|
An Anarchist Opinion
As a Theocrat, I do not believe in "the separation of church and state."
As an anarchist, I believe in the abolition of church and state.
There are over 200 Bible verses on this page, along with my opinions about the use of the word "church" in Bible translations.
In a sentence: The "church" is people "called out" of Caesar's church. The "church" is made up of kings and priests (Revelation 1:6; 5:10) who are
urging all of the world's priests and kings to repent and join the "church," the House of the Lord Jesus, the only legitimate Priest and King.
There are many "social media influencers" who claim that "church" is a terrible -- even tyrannical -- translation of the Greek word ἐκκλησία.
Translating works from one language to another language is as much an art as it is a science.
When the Greek word ἐκκλησία is "transliterated" into English, it is ekklēsia. "Transliterated" means the Greek letters are given an equivalent in the English alphabet. The Greek word πόλις, is transliterated polis, but is usually translated into English words like "city" or "city-state" or sometimes just "state." Babylon was a "polis"; it was a city as well as an empire. Rome was a "polis"; it was a city as well as an empire.
Here's some translation trivia for you: Philippians 3:20 says "our citizenship is in heaven." The word "citizenship" is a translation of the Greek word πολίτευμα , which is transliterated into English as politeuma. The Greek word politeuma is derived from the Greek word πόλις, polis, "city/state." So why don't Bible translators give us the "literal" translation of the Greek word "politeuma?" Why don't they just say "our politeuma is in heaven?" Who knows. Instead, whoever was "in charge" of translating Greek into English chose to create a new English word from the Latin word for "city," which is civitas. All of our English words like "civic" are derived from the Latin word for "city" instead of from the Greek word for "city" (polis), even though we do get words like "political" from the Greek word for "city." Again, I don't know who made this "decision" or why.
|
Clearly, there are no hard-and-fast rules for translating. If you wanted to, you would violate no "official" "rule" of translation by translating the Greek word ἐκκλησία as "zzyzx," except (1) nobody is going to understand what you're saying, and (2) that word is already taken for a desert road in California. Pick a word from Chinese or a language from some remote tribe in Africa if you want to. "Whatever works" is the rule.
Lots of "social media influencers" dogmatically maintain that "ekklesia" must be translated "congregation." That's the way William Tyndale translated the Greek in the first English translation of the New Testament. King James ordered translators of the "King James Bible" to use the word "church" instead of "congregation." Why did he do that? If you read his 15 Rules of Translation, it is pretty clear that the emphasis was on continuity and common understanding.
So why "church?"
It has a long history across many languages. Earlier English used the word "Kirk." Notice the word for "church" in the following languages:
Danish: kirke
Dutch: kerk
Finnish: kirkko
German: Kirche
Norwegian: kirke
Swedish: kyrka
King James was a powerful king, but he had nothing to do with the selection of the word "church" in all those languages. It had been used for centuries. And that's why it was chosen in the KJV. It was the most common word. The word in all these languages is derived from the Greek adjective kyriakos as used in phrases like “kuriokon doma,” the "building of the Lord," or kyriake oikia, meaning "the Lord’s house." The Greek word doma is "building." The Greek word oikos is "house." Kyriakos means "Lord." "Kirk" or "Church" comes from the word "kyriakos" so it can mean either "The Lord's House" (oikos) or "The Lord's Building" (doma). There is an obvious and Biblical justification for translating ekklesia as either "building" or "house." Further down on this webpage we're going to take a look at the massive Biblical connection in this regard. Here's a verse which makes the connection inescapable:
|
1 Timothy 3:15
I write so that you may know how you ought to conduct yourself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.
"House" is the Greek word οἶκος (oikos).
"Church" is the Greek word ἐκκλησία (ekklēsia).
Paul equates the Lord's "house" and "church," "kirk" and "ecclesia."
That's Biblical enough for me to keep using the word "church."
Why grab a Greek word for "house" instead of using some transliterated form of "ekklesia?" Many languages actually do this. Alan Knox writes,
In some modern languages, the word currently used for the church did derive from the Greek word ἐκκλησία (ekklesia). For example, the French word “église” and the Spanish word “iglesia” derive from the Greek word ἐκκλησία (ekklesia) through the Latin “ecclesia”. This does not mean that “église” and “iglesia” are always used in the same way that the New Testament authors used the word ἐκκλησία (ekklesia).
So, it does not matter what word is used to reference the church in the New Testament. We can use “church”, or “community”, or “église”, or “iglesia”. It is not the word itself that is important. Instead, it is important how we use those words. Do we use them to refer to buildings or organizations or denominations or clergy? If so, then we are not referring to the same thing that the New Testament authors were referring to when they used the Greek word ἐκκλησία (ekklesia).
If I'm wrong about that, and there really is a deeper, more sinister ecclesiastical conspiracy behind the choice of "church" rather than "congregation" or "ecclesia," I haven't seen the evidence, and I hope to show with an abundance of Scripture that "kirk" (Lord's) "house" or "building" is a more Biblical translation than "congregation" or "assembly." (Or at least as Biblical.)
The word "house" or "building" is a far more frequent description of the ekklesia than "congregation" or "assembly."
James Madison ("Father of the Constitution") frequently used the phrase "ecclesiastical body" rather than "church." But contemporary prophets who denounce the word "church" will get no mileage out of "ecclesiastical body," even though it is clearly derived from the Greek word "ekklelsia." The church-goers who are denounced by the anti-"church" crowd don't know what "church" means, what "ekklesia" means, or what "ecclesiastical body" means. That's because they don't know what the Bible is talking about, and Bible ignorance will not be overcome by changing vocabulary.
Noah Webster’s first American dictionary (1828) summarizes all this information on “church” in this way:
|
CHURCH, n. [Sax. Circe, circ or cyric; Scots, kirk, which retains the Saxon pronunciation ; D. kerk ; G. kirche ; Sw. kyrckia ; Dan. kirke ; Gr. kuriakon, a temple of God, from kuriako~ , pertaining to a Lord, or to our Lord Jesus Christ, from kurio~, a Lord. 1. A house consecrated to the worship of God, among Christians; the Lord’s house. This seems to be the original meaning of the word. The Greek, ekklesia, from ekkalew, to call out or call together, denotes an assembly or collection. But kuriako~ , kuriakon, are from kurio~, Lord, a term applied by the early christians to Jesus Christ; and the house in which they worshipped was named from that title. So kuriaka signifies church goods, bona ecclesiastica; kuriakh, sc. hmera, the Lord’s Day, dies dominica. 2. The collective body of christians, or of those who profess to believe in Christ, and acknowledge him to be the Savior of mankind. In this sense, the church is sometimes called the Catholic or Universal Church. Johnson. Encyc. 3. A particular number of christians, united under one form of ecclesiastical government, in one creed, and using the same ritual and ceremonies; as the English church, the Presbyterian church, the Romish church, the Greek church. 4. The followers of Christ in a particular city or province; as the church of Ephesus, or of Antioch. 5. The disciples of Christ assembled for worship in a particular place, as in a private house. Col. iv. [See No. 9] 6. The worshippers of Jehovah or the true God, before the advent of Christ; as the Jewish church. 7. The body of clergy, or ecclesiastics, in distinction from the laity. Hence, ecclesiastical authority. Encyc. 8. An assembly of sacred rulers convened in Christ’s name to execute his laws. Cruden. Brown. 9. The collective body of christians, who have made a public profession of the christian religion, and who are united under the same pastor; in distinction from those who belong to the same parish, or ecclesiastical society, but have made no profession of their faith. |
But as we'll see, this misses the big picture of "The Lord's Building" or "The Lord's House."
Some people think of a specific building when they think of the “house” of the Lord. But the Bible speaks of God’s House in more cosmic terms. Plus, the first Christians met in their own homes. They didn't have a separate "house of worship."
The Greek word "ekklesia" is actually derived from the Greek word καλέω, transliterated kaleo, translated "call." The prefix "ek-" means "out of," so the "literal" meaning of "ekklesia," "ek-kaleo," is "called out of." One might say "elected." So shouldn't the Greek word be translated into English as "called out people?" You could if you wanted to. Some people like the phrase "called-out ones" instead of "church."
So if you don't want to translate the Greek as "church," but prefer the transliterated "ekklesia," go for it. Nobody knows what "ekklesia" means, so you're going to have to explain it every time you use the word.
I'm going to go ahead and keep saying "church," because I don't mind having to re-define the word every time I use it. Just as nobody has the "correct" (Biblical) definition of "ekklesia," nobody has the "correct" (Biblical) definition of "church." I'm going to have to give people my own idiosyncratic (Biblical) definition of "church" at some point. If I make a big deal out of saying "ekklesia" instead of "church," people are going to think I'm in some kind of cult. When I get through explaining what I mean by "church." they're going to think that anyway, but at least I haven't alienated them right off the bat with a quirky word like "ekklesia."
If you Google "ekklesia," here is the top-ranked Google result for that word:
What is the definition of ekklesia?
According to this popular article, "church" = everything that has been "called out" of everything which is not "church." I often hear the admonition, "The Church needs to be The Church." So to "be the church" means to not be what is not the "church." That may be accurate, but it's a tautology, not very practical or helpful. "Called out" from what? "Called out" into what? Every term has to be explained eventually. The explanation (doctrine) is more important than the word.
I think I've made my point, but working through a hundred Bible verses is always profitable.
|
I like to troll people by making the following claim:
The Bible is a set of blueprints for building the house of God.
If we follow the Biblical Blueprints, we will transform the Garden into which we were planted into the City of God. The City of God is the Kingdom of God. Some Americans speak of "The Trump Administration," or "The Biden Administration," but in reality we are living under "The Jesus Administration." The "Biden Administration" is an insurrectionist rebel movement. The Bible is a blueprint or constitution for a new Administration of a new Government. "The Kingdom of God" is "The Kingdom of Jesus," the Jesus Kingdom, or the Jesus Administration.
Here is Wikipedia on "ekklesia." That article is short and worth reading. It says the "ekklesia" in ancient Greece was a civil, political, or governmental body. It made laws. It executed policy. It judged cases. It was where "democracy" happened.
This "political" aspect of "ekklesia" is very important.
The "church" represents "the Kingdom of God." That kingdom is a rival to all the kingdoms of the world. The job of "the church" is to build this "kingdom." The "church" is to be engaged in "political action."
Saying that "the called-out ones" are the "house" of God is just as political as saying Christians are the "ekklesia" of God. I'm going to show that in some detail below. For now, I want to emphasize the "political" side of "ekklesia."
When Jesus, the Messiah-King, told His disciples that He would build His ekklesia (Matthew 16:18), what did they think He meant? We must assume that His disciples knew something about Greco-Roman government, as well as something about the history of the nation of Israel, as recorded in the Scriptures (for them, the "Old Testament"). I will argue below that the "Church" should be the "State." The Greek "ekklesia" was a religious "state," and therefore a false "church." The "church" is the true "polis." There is a strong "political" struggle in the Bible.
Augustine distinguished between The City of God and the City of Man.
The City of God began in the Garden of Eden.
The City of Man began with Cain's murder of Abel and Cain's creation of the first rebellious polis: The
Meaning of the City - Wikipedia
The Origin of "the State" ("Civil Government") - Political Philosophy 101 According to the Bible
Every empire in the ancient world claimed to be religious. None were "secular." According to scholars, the coins of the Emperor Tiberius carried a “bust of Tiberius in Olympian nakedness, adorned with the laurel wreath, the sign of divinity.” The inscription read, “Emperor Tiberius August Son of the August God,” on the one side, and “Pontifex Maximus” or “High Priest” on the other. The symbols also included the emperor’s mother, Julia Augusta (Livia) sitting on the throne of the gods, holding the Olympian sceptre in her right hand, and, in her left, the olive branch to signify that “she was the earthly incarnation of the heavenly Pax [peace].” (Ethelbert Stauffer, Christ and the Caesars (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1955), p. 124.) The coins thus had a religious significance. Religion was a political affair. Caesar was a false god.
Christians would not worship this false god. To say Jesus is our "High Priest" was to deny the claim of Caesar, and inaugurate a political conflict.
Most people don't realize that "church," or ekklesia, has reference to a governmental body like our City Council or House of Representatives. The ekklesia was a decision-making body that puts the law of the civil sovereign into effect. It is a public, civic, governmental body, not a warm-fuzzy escapist retreat from life. So every "church" should be political. And in fact, every church, if consistent with "the Kingdom of God," is inescapably "political," just as Caesar was inescapably religious.
When Caesar visited a local area, he was preceded by a herald [khrux, kerux] who would proclaim, [khrussw, kerusso] the Good News [khrugma, kerugma] of the coming of the Emperor, the one who brought peace, prosperity, health and welfare [σωτηρία, sōtēria] to the conquered nation. The New Testament picked up all those Greek words and used them to describe a rival polis, a rival ekklesia, a rival empire, led by a rival Emperor.
Christians denied the claims of Caesar by affirming the claims of Jesus the Christ. Christians claimed their own heralds, or preachers, their own Gospel, or Good News, and their own Savior, who brought salvation, restoration, and regeneration to the world without regard to the claims of Caesar.
Caesar claimed to be the world’s soter, savior, who brought soteria, salvation to the oikomene, the inhabited Roman house-world. Caesar’s herald, kerux, preacher, announced, “There is no other name under heaven by which men can be saved than the name of Caesar Augustus.” Christ’s kerux announced, “Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved” (Acts 4:12).
Christ vs. Caesar. It was a conflict of two religions, two saviors, two Kingdoms. Pax Romana (the peace of Rome) or Pax Christi (the peace of Christ).
