Many Christians fail to fully grasp the fact that the essential “light” God created on the first day of Genesis is fundamentally different from the “sun” in the firmament He created on the fourth day. Observing recent political developments, I am even more acutely aware of how many people fail to distinguish between this fundamental light of truth and the objects upon which that light falls in a limited way. Looking at the biblical account of creation, we see that on the first day, God separated light from darkness; on the second day, He created the heavens by making a space in the midst of the waters; and on the third day, after separating the land from the sea, He caused green plants to sprout from the earth. Herein lies a truly astonishing spiritual truth: even before the sun and moon—the massive luminaries that govern day and night—were created on the fourth day, plants were already growing on the third day through God’s divine life force alone.
Before I fully grasped, on a spiritual level, God’s work of creation—in which He placed the sun and moon, which govern day and night, within the round vault of the sky and created the stars above it—I, too, remained stuck in the perspective of a theistic evolutionist who dichotomously separated faith from the science of the world and believed that creation and evolution could be reconciled. This spiritual discernment—distinguishing between essence and phenomenon—applies not only to the realm of faith but also to opening our eyes to the social and national systems in which we live.
Back when I was just an ordinary office worker, I enjoyed a relatively stable monthly income and was protected within the secure confines of my company. As a result, I did not deeply appreciate the immense influence government policies have on individual lives, nor did I take much interest in political issues. At most, I would share a lunch with colleagues and engage in superficial small talk about the day’s morning news gossip. However, the South Korea I witnessed during the COVID-19 pandemic—while struggling to make ends meet as a delivery driver on the front lines—opened up a completely new perspective on the world for me. While the government was heavily promoting its success in pandemic control, elevating the status of relevant administrative agencies, and pouring in massive budgets, countless small business owners were forced to lose the livelihoods they had built over a lifetime due to mandatory social distancing and one-size-fits-all capacity restrictions, pushing them to the brink of closure and bankruptcy. Although vaccination was strongly recommended with an emphasis on medical safety, a steady stream of victims emerged who suffered from side effects and the pain of sudden loss without any clear proof of causality. Furthermore, as I watched the government halt world-class nuclear power plant development under the guise of eco-friendly energy policies, cover mountains and fields with solar panels, and devastate lush forests, I began to harbor deep doubts that the national system had strayed significantly from its fundamental purpose.
In particular, my doubts turned into certainty as I witnessed the contradictory reality that the more the progressive camp—which had always placed the rights and interests of ordinary citizens and workers at the forefront—pushed its policies, the more the lives of those very people became impoverished and the gap between social classes widened. Most decisively, I came to realize the gravity of national policy all too painfully as I witnessed how the nature of money and economic mechanisms created massive bubbles in the real estate, stock, and cryptocurrency markets by lowering interest rates to historic lows and indiscriminately flooding the market with massive disaster relief funds. Looking back, the income-led growth policy—which defied the natural order of the market—was based on the anti-market delusion that injecting funds artificially would create a virtuous economic cycle. It denied the inherent human nature to work hard and reap the rewards, and was underpinned by an ideological calculation aimed at allowing a small minority of those in power to control the social system. Moreover, behind the curtain of this massive system, those forces quietly safeguarded their vested interests and engaged in corruption, while simultaneously mobilizing certain biased media outlets and influential broadcasting platforms to divert public attention elsewhere and subtly mislead public opinion.
South Korea’s political landscape was at times a series of events more dramatic and surreal than even a well-made political drama. There was the shocking incident in which a former national leader, who was undergoing rigorous judicial proceedings, suddenly passed away; and the nation also experienced a tragedy in its constitutional history when a president from a conservative administration was impeached and subsequently detained, as fabricated allegations and incitement by media outlets aligned with a specific political camp combined with the mob mentality in the public square. The recent declaration of a state of emergency by the incumbent president was also like a suspenseful drama. Much like the narrative framework of popular cultural content—such as the film *Spring in Seoul*, which reinterprets history from a specific perspective—the footage broadcast by the media throughout the night was enough to evoke images of past dictatorships mobilizing the military to suppress parliamentary power and brutally control the press.
