Two Pressing Questions

I have treated these issues previously, but someone brought them to my attention recently, so I wrote this summary of my answers.

First question: Why did Jesus have to die?

It is a part of a mystery, as Paul says several times (eg. 1 Tim. 3:16 and Eph. 3:1-11). Even now, few people fully understand what is involved in salvation. (See “It’s Not All About You”) When God created humans, He gave them a special place in creation. They were to be His “imagers” – representatives – on the earth. They refused to follow the rules and were kicked out of the perfect place God made for them and forced to fend for themselves. The condition they found themselves in was called death both literally and metaphorically. Their bodies began to literally die, and they were dead to God metaphorically as far as a relationship was concerned.

 He still loved His creation, so God made a long-term plan to bring them back into relationship. Ultimately, someone had to pay for Adam’s rebellion. Since everyone born after Adam bore Adam’s sin nature and thus deserved the penalty, God had to arrange for someone not in Adam’s line to pay the redemption price – the buy-back that earned the right to be in relationship with God again. The only way that would work is for a human without sin to take the penalty for the sin of everyone else. That’s why Jesus had to be both human and divine; human so He could stand in for Adam’s race and divine so He could live a sinless life. Human – born of a woman, and divine – conceived by the Holy Spirit (virgin birth).

The Cross can also be seen as a ransom payment to God’s arch enemy, Satan, because it was his deception of Adam and Eve that brought sin into the perfect world God had made. It’s like the enemy kidnapped the human race and demanded payment to set them free. Because a death-for-life payment was the requirement, God provided the ultimate death: His one and only Son. The surprise to Satan was that God planned to resurrect His Son after the payment was made.

So, justice was served; the penalty for human sin was paid, but God did it Himself out of pure love: John 3:16: “God so loved the world…” God is not some big meanie sending people to hell out of spite. Rather, Paul says that God, “wants everyone to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.” God wants people who trust Him – who rely on His provision for their sin: “… that whoever believes (trusts) Him will have eternal life.”

Second question: why do bad things happen to good people?

First, there are no “good” people. As I said in answer one, everyone is born under the curse of Adam’s sin. Paul said it: “There is no one who is righteous – not one” and Isaiah wrote that even human attempts at righteousness fall so far short that they are like filthy rags (literally menstrual cloths) in God’s sight. It is hard for most people to swallow, but every human ever born is headed for eternity apart from God because of what Adam did. Because of God’s goodness, He provides good things for all people: “The rain falls on the righteous and the unrighteous.” Rain here is obviously a metaphor for a positive thing: it makes it possible to grow crops.

In any case, when “bad things” happen, they are simply the result of the conditions Adam brought on the whole earth. Floods, hurricanes, wild fires, disease all are results of Adam’s fall from grace. The fall didn’t just wreck Adam’s relationship with God; it damaged his relationships with everything: God, nature, other people, and even with himself. “Bad things” are actually the natural state of affairs in a fallen world.

The better question to ask is why anything “good” ever happens to anyone. God does not shy away from the fact that everything is not all sunshine and roses with His creation. In fact, He takes responsibility for even the “bad things” as proof that He alone is God. (See “Ask the Right Question”) I take comfort in the fact that nothing happens that is outside of God’s sovereign control. If anything could happen that God did not have a hand in, then nothing He ever promised could be trusted. Think of Job’s measure of what was happening to him: “Even if he kills me, I will hope in him.” (Also see “Don’t Ask Why”)

Another reason God allows “bad things” in believers’ lives is to test them. Faith either grows in trials or else it is proved to be false. True faith realizes that God has promised, “When you pass through the waters, I will be with you…. When you walk through fire, you shall not be burned…. For I am Yahweh, your God, the holy one of Israel, your savior.” We are not promised deliverance from bad stuff; we are promised God’s care and comfort in the bad stuff. (See “The Goodness of God in the Bad Times”) That’s life!

Next question?

Despising the Down Payment

What person in his right mind would collect a down payment for something, and then put it away, forgetting he even has it? I think I know of some who have. After he listed the awesome benefits of their salvation by grace, the Apostle Paul told the Ephesians the Holy Spirit was the down payment on their inheritance. A down payment is the guarantee that a promised transaction will be completed. On the Cross of Calvary, Jesus bought our eternal home with his sacrificial blood. On the night before He was crucified, He had told His disciples that it was actually better for them if He went away, because He would send the Holy Spirit in His place (as a down payment.) This was difficult for them to fathom, and all these years later, people still have trouble figuring out what to do with the promised Spirit. After all my years in the Church, I believe the misunderstanding of the Holy Spirit’s work is perhaps the most detrimental to our life and witness.

Some churches do focus on the Spirit, but not necessarily in the right way. Charismatics who demand proof of Spirit by speaking in tongues totally miss the point of a spirit-filled life. Talk of signs and wonders abounds, but little is said about the most important sign: the fruit of righteousness in the believer’s life. I know I am generalizing; some charismatics get it. I have family wrapped up in the charismatic movement, and their faith is worn as daily clothing. They are putting into practice the one sign Jesus authorized: to love one another. He didn’t say speaking in tongues or doing miracles would set them apart; He said love was the sine qua non of true believers.

 There are many Christians who run scared from the charismatic’s excesses, virtually ignoring the Spirit, often calling it “emotionalism.” There are two things wrong with that position. First, it would do some churches good to add a little “emotionalism” to their life and worship. The dry-as-dust, asleep in the pew Christians I have seen do little to advance the Kingdom of Heaven. Statistics prove that churches like that are losing members at an alarming rate, especially among younger folks. The so-called “traditional” worship services are pandering to a generation that is fast dying out, and there is little of relevance to keep the next generation interested.

The second thing wrong with ignoring the Holy Spirit is that it denies or at best glosses over a fundamental aspect of the Christian life. Paul told the Romans that without the Spirit, it is impossible to please God. It is one thing to repeat the Apostles’ Creed every week attesting to the existence of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.” It is quite another thing to know what it means to recognize and utilize the entire trinity every moment of every day. All good Christians pray to the Father in Jesus’ name; they trust the finished work of Christ on the cross. But many have no clue what it means to live in the Spirit, or in the spirit. (More on the capitalization later.)

Beginning with Jesus and continuing throughout the New Testament, the essential purpose of the Holy Spirit is plainly stated. Live, walk, pray, sing, be led by the Spirit. I already mentioned Paul’s exclusionary statement in Romans eight saying without the Spirit it is impossible to please God. He explained to the Corinthians why that must be true. In the second chapter of his first letter to them, Paul made a startling claim. He said that a “soulish” person – contrasted to a spiritual person – could not receive anything from God because God’s things are spiritually judged. He goes on in the next chapter to say that works done in the flesh – soulish works – would not make the cut on judgment day; only works done in the spirit would pass muster.

One might ask why the focus on spiritual things is so important. Paul told the Ephesians, “Our battle is not against flesh and blood but against… spiritual forces in the heavens. For this reason, he counselled them to put on spiritual armor and to, “Stand… with the sword of the Spirit – which is the Word of God. And pray at all times in the Spirit with every prayer and request.” Considering most of the battles I have witnessed in churches and in the culture, this admonition by Paul seems to have been ignored. These “religious” battles are fought with all the characteristics of the worldly wisdom James shuns: bitter jealousy, selfish ambition, and telling lies. James’ estimate of this kind of wisdom should shock a believer; he calls it earthly, soulish, and demonic. What better way for the chief of demons to undermine the church’s witness than to cause petty squabbles?

