What do you think?
Rate this book
The Magna Carta of Humanity: Sinai's Revolutionary Faith and the Future of Freedom
"What kind of revolution brings true freedom to both society and the human soul? Cultural observer Os Guinness contrasts the secular French Revolution with the faith-led revolution of ancient Israel. Arguing that the story of Exodus is the richest vision for freedom in human history, his exploration offers a framework that charts the path to the future for America and the West"--
273 pages, Kindle Edition
Published May 11, 2021
88 people are currently reading
432 people want to read
About the author
Os Guinness
88 books357 followersOs Guinness (D.Phil., Oxford) is the author or editor of more than twenty-five books, including The American Hour, Time for Truth and The Case for Civility. A frequent speaker and prominent social critic, he was the founder of the Trinity Forum and has been a visiting fellow at the Brookings Institution and a guest scholar at the Woodrow Wilson Center for International Studies. He lives near Washington, D.C.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 38 reviews
May 23, 2021
I have mixed feelings about this book. Because this is a book review and not a paper addressing all of the issues in the book, I will only consider the most important concerns I have about the book.
America is in a crisis of freedom, Guinness says. I appreciate his exploration of the concept of freedom. True freedom is not the freedom to pursue all desires and passions. True freedom requires responsibility. True freedom is “the power to do what we ought...” (158) It requires virtue and self-limitation.
Guinness presents “...the exodus as the precedent and pattern of Western freedom.” (19) The fundamental principles of the Exodus Revolution should be recognized as the Magna Carta of humanity. One of those principles is that man is created in the image of God. “Each individual human is exceptional.” (78) Evil, injustice and oppression “are always to be fought.” (78) I agree.
I have issue with one of his principles, however, that covenant people were equals before the law, in schooling and in worth. (94) Leviticus 27 is clear women were valued less than men. Women were not allowed education in that society. The true Sinai principle of the inequality of women bore fruit in America with women not being allowed to vote for over a century, nor be allowed to engage in higher education or even own property for decades after the nation's founding.
Another problem I find with using Sinai in relation to the founding of America is the role of God. Only the power of God was able to free the Israelites. “Without the intervention of God, there would have been no exodus...” (138) Can Sinai be related to America? God founded a theocracy. The Israelites were given specific instructions for religious action and belief. America was founded on the principle that a religion could not be established by law, nearly opposite the situation at Sinai. The religious aspects of Exodus and 1776 are very different and I think Guinness' argument falls flat.
Guinness defends the American experiment. He acknowledges the evil and hypocrisy of slavery but says if “acknowledged and corrected,” the founding documents stand clear and strong. (22) I was disappointed Guinness failed to recognize and address the repeated slaughter and disenfranchisement of Native Americans. Near the end of this book, Guinness identifies the serious work needed to acknowledge and correct that evil associated with America's founding.
Guinness is, in general, very critical of the progressive left. He does admit, however, that they have reason to be upset. “Many of the injustices and inequalities are genuine, and they require genuine resolution.” (209) It is in how they respond he finds error. At times, his attacks on the left are almost humorous. He writes, “...the attitude of the left is clear: if elections go the wrong way and investigations and impeachments also fail, what is left but assassination?” (35) Ah, but then his draft of this book went to the publisher before the 2020 election and the actions of January 6, 2021. How ironic.
Guinness' book is written in a scholarly fashion and is, perhaps, aimed at scholars rather than those who need to hear and heed his message. He quotes various scholars, historians and authors, people most Americans will not recognize nor care to hear about. He also makes reference to so many political movements and ideas, average Americans may become glassy eyed as they skim over sections of material. Guinness also relies heavily on the work of Rabbi Sacks, former chief rabbi of Great Britain, something evangelical Christians may find puzzling.
I agree with Guinness' conclusion. “For Sinai (and Calvary) America must make amends, and the very real sins must be confessed with very real repentance. But if this happens, the American experiment in freedom may be given a second chance and can then go forward both wiser and more humbly.” (233) Forgiveness is the next essential act to reconciliation and restoration. But, repentance must come first.
I appreciate Guinness' honesty at the role of Christians in creating the current anti-Christian feelings. “All too often, Christian behavior has flatly contradicted Christian beliefs.” (32) “Christians have betrayed their Lord, dishonored their faith and brought down attacks on their own heads...” (32) “Confession, the willingness to acknowledge our sins...is essential today.” (33) Will Christians take the first step of repentance?
All the evils of America, and Guinness admits to the evils from slavery to Vietnam, (basically the entire history of the nation), were egregiously evil. (234) But, he argues, they were contradictions to the ideals of America's founding. Those ideals “should be lifted high so that succeeding generations could aspire to achieve them more faithfully than their ancestors did...” (234)
From my observations of recent activities in the U.S., I would say the ball is in the court of the political right. Will leaders, those in political and religious power, repent of the egregious evils against the Blacks, Native Americans, the disenfranchised, and seek forgiveness and to make amends? Will a visionary leader call for a national acknowledgment of the sins and failures of the past and present and call to recommit to the principles of America's founding? (244) I am waiting.
I received a complimentary egalley of this book from the publisher. My comments are an independent and honest review.
America is in a crisis of freedom, Guinness says. I appreciate his exploration of the concept of freedom. True freedom is not the freedom to pursue all desires and passions. True freedom requires responsibility. True freedom is “the power to do what we ought...” (158) It requires virtue and self-limitation.
Guinness presents “...the exodus as the precedent and pattern of Western freedom.” (19) The fundamental principles of the Exodus Revolution should be recognized as the Magna Carta of humanity. One of those principles is that man is created in the image of God. “Each individual human is exceptional.” (78) Evil, injustice and oppression “are always to be fought.” (78) I agree.
I have issue with one of his principles, however, that covenant people were equals before the law, in schooling and in worth. (94) Leviticus 27 is clear women were valued less than men. Women were not allowed education in that society. The true Sinai principle of the inequality of women bore fruit in America with women not being allowed to vote for over a century, nor be allowed to engage in higher education or even own property for decades after the nation's founding.
Another problem I find with using Sinai in relation to the founding of America is the role of God. Only the power of God was able to free the Israelites. “Without the intervention of God, there would have been no exodus...” (138) Can Sinai be related to America? God founded a theocracy. The Israelites were given specific instructions for religious action and belief. America was founded on the principle that a religion could not be established by law, nearly opposite the situation at Sinai. The religious aspects of Exodus and 1776 are very different and I think Guinness' argument falls flat.
Guinness defends the American experiment. He acknowledges the evil and hypocrisy of slavery but says if “acknowledged and corrected,” the founding documents stand clear and strong. (22) I was disappointed Guinness failed to recognize and address the repeated slaughter and disenfranchisement of Native Americans. Near the end of this book, Guinness identifies the serious work needed to acknowledge and correct that evil associated with America's founding.
Guinness is, in general, very critical of the progressive left. He does admit, however, that they have reason to be upset. “Many of the injustices and inequalities are genuine, and they require genuine resolution.” (209) It is in how they respond he finds error. At times, his attacks on the left are almost humorous. He writes, “...the attitude of the left is clear: if elections go the wrong way and investigations and impeachments also fail, what is left but assassination?” (35) Ah, but then his draft of this book went to the publisher before the 2020 election and the actions of January 6, 2021. How ironic.
Guinness' book is written in a scholarly fashion and is, perhaps, aimed at scholars rather than those who need to hear and heed his message. He quotes various scholars, historians and authors, people most Americans will not recognize nor care to hear about. He also makes reference to so many political movements and ideas, average Americans may become glassy eyed as they skim over sections of material. Guinness also relies heavily on the work of Rabbi Sacks, former chief rabbi of Great Britain, something evangelical Christians may find puzzling.
I agree with Guinness' conclusion. “For Sinai (and Calvary) America must make amends, and the very real sins must be confessed with very real repentance. But if this happens, the American experiment in freedom may be given a second chance and can then go forward both wiser and more humbly.” (233) Forgiveness is the next essential act to reconciliation and restoration. But, repentance must come first.
I appreciate Guinness' honesty at the role of Christians in creating the current anti-Christian feelings. “All too often, Christian behavior has flatly contradicted Christian beliefs.” (32) “Christians have betrayed their Lord, dishonored their faith and brought down attacks on their own heads...” (32) “Confession, the willingness to acknowledge our sins...is essential today.” (33) Will Christians take the first step of repentance?
All the evils of America, and Guinness admits to the evils from slavery to Vietnam, (basically the entire history of the nation), were egregiously evil. (234) But, he argues, they were contradictions to the ideals of America's founding. Those ideals “should be lifted high so that succeeding generations could aspire to achieve them more faithfully than their ancestors did...” (234)
From my observations of recent activities in the U.S., I would say the ball is in the court of the political right. Will leaders, those in political and religious power, repent of the egregious evils against the Blacks, Native Americans, the disenfranchised, and seek forgiveness and to make amends? Will a visionary leader call for a national acknowledgment of the sins and failures of the past and present and call to recommit to the principles of America's founding? (244) I am waiting.
I received a complimentary egalley of this book from the publisher. My comments are an independent and honest review.
August 10, 2021
Pretty good. Os is a nice writer and takes a big picture perspective that I like. He contrasts the Gospel picture with transhumanism, anti-humanism, etc.
Moreover, he speaks to the continuity between Judaism and the Christian faith by referring to the work of people like Rabbis Heschel and Sacks, whom I love. He speaks to God's 'pathos', His personal and elevating relationship with mankind and creation. All in a lovely writing style that makes it fun to read.
Unfortunately, whilst I respect the effort and some important insights, I must disagree with his liberal project as much as I disagree with the late great Jonathan Sacks's. I don't think the covenant can be applied coherently outside Israel and the church. I suspect it underestimates the power of other worldviews to dishonour covenantal living on many fronts.
Plus, I do not believe in any of the social contract theories upon which our secularist order rests because I do not think they are supported by the scriptures nor anything beyond fanciful myth. Yet, they advance aggressively against orthodox Christians and Jews. Anarchist and voluntaryist readings of Romans, etc, like those of Bob Murphy and Gerard Casey make more sense of the Gospel, I think, and might better help cut alternate worldviews down to size.
It would be interesting to hear what Os would say to Christian libertarians and anarchists who take issue with more of what is in the American Revolution, its documents, and aftermath. We don't like the French, etc, but also have major questions about the less dreadful revolutions and fanciful foundational myths.
