coVenants prior to Christ were marked

by antidpation and administered by

foreshadows of the Savior, while the
jjlJ6Dment or substance came in peISOn
and redemptive work of Christ, who
established the New Covenant today in
the imemational church of Christ. (ro BE
CONI1NUED)
Further Investigation
For further swdies regarding God or
covenant theology on tape - especially
"The Distinctives of the Reformed Faith"
-- write foracatalog from Covenant Tape
Minisny,24198Ash Court, Auburn, CA
95603.
To receive Dr. Bahnsen's free monthly
newsletter, Penpoint, write to Southern
California Center for Christian Studies,
P. O. Box 18021, Irvine, CA 92713.
Byron Snapp
Book Review
During the recent upheaval within
theformerSovietUnionmanywondered
if Russia, their largest state, would take
actionagainstthemuchsmaUerdi.s9mting
states. How would world opinion have
reactedifthe Russianmilitary hadmoved
into Georgia or the Uktaine and opened .
fire on the dissidents? This possibility
caused me to thinkaboutan event on our
own. soil a little over a centUlyago.
The War Between the States gives us
thisscenario. TheSouthernstatesthought
they had every right to secede from the
Union and establish their own country
''the ConfederateStatesofAmerica." They
put their beliefs into actions. The Union
took the position that individual states
could notseCede fromthe Union Putting
their beliefs imo action, they invaded the
South. Theyviewedtheconflictasadvil
war. The South saw it as one nation
invading another nation without any
warrant for so doing.
The South Was Right by James R
Kennedy and Walter D. Kenny (land
and Land, P.O. Box 1921 Baton Rouge,
La. 70821 Ph. (504)344-1059 $19.95 +
$2.00 shipping and handling 210 pp.,
including addendum and index hb.)
providesuswith excellemmaterial tonot
only more correctly interpret our own
history, but to also have a better
understanding of current events both
here and abroad.
The authors show the reader that
much of the history taught regarding the
War BetWeen the States is a myth. They
believeithasbeenwrittenfromaNorthem.
perspective. Did the South fight the War
to preserve slavery? The authors point
out that "75% to 90% of the Coufederate
soldiers and sailors were NOT slave
owners"Cp.16). Was the SoUthbetter off
as a result of losing the War? Many
students are taught that this is true. Yet
we must look at the facts: " ... one year
after the War the state of Mississippi
allotted one fifth of it's revenues for the
purchase of artificial anns and legs .. .it
wasnotuntil1951 thatthe taxable assets
of the state of Georgia surpassed the
value of 1860"(p.18).
Examining the 1980 census the
authors report that 'The U.S. Census
Bureau found thatthepovertyrateforthe
South was 20% higher than the nation as
a whole. All the states with the highest
poverty levelswerein the South, whereas,
aU of the states with the lowest poverty
rates were in the North"(p. 20). The
authors believe this poverty is traceable
totheimpoverisbmentofthesouthduring
and after the War.
Kennedyand Kennycontend that the
North wasinvolvedinslaveryandheavily
involved in the slave rrade. They point
outthattheNorthernersenslavedIndians
andprolitablyshippedthemtoCaribbean
islands. "The Yankee slave commerce
was to continue legally until 1808 and
illegally until the War for Southern
Independence" (p.35). You may well be
surprised to learn of the first state that
6 THE COUNSEL of ChaIcedon November, 1992
attempted to prohibit the importation of
slaves as well as how slaves were freed in
the North
Northern acrocities upon the South
during the War are recoumed. These
atrodties continued in a different way
following the War. The North set the
tenns by which Southernstates could be
readmitted to the Union. The authors
remind us that this was the "same Union
from which the North had previously
said we could not withdraw!" (p.80).
Local governmental power began to be
replaced increasingly by a powerful
central government. We continue to see
this growth of power and its results
throughout society today.
The authors contend that the South
was right in its stand and it's fight. But
neither the authors nor this reviewer
support Southew slavery. The warwas
not fought over slavery. It was fought
over the issue of sovereignty. Does such
sovereignty rest in individual states by
the consent of the governed, or does it
rest in a powerful central government?
The North's victory paved the way for a
strong central gOvernment. .
Ahigblightofthisveryreadablebook
is the amount of research that is made
available to the reader. Although many
quotations are given, hviU ouIymention
a quote of Abraham UncoIn in the 1847
Congressional Record. "Any people
whatever have a right to abolish the
existinggovemment and form anew one
that suits them better" (p.145).
Addendum sections include the
Constitution of the Confederate States of
America and it's comparison with the
U.S. SenateandDavis' inaugural address
as President of the Confederate State of
America.
TheauthorstracetheSouth'sposition
on secession to John Milton and John
Locke. 1 believe this is a drawback to the
book. Actually the understanding of
civil govemmE;ll.t and the governedmust
be traced back to the triune God. While
a development of this thought is beyond
the scope of this review, somespacemust
be given to this concept.
