New Warhorn Media post by Tim Bayly:
2 Likes
If a group of elected officials like Donald Trump, his cabinet, the current Supreme Court, and both houses of congress, or whatever arrangement of elected officials you like, fulfilled in essence most or all of the requirements that Christian nationalists hold to for government (good laws, protection for Christian worship, establishing justice, getting all the non conforming non Western European folk out or assimilated), but did so apart from an explicitly Christian witness: would this satisfy? Why or why not?
Well, what about non-conforming Western European folk?
Seriously, as much as I get the appeal of this approach, I think we are putting the societal cart before the Gospel horse here. In a slightly different context, CS Lewis observed that, “mere improvement is not redemption”. As I’ve also said before, it would be very helpful to get insight on this topic from Christians who live in cultures where they are more or less free to practice faith, but the cultures themselves are not at all Christian.
The part I find so tiresome about this discussion, is not merely that it continues ad nauseam but that no one seems to be saying anything new or interesting about it.
I will admit a more sympathetic view of those rascals making so much trouble for the left in DC and elsewhere…but also find myself cringing so often as they tout their faith and boast about listening to Black Sabbath (merely one recent example).
What bothers me even more is that political strides are largely being won by so called Catholic’s (who seem to be a particularly rowdy bunch these days), name it and claim it charismatics, and I suppose some federal vision-ists.
Why are my kinds of Christians so far absent from this fight? Calvin said there were three uses of the law, and clearly two of them were purposes to the church but the other use was clearly purposed to the state.
One to show God’s perfect righteousness that we can’t fulfill the law
One to show our need of Christ who did, so that we may love the law.
One to restrain evil. “by means of its fearful denunciations and the consequent dread of punishment, to curb those who, unless forced, have no regard for rectitude and justice” (Institutes 2.1.307)
Unless forced, is precisely the point. Much has been said about Cromwell. Others outside our camp have the same to say of Calvin.
As Pastor Bayly has clearly said in his book on Fatherhood, how we respond to our earthly fathers (city and church) has a very real impact on our view of our heavenly father, or well maybe that’s just inverted, either way.
If our camps have no men equal to the fight to the to restrain evil in our nation, then that’s an indictment of our pulpits for sure. Not necessarily an indictment of the men outside our camps who do.
4 Likes
We happen to be preaching through 1 Peter in our church right now. In supplemental preparation for preaching 1 Peter 2:13-17 yesterday, I spent a good bit of time last week reading about the arguments of colonial clergy leading up to the American revolution (I found this dissertation from Dr. Gary Steward to be a useful treatment on the subject). This led me to reading quite a bit about the 1628 and 1691 Massachusetts charters, the effects of British mercantilism within the colonies (e.g. the Navigation Acts), the Boston Tea Party and the Coercive Acts, as well as a refresher on the execution of Charles I, and later the Glorious Revolution of 1688, the 1689 Boston Revolt, etc.
The more you peel back the onion of history to learn the chain of how events are precipitated, the more you realize that history is just one steady stream of sin. Sin begets more sin, begets more sin, etc. History is rarely so simple as just identifying the righteous between two parties.
There is one righteous party. His name is Jesus Christ, and both we and our fathers need to be saved through him.
I am convinced that Peter’s instruction concerning civil authority cannot be understood rightly until we’re thoroughly convinced that we’re sojourners here (1 Peter 2:11), that our task is to win souls (1 Peter 2:12) and until our hope is placed firmly upon the revelation of Jesus Christ at the end of history (1 Peter 1:13). All other hopes are insufficient. To direct our efforts and our hopes toward building an earthly Christendom is to miss the mark, and set our sights far too low.
And I don’t believe I am precluding historical postmillennialism when I say that. If one day we look up and come to realize that the millenarian kingdom has been built, it will only be because we’re targeting getting men to heaven. It will not be because we were targeting the millenarian kingdom.
6 Likes
True, brother; very true. Love,
1 Like