Therefore Christian action -- action which exalts Christ as Lord -- is always "political action." Life is a war between the "City of God" and the city of man. The Greek word from which we get our word "politics" is polis.
| The City of Man: anthropolis |
The City of God: Theopolis |
| η πόλη του ανθρώπου |
η πόλη του θεού
|
Every human being is ethically obligated to be a part of the City of God. If a mother is preparing to kill her child, a Christian takes action, because that human being should be a part of the City of God, and the city of man says the Christian is engaged in "political action" for opposing abortion.
The Biblical word for "salvation" is yasha, and it means "health," "welfare," "deliverance," "wholeness," "victory," and "security." Only a small fraction of the occurrences of this word have to do with where you go when you die. They have to do with the City of God.
The City of Man claims to be our savior. The City of Man claims to give us "salvation." That's why the City of Man has a "Department of Health," a "Department of Welfare," and a Department of Homeland Security. All of these are elements of the Biblical definition of "salvation."
Who is Lord? Christ or Caesar?
Who is Savior? Christ or Caesar?
Whose is the true City: man or God?
Who is the true King? Whose is the true Kingdom?
"Building" is an important metaphor in the Bible. We are to build a building. In older English, we are to "edify" one another. When "edifying" is complete, we have an "edifice." That's not a word that pops up in colloquial conversation very often. Look it up. It can mean "a building," or it can mean much more:
"It would mean the entire edifice of the American state has become a tool for repressing conservatives."
THE INTELLECTUAL RIGHT’S WAR ON AMERICA’S INSTITUTIONS | ZACK BEAUCHAMP | NOVEMBER 19, 2021 | VOXBut, at other times, vast, well-constructed, apparently robust intellectual edifices are swept away with barely a murmur because, to paraphrase Vadianus, experience really can be demonstrative.
The Invention of Science
When Jesus said "I will build My church" (Matthew 16:18), He meant more than "I will build an assembly of 50, 250, or even 2500 people." Christ is building a rival to "the American state." He is building a "robust intellectual edifice" as well as a robust spiritual and cultural edifice. The word "Christendom" has been used to describe this world-wide edifice.
The KJV word "edify" comes from the Greek word οἰκοδομή (oikodomē), which comes from two Greek words meaning "build a house." The word "church" comes from "house." The "church" is a house. But the house is being built. Its members build one another. The church builds itself. The church builds the edifice of "the Kingdom of God."
When I say "It is the Job of 'the Church' to 'Build the Kingdom' through 'Political Action,'" am I saying it is "the Pope's" job to do this? Is it the job of the "bishops" or "elders" or "pastors" to do this?
No.
Not exclusively.
When I talk about "the Church" I'm not talking about "the Institutional Church" (whatever that is).
Ephesians 4:11-12 says:
And He gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the shepherds and teachers,12 to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ,
It is "the saints" who discharge "the work of ministry." It is "the saints" who are to "build." That means you and me. Not "the clergy." They were given to equip the saints to build the Kingdom of God.
You might not agree with that last sentence. You may not agree that it is your job and my job to "build the Kingdom."
Verse 12 says you and I are to be equipped for "building up the body of Christ."
Is "the body of Christ" not a part of "the Kingdom of God?"
Of course it is.
"Kingdom" is inescapably a political term. Jesus claims to be a King. "Christ" means "king."
Many people object to the idea that man builds the Kingdom of God. They say this is "humanistic," and that the Polis of God must be created wholly by God with no participation by man, and then handed to man on a silver platter. Correct thinking on this issue requires a "paradigm shift." Hal Lindsey represents the old paradigm:
There used to be a group called "postmillennialists." They believed that the Christians would root out all the evil in the world, abolish godless rulers, and convert the world through ever-increasing evangelism until they brought about the Kingdom of God through their own efforts. Then after 1000 years of the institutional church reigning on earth with peace, equality and righteousness, Christ would return and time would end. These people rejected much of the Scripture as being literal and believed in the inherent goodness of man. World War I greatly disheartened this group and World War II virtually wiped out this viewpoint. No self-respecting scholar who looks at the world conditions and the accelerating decline of Christian influence today is a "postmillennialist."
Hal Lindsey, The Late, Great Planet Earth, 1970, p. 176
The idea that Christians would bring about the Kingdom of God "through their own efforts" is a real red-flag for these kind of Christians. They say it reeks of "secular humanism."
We do not build the Kingdom of Man, we follow God's blueprints and build the City of God, under His Providential direction.
Let's look at how the Bible connects "church" and "building" and "kingdom."
First, let's get behind the English word "church" to see what the Bible itself is saying.
We began above by noting that there are many Christians and even some denominations that get real hung-up on the English word "church." They claim that the word "church" is some kind of sinister conspiracy by King James.
God’s House = Church = Kingdom
I do not defend ecclesiastical authority or ritual and ceremonies. I object to the distinction between clergy and laity. All the laity should be active priests and kings (Revelation 1:6; 5:10). We should all be functioning as a royal priesthood (1 Peter 2:9). Christianity is not a spectator sport. Nor is it a ritual. “Worship” means service, obedience to God in every area of life.
The basic meaning of the word “worship” is service. To “worship” God is to put every area of one’s life under the His Law. As The New Bible Dictionary puts it, “[T]he essential concept in both the Old and New Testaments is ‘service.’” John Murray writes,
[Worship in the] generic sense is the devotion we owe to God in the whole of life. God is sovereign, He is Lord, having sovereignty over us and propriety in us, and therefore in all that we do we owe subjection to him, devotion to His revealed will, obedience to His commandments. There is no area of life where the injunction does not apply (I Cor. 10:31). In view of the lordship of Christ as Mediator all of life comes under His dominion (Col. 3:23,24).
Worship in the generic sense is thus service to God in every area of life; total slavery to Him Who is Lord of all. Worship cannot be limited to a “church,” or the building Christians go to once a week.
I don’t have any objection to Christians getting together in a house, rented hall, or arena to sing, pray, and listen to an entertaining motivational speaker. The question is, when they leave “the church” will they be an obedient church.
Who builds the True City? Who builds the Lord's House?
The Jews were friends of Caesar. They had been bought off.
(Luke 7:2-5) A [Roman] centurion there had a slave whom he valued highly, and who was ill and close to death. {3} When he heard about Jesus, he sent some Jewish elders to him, asking him to come and heal his slave. {4} When they came to Jesus, they appealed to Him earnestly, saying, “He is worthy of having you do this for him, {5} for he loves our people, and it is he who built [oikodomeo:G3618] our synagogue for us.”
When the Apostle Peter challenged Roman Caesar worship, he announced the building of the true empire, the true Kingdom, the True City.
(Acts 4:10-12) Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole. {11} This is the stone which was set at nought of you builders, which is become the head of the corner. {12} Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.
A new building is being erected. It is Christ’s Kingdom.
James B. Jordan writes:
| The Bible pictures the earth as a house, as in Job 38:4-6. Moreover, the Bible pictures the earth as an altar, with four corners, in Revelation 7:1; 9:13-21. All of this
goes back to the Garden of Eden, which had four rivers flowing out of it to water the whole earth, headed for the "four corners." The word for ‘corner’ in
Hebrew is kanaf, which literally means ‘wings.’ The cherubim have four wings (Ezekiel 1). The garment worn by each Hebrew male was to have four wings or corners,
so that his garment was analogous to a house or tent that he carried with him at all times (Numbers 15:38; Deuteronomy 22:12; Haggai 2:12).
What this gives us is a series of analogous models: The Garden of Eden is like a house, and they are like an altar, and they are analogous to the human person (who is the temple of the Spirit), etc. For an extended treatment of this subject, see the discussions in my book Through New Eyes: Developing a Biblical View of the World. So, when the Bible uses language that indicates that the earth is flat, that it has ends, and that it has corners, we are to understand such language in its Biblical context. And that Biblical context is the house-model of the world, seen in the glory cloud, the Garden of Eden, the Tabernacle, the Temple, the holy land, the entire earth, the human body, the clothing of the human body, the cherubim, etc. We are not to try to stretch this language to answer cosmological questions that it was not intended to address. Heaven As a Fortress Just as the earth is pictured as a house, so is heaven. Heaven is a separate house from earth, and is the model home that earth is to imitate. We pray, therefore, "Thy kingdom come on earth as in heaven; Thy will be done on earth as in heaven." The goal of history is for heaven to impress itself on earth, so that eventually heaven and earth are one, and there is one house. Heaven was created in Genesis 1:1, and so was the earth. Much of the book of Revelation takes place in heaven, so we have some idea of what it is like. The glory cloud is a sort of portable heaven-house that operates within the earthly environment. Genesis 1:2 tells us that originally the earth was without form and empty, dark and covered with water. Then, after making light, God created a ‘firmament’ to separate waters above and below (v. 6, 7). This firmament He called ‘heaven.’ Now there are two heavens, the one the dwelling place of God and the angels, made on the first day, and the second created within the original earth as a reminder of the original heaven. The fact that the word ‘heaven’ is used for the firmament means that the firmament is analogous to the original heaven, is symbolic of it. But it is important to see that the firmament-heaven is actually part of the original earth of Genesis 1:1. On the fourth day, God placed lights in the firmament-heaven, to be symbols (signs) and to act as clocks (seasons, days, and years). This means that the sun, moon, and stars are not part of the original heaven, but part of the original earth. The original earth is being differentiated into the globe on which we live on the one hand, and upper waters and lights on the other hand. On the fifth day, God created birds to fly in the firmament-heaven. What is the firmament-heaven? Dr. Hanson thinks it is "æther," because it is an environment common to both stars and birds. This won’t work, however, because ‘firmament’ is derived from a Hebrew verb meaning ‘to beat out’ or ‘to flatten out.’ The idea is of a shell or surface cast over the earth. A synonym for firmament (raqia) is aggudah (Amos 9:6), which means a vault made of strong bands. Now as a matter of fact, there is no hard shell around the earth, nor do birds fly inside a hard shell. In fact, Genesis 1 does not say that birds fly within the firmament, but across the face of it (i.e., below it). Thus, we need to see the language here as pointing to a symbolic structure. Heaven is like a fortress, and the firmament-heaven that symbolizes the original heaven, presents an appearance of a hard surface, a wall, to the viewer. After all, the Bible clearly speaks of ‘windows’ of heaven (Gen. 7:11; 8:2; 2 Kings 7:2, 19; Is. 24:18; Mal. 3:10). There are ‘doors’ in heaven (1 Kings 9:35; 2 Chron. 6:26; 7:13; Ps. 78:23; Rev. 4:1; 11:6; 19:11). Heaven has ‘gates’ (Gen. 28:17; Lev. 26:19), and so does the house of hell (Matt. 16:18). Heaven has stories of stairs (Amos 9:6). A study of these passages will indicate that rain and food come through heaven’s windows, clearly symbolic language. What we have here is phenomenal language, language of appearances. The Bible frequently uses phenomenal language, as when it refers to rodents, reptiles, and insects as "creeping things"; language not acceptable in Biology 101, but perfectly adequate for the Bible’s purposes. This is not at all to say that the Bible is irrelevant for science; but it is to say that we must interpret the Bible correctly, on its own terms, if we are to make proper applications to the questions of modern science. Genesis 1, for instance, clearly tells us that God created the universe in six normal days. It tells us the order in which He developed things. It tells us also that He made two lights, which we understand to be the sun and moon in Genesis 1. It tells us that these lights were made to function as symbols and clocks. We understand that the sun is an energy source, a source of heat, etc.; but the Bible does not call attention to this in Genesis 1. We have to take Genesis 1, and all the Bible, as it stands, and not try to force it to say things it does not intend to say. (For a full discussion of the firmament, and its expansion outward to form "outer space" on the fourth day of Genesis 1, see my book Creation in Six Days: A Defense of the Traditional Reading of Genesis One .) |
“Church” = “Kingdom”
We grievously err if we limit the meaning of “church” to a building that we attend only once (maybe twice) a week. The New Testament is filled with allusions to the building of a church, a kingdom, a temple, a dwelling place for God, in which all the saints dwell, indeed, which is all the saints.
The first occurrence of the word ekklesia in the New Testament is Matthew 16:18-19:
And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. {19} And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
Note the following about “the church”:
It goes on the offensive against a rival kingdom, hell, but hell’s defenses (“gates”) will not be able to withstand the assault by Christ’s Kingdom.
Christ promises to build this kingdom,
Christ promises to give the keys of this kingdom.
“Church” is synonymous with “kingdom.”
The following verses bring together the following themes:
· Church
· Kingdom
· Throne
· Temple
· Dwellingplace, dwell
· Body
· Build, building
These relationships emerge:
· Body = temple
· Temple = throne
· Throne = kingdom
· The body/temple/kingdom is to be built
· We are builders
· We are being built up
· We are the temple
· We are the Kingdom
· We are to build the Kingdom
In fact, one of the central purposes of being a Christian is to build the Kingdom of Christ, a command repeatedly found in the New Testament.
The temple is where God lives, or dwells. Throughout ancient world, “temple” = “palace” because the emperor (king) was divine. So “temple” = “Kingdom.”
When you see the word “throne” you should think about the King that sits on the throne, and the Kingdom which He rules. The word “temple” emphasizes the holiness of the place, while the word “palace” might emphasize its royal character. That’s why the Church is a “royal priesthood” (1 Pet 2:9), because we serve in the temple of the King.
(Acts 7:47-50) But Solomon built him an house. {48} Howbeit the most High dwelleth not in temples made with hands; as saith the prophet, {49} Heaven is my throne, and earth is my footstool: what house will ye build me? saith the Lord: or what is the place of my rest? {50} Hath not my hand made all these things?
