Thoughts for Easter
The Two Kingdoms
In the last week of His life Jesus spoke about the two kingdoms that all who follow Him live in. The Pharisees attempted to catch Jesus in a contradiction. Should we pay taxes to Caesar they asked? Procuring a coin, He asked “Who is pictured on the coin?” Upon their response, He uttered a line that should never be forgotten by any of His followers: “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s and to God the things that are God’s.” [Mark 12:17 ESV]. The Pharisees marveled at Him and rightly so. They did not miss the import of what He said.
He did not say there was nothing that you owed Caesar. So much for Him coming back to impose the Messianic Kingdom that will depose Caesar. The Jewish leaders were chaffing under the yoke of Roman rule. They did not like that. When would David’s Kingdom return? They were looking forward to a position in that kingdom as religious leaders granting them secular as well as sacred power.
Note that Jesus does not create a tension between the kingdoms. Nor does He indicate that it is up to His followers to shape Caesar’s kingdom to look more like His. Why? Because His Kingdom is heavenly, spiritual and eternal and Caesar’s is earthly, secular and temporal. It would be foolish to attempt to mix the two. Sounds like a good argument for separation of church and state. And, it certainly does not fit with the theonomic and/or theocratic arguments afoot today for the future of the USA.
Jesus has ascended to be the King over all. But, He has not superseded the secular state. It has a place in the two kingdom paradigm. Caesar heads the civil government that wields the sword so as to promote good. Caesar’s work is not redemptive but provisional in order that the church can do its work of a redemptive nature. All falls under the overruling of King Jesus, but each kingdom has a role to play during this time of grace. Obviously, there is much disagreement on how the state and church interface, what kind of state is ideal or acceptable under the two kingdoms plan and what influence Christians should exercise over the state. But, one thing is certain…our Lord endorses the two kingdoms as our pattern and it is our obligation to make it work.
Friday, March 30, 2007
Thursday, March 29, 2007
Thoughts for Easter
Basic Economics
During the last week of His earthly life, our Lord gives to us a lesson concerning worldly possessions. It occurred at the Temple and involved the widow’s mite. While her gift was not as valuable monetarily as the others observed, it was all she had to give. Thereupon, Jesus uttered His famous economic statements: “Truly, I say to you, this poor widow has put in more than all those who are contributing to the offering box.” [Mark 13: 43 ESV] How could that be? Side by side her gift was a mere pittance being far less than the others. But, comparison between folks is not God’s way. When you give all you have to Him it shows a reliance and trust on Him that is not shown by those who give from excess. She gave all she had to live on.” [12:44].
This is the basic economics of Jesus. It can be summed up in the theorem: 1] Give all you have to Him. This is the economics of service and sacrifice for the Kingdom. Remember the rich young ruler? Jesus said to him give all you have to the poor. Not because what he possessed was evil but because the young man had put his trust in his goods and possessions and not in the “good teacher.” Imagine the influence the church militant would have if this was the economics of His people. Oh how the Kingdom would advance if His people gave what they possessed to the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ.
Basic Economics
During the last week of His earthly life, our Lord gives to us a lesson concerning worldly possessions. It occurred at the Temple and involved the widow’s mite. While her gift was not as valuable monetarily as the others observed, it was all she had to give. Thereupon, Jesus uttered His famous economic statements: “Truly, I say to you, this poor widow has put in more than all those who are contributing to the offering box.” [Mark 13: 43 ESV] How could that be? Side by side her gift was a mere pittance being far less than the others. But, comparison between folks is not God’s way. When you give all you have to Him it shows a reliance and trust on Him that is not shown by those who give from excess. She gave all she had to live on.” [12:44].
This is the basic economics of Jesus. It can be summed up in the theorem: 1] Give all you have to Him. This is the economics of service and sacrifice for the Kingdom. Remember the rich young ruler? Jesus said to him give all you have to the poor. Not because what he possessed was evil but because the young man had put his trust in his goods and possessions and not in the “good teacher.” Imagine the influence the church militant would have if this was the economics of His people. Oh how the Kingdom would advance if His people gave what they possessed to the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ.
Wednesday, March 28, 2007
Thoughts for Easter
The Praise of Men
If Jesus had been a politician, Palm Sunday would have been his triumph. After three years of public ministry, He rides into the Holy City amidst the cheers, adoration and acclamation of the public. The peoples’ choice was Jesus! But, of course, Jesus was not a politician. He did not rub shoulders with the fat cats, the rich and powerful from the government, public or the religious sector. No, his constituency numbered fishermen, tax collectors, harlots, the sick and lame, the poor, the weak and those without power or influence. Common people just like the Nazarene Himself.