He doesn't argue at this intersection and doesn't develop a number of points he makes throughout the book. Which he could have done in a book of this size. Instead, we hear him repeat his favoured points. It is a compelling narrative with a moral impetus behind it but one that must be better argued.
I also disagree with the dichotomy that he makes between hearing and seeing. I think Iconography, broadly speaking, is as vital to the incarnation and its importance has been preserved by Orthodox, Catholics, and some Protestants alike. Both via traditional icons and then distinct Christian art through the renaissance, etc.
This point would hold for prayer and the role of the imagination too. As suggested in Richard Foster's work on the spiritual disciplines and Dr Bernard McGinn's work on mysticism. I think it is a case of both/and here according to the scriptures and the Gospel taking over all of life.
Moreover, he speaks to the continuity between Judaism and the Christian faith by referring to the work of people like Rabbis Heschel and Sacks, whom I love. He speaks to God's 'pathos', His personal and elevating relationship with mankind and creation. All in a lovely writing style that makes it fun to read.
Unfortunately, whilst I respect the effort and some important insights, I must disagree with his liberal project as much as I disagree with the late great Jonathan Sacks's. I don't think the covenant can be applied coherently outside Israel and the church. I suspect it underestimates the power of other worldviews to dishonour covenantal living on many fronts.
Plus, I do not believe in any of the social contract theories upon which our secularist order rests because I do not think they are supported by the scriptures nor anything beyond fanciful myth. Yet, they advance aggressively against orthodox Christians and Jews. Anarchist and voluntaryist readings of Romans, etc, like those of Bob Murphy and Gerard Casey make more sense of the Gospel, I think, and might better help cut alternate worldviews down to size.
It would be interesting to hear what Os would say to Christian libertarians and anarchists who take issue with more of what is in the American Revolution, its documents, and aftermath. We don't like the French, etc, but also have major questions about the less dreadful revolutions and fanciful foundational myths.
He doesn't argue at this intersection and doesn't develop a number of points he makes throughout the book. Which he could have done in a book of this size. Instead, we hear him repeat his favoured points. It is a compelling narrative with a moral impetus behind it but one that must be better argued.
I also disagree with the dichotomy that he makes between hearing and seeing. I think Iconography, broadly speaking, is as vital to the incarnation and its importance has been preserved by Orthodox, Catholics, and some Protestants alike. Both via traditional icons and then distinct Christian art through the renaissance, etc.
This point would hold for prayer and the role of the imagination too. As suggested in Richard Foster's work on the spiritual disciplines and Dr Bernard McGinn's work on mysticism. I think it is a case of both/and here according to the scriptures and the Gospel taking over all of life.
June 6, 2021
Like always, Os Guinness does not disappoint. This book follows on the same lines as other books dealing with the relationships between faith and freedom in the United States (Fools Talk, Last Call for Liberty, etc.). What Magna Carta of Humanity does is pulls them all together and applies these ideas directly to the events of 2020 and the results we're now seeing. Like the previous ones on the same topic, this one should be read by all Americans, no hyperbole.
June 26, 2021
Sometimes it takes non-American eyes to see America well. Os Guinness, born in China and expelled by the Chinese Revolution in 1951, prolific author, social critic, senior fellow at the Oxford Centre for Christian Apologetics and founder of the Trinity Forum, has a pair of those eyes, and shares his observations regularly. His most recent survey and evaluation has come forth in his new 288-page hardback "The Magna Carta of Humanity: Sinai's Revolutionary Faith and the Future of Freedom". This densely argued dossier is a valuable excursion through history, political philosophy, economics, Bible, theology, social analysis, as well as the "is" and "ought to be". This is an adult manuscript that forms readers into citizens, and citizens into neighbors.
Guinness picks up his theme from a previous work distinguishing between the French Revolution (1789) and the American War of Independence (1776). He chronicles the rise of five revolutionary epochs, dissecting each one to show their innards and inner workings, and addresses the present moment with its revolutionary liberationism. Here the author spends much of his time assessing the faith and religious diktats of this movement, including it's "hi-tech resuscitation of ancient Gnosticism" (75), victimology, eschatological expectations, neo-puritanism, and salvific endeavors of might over right. As it unfolds, chapter upon chapter, it gives thinking readers much to ponder, repent of, return to, and revalue.
Though it would be easy to think this work is criticizing "that" group or "those" people, Guinness will not allow us such luxuries. Every conclusion ends up cutting "Right" and "Left" exposing the soft underbellies of conservatives and liberals. For example, as he addresses the present hermeneutics of suspicion (interpreting every thing, every action, every literary work, etc. as a power ploy or coming from oppressive intent) the author states that the "outcome is an aging society fueled by pervasive suspicion, mistrust, rumor, conspiracy theories, and cynicism" (112). We've all swallowed that postmodernist pill! Another specimen of this is as he discusses "rights" he makes the perceptive observation that rights and responsibilities go together, and that when the "clamor for rights is pursued solely in the name of individuality, there will be an even greater proliferation of claims and a weaker response to any of them, and the end will be conflict and lawsuits without end" (227). One of the author's main working suppositions is that each of us is part of the disease, and haven't been much about the remedy. "We too are the problem. The human problem is never simply out there but always in here too" (120).
But unlike some social critics, Guinness runs through each chapter with thoughtful corrections and guides for (re)newed directions. To paraphrase Martin Luther King Jr., his slogan is not “Burn, baby, burn.” Rather, “Build, baby, build.” “Organize, baby, organize.” “Learn, baby, learn.” The author exposes how our house has termite damage, dry-rot, and leaks, and then brings out ways to remodel and revamp to restore. And he draws deeply from God's liberation movement where he emancipated his people from Egyptian oppression and set them on a path of true liberty at Sinai.
Guinness rightly sees that faith "in God is therefore protest against any and every status quo and all abuse of power" (12). It is a book for those who are ready to reassess our place in history and our moment. It is a volume that calls God's people to repentance and forward to liberty - liberty as God defines liberty. I highly recommend the book.
My thanks to IVP for responding to my request for a review copy. They happily sent it, and gave me the latitude to come up with my own assessment. Therefore, this evaluation is mine, freely made and freely given.
Guinness picks up his theme from a previous work distinguishing between the French Revolution (1789) and the American War of Independence (1776). He chronicles the rise of five revolutionary epochs, dissecting each one to show their innards and inner workings, and addresses the present moment with its revolutionary liberationism. Here the author spends much of his time assessing the faith and religious diktats of this movement, including it's "hi-tech resuscitation of ancient Gnosticism" (75), victimology, eschatological expectations, neo-puritanism, and salvific endeavors of might over right. As it unfolds, chapter upon chapter, it gives thinking readers much to ponder, repent of, return to, and revalue.
Though it would be easy to think this work is criticizing "that" group or "those" people, Guinness will not allow us such luxuries. Every conclusion ends up cutting "Right" and "Left" exposing the soft underbellies of conservatives and liberals. For example, as he addresses the present hermeneutics of suspicion (interpreting every thing, every action, every literary work, etc. as a power ploy or coming from oppressive intent) the author states that the "outcome is an aging society fueled by pervasive suspicion, mistrust, rumor, conspiracy theories, and cynicism" (112). We've all swallowed that postmodernist pill! Another specimen of this is as he discusses "rights" he makes the perceptive observation that rights and responsibilities go together, and that when the "clamor for rights is pursued solely in the name of individuality, there will be an even greater proliferation of claims and a weaker response to any of them, and the end will be conflict and lawsuits without end" (227). One of the author's main working suppositions is that each of us is part of the disease, and haven't been much about the remedy. "We too are the problem. The human problem is never simply out there but always in here too" (120).
But unlike some social critics, Guinness runs through each chapter with thoughtful corrections and guides for (re)newed directions. To paraphrase Martin Luther King Jr., his slogan is not “Burn, baby, burn.” Rather, “Build, baby, build.” “Organize, baby, organize.” “Learn, baby, learn.” The author exposes how our house has termite damage, dry-rot, and leaks, and then brings out ways to remodel and revamp to restore. And he draws deeply from God's liberation movement where he emancipated his people from Egyptian oppression and set them on a path of true liberty at Sinai.
Guinness rightly sees that faith "in God is therefore protest against any and every status quo and all abuse of power" (12). It is a book for those who are ready to reassess our place in history and our moment. It is a volume that calls God's people to repentance and forward to liberty - liberty as God defines liberty. I highly recommend the book.
My thanks to IVP for responding to my request for a review copy. They happily sent it, and gave me the latitude to come up with my own assessment. Therefore, this evaluation is mine, freely made and freely given.
May 14, 2021
This book is about freedom.
The best single line summary of Os Guinness' thesis is the refrain which concludes each chapter "America cannot endure permanently half 1776 and half 1789…" For the author, 1776 represents the American Declaration of Independence, whereas 1789 represents the French Revolution. He argues that the principles of America's founding fathers is rooted in what he calls the "Sinai Revolution," which refers to God's redemptive activities in Exodus.
In the introduction, Os writes that freedom in America today is at stake, with the nation largely split between two camps - those aligned with the principles of 1776 and those aligned with that of 1789.
These seven principles form the backbone of Os' exposition of the Magna Carta of Humanity.
1. Principle 1: Freedom requires authority - exploring God's sovereign freedom.
2. Principle 2: Freedom must be grounded and authorised - exploring humanity's freedom derived from being created in God's image.
3. Principle 3: Freedom must be realistic - exploring freedom's greatest enemy - itself.
4. Principle 4: Freedom must be won - exploring God's freeing of the Israelites from Egypt.
5. Principle 5: Freedom must be ordered and cultivated - exploring the covenant the Israelites freely entered with God at Sinai.
6. Principle 6: Freedom must be celebrated and handed on - exploring the importance of education to maintaining freedom.
7. Principle 7: Address wrongs, but in the right way - exploring the way of the left versus the way of the prophets.
This book is also heavily indebted to the Rabbi Heschel and Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks, especially the latter's Covenant & Conversation series.
Positives
Os Guinness is incisive in his analysis and eloquent in his defense and elaboration of the true, the good and the beautiful nature and vision of freedom that Sinai propounds, and makes a compelling case - but only to those who are already sympathetic with his position. Arugably, the main dichotomy Os Guinness sets up, Sinai and 1776 America versus 1789 Paris, is fair, although I have concerns about how he applies these contrasts to America today.
