With the third anniversary of the January 6 Capitol riot (or attack or protest or insurrection or whichever descriptor you prefer) coming up tomorrow, reactions to the event continue to dominate the news. President Biden plans to address the subject in a speech that uses the events of that day to portray former President Trump as a threat who, in the words of Biden’s communications director Michael Taylor, “will use all his power to systematically dismantle and destroy our democracy.”
Not to be outdone, Trump plans to hold two campaign rallies on Saturday as well in what-if current polls are to be believed-will mark one of many attempts for the two candidates to control the national narrative surrounding the election across the coming months.
My purpose today is not to relitigate what happened at the January 6 Capitol riot three years ago or cast judgment on how the event continues to be used for political ends. Overall, my thoughts on that day have not really changed since I discussed it last year, and Dr. Jim Denison did an excellent job of speaking to why having a productive conversation on the topic can be so challenging in yesterday’s article.
Rather, I would like to look at what I think is the most pertinent and applicable lesson we can take from that event to help us protect our witness and grow in our walk with the Lord.
An indelible part of Trump’s legacy
Debate continues over how much responsibility the former president bears for what happened at the January 6 Capitol riot three years ago. However, it is beyond dispute that the day’s events continue to play an inescapable part in the narrative surrounding Donald Trump’s attempt to regain the Oval Office. It was felt in the red wave that turned into a trickle during the 2022 midterms and the repeated accusations of wanting to destroy democracy that have been part of the Democratic rhetoric whenever Trump is discussed.
And, ultimately, he has no one to blame but himself.
You see, people don’t typically get to choose the consequences of their decisions. For Trump, the consequence of his actions-or inactions-is that his political opponents have all the fodder necessary to repeatedly level accusations that he is a threat to democracy. And while you may or may not find those accusations convincing, enough Americans do that it has greatly clouded his path back to the White House.
And there is nothing the former president or any of his supporters can do to stop it. Those events and his role in them-whether accurately perceived or not-are an indelible part of his legacy.
When people discuss his presidency in fifty years, be it one term or two, January 6 will come up. As we discussed on a recent episode of The Denison Forum Podcast, the nature of what that conversation will look like is yet to be determined, but the odds are good that Trump will be remembered as much for the election he lost as for the four years that preceded it.
And therein lies the lesson for us today.
When Saul faced grave consequences
One of the facets of the Bible that sets it apart from the holy books of many other faiths is that its most important figures are often among its most flawed characters. Take King Saul, for example.
Saul was no stranger to thoughtless actions and the consequences that ensued, but perhaps the most noteworthy instance occurred in 1 Samuel 13. Facing the imposing might of the Philistines and an army that had begun to scatter, Saul took it upon himself to offer sacrifices that only Samuel was supposed to give. It’s important to note that he was not trying to usurp the prophet’s position or claim any special rights for himself. Rather, he was simply trying to keep his army together ahead of battle.
Yet, despite his motivations being reasonable on the surface, they demonstrated a lack of faith in the Lord, and it exhausted God’s patience.
Through Samuel, God told the king “You have done foolishly. You have not kept the command of the L??? your God, with which he commanded you. For then the L??? would have established your kingdom over Israel forever. But now your kingdom shall not continue. The L??? has sought out a man after his own heart, and the L??? has commanded him to be prince over his people, because you have not kept what the L??? commanded you” (1 Samuel 13:13-14).
When Saul offered those sacrifices, he had no way of knowing that it would cost him his kingdom. Had he understood what the consequences would be, chances are good that he would have acted differently. But, again, we typically don’t get to choose the consequence when we make a mistake, and focusing on whether the result of our sin seems proportionate or fair to us is ultimately pointless.
After all, the purpose of God’s judgment is to bring us back into a right relationship with him and to help us avoid sin in the first place. Far too often, though, we act like a child who is surprised to learn that his choices come with a cost. And while we serve a God who is quick to forgive any sin we confess, that forgiveness does not necessarily remove the natural consequences of our mistakes. Those are still often ours to bear, and the price is rarely what we might expect.
Dr. Jim Denison has frequently stated that sin will always take you further than you want to go, cost you more than you want to pay, and keep you longer than you want to stay.
That statement is just as true for former presidents as it is for you and for me.
Will you heed its warning today?

Denison Forum

As the third anniversary of the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol approaches, attention is being focused on the question: Was it an “insurrection”?