Within the Trinity we have the
solution of the problem regarding the
importance of the one and the many.
God is one God, yet He exists in three
persons. Narurnllywe cannot say which
member of the God head is most
important. AU members are equal. Yet
each member of the Godhead has an
important role in salvation. The Father
elects a people to be saved. The eternal
Son took on human i1esh and lived and
died to redeem the elect. The Holy Spirit
opens the sinners hean to the Gospel
andappliessalvationtoourlife. Applying
this to dvil government one cannot say
that the cenlml government is most
important or that local government is
most important. U.s. Civil government,
as a result of Christian iniluence, is a
covenantalgovernmeru. Themanystates
representing the dtizens within them,
freely entered into a covenantal
relationship with a central government
giving, by means of the Constirution,
certain powers to the central government
When those powers were abused the
states understood that having freely
entered into the relationship they could
withdraw from it as a result ofthe central
government encroaching on the powers
of the state, thus breaking the covenantal
relationship. Bytheirrefusaltoallowthis
action to occur unhindered the North
was insisting that the Union, (the One) is
all important. Thus a failure to properly
understand the relationship between the
one and the many has resulted in an
acquiescenceto theruledofaevergrowing
central govemment.
In proposing a remedy the authors
rightly point out the imponance of
becoming involved in local government.
I believe they are right in stating that too
much emphasis is placed on the national
level to the neglect of the local political
contests.
However their remedy is too
man-<:entered. Regarding the South's
economic development they write, "We
must look to ourselves for our economic
salvation: (p.137) I do not believe we
can trace all of our economic woes to the
War Between the States. We in the South
as well as those in the North are in many
instances covenant breakers with God.
For example we have abortion clinics.
Pornography exists in the South.
Deuteronomy 28 clearly teaches that a
nation cannot continually sin against
God without sever economic
consequences.
The book's drawbacks do not hinder
it from being a valuable resource for the
discerning reading. I profited much
from the authors' research and believe
you will also.n
Royer Schultz
Book Review
JohnEidsmoe, Columbus and Cortez:
Conquerors!orChrist(GreenForest,AR:
New Leaf Press, 1992) $9.95. 304 pp.
Index. Endnotes.
Columbus and Cortez is an excellent
andtimelyworkforthe5OOthanniversary
of Columbus' voyage. Heavy attacks on
Columbusandhislegacybythepolitically
correct have badly distorted the real
explorer. And as Eidsmoe shows, such
attacks are actually thinly veiled
challenges to the Westem tradition and,
in particular, to Christianity.
Columbus and Cortez will help set
the record straight Eidsmoe discusses
the motivations of European explorers
and conquerors, drawing on passages in
theirjournalsthathistorianseitherignore
or radically reinterpret. He is also candid
about the problems and inconsistencies
of the Spanish, showing that they were
sinners and had varied motivation, such
as wealth, fame, and power. But he
correctly insists that their Christian
convictions must also be taken seriously.
The book begins with excellent
background chapters on the Norseman
and Islam. Eidsmoe describes the faith of
new convert Leif Ericsson who,
commissioned by the king of Norway to
evangelize Greenland, stumbled unto
America. The struggle between
Christianity and paganism within the
Viking community is fascinating, as is
the history of the church in Greenland.
Find out what Greenlanders used in
place of wine in communion and the
unique way Mrs. Eric the Red tried to
conven her husband.
The main challenge to Christianity at
the time of Columbus' birth was Islam,
an aggressive, militaristic religion pledged
to world domination. In 1492 Spain
scored a decisive victory of
Mohammadanism, taking the Moorish
stronghold at Granada, and became the
bastion of ctUSading Christianity.
Columbus' voyage was inspired by
this crusading spirit. Sailing west in
1492, he hoped to outllank Muslims in
the east. He earmarked gold discovered
on the voyage for recapturingJerusalem.
A devout Christian, Columbus was
concerned about the spirirual condition
of "Indians" In the Caribbean and
encouraged their evangelization.
MostinterestingisthewayColumbuS
saw his work fitting into God's plan. He
believed that the Lord had shown him
the way to America. He made much of
hisname, Christopher(mearting"Christ-
bearer"),andbelievedhisvoyagesfulfilled
the prophecy of Isaiah (e.g., Is. 49:6).
Eidsmoe does anexcellent job of showing
Columbusasasincereandcourageous--
iftanenandsomewhat driven-Medieval
Christian.
Cortez was the same type of man.
Despite his reputation as a blood-thirsty
conquistador, Conez evangelized and
sought friendly relations with the tribes
he encountered. His conquest was
successful largely because he made
alliances with oppressed Indians who
CONrlNUEDON PAGE 14
November, 1992 THE COUNSEL of Chalcedon 7