Despite being a Christian, he draws extensively on Jewish frames of references and interpretation of key Old Testament texts, especially Genesis and Exodus. Reading these sections were refreshing. Os Guinness clearly wanted to find common ground and I think he does so with respect.
The chapters on the "covenantal vision" of Exodus and the importance of "transmission" through education were well structured and argued. He paints a clear and grand picture of what could be if his American(?) readers frequently drank from the deep wells of its rich history.
Negatives
The author writes with passion, but it can come across as lacking empathy and understanding of the "other side." When he talks about the threats to freedom today, the dangers he identifies are mostly, if not almost exclusively, from the Left. There are rare instances of him mentioning the less savoury characters and things that the Right produce.
If the progressive left is threatening freedom today, what's the solution? Os Guinness doesn't explicitly state "the conservative right," but it is implied. Because in America, there is realistically only two options if people want to make political change. But those who profess allegiance to Sinai and 1776 often don't behave any better than their revolutionary counterparts.
Furthermore, he doesn't engage adequately with the concerns of the left. Why are they upset, angry and aggressive? Os Guinness identifies societal problems like racism and inequality, but does not offer solutions. He writes about the need for forgiveness and tells powerful anecdotes, but I doubt that's going to be enough. I was hoping for him to challenge or motivate those who hold to the principles of Sinai and 1776 to take positive action.
Closing thoughts and who should read it
For me, the biggest benefit of this work is introducing, or should I say, re-introducing Jewish thought back into Western Christianity. Chapter 1 on God's self-identification was hands down my favourite chapter. The way he used "freedom" as the controlling narrative of the book is a model of good political theology rooted in (Judeo-Christian) exegesis.
As a Christian, I don't deny that Os has accurately identified that America faces a crisis of freedom, and I wholeheartedly agree with the Sinai, or should I say Jewish, or Judeo-Christian, principles on which true freedom - like that of 1776 America - must be founded and maintained. However, I think the solution he proposes might work at the level of personal conviction, and maybe a small conservative, Christian community, but it will not be able to drive impactful political action and change.
I was graciously given an advance review copy of this book through NetGalley for an honest review.
The best single line summary of Os Guinness' thesis is the refrain which concludes each chapter "America cannot endure permanently half 1776 and half 1789…" For the author, 1776 represents the American Declaration of Independence, whereas 1789 represents the French Revolution. He argues that the principles of America's founding fathers is rooted in what he calls the "Sinai Revolution," which refers to God's redemptive activities in Exodus.
In the introduction, Os writes that freedom in America today is at stake, with the nation largely split between two camps - those aligned with the principles of 1776 and those aligned with that of 1789.
These seven principles form the backbone of Os' exposition of the Magna Carta of Humanity.
1. Principle 1: Freedom requires authority - exploring God's sovereign freedom.
2. Principle 2: Freedom must be grounded and authorised - exploring humanity's freedom derived from being created in God's image.
3. Principle 3: Freedom must be realistic - exploring freedom's greatest enemy - itself.
4. Principle 4: Freedom must be won - exploring God's freeing of the Israelites from Egypt.
5. Principle 5: Freedom must be ordered and cultivated - exploring the covenant the Israelites freely entered with God at Sinai.
6. Principle 6: Freedom must be celebrated and handed on - exploring the importance of education to maintaining freedom.
7. Principle 7: Address wrongs, but in the right way - exploring the way of the left versus the way of the prophets.
This book is also heavily indebted to the Rabbi Heschel and Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks, especially the latter's Covenant & Conversation series.
Positives
Os Guinness is incisive in his analysis and eloquent in his defense and elaboration of the true, the good and the beautiful nature and vision of freedom that Sinai propounds, and makes a compelling case - but only to those who are already sympathetic with his position. Arugably, the main dichotomy Os Guinness sets up, Sinai and 1776 America versus 1789 Paris, is fair, although I have concerns about how he applies these contrasts to America today.
Despite being a Christian, he draws extensively on Jewish frames of references and interpretation of key Old Testament texts, especially Genesis and Exodus. Reading these sections were refreshing. Os Guinness clearly wanted to find common ground and I think he does so with respect.
The chapters on the "covenantal vision" of Exodus and the importance of "transmission" through education were well structured and argued. He paints a clear and grand picture of what could be if his American(?) readers frequently drank from the deep wells of its rich history.
Negatives
The author writes with passion, but it can come across as lacking empathy and understanding of the "other side." When he talks about the threats to freedom today, the dangers he identifies are mostly, if not almost exclusively, from the Left. There are rare instances of him mentioning the less savoury characters and things that the Right produce.
If the progressive left is threatening freedom today, what's the solution? Os Guinness doesn't explicitly state "the conservative right," but it is implied. Because in America, there is realistically only two options if people want to make political change. But those who profess allegiance to Sinai and 1776 often don't behave any better than their revolutionary counterparts.
Furthermore, he doesn't engage adequately with the concerns of the left. Why are they upset, angry and aggressive? Os Guinness identifies societal problems like racism and inequality, but does not offer solutions. He writes about the need for forgiveness and tells powerful anecdotes, but I doubt that's going to be enough. I was hoping for him to challenge or motivate those who hold to the principles of Sinai and 1776 to take positive action.
Closing thoughts and who should read it
For me, the biggest benefit of this work is introducing, or should I say, re-introducing Jewish thought back into Western Christianity. Chapter 1 on God's self-identification was hands down my favourite chapter. The way he used "freedom" as the controlling narrative of the book is a model of good political theology rooted in (Judeo-Christian) exegesis.
As a Christian, I don't deny that Os has accurately identified that America faces a crisis of freedom, and I wholeheartedly agree with the Sinai, or should I say Jewish, or Judeo-Christian, principles on which true freedom - like that of 1776 America - must be founded and maintained. However, I think the solution he proposes might work at the level of personal conviction, and maybe a small conservative, Christian community, but it will not be able to drive impactful political action and change.
I was graciously given an advance review copy of this book through NetGalley for an honest review.
July 17, 2021
Premise
The following refrain at the end of each chapter is a summary of the entire book:
“America cannot endure permanently half 1776 [the American Revolution] and half 1789 [the French Revolution]. The compromises, contradictions, hypocrisies, inequities, and evils have built up unaddressed. The grapes of wrath have ripened again, and the choice before America is plain. Either America goes forward best by going back first, or America is about to reap a future in which the worst will once again be the corruption of the best.”
He emphasizes this throughout, “The ‘land of the free’ is foolishly switching revolutions (from the 1776 way of freedom to the 1789 way of freedom.)” P. 173.
Praise
It brings joy to all lovers of liberty to see a book calling America back to her roots, the Declaration, and the Constitution. If America goes under, so does the rest of the West. As seen in the book’s title, Sinai figures prominently throughout. Guinness points to God’s Covenant with Israel at Sinai as the basis of the American Constitution. Israel promised to keep the Ten Commandments, i.e., the Law of God. As Old Testament Israel was a nation of laws, and was governed in accordance with the Sinai Covenant, so America is a nation of laws, and is governed in accordance with her Constitution.
Guinness clearly identifies the opponents of American Constitutionalism. “The progressive left is deforming America, just as the logic of their concept of force and violence has long been a twisted feature of earlier revolutionary movements.” p. 215. He mentions the Russian and French Revolutions, including Trotsky who says, ‘I tell you, heads must roll, and blood must flow,’ and the French Revolution with its head-rolling guillotine. Guinness goes on to say, “Such revolutionary language can be heard only at the extremes in America today.” He lists some of those extremes as “among the supporters of antifa, on the Marxist left among the supporters of Black Lives Matter, some of the supporters of Bernie Sanders, and even in the US Congress among the ‘Squad,’ who have called for a dismantling of the system.” p. 215.
Yes indeed! Give us 1776 over 1789 any day.
Problem
I wanted to like this book, (just as I wanted to like his previous Last Call for Liberty), but Guinness keeps on jarring me to the point that I can hear the gears grinding and smell the smoke coming from the gearbox as he spins his wheels while stuck in muddy theology.
I wish he would spell out to the reader why he did the following:
He deals with YHWH and Elohim without even mentioning the Triune God!
Unlike the Messiah and Paul (John 8:44-47; Gal. 1:13-14), he praises Judaism!
He refers to “both” Hebrew and Christian Scriptures (as if the whole Bible is not Christian! 2 Tim. 3:16-17.)
He dedicates his book to a Rabbi, the late Jonathan Sacks, and liberally quotes him, which may be fair enough because all truth is the Triune God’s truth wherever it may be found.
Contra Romans 2:11, (“there is no one who seeks God”), Guinness seems to hold a strange view of God sitting quietly on the sidelines waiting for people to seek Him, to which Sacks concurs. “As we saw with the great revelation, even God limits his freedom with respect to human freedom. (“Is God everywhere” “No,” the rabbis answered, “God is omnipresent, but he does not enter and invade the human heart” – a truth pictured in Holman Hunt’s much-loved painting Light of the World that hangs in Keble College, Oxford.”
I do not wish to be unkind to Os Guinness. However, (as with his previous book, Last Call for Liberty, he gives the reader the distinct impression that he, as he ought, holds to God’s free offer of the Gospel to all humanity. The Gospel invitation can indeed be construed even from the Light of the World painting, which of course is in reference to Jesus in Revelation 3:20 saying, “Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and dine with him, and he with Me.” Yes, God incarnate invites all sinners to repent and believe in the Gospel, Mark 1:15. However, here’s the rub, Guinness here and elsewhere gives the distinct impression that he holds the erroneous view that God won’t act in a human heart unless the human acts first.
The bottom line is that Guinness, though he appears to have a faulty view of it, unless I’m mistaken, does not even mention the word Gospel anywhere in this book!
Law & Gospel
Am I missing something about Os Guinness? Has he gone over to Judaism in his old age?