(1 Kings 6:12-14) Concerning this house which thou art in building, if thou wilt walk in my statutes, and execute my judgments, and keep all my commandments to walk in them; then will I perform my word with thee, which I spake unto David thy father: {13} And I will dwell among the children of Israel, and will not forsake my people Israel. {14} So Solomon built the house, and finished it.
(John 2:15-16) And when he had made a scourge of small cords, he drove them all out of the temple, and the sheep, and the oxen; and poured out the changers’ money, and overthrew the tables; {16} And said unto them that sold doves, Take these things hence; make not my Father’s house an house of merchandise.
(Revelation 7:15) Therefore are they before the throne of God, and serve him day and night in his temple: and he that sitteth on the throne shall tabernacle among them.
(Hebrews 3:6) But Christ as a son over his own house; whose house are we, if we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm unto the end.
(Ephesians 2:19-22) Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellow-citizens with the saints, and of the household of God; {20} And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone; {21} In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord: {22} In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.
(Galatians 6:10) As we have therefore opportunity, let us do good unto all men, especially unto them who are of the household of faith.
(1 Timothy 3:15) if I am delayed, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth.
(1 Corinthians 3:16-17) Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you? {17} If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are.
(1 Corinthians 6:19) What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?
(2 Corinthians 5:1-4) For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens. {2} For in this we groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed upon with our house which is from heaven: {3} If so be that being clothed we shall not be found naked. {4} For we that are in this tabernacle do groan, being burdened: not for that we would be unclothed, but clothed upon, that mortality might be swallowed up of life.
(2 Corinthians 6:16-17) And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. {17} Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you,
(1 John 4:12) No man hath seen God at any time. If we love one another, God dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in us.
(Revelation 21:3) And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God.
(Revelation 21:22) And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it.
(Revelation 3:12) Him that overcometh [nikao – think “Nike” - victory] will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name.
Overcome + Kingdom
(Revelation 3:21) To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne.
(Luke 11:20-22) But if I with the finger of God cast out devils, no doubt the kingdom of God is come upon you. {21} When a strong man armed keepeth his palace, his goods are in peace: {22} But when a stronger than he shall come upon him, and overcome him, he taketh from him all his armour wherein he trusted, and divideth his spoils.
(Revelation 12:10-11) And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night. {11} And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death.
(Revelation 15:2-3) And I saw as it were a sea of glass mingled with fire: and them that had gotten the victory [nikao] over the beast, and over his image, and over his mark, and over the number of his name, stand on the sea of glass, having the harps of God. {3} And they sing the song of Moses the servant of God, and the song of the Lamb, saying, Great and marvellous are thy works, Lord God Almighty; just and true are thy ways, thou King of saints.
(Revelation 17:12-14) And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast. {14} These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings: and they that are with him are called, and chosen, and faithful.
(Matthew 21:42-44) Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord’s doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes? {43} Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof. {44} And whosoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken: but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder.
(Matthew 24:1) And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to him for to show him the buildings [oikodome] of the temple.
(John 2:18-21) Then answered the Jews and said unto him, What sign showest thou unto us, seeing that thou doest these things? {19} Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. {20} Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days? {21} But he spake of the temple of his body.
(1 Corinthians 3:6-17) I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase. {7} So then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase. {8} Now he that planteth and he that watereth are one: and every man shall receive his own reward according to his own labour. {9} For we are labourers together with God: ye are God’s husbandry, ye are God’s building. {10} According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon. {11} For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ. {12} Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble; {13} Every man’s work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man’s work of what sort it is. {14} If any man’s work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. {15} If any man’s work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire. {16} Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you? {17} If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are.
[The temple in Jerusalem was burned to the ground in AD70.]
(Psalms 68:15-16) The hill of God is as the hill of Bashan; an high hill as the hill of Bashan. {16} Why leap ye, ye high hills? this is the hill which God desireth to dwell in; yea, the LORD will dwell in it for ever.
(Isaiah 4:5-6) And the LORD will create upon every dwelling place of mount Zion, and upon her assemblies, a cloud and smoke by day, and the shining of a flaming fire by night: for upon all the glory shall be a defence. {6} And there shall be a tabernacle for a shadow in the daytime from the heat, and for a place of refuge, and for a covert from storm and from rain.
(Micah 4:1-5) In days to come the mountain of the Lord’s house shall be established as the highest of the mountains, and shall be raised up above the hills. Peoples shall stream to it, {2} and many nations shall come and say: “Come, let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob; that he may teach us his ways and that we may walk in his paths.” For out of Zion shall go forth instruction, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem. {3} He shall judge between many peoples, and shall arbitrate between strong nations far away; they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks; nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more; {4} but they shall all sit under their own vines and under their own fig trees, and no one shall make them afraid; for the mouth of the LORD of hosts has spoken. {5} For all the peoples walk, each in the name of its god, but we will walk in the name of the LORD our God forever and ever.
The Biblical word “edify” is from the Greek,
3618. oikodomeo, oy-kod-om-eh’-o; from the same as G3619; to be a house-builder, i.e. construct or (fig.) confirm:--(be in) build (-er, -ing, up), edify, embolden.
3619. oikodome, oy-kod-om-ay’; fem. (abstr.) of a comp. of G3624 and the base of G1430; architecture, i.e. (concr.) a structure; fig. confirmation:--building, edify (-ication, -ing).
3624. oikos, oy’-kos; of uncert. affin.; a dwelling (more or less extensive, lit. or fig.); by impl. a family (more or less related, lit. or fig.):--home, house (-hold), temple.
1430. doma, do’-mah; from demo (to build); prop. an edifice, i.e. (spec.) a roof:--housetop.
Recall above that the English word “church” was found in phrases like “kuriokon doma,” the “house of the Lord.” The Greek word “oikodomeo” is literally “build a house.” The House of God is the "Temple," where the King dwells.
Our English word “edifice” means building. To “edify” is to build an edifice. To “edify” someone in the Christian sense is to build them up into the House of God on the Foundation of Christ and the Apostles. They become indwelt by the King. The church becomes the Kingdom. The temple is where God dwells. The dwelling/palace of God is where His throne is. The temple is kingdom headquarters. The Body of Christ is His temple, His Kingdom.
(Acts 9:31) Then had the churches rest throughout all Judaea and Galilee and Samaria, and were Kingdom/House-built; and walking in the fear of the Lord, and in the comfort of the Holy Ghost, were multiplied.
(Acts 20:32) And now, brethren, I commend you to God, and to the word of his grace, which is able to Kingdom/House-build you up, and to give you an inheritance among all them which are made into saints.
(Romans 14:17-19) For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost. [pax romana, or pax Christi?]{18} For he that in these things serveth Christ is acceptable to God, and approved of men. {19} Let us therefore follow after the things which make for peace, and things wherewith one may Kingdom/House-build one another.
(Romans 15:2) Let every one of us please his neighbour for his good to Kingdom/House-building.
(Romans 15:20) Yea, so have I strived to preach the gospel, not where Christ was named, lest I should build upon another man’s foundation:
(1 Corinthians 8:1) Now as touching things offered unto idols, we know that we all have knowledge. Knowledge puffeth up, but charity oikodomeo, builds the house of God.
(1 Corinthians 10:23) All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but all things do not oikodomeo, build the house of God.
(1 Corinthians 14:3-5) But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men to house-building, and exhortation, and comfort. {4} He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church. {5} I would that ye all spake with tongues, but rather that ye prophesied: for greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying.
(1 Corinthians 14:12) Even so ye, forasmuch as ye are zealous of spiritual gifts, seek that ye may excel to the house-building of the church.
(1 Corinthians 14:17) For thou verily givest thanks well, but the other is not built into a house.
(1 Corinthians 14:26) How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto house-building.
(2 Corinthians 10:8) For though I should boast somewhat more of our authority, which the Lord hath given us for edification, and not for your destruction, I should not be ashamed:
(2 Corinthians 12:19) Again, think ye that we excuse ourselves unto you? we speak before God in Christ: but we do all things, dearly beloved, for your edifying.
(2 Corinthians 13:10) Therefore I write these things being absent, lest being present I should use sharpness, according to the power which the Lord hath given me to house-building, and not to demolition (kathairesin | καθαίρεσιν; see 2 Corinthians 10:4,8).
(Ephesians 2:20-22) And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone; {21} In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord: {22} In whom ye also are builded together for an dwelling-place of God through the Spirit.
(Ephesians 4:12) For the perfecting of the saints for the work of the ministry, for the building into a house of the body of Christ:
(Ephesians 4:15-16) But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ: {16} From whom the whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love.
(Ephesians 4:29) Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth, but that which is good to the use of house-building, that it may minister grace unto the hearers.
(Colossians 2:7) Rooted and built up [ep-oikodomeo] in him, and stablished in the faith, as ye have been taught, abounding therein with thanksgiving.
(1 Thessalonians 5:11) Wherefore comfort yourselves together, and edify one another, even as also ye do.
(1 Timothy 1:4) Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith: so do.
(2 Timothy 2:19-21) Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his. And, Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity. {20} But in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and of silver, but also of wood and of earth; and some to honour, and some to dishonour. {21} If a man therefore purge himself from these, he shall be a vessel unto honour, sanctified, and meet for the master’s use, and prepared unto every good work.
(Hebrews 11:10) For he looked for a city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God.
[The city is the New Jerusalem (Revelation 3:12), which is the church.]
(1 Peter 2:4-9) To whom coming, as unto a living stone, disallowed indeed of men, but chosen of God, and precious, {5} Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ. {6} Wherefore also it is contained in the scripture, Behold, I lay in Sion a chief corner stone, elect, precious: and he that believeth on him shall not be confounded. {7} Unto you therefore which believe he is precious: but unto them which be disobedient, the stone which the builders disallowed, the same is made the head of the corner, {8} And a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence, even to them which stumble at the word, being disobedient: whereunto also they were appointed. {9} But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should show forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:
(Jude 1:20) But ye, beloved, building up yourselves on your most holy faith, praying in the Holy Ghost,
(Revelation 3:12) Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name.
(1 Chronicles 23:25-28) For David said, The LORD God of Israel hath given rest unto his people, that they may dwell in Jerusalem for ever: {26} And also unto the Levites; they shall no more carry the tabernacle, nor any vessels of it for the service thereof. {27} For by the last words of David the Levites were numbered from twenty years old and above: {28} Because their office was to wait on the sons of Aaron for the service of the house of the LORD, in the courts, and in the chambers, and in the purifying of all holy things, and the work of the service of the house of God;
(Revelation 22:3) And there shall be no more curse: but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it; and his servants shall serve him:
The City of God claims jurisdiction over the entire creation.
The City of Man resents this.
The City of Man tells Christians to keep God's morality out of [humanistic, secular] politics.
Christians refuse to do this.
Therefore Christians will always be accused of engaging in "political action" or trying to "impose a Theocracy."
The kind of "political action" that Christmas commands has little to do with "voting" and "electing" "political" "candidates." Not that there's anything inherently wrong with that, but it isn't what changes the world. It isn't what builds the City of God.
If you want to abolish the Department of Education (which politicians since Ronald Reagan have been promising), you must personally see to it that a child is educated. The entire Church should follow your example.
If you want to abolish the Department of Welfare, you must perform the "works of mercy" which the Messiah commanded. The entire Church should follow your example.
The Secular Messianic State will always allege that your exercise of religion is "political," because politics is a substitute for true religion:
James 1:27 says
Pure and undefiled religion before God and the Father is this:
to visit orphans and widows in their trouble,
and to keep oneself unspotted from the world.
This verse, according to some churches, says true religion is "social action," and the "church" must not be involved in "social action."
Politicians are happy to put up a façade of social action, because they do so with other people's money. But social action which is not an extension of the reign of the Messiah, through His Body, is not real social action.
Our text here is "the Dominion Mandate," Genesis 1:26-28. Also, Genesis 2:15,19
Here we read the purpose for which God created Man.
Human beings were created to "exercise dominion" over the earth as stewards of God's property.
This means growing and building the Kingdom of God, for the glory of God.
This means transforming a wilderness into a Garden, and the Garden into the City of God, the New Jerusalem, a city of unlimited
growth and wealth.
I have benefited from a book entitled, Images of the Spirit by Meredith G. Kline. Kline suggests that the physical theophanic Glory of the Holy Spirit, who hovered over the original earth creation in Gen 1:2, served as the "divine model" for man's creation. In expounding these themes, Kline develops a system of typology where the Garden of Eden, the tabernacle, temple, priest and prophet are all modeled after the archetypal form of the Glory-Spirit, which is a model of heaven itself. Jesus taught us to pray that God's will would be done "on earth as it is in heaven." Comparing the first chapters of Genesis and the last chapters of Revelation suggests that man's original purpose is nothing less than building the City of God, the New Jerusalem. Edenic motifs are clearly seen in Revelation.
The "newness" of the "New" Jerusalem is the absence of the ceremonial temple, and the liturgical or restorative patterns of reconciling God and sinners found in the Old Covenant. Just as man was to "dress and keep" the Garden, so he was/is to dress the entire world into the City of God.
Obviously, "anarcho-preterists" do not believe that The City of God is created by a joint act of Congress. The New Jerusalem is not the handiwork of an ecclesiastical council or synod, or ecumenical one-world religion.
The New Jerusalem is the Bride of Christ, and she must adorn herself for her Husband with righteous acts (Revelation 21:2; 19:7-8; Psalm 45:9-14; Isaiah 54:5; 61:10; 62:4).
But God still gets all the credit.
Consider the "Division of Labor" (Romans 12; 1 Corinthians 12).