Also in Ephesians, Paul prayed that those believers would be, “Strengthened with power through His Spirit in the inner person.” A few verses later he explains that divine power is what enables us to do, “Beyond all measure more than what we ask or think.” Exactly what Paul meant by “inner person” is debated by some. I believe he recognized two separate aspects of the human immaterial essence, one he calls variously soul or flesh or mind, and another aspect he always refers to as spirit. I believe in Ephesians three he is talking about God’s Spirit interacting with our spirit. The Greek language of the New Testament does not use capital letters the way English does. Sometimes it is hard to know whether Paul is talking about the Holy Spirit (capital “S”) or the human spirit (lower case “s”). This passage makes the distinction unmistakable. Believers’ power to do the work of God is a spiritual power coming from the indwelling Spirit of God.

I fear many Christians are ignoring another command Paul gave the Ephesians: “Do not grieve the Holy Spirit by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption.” (There’s that down payment idea again.) We must all follow Paul’s admonition to, “Be renewed in the spirit of our mind,” and access wisdom from above (spiritual wisdom) as James suggests. That kind of wisdom will produce behavior that is, “first pure, then peaceful, gentle, obedient, full of mercy and good fruits, nonjudgmental, without hypocrisy, and the fruit of righteousness is sown in peace among those who make peace. After His resurrection, Jesus told His disciples to wait in Jerusalem for the Spirit and then to go into all the world with the gospel. I think it’s about time we started using our down payment.

Hell? Yes!

It’s Thanksgiving, and as usual, we are challenged to recount the things we are grateful for. Family, friends, health, prosperity, freedom – these are all worthy of our gratitude. But if Christians are honest, the thing we should be most thankful for is God’s mercy and grace to us. When God grants us mercy, He withholds giving us what we deserve. Because Paul was right to say, “There is none righteous,” we all deserve God’s wrath. Despite what the warm fuzzy teachers like Rob Bell want us to believe, hell is real; God’s wrath is as much a part of His character as His love is. If we look deeply into the message of the Bible, we can see why wrath and love must both exist.

When Adam rebelled, he died. He died immediately to fellowship with God, and he began the gradual decay that would end in physical death. Sadly, the consequences of Adam’s sin were passed on to all his descendants. “In Adam all die,” says the Apostle Paul. This is also why he says we are subject to God’s judgment for our own sin. “And you, although you were dead in your trespasses and sins…. were children of wrath by nature, as also the rest of them were.” Fortunately, as the next verse assures us, “God, being rich in mercy, because of his great love with which he loved us, and we being dead in trespasses, he made us alive together with Christ.”

We rejoice with thanksgiving that God made us alive, but what about “the rest” as Paul calls them? The judgment issued at the time of Adam’s rebellion still stands. Paul based God’s authority as judge on His position as creator. God made us; therefore, He owns us. He told the idol worshippers at Lystra, “Turn from these worthless things to the living God who made the heaven and the earth and the sea and all the things that are in them, who in generations that are past permitted all the nations to go their own ways.” Adam chose to do things his own way, and God allowed Adam’s descendants to follow the same path.

Speaking to the philosophers in Athens, Paul made the same point. “The God who made the world and everything in it—he is Lord of heaven and earth—does not live in shrines made by hands…. From one man [Adam] he has made every nationality to live over the whole earth and has determined their appointed times and the boundaries of where they live.” Anyone who has read the Bible knows this is true of Israel, God’s chosen nation, but few realize that the Sovereign designated the “times and boundaries” of every nation on earth. We shouldn’t be surprised since we know He used the Egyptians, Assyrians, Babylonians, and Persians to further His redemption plan.

God did not totally abandon the nations. As Paul told the people at Lystra, “He did not leave himself without a witness, since he did what is good by giving you rain from heaven and fruitful seasons and filling you with food and your hearts with joy.” In Athens, Paul suggested God’s purpose was to make Himself known: “So that they might seek God, and perhaps they might reach out and find him, though he is not far from each one of us.  For in him we live and move and have our being.” His word to the Romans was similar, “For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all impiety and unrighteousness of people, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because what can be known about God is evident among them, for God made it clear to them.”

Paul asserts that God treated other nations differently from Israel by His own choice. While He let the other nations go their own way, He lovingly shepherded Israel into fulfilling His redemption plan. It is made plain during the conquest of Canaan that the nations followed “gods” who were enemies of Israel’s God. This is why God commanded the annihilation of the Canaanites. (See Defending the Wrath of God.) The difference between Israel and the nations was removed at the cross. This is the long-standing mystery Paul refers to in his letters especially to the Ephesians.

One might still ask if God’s wrath against sin is necessary. As I wrote in The Goodness of Wrath, “Someone has said that we only appreciate light because we know darkness. If God did not pour out His wrath against sin, His merciful love would be meaningless. Because He does judge the wicked, His love of the redeemed is more significant.” There is room for honest debate about the means of God’s sovereign election of His people, but there can be no doubt that love and wrath coexist in the heart of God. Referring to the unrighteous acts of unbelievers Paul wrote, “Now we know that the judgment of God is according to truth against those who do such things. But do you think this, O man who passes judgment on those who do such things, and who does the same things, that you will escape the judgment of God?”

On this Thanksgiving, I am grateful that God has delivered me from wrath and assured my eternity with Him through the blood of Christ. I am also thankful that I have been granted the privilege to live in a country that for over two hundred years has attempted (though imperfectly) to support Judeo-Christian values. With the increasing secularization (perhaps paganization is a better word) of Western society, the blessings those values have provided are being seriously eroded.

In Defending the Wrath of God I wrote, “Getting queasy about the wrath of God is a corollary to ignoring the spiritual battle that we all participate in. If we honestly regarded the faces of evil we encounter in our daily lives, I don’t think we would despise the wrath of God that is due His enemy. We are soft on sin, and we deny the depth to which it has pervaded our society. My woke neighbors will hate me for saying this, but when political correctness becomes a cloak for evil, we have surrendered the field without firing a shot.” Being thankful for our salvation does not eliminate the need to be on the offensive. In fact, the reality of God’s mercy in our lives should motivate us to share the good news with others: God’s love has overcome His wrath through faith in His Son. Spread the Word.

 

Who’s in the Temple?

As I was reading through the book of Acts recently, something caught my eye that I had not noticed previously. In chapter seven, Stephen is giving the sermon to the Jewish leadership that ended with his being stoned to death. Stephen was reciting a thumbnail sketch of Jewish history, and when he got to David and the building of the temple, he suddenly made a dramatic change in tone and blasted his listeners with the accusation that they were murders: “You stiff-necked people and uncircumcised in hearts and in your ears! You constantly resist the Holy Spirit! As your fathers did, so also do you! Which of the prophets did your fathers not persecute? And they killed those who announced beforehand about the coming of the Righteous One, whose betrayers and murderers you have now become, you who received the law by directions of angels and have not observed it!” (7:51-53)

I am certain that the Jews would have been nodding in agreement until Stephen’s accusation. Luke tells us that Stephen was “full of the Holy Spirit,” so we know his recitation was spirit-guided; the question I asked myself is why Stephen was prompted to attack them at that point in his history lesson. Here’s my thought: the temple in Jerusalem was at the center of Jewish politics and worship. First century Jews operated under a semi-theocratic government that their Roman occupiers tolerated. King Herod was little more than a puppet allowed by Rome as a concession to Jewish idiosyncrasies. It was the Sanhedrin that held the reigns of power at the grass roots level. The Sanhedrin was chaired by the High Priest and populated by numerous priests, making it a virtual arm of the temple.

