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

Claudine Gay announced her resignation as Harvard’s president yesterday after a new round of accusations surfaced over plagiarism in her scholarly work. She has been facing mounting criticism over how she responded to antisemitism on campus as well. Her testimony before a House committee on December 5 was excoriated by very influential donors to the university, and student groups have been calling for her resignation over plagiarism allegations.

The story shows that even the president of America’s oldest and most highly endowed institution of higher education is not immune to criticism from the constituents she serves. Theirs is a transactional and symbiotic relationship—if the president leads in ways her students and donors affirm, they will provide the support she needs to lead effectively.

It’s hard to identify a significant relationship in our capitalistic, consumeristic society that does not function on similar lines. If my Daily Articles do not meet your needs, you will stop reading my work and supporting our ministry. If they do, you will enable us to continue, which enables us to serve you, which enables us to continue.

Even most marriages and families have a transactional dimension whereby we serve those we hope will serve us as well. Rare is the relationship based on unconditional, holistic, and unrequited sacrifice by one for the other.

But this is exactly how our Father loves us. Now he is calling us to embrace his love in ways that transform our souls and our society.

As our witness grows bolder

Yesterday, we noted that many Americans have all of God they want. This pleases Satan. He wants us to be inoculated with religion about God so we don’t develop a real relationship with him. The result is lost people who are convinced they’re not lost and Christians who are happy with their spiritual status quo.

Consequently, when believers decide that we want to experience more of God through more holistic obedience, Satan can be expected to respond by raising the cost of such obedience. Unexpected distractions arise when we are trying to be alone with the Lord. New and increasing temptations entice us to turn back from our quest for greater holiness. Painful circumstances provoke us to question the reality and relevance of our deeper faith.

Also, as we grow bolder in our witness, our anti-Christian culture grows more intransigent and condemning. If we will not be silent, those under Satan’s control will try to silence us (cf. Acts 4:18).

Of course, the Enemy would rather we persist in spiritual complacency. But if we are determined to seek deeper intimacy with our Lord, Satan will do all he can to stymie us. If he succeeds, the consequences can be even more fruitful for him—we become discouraged and may abandon our quest for more holistic obedience, and our moral and spiritual defeats dishonor our Lord.

The remedy is to greet temptations and difficulties as the spiritual good news they are. They show that Satan sees us as an enemy worth his time, indicating that our deeper commitment to Christ threatens him on a level that requires his nefarious response. And they provide us with an opportunity to trust our Lord even more fully and thus experience his grace even more powerfully.

The challenge is the opportunity

Of course, Satan knows that this response will defeat his strategy. This is why he sometimes adopts the opposite approach: he maintains his status quo with us, hoping the spiritual disciplines we are practicing become ends instead of means. Over time, our time with God becomes a habit more than an experience. We read the Bible and pray as chores to complete more than invitations to accept. And we fall back into the transactional consumerism we sought to avoid.

Such self-reliance is by definition the enemy of spiritual formation since the latter can be accomplished only by God’s Spirit. Praying, reading Scripture, and all other spiritual disciplines do not earn God’s favor—they position us to experience his grace. When we practice them as tasks to complete more than encounters with the living Christ, we forfeit his transforming presence. And over time, we are likely to abandon them altogether.

So, the challenge is the opportunity. Begin every day by submitting that day to God’s Holy Spirit (Ephesians 5:18). Make time to worship, pray, read Scripture, and practice other spiritual disciplines as he leads you. Walk with your Lord through the day as you pray about all you experience, seeking to think biblically and respond redemptively.

But do so in reliance on God’s Spirit to empower you and to use your commitments to form the character of Christ in you. When you meet temptation and opposition, turn them immediately over to your Lord, asking him for the strength to refuse sin and to persist in godliness. See them as evidence that you are proceeding in a way that honors your Father and frustrates your enemy. And know that your quest to know Christ and make him known is making you more like Jesus and continuing his earthly ministry in transforming ways.

“King Jesus comes again to take over”

My friend Dr. Duane Brooks recently noted:

Someday our King will come back to this world. He will not come to take sides in our internecine conflicts. King Jesus comes again to take over. He will not ride a donkey or an elephant.

So the question is not: “Is Jesus King?” but “Will you serve King Jesus today?”

He also quoted in his daily devotional this statement by Alan Redpath: “We can never pray, ‘Thy kingdom come,’ until we are willing to pray, ‘My kingdom go.’”

Whose kingdom will you serve today?

Denison Forum