As of October 2022, the approximate losses from the events of that day totaled more than $2,881,360. Approximately 140 police officers were assaulted; more than 1,100 people have been charged in connection with the event, and more than 600 have pleaded guilty to federal charges. Five people died in the riot.

But was it an “insurrection”? The question matters enormously since two states have now barred former President Trump from appearing on their election ballots after claiming that he participated in such an action on January 6. They cited Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment, which forbids those who previously held office but “have engaged in insurrection or rebellion” against the United States from holding office again.

Section 3 does not specifically include the presidency among its listed offices, leading some to argue that it does not apply to Mr. Trump. Others question whether the January 6 event constitutes an “insurrection”; if it does not, they claim that Section 3 does not apply to the former president.

The latter question is obviously relevant to our national politics, but there’s an even more foundational issue here that speaks to the future of our democracy.

“An attack on democracy that should never be forgotten”?

The Cambridge Dictionary defines “insurrection” as “an organized attempt by a group of people to defeat their government and take control of their country, usually by violence.” I have italicized the three elements that make up this definition. 

Some point to the “violence” of January 6 as justifying this description; others claim that the “object” of the riot “was to prevent a legitimate president-elect from assuming office,” thus constituting an “insurrection” by virtue of the second definitional element.

However, others cite the first element—an “organized attempt”—as invalidating the charge of “insurrection.” They note a Reuters report: “The FBI has found scant evidence that the Jan. 6 attack on the US Capitol was the result of an organized plot to overturn the presidential election result.” The article adds: “The FBI at this point believes the violence was not centrally coordinated by far-right groups or prominent supporters of then-President Donald Trump.” Some even believe that “the riot was instigated by law enforcement to suppress political dissent.”

The partisan nature of this issue is enormously significant. In a poll published this week, 55 percent of US adults agreed that the storming of the US Capitol on January 6 was “an attack on democracy that should never be forgotten.” But note: 89 percent of Biden voters agreed with the statement, contrasted with 17 percent of Trump voters.

The commodification of truth

“Democracy” translates the Greek demokratia, from demos (“the people”) and kratia (“power, rule”). As Abraham Lincoln so memorably proclaimed, the American democratic experiment entails “government of the people, by the people, for the people.”

As George Washington and many others have noted, such consensual governance requires shared values derived from shared religious convictions. But these shared values require a shared vocabulary by which to understand and communicate them. Even more foundationally, the exercise of consensual governance itself requires a consensual vocabulary by which people choose leaders, enact jurisprudence, and enforce laws.

If words become weaponized for partisan purposes, the fundamental means by which democracy exists and functions is undermined. This is where we find ourselves in America today.

As consumers in a consumption-based society, everything and everyone has become a potential commodity. We purchase those goods and services that we believe are worth more than their cost. In a postmodern, “post-truth” culture, we feel free to do the same with our words, using them in whatever way suits us and advances our agendas.

Consequently, millions of Americans believe their former president, currently leading in polls to become their next president, is an “insurrectionist” who is therefore constitutionally barred from office. Millions of others believe this charge to be yet another illegitimate attempt to deprive Americans of their constitutional right to vote.

The chasm between these two positions is dangerous to our future as a nation.

When we choose to live biblically

The demise of a shared vocabulary and the objective reality it describes is an existential crisis for any democracy. Our response as Christians should be to pray fervently and work redemptively to help our nation turn to the one true God and the objective, authoritative truth of his word. Such a moral and spiritual reformation is vital not only for the spiritual health of Americans but for the future of America.

As we pray for others, however, we must take care to pray for ourselves as well.

I am as tempted as anyone to commodify biblical truth, “buying” those parts that appeal to me and refusing those that do not. Every time you and I do something Scripture forbids or do not do something it requires, we make this choice. We exercise our “will to power” by choosing to be our own god (Genesis 3:5), the foundational sin behind all sins. In so doing, we forfeit God’s best for our lives and for those we influence. And we abandon our calling to be salt and light in a broken culture dying for purity and truth (Matthew 5:13–16).

By contrast, every time we choose to think biblically and act redemptively, we glorify our Lord and advance his kingdom in eternally significant ways. The higher the cost of such obedience, the greater its value in this life and the next.

If you were to live even more biblically than you do now, what would you change first?

Why not today?

Denison Forum