 Stephen saw what we may be missing because of our distance theologically and chronologically. He saw that what Jesus had done was to make the temple an irrelevant religious institution – along with all its political significance. Absent the temple, the Jewish leadership had no power, and it was that power they sought to protect by having the upstart Galilean Rabbi killed. Twenty centuries later, we might not see the true impact of Jesus’ prophecy that the temple would be destroyed. We correctly understand His metaphorical reference to His physical body; we may misjudge how essential the literal statement, “Not one stone left here on another” is to His proclamation. Just as Christ’s death on the cross put an end to the sacrificial system, the total destruction of the temple in 70 AD put, “It is finished” on the entire Old Covenant.

It is probable that when Paul wrote that believers’ bodies were the temple of the Holy Spirit, the temple in Jerusalem was still standing. Paul’s early commitment to the entire Jewish system surely would have left him with a deep reverence for the word “temple.” He would not use it lightly. By calling believers’ temples, he was underlining the contrast between the two temples. Jesus’ death paved the way for God to dwell in us. The center of our lives, the true source of any power we may have is the God-in-us Emmanuel. Thus Paul says, “I have been crucified with Christ, and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me, and that life I now live in the flesh, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.”

Many people today have a problem similar to the one the Jewish leadership had with Jesus. The Jews were trying to protect a temple that was no longer home to God’s earthly presence. People who claim to be Christians but live as practical atheists are making a similar mistake. The Psalmist tells us “the fool says in his heart ‘There is no god.’” In biblical Hebrew, the heart symbolized the core of a person’s being. By saying there is no god, the fool is admitting that the “temple” is empty. John MacArthur writes, “A fool, then, begins by living as if there were no God, substituting himself as god and determining his own style of life…. The world is full of the opinions of fools—fools who have denied God in their living, who have become their own gods, and who mock the reality and consequences of sin.”^[1]

Sadly, this tendency is too prevalent among many who claim to be teachers of the Word. But then, this is precisely what Paul told Timothy would happen: “Now the Spirit explicitly says that in the last times some will depart from the faith, paying attention to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons.” One might say the teachings of fools. MacArthur continues, “In contrast to fools, you as a believer are blessed to have the Spirit of wisdom indwelling you and illuminating your understanding of His Word. Your words to others are based on the wisdom of Scripture, not empty speculation.”

Jesus said, “From the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks.” We need to pay close attention to what people are saying – even those who claim to be Christians. Paul explains how one can descend into foolishness: “For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their reasoning, and their senseless hearts were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools.” We need to be discerning people, guarding the temple of our hearts – renewing our minds.

At the close of the Revelation of John, the New Jerusalem is revealed as a city without a temple. Why? It’s for the same reason there is no sun: God’s light is universal. In the same way every resident in the heavenly Jerusalem is a temple: God has made His dwelling in man. Here’s the shocker: according to the writer of Hebrews, we have already come to that New Jerusalem. The verb tense used for “come” indicates a past action with present, continuing results. It is obvious why Stephen turned the corner when he got to the temple. He knew where the true temple was. He knew the Jews did not know. Do you?

 

---

^[1] John MacArthur, Strength for Today (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 1997).

Necessary Obedience

“For by grace you are saved through faith, and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God; it is not from works, so that no one can boast.” This word from Paul to the Ephesians is probably one of the best-known passages in the Bible. It may also be one of the most frequently misused. Whether from laziness or stubbornness, people see “gift” and “not from works” and assume that human behavior has little or nothing to do with salvation. As with many of the finer points of Christianity, this passage must be viewed in light of the total message of Scripture. The full message is that behavior matters; works do play a part in our salvation.

Many Bible readers think that James was contradicting Paul when he wrote that, “Faith without works is dead.” There is no contradiction. James’ argument is that one shows ones’ faith by acting faithfully, which is to say in accord with God’s principles. This is exactly what Paul told the Romans when he begged them not to think they could live any way they pleased because grace would excuse them. “May it never be!” Paul shouted. The believer proves that salvation is real by righteous behavior.

The Messiah Himself pounded that truth home in another well-known passage we call the “Sermon on the Mount.” For three chapters, Matthew’s Gospel records Jesus’ instructions on how to live as members of the kingdom of God. It serves Christians well to remember that being part of God’s kingdom doesn’t involve a physical location. “Kingdom” is not a geographical term; it is behavioral. The Greek word Matthew used for kingdom means rule or reign. To be in the kingdom of God is to be governed by God’s rules. We prove He reigns in our lives when we do what His rules require. Back to James: the proof of our allegiance is found in our obedience.

Jesus’ final discourse as reported by John also plainly binds behavior to discipleship. Our Lord said, “The one who has my commandments and keeps them—that one is the one who loves me. And the one who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I will love him and will reveal myself to him.” Believers marvel at the fact that Jesus called his disciples His friends, but even that position is conditioned on obedience: “You are my friends if you do what I command you.” He also said that He had done the works His Father had required, and believers would do even greater works after the Holy Spirit came. Works, works, works! Despite Paul’s claim that we are saved by grace not works, works are expected, nay required as our response to that grace.

I believe that there is another elemental factor in the necessity of works as part of our relationship with God. One of the first responsibilities God gave to Adam in the Garden of Eden was to work: “And Yahweh God took the man and set him in the garden of Eden to cultivate it and to keep it.” We know that God’s original plan was for Adam and Eve to spread the Eden-like quality of creation across the globe. Sin, of course, interrupted that, but God is still working toward His original goal via the plan of redemption of man and Earth through the Cross of Christ. The first Adam’s boo-boo is erased, and the Kingdom of God (Eden) is accomplished through the works of the followers of the Second Adam.

I developed the idea of Christians as agents of God’s original plan more fully in “Bringing the Kingdom” and “It’s Not All About You,” but I want to repeat here that our individual salvation is part of a much bigger operation that has truly cosmic dimensions. We are supposed to be agents who fulfill the request found in the prayer Jesus taught His disciples: “Thy kingdom come; Thy will be done on earth as it is in Heaven.” Our salvation is, quite literally that we should work towards God’s ultimate goal: Earth as Eden.

Some people shirk their duty on this call because they are waiting for a rapture of the church; then they expect a seven-year tribulation; then they imagine a temporary kingdom for one thousand years before the “real thing” finally comes to pass after Armageddon. I believe those who view this scenario as an excuse to wait are missing the whole purpose of the church. Even if they were right, the church age should be a time when Christians proclaim the Kingdom of God as Jesus did. It is difficult for me to read His words and not see that the kingdom has already been initiated. Maybe we do have to wait 1007 years after a secret “second coming” before it is fulfilled, but that doesn’t change the fact that Jesus said it had already come roughly 2,000 years ago.