Guinness is on the right track with the Sinai Covenant and the US Constitution. But it seems as if he’s blindly driving down all these back roads, backfiring, and getting bogged down in the deep potholes of Arminianism (including Dispensationalism?) as he tries to get us there. There’s quicker and better way. It was the way of the Founding Fathers. It’s called Calvinism, and Covenant Theology is the high-octane fuel it runs on. Let me elaborate:
Indulge me. Picture, if you will, rows of newborn babies in those little plastic bassinettes in a maternity ward. You have no idea who any of these babies belong to. Which baby is more equal? Which baby does not deserve life? Which baby does not deserve liberty? And which baby does not deserve to pursue happiness? Ponder that as you read the following:
I find it astounding that a Christian (e.g., Os Guinness) can trash the following words found in The Declaration of Independence:
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable [sic] Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
“Sadly, Jefferson himself, and many of the American founders, failed to live up to their own declaration. But the problem is deeper than hypocrisy. As Sacks comments, ‘“These truths” are anything but self-evident. They would have been considered subversive by Plato ... and incomprehensible by Aristotle.’ Plato held that humanity was divided into gold, silver, and bronze people so that society was inevitably hierarchical, and Aristotle taught that some people were born to rule and others to be ruled. The plain fact is that ‘these truths’ would have been anathema to people as diverse as Nietzsche and to the creators of the Hindu caste system. ‘These truths’ are self-evident, Sacks concludes, ‘only to one steeped in the Bible.’”
Back to the maternity ward. If these truths are not self-evident, then which baby is not created equal? Which baby has not been endowed with certain inalienable rights, such as life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness? Do you need the Bible to help you figure this out? The self-evidence of “these truths” are certainly spelled out in the Bible, yes indeed. But would you judge the value of a child because of skin-tone, hair, lack of hair, hair-colour, chubbiness, or what? If so, why? What are your biases based upon? By what standard?
Surely, you can see that these truths are indeed “self-evident”; contrary to the biases of Guinness, Rabbi Sacks, Nietzsche, and the Hindu caste system.
What makes a truth self-evident? I’m not sure about all truths, but I believe that “these truths” (i.e., Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness) are obvious to all, i.e., self-evident.
Interview the inmates of the Barlinnie prison. The reason they are in prison means that they have obviously negatively and criminally affected the Life, and/or Liberty, and/or pursuit of Happiness of innocent others. Yet while behind bars they too yearn for “these truths” that are self-evident.
Talk to genuine refugees. They flee from oppressive regimes. E.g., the flow invariably is from Communist North Korea to the Capitalist Christian-influenced South Korea.
Why is the southern US border being swamped by one-way traffic? Sure, not all of the thousands upon thousands coming north are genuine refugees, and are perhaps mostly economic refugees, but they want to enter into “the land of the free” so that they too can enjoy Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. “Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free…”
Why do people not want to go to prison? Why do people not want to stay in oppressive countries? It seems to me that it is self-evident.
Also, a truth is not a truth because 51% of the people say it is. This is the point where we bring the Bible into it…
However, before we actually go to the sixty-six books of the Bible, let’s consider the context in which Jefferson wrote.
Historically, there were 56 signers of the Declaration, all who had read it and had given input. None of the 56 were Judaists, as in practicing Jews. They were primarily Christian men, men who had come under the influence of Calvinist Christians such as George Whitefield and the rest of the Calvinist “Black Robed Regiment”. Their influence was so much that the War for Independence was also referred to as “The Presbyterian Rebellion.”
One of the 56 signers was the Princeton theological professor and Presbyterian, i.e., Calvinist, John Witherspoon. Therefore, the Founders were not a bunch of Deists with a Third Degree Masonry worldview. Nor did they hold an Arminian view of the Law and the Gospel, or a Dispensationalist view of Old Testament Israel. No! Sure, some of these men perhaps may have backslid and even apostatized in later years, but these signers were predominantly Bible-believing Trinitarians. (Detractors tend to pick the low-hanging fruit of, e.g., Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin who, though greatly influenced by Calvinism, went on to hold and express some strange views of Christianity.)
Now back to context. Notice the preamble to the words, “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”, for literary context is important to our understanding of the hyphenated “self-evident”. Again, which truths are self-evident? – “among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness”. The preamble to that includes the words, “the Powers of the Earth, the separate and equal Station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them”.
Do you see that? Self-evident has to do with the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God. What is meant by Laws of Nature? Neo-Darwinism? Evolutionism? Gravity? Quantum Theory? Deism? Freemasonry? Postmodernism? No! The Laws of Nature are those things that can be known about the God of Nature before reading the Bible to study the God of Nature. In other words, the Laws of Nature is the revelation of God in Nature.
How does God reveal Himself in Nature? Through the things He has made, the heavens and the earth and all therein. But here’s the really important part. God reveals Himself through the things He has made including our conscience. The word “self-evident” therefore means that we each know in our own heart, i.e., that it is by our conscience that “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”.
Therefore, the study of Scripture simply verifies these self-evident truths to be truly true. See, e.g., Psalm 19, Romans 1:18-25; 2:13-15.
And notice that the Calvinists also mention the Creator, i.e., the Triune God another couple of times, as the “Supreme Judge”, (i.e., the One who judges every thought and intent of the human heart, i.e., conscience),
“We, therefore, the Representatives of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the World for the Rectitude of our Intentions” – and also the One Who providentially guides the affairs of men, even in making a Declaration of Independence – “And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm Reliance on the Protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.”
Solution
God’s Covenant revealed to Israel at Sinai with the giving of His Decalogue and the bringing of Israel into that Covenant, is indeed the template for America and her Constitution. Guinness spells this out and urges America to get back to her Constitution or perish. Says Guinness,
“The two principles are addressed generally in the notion of the rule of law and more specifically in the notion of the separation of powers and checks and balances – whether in the three crowns of Jewish governance (king, priest, and prophet), the separation of powers discussed by Montesquieu in The Spirit of the Laws, or the intricate system of checks and balances set in place by the American founders. James Madison, who had been a student of the Presbyterian pastor John Witherspoon at Princeton, wrote famously in Federalist 51,
‘It may be a reflection on human nature that such devices should be necessary to control the abuses of government. But what is government itself, but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? If men were angels, no government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered to by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself.’” p, 222.
Throughout the Declaration the founders mention the word “laws” numerous times. It is these “laws” that the signers are claiming to be self-evident. Guinness mentions many times that God made human beings in His own image. He does not mention that the founders believed that the image of God included the Ten Commandments, i.e., God’s Law, written on the heart of every human being. It was these inherent laws that the founders were calling “self-evident.”
The Ten Commandments are the revelation of God’s character. The summary of the Ten Commandments is to love God, and to love your neighbour as yourself – just like God, the Triune God, does from and to all eternity. The Father loves the Son and the Spirit. The Son loves the Father and the Spirit. And the Spirit loves the Father and the Son. Thus, each Person in the Godhead loves God, and He loves His neighbour as Himself. God loves God, and He loves His neighbour as Himself. Mankind was created to reflect God by loving God and loving His neighbour as himself. But something went wrong with mankind. Sin!
This is why the founders insisted on all their checks and balances for government. Unlike when God created us, humans are now inherently evil by nature. Thus, the Law and the Gospel. The Law shows us up as sinners. And the Gospel reveals the way of salvation for sinners – which is only and exclusively through Jesus Christ: “Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and dine with him, and he with Me.”
Jesus is the Mediator between God and men. Therefore, He, as the middle person in the Trinity was the One who handed the tablets to Moses on Mount Sinai. It was through Him that God covenanted with Israel and Israel with God. God identifies Himself and His grace (i.e., Gospel grace) towards Israel in the preamble to the Sinai Covenant, i.e., the Ten Commandments. And having done that, He presents them with His Law written in stone, (i.e., the same Law that was written in mankind’s heart upon our creation), which Law was to be applied in every sphere of activity in Israel, from king, priest, and prophet, rich and poor.
The Law can be defined as Moral, Judicial or Civil, and Ceremonial. The Judicial component was for how Israel was to act and interact in civil life, with judges to judge in civil disputes, and the Ceremonial Law was how Israel was to act religiously towards God and each other. The Ceremonial Law was the Gospel in the Old Testament, all of which pointed to THE King, Prophet, and Priest, Jesus Christ (who was with them at the exodus, Sinai, and the wilderness etc. Guinness fails to touch on any of this, and thereby misses how the founders understood Sinai, the Law and the Gospel.
Conclusion
Therefore, Guinness needs to write another book to follow on from this one, showing that the original intent of the Founding Fathers was to emulate Israel and Sinai, not as understood by a bunch of unconverted rabbis, (though there is a wealth of good material to be found in their numerous quotes!), but rather in the Calvinist understanding of Israel and Sinai, and therefore of the Law and the Gospel as applied in the Declaration, and of which the same principles subsequently applied to the Constitution and its Bill of Rights.
Whenever God converts any individual, He grants them repentance to turn away from their sins, and He gives them the gift of faith so that the individual will believe in the Gospel. When converted, God writes His laws anew on His new creation’s heart, just as He did when He first created mankind without sin in the beginning. See e.g., Jeremiah 31:33 with Hebrews 8:10.
Only the same Gospel that was proclaimed by the “Black Robe Regiment” pre- and during the Revolution can save America. May the Triune God be pleased to raise up preachers of this Gospel before it is too late.
The following refrain at the end of each chapter is a summary of the entire book:
“America cannot endure permanently half 1776 [the American Revolution] and half 1789 [the French Revolution]. The compromises, contradictions, hypocrisies, inequities, and evils have built up unaddressed. The grapes of wrath have ripened again, and the choice before America is plain. Either America goes forward best by going back first, or America is about to reap a future in which the worst will once again be the corruption of the best.”
He emphasizes this throughout, “The ‘land of the free’ is foolishly switching revolutions (from the 1776 way of freedom to the 1789 way of freedom.)” P. 173.
Praise
It brings joy to all lovers of liberty to see a book calling America back to her roots, the Declaration, and the Constitution. If America goes under, so does the rest of the West. As seen in the book’s title, Sinai figures prominently throughout. Guinness points to God’s Covenant with Israel at Sinai as the basis of the American Constitution. Israel promised to keep the Ten Commandments, i.e., the Law of God. As Old Testament Israel was a nation of laws, and was governed in accordance with the Sinai Covenant, so America is a nation of laws, and is governed in accordance with her Constitution.
Guinness clearly identifies the opponents of American Constitutionalism. “The progressive left is deforming America, just as the logic of their concept of force and violence has long been a twisted feature of earlier revolutionary movements.” p. 215. He mentions the Russian and French Revolutions, including Trotsky who says, ‘I tell you, heads must roll, and blood must flow,’ and the French Revolution with its head-rolling guillotine. Guinness goes on to say, “Such revolutionary language can be heard only at the extremes in America today.” He lists some of those extremes as “among the supporters of antifa, on the Marxist left among the supporters of Black Lives Matter, some of the supporters of Bernie Sanders, and even in the US Congress among the ‘Squad,’ who have called for a dismantling of the system.” p. 215.