Oh, you can be sure the fat cats were there on Palm Sunday. Not lining the streets, but watching from the shadows with concern etched on their faces. This carpenter’s son from Nazareth was eroding their influence. What could be done? What the crowd, the chief priest, elders and teachers of the law did not know was that this was not the triumph of the Messiah. Did anyone understand? He was not in town to be crowned Messiah. He was not in town for the hosannas of men. He was coming to Jerusalem to please the Father and do His will.
Here is the answer to In His Steps, WWJD or the current popular slogan among the greening crowd: “What would Jesus drive?” It is quite simple…please God not men. Seek to live a life that brings honor and glory to Him. A life that is faithful and obedient to all He commands. We live in a culture of man pleasers. It is more important to us that our neighbor likes us than our neighbor love God. Let’s begin taking our cue from the Lord and live a life that pleases the Father and does His will.
The Praise of Men
If Jesus had been a politician, Palm Sunday would have been his triumph. After three years of public ministry, He rides into the Holy City amidst the cheers, adoration and acclamation of the public. The peoples’ choice was Jesus! But, of course, Jesus was not a politician. He did not rub shoulders with the fat cats, the rich and powerful from the government, public or the religious sector. No, his constituency numbered fishermen, tax collectors, harlots, the sick and lame, the poor, the weak and those without power or influence. Common people just like the Nazarene Himself.
Oh, you can be sure the fat cats were there on Palm Sunday. Not lining the streets, but watching from the shadows with concern etched on their faces. This carpenter’s son from Nazareth was eroding their influence. What could be done? What the crowd, the chief priest, elders and teachers of the law did not know was that this was not the triumph of the Messiah. Did anyone understand? He was not in town to be crowned Messiah. He was not in town for the hosannas of men. He was coming to Jerusalem to please the Father and do His will.
Here is the answer to In His Steps, WWJD or the current popular slogan among the greening crowd: “What would Jesus drive?” It is quite simple…please God not men. Seek to live a life that brings honor and glory to Him. A life that is faithful and obedient to all He commands. We live in a culture of man pleasers. It is more important to us that our neighbor likes us than our neighbor love God. Let’s begin taking our cue from the Lord and live a life that pleases the Father and does His will.
Thursday, March 22, 2007
Reading
A Secular Faith: Why Christianity Favors a Separation of Church and State
DG Hart has written a new book, the title of which is identified above. I have not yet read the book, but there is a fascinating discussion about its premise on De Regno Christi [The Reign of Christ] website Dr. Hart explains the book thusly:
What A Secular Faith proposes to do is examine a set of assumptions about religion and American politics held primarily by Protestants. The book examines eight of these assumptions, identifies them with important historical figures, from John Winthrop and John Witherspoon to Martin Luther King, Jr., and George W. Bush, and shows how they developed among American Protestants as these believers tried to defend and maintain a Christian America.The first chapter accordingly begins with John Winthrop’s appeal to the biblical refrain of a “city on a hill” and examines the eschatology that has informed American Protestant appeals to their nation’s providential role in human history. The problem, as I see it, is that a flawed eschatology has resulted in two significant errors. The first is an identification of God’s redemptive purposes with the U.S.A. Although many Reformed Christians know better than to equate the U.S.A. with Israel, many Presbyterians do think of America in religious categories that fail to do justice to sovereignty and legitimacy of other nation-states, as if America were better because of its Christian heritage. A second and more important error has been to undervalue the institutional church as the locus of God’s saving work. Because of sufficiency of Christ’s ministry, God’s redemptive purposes are now being carried out not by Israel (or any nation) but by the church, a trans-national and spiritual institution.This does not appear to me to be a very controversial argument for anyone who has imbibed the redemptive historical insights of a Geerhardus Vos or a John Murray. And yet, recognizing that God’s saving work is now spiritual and not physical, ecclesiological and not civil, is a proposition that does not sit well with Protestants who continue to think in some way of America as a Christian nation
With the success at the box office of Amazing Grace, the ideas of how or whether Christians are to be agents of change in government [civil authorities] is certainly a topic of current interest. Darryl Hart poses 3 questions he thinks important for “laying down the gauntlet” of thinking on the 1st chapter of his book:
1] To what extent does eschatology determine one’s understanding of the relationship between church and state?
2] Is the idea of a Christian America a hangover of postmillennial optimism (with pre-millennialism being the pessimistic flipside)?
3] In other words, is the spirituality of the church merely the logical consequence of a-millennialism?
A while back I posted on millennial views. Darryl Hart proposed that millennial views have greatly influenced the way Americas look at their relationship to the civil authorities and maybe we must step back and see why Christians are deeply involved in politics and analyze if that is a proper response for Biblical Christians. Read the comments at De Regno Christi, you will find them fascinating.