What does this have to do with obedience? Whether we have to wait for two or three “second comings,” or if the next “coming” is the last, our job as Christians is to do what Christ implied  in the parable of the ten minas : “Occupy till I come.” (KJV) I like the word “occupy.” I think of it as occupying enemy territory, for that is what we have been charged with: occupying the devil’s territory. We have been transferred out of the kingdom of darkness into the light. Let us occupy it with bold obedience!

Powerful Meekness

I am going to circle back to a topic I have written about more than once already. It seems to keep knocking on my door, so I feel I have to answer it again. I have experienced that confluence of circumstances I have mentioned before where several things combine to make a point I cannot avoid. The subject I am coming back to is how we are supposed to handle differences of opinion with our Christian brothers and sisters. If you haven’t read “Disagree Agreeably” and “The Importance of Being Right,” I recommend that you check them out.

I was pushed to today’s review of this topic by criticism from a fellow-Christian who perceived my attitude as arrogant. He said, “You think you are always right; you’re not!” It is ironic that he should be so perceptive and so wrong at the same time. As I have written previously, I grew up in an atmosphere where it was imperative that you were “right,” and that you made everyone else see how right you were. Through the patience of my loving wife and the grace of God, I have gradually shed much of the argumentative attitude that characterized my life for decades. My behavior just prior to the man’s criticism was a study in Clair-being-non-argumentative. That’s the further irony: here I was being what I thought a Christian should be when having a disagreement. Apparently, I still have work to do.

A couple days after the confrontation at church, John MacArthur’s devotional was on James’ admonition to behave, “in the gentleness of wisdom.” MacArthur insisted that, “A wise person is a gentle person.” He focused on the word “gentle” explaining that it translated a Greek word that could be rendered as “meek.” He said, “The Greeks characterized meekness as power under control; in the believer’s case, that means being under the control of God.”* He also pointed out that Jesus is our perfect example of meekness, and not surprisingly, it is listed as a fruit of the Spirit.

This all should have gone down without a hitch except that my Bible reading for that day had been John’s report of Jesus cleansing the temple – with a whip and some caustic criticism. In “True Lies and Lying Truth” I wrote, “Over the last few months, I studied a harmony of the Gospels as my daily devotional reading. The strongest impression I came away with is that Jesus was a very critical person. He was a stickler for the truth and a warrior against lies. He called His arch enemy the father of lies. I think we do our Lord a disservice to suggest that He would stand meekly aside while a wave of lies washes the shores of our society.”

In that article I was primarily focused on lies in the political realm, but I am equally disturbed by the “truth” shared by some Bible teachers that might be called lies – a lie told in ignorance or through misinterpretation is still a lie. (See “Lies We Have Been Told”) The man who confronted me was quoting the words of a Bible commentator on a subject that honest Christians can disagree about. I suggested that we look at what the Bible itself has to say, and that is what caused the critical response on his part. I suspect the commentator was one he held in high esteem, and he believed I was wrong to disagree with him. I think I exhibited meekness in my response to him (I have a witness who agrees.), but he did not take it well.

My point is that while Jesus was the epitome of meekness, and we should always follow His example (WWJD), Jesus never allowed His meekness to turn Him into a doormat. (Admittedly, the cross was a major doormat moment, but that was the explicit purpose for the incarnation: that He should submit to the punishment due us for our transgressions.) Most of the disagreements I have with fellow-believers center on the interpretation of Scripture. In many cases, the only option is to agree to disagree. That is fine; it can be done in perfect meekness and in honor to the truth of God’s Word.

However, there are times when an opinion is not based on truth, and it should be corrected. As an example, I spent several weeks debating with a fellow-Christian who believes that God blesses same-sex marriages. (For more on that debate see “Clobber the Argument”) While it is true that God loves homosexuals and heterosexuals unconditionally, it is disingenuous to say that Scripture condones any sexual intimacy outside of the marriage of a man and a woman. This applies to all aberrations: homosexuality, adultery, incest, pedophilia, beastiality, and anything else a perverted mind can imagine. God’s plan for His creation has procreation at its core, and to tamper with the beauty and simplicity of marital intimacy is to destroy the very foundation of human society. (See “You Have Heard That it was Said”)

There are other subjects that rise to this level of demand for correction: denial of the virgin birth, acceptance of salvation through any means but the sacrifice of Jesus Christ, dismissal of the existence of hell and judgment, the elevation of any book but the Bible as inspired revelation from God. And more. The point I am trying to make in all humility and meekness is that as Christians, we are compelled to defend the truth as revealed in Scripture. If any person, regardless of their popularity or admiration, holds an opinion that cannot be supported by the Word of God, that opinion should be challenged. And that challenge must be made with all meekness – truth spoken in love as Paul directs. This approach will not always have happy results. Remember how the Temple merchandisers reacted to Jesus’ dramatic correction of their misuse of God’s house. Stay meek, yes, but stay strong.

* John MacArthur, Strength for Today (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 1997).

Related posts: How Do You Read Paul; Sanctify Them; Truth Matters; The Truth About the Truth

Here, There, or in the Air

Often, when people say to me, “See you later,” I respond, “Here, there, or in the air.” It may sound flippant or cute, but I mean something theologically significant by it. As a Christian, I believe the words of the old song, “This world is not my home; I’m just a-passin’ through.” Absolute certainty of our eternal destiny is the shining hope of everyone who has trusted Jesus Christ. As I will explain momentarily, confusion about “this world” being home or not plagues many sincere Christ-followers. If we are just “passin’ through,” where exactly are we headed?

To answer this, I will share how the quip, “Here, there, or in the air” plays out in my opinion. When I agree that I may meet my friends “here,” I am thinking of this space-time continuum – Earth as we know it. Perhaps I will see them tomorrow, next week, or next year here on earth. We can’t know for sure we will ever see someone again because all our days are numbered, and no one knows which one will be the last. But if God grants that we each spend the intervening time here, we may well meet again here. That’s the simple part of the triad.

It gets much more complicated when I try to explain what I mean by “there.” For much of my life as a believer, I thought “there” meant Heaven. Most Christians believe they will go to Heaven when they die, although the New Testament never makes that assertion. Shocked? I have previously written at length that the British theologian, N. T. Wright corrected my thinking on that subject in his book, Surprised by Hope: Rethinking Heaven, the Resurrection, and the Mission of the Church. Wright points out that when Jesus spoke of heaven, He was always referring to the Kingdom of Heaven which is not a place, per se, but a state of being ruled by the King of Heaven. Heaven came to earth in one sense with the first coming of our Savior, and it’s coming will be fully realized at His return. (More on that later.)

So, if we don’t go to Heaven when we die, where do we go – where is “there.” Wright holds out the possibility that there could be a “there” that might better be called “paradise” where departed souls wait for the end of the age. This idea rests on the assumption that humans remain time-bound creatures after they die. If time continues to roll in the afterlife, there must be a waiting place somehow related to this place (Earth) that houses disembodied souls (or perhaps re-embodied souls). The only Scripture that seems to hint at this is Jesus’ story about the dead beggar who rested in Abraham’s bosom while his earthly tormentors suffered on the other side of an impassable chasm.

There are several things about that story that are troublesome which makes me believe Jesus was simply playing to the contemporary Jewish belief about the afterlife. Scripture often uses imagery that fits the understanding of its recipients without describing literal truth. Two common ones are that the sun rises and sets or that the Earth rests on foundations. Neither of these descriptions matches reality, but they both are used to teach absolute truth. I am of the opinion that there is no actual place called “Abraham’s bosom” where dead souls wait for the end of the age. However, the Jews in Jesus’ day did believe in such a place, so He used it to make a point. The point was that once you die, there is no going back for second chances.