There is not a single person on planet earth who can build a pencil from scratch. This is
because all the labor and skills required to extract the raw materials from God's Creation and assemble them into a pencil are divided among many human beings, no one of
them possessing all the skills and knowledge needed to plant and harvest trees, extract and refine chemicals, and build the equipment which fabricates a pencil. While Faber-Castell
might get credit for making pencils, many other companies had a hand in the task. Previous generations saw the global human economy as being overseen by an "Invisible
Hand." Also called "Providence," about which we'll see more below.
Ultimately, only God can get credit for building the New Jerusalem, but man is commanded to do the work.
Imagine a large apartment. I mean really large, like 432 Park Avenue, the tallest residential building in New York. Or five of the ten tallest buildings in the world, found in Dubai, United Arab Emirates. One of these buildings can house 25,000 human beings. Who gets "credit" for building one of these buildings? Maybe the architect -- except it was a team of architects. Maybe the CEO of the Construction firm, but he personally does not know how to build a cement mixer. Suppose your vocation is being a plumber, and you were hired to install a unique sink in one of the residences on the 32nd floor during the construction of one of these buildings. Do you get credit for building the building? Of course not. You knew very little about what kind of building was being constructed. You were just fulfilling your individual calling as a plumber. Should you say, "This is not my building, so I'm not going to contribute to its edification?" That would be disobedient.
Each human being has a calling to build part of the Kingdom of God. It is man's job to build the kingdom. God gets all the credit.
Man's divine purpose on earth is to create a flourishing anarchist society, overseen only by an Invisible Hand.
It is the task of "the Church" (The Body of Christ) to "build." We build the Body of Christ into the Lord's House. We build the earth into the Lord's Temple. We tear down the city of man and build the City of God. And when the New Jerusalem is complete, Christ the Master-Builder will get all the praise and credit.
The Empires of the world will say this interferes with their agenda. It violates "the separation of church and State."
The Empires are correct.
To be "saved" means to enter the Kingdom. The Kingdom is salvation. What do the Biblical Blueprints describe? What does the Kingdom/Building look like? The Bible frequently uses “Vine & Fig Tree” imagery to describe "salvation."
The phrase "Vine & Fig Tree" is seen most clearly in the Old Testament Prophet Micah, the fourth chapter.
| The “Vine & Fig Tree” Prophecy Micah 4:1-7 1 But it shall come to pass, |
Some of George Washington's favorite passages of the Bible were those that spoke of every man dwelling safely "under his own vine and fig tree." Other Founding Fathers also referred to this "Vine & Fig Tree" ideal.
(George Washington would recommend that you enroll in The 12 Days of Christmas program. He read the Bible for an hour each morning, and another hour in the evening.)
George Washington was motivated by the Vine & Fig Tree vision revealed in the Bible. Washington's Diaries are available online at the Library of Congress. They are introduced with these words:
No theme appears more frequently in the writings of Washington than his love for his land. The diaries are a monument to that concern. In his letters
he referred often, as an expression of this devotion and its resulting contentment, to an Old Testament passage. After the Revolution, when he had returned to Mount
Vernon, he wrote the Marquis de Lafayette on Feb. 1, 1784:
This phrase occurs at least 11 times in Washington's letters.
|
Vine & Fig Tree is also a phrase from the prophet Micah, the idea of everyone owning property and enjoying the fruits of their labor without fear of theft or political oppression, of sitting peacefully under your "Vine & Fig Tree."
Hundreds of years before Christ, the prophet Daniel spoke of the first Christmas, the birth of the Messiah in the days of the Roman Empire. That barbaric, debauched empire was destroyed, and the Kingdom of Christ began growing like a mustard tree, like leaven, like a field (Matthew 13). The Emperor Justinian began Christianizing the Eastern Roman Empire, and in the West kings like Alfred and Ethelbert made the 10 Commandments the basis of new legal systems. The "Common Law" began, with a Christian foundation, and eventually found its way into the Constitution of the United States, "a Christian nation." From 12 dejected disciples, Christianity has spread across the world, and billions of people claim to be Christian. Though there have been ups and downs, the progress of Christianity has been undeniable -- at least to those who have been taught the facts of history.
Most Americans in the 21st century have not.
Many Christians today believe Jesus came to get us a ticket to heaven when we die. In the meantime, Satan rules the planet. Their story of the Bible goes like this:
In other words, Satan wins.
Pretty dismal story, isn't it?
Sure, God sent His Son, who died on the cross, so that some of the players can be forgiven for their rebellion and go home with God, but God's original purposes for man and the creation were thwarted by Satan, the ultimate victor.
Click here to listen to the "Vine & Fig Tree" worldview
Americans should be able to understand the Biblical concept of "church." The first Americans were "called out" of Europe. They saw themselves on an errand into the wilderness. In 1776 they Declared that the abolition of the government of the European Caesar was their "duty" (not just a "right").
What kind of Kingdom would we build if we were starting from scratch? The first Adam had this opportunity in the Garden of Eden, but rejected the command to build the Kingdom of God, and chose to build the kingdom of man instead.
But Jesus is the Last Adam (1 Corinthians 15:45) and He restores His people to the position they had in the Garden of Eden.
We need to abolish the City of Man and build the City of God.
America's Founders abolished their government. They said their government had crossed the line and become a tyranny. If America's Founders could travel through time from their day to ours, they would be appalled at our government, and take immediate steps to abolish it.
John Quincy Adams, in an “Oration on the Life and Character of Gilbert Motier de la Fayette,” Delivered at the request of both Houses of the Congress of the United States, before them, in the House of Representatives at Washington, on the 31st of December, 1834, said:
The war was revolutionary. It began by the dissolution of the British Government in the Colonies; the People of which were, by that operation, left without any Government whatever.
If we were starting over, creating a new society, what kind of constitution should we choose, seeing the current Constitution has been such a failure?
Adams was exaggerating. America was not "left without any Government whatever." Americans had "government" -- self-government. James Madison, "the Father of the Constitution," is reported to have said this:
We have staked the whole future of American civilization, not upon the power of government, far from it. We have staked the future of all of our political institutions upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves ... according to the Ten Commandments of God.
Americans would be well-governed not because they had laws, statutes, executive orders, regulations, and Supreme Court opinions from a "civil government," but because they had the Bible. R. J. Rushdoony wrote the following:
|
|
In principle, Adams is advocating "Theocracy." Adams is saying we should be governed by God and His Law Book, the Bible.
In principle, John Adams is also advocating "anarchy." A society without "The State."
No, he wasn't advocating "anarchy" directly. Adams' purpose was just to praise the Bible. He would probably say it was just "hyperbole."
The Bible as the "only law book?"
Nobody in government today would ever say what Adams said, not even in "hyperbole":
"We should take the Bible for our only law book."
That's too "radical." That's "extremist." It's "homophobic." Or something. Only a "domestic terrorist" would say something like that.
Rushdoony authored a book called Institutes of Biblical Law [read] [buy], explaining how the Bible had been used as a law book in John Adams' day (and throughout the history of Christendom), and how the Bible could be used today. Rushdoony's "law book" is not the same kind of "law book" as those found in a law library, containing statutes and decrees of government, enforced by violent earthly enforcers. Rushdoony's book explains how to take the Bible as our only law book.
The reason we don't need a library of books on compulsion and violence is because there is no verse in the Bible that anyone can point to and say,
This verse gives me the right to
and be assured God will not hold me guilty of sin for doing such things." |
Joe Biden cannot say that. Vladimir Putin cannot say that. No human being on planet earth in our day can say that. If you take the Bible seriously, that claim has staggering implications. Can you find such a verse in the Bible that Putin can legitimately point to?
I've heard this expression several times. I'm not always sure what the phrase means. I think it means whatever the writer wants to say it means. It means the reader should do what the writer thinks other people should do. So allow me to join the crowd and tell you what I think the phrase should mean. From an Anarcho-Theocratic perspective.
The Greek word ekklesia was a civil/political term in New Testament times. The "church" should be a rival and replacement for the humanistic ekklesia.
Compare also the Greek word πόλις, polis, which can be translated "city" or "city-state." We get the English word "political" from the Greek polis.
I would argue that to "be the church" means to be the true State, that is, the true "polis," the true "ekklesia," the socio-political kingdom of God on earth. Every other ekklesia, every other kingdom is a false pseudo-church. The true church is the true ekklesia, the true government.
Both "church" and "state" claim to be the source of "salvation." The State's definition of "salvation" is more Biblical than that of the Church.
There is nothing that any human society needs that can be provided better by the Greek/secular polis/ekklesia than by the Christian church, the City of God.
Notice how the Christian ekklesia rivals the secular ekklesia:
On the other hand, there are many things that the secular ekklesia does that Christians should never do:
|
Of course, the church cannot use the weapons of the State. "The Private Sector" uses only persuasion, while "The Public Sector" uses force and threats of violence. Every Professor of Political Science in every university on planet earth will agree that the fundamental nature of "The State" is its Monopoly on Violence. "The State" is systematic, institutionalized SIN. "Civil government" does what every member of the "private sector" would consider sinful. "Civil Government" does not exist at all if it is not violating God's Commandments. The two most obvious being
There are two functions which everyone (except anarchists) agree must be done by "the State."
Everybody agrees (except anarchists) that we need "the State" (a secular ekklesia/polis) to perform these "vital functions."
The Christian Anarcho-Theocrat does not believe these functions are "vital," and does not believe they require the creation of "civil government" even if
they are [still] vital.
The Christian Anarcho-Theocrat believes that these functions were originally given to "The City of God" and more particularly to the Family, not "the State."
What happened at the time of Moses was the addition of the Levitical priesthood to the patriarchal society of Israel. The priests became centrally involved in both "capital punishment" and "holy war."
The priesthood would be much better likened to "the church" rather than to "the State." But there was no "separation of church and state" in ancient Israel.
The purpose of "capital punishment" was shedding blood to make atonement for "capital" crimes.
Blood, Atonement, and "Capital Punishment"
The command to shed blood was originally given to the Family, and the priests were added at the time of Moses to aid the family heads ("elders").
"Holy War" was also overseen by the priests, and the offensive genocidal wars of Israel against the nations of Canaan cannot possibly provide a model for any "state" today. Those wars were not "defensive," they were offensive/aggressive, and they were priestly, not "civil." Wars were prosecuted by "the church." (The entire nation of Israel is called a "church" [Acts 7:38, ekklesia].)
"Holy War" and "Capital Punishment"
No vital social function was ever given by God to a secular political monopoly.
Suppose the State bakes yummy chocolate chip cookies and gives them to the poor. Nothing wrong with baking, nothing wrong with cookies, nothing wrong with helping the poor. But in order for these good things to be done by "The Public Sector," they must engage in taxation, which is extortion, a violation of the command "Thou shalt not steal." "The Private Sector" can bake cookies and pass them out without sinning like the State does.
I've drawn the contrast between the Christian ekklesia and the "secular" ekklesia. Actually, the civil government in Greece was "very religious" [Acts 17:22], not "secular," but we've all been trained to believe in the separation of church and secular).
The secular state/ekklesia is in rebellion against Christ's State/Ekklesia.
I think the New Testament is saying that Christians are called out of "the polis," the Greek city-state, the ekklesia of the pagans, and are commanded to build a new ekklesia, a new "polis."
James 4:4
Adulterers and adulteresses! Do you not know that friendship with the world is enmity with God? Whoever therefore wants to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God.
"The Church" needs to be "anarchist" with respect to the polis, the City of Man, and "archist" with respect to King Jesus, the Messiah, and the City of God.
Jesus is the One True ArchistThat link defines what an "archist" is. When the Bible says we are to leave vengeance to God, it is saying we should leave archism to God.
To sum it up, the Church should be the State. Every activity performed by the State should be performed by the Church -- unless that activity is immoral and should be performed by nobody at all.
Any entity calling itself "the church" or a "local church" which only provides "liturgical" services and doesn't have a vision for providing vital social functions which are currently usurped by "the State" is not a part of the City of God.
Is "The Institutional Church" a Part of "The Kingdom of God?""The Public Sector" ought to be abolished, and "The Private Sector" ought to be Christianized.
There are two directions to go from here.
Your typical "church" claims that it's primary purpose is related to "salvation." It's primary task is to "preach the Gospel."
True enough: What the world needs is "The Gospel," which means "Good News."
The "Good News" is "salvation."
But . . .
In the Bible, "salvation" means "deliverance" -- deliverance from the pagan polis, the secular ekklesia.
In the Bible, "salvation" is primarily social, and therefore primarily political. (Everything is "political," because everyone is a member
of a polis, either the Polis of God or the Polis of Man, and in the ancient world, the City of Man was the City of Satan and his powers (Luke 4:5-7). Jesus ascended to the
throne in heaven after all power and authority on earth and in heaven had been taken from Satan and given to Christ (Matthew 28:18-20).
The Secular polis/ekklesia promises "salvation" in the holistic Biblical sense.
When the church starts to "be the church," it will stop looking to the secular state for holistic socio-political salvation.
Make no mistake: the State will be deeply offended by that.
In the Bible, "salvation" is statelessness. We are saved from archists.
We're going to look at the overwhelming Biblical support for those claims.
Not "What is 'salvation' in the minds of most professing Christians?"
What does the Bible say?
The Hebrew word for "save" or "bring salvation" is "yasha." In various derivatives it can be translated "deliverance," "victory," "safety," "security," and "welfare." (The Greek equivalent also carries the idea of "health.")
What does the government promise? We have a Department of Health, a Welfare Department, a Department of Homeland Security -- all components of the Biblical concept of "salvation." "The Government" (a.k.a. "civil government") is always a substitute for God. God is our Governor (Isaiah 33:22), and He brings salvation.
The name "Jesus" comes from the Hebrew word Yhowshuwa', which is derived from yasha', which is the Hebrew word most frequently translated "salvation."
