Conference on Arms for Defense, Lausanne (1)

Rev. Hyung Jin Moon

“Natural Rights from a Philosophical & Biblical Perspective”

European Sovereign Citizens Alliance

Conference on “Arms for Defense”, Lausanne, Jan 20, 2018

Hyung Jin Moon was born in New York State, USA, and has a Bachelor of Liberal Arts degree and a Master of Theology degree from Harvard University. Pastor Hyung Jin Moon founded World Peace and Unification Sanctuary, known as Sanctuary Church, and conducts his ministry through Sunday services and daily Kings Reports, giving a commentary on current affairs from a religious perspective.

He has a brown belt in Brazilian Jiu-jitsu, teaches martial arts and self- defense, and gives peace militia training.

He is the heir and successor of Reverend Sun Myung Moon of Korea, and 2nd King of Cheon IL Guk. He published the Constitution of the United States of Cheon IL Guk in 2015. He lives in Pennsylvania with his wife and five children.

At the conference, he speaks on "Natural Rights from a Philosophical and Biblical Perspective."

Part 1

Good morning everyone. So beautiful to be here on this stunning lake and of course this historical site! Today I would like to speak about natural rights from both philosophical and biblical perspectives.

When we look at natural rights or our rights as sovereign citizens, our rights in my view cannot be grounded in anything but theistic Judeo-Christian values. If our rights are determined by groups or coalitions, boards or bureaucracy, they are not really rights. They are only privileges that are given to a lesser population.

Our rights have to be rooted in something that’s transcendental, that’s beyond any human institution, and /or board, government, etc… They must be rooted in God. For our rights to be human they must be intrinsic to the nature of human being, that is to say, they must be held as soon as that person is conceived, and they must be inextricable- not being able to be separated –from that person with any outside power.

That is why some of the greatest philosophers have always evoked not only the idea but the truth about God, in order to discuss human rights and discuss universal values. In the modern day it’s very common to see different philosophies such as relativism, moral relativism, philosophical relativism, being heavily pushed in universities and institutions of higher learning.

Unfortunately with this kind of doctrine comes the weakness of human beings in being able to decide what is right, what is morally objectively true, and what is not. Now of course Europe has seen the repercussions of such a philosophical position in the person of Hitler who believed he could create his own determination of good and evil. What that does to history is recorded in textbooks around the world.

My journey is very interesting because we grew up in New York, a very liberal state in the United States, but my father and our family have always been into firearms. As you may know one of the first businesses that my father Rev Sun Myung Moon created was a firearms business in South Korea. After he fled from North Korea being there in prison for preaching the Gospel, he went to South Korea, where he was persecuted as well, but eventually he was able to work with the South Korean government to develop the arms industry, eventually producing such weapon as the Vulcan cannon for the Korean military.

So, our father pioneered this area, but on the ecclesiastical or the church side we did not see it as vividly as people who were with him in the early days. That’s why we now reside in Pennsylvania with the True Mother of our tradition who was also part of that original business, and who was awarded the prize of being the best seller in the early rifles business.

You may also know that one of Rev. Moon’s sons, Mr. Kook Jin Moon is also one of the top firearm inventors and manufacturers in the United States running companies such as Kahr Arms, Tommy gun and Thompson magnum research etc… So this has been quite a big part of our family’s past stemming all the way from East Asia. It has always been my father’s desire to have all peoples experience sovereignty, experience authority in their lives, and be able to freely seek God whether or not in a free society, but obviously his prayer and his compelling was always to seek God, for our rights and our human value are determined in our relationship with Him.

There is no honest discussion about natural rights and human rights without the idea of a personal God. If you know and are familiar with some of the works of preeminent scholars like Dr. William Craig, Alvin Plantinga, etc… - who have really solidified and strengthened the Christian apologetic position, debating some of the top atheist minds in the world including Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris and alike - you will see their positions outlined very clearly in the idea that it is most likely that we are in a universe that is created by a designer.

When we look for example at the great fine-tuning of the universe, it is so precisely done that any modification of any of the constants and conditions including the mass of the electron, proton, with the weak force of the gravitational pull, etc…will result in the complete collapse of the universe.

These arguments are developed in these intellectuals’ works, so I will not delve into them deeply here, but it is clear that there is a great fine-tuning in the universe and that all these constants and conditions must balance and work together in order for it to function, less they collapse into what some prominent scientists called a reverse implosion or a complete annihilation of life.

We also need to look at the question of whether there is real good or evil in the world, for example if the act of rape is evil or if it is simply a cultural taboo. Then we have to get into the whole discussion of moral objective truth, and of course of a moral objective truth giver, or a standard upon which we can decipher whether something is good or something is evil.