So, if Wright is wrong about a “paradise” where the dead wait, where is “there?” Personally, I think that there is no “there” there. I suspect that when we die, we leave this space-time continuum and enter the spiritual realm where time is an entirely different construct. There is no need for “waiting” because time will have ceased to be an issue we deal with. Difficult as it may be to grasp, it makes sense to me that everyone goes directly into eternity upon their death. After death comes judgment; thus says the Scripture. You might say that we all die at the same “time.”

Now we come to what I mean by “in the air.” Paul told the Thessalonians that upon Jesus’ return, they would meet the Lord “in the air,” and thus be forever with the Lord. This passage has been much abused by a group of believers who look forward to a rapture of the church near the end of the age. Again, I thank Wright for clearing up what this passage actually refers to. He points to a parallel passage in 1 Corinthians 15 that also details what happens to believers both living and dead upon Christ’s second “coming.” Christ is said to “appear,” and believers are changed into their eternal, spiritual state. The same idea is found in Philippians 3:21 where Paul speaks of being transformed into a body like Jesus’ glorious body when Christ returns.

The word “coming” in Corinthians translates the Greek word “parousia” which had a very specific meaning in the ancient world of Paul. When an important person came to visit a city, he would “appear” outside the gate, and the citizens would go out to meet him and escort him into the city; they didn’t stay outside the gates. The dignitary’s parousia was the signal that the king’s representative had come. He was bringing the king’s authority to his citizens. Rather than being raptured and taken away from their homes, the parousia initiated a new state of affairs in their old world. Applying this concept to the second coming, Jesus’ parousia will mark the beginning of the new heavens and new earth where His faithful ones will dwell for eternity. The judgment – the sheep versus goats, tares separated from wheat – happens at this “time,” and it determines who gets to be where.

The ancients pictured heaven as being “in the air.” So do we when we point up to locate Heaven. Like the ancient idea of a third heaven – a spiritual realm – we should also think of Heaven as a spiritual “place” in the sense that it encompasses the entirety of where we will live eternally in our resurrected, “spiritual bodies” as Paul calls them. Heaven and Earth will be one as originally intended. To meet Jesus “in the air” is a confirmation of the belief that we will be transformed into our eternal, spiritual state. I believe, as Wright insists, that we will spend eternity in our resurrected bodies on a renewed earth reunited with “Heaven.” As John says, “We will be like him, because we will see him just as he is.” I can’t wait! So, until we meet again – here, there, or in the air.

Related posts: Understanding Salvation; Why Heaven Matters; Defending Resurrection Faith

Christian Responsibility to Government

This is the manuscript of a message I delivered at Desert Shores Community Baptist Church on October 16, 2022.

So, Pastor George asked me to talk about politics. UHG! Please don’t zone out on me just yet! If you are like me, you are already tired of the political advertisements that are flooding the media. If I didn’t know Pastor George better, I’d think he was trying to get me into trouble. But hear me: the worst thing we can do as Christians is to fail to participate in elections. We are blessed with a form of government that allows citizens to express their opinions by voting for representatives who will carry their wishes to the seats of power. I believe we are shirking our duty if we don’t remain engaged in the political process.

The question I want to address is how we should be engaged as Christians. I am going to be rooting my comments today in the thirteenth chapter of Paul’s letter to the Romans, but we will find there are many passages of Scripture that can help us understand what our role should be. Let’s begin by looking at the first few verses of Romans 13. [Romans 13:1-3 All citations are from NASV unless noted.]

                1              Every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God.

                2              Therefore whoever resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God; and they who have opposed will receive condemnation upon themselves.

                3              For rulers are not a cause of fear for good behavior, but for evil. Do you want to have no fear of authority? Do what is good and you will have praise from the same.

In this passage, Paul makes it perfectly clear that Christians have a responsibility to submit to government. The Apostle explains that this is the case because God has ordained government as a requirement of civil society. Because God made us, He knows human nature; He knows that we need structure to keep our proclivity toward independence under control. (Original sin?)

There is something this passage doesn’t say, but it is important for us to understand; it doesn’t say that the individuals who are in authority are necessarily good people. Authority is good; authority is from God. We have to remember that Paul most likely wrote this when Nero was the supreme authority over his life. Nero was not a good person. Nero is thought to have been responsible for some of the worst persecution of Christians (and anyone else who refused to worship him). One of the stories is that he hung Christians on posts, covered them with tar, and set them on fire as streetlamps.

Yet Paul commanded submission to Nero.

I should probably add at this point that there is one biblical exception to Paul’s command. It is found in [Acts 5:29]. When Peter and John were called before their governing authorities, the Jewish Sanhedrin, they were told they had to stop preaching about Jesus. Peter answered them plainly, “We must obey God rather than men.” I believe this confirms that Christians can justifiably refuse to do anything an authority asks if it would cause them to violate one of God’s commands. This doesn’t mean there won’t be consequences if we refuse to obey man’s law: Peter and John had been held in jail; Paul spent quite a long period of imprisonment because of his obedience to God contrary to the law of the land. The early disciples understood, as we should too, that disobedience to God would bring a far more serious penalty that disobedience to men.

This exception to submission to authorities brings up an important point for us. Jesus faced this dilemma when He stood on trial for His life before Pontius Pilate. The Jewish leaders had brought Jesus to Pilate with charges of treason saying that He claimed to be a king. This is treason because Caesar was the only person who could appoint subordinates (like King Herod). The Romans did not permit the Jews to execute anyone, so the Jews had to appeal to Pilate, their Roman governor, to get Jesus killed.

The exchange between Jesus and Pilate is instructive. We read in the Gospel of [John, chapter 18:33-38a]

33 “Therefore Pilate entered again into the Praetorium, and summoned Jesus and said to Him, “Are You the King of the Jews?”

                34           Jesus answered, “Are you saying this on your own initiative, or did others tell you about Me?”

                35           Pilate answered, “I am not a Jew, am I? Your own nation and the chief priests delivered You to me; what have You done?” (Pilate thinks Jesus is innocent.)

                36           Jesus answered, “My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, then My servants would be fighting so that I would not be handed over to the Jews; but as it is, My kingdom is not of this realm.”

                37           Therefore Pilate said to Him, “So You are a king?” Jesus answered, “You say correctly that I am a king. For this I have been born, and for this I have come into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth hears My voice.”

                38           Pilate *said to Him, “What is truth?””

We will get to Pilate’s fascinating question of truth in a minute, but let’s look first at Jesus’ explanation of His kingship: He said, “My kingdom is not of this world.” Notice: Jesus did not deny that He is a king. He frequently announced the coming of the Kingdom of Heaven throughout His earthly ministry. But hear Him: it is the Kingdom of Heaven – not a kingdom of this world. If we enter Jesus’ kingdom by trusting Him with our eternal destiny, we place our citizenship in an otherworldly realm: Heaven.

The Apostle Paul points to this reality in [2 Corinthians 5:17-21].

17           Therefore if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creature; the old things passed away; behold, new things have come.

18           Now all these things are from God, who reconciled us to Himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation,

                19           namely, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and He has committed to us the word of reconciliation.