Here is how a very mainstream scholar defines that Hebrew word:
Yasha and its derivatives are used 353 times. The root meaning . . . is “make wide” or make sufficient: this root is in contrast to sarar, “narrow,” which means “be restricted” or “cause distress.” To move from distress to safety requires deliverance. [T]he majority of references to salvation speak of Yahweh granting deliverance from real enemies and out of real catastrophes. That which is wide connotes freedom from distress and the ability to pursue one’s own objectives. Thus salvation is not merely a momentary victory on the battlefield; it is also the safety and security necessary to maintain life unafraid of numerous dangers.
Hartley, John E. (1999). 929 יָשַׁע ["yasha"], in R. L. Harris, G. L. Archer, Jr. & B. K. Waltke (Eds.), Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, vol. 1, pp. 414-15.
I admit that I say many controversial things. That definition is not one of them. It is thoroughly Biblical. That's a very conservative, mainstream reference work. Let's look at it in more detail.
|
Consider first the phrase "safety and security necessary to maintain life." This is also the "safety and security necessary to maintain a prosperous and humane society." In order to go to WalMart and buy a shopping cart full of food and household accessories, there has to be a global network of businesses who create and transport millions of products by making billions of economic calculations and transactions. Millions of human beings have to get to work on time, run the trucks on schedule, choose to work instead of stealing and robbing, and work the graveyard shift so that when you get to the store, all the items you want are neatly arranged on the shelf in an order which makes it possible for you to quickly find what you need and get on with life.
Who should we trust for "safety" and "security?" What does the Bible say?
Most of us, who were educated in State-approved schools, believe that the "safety and security necessary to maintain life" is the product of a strong State. "Anarchism" in their mind is the complete absence of safety and security.
The Bible repeatedly says that if we obey God the Lawgiver by loving our neighbor through productive service, God our Judge and King will "bless" us with peace and prosperity. "Peace" means "safety" and "security." These are all components of the Biblical picture of holistic "salvation."
But there are those who want to supplant God the King by promising to give us salvation if we will vote for them.
"Safety" and "security" are blessings from God, not government. We enjoy "safety" and "security" when our nation is Christian and observes "the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God," that is, the Bible. Nobody enjoys "safety" and "security" when the government becomes a tyranny which bans the Bible and people behave like pagans.
Leviticus 26
"Archists" will not go through your land. If we obey God's commandments, He will not send archists to judge us.
Notice in the following verses, social/political/military peace is promised. This is part of the Biblical doctrine of "salvation": freedom from archists. No fear of archists and the sword they bear.
| Micah 4:4 4 But they shall sit every man under his vine and under his fig tree; and none shall make them afraid: for the mouth of the LORD of hosts hath spoken it. |
I'm calling this a "Reader's Guide" because it is not yet a coherent, well-edited essay. It's a "brain dump." It's a collection of resources, someday to be re-packaged for easier consumption. You'll notice repeating headers. I've pasted a few other articles into this one. My apologies. As Mark Twain might have said, "I wanted to write a shorter web page, but I didn't have time."
Salvation is comprehensive.
In order for "the public sector" to provide salvation, it must govern "the private sector" with totalitarian authority. Even if it initially permits a limited
number of "freedoms," the secular State claims total jurisdiction over our lives. Every State says, "We can do anything we want in an 'emergency.'" Based on the
laws already on the books, you commit several crimes against the State every day of your life, but the conflict is not
completely manifest just yet. We are compliant. Like the fish in the fishbowl, we don't realize that we are swimming in the water of the State. Even though you are a criminal, the
State has bigger fish to fry. For now.
In order to give us salvation, the State needs to direct the totality of life.
The Framers of the U.S. Constitution tell us we need a "civil government" with
|
The Bible says,
|
|
These are two completely different, contradictory, rival religions. |
|
James 1:27 tells us that true "religion" is looking out for widows and orphans.
The religion of Statism tells us to trust "the State" to take care of the weak.
But the religion of Statism also tells us that it is morally legitimate for the State to create millions of widows and orphans in pursuit of salvation, a "New World Order," or a "bold foreign policy." On average in the 20th century, the State created thousands of widows and orphans every single day of the year, every year for the last century. During my lifetime, the U.S. government killed, crippled, or made homeless TENS of MILLIONS of innocent, non-combatant non-white civilians around the world. The once-Christian United States is a false god, a false savior, and the enemy of God and humanity.
The Federalists gave us a new Constitution in order to un-do what the Anti-Federalists had done in the American Revolution. John Quincy Adams said,
The war was revolutionary. It began by the dissolution of the British Government in the Colonies; the People of which were, by that operation, left without any Government whatever.
The Federalists believed we could not survive as a society without any government whatever. America needed a Greek-style ekklesia.
The Framers were victims of "natural law" thinking, not Biblical Law.
Roman law, not Hebrew law.
Athens, not Jerusalem.
The Federalists now rule not only the United States, but their tentacles of the Greek ekklesia extend around the world.
Jesus is the only legitimate "Archist." All human archists are idols or false gods. The absence of creaturely archists -- "an-archy" -- is good news.
The English word "anarchist" comes from two Greek words meaning "not an archist."
An "archist" is someone who believes he has the right to impose his own will on others by force or threats of violence.
The State tells us that "anarchists" are bad people.
The Bible tells us that "archists" are the bad guys. Proof.
Most people would say the Bible is all about how to "get saved," that is, go to heaven when you die.
Actually, the vast majority of the occurrences of the word "salvation" in the Bible are talking about a peaceful and prosperous society on earth.
There are whole books in the Bible about "politics" ("Judges" "Kings") but not a single book that says nothing about the State and is wholly about going to heaven when you die.
There are 30,000 verses in the Bible. Most of them are not talking about heaven. They're talking about earth.
"Salvation" is "heaven on earth." Paradise. Utopia. Freedom from archists.
We'll look at all those verses below. It's a big job.
Jesus said we should pray that God's will would be done "on earth as it is in heaven." Matthew 6:10
Jesus said the greatest commandment is to love God with all your heart, mind, soul, and strength. (Mark 12:30; quoting Deuteronomy 6:4-5)
100%. (Jesus was no "moderate.")
The second greatest commandment (Mark 12:31) can be summed up like this:
"Don't hurt people and don't take their stuff." (See Romans 13:8-10)
The Bible says "the State" was invented by people like Cain and Nimrod to get around these two commandments.
"archists" want to "be as gods" (Genesis 3:5), and exercise their divinity over others through force and threats of violence: taxation, incarceration, war, etc.
If Jones says, "I have an idea: Let's form a State!" and Smith says, "OK, but this time, let's have a State which will never engage in taxation or violence (lockdowns, war, vengeance, etc.) of any kind," Jones will say (or should say), "Well then why have a State at all?"
Good question.
The whole purpose of the State is to create a plausible-sounding excuse for violating God's commands to love your enemy, not steal, and not take vengeance.
People create "governments" because they don't trust God to provide "salvation" in the holistic Biblical sense of that word.
"Thou shalt not steal," says God, but "the State" does not exist without theft (extortion, "taxation").
"Thou shalt not kill," says God, but "the State" claims the power of life and death. If it does not, it is not a "State" or "civil government."
The purpose of the State is not just to create an efficient machine or structure for exacting revenue and inflicting violence on people. It's about a mythology. It's about a religion that inculcates faith in the machinery of vengeance and extortion.
The State exists not only to steal, but to make stealing by the State seem "responsible," "practical," "realistic," "sensible,"
and to make faithfulness seem "irresponsible," "impractical," "unrealistic," "utopian."
"Faithfulness" means trusting God, loving our enemies, not hurting or stealing.
Education is therefore an important part of the State. A Messianic State needs Messianic Education. See R.J. Rushdoony's book, The Messianic Character of American Education. Government education ("public schools") is religious. Liberal historian Sidney Mead has admitted that the public school system is America's "established church." It teaches us to trust the plutocrats in the ruling Oligarchy rather than the God of the Bible.
All the empires in the Bible were explicitly religious. Caesar was the high priest ("Pontifex Maximus") and the divine "son of god."
Today governments claim to be "secular," but the Religion of Secular Humanism is just a replacement for the
religion of Jesus Christ.
|
|
The fundamental issue in the Bible is Providence vs. Statism.
Faith in God to provide "salvation" in the broadest sense, vs. faith in Man ("the State") to provide salvation.
The City of God vs. the City of Man, as Augustine put it.
The "Invisible Hand of Divine Providence" vs. the visible fist of socialist planners.
Faith in the creature rather than the Creator is the essence of "idolatry."
"The State" is an idol. It is a false god.
We should abolish all the kingdoms of man and put our faith in the Kingdom of God.
Christ, not Caesar, is Lord and Savior.
In order to understand the Biblical meaning of the word "salvation," it is necessary to understand that the Bible is an Anarchist Manifesto.
If you read the Bible and you don't walk away saying that we should abolish "the State" -- or as the prophet Micah put it: beat our "swords into plowshares" -- then you don't understand what the Bible is saying, or you don't understand what "the State" is saying, or both.
This is probably because you're a victim of educational malpractice.
Like me.
The Bible is saying that Jesus is the only legitimate Government. The Bible is saying that the Bible, as the Word of God, is a blueprint for a peaceful and prosperous society. The Bible is a textbook of political science. "Political" in terms of the Polis of God, the City of God, not "political" in the way the secular polis wants to rule us all as the City of Man. The Bible is a textbook of Theonomic Politics, with which we are morally obligated to replace the autonomous City of Man.
|
I used to believe as you do, that the Bible is not a "political tract." Or as this idea is also stated, "The Bible is not a textbook of political science," or economics, or any field of study -- including religion. The Bible, it turns out, is not a textbook of ANYTHING. Or so I was taught.
It took me half my life to realize that the Bible is actually an anarchist manifesto.
I realize that sounds crazy.
The State claims to bring "salvation" in the Biblical sense of that word.
As I said, I realize it's going against the tide to say that the central message of the Bible is "anarchism."
The Bible is a very big book.
The State is a very big Leviathan.
Most people don't understand most of what the Bible is saying.
Most people don't understand most of the The State is doing.
The State is doing the opposite of what the Bible is saying.
But the State is trying to bring "salvation" in the Biblical sense. "Civil Government" is a secular ekklesia. The State is a false savior. It is a false god.
Man's basic sin against God is the desire to "be as gods."
Genesis 3
4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:
5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.
An aspect of this rebellion is the desire to get something for nothing, or something without working for it. (James Jordan has argued that Adam and Eve would eventually have been allowed to eat of the Tree of Knowledge, but they were required to work for it first and earn it.)
This is a major motivation for forming "the State" and conquering other people. (The other one being vengeance.)
God is man's Governor. Man rejects God's Government by desiring to be his own governor.
God punishes man for his rebellion by granting him his wishes. When man lusts for political power, God gives it to him.
Then in His mercy, God saves the repentant sinner by delivering him from the political disease.
If we obey God's commandments, we will not have war; God will not send "the sword" against us.
I will argue below that peace is possible only in a state of "an-archy," that is, the absence of "archists." This too is a "paradigm shift."
|
When we disobey God's Law, God sends archists as a judgment/curse against us.
We see this repeatedly in the Scripture. Israel lusts after gentile archists (false "gods," like Moloch, which means "king"). God delivers Israel into the hand of these false gods, these pagan archists, and Israel cries out for deliverance, and God delivers them by sending a deliverer, or "savior" or "judge" who "saves" Israel from the pagan archists.
Here's how Nehemiah sums up Israel's history of rebelling against God's Law and then being "saved" from the consequences of their disobedience:
God sent Israel many "saviors."
When most church-goers think of a "savior," they think of someone who gives them a ticket to heaven after they live a miserable salvation-free life on earth.
When whole-Bible Christians think of a "savior," they think of someone who will save Israel "out
of the hand of their enemies."
The angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph, and said:
- Matthew 1:18-23
- Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost. And she will bring forth a Son, and you shall call His name JESUS, for He will save His people from their sins.
A first-century Jew, steeped in the Scriptures, would hear this as a promise to save "His people" from the consequences of their sins, the curses imposed on them by God because of their rebellion against His Law. John the Baptist's father "Zacharias was filled with the Holy Spirit, and prophesied, saying"
- Luke 1:67-80
- 68 “Blessed is the Lord God of Israel,
For He has visited and redeemed His people,
69 And has raised up a horn of salvation for us
In the house of His servant David,
71 That we should be saved from our enemies
And from the hand of all who hate us,
74 To grant us that we,
Being delivered from the hand of our enemies,
Might serve Him without fear,
75 In holiness and righteousness before Him all the days of our life.
79 To guide our feet into the way of peace.”
The Babe born in Bethlehem saved Christians in the first century from their enemies: the Jews who collaborated with Rome. Then the Rock destroyed Rome, and has filled the earth with Christian Civilization -- The City of God. The growing and filling continues.
Consider this classic Christmas text:
- Luke 2:8-20
- 8 Now there were in the same country shepherds living out in the fields, keeping watch over their flock by night. 9 And behold, an angel of the Lord stood before them, and the glory of the Lord shone around them, and they were greatly afraid. 10 Then the angel said to them, “Do not be afraid, for behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy which will be to all people. 11 For there is born to you this day in the city of David a Savior, who is Christ the Lord. 12 And this will be the sign to you: You will find a Babe wrapped in swaddling cloths, lying in a manger.”
- 13 And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God and saying:
- 14 “Glory to God in the highest,
and on earth peace among those with whom He is pleased!”
