Is the Kingdom of God manifested in temporal,
geographical, and cultural terms? Through our labours can we make this a
reality?
Some argue…yes, but that will be in the future when
Christ returns and establishes a temporal, geo-political Kingdom based in
Jerusalem which will last for 1000 years. At least the adherents of this
Premillennial vision of a physical Kingdom don’t believe it comes about through
human endeavours.
Dominionists, Transformationalists, Constantinians,
Postmillennialists…all nuances of the same Kingdom-vision, believe more or less
this can be done now.
And they’ve tried before, in the Roman Empire, the
Middle Ages, and even in relatively modern times. In the glowing optimism of
the late 19th and early 20th century, when Christendom
sat atop the world, ruling most of the earth, many of the adherents of Social
Gospel believed that if we pushed hard we could finish the task of
Christianizing the world and bring in a quasi-utopia. They too had accommodated
themselves to a set of cultural norms which were unbiblical and as we know...it
all blew up in their faces in 1914.
Sacralist Constantinianism whether Left or Right is
built on the same foundation. Contemporary Right-wing Dominionists loathe the
Social Gospel and Jim Wallis its most well known modern proponent.
But from my non-Sacralist perspective...they're the
same animal. There's not much difference. The spiritual descendants of Kuyper,
Schaeffer, and Rushdoony are all in the end...Social Gospellers.
If they are right....that we're supposed to erect some
kind of Constantinian structure...how do they get American Republican values
from that? Strange that somehow that system becomes the model. I argue it's
because they're defending Establishment values. In England the Dissenters from
Anglicanism were combating the Establishment and so the Bible believers in the
United Kingdom often embrace what Americans would call Leftist positions. And
they did this by reading their Bible and trying to apply those values contrary
to the Conservative and Establishment protecting Anglican Church and Tory
Party.
In the United States, those who were Dissenters in the
United Kingdom became the Elite. Rather than apply the Bible, they did what all
people in power do…erect systems which protect and advance their own interests.
The Dissenters in the United States weren’t Bible believing Protestants, but
Unorthodox Christian Miners, Catholic Immigrants, and Unbelievers. So in our
country it is these people who adopted positions quite similar to the ideology
of Christians in England.
So who's right? Well the whole model is wrong, but if
it was right, I find it very strange that a Christian society would reject
helping the poor, providing universal healthcare and promote Imperialist wars.
On the surface it sounds crazy to argue with Kuyper.
How could a Christian suggest that all of creation isn't supposed to be
subjected to Christ? But there's a whole lot behind the statement and when
understood the way he meant it, and what’s behind the asking of it...it must be
rejected.
What about our call to bring every thought captive?
Our thoughts as believers, or the unbeliever's
thoughts? Will forcing the unbeliever to conform his thinking to a Christian
worldview glorify God, help the unbeliever, or advance the Kingdom?
It can’t be denied that the attempt to do this will
bring about some kind of social change…but to what end? I argue the end result
is precisely the opposite of what they’re hoping for. I think the Bible teaches
this and history vindicates it.
Now some Postmillennialists think the entire world at
some point will become Christian, something like 99% of the world will be Born
Again and much of what they do is in preparation for that time. Patently in
disaccord with the New Testament, they're largely wasting their time, or worse.
Historically Postmillennialists looked for a
Revival-style outpouring of the Spirit. They didn’t worry so much about the
details of the effects of the revival on society. They looked for a Golden Age
of Christendom, but trusted in the Spirit to work it out.
In the 20th century, with the advent of
Theonomy, the Dominionist vision became more comprehensive. They also believe
in the coming Christian society, but they started to think about exactly HOW
that would look. How could each of the social and cultural spheres be shaped to
be specifically Christian?
The New Testament doesn’t answer these questions, and
so the Church in seeking to answer them has been largely distracted by
questions which really belong to the realm of Speculative Theology. The Church
became and continues to be entangled in issues of Systematics, philosophical
speculation, politics, and culture war.
But many others who don't necessarily look for the
Golden Age still believe they are to construct Christian culture that will also
shape the unbeliever. Spiritual Kingdom truths are to be applied to every
question and then applied to society.
There are two very serious problems with this.
1.
The New Testament teaches we must be Born
Again in order to see the Kingdom of God. We must have the Holy Spirit
sanctifying us in order to rightly understand the world around us and know how
to live as Christian in it. Unbelievers are INCAPABLE of living as Christians.
Turn to the Proverbs, their prayers, their worship is not pleasing to God. It's
an abomination. At best they can only become like the Samaritans, worshipping
what they do not know.
2.
Without faith it is impossible to please him,
and unbelievers are in a state of enmity with God, they cannot obey his laws
and according to Romans do not desire to do so. So even if unbelievers are
legally forced to behave in a certain way and engage in certain social rituals
it IN NO WAY enhances the Kingdom of God. It's pretty clear, it does not please
Him to have unbelievers behaving in this way. It may create a social veneer of
what seems like lots of 'nice' people, but from a spiritual perspective, from a
gospel perspective, is this helpful? Do we desire a society of Pharisees and
nominal Christians? Was the gospel more effective with the Pharisees who said
they see, or with the lost who knew they were lost?
Has no culture on earth ever been able
to create a reasonably civil society apart from Christianity? They try to argue
this way, but history does not support them. Pagan Rome, the setting of the New
Testament was a civil and orderly place. Many other civilizations with nothing
more than Natural Law have succeeded. Will any model last forever? Of course
not. That's not how history works. I'm content with these failed models in a
fallen world. I'm not looking for a physical Heaven at this time.
So how are Christian understandings applied to society?
They can't be. If they are it's through this method....Christians living their
lives being salt and light, not with the expectation of changing the outcome of
elections or helping architectural standards to conform to some dreamt up
theological model. Rather it's Christians living as Christians being witness in
word and deed to the Gospel of Christ.
The Bible doesn't tell me how to do Chemistry. It tells
me how to be a Christian and then when I'm doing Chemistry I proceed with a
Christian attitude...also understanding that I'm interacting with lost people.
My expectations are going to be limited by that. I may sometimes have to walk
away because I can't participate in what the unbeliever does. Sometimes that
action itself is part of being salt and light. What is denigrated as Retreatism
is sometimes the very thing we are called to do.
So there is no specifically Christian way to do
Chemistry. You see it's not part of the Holy Realm. It's part of the Common
Realm which like all the kingdoms and cultures of the earth will be burned up
at the 2nd Coming.
We don't have to flee from the Common Realm like monks
or pietists, but we don't have to transform it either. If you're a chemist...be
a Christian who is also a chemist. That's all you have to do.
I'm a pilgrim here and this gives me an ethic even when
I approach something like Chemistry. This is but one example.
Dominionism teaches that we have to transform Chemistry
and make it explicitly Christian if not for now then for the future Christian
Culture.
But if the Bible doesn't teach any of this...are these
"Christian" "Transformed" models they come up with really
Christian or Biblical? And if they're
not...I ask again… then what are they doing to the Church? There’s a real
danger and I hope to keep visiting it.