However, when we revisit the essence of the situation and the objective circumstances as outlined by the president in his address, the reality was quite different. The troops dispatched to the National Assembly after the declaration of martial law did not resort to physical violence, were not armed, and did not obstruct lawmakers from entering the building. Once the resolution to lift martial law—passed in accordance with constitutional procedures—was adopted, they withdrew peacefully within just an hour or two, and the situation concluded as nothing more than a commotion. While the media sensationalized and broadcast the outwardly confrontational scenes at the National Assembly, numbing the public’s rational judgment, it later came to light that, on another front, legitimate actions by state authorities were quietly underway to inspect the security status of the computer systems at the core agency responsible for national election administration and to investigate the allegations. After the situation stabilized, the President personally addressed the nation in a speech, clearly explaining the constitutional justification and background for declaring martial law. He outlined the specific circumstances necessary to safeguard the liberal democratic system from the abuses of the parliamentary majority party and appealed to the public for cooperation with a resolute demeanor—a moment that was deeply impressive.
The fundamental reason behind this unprecedented decision was to uncover the truth behind the National Election Commission’s opaque computer system operations and the long-standing allegations of election fraud surrounding them. It was explained that this was intended to break through a judicial blind spot—where, even when signs of persistent cyberattacks by external hacking groups were detected and a joint investigation at the national security level was sought, the National Election Commission refused on the grounds that it was an independent constitutional body, and where key judicial officials held concurrent positions on the Commission, making the execution of standard warrants or compulsory investigations virtually impossible. This also serves as proof that the accumulated efforts of former bureaucrats and conscientious politicians—who, during past general election campaigns, persistently raised allegations of computer errors and mismanagement in the election system and waged a lonely battle to uncover the legal truth—were by no means an illusion.
Nevertheless, the mainstream media—which should have reported the truth as it is—failed to fulfill its role. Even during the recent U.S. presidential election, major domestic broadcasters distorted public opinion until the very last moment by uncritically copying reports from left-leaning mainstream progressive media in the U.S. declaring Harris the likely winner, rather than conveying the vivid public sentiment or grassroots voices on the ground. This is all part of the same pattern: the past practice of politicizing the issue of treated water from a specific nuclear power plant—which led to the waste of massive national funds on a comprehensive inspection of seafood—and the use of inflammatory performances by some popular artists to maximize public fatigue; as well as the trend of challenging Christian values through irregular judicial rulings on LGBTQ+ issues. As a result, even though a million committed believers gathered in the public square to form a “breakwater” to block the Anti-Discrimination Act, the majority of the public still cannot see the light of fundamental truth through the fog created by the media.
Setting aside the political disputes surrounding the electoral system, in a democratic nation where sovereignty resides with the people, all that is needed is to transparently compare and verify before the public the allegations of statistical discrepancies in the early voting rolls, the state of password management vulnerable to external hacking, and clear data proving that a specific candidate’s ballot markers did not compromise the system’s mechanical fairness. Furthermore, this issue could be resolved by disclosing measures to prevent data manipulation to ensure the system’s reliability, and by having those responsible for potentially misleading server migrations or record management confidently address the public’s doubts.
At the heart of past election manipulation controversies and civil unrest in some African and Central Asian countries—as well as the historic event in which the presidential election in Romania was invalidated due to illegal digital interference by external forces—lies a common suspicion of digital manipulation. It is a deeply saddening reality that highly advanced IT technology can be misused as a tool to threaten the fairness of elections, the very flower of democracy. Just as a sharp knife becomes a scalpel that saves lives in the hands of a doctor but a weapon in the hands of a robber, the purpose of technology changes completely depending on the moral conscience of those who control it. If adult content or illegal financial transactions are sins that corrode an individual’s soul and spirit, then acts that undermine the credibility of the electoral system—the very foundation of democracy—are the most deadly social evils capable of bringing down the entire fate of a community and a nation.
However, following the recent U.S. presidential election, in which leadership committed to upholding traditional values succeeded in regaining power, a comprehensive investigation is now anticipated into the various allegations surrounding the electoral system and the practices of Big Tech companies in controlling public opinion. The voices of vigilant, independent journalists on social media—unbound by the cartel of capital—are lifting the massive veil, and the declarations of conscience emerging from within the IT equipment industry shed a glimmer of dawn, as if the thick clouds that had been obscuring the light of truth are finally dispersing.
Today, as always, I wake up at 4:30 a.m. to gaze at the majestic sun rising outside my window. I revere God the Creator, who proclaimed the light of eternal truth on the first day even before creating the sun on the fourth day, and I earnestly pray that the light of truth—which cannot be obscured—may finally shine fully upon the land of the Republic of Korea, a free democracy trapped in the darkness of lies and incitement. Embracing the mission of a believer who trusts in the God of justice, I begin today’s day with vigour and alertness.
God, who said, “Let light shine out of darkness,” has shone in our hearts to recognize the glory of God in the face of Christ.’ (2 Corinthians 4:6)
Deliveryman's Blog 
Leave a comment