What would a first-century Israelite think if an angel of the LORD announced the coming of a "savior?" They would doubtless think back to all the saviors in the [Old Testament] Scriptures. Those saviors did not just promise a ticket to heaven when everyone died. They promised to save Israel from the consequences of her sins. Those consequences included "the Sword." Freedom from the sword is one aspect of the holistic Biblical concept of Salvation, and one of the benefits of a Biblical savior. The savior brought the benefits ("blessings") of obedience upon a people who had not been obedient, but who had repented of their disobedience.
Jesus was a Savior in this Biblical tradition. He came to bring Salvation. He came to save His people from their enemies, so they could get on with the work of building the New Jerusalem.
"Salvation" is holistic/cultural/economic, not just a ticket to heaven when you die. We'll see this below in more detail.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
When Israel rejected the government of God and lusted after Gentile archists, God delivered Israel into the hands of her archist lover/idol. Then Israel cried out for deliverance from these archists. This deliverance is the doorway through which we can gain a larger understanding of the Biblical doctrine of "salvation."
Most Christians think "salvation" means "going to heaven when I die." They focus on a tiny fraction of the Bible, and ignore the vast majority.
"Salvation" -- in the vast majority of Biblical texts -- means "anarchism." "Salvation" means a "libertarian" society. Some would call it an "anarcho-capitalist" society.
The Libertarian Party requires party members to affirm but one proposition:
I do not believe in or advocate
the initiation of force
as a means of achieving political or social goals.
People who will not make this pledge are "archists." They believe they have a right to impose their will on other people by force, usually by "the sword" -- political or military power.
Being an "archist" is un-Christian (Mark 10:42-45). We are not to spread Christianity with the sword. We are not to vote for archists who promise to bring salvation.Here are other key descriptions of Biblical "salvation," according to our mainstream source above:
The Bible describes "salvation" as being placed onto a large piece of property that supplies everything you need:
In the Bible, Godly men are shown to be concerned about living in a “large” land. Of course, in a more agrarian society, “large” is better, as far as land goes. But when God promises to save us by putting us into a “large land,” it’s clear that more is included than going to heaven after living for decades in a narrow land before we up and die. What is the modern equivalent of a “large land?” It varies from person to person, but it includes some form of economic prosperity and political Liberty. “Liberty” and “large” are Biblical concepts we are not familiar enough with. Let’s review them and put them in our brains, so that as we read the Bible we will be more aware of them.
|
One of the blessings promised to the obedient in the Bible is "liberty."
"Liberty" means "freedom." But "freedom from what?" In the pages of the Bible, the answer is almost always: "freedom from archists."
One of the blessings promised in Leviticus 26 is "peace," or freedom from those who bear the sword. Those who bear the sword are archists. They are also called in the Bible "enemies."
Of course, "freedom from" is always for the purpose of "freedom to" -- freedom to serve and obey the Lord.
The name "Jesus" comes from the Hebrew word Yhowshuwa', which is derived from yasha', which is the Hebrew word most frequently translated "salvation." "Jesus" means God will save. It was said of Jesus at His birth:
- Luke 1:71
- That we should be saved from our enemies
and from the hand of all that hate us;- 74 That He would grant unto us, that we
being delivered out of the hand of our enemies might serve Him [exercise dominion and build His Kingdom] without fear [living under our "vine and fig tree" "with no one to make them afraid" (Micah 4:1-7)]
This is what "salvation" means in the Bible.
The specific enemies Christians had in the first century were of the Jewish establishment, but I believe Jesus the Messiah will save us from our enemies today -- whoever they may be, whenever we live -- if we obey God's Law.
"But isn't the real meaning of salvation 'being forgiven of your sins and going to heaven when you die?'"
Most church-goers ask this.
Forgiveness of sins = restoration to fellowship with God,
Forgiveness of sins = restoration to our original Edenic Mandate to build the Kingdom of God.
Forgiveness of sins is a means to an end, not an end in itself.
Jesus: Savior but not Messiah?The overwhelming majority of Christians today agree with Jews who say that Jesus is not the Messiah. The vast majority of Christians believe that Jesus will not reign as Messiah until there is a second Christmas -- a second Advent, or "second coming of Christ" -- which is really the first coming of the Christ, since at His first Advent Jesus came only as "savior," -- that is, someone who secures for us a ticket to heaven when we die -- and not as "Christ" -- that is, someone who delivers us out of the hand of our enemies, sets us in a wide open place, opens the bounties of heaven, and makes our land like Eden, so we can enjoy a “Vine & Fig Tree” society.
Many Christians in our day say that the Jews rejected Jesus as their Messiah, therefore He could only offer to be their Savior. This is so confused it's hard to know where to begin.
- Nehemiah 9:27
- Therefore Thou deliveredst them into the hand of their enemies that vexed them: yet in the time of their affliction, when they cried unto Thee, Thou heardest them from the heaven, and through Thy great mercies thou gavest them saviors, who saved them out of the hand of their adversaries (cp. Luke 1:71,74).
The idea that Jesus is only a "savior" but not the Messiah is is not a Biblically tenable position. There is almost no hint in the Bible that any "savior" would do nothing to "save" his people in this life, but only in the next.
A "savior" brings "salvation." Doesn't that make sense? But what is "salvation?" It is not, Biblically speaking, going to heaven after you die, having lived a life without being "saved" in the holistic Biblical sense of that word. In the Bible, saviors brought freedom from archists for God's People. See the discussion of the Hebrew word for "salvation" above.
These "saviors" were sometimes called "judges." The various "kings" of Israel could also serve as "saviors" because they would "save" Israel from her oppressors (1 Samuel 9:16; 2 Samuel 3:18, etc.).
|
"Saviors" in the Old Testament served what we could call primarily "messianic" functions." Biblically speaking, "savior" is virtually a synonym for "messiah." And "Messiah" is a political term, that is, a term that does not have primary reference to us after death, but reference to our lives today, in their holistic cultural, social, political, civil, economic, recreational, and legal dimensions.
A "Messiah" brings political changes. A "savior" brings "salvation." But the Biblical definition of "salvation" is not just a short-term relief on the battlefield, but long-term liberty from archists. See the definition of the Hebrew word for "salvation," yasha, which we looked at above.
Jay Wile writes (An Interesting Observation from China | Proslogion):
Recently, I read an article by Dr. Paul Copan entitled, “Jesus-Shaped Cultures.”1 In that article, he makes the case for how faithful Christians have transformed the societies they have served. For example, he discusses the Ethiopian famine that took place in 1984 and 1985. Brian Stewart, a CBC journalist, noted that it was Christians who were on the front lines of the famine, giving aid to the suffering. Their service was such a powerful witness to him that it started him on his journey to becoming a Christian himself.
While Copan’s article is interesting, it led me to a book that I thought was even more interesting. It is entitled Jesus in Beijing: How Christianity Is Transforming China And Changing the Global Balance of Power, and it is written by David Aikman, who served as a journalist for Time Magazine from 1971 to 1994. In his role as a Time correspondent, he visited China several times and even lived in China for two years as Time’s bureau chief. He returned to China in 2002 to gather the information he needed to complete his book.
He begins the book in a dramatic way. It is worth quoting at length:2
The eighteen American tourists visiting China weren’t expecting much from the evening’s lecture. They were already exhausted from a day of touring in Beijing. But what the speaker had to say astonished them.
The Victory of Reason Listen Now | Download
“One of the things we were asked to look into was what accounted for the success, in fact, the pre-eminence of the West all over the world,” he said. “We studied everything we could from the historical, political, economic, and cultural perspective. At first, we thought it was because you had more powerful guns than we had. Then we thought it was because you had the best political system. Next, we focused on your economic system. But in the past twenty years, we have realized that the heart of your culture is your religion: Christianity. That is why the West has been so powerful. The Christian moral foundation of social and cultural life was what made possible the emergence of capitalism and then the successful transition to democratic politics. We don’t have any doubt about this.”
This was not coming from some ultra-conservative think tank in Orange County, California or from Jerry Falwell’s Liberty University in Lynchburg, Virginia. This was a scholar from China’s premier academic research institute, the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (CASS) in Beijing in 2002. (emphasis mine)
In his book, Aikman suggests that Christianity will transform China to the point where it won’t even be communist anymore. He suggests that in the next thirty years, nearly one-third of China could be Christian, making it one of the largest Christian nations in the world and a strong ally of the U.S.
2. David Aikman, Jesus in Beijing: How Christianity Is Transforming China And Changing the Global Balance of Power, pp. 5-6
See also: The Iona Institute | Christianity the reason for West's success, say the Chinese
In asking whether Habakkuk's prophecy has been or is being fulfilled, and whether the knowledge of God covers the earth as the waters cover the sea, don't ask those who should admit that they know the Lord; ask the Scriptures whether they ought to admit it. Sometimes they won't, but many times they will. Truth is truth, whether we admit it or not.
Today, the Chinese are "streaming" to Zion (Micah 4:1-2). So are people in Latin America, Africa, and even India, according to Philip Jenkins. Humanity has been flowing to Zion for 2,000 years, but the rate may be accelerating. This phenomenon is not yet on the radar of archists. It will dramatically increase when Christians become widely recognized as a Dispute Resolution Forum. It will exsanguinate the State by doing so.
John 4:42
Then they said to the woman, “Now we believe, not because of what you said, for we ourselves have heard Him and we know that this is indeed the Christ, the Savior of the world.”1 John 4:14
And we have seen and testify that the Father has sent the Son as Savior of the world.John 1:29
The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, “Behold! The Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!John 3:17
For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved.Isaiah 45:22
“Look to Me, and be saved,
All you ends of the earth!
For I am God, and there is no other.1 Chronicles 16:23
Sing to the Lord, all the earth; Proclaim the good news of His salvation from day to day.Psalm 65:5
By awesome deeds in righteousness You will answer us, O God of our salvation, You who are the confidence of all the ends of the earth, And of the far-off seas;Psalm 67:2
That Your way may be known on earth, Your salvation among all nations.Psalm 74:12
For God is my King from of old, Working salvation in the midst of the earth.Psalm 98:3
He has remembered His mercy and His faithfulness to the house of Israel; All the ends of the earth have seen the salvation of our God.Isaiah 45:8
“Rain down, you heavens, from above, And let the skies pour down righteousness; Let the earth open, let them bring forth salvation, And let righteousness spring up together. I, the Lord, have created it.Isaiah 49:6
Indeed He says, ‘It is too small a thing that You should be My Servant To raise up the tribes of Jacob, And to restore the preserved ones of Israel; I will also give You as a light to the Gentiles, That You should be My salvation to the ends of the earth.’”Isaiah 49:8
Thus says the Lord: “In an acceptable time I have heard You, And in the day of salvation I have helped You; I will preserve You and give You As a covenant to the people, To restore the earth, To cause them to inherit the desolate heritages;Isaiah 51:6
Lift up your eyes to the heavens, And look on the earth beneath. For the heavens will vanish away like smoke, The earth will grow old like a garment, And those who dwell in it will die in like manner; But My salvation will be forever, And My righteousness will not be abolished.Isaiah 52:10
The Lord has made bare His holy arm In the eyes of all the nations; And all the ends of the earth shall see The salvation of our God.Acts 13:47
For so the Lord has commanded us: ‘I have set you as a light to the Gentiles, That you should be for salvation to the ends of the earth.’”2 Corinthians 5:19
that is, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not imputing their trespasses to them, and has committed to us the word of reconciliation.1 John 2:2
And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world.1 Timothy 4:10
For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.1 Corinthians 15:45
And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.Romans 5
17 For if by one man's offence death reigned by one;
21 even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.John 6:33
33 For the bread of God is He which cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto the world.
When the Lord spoke to Isaiah and the prophets, that He would save the whole world, was He announcing a doctrine of "universalism," that every individual would go to heaven when he died? Even universalists would say no -- provided they understand the prophetic meaning of the concept of "salvation." That is, even if eternal paradise after death has been granted universally to all individuals, that's not what the prophets were talking about when they foretold the "salvation" of the entire world.
In the Bible, especially in the Old Testament, "salvation" means what economist Murray N. Rothbard described as "anarcho-capitalism" -- a vibrant global network of commerce liberated from the "strife," "war," and coercive regulatory "domination" of the City of Man. The economics of the New Jerusalem rather than the Old Babylon.
Contrary to amillennialists like Michael Horton, Christians best "serve" the world by helping to "save" it. For "serve" see here. For "save" see here. "Save the world" does not mean "preserve the world in a state of rebellion against The City of God." It means convert the whole world into the City of God. "In earth as it is in heaven" (Matthew 6:10).
The Bible is an infallible history of the human race and the origin of "Civil government."
"The State" has its origin in rebellion against God and conquest of other human beings.
Nowhere in His inscriptured Law does God command any society to form an empire or a State or a "civil magistrate."
We must agree with James Benjamin Green who, in his exposition of the chapter on the Civil Magistrate in the Westminster Confession of Faith rightly observes (concerning Romans 13:1), "It is not meant that God directly ordained the state by saying to man, Thou shalt set up a government or organize a commonwealth."
Romans 13 doesn't mean that because it never happened. God never commanded anyone to form "the State."
Franz Oppenheimer, in his book The State: Its History and Development Viewed Sociologically, distinguishes between "Economic Man" and "Political Man."
Here is an excerpt from Albert Jay Nock and the Libertarian Tradition - Jeff Riggenbach - Mises Daily
| One such question was, what is the nature of the state? Where did it come from? If the state was in fact useless for the purpose of improving human society
what was it in fact good for? So he wrote a book. It's called Our Enemy, the State. It came out in 1935, after
being delivered as a series of lectures at Nock's newly renamed alma mater, Bard College. Our Enemy, the State is a true libertarian classic, one of those
books you simply must read if you have any serious interest at all in the libertarian idea.
