Revelation 13 in 2021

  

And the Dragon stood on the shore of the sea. 

I saw a Beast rising from the sea. It had great political and military strength — it controlled governments and media and shouted words that perverted justice and generated inequity. The Beast was swift, cunning, and brute, and devoured any who would stand against it. The Dragon turned over its power to it, its throne and great authority.

At one point in time it appeared as though this Beast had been defeated, but it deceived its way back into power and appeared to have overcome the truth. The whole world was agog, amazed at what the Beast could do, as the Dragon unleashed a terrible plague upon the earth. Struck by fear, the people of the earth gave authority to the Beast, and in doing so worshipped the Dragon. They exclaimed to one another, “There’s never been anything like the Beast! No one would dare go to war with the Beast!”

The Beast had a loud mouth, boastful and blasphemous, with contempt for humanity. It spend the lives of innocent women and men for its own profit, and while using words such as ‘peace’ and ‘unity’ and ‘truth’ was responsible for more bloodshed and violence, both in the world and in the hearts of humanity. The Beast was given power to remove freedom from the earth, in the name of keeping people safe from its plague — upon the church it was permitted to constrain and censor and coerce. It held absolute sway over all people, and everyone who was not secure in the Lamb was drawn into worship of this Beast, who mimicked the promise of life.

Do we have the ability to see and hear what is happening all around us? Many have made their choice and will not turn back; many of the followers of the Lamb have been tempted by the message and method of the Beast and will no longer listen to their brothers and sisters. The people of God must stand firm in the truth and refuse to capitulate.

I saw another Beast rising out of the ground. It had the appearance of salvation but moved throughout the world with rage and anger and fear. It was a puppet of the first Beast, and it summoned everyone to worship the first Beast, which appeared as almighty.

This second Beast presented magical signs, dazzling all sorts of people with its healing dose, the answer to the plague brought on by the first Beast. At first many in power opposed this dose, but the second Beast aligned their thoughts to the power of the first Beast, and they dazzled at the dose as though it were fire from heaven — the very salvation of humanity. The second Beast used the authority it received, the devotion of those dazzled by the dose, to promote the first Beast so that anybody not adhering to the first Beast would be cast away. It forced all people, small and great, rich and poor, healthy and sick, to take within themselves the dose. Those who did not receive the dose and who did not conform to its policies lost jobs, could not enter public places, were arrested, attacked with dogs, separated from their children, maligned, ridiculed, and mocked as those who did not deserve to live.

See what is happening: Remain in the Spirit and think hard about what is happening around you. The Dragon and these two Beasts have risen up to destroy the earth, accomplishing their treachery in the hearts of humanity.

winsome

  

In his book on spiritual discipline, John Ortberg tells the story of "Hank," a cranky fellow who had been attending church for years, with little to no visible growth or maturity. One observation made from this revealed the importance of expectation: "We didn't expect that he would progressively become the way Jesus would be if he were in Hank's place." There was no real prospect of sanctification, even though this fellow was part of the church community for so long. And this story is compelling, not simply because we all can think of a man or woman like Hank in our own experiences of church. Rather, this one example serves as a picture of the larger church. 

We are experiencing the fruits of an entire generation that has been brought up in a church with every conceivable cultural advantage imaginable. The American church culture is "doing church" at a more polished and professional level, on a more widespread scale, than ever before in world history. But what about the fruit that is being produced from this present culture of faith?

Biblical literacy rates continue to be quite low; processing Christian worldview is largely nonexistent; the consumerist culture has overtaken much of congregational dynamics; and socio-political activism has, in many ways, pushed out the unit of the Spirit.

These trends have not made for a more acceptable Christianity, as is constantly promised by those who advocate for such accommodation. In some cases, there has been a joining together of church and culture, although never without a loss of the distinctiveness of the gospel as a result. (The gospel with adjectives is always a distortion of the gospel itself, which is a natural human tendency to be guarded against, not celebrated.) What is the point of the church community? Why would the church want to be like everyone else?

The latter question is simple: the people of God have had a continual problem of wanting to be like everyone else. Just ask Samuel, who walked away frustrated at Israel's desire for a king even though he had just outlined all of the negative effects of having an instituted monarchy; or the author of Revelation, who pushed his seven congregations to stand firm against the shifting tides of cultural accommodation.

The point of a church community is to be, in Hauerwas and Willimon's words, a colony of heaven in a culture of hell. That means we are to be different: set apart: holy. Our present internal struggle as the people of God is revealing some disturbing truths about where we stand. This is not a political statement, except to say that our national politics have been granted too much power to influence the American church. 

And thus, the church is presently being drawn into the ugly rhetoric of politics, even going so far as to force-fit the message of the gospel into the language of political argument. The melody of love, however, cannot be communicated in chords of dissonance. The church is not called to wage war with the weapons of this world, and so must work to stand apart, driven by the Spirit, to be winsome.

What would happen if the church spoke of the gospel with the genuine expectation that it would change those who encountered it? What would happen if we thought that the message of the gospel had this power on its own, without our dressing it up or dumbing it down? (As though we could genuinely improve on the work that has been accomplished in Christ.)