Intrinsically we all know from our conscience that there is really evil in the world. No one can stand and see millions of children being massacred and say,”Oh that’s just taboo!” Nor can anyone stand to see women assaulted in the European crisis and say, “Oh that’s just cultural taboo! It’s not evil or wicked!” Instinctually, as human persons, we know that there is a good and there is an evil. This position of course is developed and worked out through the moral objective truth arguments.

These are just brief summations of some of the most compelling arguments for the reasons for a God and a personal. When we look at even the most modern science which points to the creation of the universe, referred to as the big bang, we see that the nature of the universe in its inception, all matter and all time, began at a certain point where previously it did not exist. It is of course main stream scientific theory.

If there is a beginning to time, then it is most plausible that there is an agent or someone that has personality, that has an element of choice, that can chose to bring in the universe at our dimensions of time and space, from nothing to something. Many of these arguments are written in very large philosophical treaties and intellectual works, and I highly recommend the work of Dr. William Lane Craig, Mr. Plantinga for the ontological argument etc… very well worked out thorough arguments that we simply don’t have time to cover today.

Getting back to the topic of natural rights, I think from my perspective as a pastor, we have to go to the word of God. And I briefly create the summation of the plausibility of God’s existence because in the end without God we are simply animals. The process of evolution dating back according to theories, millions and millions of years, that we are floating on a large asteroid rock in outer space, with no particular meaning and no particular purpose.

These types of philosophies or positions lead to morally a hedonistic position but of course philosophically a nihilistic position which is the idea that there is no real purpose to life and our life is in the end meaningless. These of course are untenable positions from the Christian worldview, because our image and nature is made in the image of our Creator, so as a pastor I have to go into Scripture to delve into the idea of natural rights and human rights. So that’s what I’d like to do in a most focused way this morning.

In the Judeo-Christian worldview and framework, when we look at Scripture our natural rights begin in Genesis 1:26, where God says, “Let us make man[a] in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.”

He also says in Genesis 9:6 “Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed, for God made man in his own image.”

These are two essential Scriptures talking about the nature of man, and as unique creation a human being is different from an orangutan or a chimpanzee or an armadillo or whatever you have in Switzerland. It is a different ontological being that has a different connection to the Creator.

So the idea of human rights, at least scripturally, begins with human beings made in the image of God. This has to be contextualized and framed, because God is not just another person. He is the great creator of all things; He is the great architect of the universe, the mathematician of all constants and conditions that we find, that sustain the universe. He is the great mind and the great intellect behind all things.

So when we say, “Human beings are made in the image of God” that’s quite a remarkable statement; that’s quite a powerful statement! To say that there is nothing greater than God, and of course that among all living things human beings hold a special place in the universe, that we are not just another species, or that we are not just another form of animal! We hold a very special unique place in the universe which of course seems very large and vast.

In Jeremiah 31:33 God speaks to his people about the Covenant that He will make with the House of Israel in those days. He declares, “I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts and they shall be My people.”

Also in Romans 2:14: “When Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law themselves, even though they do not have the law.”

From a Judeo-Christian framework all human beings, all men and women, have what is commonly called a conscience, or what the Bible calls, “the law of God that is written on our hearts”, that we know intrinsically, we know the difference between good and evil, we know when people are being oppressed or exploited or if there are cases of assault or rape, we know these are bad things. Intrinsically human persons know that these things are wrong, and the Bible delves into that, shedding light on the fact that our Creator writes these things on our heart and our heart becomes a conscientious decision maker that allows us to discern between good and evil.

It’s very interesting, when we think about moving onto the topic of self-defense, that all these things are determining the value of the person, of the human being, that life itself is valuable and that it is purposeful, or that it is important or even worthwhile to defend. If our life had no value it would not be worthwhile to defend, especially at the risk of your own life.

The whole idea of defense comes from the notion that life and in particular human life is valuable, and human life must be protected, especially the life of those who cannot protect themselves and are vulnerable. I believe every human person has this intrinsic nature in their own heart that when they see other people being oppressed the natural tendency is to want to defend them and/or protect them. That comes from an idea and a perspective on the value of human life, which is of course the reason why any modern, post-modern, and /or nihilistic framework cannot lead to an adequate explanation of why a human person is valuable in the first place.

All nihilists and moral objectivists can get to, is an idea of universal preferred behavior but that has nothing to say whether something is good or evil, and of course that has nothing to say against the dictator principle. It is the theoretical concept and historical reality that if a dictator takes over a nation by force, annihilates or eradicates his opposition, and himself becomes the majority with his new power, then of course the morally preferential and morally universally preferred values, now change - if the dictator is able to win and destroy, in many cases committing genocide against his opposition.