                20           Therefore, we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God were making an appeal through us; we beg you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God.”

Understand this: ambassadors travel to foreign countries as representatives of their governing authority. Paul says we are like ambassadors from the Kingdom of Christ begging people to turn their hearts to God.

Peter makes a similar point in [1 Peter 2:9-10a]

                9              But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for God’s own possession, so that you may proclaim the excellencies of Him who has called you out of darkness into His marvelous light.

                10           for you once were not a people, but now you are the people of God.

So, we might ask what it means to be “other worldly.” How do we behave with this dual citizenship? Note that in [John 17:14-17] in Jesus’ prayer on the night He was betrayed confirmed with His Father that

                14           “I have given them Your word; and the world has hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.

                15           “I do not ask You to take them out of the world, but to keep them from the evil one.

                16           “They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.

                17           “Sanctify them in the truth; Your word is truth.

 

The language the authors of the New Testament used to describe our condition helps clarify what we should be like. For example, the Greek word Paul chose in [Philippians 4:20] is interesting.

                20           For our citizenship is in heaven, from which also we eagerly wait for a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ.

                21           who will transform the body of our humble state into conformity with the body of His glory, by the exertion of the power that He has even to subject all things to Himself.

The Greek word for “citizenship” (v.20) could better be translated as “commonwealth.” I like the word commonwealth because it speaks of being concerned about the common good. So, although Paul says we wait “in Heaven,” he has also made it clear that we are still here on earth as ambassadors – in the world but not of the world as Jesus said.

Again, I will ask: what does Christian involvement in government look like? There is a group of people speaking out in America today who have been called Christian nationalists. They are getting quite a bit of interest from the secular media, most of whom believe the Christian nationalists represent all Christians. Unfortunately, they do not properly interpret the biblical responsibility toward government because they are proposing a theocracy like that of Old Testament Israel.

Christianity Today has a helpful article which differentiates Christianity from Christian nationalism. They explain that historically Christians have, “worked to advance Christian principles, not Christian power or Christian culture, which is the key distinction between normal Christian political engagement and Christian nationalism. Normal Christian political engagement is humble, loving, and sacrificial; it rejects the idea that Christians are entitled to primacy of place in the public square or that Christians have a presumptive right to continue their historical predominance in American culture.”

The US Constitution specifically prohibits favoring one religion over another. The founding fathers may not have imagined the small world/global village nature of  20^th century America. The religious freedom they envisioned encompassed primarily variations of Christianity or Judaism. We are in a different world from theirs, but the Constitution remains the law of the land. Christian nationalism strains against religious plurality as we know it today.

The majority of the public sees the name “Christian” applied to this group of nationalists and assumes they represent all Christians. This is at least partially a result of the fact that many people are not careful to discern truth from lies. Anyone can call himself a Christian, as the writers of the New Testament warned us. Non-believers are ill equipped to make the distinction between who is and who is not a true Christian. However, it is a believer’s first responsibility to examine the claims of a person or movement to decide if their position aligns with biblical truth.

This brings us back to Pilate’s question of Jesus, “What is truth?” Getting to the truth demands an inquiring mind. Cornelius VanTil, a Dutch theologian of the 20^th century is famous for having encouraged believers to view all things through what he called biblical spectacles. He insisted, “The Bible gives us the presuppositions we need to interpret individual facts rightly. It is the spectacles by which we can view all of life rightly.” Let me break that down for you. Presuppositions are the things we bring to our investigations which color our interpretations. For example, if one presupposes that there is no God, and all things exist through time and chance, one sees the universe in a certain way. If, on the other hand, one assumes that the universe was created by a loving, communicating, all-powerful God, things appear quite different.

I believe it is our Christian responsibility to represent Christ in response to all our 21^st century issues. However, as sojourners or ambassadors from another kingdom, we should not expect to find our rules of behavior, the “law of Christ,” fully encoded in America’s laws. That is the Christian nationalist goal. The true aim of every Christian is to be the salt and light Jesus commanded; Or as Paul recommended in Philippians 2:14-15 our goal is to

 14          Do all things without grumbling or disputing;

15           so that you will prove yourselves to be blameless and innocent, children of God above reproach in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation, among whom you appear as lights in the world.

Notice Paul says we may disagree, but we must to it agreeably: without grumbling or disputing.”

So how does a Christian engage in a “humble, loving, and sacrificial way as the Christianity Today article recommends? Let’s look at some examples and consider the Christian approach. First let’s think about abortion. There is no doubt that a biblical opinion would call abortion the murder of a human being. Scripture repeatedly says that God knows a person and has plans for that person even before conception. The thing growing in a mother’s womb is a human being.

We don’t even have to resort to Scripture to argue that human life begins at conception; logic dictates that fact. If the entity that exits the birth canal is a human being, then it was human one second before, one week before, nine months before. The secular debate about abortion has always centered around the concept of viability – when is the fetus capable of living outside the womb. The real question should be when is the fetus NOT a human being. Logically, humanness begins at conception. The fertilized egg will not become anything but a human being, therefore human rights inhere from conception. Logic and the Bible agree. No surprise there!

Does this mean that we shun women who have chosen to have an abortion. NO! Of course not. We love them as Jesus loves them – just as they are. We are humble, loving and sacrificial. Maybe we ask if we can help. Maybe they are struggling with the consequences of their decision – many women do. We need to be there for them.

For a second example, we can see that the homosexual agenda is also clearly unbiblical. The Levitical law and Paul’s comments in Romans 1 clearly call homosexual behavior an abomination. It is true that some Christians point out that we are no longer under Old Testament law, and they believe Paul’s comments in Romans specifically refer to male temple prostitutes. They are right about the law, but the argument they use to dismiss Paul cannot be maintained. There are numerous references throughout the New Testament that carry the implication that perverted sex, particularly homosexual behavior is a sin.

Again, there is sound evidence outside Scripture that homosexual behavior is less than ideal. Christians understand that God instituted marriage between a man and a woman for His own purposes. Even secular psychologists have determined that children raised by parents of both genders are more likely to thrive. Surprise: God knew what He was doing when He ordained the mother-father-child family institution. It is the proper basis of all human society.

Then there are the physical consequences of perverted sexual behavior. The AIDS epidemic among homosexual males brought this to light some time ago; monkey pox is sounding the same alarm today, and there are other sexually transmitted diseases that plague them as well. Studies have shown that homosexually active men have a reduced life expectancy due to the consequences of their behavior. We don’t even need to mention Paul’s comment that they would “[receive] in their own persons the due penalty of their error.”

So, do we hate homosexuals? Again, NO! We must love them humbly and sacrificially just like Jesus. Sadly, the church has not done a good job of accepting homosexuals the same way we accept all other sinners.

Let’s look at one more issue where Christians might have a biblical opinion. It’s another part of the broader LGBTQ agenda: the “T” stands for transgender. Again, I think we are on sound biblical footing to say that those who deny their biological gender are saying, in effect, that God made a mistake by putting their soul in the wrong body. That’s pretty arrogant if you think about it – God didn’t know what He was doing when He made me. The proof that this is a ridiculous idea is found in the fact that transgender individuals have a much higher rate of mental disorders. Studies show that those who complete “gender affirming” surgery and take hormones to alter their bodies have a suicide rate twenty times that of the general population.