Yes indeed! Give us 1776 over 1789 any day.
Problem
I wanted to like this book, (just as I wanted to like his previous Last Call for Liberty), but Guinness keeps on jarring me to the point that I can hear the gears grinding and smell the smoke coming from the gearbox as he spins his wheels while stuck in muddy theology.
I wish he would spell out to the reader why he did the following:
He deals with YHWH and Elohim without even mentioning the Triune God!
Unlike the Messiah and Paul (John 8:44-47; Gal. 1:13-14), he praises Judaism!
He refers to “both” Hebrew and Christian Scriptures (as if the whole Bible is not Christian! 2 Tim. 3:16-17.)
He dedicates his book to a Rabbi, the late Jonathan Sacks, and liberally quotes him, which may be fair enough because all truth is the Triune God’s truth wherever it may be found.
Contra Romans 2:11, (“there is no one who seeks God”), Guinness seems to hold a strange view of God sitting quietly on the sidelines waiting for people to seek Him, to which Sacks concurs. “As we saw with the great revelation, even God limits his freedom with respect to human freedom. (“Is God everywhere” “No,” the rabbis answered, “God is omnipresent, but he does not enter and invade the human heart” – a truth pictured in Holman Hunt’s much-loved painting Light of the World that hangs in Keble College, Oxford.”
I do not wish to be unkind to Os Guinness. However, (as with his previous book, Last Call for Liberty, he gives the reader the distinct impression that he, as he ought, holds to God’s free offer of the Gospel to all humanity. The Gospel invitation can indeed be construed even from the Light of the World painting, which of course is in reference to Jesus in Revelation 3:20 saying, “Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and dine with him, and he with Me.” Yes, God incarnate invites all sinners to repent and believe in the Gospel, Mark 1:15. However, here’s the rub, Guinness here and elsewhere gives the distinct impression that he holds the erroneous view that God won’t act in a human heart unless the human acts first.
The bottom line is that Guinness, though he appears to have a faulty view of it, unless I’m mistaken, does not even mention the word Gospel anywhere in this book!
Law & Gospel
Am I missing something about Os Guinness? Has he gone over to Judaism in his old age?
Guinness is on the right track with the Sinai Covenant and the US Constitution. But it seems as if he’s blindly driving down all these back roads, backfiring, and getting bogged down in the deep potholes of Arminianism (including Dispensationalism?) as he tries to get us there. There’s quicker and better way. It was the way of the Founding Fathers. It’s called Calvinism, and Covenant Theology is the high-octane fuel it runs on. Let me elaborate:
Indulge me. Picture, if you will, rows of newborn babies in those little plastic bassinettes in a maternity ward. You have no idea who any of these babies belong to. Which baby is more equal? Which baby does not deserve life? Which baby does not deserve liberty? And which baby does not deserve to pursue happiness? Ponder that as you read the following:
I find it astounding that a Christian (e.g., Os Guinness) can trash the following words found in The Declaration of Independence:
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable [sic] Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
“Sadly, Jefferson himself, and many of the American founders, failed to live up to their own declaration. But the problem is deeper than hypocrisy. As Sacks comments, ‘“These truths” are anything but self-evident. They would have been considered subversive by Plato ... and incomprehensible by Aristotle.’ Plato held that humanity was divided into gold, silver, and bronze people so that society was inevitably hierarchical, and Aristotle taught that some people were born to rule and others to be ruled. The plain fact is that ‘these truths’ would have been anathema to people as diverse as Nietzsche and to the creators of the Hindu caste system. ‘These truths’ are self-evident, Sacks concludes, ‘only to one steeped in the Bible.’”
Back to the maternity ward. If these truths are not self-evident, then which baby is not created equal? Which baby has not been endowed with certain inalienable rights, such as life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness? Do you need the Bible to help you figure this out? The self-evidence of “these truths” are certainly spelled out in the Bible, yes indeed. But would you judge the value of a child because of skin-tone, hair, lack of hair, hair-colour, chubbiness, or what? If so, why? What are your biases based upon? By what standard?
Surely, you can see that these truths are indeed “self-evident”; contrary to the biases of Guinness, Rabbi Sacks, Nietzsche, and the Hindu caste system.
What makes a truth self-evident? I’m not sure about all truths, but I believe that “these truths” (i.e., Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness) are obvious to all, i.e., self-evident.
Interview the inmates of the Barlinnie prison. The reason they are in prison means that they have obviously negatively and criminally affected the Life, and/or Liberty, and/or pursuit of Happiness of innocent others. Yet while behind bars they too yearn for “these truths” that are self-evident.
Talk to genuine refugees. They flee from oppressive regimes. E.g., the flow invariably is from Communist North Korea to the Capitalist Christian-influenced South Korea.
Why is the southern US border being swamped by one-way traffic? Sure, not all of the thousands upon thousands coming north are genuine refugees, and are perhaps mostly economic refugees, but they want to enter into “the land of the free” so that they too can enjoy Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. “Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free…”
Why do people not want to go to prison? Why do people not want to stay in oppressive countries? It seems to me that it is self-evident.
Also, a truth is not a truth because 51% of the people say it is. This is the point where we bring the Bible into it…
However, before we actually go to the sixty-six books of the Bible, let’s consider the context in which Jefferson wrote.
Historically, there were 56 signers of the Declaration, all who had read it and had given input. None of the 56 were Judaists, as in practicing Jews. They were primarily Christian men, men who had come under the influence of Calvinist Christians such as George Whitefield and the rest of the Calvinist “Black Robed Regiment”. Their influence was so much that the War for Independence was also referred to as “The Presbyterian Rebellion.”
One of the 56 signers was the Princeton theological professor and Presbyterian, i.e., Calvinist, John Witherspoon. Therefore, the Founders were not a bunch of Deists with a Third Degree Masonry worldview. Nor did they hold an Arminian view of the Law and the Gospel, or a Dispensationalist view of Old Testament Israel. No! Sure, some of these men perhaps may have backslid and even apostatized in later years, but these signers were predominantly Bible-believing Trinitarians. (Detractors tend to pick the low-hanging fruit of, e.g., Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin who, though greatly influenced by Calvinism, went on to hold and express some strange views of Christianity.)
Now back to context. Notice the preamble to the words, “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”, for literary context is important to our understanding of the hyphenated “self-evident”. Again, which truths are self-evident? – “among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness”. The preamble to that includes the words, “the Powers of the Earth, the separate and equal Station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them”.
Do you see that? Self-evident has to do with the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God. What is meant by Laws of Nature? Neo-Darwinism? Evolutionism? Gravity? Quantum Theory? Deism? Freemasonry? Postmodernism? No! The Laws of Nature are those things that can be known about the God of Nature before reading the Bible to study the God of Nature. In other words, the Laws of Nature is the revelation of God in Nature.
How does God reveal Himself in Nature? Through the things He has made, the heavens and the earth and all therein. But here’s the really important part. God reveals Himself through the things He has made including our conscience. The word “self-evident” therefore means that we each know in our own heart, i.e., that it is by our conscience that “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”.
Therefore, the study of Scripture simply verifies these self-evident truths to be truly true. See, e.g., Psalm 19, Romans 1:18-25; 2:13-15.
And notice that the Calvinists also mention the Creator, i.e., the Triune God another couple of times, as the “Supreme Judge”, (i.e., the One who judges every thought and intent of the human heart, i.e., conscience),
“We, therefore, the Representatives of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the World for the Rectitude of our Intentions” – and also the One Who providentially guides the affairs of men, even in making a Declaration of Independence – “And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm Reliance on the Protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.”
Solution
God’s Covenant revealed to Israel at Sinai with the giving of His Decalogue and the bringing of Israel into that Covenant, is indeed the template for America and her Constitution. Guinness spells this out and urges America to get back to her Constitution or perish. Says Guinness,
“The two principles are addressed generally in the notion of the rule of law and more specifically in the notion of the separation of powers and checks and balances – whether in the three crowns of Jewish governance (king, priest, and prophet), the separation of powers discussed by Montesquieu in The Spirit of the Laws, or the intricate system of checks and balances set in place by the American founders. James Madison, who had been a student of the Presbyterian pastor John Witherspoon at Princeton, wrote famously in Federalist 51,
‘It may be a reflection on human nature that such devices should be necessary to control the abuses of government. But what is government itself, but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? If men were angels, no government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered to by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself.’” p, 222.
Throughout the Declaration the founders mention the word “laws” numerous times. It is these “laws” that the signers are claiming to be self-evident. Guinness mentions many times that God made human beings in His own image. He does not mention that the founders believed that the image of God included the Ten Commandments, i.e., God’s Law, written on the heart of every human being. It was these inherent laws that the founders were calling “self-evident.”
The Ten Commandments are the revelation of God’s character. The summary of the Ten Commandments is to love God, and to love your neighbour as yourself – just like God, the Triune God, does from and to all eternity. The Father loves the Son and the Spirit. The Son loves the Father and the Spirit. And the Spirit loves the Father and the Son. Thus, each Person in the Godhead loves God, and He loves His neighbour as Himself. God loves God, and He loves His neighbour as Himself. Mankind was created to reflect God by loving God and loving His neighbour as himself. But something went wrong with mankind. Sin!
This is why the founders insisted on all their checks and balances for government. Unlike when God created us, humans are now inherently evil by nature. Thus, the Law and the Gospel. The Law shows us up as sinners. And the Gospel reveals the way of salvation for sinners – which is only and exclusively through Jesus Christ: “Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and dine with him, and he with Me.”
Jesus is the Mediator between God and men. Therefore, He, as the middle person in the Trinity was the One who handed the tablets to Moses on Mount Sinai. It was through Him that God covenanted with Israel and Israel with God. God identifies Himself and His grace (i.e., Gospel grace) towards Israel in the preamble to the Sinai Covenant, i.e., the Ten Commandments. And having done that, He presents them with His Law written in stone, (i.e., the same Law that was written in mankind’s heart upon our creation), which Law was to be applied in every sphere of activity in Israel, from king, priest, and prophet, rich and poor.
The Law can be defined as Moral, Judicial or Civil, and Ceremonial. The Judicial component was for how Israel was to act and interact in civil life, with judges to judge in civil disputes, and the Ceremonial Law was how Israel was to act religiously towards God and each other. The Ceremonial Law was the Gospel in the Old Testament, all of which pointed to THE King, Prophet, and Priest, Jesus Christ (who was with them at the exodus, Sinai, and the wilderness etc. Guinness fails to touch on any of this, and thereby misses how the founders understood Sinai, the Law and the Gospel.