So any philosophical exercise or exploration into the idea of human rights and natural rights cannot be separated from our divine nature which is given to us by God. Cannot be separated!

Then again with the universally preferred behavior we run into the same issue, with a new majority which is violent, a new majority which has no problem using force to take what they want, and “might equals right”, a new majority that will determine what will be morally preferential. Unfortunately this has been the course of history, time and time again in various cycles, in what from the Judeo-Christian framework we would call the fallen state or the fallen history.

In the Bible we can also see God speaking to His people, in Exodus 22:2. This is under the Mosaic Law: “If a thief is caught in the act of breaking into a house and is killed, the one who killed him is not guilty.” God says.

So if someone in the night is breaking into one’s house and that intruder is killed in self-defense, even a thief, it’s not a murderer or a rapist, but in this case a thief, then in terms of Judeo-Christian law the person who killed him would not be guilty.

Of course the next verse goes on to say that in the morning if the person could be visible then he should be given a warning, so that person would be held culpable if that person was killed and he had the ability to chase him away.

In Nehemiah 4:14 God also says,” “Do not be afraid of them. Remember the Lord, who is great and awesome, and fight for your brothers, your sons, your daughters, your wives, and your homes.”

This is another reference where God calls his people to stand up for those who are vulnerable, and stand up for their own kinsmen and people.

In Proverbs 31:8-9 God says, “Open your mouth for the mute, for the rights of all who are destitute. 9 Open your mouth, judge righteously, defend the rights of the poor and needy.

You will see this constant compelling from Christ to defend the poor and the needy. There are many biblical Scriptures, in the New Testament, referring to these things such as the Gospels where Christ says, “And whoever shall cause to stumble one of these of the little ones believing in Me, it is better for him that a heavy millstone should be hung around his neck, and he be sunk in the depth of the sea” and in the Beatitudes also, Christ says, “Blessed are the poor” or “ those who are humble in heart for they will inherit the Kingdom of God. “

Many references again to standing up to defend the rights of other people- a central Christian and biblical principle!

Also in Psalm 82: 3 we see in the Scripture God says, “Give justice to the weak and the fatherless; maintain the right of the afflicted and the destitute. Again calling upon believers and humanity to stand for those who are weak, for those who are afflicted and destitute! These are of course central Judeo-Christian values that are rooted in the human person as a creation made in the image of God, again not simply another species of animal, but a being that has special place and value in the universe.

In Luke 22, Jesus is talking to his disciples; this is a very famous episode in Scripture unfortunately not taught in most Christian churches, parishes, Catholic churches, etc… because it is such a clear reference to the fact that believers in Christ must not only defend themselves but must be armed as well.

In Luke 22:35 -37

“Jesus said unto them, When I sent you without purse, and scrip, and shoes, lacked ye anything? And they said nothing. 36 Then said he unto them, but now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. 37 For I say unto you, that this that is written must yet be accomplished in me, and he was reckoned among the transgressors: for the things concerning me have an end. 38 And they said, Lord, behold, here are two swords. And he said unto them, it is enough.”

Here we see Jesus - contrary to how many on the left try to position Jesus excluding these very clear statements about his believers having to defend themselves and/or Jesus entering the Temple a different religious establishment and flipping over tables and chasing out the money changers etc… very radical behaviors for those who want to package Christ as a peace activist or a Dalai Lama type figure!

We can see a much more radical view of Christ but of course one who ultimately is protecting and is destined to save human life.

In the episode with Luke 22, we see that Christ implores his disciples to sell their accoutrements, some of the most important things in the ancient world being garments, to protect oneself against the elements, but also even as a status symbol. Even in the modern days, as you know, garments are status symbols. And selling of one’s garments would be a very large thing to give up, especially given the fact that they did not have the modern accoutrements that we have and we enjoy today.

Christ says very clearly that they are supposed to sell these things for the possession of a sword, obviously not for offense. But in the times in which the disciples would be confronted and/or their lives would be in danger, to have a sword with a specific purpose and that sword ,as a firearm in the modern day, does not have any other purpose than a lethal purpose for the defense of human life. Obviously a sword in that period is not used for agriculture or for culinary purposes, but a sword is used for combat.

So the idea of having a sword to defend oneself is of course really very strong in the Old Testament, but very clear in the New Testament as well. I am very surprised when I meet pastors and /or Christians who have never heard Luke 22.

Part 2

Complete speech video