The state, Nock wrote,
Nock quotes the German sociologist Franz Oppenheimer, who described the typical primitive state,
Nock wrote,
In essence, then, "taking the State wherever found, striking into its history at any point, one sees no way to differentiate the activities of its founders, administrators and beneficiaries from those of a professional-criminal class." After all, Nock argued, there are two and only two means of making a living in this world. There's the economic means — earning it. And there's the political means — seizing it from someone else who has earned it. The state, Nock said, is "the organization of the political means." Does this sound familiar somehow? Does it sound, perhaps, like the rhetoric of Mr. Libertarian, Murray N. Rothbard? Nock had an immense influence on Rothbard. He also had an immense influence, apparently, on another major figure in the contemporary libertarian movement, Ayn Rand. According to Anne C. Heller, whose biography of Rand, Ayn Rand and the World She Made, was published about a year ago, it was the theory Nock had adapted from Franz Oppenheimer that inspired Rand to write The Fountainhead. |
In his book, Nock powerfully distinguishes between "political power" and "social power."
"The Church" needs to be "the society."
The Christian ekklesia needs to replace political power with social power.
Using political power to accomplish any goal, no matter how noble, is always a sin.
Anarchism: It is a SIN to be a Government
When Paul spoke to the Areopagus, he said they were "very religious."
So Paul, standing in the midst of the Areopagus, said: “Men of Athens, I perceive that in every way you are a very devout (deisidaimonesterous, δεισιδαιμονεστέρους ) people
The Greek word, δεισιδαίμων, deisidaimōn, is literally "reverent to demons." In Romans 13 terms, we would say "reverent to the higher powers." Everyone in Paul's day believed the empires were guided by demons. Paul said Christians wrestle against the powers (Ephesians 6:12). Paul proclaimed a rival Power. As the men in Acts 17 put it,
Also some of the Epicurean and Stoic philosophers were conversing with him, and some were asking, “What does this babbler want to say?” Others said, “He seems to be a proclaimer of strange gods,” (daimoniōn | δαιμονίων | gen pl neut) for he was proclaiming the Good News/Gospel about Jesus and the resurrection.
The word translated "strange" doesn't mean "weird." It is the Greek word ξένος, xenos, from which we get our English word "xenophobia," hatred of out-of-state foreigners. Paul was proclaiming "out-of-state powers," "out-of-polis gods." Paul was preaching a political rival to the Greek state.
Rushdoony called the City of Man "The Society of Satan."
For more on the demonic origin of the State, see:
The Origin of "the State" ("Civil Government") - Political Philosophy 101 According to the Bible
Daniel 2: The Demonic Imperial Paradigm
The State -- in every age -- is saying that it is our SAVIOR. It claims to be the source and bringer of SALVATION. Ancient empires made this claim explicitly. Modern regimes do so more implicitly, because they want to claim to be "secular" or "neutral," not "religious." Every "government" in the history of the human race -- up until a century or so ago -- claimed to be on the side of the true religion.
This is not to say that the State claimed to be able to ensure that you go to heaven when you die. "Salvation" is a much broader concept than that -- in the Bible and throughout the ancient world.
This claim is a huge part of this website. Details here.
One way the modern State makes you think it is not in competition with Jesus for the title of SAVIOR is by making you think that Jesus offers a completely different kind of "salvation" than the State does. The salvation Jesus brings (we are told) has nothing to do with the economy, government, society, or anything relating to this present world, but only has to do with what happens to you after you serve the Empire for your entire life, enjoying the salvation it brings, and then die.
Builders need blueprints.
The Bible is the builder's set of blueprints, drafted by the Architect.
| What Are Biblical Blueprints? By Gary North How many times have you heard this one?
You've heard it about as many times as you've heard this one: "The Bible doesn't provide blueprints for . . ." The odd fact is that some of the people who assure you of this are Christians. Nevertheless, if you ask them, "Does the Bible have answers for the problems of life?" you'll get an unqualified "yes" for an answer. Question: if the Bible isn't a textbook, and if it doesn't provide blueprints, then just how, specifically and concretely, does it provide answers for life's problems? Either it answers real-life problems, or it doesn't. In short: Does the Bible make a difference? Let's put it another way. If a mass revival at last hits this nation, and if millions of people are regenerated by God's grace through faith in the saving work of Jesus Christ at Calvary, will this change be visible in the way the new converts run their lives? Will their politics change, their business dealings change, their families change, their family budgets change, and their church membership change? In short: Will conversion make a visible difference in our personal lives? If not, why not? Second, two or three years later, will Congress be voting for a different kind of defense policy, foreign relations policy, environmental policy, immigration policy, monetary policy, and so forth? Will the Federal budget change? If not, why not? In short: Will conversion to Christ make a visible difference in our civilization? If not, why not? The Great Commission What the Biblical Blueprints Series is attempting to do is to outline what some of that visible difference in our culture ought to be. The authors are attempting to set forth, in clear language, fundamental Biblical principles in numerous specific areas of life. The authors are not content to speak in vague generalities. These books not only set forth explicit principles that are found in the Bible and derived from the Bible, they also offer specific practical suggestions about what things need to be changed, and how Christians can begin programs that will produce these many changes. The authors see the task of American Christians just as the Puritans who came to North America in the 1630's saw their task: to establish a city on a hill (Matthew 5:14). The authors want to see a Biblical reconstruction of the United States, so that it can serve as an example to be followed all over the world. They believe that God's principles are tools of evangelism, to bring the nations to Christ. The Bible promises us that these principles will produce such good fruit that the whole world will marvel (Deuteronomy 4:5-8). When nations begin to marvel, they will begin to soften to the message of the gospel. What the authors are calling for is comprehensive revival-a revival that will transform everything on earth. In other words, the authors are calling Christians to obey God and take up the Great Commission: to disciple (discipline) all the nations of the earth (Matthew 28:19). What each author argues is that there are God-required principles of thought and practice in areas that some people today believe to be outside the area of "religion." What Christians should know by now is that nothing lies outside religion. God is judging all of our thoughts and acts, judging our institutions, and working through human history to bring this world to a final judgment. We present the case that God offers comprehensive salvation-regeneration, healing, restoration, and the obligation of total social reconstruction--because the world is in comprehensive sin. To judge the world, it is obvious that God has to have standards. if there were no absolute standards, there could be no earthly judgment, and no final judgment because men could not be held accountable. (Warning: these next few paragraphs are very important. They are the base of the entire Blueprints series. It is important that you understand my reasoning. I really believe that if you understand it, you will agree with it.) To argue that God's standards don't apply to everything is to argue that sin hasn't affected and infected everything. To argue that God's Word doesn't give us a revelation of God's requirements for us is to argue that we are flying blind as Christians. it is to argue that there are zones of moral neutrality that God will not judge, either today or at the day of judgment, because these zones somehow are outside His jurisdiction. In short, "no law-no jurisdiction." But if God does have jurisdiction over the whole universe, which is what every Christian believes, then there must be universal standards by which God executes judgment. The authors of this series argue for God's comprehensive judgment, and we declare His comprehensive salvation. We therefore are presenting a few of His comprehensive blueprints. The Concept of Blueprints An architectural blueprint gives us the structural requirements of a building. A blueprint isn't intended to tell the owner where to put the furniture or what color to paint the rooms. A blueprint does place limits on where the furniture and appliances should be put — laundry here, kitchen there, etc. — but it doesn't take away our personal options based on personal taste. A blueprint just specifies what must be done during construction for the building to do its job and to survive the test of time. It gives direction to the contractor. Nobody wants to be on the twelfth floor of a building that collapses. Today, we are unquestionably on the twelfth floor, and maybe even the fiftieth. Most of today's "buildings" (institutions) were designed by humanists, for use by humanists, but paid for mostly by Christians (investments, donations, and taxes). These "buildings" aren't safe. Christians (and a lot of non-Christians) now are hearing the creaking and groaning of these tottering buildings. Millions of people have now concluded that it's time to: (1) call in a totally new team of foundation and structural specialists to begin a complete renovation, or (2) hire the original contractors to make at least temporary structural modifications until we can all move to safer quarters, or (3) call for an emergency helicopter team because time has just about run out, and the elevators aren't safe either. The writers of this series believe that the first option is the wise one: Christians need to rebuild the foundations, using the Bible as their guide. This view is ignored by those who still hope and pray for the third approach: God's helicopter escape. Finally, those who have faith in minor structural repairs don't tell us what or where these hoped-for safe quarters are, or how humanist contractors are going to build them any safer next time. Why is it that some Christians say that God hasn't drawn up any blueprints? If God doesn't give us blueprints, then who does? if God doesn't set the permanent standards, then who does? If God hasn't any standards to judge men by, then who judges man? The humanists' answer is inescapable: man does--autonomous, design-it-yourself, do-it-yourself man. Christians call this man-glorifying religion the religion of humanism. It is amazing how many Christians until quite recently have believed humanism's first doctrinal point, namely, that God has not established permanent blueprints for man and man's institutions. Christians who hold such a view of God's law serve as humanism's chaplains. Men are God's appointed "contractors." We were never supposed to draw up the blueprints, but we are supposed to execute them, in history and then after the resurrection. Men have been given dominion on the earth to subdue it for God's glory. "So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. Then God blessed them, and God said to them, 'Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it; have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over every living thing that moves on the earth'" (Genesis 1:27-28). Christians about a century ago decided that God never gave them the responsibility to do any building (except for churches). That was just what the humanists had been waiting for. They immediately stepped in, took over the job of contractor ("Someone has to do it!"). and then announced that they would also be in charge of drawing up the blueprints. We can see the results of a similar assertion in Genesis, chapter 11: the tower of Babel. Do you remember God's response to that particular humanistic public works project? Never Be Embarrassed By the Bible This sounds simple enough. Why should Christians be embarrassed by the Bible? But they are embarrassed . . . millions of them. The humanists have probably done more to slow down the spread of the gospel by convincing Christians to be embarrassed by the Bible than by any other strategy they have adopted. Test your own thinking. Answer this question: "Is God mostly a God of love or mostly a God of wrath?" Think about it before you answer. It's a trick question. The Biblical answer is: "God is equally a God of love and a God of wrath." But Christians these days will generally answer almost automatically, "God is mostly a God of love, not wrath." Now in their hearts, they know this answer can't be true. God sent His Son to the cross to die. His own Son! That's how much God hates sin. That's wrath with a capital "W." But why did He do it? Because He loves His Son, and those who follow His Son. So, you just can't talk about the wrath of God without talking about the love of God, and vice versa. The cross is the best proof we have: God is both wrathful and loving. Without the fires of hell as the reason for the cross, the agony of Jesus Christ on the cross was a mistake, a case of drastic overkill. Nothing in the Bible should be an embarrassment to any Christian. We may not know for certain precisely how some Biblical truth or historic event should be properly applied in our day, but every historic record, law, announcement, prophecy, judgment, and warning in the Bible is the very Word of God, and is not to be flinched at by anyone who calls himself by Christ's name. We must never doubt that whatever God did in the Old Testament era, the Second Person of the Trinity also did. God's counsel and judgments are not divided. We must be careful not to regard Jesus Christ as a sort of "unindicted coconspirator" when we read the Old Testament. "For whoever is ashamed of Me and My words in this adulterous and sinful generation, of him the Son of Man also will be ashamed when He comes in the glory of His Father with the holy angels" (Mark 8:38). My point here is simple. If we as Christians can accept what is a very hard principle of the Bible, that Christ was a blood sacrifice for our individual sins, then we shouldn't flinch at accepting any of the rest of God's principles. As we joyfully accepted His salvation, so we must joyfully embrace all of His principles that affect any and every area of our lives. The Whole Bible When, in a court of law, the witness puts his hand on the Bible and swears to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help him God, he thereby swears on the Word of God — the whole Word of God, and nothing but the Word of God. The Bible is a unit. It's a "package deal." The New Testament doesn't overturn the Old Testament; it's a commentary on the Old Testament. It tells us how to use the Old Testament properly in the period after the death and resurrection of Israel's messiah, God's Son. Jesus said: "Do not think that l came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. l did not come to destroy but to fulfill. For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men to do so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven" (Matthew 5:17-19). The Old Testament isn't a discarded first draft of God's Word. It isn't "God's Word emeritus." Dominion Christianity teaches that there are four covenants under God, meaning four kinds of vows under God: personal (individual), and the three institutional covenants: ecclesiastical (the church). civil (governments), and family. All other human institutions (business, educational, charitable, etc.) are to one degree or other under the jurisdiction of these four covenants. No single covenant is absolute; therefore, no single institution is all-powerful. Thus, Christian liberty is liberty under God and God's law. Christianity therefore teaches pluralism, but a very special kind of pluralism: plural institutions under God's comprehensive law. it does not teach a pluralism of law structures, or a pluralism of moralities, for as we will see shortly, this sort of ultimate pluralism (as distinguished from institutional pluralism) is: always either polytheistic or humanistic. Christian people are required to take dominion over the earth by means of all these God-ordained institutions, not just the church, or just the state, or just the family. The kingdom of God includes every human institution, and every aspect of life, for all of life is under God and is governed by His unchanging principles. All of life is under God and God's principles because God intends to judge all of life in terms of His principles. In this structure of plural governments, the institutional churches serve as advisers to the other institutions (the Levitical function), but the churches can only pressure individual leaders through the threat of excommunication. As a restraining factor on unwarranted church authority, an unlawful excommunication by one local church or denomination