Conclusion
Therefore, Guinness needs to write another book to follow on from this one, showing that the original intent of the Founding Fathers was to emulate Israel and Sinai, not as understood by a bunch of unconverted rabbis, (though there is a wealth of good material to be found in their numerous quotes!), but rather in the Calvinist understanding of Israel and Sinai, and therefore of the Law and the Gospel as applied in the Declaration, and of which the same principles subsequently applied to the Constitution and its Bill of Rights.
Whenever God converts any individual, He grants them repentance to turn away from their sins, and He gives them the gift of faith so that the individual will believe in the Gospel. When converted, God writes His laws anew on His new creation’s heart, just as He did when He first created mankind without sin in the beginning. See e.g., Jeremiah 31:33 with Hebrews 8:10.
Only the same Gospel that was proclaimed by the “Black Robe Regiment” pre- and during the Revolution can save America. May the Triune God be pleased to raise up preachers of this Gospel before it is too late.
May 25, 2023
Review of The Magna Carta of Humanity
Os Guinness discusses relevant concepts like freedom, justice, revolution, mercy and their diseased status in our society. I appreciated that he did not shy away from, but directly related those concepts to race, gender, and other ongoing revolutions in America. He traces the foundation of the American revolution in 1776 back to the revolution of Israel in the Exodus and at Mount Sinai and then our modern American revolutions back to the French Revolution in 1789. It is remarkable to see how many of the movements we see today are explicitly post-Marxist and where those sorts of revolutions have led in the past and are likely to lead now.
The book was fascinating to me as much of the book is inspired by the work of Rabbi Sacks and discusses the events of the Exodus and Mount Sinai from a Jewish rather than Christian perspective. I didn’t agree with everything in the book and it repeated concepts often enough for it to feel a bit repetitive at times. But it gave me a greater appreciation for the American experiment and gave me a clearer picture that is grounded in history and biblical truth of the forces that are vying for the future of the US.
Os Guinness discusses relevant concepts like freedom, justice, revolution, mercy and their diseased status in our society. I appreciated that he did not shy away from, but directly related those concepts to race, gender, and other ongoing revolutions in America. He traces the foundation of the American revolution in 1776 back to the revolution of Israel in the Exodus and at Mount Sinai and then our modern American revolutions back to the French Revolution in 1789. It is remarkable to see how many of the movements we see today are explicitly post-Marxist and where those sorts of revolutions have led in the past and are likely to lead now.
The book was fascinating to me as much of the book is inspired by the work of Rabbi Sacks and discusses the events of the Exodus and Mount Sinai from a Jewish rather than Christian perspective. I didn’t agree with everything in the book and it repeated concepts often enough for it to feel a bit repetitive at times. But it gave me a greater appreciation for the American experiment and gave me a clearer picture that is grounded in history and biblical truth of the forces that are vying for the future of the US.
June 25, 2021
Os Guinness provides an insightful and penetrating treatise in which his main thesis is that America, finds itself between "Paris and Sinai". Guinness dissects the roots of "the left" as grounded in the ideology of the French, Chinese and other revolutions, which had even occult roots. On the other side, he finds the Biblical truths as found in the giving of the Law as vital for America's recovery; a nation under God. This book is fairly important for the current momentum in post-Covid America, medium-level and not complex for the lay-reader. Guinness is right, America's decision will affect the coming generations, and either it extirpates the cancer or dies with valor.
July 20, 2021
Best book ever written on the contrast between liberty and leftism
This book will transform your thinking on the origins of liberty whether you are a conservative or a leftist. The contrast helps clarify the difference between the 1776 revolution and the 1789 revolution, both of which are still ongoing.
This book will transform your thinking on the origins of liberty whether you are a conservative or a leftist. The contrast helps clarify the difference between the 1776 revolution and the 1789 revolution, both of which are still ongoing.
October 12, 2021
Loved this book. It’s dense and will be worth a reread soon. Os Guinness captures many of the conversation my wife and I have had over the last few months and articulates the rapid, subtle cultural change that is taking place in America. His conclusion poses an important question - will we at least have a debate over the culture change that is happening.
February 24, 2022
Os Guinness’s 2021 book ‘The Magna Carta of Humanity: Sinai’s Revolutionary Faith and the Future of Freedom’ is my first interaction with his views and appraisals in something approaching their entirety.
The premise of Guinness’s ‘The Magna Carta of Humanity’ is so profound as to necessitate more thought before I can give anything approaching a satisfying verdict, but there is a lot here. And the reputation Guinness has for thinking big picture and communicating about the complex relationships between our beliefs and the reality we experience is well-deserved.
Have you considered, for instance, how closely related what the Bolsheviks did in Russia and what the Maoists did in China was patterned after what happened in France in 1793? Guinness clearly has, and here he invites you to join him in such considerations – not as some arcane ivory tower thought exercise, but as an entirely practical way of viewing our current circumstances.
There is no new thing under the sun. And that includes Gender Theory, BLM, Antifa, Progressivism, Cancel Culture, CRT, Surveillance Capitalism, and the censorship of conservatives online and IRL, to name just a few of the now too-dominant features of modern political discourse and policy-making.
It’s worth noting also that Guinness wrote this work before the recent troubles in Canada which are possibly on their way to the U.S. via another Freedom Convoy, this one American-style. Hopefully the Democrats under Joe Biden respond better than Trudeau did and actually, if you can imagine it, listen to the concerns of the governed if they hope to maintain anything approaching the consent of the governed.
Yet the bend toward fickle and arbitrary totalitarianism based on the elevation of secular man’s reason to the place which should be occupied by God alone is easy to anticipate. Just look at how men who have played God throughout history have acted when questioned about the treatment of their inalienable rights – and look no farther than what Russia and China are doing today if you need a contemporary example.
As Guinness puts it succinctly, “Only when God is God can we be us.” And what Os means by this is that whether governed or governing, we don’t relate to one another in a fully human nor humane way when we reject the basis for human rights – the divine authority of God Almighty.
The dignity which each man, woman, and child possesses by virtue of being God’s possession, and made in God’s image, must then be understood in the context of the righteousness of the Lord of all Creation Himself in order to be preserved and protected.
Just so, Guinness argues that better than comparing and contrasting the American Revolution and the French Revolution directly is something which had honestly not occurred to me. And I have to give Guinness full marks for this.
Consider history’s greatest liberation of an enslaved people – at Sinai, where God took a people who were no people and made them His own, delivering them out of 400-years of hard bondage to the Pharaoh of Egypt and giving to them the Promised Land and His covenant. Now compare and contrast Sinai with Paris, and Moses with Robespierre – or Marx and Engels, or Stalin and Mao and Pol Pot and Castro.
Guinness is right to assert that this is a more apt comparison in many ways, not least if it is right to say that the revolution at Sinai was the inspiration for the signing of Magna Carta in England in 1215, and both in turn inspiring the revolution in the thirteen colonies which became the United States.
As I was reminded in reading ‘The Magna Carta of Humanity,’ the first proposed Great Seal of the United States [before 14 August 1776] was actually Moses leading the children of Israel through the Red Sea, Pharaoh sword-in-hand with his chariots visible as well – and the motto inscribed, “Rebellion to Tyrants Is Obedience to God.”
For more thoughts on 'The Magna Carta of Humanity: Sinai's Revolutionary Faith and the Future of Freedom,' check out this episode of The Garrett Ashley Mullet Show podcast.
https://thegarrettashleymulletshow.co...
The premise of Guinness’s ‘The Magna Carta of Humanity’ is so profound as to necessitate more thought before I can give anything approaching a satisfying verdict, but there is a lot here. And the reputation Guinness has for thinking big picture and communicating about the complex relationships between our beliefs and the reality we experience is well-deserved.
Have you considered, for instance, how closely related what the Bolsheviks did in Russia and what the Maoists did in China was patterned after what happened in France in 1793? Guinness clearly has, and here he invites you to join him in such considerations – not as some arcane ivory tower thought exercise, but as an entirely practical way of viewing our current circumstances.
There is no new thing under the sun. And that includes Gender Theory, BLM, Antifa, Progressivism, Cancel Culture, CRT, Surveillance Capitalism, and the censorship of conservatives online and IRL, to name just a few of the now too-dominant features of modern political discourse and policy-making.
It’s worth noting also that Guinness wrote this work before the recent troubles in Canada which are possibly on their way to the U.S. via another Freedom Convoy, this one American-style. Hopefully the Democrats under Joe Biden respond better than Trudeau did and actually, if you can imagine it, listen to the concerns of the governed if they hope to maintain anything approaching the consent of the governed.
Yet the bend toward fickle and arbitrary totalitarianism based on the elevation of secular man’s reason to the place which should be occupied by God alone is easy to anticipate. Just look at how men who have played God throughout history have acted when questioned about the treatment of their inalienable rights – and look no farther than what Russia and China are doing today if you need a contemporary example.
As Guinness puts it succinctly, “Only when God is God can we be us.” And what Os means by this is that whether governed or governing, we don’t relate to one another in a fully human nor humane way when we reject the basis for human rights – the divine authority of God Almighty.
The dignity which each man, woman, and child possesses by virtue of being God’s possession, and made in God’s image, must then be understood in the context of the righteousness of the Lord of all Creation Himself in order to be preserved and protected.
Just so, Guinness argues that better than comparing and contrasting the American Revolution and the French Revolution directly is something which had honestly not occurred to me. And I have to give Guinness full marks for this.
Consider history’s greatest liberation of an enslaved people – at Sinai, where God took a people who were no people and made them His own, delivering them out of 400-years of hard bondage to the Pharaoh of Egypt and giving to them the Promised Land and His covenant. Now compare and contrast Sinai with Paris, and Moses with Robespierre – or Marx and Engels, or Stalin and Mao and Pol Pot and Castro.
Guinness is right to assert that this is a more apt comparison in many ways, not least if it is right to say that the revolution at Sinai was the inspiration for the signing of Magna Carta in England in 1215, and both in turn inspiring the revolution in the thirteen colonies which became the United States.
As I was reminded in reading ‘The Magna Carta of Humanity,’ the first proposed Great Seal of the United States [before 14 August 1776] was actually Moses leading the children of Israel through the Red Sea, Pharaoh sword-in-hand with his chariots visible as well – and the motto inscribed, “Rebellion to Tyrants Is Obedience to God.”
