The Kingdoms of This World

Jesus explicitly says that His Kingdom is “not of this world” (John 18:36) yet some of us still persist, like the crowds, to make him an Earthly king by force (John 6:15).   This is not what Jesus wants from us.  What he wants is for us to “make disciples” of the nations.   Unlike the devil, He wants to rule over a kingdom of voluntary subjects, not of people who are enslaved to Him and hate Him.   What is this “making disciples” all about though?   Some explain “make disciples of all nations” to mean “take over the nations” whereas others explain it to mean “take some people from all of the nations.”   Does history offer us any help in resolving which interpretation is better?

Well certainly we can observe that any time that the church and state are intertwined, it leads to serious corruption of the church.   Christianity gets physical defense from other powers in exchange for being corrupt.    History does not lead in the trajectory of the Church “taking over” nations.

On the other hand, to take the other view that the Christian take-over of Rome was a tragic mistake will not do either.  We’ve made a lot about Wilberforce, but what about all of great things that Christianity did to culture before then?  We abolished ancient slavery, gladiatorial matches, raised the status of women significantly,  including female infants, took power away from the autocrats and created room in the society for the common man, to mention a few of the “human rights” related changes that never happened in Rome or anywhere else in history without Christ.    Everything we became as a civilization stemmed out of Christianity being the dominant cultural force,  instead of paganism.   Now we are using the technology and money that resulted from having these Christian principles to reach to the literal ends of the earth for Christ.  Moreover, neither Islam nor barbarians were able to kill us because we were protected by the medieval states.   To argue that the church should not have influence on the state is to argue for a state of perpetual persecution and martyrdom.  God saw fit to end that by making Caesar acknowledge Christ.  I disagree with those who say “the church needs a little persecution.”   If they are so sincere in that belief, I have a short list of places they can move to volunteer.

Part of our inheritance from our Spiritual forebears is not just salvation, it is the environment in which we could find salvation and even more importantly — give it to others.   We need to pass something down to our children other than just salvation — we need to pass down to them the cultural inheritance of our past.  We need to pass down to them the Christian principles that make us free as a people, or not only they but all of the weak of the secular world will be slaves again.    Our governments have been working against us to remove the Christianity from our civilization, and when they are done, nothing will be left but the pagan roots of Rome that were there before.   Can you say “welcome back” gladiators?

A large part of the church is focused simply on saving souls, and part of the church is focused on reforming the government.   Both are needed, but these groups have completely different theologies.  Is there any view which would consistently motivate us to do both?  I haven’t solved the puzzle but I’m becoming more convinced of several things.

First, culture is the main thing that welcomes or rejects God among a people, this includes both revival, as well as freedom.   Winning souls is critical, influencing law is good, but impacting culture is the stage upon which these things happen.  If we abandon culture, we curse the ability to reach future generations and their ability to affect the law.

Second, part of who we are as Christians is our Christian cultural values.   Multiculturalists are working hard to undermine this by labeling it Western imperialism.    In reality it has taken 2000 years to get certain values to be deeply a part of who we are.  We can’t throw that under the bus.   The logical extension of this is that we must teach every disciple of Christ the fundamental elements of Christian culture.  Most people refer to this as “Biblical worldview” but this often ends up as a side topic.    We need to understand this as central to the discipleship process.   Of course Biblical worldview is deeply enmeshed in personal character, but what we need to pass down is something about our corporate relationships and relationship to the world.

Third, I have come to the belief that what you belief about the Earth is what you is what you leave on the Earth. I mean that in the very specific sense that the cultural inheritance you pass down is what you pass down to change the Kingdoms of this world.   If you only pass down your faith or people you have evangelized, but pass nothing to them about culture you pass them down an inheritance of slavery.    You have been given an inheritance by all of the Christians before you, you must maintain that trust and pass it down to your children.  If you do not believe in the principles of freedom and pass them down, you are setting the stage for their slavery and bondage.

Fourth, the church is locked in a mortal struggle with the state.   When the state gains enough power over the church, Satan will use it to try and wipe the church out.    The more space in society that the state takes up, the less “room” there is for the church.   “Big government” is not a modern invention.  It is an historical reality.  Christ comes to set people free from the chains of serving man, often personified as an absolute ruler.   Our ideal is not a state we control or one that we ignore.  Our ideal is a state that we influence.   If Jesus says “render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s and to God that which is God’s” that means that something belongs to God which does not belong to Caesar and that Caesar himself must render unto God his due.   We as the church are the voice and influence to make that happen.     This doesn’t mean that we can’t actually run the government.  We can, but when we do, we must do so in the spirit of Daniel — as a blessing to all people, like God who “causes it to rain on the unrighteous,” not as implementers of a religious policy.    When we put in place policies which give people freedom, and serve justice to the weak, we fundamentally set back the devil’s Kingdom.   The church can help the poor, but only the state can give them “justice.”   Some have perverted this to mean give them handouts.    Justice means the right to be treated the same as someone who has money, not the right to have their money.