is always subject to review by the others if and when the excommunicated person seeks membership elsewhere. Thus, each of the three covenantal institutions is to be run under God, as interpreted by its lawfully elected or ordained leaders, with the advice of the churches, not the compulsion. Majority Rule Just for the record, the authors aren't in favor of imposing some sort of top-down bureaucratic tyranny in the name of Christ. The kingdom of God requires a bottom-up society. The bottom-up Christian society rests ultimately on the doctrine of self-government under God. It's the humanist view of society that promotes top-down bureaucratic power. The authors are in favor of evangelism and missions leading to a widespread Christian revival, so that the great mass of earth's inhabitants will place themselves under Christ's protection, and voluntarily use His covenantal principles for self-government. Christian reconstruction begins with personal conversion to Christ and sell-government under God's principles, then spreads to others through revival, and only later brings comprehensive changes in civil law, when the vast majority of voters voluntarily agree to live under Biblical blueprints. Let's get this straight: Christian reconstruction depends on majority rule. Of course, the leaders of the Christian reconstructionist movement expect a majority eventually to accept Christ as savior. If this doesn't happen, then Christians must be content with only partial reconstruction, and only partial blessings from God. It isn't possible to ramrod God's blessings from the top down, unless you're God. Only humanists think that man is God. All we're trying to do is get the ramrod away from them, and melt it down. The melted ramrod could then be used to make a great grave marker for humanism: "The God That Failed." The Continuing Heresy of Dualism Many (of course, not all!) of the objections to the material in this book series will come from people who have a worldview that is very close to an ancient church problem: dualism. A lot of well-meaning Christian people are dualists, although they don't even know what it is. Dualism teaches that the world is inherently divided: spirit vs. matter, or law vs. mercy, or mind vs. matter, or nature vs. grace. What the Bible teaches is that this world is divided ethically and personally: Satan vs. God, right vs. wrong. The conflict between God and Satan will end at the final judgment. Whenever Christians substitute some other form of dualism for ethical dualism, they fall into heresy and suffer the consequences. That's what has happened today. We are suffering from revived versions of ancient heresies. Marcion's Dualism The Old Testament was written by the same God who wrote the New Testament. There were not two Gods in history, meaning there was no dualism or radical split between the two testamental periods. There is only one God, in time and eternity. This idea has had opposition throughout church history. An ancient two-Gods heresy was first promoted, in the church about a century after Christ's crucifixion, and the church has always regarded it as just that, a heresy. It was proposed by a man named Marcion. Basically, this heresy teaches that there are two completely different law systems in the Bible: Old Testament law and New Testament law (or non-law). But Marcion took the logic of his position all the way. He argued that two law systems means two Gods. The God of wrath wrote the Old Testament, and the God of mercy wrote the New Testament. In short: "two laws — two Gods." Many Christians still believe something dangerously close to Marcionism: not a two-Gods view, exactly, but a God-who-changed-all-His-rules sort of view. They begin with the accurate teaching that the ceremonial laws of the Old Testament were fulfilled by Christ, and therefore that the unchanging principles of Biblical worship are applied differently in the New Testament. But then they erroneously conclude that the whole Old Testament system of civil law was dropped by God, and nothing Biblical was put in its place. In other words, God created a sort of vacuum for state law. This idea turns civil law-making over to Satan. In our day, this means that civil law-making is turned over to humanists. Christians have unwittingly become the philosophical allies of the humanists with respect to civil law. With respect to their doctrine of the state, therefore, most Christians hold what is in effect a two-Gods view of the Bible. Gnosticism's Dualism Another ancient heresy that is still with us is gnosticism. It became a major threat to the early church almost from the beginning. It was also a form of dualism, a theory of a radical split. The gnostics taught that the split is between evil matter and good spirit. Thus, their goal was to escape this material world through other-worldly exercises that punish the body. They believed in retreat from the world of human conflicts and responsibility. Some of these ideas got into the church. And people started doing ridiculous things. One "saint" sat on a platform on top of a pole for several decades. This was considered very spiritual. (Who fed him? Who cleaned up after him?) Thus, many Christians came to view "the world" as something permanently outside the kingdom of God. They believed that this hostile, forever-evil world cannot be redeemed, reformed, and reconstructed. Jesus didn't really die for it, and it can't be healed. At best, it can be subdued by power (maybe). This dualistic view of the world vs. God's kingdom narrowly restricted any earthly manifestation of God's kingdom. Christians who were influenced by gnosticism concluded that God's kingdom refers only to the institutional church. They argued that the institutional church is the only manifestation of God's kingdom. This led to two opposite and equally evil conclusions. First, power religionists ("salvation through political power") who accepted this definition of God's kingdom tried to put the institutional church in charge of everything, since it is supposedly "the only manifestation of God's kingdom on earth." To subdue the supposedly unredeemable world, which is forever outside the kingdom, the institutional church has to rule with the sword. A single, monolithic institutional church then gives orders to the state, and the state must without question enforce these orders with the sword. The hierarchy of the institutional church concentrates political and economic power. What then becomes of liberty? Second, escape religionists ("salvation is exclusively internal") who also accepted this narrow definition of the kingdom sought refuge from the evil world of matter and politics by fleeing to hide inside the institutional church, an exclusively "spiritual kingdom," now narrowly defined. They abandoned the world to evil tyrants. What then becomes of liberty? What becomes of the idea of God's progressive restoration of all things under Jesus Christ? What, finally, becomes of the idea of Biblical dominion? When Christians improperly narrow their definition of the kingdom of God, the visible influence of this comprehensive kingdom (both spiritual and institutional at the same time) begins to shrivel up. The first heresy leads to tyranny by the church, and the second heresy leads to tyranny over the church. Both of these narrow definitions of God's kingdom destroy the liberty of the responsible Christian man, self-governed under God and God's law. Zoroaster's Dualism The last ancient pagan idea that still lives on is also a variant of dualism: matter vs. spirit. if teaches that God and Satan, good and evil, are forever locked in combat, and that good never triumphs over evil. The Persian religion of Zoroastrianism has held such a view for over 2,500 years. The incredibly popular "Star Wars" movies were based on this view of the world: the "dark" side of "the force" against its "light" side. In modern versions of this ancient dualism, the "force" is usually seen as itself impersonal: individuals personalize either the dark side or the light side by "plugging into" its power. There are millions of Christians who have adopted a very pessimistic version of this dualism, though not in an impersonal form. God's kingdom is battling Satan's, and God's is losing. History isn't going to get better. In fact, things are going to get a lot worse externally. Evil will visibly push good into the shadows. The church is like a band of soldiers who are surrounded by a huge army of Indians. "We can't win boys, so hold the fort until Jesus comes to rescue us!" That doesn't sound like Abraham, Moses, Joshua, Gideon, and David, does it? Christians read to their children one of the children's favorite stories, David and Goliath, yet in their own lives, millions of Christian parents really think that the Goliaths of this world are the unbeatable earthly winners. Christians haven't even picked up a stone. Until very recently. An Agenda for Victory The change has come since 1980. Many Christians' thinking has shifted. Dualism, gnosticism, and "God changed His program midstream" ideas have begun to be challenged. The politicians have already begun to reckon with the consequences. Politicians are the people we pay to raise their wet index fingers in the wind to sense a shift, and they have sensed it. It scares them, too. It should. A new vision has captured the imaginations of a growing army of registered voters. This new vision is simple: it's the old vision of Genesis 1:27-28 and Matthew 28:19-20. It's called dominion. Four distinct ideas must be present in any ideology that expects to overturn the existing view of the world and the existing social order: A doctrine of ultimate truth (permanence) The Marxists have had such a vision, or at least those Marxists who don't live inside the bureaucratic giants called the Soviet Union and Red China. The radical (please, not "fundamentalist") Muslims of Iran also have such a view. Now, for the first time in over 300 years, Bible-believing Christians have rediscovered these four points in the theology of Christianity. For the first time in over 300 years, a growing number of Christians are starting to view themselves as an army on the move. This army will grow. This series is designed to help it grow. And grow tougher. The authors of this series are determined to set the agenda in world affairs for the next few centuries. We know where the permanent answers are found: in the Bible, and only in the Bible. We believe that we have begun to discover at least preliminary answers to the key questions. There may be better answers, clearer answers, and more orthodox answers, but they must be found in the Bible, not at Harvard University or on the CBS Evening News. We are self-consciously firing the opening shot. We are calling the whole Christian community to join with us in a very serious debate, just as Luther called them to debate him when he nailed the 95 theses to the church door, over four and a half centuries ago. It is through such an exchange of ideas by those who take the Bible seriously that a nation and a civilization can be saved. There are now 5 billion people in the world. If we are to win our world (and these billions of souls) for Christ we must lift up the message of Christ by becoming the city on the hill. When the world sees the blessings by God upon a nation run by His principles, the mass conversion of whole nations to the Kingdom of our Lord will be the most incredible in of all history. If we're correct about the God-required nature of our agenda, it will attract a dedicated following. It will produce a social transformation that could dwarf the Reformation. This time, we're not limiting our call for reformation to the institutional church. This time, we mean business. The Biblical Blueprints Series is a multi-volume book series that gives Biblical solutions for the problems facing our culture today. Each book is written in a simple, easy to read style and deals with a specific topic such as economics, government, law, crime and punishment, welfare and poverty, taxes, money and banking, politics, the environment, retirement, and much more. Each book can be read in one evening and will give you the basic Biblical principles on each topic. Each book concludes with three chapters on how to apply the principles in your life, the church and the nation. Every chapter is summarized so that the entire book can be absorbed in just a few minutes. As you read these books, you will discover hundreds of new ways to serve God. Each book will show you ways that you can start to implement God's plan in your own life. As hundreds of thousands join you, and millions more begin to follow the example set, a civilization can be changed. Why will people change their lives? Because they will see God's blessings on those who live by His Word (Deuteronomy 4:6-8). Each title in the Biblical Blueprints Series is available in a deluxe paperback edition for $7.95 or a classic leatherbound edition for $15.95. The following titles are now available: Liberating Planet Earth: An Introduction to Biblical Blueprints Ruler of the Nations: Biblical Blueprints for Governments Who Owns the Family?: Biblical Blueprints for Family/State Relations In the Shadow of Plenty: Biblical Blueprints for Welfare and Poverty Honest Money: Biblical Blueprints for Money and Banking The Children Trap: Biblical Blueprints for Education Inherit the Earth: Biblical Blueprints for Economics The Changing of the Guard: Biblical Blueprints for Political Action Healer of the Nations: Biblical Blueprints for International Relations |
Micah 4:1-7
|
|
Notes
|
The Bible is a blueprint for the construction of a healthy, prosperous society.
Imagine a construction worker who decides to ignore the blueprints and "do it my own way."
The building could collapse.
The Bible is a thick book of blueprints.
If you've never studied architecture or civil engineering, you might not understand a set of blueprints. It takes some study to understand and apply God's Biblical Blueprints. In many ways, Early Americans were better educated in this task than we are. They believed the Bible was a textbook in every discipline of human life.
Here are some examples of attempts to apply Biblical Blueprints:
These attempts to apply the Bible do not always agree with the attempts made on this website. The next generation may get it right and disagree with both of us. But we won't make it to the next generation if civilization is destroyed by atheistic communism or jihadism.
What kind of building is described by the Biblical Blueprints?
The Program
12 Days Bringing to Mind
The Most Significant Event in Human History
Each day you'll receive an audio for your morning commute to work, and another audio for your commute back home. The morning audio will look at Micah's Vine & Fig Tree prophecy, and in the evening we'll show how that vision began to be fulfilled at Christmas two millennia ago.
Each day along the way, we will compare these historical accounts of Christmas with Micah's Vine & Fig Tree prophecy predicting:
The message of the angels to the shepherds on the first Christmas:
And this is the sign unto you:
Ye shall find a Babe
wrapped in swaddling clothes,
and lying in a manger.
And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God, and saying,
Glory to God in the highest,
And peace on earth
among men with whom He is well pleased.
Luke 2:8-15
Peace on Earth Begins with You.
To be one in whom God is well pleased:
His lord said unto him, `Well done, thou good and faithful servant. Thou hast been faithful over a few things; I will make thee ruler over many things. Enter thou into the joy of thy lord.' Matthew 25:21
If you enroll in this Home Study Program, you will learn the story of the "Vine & Fig Tree." You will learn that the Bible says the purpose of the first Christmas was that "the knowledge of the Lord should cover the earth as the waters cover the sea." (Isaiah 11:9; Habakkuk 2:14). This has been going on for 2,000 years now. This is a wonderful story that isn't being told.
And the story is really just beginning.
You're invited to celebrate
the Twelve Days of Christmas.
No matter what time of year it may be.
The Birth of Christ transformed the world.
The next 12 days can transform your life.
What is the "real meaning" of Christmas? Don't wait until "the holiday season" to find out. You'll be much too distracted. Start now.
Join our online party and accomplish the following over the next 12 days:
The "real meaning of Christmas" is:
What we've already witnessed:
Controversy:
There are two groups that oppose this concept of Christmas:
"Premils" are "pre-millennialists" who believe the "millennium" (described by Micah 4 and other passages) cannot take place until after a Second Coming of Christ, when Jesus returns and sets up a strong, military, "police-state"-style centralized government, with armed believers dispatched from a throne in Jerusalem to put down unbelievers. "Premils" believe Christmas only secured for believers a ticket to heaven when they die, or a ticket on "the Rapture" if they live that long. Not global transformation.
"Pinkos" are those who believe that Jesus is not King enough to bring about the "millennium"; we need strong centralized government for that. Pinkos call us "anarchists."
During the next 12 days, we'll find out why the Premils and the Pinkos are both wrong, and why you and I can and should work to bring "Peace on Earth" so that everyone can dwell prosperously and securely under their own Vine & Fig Tree.
For more about the "Vine & Fig Tree" vision, see our home page.