I think we often can promote our agenda without using Scripture. Unhealthy behavior is bad for individuals, and it has consequences for society at large. For this reason, the government requires warning labels on tobacco products; the government has outlawed illicit drugs; the government has mandated seatbelt use in automobiles. It is totally legitimate for Christians to push for this kind of government action. We don’t have to mention that it happens to follow God’s rules.

In each of these examples, I think Christians would be acting in a “humble, loving, and sacrificial way” if they attempt to correct people who are violating God’s rules. The thing we need to keep in the forefront at all times is that we are all sinners. Jesus didn’t come to save “good people.” Paul reminds us that Christ died while we were still sinners. God’s love is unconditional; that means we must show His love first, then talk about behavior changes.

 

When Jesus identified God’s Word as the source of truth, He preceded that assertion in John 17:17 with a request that the Father would, “Sanctify [His disciples] in the truth.” To sanctify something is to set it apart for a specific purpose. If we are going to be living proof that Jesus’ prayer was answered, we must set about mining and distributing truth. We need to put on our biblical spectacles as Van Til would say. We need to follow the advice of the Psalmist and meditate on God’s Word day and night. We need to refuse to be conformed to the world and be transformed by renewing our minds with the Word. We need to set our minds on things above not on things of earth. These acts of sanctification will give us the ability to follow John’s admonition to test everything to determine if it is from God.

The Bible says that in the last days things will get worse and worse before the end comes. The Bible predicts that men will behave badly and be proud of it. When I see the shameless depravity of our politicians, when I think of the debauchery that is standard fare for Hollywood and television, when I think of the audacity of the LGBTQ movement with their claims of legitimacy, or when I mourn the millions of unborn children slaughtered since Roe v. Wade, I can't imagine a more striking fulfillment of those Bible words about the end times. Things are getting worse and worse. Scripture also records Daniel’s prophesy that there will be some in the last days who will remain righteous and "be mighty and do exploits." It's beginning to look like just doing right thing will be the mighty doing exploits. Maybe just voting would qualify.

I am going to close with a thought from the Romans 13 passage I started with.

Romans 13:7-8

7              Render to all what is due them: tax to whom tax is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honor to whom honor.

                8              Owe nothing to anyone except to love one another; for he who loves his neighbor has fulfilled the law.

After commanding submission in the first part of the chapter, Paul said we should honor and respect those in authority, and, yes, pay taxes when they are due. But then he finished the thought by saying, “Owe nothing to anyone except to love one another; for he who loves his neighbor has fulfilled the law.” When the New Testament commands love, it is not a warm fuzzy kind of love. The Bible never commands us to like anybody. To love in the New Testament sense means to care for someone – to want the best for them – whether we like them or not. I want to suggest that the most loving/caring thing we can do for someone is to assure that the policies and practices of government follow God’s plan. As I said before: God made us; He knows what’s best for us. I bet you never thought of voting as an act of love for your neighbor. Maybe you should.

 

Taking the Bible Literally Part 2

This is not the first time I have written about this topic. If you haven’t read the previous articles, “Understanding the Bible as Literature,” and “Take the Bible Literally?,” you may want to check them out for further clarification of what the word “literal” means when applied to Scripture. The motivation for this post comes from my daily reading in the Gospels. Luke quotes Isaiah in reference to John the Baptist’s ministry. Mountains are leveled; valleys are filled; rough roads are made smooth in preparation for the coming Messiah. Taken literally, this makes John the Baptist more like John the Road Builder.

Being the last Old Testament prophet, John the Baptist also used metaphors when he preached. Immediately after Luke’s road-building metaphor, the evangelist records John calling the unbelieving Jews “offspring of vipers,” not because he thought they came from snakes but because snakes were associated with lying and deception. As a warning to the “snakes,” John said, “Even now the axe is positioned at the root of the trees.” Here John is using the same symbolism that Isaiah used when he prophesied that the Messiah would be a shoot from the stump of Jesse. When the Bible authors use symbolism and metaphor, they are conveying truth, but their words are not to be taken literally. They are truthful not literal.

This true but not literal interpretative challenge has led to serious doctrinal errors. I mentioned before that believers were once persecuted by the church because they denied that the sun literally revolved around the earth as Scripture suggests. The centuries-long debacle known as the Crusades stemmed from the interpretation that Jerusalem remained the Holy City even after God abandoned it and brought about its destruction by the Romans. With the coming of the church age, Jerusalem is no more holy than Joplin or Jersey City. The true Jerusalem is now a heavenly city which exists in the spiritual dimension rather than the physical one. The city of Jerusalem in modern Israel is interesting historically, but it is not the City of God.

The misunderstanding of Jerusalem’s continuing importance survived long after the Crusades. Four hundred years later, the idea that Jews needed a homeland swept through the church. Because of their historical connection to Palestine, the Jews were encouraged to resettle there. This movement, known as Christian Zionism, was at least partially responsible for the reinterpretation of biblical end times teaching. John Nelson Darby, an Anglo-Irish Bible teacher, collapsed 1800 years of church history and imagined a literal Jerusalem and a literal temple as the setting for the last days. Ignoring the fact that physical Jerusalem was judged by God and destroyed in 70 AD, Darby reassigns the apocalyptic prophecies* of Daniel, Isaiah, Ezekiel, and even Jesus to a time in Darby’s future.

Darby’s followers today are found mostly in the United States and align themselves with C.I. Schofield who plagiarized much of Darby’s work and spread it across the country as his own. The insistence on literal fulfillment of certain prophecies is at the core of this teaching. The most dramatic of these, the belief in a literal 1,000-year reign of Christ on earth, lends it name to the movement we now call millennialism (a millennium being 1,000 years). Despite the fact that the Bible itself argues against taking the number 1,000 literally, Darby’s followers cling to it like a talisman. They ignore Peter’s comment that “One day with the Lord is like a thousand years, and a thousand years is like one day.”

Although much of their teaching relies on literal fulfillment of biblical prophecy, the millennialists become curiously non-literal when something contradicts their interpretation. Jesus predicted as recorded in Matthew’s gospel that the people He was addressing would be alive at the fulfillment of His description of the last days. When Jesus spoke to John as recorded in Revelation, He implied the same thing saying that those who pierced him would see Him coming in judgment against them. Rather than take Jesus’ words literally, Darby’s followers twist them to mean some other group of people at some other point in time.

A broad view of Scripture, accounting for the nature of apocalyptic literature*, makes me believe that the judgment Jesus predicted was accomplished in 70 AD when the Romans destroyed the temple and much of Jerusalem itself culminating a seven-year siege (tribulation). Although the usefulness of the temple ended when the veil was torn at Christ’s crucifixion, its physical destruction completed God’s judgment of the apostate worship of the wayward Jewish leaders. I believe it was those leaders who would see Jesus “coming with the clouds,” a frequent metaphor of judgment throughout the Old Testament. They are called “everyone who pierced Him,” clearly identifying the Jews who demanded the execution. The “tribes of the land” who would mourn His coming describes the nation of Israel which was no longer God’s chosen people. That is a literal interpretation, but it doesn’t fit the scheme invented by Darby.