A Conservative Education

The past 20 years has seen a closing of the ranks among liberals in the American University setting. It’s long been an open secret that colleges were liberal, and of course the liberals attributed this to the fact that smart people were liberal. Once you get an education, of course you go liberal. It’s recently taking a more sinister turn. Ward Churchill is of course the most striking example. Here is someone who thinks that the victims of 9/11 were morally equivalent to the rulers of the Nazi party. As sick as that is, it’s his right to believe that–although I certainly would not pay for him to teach it. Going beyond that, however, it has been shown that he has basically plagiarized his way into the academy, which appears to finally be ending in his termination. What is concerning is that he is still a folk hero among the left, and that the discpilinary board at the school was not unanimous in his removal.The University and the public schools are the iron chain of liberalism. Together they virtually ensure that the nation will continue to slide into the moral abyss regardless of how much revival or political success the church may have on other fronts. My college education at an elite private school was helpful in some ways, but now that I have a more complete understanding of the Christian worldview, I realize that I have to be unbrainwashed to see things rightly. It’s a realization that being Christian is not just about having moral character but about having a view of the world which is consonant with God’s view, and taking appropriate action. Case in point: Jimmy Carter, the “born again” Christian, almost lost the cold war. Although he cared about “human rights” he did not understand the true evil of the Communist system. On the other hand the moral clarity of Ronald Reagan, the marginal Christian ultimately freed 1 billion people from slavery in the Communist system and gave our country a new birth of freedom. Let’s not forget that the context of Reagan’s “evil empire” speech was his explanation to the National Assocation of Evangelicals (that’s us folks), that Communism was in fact evil and it did in fact have to be fought. It was not enough just to save souls. If anything in the past few sentences shocked you, then please join the “unbrainwashing club” with me.

One thing I would do differently if I had the chance would be to actively seek a conservative education. The “credentials” from the big name liberal school are nice, but I think at this point in life I’d rather have more understanding of the world. I spent a good bit of time looking at conservative educational options recently, hoping that someone would have some kind of program which I could ultimately benefit from, rather than just learning piecemeal. I did not find any, although I wrote to the Academic Dean at Grove City and received a kind response.

The conclusion of my investigation was that if I had the option to attend school over again, I would probably go to Grove City College. Not only is it affordable, but the curriculum is very comprehensive and would definitely lead to building a complete Christian worldview of all of the major disciplines. The campus is beautiful, and the students seem very nice. Although it is associated with the increasingly liberal PCUSA denomination, the school itself is morally, politically and intellectually conservative. There are few such schools in the country which can claim this, and also have strong academics.

Another intriguing option is Patrick Henry College. This school seems like a leadership training bootcamp. It draws intensely motivated students, empowers them, and drives them even harder. If your child is thinking about a life in politics this would be the place. If your daughter is wanting to meet a motivated Christian young man, and get a good education in the process, this would be the place.

Other schools noted as conservative include Indiana Wesleyan, The Kings College, Harding, Hillsdale, College of the Ozarks, Liberty, Hampden-Syndey, several Catholic schools, and the military academies, especially Air Force. Texas A&M is the only big state school I have ever heard referred to as conservative. I’m not sure I would have aborted a “big name” education for some of these options, but I think they need to be mentioned here.

For Graduate Education, I believe that Regent University has some great programs. My wife went there for her education degree and found it to be truly edifying. I was impressed at the value of what she was reading, and the ultimate end product. Ave Maria is a newly formed (Catholic) Law School that appears to be not only very conservative, but also have strong academics, and the moral foundations behind it. I’m not sure how it would be a for a protestant, but I would definitely look at it.

I want to explore this area further, and look at readings which promote a conservative understanding of the world. This is not because I am a right wing politico, but because I’ve come to understand that a proper understanding of life and Godly course of action hinges on intepreting our world properly, and those who have based their understanding on what we call “conservatism” are holding keys to this mystery which the rest of the world is explicitly rejecting or trying to hide.

Movies a Christian can enjoy.

As the film industry continues to produce movies with no morality, a pagan morality, or which are otherwise unenjoyable to the Christian who is pursuing God, it has become of more interest to me to find Movies which support a Christian worldview.  This does not mean that life is sanitized, but that theme of the movie overall supportive or revelatory of ideals we should appreciate as Christians.   Many of these are war movies, I guess partly because the struggle of good versus evil is one of the last values to leave a culture.