For more thoughts on 'The Magna Carta of Humanity: Sinai's Revolutionary Faith and the Future of Freedom,' check out this episode of The Garrett Ashley Mullet Show podcast.
https://thegarrettashleymulletshow.co...
September 25, 2021
Sinai or Paris? 1776 or 1789? An Earnest Plea to America in Crisis
British scholar Os Guinness is an outspoken advocate for the American ideal and, frankly, for American exceptionalism. This latest excellent book continues his urgent and earnest plea for America begun in his recent Last Call for Liberty and earlier A Free People’s Suicide. It also is a fine companion to Ben Shapiro’s latest book, The Authoritarian Moment. The message of all is the urgent need to return to the principles of our founding and away from the growing influence of the discordant objectives of the extreme left.
In this book, he argues that the American Revolution of 1776 uniquely (with some acknowledgement to the short-lived English Revolution of 1642) derived from the principles of the Exodus, fundamentally justified by the understanding that all humanity is created in God’s image and thus worthy of freedom. In contrast, the subsequent world revolutions (Russian in 1917 and Chinese in 1949) followed the destructive example of the French Revolution of 1789, viewing the state as the ultimate object of worth, not the individual, and not derived from God, as they all were in essence atheistic. One could add the other communist revolutions of the 20th Century (Korean, Cuban, Cambodian, etc.) as well as the Nazi and other fascist regimes.
The notable theme of The Magna Carta of Humanity is theological. Guinness does a superb job of relating theological ideas to historical developments, political positioning, our present polarization and division, and practical consequences. He stresses the importance of the Covenantal aspect of the Constitution. Guinness is a great admirer of Jonathan Sacks, the former chief rabbi of Great Britain (to whom, along with Guinness’ wife, the book is dedicated), upon whom he draws extensively (sometimes almost to excess) in relating the human condition, particularly the human political condition, to God’s intention for humanity. Importantly, the book attributes the unique resilience and survival of the Jewish people over millennia to passing their heritage down through the generations as the will of God, and warns of the existential risk to the American ideal from failure to do likewise in appeasement of or relative indifference to the revisionist claims of the left.
In summary, he makes a powerful case for the theological basis for the American ideal, and therefore its vital importance. He addresses effectively what has gone wrong and why, and convincingly argues for the urgency and priorities of rectification.
As Guinness concludes each chapter: “America cannot endure permanently half 1776 and half 1789. The compromises, contradictions, hypocrisies, inequities, and evils have built up unaddressed. The grapes of wrath have ripened again, and the choice before America is plain. Either America goes forward best by going back first, or America is about to reap a future in which the worst will once again be the corruption of the best.”
Highly recommended!
British scholar Os Guinness is an outspoken advocate for the American ideal and, frankly, for American exceptionalism. This latest excellent book continues his urgent and earnest plea for America begun in his recent Last Call for Liberty and earlier A Free People’s Suicide. It also is a fine companion to Ben Shapiro’s latest book, The Authoritarian Moment. The message of all is the urgent need to return to the principles of our founding and away from the growing influence of the discordant objectives of the extreme left.
In this book, he argues that the American Revolution of 1776 uniquely (with some acknowledgement to the short-lived English Revolution of 1642) derived from the principles of the Exodus, fundamentally justified by the understanding that all humanity is created in God’s image and thus worthy of freedom. In contrast, the subsequent world revolutions (Russian in 1917 and Chinese in 1949) followed the destructive example of the French Revolution of 1789, viewing the state as the ultimate object of worth, not the individual, and not derived from God, as they all were in essence atheistic. One could add the other communist revolutions of the 20th Century (Korean, Cuban, Cambodian, etc.) as well as the Nazi and other fascist regimes.
The notable theme of The Magna Carta of Humanity is theological. Guinness does a superb job of relating theological ideas to historical developments, political positioning, our present polarization and division, and practical consequences. He stresses the importance of the Covenantal aspect of the Constitution. Guinness is a great admirer of Jonathan Sacks, the former chief rabbi of Great Britain (to whom, along with Guinness’ wife, the book is dedicated), upon whom he draws extensively (sometimes almost to excess) in relating the human condition, particularly the human political condition, to God’s intention for humanity. Importantly, the book attributes the unique resilience and survival of the Jewish people over millennia to passing their heritage down through the generations as the will of God, and warns of the existential risk to the American ideal from failure to do likewise in appeasement of or relative indifference to the revisionist claims of the left.
In summary, he makes a powerful case for the theological basis for the American ideal, and therefore its vital importance. He addresses effectively what has gone wrong and why, and convincingly argues for the urgency and priorities of rectification.
As Guinness concludes each chapter: “America cannot endure permanently half 1776 and half 1789. The compromises, contradictions, hypocrisies, inequities, and evils have built up unaddressed. The grapes of wrath have ripened again, and the choice before America is plain. Either America goes forward best by going back first, or America is about to reap a future in which the worst will once again be the corruption of the best.”
Highly recommended!
March 25, 2023
“People who desire to evade responsibility get to the point where there appears to be tyranny in freedom, because of its responsibility, and freedom in tyranny, because there is no responsibility required, only dependency. The result grows into a fear of freedom that ends in a desire for freedom from freedom.”
“…for two thousand years, desires and passions were the chief menaces to freedom, and both the classical and the Jewish and Christian accounts advised people unashamedly how to deal with the desires and passions in order to sustain freedom.
The combined influence of the Enlightenment and modernity has changed this sitation and tipped the scale toward the paradox in two ways. According to the sexual revolution and other secular philosophies of freedom, desires and passions are no longer the problem but the goal. Freedom, as they see it, is the freedom to pursue desires and passions wherever they lead. But this cultural revolution has come with a steep but hidden price. In the post-Christian age the bonds once provided by faith and ethics must now come from elsewhere, and the search is on for social control by whatever means.”
“Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women; when it dies there, no constitution, no law, no court can save it; no constitution, no law, no court can even do much to help it.”—Judge Learned Hand
“…where Sinai (and Jesus of Nazareth and his followers down through Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.) stand for love that drives out hate, just as light drives out darkness, the left perpetuates and exploits the hate and the darkness as its instruments of power.”
“Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Hate multiplies hate, violence multiplies violence, and toughness multiplies toughness.”—Martin Luther King Jr.
“To be free you have to let go of hate. ... You cannot create a free society on the basis of hate. Resentment, rage, humiliation, a sense of injustice, the desire to restore honor by inflicting injury on your former persecutors—these are conditions of a profound lack of freedom. You must live with the past . .. but not in the past. Those who are held captive by anger against their former persecutors are captive still. Those who let their enemies define who they are have not yet achieved liberty.”—Rabbi Sacks
“…for two thousand years, desires and passions were the chief menaces to freedom, and both the classical and the Jewish and Christian accounts advised people unashamedly how to deal with the desires and passions in order to sustain freedom.
The combined influence of the Enlightenment and modernity has changed this sitation and tipped the scale toward the paradox in two ways. According to the sexual revolution and other secular philosophies of freedom, desires and passions are no longer the problem but the goal. Freedom, as they see it, is the freedom to pursue desires and passions wherever they lead. But this cultural revolution has come with a steep but hidden price. In the post-Christian age the bonds once provided by faith and ethics must now come from elsewhere, and the search is on for social control by whatever means.”
“Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women; when it dies there, no constitution, no law, no court can save it; no constitution, no law, no court can even do much to help it.”—Judge Learned Hand
“…where Sinai (and Jesus of Nazareth and his followers down through Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.) stand for love that drives out hate, just as light drives out darkness, the left perpetuates and exploits the hate and the darkness as its instruments of power.”
“Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Hate multiplies hate, violence multiplies violence, and toughness multiplies toughness.”—Martin Luther King Jr.
“To be free you have to let go of hate. ... You cannot create a free society on the basis of hate. Resentment, rage, humiliation, a sense of injustice, the desire to restore honor by inflicting injury on your former persecutors—these are conditions of a profound lack of freedom. You must live with the past . .. but not in the past. Those who are held captive by anger against their former persecutors are captive still. Those who let their enemies define who they are have not yet achieved liberty.”—Rabbi Sacks
January 13, 2024
At points truly excellent, especially in its trenchant criticism of leftist progressivism, and the connections made between that ideology and the French revolution of 1789 (in contrast to the 'Sinai' revolution and its distant offspring, the American revolution of 1776).
The text could definitely have been condensed at points. The introduction ran far too long - just make it another chapter at that point. An introduction should just whet the appetite and convince the reader he wants to read the book, not wax eloquent about all the major themes that will be repeated later.
The focus on the ideology and dangers of the left and the lack of much of any commentary on the Nietzschean new right left me feeling that it lacked a bit of balance in this regard.
And as other reviewers have picked up on, Guinness seemed less distinctly Christian in his thinking and writing in this book than I have known him to be elsewhere. No doubt related to his appreciation for Rabbi Jonathan Sacks, and to a certain degree I have no problem with it, yet at times it seemed overly fawning towards Judaism while refraining from being too plainly Christian. I am not making too much of this, however, because I think Guinness' track record as a Christian apologist speaks for itself.
All in all, a worthwhile read that has all the strengths of Guinness' writing: copious quotes from leading thinkers throughout time, a free-flowing facility with political and cultural history, and clear-eyed insights into the realities facing the American republic. Like him, I am an appreciative outside observer, and I only hope America will heed voices like Guinness' and avert the collapse and calamity we can all see is coming down the way of this current trajectory.
The text could definitely have been condensed at points. The introduction ran far too long - just make it another chapter at that point. An introduction should just whet the appetite and convince the reader he wants to read the book, not wax eloquent about all the major themes that will be repeated later.
The focus on the ideology and dangers of the left and the lack of much of any commentary on the Nietzschean new right left me feeling that it lacked a bit of balance in this regard.
And as other reviewers have picked up on, Guinness seemed less distinctly Christian in his thinking and writing in this book than I have known him to be elsewhere. No doubt related to his appreciation for Rabbi Jonathan Sacks, and to a certain degree I have no problem with it, yet at times it seemed overly fawning towards Judaism while refraining from being too plainly Christian. I am not making too much of this, however, because I think Guinness' track record as a Christian apologist speaks for itself.