Darby chose to ignore that the judgment God promised through His prophets was primarily against Jerusalem and its disobedient kings and priests. Many passages place the time of God’s judgment concurrent with the coming of the Messiah. No one can deny that God made a dramatic paradigm shift at the cross. God replaced the nation of Israel with what Peter called the “holy nation” known as the Church of Christ. God literally made a cosmic statement when the sun darkened (as predicted) for three hours while the Messiah bore the sins of the world. Paul plainly says the Seed of woman fulfilled the promise that Abraham’s descendants would be a blessing to the entire world.

Skipping over the obvious meaning of the destruction in 70 AD, Darby puts the fulfillment of the “last days” at the second coming of Jesus. Peter had no such illusion. He stated plainly that the prophecy of Joel concerning the last days was being fulfilled as he spoke. The writer of Hebrews says that God had spoken through His Son “in these last days.” Many other New Testament passages make similar statements. To my mind, the strangest result of Darby’s interpretation is to erase what is now 2,000 years of church history from the biblical record. Darby would have us believe that nothing of prophetic value would happen until the last seven years of history: the tribulation. Then the millennium. That, to me, is literally unbelievable.

* Apocalyptic literature is a type of biblical prophecy that is full of symbolic language that is not intended to be taken literally.

Post Script:

Most ordinary Christians in the United States who are taught the millennial/dispensational last days scenario have no idea that it was invented in the 19^th century. Nor do they realize that the vast majority of believers throughout the world today do not follow Darby’s scheme. The predominant end-times teaching in the modern world follows the centuries-old understanding that the 1,000-year reign of Jesus is a symbolic representation of the current church age. Because they deny the literal 1,000 years, they are called amillennials.

Christian Nationalism?

In my previous post I repeated my frequent assertion that Christians have a blessing and a duty to vote because our representative republic allows us to express our wishes regarding political issues. (See “Vote Anyway”) This naturally raises the issue of Christian involvement in government. Two of my readers reminded me of the current media interest in Christian Nationalism which does seem to be advocating a theocracy (direct rule by God). As I said before, a theocracy is not what the New Testament describes as our relationship to secular government, nor can it be supported under the guidelines of the US Constitution.

That said, the Bible does give guidance to believers regarding political issues, and the Constitution grants religious input by all while favoring none. Jesus’ most poignant statement regarding secular government came in answer to Pilate’s question about Jesus’ kingship. Jesus did not deny that He is a king, but He made it clear that His kingdom did not involve a worldly domain. It helps to remember that the word used throughout the New Testament for “kingdom” does not imply a physical area. Rather, the Greek sense of the word kingdom leans toward the idea of rulership; those who are ruled by the King are thereby members of His kingdom. This is the basis for both Paul’s and Peter’s assertion that Christian citizenship is other-worldly, heavenly, or spiritual.

Even so, our heavenly citizenship does not release us from earthly responsibilities. The New Testament clearly commands submission to our governing authorities (Paul and Peter). Some might suggest that Paul couldn’t have imagined a representative government like we have. This is not likely the case. The Apostle Paul, being well-educated, raised in a blended Greek/Jewish household, was certainly aware of the Athenian tradition of democracy. True, Roman imperialism was universal throughout the Mediterranean world in which Paul travelled and emperor worship was expected, but the Romans allowed other religions to practice their beliefs as long as they did not subvert Rome’s governance.

It was in this climate that the Apostles taught believers to submit to earthly governments. In 21^st century America, believers have the same responsibility to submit but with an added benefit: we can participate in our government. At the fringes of the Moral Majority movement of the last century, the concept of a theocracy was debated. Today’s Christian nationalism movement has reignited that debate. Christianity Today has a helpful article which differentiates Christianity from Christian nationalism. They explain that historically Christians have, “worked to advance Christian principles, not Christian power or Christian culture, which is the key distinction between normal Christian political engagement and Christian nationalism. Normal Christian political engagement is humble, loving, and sacrificial; it rejects the idea that Christians are entitled to primacy of place in the public square or that Christians have a presumptive right to continue their historical predominance in American culture.” (Read full article)

The entitlement mentality of many who espouse Christian nationalism is perhaps its worst feature. Christianity Today reports that some in the movement believe they must protect the “predominant “Anglo-Protestant” culture to ensure the survival of American democracy.” This quickly devolves into an un-Christian attitude that, “Christians are entitled to primacy of place in the public square because they are heirs of the true or essential heritage of American culture.” The “Anglo” insinuation in their mindset has rightly earned the accusation of white supremacy which is obviously unbiblical. Nothing could be farther from the truth expressed by Paul that in Christ, there are no racial distinctions in Christ’s kingdom.

The majority of the public sees the name “Christian” applied to this group of nationalists and assumes they represent all Christians. This is at least partially a result of the condition I warned against in my previous post: many people are not careful to discern truth from lies. Anyone can call himself a Christian, as the writers of the New Testament warned us. (timothy, 1 cor. 12, ) Non-believers are essentially unequipped to make this distinction. It is a believer’s first responsibility to examine the claims of a person or movement to decide if their position aligns with biblical truth. The second, perhaps equally important thing believers must do is live their true Christianity “out loud” as Lippa and Crawley poetically recommend.

I am going to present one issue as an example of the difference between a Christian nationalist approach and a truly Christian approach. A few days ago, I was watching a particularly depressing news commentary outlining the shameful way the trans-gender lobby is pushing “life-affirming” therapies and surgery on confused teen-agers. I was reminded how in one generation we have gone from homosexual and transexual ideologies being taboo to their being normalized, despite sound scientific evidence that gender dysphoria causes severe emotional and psychological problems.

The science is evident in a recent government publication. The National Library of Medicine, an arm of the National Institutes of Health, reported on a Swedish study over a thirty-year period which found that individuals who underwent sexual reassignment therapies (hormonal or surgical) were far more likely to have serious mental health issues than the straight population. Their conclusion was in part that, “Persons with transsexualism, after sex reassignment, have considerably higher risks for mortality, suicidal behaviour, and psychiatric morbidity than the general population. Our findings suggest that sex reassignment, although alleviating gender dysphoria, may not suffice as treatment for transsexualism.”

 The author of the Swedish study claims that this proves more attention needs to be paid to “gender-affirming” care. The NLM review comes to a similar conclusion stating that the dire revealed by the study, “should inspire improved psychiatric and somatic care after sex reassignment for this patient group.” I would suggest that it should inspire Christians to be more forceful in proclaiming the biblical truth that gender dysphoria is a mental (and spiritual) condition that places a person at risk.

In America today, the biblical position on human sexuality has become hate speech and is punishable by law in many instances. This issue represents a body of lies Christians are told they must accept as truth. The radical Christian nationalist position on this issue is that all sexual deviancies must be criminalized. That would be theocracy in action as per Old Testament law. That is not biblical by New Testament standards. The correct Christian response should be what the Christianity Today article suggests: humble, loving, sacrificial, and I would add, instructive intervention as a testament to the truth.

I believe it is our Christian responsibility to represent Christ in response to all our 21^st century issues. However, as sojourners or ambassadors from another kingdom, we should not expect to find our rules of behavior, the “law of Christ,” fully encoded in America’s laws. That is the Christian nationalist goal. The true Christian goal is to be the salt and light Jesus commanded; our goal is to, “become blameless and innocent, children of God without fault in the midst of a crooked and perverted generation, among whom you shine as stars in the world.”

Related posts: Christophobia; Christophobia Part 2; Bringing the Kingdom; Curtain, Please; Think or Swim; Loyal Opposition;