centralized there where it used to be centered. The gravitational pull used to be on their own state. So it's all messed up. All right. So let's go to the Bible. So picked up this book yesterday sitting on my desk.
It's an amazing book. You have to go get it immediately.
I'm going to call it Required Reading.
Studies in the Sermon on the Mount by Dr. Martin Lloyd -Jones. It's wonderful. And I picked it up yesterday. It's been a long time since I read it, so I got to read it all over again. So good. So good.
I picked it up yesterday because, you know, yesterday's episode we did about the spat between the president and the pope. By the way, After I recorded the episode, I read the tweet from the Pope about embracing the Muslims in Algeria. You're like, oh man, yikes. We'll see how it goes. Maybe we'll do another episode on that. But I would have put that in yesterday's episode if I saw it before.
So we did the episode yesterday on the Pope and the President, and the Pope's criticizing the President for not choosing peace.
Whatever, ridiculous.
And I thought, you know what, I want to go see what Dr. Martin Luther King says about turn the other cheek. That's Matthew 538, Sermon on the Mount. So grab the book. So Martin Luther goes through every line of the Sermon on the Mount and breaks it all down. It's brilliant. So let me quote here.
538. You have heard that it was said, this is Jesus. You have heard that it was said, an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. But I say to you, do not resist the one who is evil. But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if anyone would sue you,
and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. And if anyone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. Give to the one who begs from you and do not refuse the one who would borrow from you. " Okay, so let's break this down. So eye for an eye, right? Jesus said you've heard it say eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth. Almost everyone misinterprets that, certainly pagans who hate Christians and hate Christianity and hate the Bible. And what they do is they say that Eye for an eye, tooth for tooth is bad because you people want to seek revenge, right? Like Gandhi, there's no evidence that Gandhi ever said it, but everyone quotes Gandhi as saying, oh, an eye for an eye will make the whole world blind. But the point of eye for an eye was not so that we go seek revenge. It was to limit the revenge that is instinctual in humans and to enact a system of proportional justice. Meaning if someone pokes you in the eye, you can't kill them. That would be disproportionate. Justice has to be proportional. We see this principle in our constitution. No cruel, unusual punishments, no excessive bail, no excessive fines imposed. I believe it's the eighth amendment. So eye for an eye, tooth for tooth, like nothing beyond that. So it's not, it's not a call for revenge. It's a limit to revenge or, uh, I would call it portional justice. But then Jesus says, but I say to you. do not resist the one who is evil, but if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also." Now, Martyn Lloyd -Jones brilliantly goes into this whole thing about how this is for individuals, not for the state, not for the government, not for the military. It's not about the death penalty.
It's not about pacifism. This is about the individual. it's a key point this is but the individual christian and their reaction to injustice done to them now once you realize that this leads to a very important question that i guarantee you i shouldn't guarantee you i bet you asked yourself without even noticing this is what happened to me i asked myself this question but it was like really deep down and i could barely hear its voice until martin lloyd jones pulled it out of me i was like oh yeah i was wondering that actually i did but it was i didn't even here let me see if it Let me see if this happened to you. So I'm gonna read that section again, Matthew 5, 38. You've heard it said, you've heard that it was said, an eye for an eye and a tooth for tooth. But I say to you, do not resist the one who is evil.
But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn him the other also. And if anyone would sue you and take your tunic, give to him your cloak as well. And if anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. Give to the one who begs from you and do not refuse the one who would borrow from you. So my question is, why are all these seemingly unrelated things all jammed together like this? Like we always, everyone stops at, you know, turn the other cheek, but he keeps going.
This is the middle of a thought, which by the way, is in the middle of a sermon, which matches the same theme that I want to make clear in just a second as well. But, but it seems like he has all these totally unrelated things all jammed together. Like it's like Jesus had a bunch of things to say and he forgot he was running out of time or like the end of a sermon. He's like, I can tell people are getting a little, a little antsy here. Let me just, let me just throw everything in here at once. A bunch of random things.
What is turning the other cheek have to do with giving away your cloak and having to do with going two miles when you don't want to go. two mile, you don't want to go any mile, right? What do those have to do with each other? Here's what ties it all together. It's about the emptying of the self. If you are truly a Christian, you must become dead.
to self. Meaning if something bad happens to you, if there's an injustice done against you, your first human instinct, of course, is to attack, attack back, seek revenge. That is all fueled by the self. Similarly, your personal possessions, your cloak, it's about the self. If someone says, hey, let's go this way one mile, that's your self. Like they're trying to take you from where you want to be and where you want to go.
And Jesus says, we'll go to go even further. But we don't want to do that because we want to be about the self. Because that's our natural state is to glorify the self and to protect ourselves. And when someone asks you for something, our instinct is to be like, no, that's mine. Why would I, why would I impoverish myself? It's all about self.
So what Jesus is saying here is that if you want to be a disciple of mine, you have to become dead to yourself. If you want to be my disciple, you have to deny yourself. Everything about it, everything about you, all the rights to self, and you have to take up the cross and follow me. So we can bring it to the Pope. Again, it's not, it's not about this verse right here. It's not about pacifism.
If you want to read about pacifism, go read Romans. If you want to hear about what Jesus thought about the Roman soldiers or whatever, there's other verses, other scriptures you can go to about that issue. This scripture, turning the other cheek, it's not about pacifism. It's not about the military. It's not about war. It's about dying to self.
Now, why does our, back to the main topic here, why is our Senate so awful? Because they're all about the self. It's all about their power, their money, their prestige, their greed, their cloak, their power. Injustice is there, going where they want to go. It's all about me, me, me. Our founders set up the system, the constitution as justice.
Adams said, for a moral and religious people. And in a Christian country, the only people who would become senators would be moral and religious people who are not about the self. So they would do the right thing. With moral and religious people, lobbyists would come knocking, job offers would come knocking, corruption deals would come knocking. In Swalwell's case, women would come, whatever. But the senator would already be dead to self.
So all of these efforts would be useless. So if you want to have a Senate and a Congress that functions again, and beyond just DC, if you want to have anything in our society that's broken, you want to have it work again. We need to be a moral and religious people. And what does that mean exactly? You have to die to self. YouTube .
com slash at politics by faith. If you haven't subscribed yet, I really appreciate it. It'd be amazing if you could subscribe over there at YouTube, trying to break into that algorithm so that we can together spread the word.