• In the Face of Evil — Documentary of Ronald Reagan's life.  This is bar none my favorite movie.  Watching it edifies my spirit.  It's like being deprogrammed from a liberal view of American life. 
• The Matrix — So this movie was not made with any conservative or Christian purpose, but it has deep paralells to Christianity in several key scenes, such as The Red Pill scene, the steak scene, the final victory scene, etc. It is a bit violent, but not in a traumatizing way.
• The Truman Show — Not as good as the Matrix but good for the same reasons.  That programmed fantasy land with the god who does not care about you is your real life without Christ.  Time to get off the show, Truman.
• Flywheel — Here is one I discovered recently.  It's actually a Christian movie about a used car dealer who gets under conviction and turns his life around.  It has some heartwarming elements and is generally pretty good for the “Christian” genre.
• Mr. Smith Goes to Washington — This was a truly good film.   It's a story about a good man who gets nominated to the Senate and ends up confronting the political powers that be.   It is patriotic, and has some interesting scenes where we learn a little bit about how the machine can operate, including the news media. 
• Gettysburg/Gods and Generals — Both of these Civil War films are excellent in educating us.  In Gettysburg we see the North in the crucible for its identity and Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain holding the line.  In Gods and Generals start to understand what the war was about for a lot of southerners, even if they were deceived.  Stunning portrayal of Jackson here.
• The Apostle — I know that some Christians did not like this film, and it does have that horrible scene where the apostle hits his rival with the baseball bat, but it also has many scenes which show a lot about the reality of southern Pentecostalism.  DuVall is amazing in his portrayal of the psychology sin and redemption.
• Braveheart — No Christian movie list is complete without Braveheart.  This one truly is violent, but we learn a lot here about conviction and fighting for freedom against evil. 
• The Patriot — Somewhat like a sequel to Braveheart.  This one is good partly because it too uses real historical figures, although some are amalagamated from several historical people.  The portrayal of the British here is especially helpful in understanding the revolution.
• We Were Soldiers — This is THE Vietnam movie.   Although it could have been more patriotic, it definitely honored the soldiers, the family and the service, and showed us what Vietnam was like for those who served.
• Top Gun — Minus the sex subplot, this film comes off as one of the standout patriotic movies of our time.  Here the Americans are the good guys and the Soviets are the bad guys.   It's about a young man's attempt to come to grips with himself and his father's legacy.
• Star Wars: Episode IV – The original Star Wars in 1977.  While the others got into more science fiction, this one is a simple struggle of Good versus evil.   A seemingly unstoppable evil (Can you say Soviet Empire?) is pitted against a seemingly defeated “Federation” (Can you say USA?).   Ultimately a farm boy finds the weakness in the Empire and destroys the “Death Star” Strking resemblance to what Ronald Reagan did to the Soviets just a few years later.   In the context of the valueless movies of the 70's this one was part of a cultural shift which ultimately brought our nation back from the brink.

More to come later!

The Problem with Scholarship

So I recently found out that I need to review my Hebrew for an upcoming class.  I got out my old Hebrew book and started to review.   I quickly found myself lost in details as I tried to capture the big picture.  I was swimming in exception cases on Dagesh Fortes before I knew it.    Nevermind nouns and adjectives.

This kind of approach is typical to scholarly literature.   It's hard to see the forest for the trees.   I remember in College, the hardest class I ever took was statistics.  It got so bad that I went to the mall and got a copy of some kind of dummies book.  The guy at the counter said something like “I almost failed statistics too.”   As soon as I started reading the book, everything made sense.  The book that I was using as an “intro text” was probably better suited for, well, the professor.  Instead of explain the basics, we were doing some kind of reverse proofs.    Onece I started reading the dummies book, my grade leapt out of the garbage can, and I managed to pass.

Now I don't think there is a problem with reverse proofs or the finer points of Hebrew accents, I just think it should be for those who have already mastered the basics, not as some kind of weed out that separates the future scholars from the rest of us.   That's the thing though.. the academy promotes and produces this kind of ultra-technical lost in the forest way of thinking, and attracts those who like it.   Every once in a while you get one of these professors who is a true teacher and has made it his life to make the abstruse plain.   These are the people that inspire you about a subject.    The problem is that they should be the rule, not the exception. 

I believe what ultimately matters is communication and application and this makes me a populist.  I'd rather have a so called “popular” treatment of almost anything than a scholarly treatment, because that is what it means–it means something that has been distilled so that you can understand it, and so that it focuses on the big picture.  The scholarly treatments should be for scholars not for intro students… but then, how would they stay in business if they did it that way?