All in all, a worthwhile read that has all the strengths of Guinness' writing: copious quotes from leading thinkers throughout time, a free-flowing facility with political and cultural history, and clear-eyed insights into the realities facing the American republic. Like him, I am an appreciative outside observer, and I only hope America will heed voices like Guinness' and avert the collapse and calamity we can all see is coming down the way of this current trajectory.
January 2, 2025
It was pretty interesting. I didn't read it all. A bit long. I like how he gets into the four major revolutions of the modern world and what sets them apart. The connection to Judeo-Christian values is reminiscent of "The Right Side of History."
I think I'm probably just a bit tired of logical arguments. While he is entirely right in my opinion that the Sinai revolution is the president for true freedom, and that leads us to the assertion that no wisdom can be had outside of God, I think sometimes we can get long-winded about the bottom line.
"Fear God and keep his commands." This is the biblical mandate at the conclusion of the Ecclesiastical wisdom literature. Does this beat that? Can you add much to that?
So for the bits that are historical, I appreciate the history lesson and reminding the reader that America must have its foundation on God's laws.
However, nothing more really needs to be said in my opinion. Is there any complex strategy for enacting the simple command to fear God? I don't think so.
We preach a simple gospel after all.
Now, you might appreciate that the author makes Rabbi Jonathan Sacks a lot more accessible. I've heard he has a lot of great exposition on the Tanak and what Biblical law has to say for the modern age. We should all meditate on God's laws... I'll stop there.
I think I'm probably just a bit tired of logical arguments. While he is entirely right in my opinion that the Sinai revolution is the president for true freedom, and that leads us to the assertion that no wisdom can be had outside of God, I think sometimes we can get long-winded about the bottom line.
"Fear God and keep his commands." This is the biblical mandate at the conclusion of the Ecclesiastical wisdom literature. Does this beat that? Can you add much to that?
So for the bits that are historical, I appreciate the history lesson and reminding the reader that America must have its foundation on God's laws.
However, nothing more really needs to be said in my opinion. Is there any complex strategy for enacting the simple command to fear God? I don't think so.
We preach a simple gospel after all.
Now, you might appreciate that the author makes Rabbi Jonathan Sacks a lot more accessible. I've heard he has a lot of great exposition on the Tanak and what Biblical law has to say for the modern age. We should all meditate on God's laws... I'll stop there.
December 31, 2022
I heard Os Guinness speak at least 40 years ago in Tasmania at a Christian Conference and found him quite difficult to understand. I ventured into this book with trepidation. It was an interesting read, if at times hard going. The constant references and tributes to Rabbi Lord sacks were a little disturbing at times. I support the Jewish people and do recognise their enduring contribution to our culture and the Christian faith. I was little mystified by the reverence when someone like Lord Sacks has not recognised Jesus Christ as the Messiah. I know many voices have wisdom but as a Christian, Christ is central as the Way, the Truth and the Life.
Also the constant reference to the need to repent of the sins of our fathers and forbears. Jesus came to die for our sins and today there is no such thing as national guilt and repentance. Repentance is an individual process. I find it little confusing when great thinkers like Guinness encourage the idea of national guilt. But is was an enlightening read with much to recommend it.
Also the constant reference to the need to repent of the sins of our fathers and forbears. Jesus came to die for our sins and today there is no such thing as national guilt and repentance. Repentance is an individual process. I find it little confusing when great thinkers like Guinness encourage the idea of national guilt. But is was an enlightening read with much to recommend it.
March 20, 2022
It’s difficult to find fault with this book. Early revelations such as:
✨God doesn't invade the human heart. He lives where we let him.✨
debunks Calvinism and suggests Os ain't no lightweight.
Soon Guinness eloquently spells America’s decline with such pronouncements as:
✨Science cannot replace faith because it speaks to the how and not the why.✨
He exposes America's current cultural insanity explaining:
✨We now teach the young of their victimhood which teaches them to use the injuries of their past to serve the interests of their future and thus to ignore the responsibilities of the present.✨
All-in-all this is a five star book, and should be required readin' for our president and congress, but Os makes a four star mistake. He uses 250 pages to "summarize" 125 pages of wisdom, but then not every author is a John R. Erickson. And I'm sure Os is willing to admit as much.
Doc Holidavid
✨God doesn't invade the human heart. He lives where we let him.✨
debunks Calvinism and suggests Os ain't no lightweight.
Soon Guinness eloquently spells America’s decline with such pronouncements as:
✨Science cannot replace faith because it speaks to the how and not the why.✨
He exposes America's current cultural insanity explaining:
✨We now teach the young of their victimhood which teaches them to use the injuries of their past to serve the interests of their future and thus to ignore the responsibilities of the present.✨
All-in-all this is a five star book, and should be required readin' for our president and congress, but Os makes a four star mistake. He uses 250 pages to "summarize" 125 pages of wisdom, but then not every author is a John R. Erickson. And I'm sure Os is willing to admit as much.
Doc Holidavid
January 1, 2023
A fascinating and at times disturbing book. Guinness is putting forward a challenge to America, and indeed the West, to recover it origins in the 1776 revolution and not be snared by the philosophy of 1789 and the French experiment. More than that he posits Sinai as the ultimate Magna Carta of humanity and the only true guide to human freedom and flourishing. Written as much as a tribute to his friend Lord Rabbi Sachs, whose exposition of the true significance of the Exodus has influenced Guinness significantly, as a call to a return to Sinai. Chapter 7 is horrifying as he exposes our future under the Progressive Left and the Postmoderns but the picture of restoration under the Sinai covenant, gives hope for the future. Beautifully written of course and a book for today as we face extreme challenges not just to religious freedoms but to freedom generally.
May 24, 2022
Guinness once again writes to call out Americans, and Westerners, to look for the foundation of freedom and liberty in a new place. He does this by pointedly reminding readers that the U.S. was founded upon the principles of Mount Sinai, the Ten Commandments. While a compelling read, and a thoughtful argument, he persists to use the comparison of the American Revolution and French Revolution throughout the book at the end of each chapter. However, the entirety of the chapter seems to deal little with those components. Thus, the incessant call to look at the two seem superfluous in light of the exposition of the chapter. Guinness does provide a clear warning and clearly articulates the need that the West has for turning to a Judeo-Christian worldview.
November 6, 2025
Contrast between 1776 and 1789, with applications each chapter to today. Read as I was teaching the French Revolution. I've heard Guinness talk before, but this was the first time I had read him. His book is well researched and pulls from so many great voices of truth from the past (Haval, Solzhenitsyn, Burke, Lewis, Chesterton, Orwell, Toqueville, Wilberforce, Bonhoeffer, Doestoevsky, King Jr., etc.), and especially unpacks the thoughts of Rabbi Sacks (a new one for me!). Unfortunately, in his application, his valid critiques of the secular left lose their impact because of the blind eye toward the same thinking on the right. As a historian, I'm also wary of equating the covenant of Sinai with the revolution of 1776.
August 8, 2022
I really enjoy Os Guinness’s insights, particularly with respect to American history and current events. In a previous book he contrasted the bloody French Revolution with the American Revolution and in this book he takes it further to show that the French Revolution was a failure with regard to not actually providing freedom, and the Revolutions after it (e.g. in Russia, and China) were bloody and didn’t bring freedom. He goes on to suggest that the way the Jewish nation was set up at Sinai is a type of revolution that America modeled successfully and calls Americans to not throw it away and switch to the French style of revolution. Interesting insights indeed.
April 10, 2024
I wanted this to be better than it was. There is a biblical basis for America’s Revolution and for the foundation of freedom, but by limiting his Biblical lens to Sinai, I don’t think Guinness was successful in arguing it. While I agree with him overall and he said many good and true and helpful things, the weight of his arguments fell on points that were theologically inaccurate. This made his arguments weak. If he had broadened the scope of his biblical analysis on freedom, broadened his scholarship sources beyond Jewish Rabbi’s, and had a correct view of free will and the character of God, this would have been a better book.
January 23, 2025
A profound call to revitalise forgotten ideas about society, genuine freedom and, ultimately, life and love. An indictment of the useful idiots of cultural Marxism and justice warrior insanity and their destruction of the West. Sadly, I think you can tell him he’s dreaming.
“America cannot endure permanently half 1776 and half 1789. The compromises, contradictions, hypocrisies, inequities, and evils have built up unaddressed. The grapes of wrath have ripened again, and the choice before America is plain. Either America goes forward best by going back first, or America is about to reap a future in which the worst will once again be the corruption of the best”
“America cannot endure permanently half 1776 and half 1789. The compromises, contradictions, hypocrisies, inequities, and evils have built up unaddressed. The grapes of wrath have ripened again, and the choice before America is plain. Either America goes forward best by going back first, or America is about to reap a future in which the worst will once again be the corruption of the best”
June 28, 2022
Os Guinness is an outstanding speaker and author. I have greatly appreciated his books over the years, yet this one did not resonate with me. The main message and content were excellent, but the delivery was tedious. After completing the first half of the book, it felt like I had read the same two pages over and over. Thankfully the book ended on a much better note. As a political commentary aimed at the US, Guinness provides a warning for the country. What a normal person was supposed to do with that warning was unfortunately unclear.
May 2, 2025
A very philosophical book comparing the foundations and principles of the revolutions of 1776 (American) and 1789 (French), while drawing true meaning from the Exodus story, often quoting from Rabbi Sacks. I found it a bit deep and dense for me, but his discussion of repentance and forgiveness in the last chapter made the book all the more worthwhile. There is hope for our future through the cross, not vengeance.
March 18, 2024
I can't recommend this highly enough. Excellent commentary on liberty and freedom in relation to the Exodus from Egypt, thr French Revolution and the American Revolution. Full of quotes from Rabbi Jonathan Sacks; he is incredibly wise and has a unique ability to take complicated concepts and distill them into simple ideas. I read this with my book study and it was excellent for discussion.
July 19, 2022
Good. Showing how religious beliefs rooted in the Sinai covenant have implications for how we understand the 1776 American revolution as opposed to the 1789 French revolution. Theology proper was a little off at certain points, but solid overall.
August 3, 2023
Every freedom-loving American needs to read this book. Erudite and measured in tone, The Magna Carta of Humanity does not pull punches and speaks truths that today, sadly, are considered controversial by many.
December 21, 2021
Using Sinai, the Magna Carta and Declaration of Independence he explains through seven principles how we may recover freedoms our forefathers fought for.
August 18, 2022
Truly remarkable. I’m cannot recommend enough.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 38 reviews