A Secular Faith: Why Christianity Favors a Separation of Church and State
DG Hart has written a new book, the title of which is identified above. I have not yet read the book, but there is a fascinating discussion about its premise on De Regno Christi [The Reign of Christ] website
What A Secular Faith proposes to do is examine a set of assumptions about religion and American politics held primarily by Protestants. The book examines eight of these assumptions, identifies them with important historical figures, from John Winthrop and John Witherspoon to Martin Luther King, Jr., and George W. Bush, and shows how they developed among American Protestants as these believers tried to defend and maintain a Christian America.The first chapter accordingly begins with John Winthrop’s appeal to the biblical refrain of a “city on a hill” and examines the eschatology that has informed American Protestant appeals to their nation’s providential role in human history. The problem, as I see it, is that a flawed eschatology has resulted in two significant errors. The first is an identification of God’s redemptive purposes with the U.S.A. Although many Reformed Christians know better than to equate the U.S.A. with Israel, many Presbyterians do think of America in religious categories that fail to do justice to sovereignty and legitimacy of other nation-states, as if America were better because of its Christian heritage. A second and more important error has been to undervalue the institutional church as the locus of God’s saving work. Because of sufficiency of Christ’s ministry, God’s redemptive purposes are now being carried out not by Israel (or any nation) but by the church, a trans-national and spiritual institution.This does not appear to me to be a very controversial argument for anyone who has imbibed the redemptive historical insights of a Geerhardus Vos or a John Murray. And yet, recognizing that God’s saving work is now spiritual and not physical, ecclesiological and not civil, is a proposition that does not sit well with Protestants who continue to think in some way of America as a Christian nation
With the success at the box office of Amazing Grace, the ideas of how or whether Christians are to be agents of change in government [civil authorities] is certainly a topic of current interest. Darryl Hart poses 3 questions he thinks important for “laying down the gauntlet” of thinking on the 1st chapter of his book:
1] To what extent does eschatology determine one’s understanding of the relationship between church and state?
2] Is the idea of a Christian America a hangover of postmillennial optimism (with pre-millennialism being the pessimistic flipside)?
3] In other words, is the spirituality of the church merely the logical consequence of a-millennialism?
A while back I posted on millennial views. Darryl Hart proposed that millennial views have greatly influenced the way Americas look at their relationship to the civil authorities and maybe we must step back and see why Christians are deeply involved in politics and analyze if that is a proper response for Biblical Christians. Read the comments at De Regno Christi, you will find them fascinating.
Monday, March 5, 2007
Living in the World
Incomplete DNA Conclusions
Not surprisingly, it appears that the Cameron Crazies [not the Dukies!] of Jesus Tomb infamy have not been totally forthcoming on the "blockbuster" DNA info. As reported on www.aomin.org , the blog of James White, e-mail correspondance with the DNA tester indicates the Cameron Crazies selectively reported possible results.
On page 172 of tge Jesus Family Tomb, Dr. Carney Matheson, reports that the bones are not maternally related in one of the tombs, so if unrelated would most likely have been husband and wife. However, in the e-mail response to Dr. White he stated that he mentioned "all the possibilites...father and daughter, paternal cousins, half brother and sister (sharing the same father) or simply unrealated individuals" to the Cameron Crazies.
So, for you CSI fans, the "evidence" has much broader implications that the Cameron Crazies lead the viewer/reader to believe. And, much broader implications dramatically affects their propostions. A disingenuous handling of information casts great shadows of doubt on the motives of the promoters of this hyped up publicity stunt. There is a lack of sincerity and integrity when you fail to address all the consequences of your so-called scientific evidence in formulating your hypothesis. Why would they do that? Because to do otherwise is fatal to the case of CSI:Jerusalem and puts them out of court.
Incomplete DNA Conclusions
Not surprisingly, it appears that the Cameron Crazies [not the Dukies!] of Jesus Tomb infamy have not been totally forthcoming on the "blockbuster" DNA info. As reported on www.aomin.org , the blog of James White, e-mail correspondance with the DNA tester indicates the Cameron Crazies selectively reported possible results.
On page 172 of tge Jesus Family Tomb, Dr. Carney Matheson, reports that the bones are not maternally related in one of the tombs, so if unrelated would most likely have been husband and wife. However, in the e-mail response to Dr. White he stated that he mentioned "all the possibilites...father and daughter, paternal cousins, half brother and sister (sharing the same father) or simply unrealated individuals" to the Cameron Crazies.
