I'm A Fusionist

So, what in the world is a fusionist?  Fusionism is a political philosophy that combines traditionalism and libertarianism.  The architect of fusionism was Frank Meyer (1909-1972).  Meyer was a former communist who became a conservative and was one of the original editors of National Review.  He believed that traditionalists should be libertarians and libertarians should be traditionalists.  Meyer believed the two groups had a common enemy (liberalism/socialism) and also a common heritage.  The name "fusionism" was actually coined by Brent Bozell Jr. who was a traditionalist opponent of the political philosophy of Frank Meyer.  

In 1955 William F. Buckley brought together traditionalists, libertarians, and anticommunists at his new magazine National Review.  Buckley credited Frank Meyer for doing the best job of bringing these groups together with his fusionism.  Fusionism was embraced by Buckley as well as Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan.  Fusionism became known simply as conservatism.  

Frank Meyer saw the basic functions of government as national defense, maintaining order, and promoting justice.  He believed the national government should be limited, states rights should be recognized, and in decentralized power.  Of course freedom is of the utmost importance but we must have an ordered liberty.  Meyer pointed out that freedom needs virtue and virtue needs freedom.  Freedom by itself leads to anarchy and then tyranny will eventually arise.  Of course virtue that is coerced is not really virtue at all.  Fusionism places great value on freedom while still maintaining respect for religion and tradition.  Fusionism combines cultural conservatism with political and economic libertarianism.  

The government must be limited because those in government are affected by original sin just like those whom they must govern.  Government must be able to restrain evil but at the same time it must be restrained itself.  Too much power in the hands of sinful men is horrifying.  We must also distinguish between an authoritarian government and the authority of God.  The authority of government must be strongly limited but the authority of God should be fully embraced.  We must recognize the absolute authority of God.   Those who reject the authority of God end up losing truth, virtue, and even freedom.  

A fusionist is simply a constitutionalist.  The U.S. Constitution was a brilliant political document with its limits on government, containing a system of checks and balances and the separation of powers.  America needs to embrace the political philosophy known as fusionism.  

Transgenderism And Modern Society

The secular left is now pushing the acceptance of transgenderism after having succeeded with normalizing homosexuality.  President Barack Obama has issued an order for public schools to allow transgenders to use which ever restroom or locker room they choose.  Presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump have both expressed their support for transgenderism.  There has been great outrage over a North Carolina law mandating that men use the men's restroom and that women use the women's restroom.  ESPN, the liberal politically correct sports network even fired Curt Schilling for speaking out against transgenderism.  

Transgenderism has been framed as a civil rights issue.  And of course anyone who opposes civil rights is a bigot.  Transgenderism was once condemned but is now accepted.  And if you oppose it you will be condemned.  It seems that the whole world is upside down.  Woe to those who call evil good and good evil (Isaiah 5:20).  

Transgenderism is an abomination to God (Deuteronomy 22:5).  God created them male and female (Genesis 1:27).  The issue is who determines who you are.  Is your identity determined by you or by God?  The reality is that God creates you as a man or a woman and that is who you are.  Transgenderism is a sin, it is simply rebellion against God.  

What Proves The Authority Of Scripture?

The Bible is constantly under attack these days and its authority is often rejected.  Liberal scholars and sometimes evangelical scholars express doubt about the trustworthiness of Scripture.  So how can the authority of Scripture be proven?  

Biblical Christians believe that the Bible is the ultimate authority.  If something is an ultimate authority it cannot be proven by a lesser authority.  The Bible is the Word of God so it cannot be authenticated by the word of man.  There is no authority outside of Scripture that can prove its authority.  Ultimately the Bible is self authenticating, it proves itself as the Word of God.  Since Scripture is the ultimate authority it must be appealed to in order to prove its own authority.  

But what about evidences, proofs, and arguments?  All of these can be helpful and do provide support for the authority of Scripture but they cannot offer ultimate proof of its authority.  All of these would involve appealing to a lesser authority to validate Scripture which is the ultimate authority.  

We can see some weaknesses in evidentialism and classical apologetics.  They both end up appealing to a lesser authority to prove Scripture as the ultimate authority.  They start with the premise that the Bible cannot be used in apologetics.  So in order to defend the Bible we must set it aside and not use it.  This makes no sense whatsoever.  They believe we should start on a neutral ground with the unbeliever.  Quite frankly this is simply not Biblical apologetics.  

In reality there is no neutral ground to start on with the unbeliever.  Everyone operates with basic presuppositions or assumptions.  All people start with the assumption that Scripture is authoritative or it is not authoritative.  This then shapes how one views evidences and arguments that are presented.  The strength of presuppositional apologetics is that it actually uses the Bible to defend the Bible.

Ultimately the Holy Spirit must open a person's heart and mind to the truth of the Bible.  Scripture is self attesting or self authenticating, it depends on no outside authority.  But is claiming that the Bible proves itself as authoritative a circular argument?  To a certain degree all arguments for an ultimate authority involve circular reasoning.  For example one who holds that reason is the ultimate authority must use reason to prove it.  Only presupposing the authority of Scripture leads to truth and reality.