So, for you CSI fans, the "evidence" has much broader implications that the Cameron Crazies lead the viewer/reader to believe. And, much broader implications dramatically affects their propostions. A disingenuous handling of information casts great shadows of doubt on the motives of the promoters of this hyped up publicity stunt. There is a lack of sincerity and integrity when you fail to address all the consequences of your so-called scientific evidence in formulating your hypothesis. Why would they do that? Because to do otherwise is fatal to the case of CSI:Jerusalem and puts them out of court.
Thursday, March 1, 2007
Living in the World
Wow...aid from unusual quarters
In truly amazing developments, even the "liberal" press seems to be accepting the fact that the Jesus' Tomb story is at best a publicity stunt or at worse a hoax. The Washington Post carried a headline "Lost Tomb of Jesus Claim Called a Stunt"!!! The author of the story, Alan Cooperman, has this quote:
Scorn for the Discovery Channel’s claim to have found the burial place of Jesus, Mary Magdalene and — most explosively — their possible son came not just from Christian scholars but also from Jewish and secular experts who said their judgments were unaffected by any desire to uphold Christian orthodoxy.
Seems as if everyone has caught on, already. Read the entire story at http://www.washingtonpost.com/
The Old Grey Lady even gets into the act. In a story by Laurie Goodstein, she quotes Lawrence E.Stager, the Dorot Professor of Archeology of Israel at Harvard
This is exploiting the whole trend that caught on with ‘The Da Vinci Code. One of the problems is there are so many biblically illiterate people around the world that they don’t know what is real judicious assessment and what is what some of us in the field call ‘fantastic archaeology. [Emphasis added.]
Read the whole story at http://www.nytimes.com/
Imagine the NY Times quoting a source that says one of the problems in discerning the modern gnosticism flowing from the Da Vinci Code is Bible illiteracy! They did and they are correct. This has to be sweet music to the ears of my friend Woodrow Kroll who has been trumpeting the problem of Biblical illiteracy for years. If Harvard and the NY Times recognizes the problem, why don't Christians and the church? If you want to know more about Dr. Kroll's Bible Literacy Center and his campaign against Biblical illiteracy, go to http://www.bibleliteracycenter.com/
By the way, even though the "gig is up" on this matter, the irrepressible James White has started a blog section to deal specifically with the Jesus Tomb "facts" at http://aomin.org/index.php?catid=21 [In today's entry he sites Ben Witherington, a site we gave you yesterday.] White's apologetics are second to no one and even if this attack on the Christian faith has almost passed into the dust bin of history before it is even shown, you may want to arm yourself for the next anti-Christian follies to surface.
Wow...aid from unusual quarters
In truly amazing developments, even the "liberal" press seems to be accepting the fact that the Jesus' Tomb story is at best a publicity stunt or at worse a hoax. The Washington Post carried a headline "Lost Tomb of Jesus Claim Called a Stunt"!!! The author of the story, Alan Cooperman, has this quote:
Scorn for the Discovery Channel’s claim to have found the burial place of Jesus, Mary Magdalene and — most explosively — their possible son came not just from Christian scholars but also from Jewish and secular experts who said their judgments were unaffected by any desire to uphold Christian orthodoxy.
Seems as if everyone has caught on, already. Read the entire story at http://www.washingtonpost.com/
The Old Grey Lady even gets into the act. In a story by Laurie Goodstein, she quotes Lawrence E.Stager, the Dorot Professor of Archeology of Israel at Harvard
This is exploiting the whole trend that caught on with ‘The Da Vinci Code. One of the problems is there are so many biblically illiterate people around the world that they don’t know what is real judicious assessment and what is what some of us in the field call ‘fantastic archaeology. [Emphasis added.]
Read the whole story at http://www.nytimes.com/
Imagine the NY Times quoting a source that says one of the problems in discerning the modern gnosticism flowing from the Da Vinci Code is Bible illiteracy! They did and they are correct. This has to be sweet music to the ears of my friend Woodrow Kroll who has been trumpeting the problem of Biblical illiteracy for years. If Harvard and the NY Times recognizes the problem, why don't Christians and the church? If you want to know more about Dr. Kroll's Bible Literacy Center and his campaign against Biblical illiteracy, go to http://www.bibleliteracycenter.com/
By the way, even though the "gig is up" on this matter, the irrepressible James White has started a blog section to deal specifically with the Jesus Tomb "facts" at http://aomin.org/index.php?catid=21 [In today's entry he sites Ben Witherington, a site we gave you yesterday.] White's apologetics are second to no one and even if this attack on the Christian faith has almost passed into the dust bin of history before it is even shown, you may want to arm yourself for the next anti-Christian follies to surface.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)