In a world filled with anger and rage and hate and riots and conquest and bitterness and greed (and that is just the first five weeks of 2021), would it not be a radical statement indeed to have a community of faith that embodied an overwhelming love for one another, so genuine that it spilled out into the world around us? I am convinced that this would wreak more havoc on the world than a thousand protests, and would cause more disruption to the status quo than a million executive orders. A community that could speak truth in chords of love would upend the power structures so much that they would almost certainly be declared an enemy of the state, for there would be an undoubted allegiance being given to another kingdom and another king.

While so many Christians today are worried about national and international affairs, or the condition of the economy, or the wars and rumors of wars that swirl around us, it is good for us to remember that our greatest work is right in front of us: the Spirit has called and equipped us to love each other and to do our best to put others before ourselves, and to meet the needs of men and women right next door. This happens, not by winning online arguments or scoring political points. Rather, this comes from loving our neighbors as we love ourselves. Being winsome.

Lord, may we have tenacious winsome courage to live the gospel and see your kingdom coming no matter what the stuff of earth may be.

The Spiritual Danger of Anti-Trumpism

The Spiritual Danger of Anti-Trumpism

Michael C Thompson

In the middle of 2020 thirty self-identified evangelical Christians came together and published the book, The Spiritual Danger of Donald Trump (Cascade Books). Twenty-five chapters set out to criticize the character and leadership of the sitting President, unsurprisingly released in an election year. The fact that there were as many as thirty authors producing some twenty-five chapters of content was supposed to be a convincing and convicting statement, so bravely offered at such a critical juncture in our nation’s history. In reality, it wasn’t earth-shaking and actually failed to produce any critique that could be divorced from the narratives of other mainstream media. Nevertheless, it was an intentional statement: one that would give a certain reinforcement to many Anti-Trump voices in the ever-shifting demographic of evangelicalism.

Over the past four years there has been an ever-increasing decrying of what some have labelled, Trumpism. This term has a few meanings, but within the church it is intended as a criticism of any believer who may actually give any sort of political or personal support to President Trump. It is no secret that our governing elitists, along with their media cohorts, have been trying to ruin Trump and destroy his presidency since before the beginning of his term. One hit-piece after another has filled the media stage, often masquerading as news, regardless of the availability of supporting facts or credible sources. Especially in the early days of figuring out who Trump as President was going to be, many within the church took these accounts and felt a moral obligation to raise their voices against it. Although many have moved on from these juvenile attacks, others have not.

This idea of Trumpism has never been clearly defined, and even now remains vague. As a criticism of Christians its claim is that political support of President Trump is essentially wrapping the flag of nationalism over the commitment to the Cross. For this label to have its intended effect it cannot be more precisely defined, lest we discover that there are many who do not simply fit within the nationalistic categories. Like most socio-political labels, this one unfairly and uniformity lays over a wide range of people, discounting their layers of diversity, and works simply to make it easy to score public debate points against them. In reality, the vast majority of Christians who support Trump do not believe their political commitment has superseded their faith commitment. And yet, that is how they have been treated, even by those within the church.

Ironically, the push against so-called Trumpism has led to the rise of Anti-Trumpism, a movement with a simple purpose: to be against Trump and any of his supporters. This, I believe is taking place within the American church, not only in the production of critical books by evangelicals, but within the broader spectrum of our ecclesial communities. Because this backlash, like other movements, is based on politics, there is inherent spiritual dangers to be identified as well. Unsurprisingly, very few of these no-Trump evangelical voices have raised their concerns over things happening within the Anti-Trumpism movement, even though they posture themselves as prophetic enough to be above the fray. This essay is my attempt to outline some of these widespread dangers that I feel are working against the unity of the church. I am not a politician, though I can recognize my political biases. I am a biblical scholar and theologian, and so I will keep my concerns centered on the church. My aim is to balance out some of the rhetoric so that Christianity in American can return to a more responsible form of public discourse, for the sake of the gospel.

Instead of dragging this out into twenty-five needless chapters, I present five identifiable dangers that ought to be considered regarding the Anti-Trumpism movement: things that are particularly concerning in light of the biblical commitment Christians ought to have.

First, Anti-Trumpism presents a spiritual danger in allowing for a loss of commitment to truth as it stands. This can be a challenging claim to make, for it can be quickly dismissed as though I am simply declaring any competing political viewpoint from my own as a non-truth. This is most certainly not the case: instead, I am referring tot he priority that is being given to the narrative of Anti-Trumpism that overrides facts that may prove otherwise, or which might show some sort of nuance. In our national political discourse it appears that there is no place for nuance, which is quite troublesome, but it is most definitely harmful within the life of the church. The narrative that Trump is such a terrible human being has been so constantly pushed by the media, that one’s anger would certainly be justified if it were proven true. But the overwhelming majority of these claims have no credible evidence or witness. It appears the filter has been set, and adopted by certain people within the church.

One recent example I have seen has been in regards to President Trump’s pro-life stance. In two separate online discussions I read the criticism that Trump was only “apparently” pro-life, and that he secretly mocks the movement’s proponents behind closed doors. The intent of this claim is to overthrow Trump’s official statements, speeches, and policies that make him the most pro-life president in American history with some sort of random hearsay. Advocating for this assertion is a foremost dedication to the Anti-Trump narrative.

The same could be pointed out regarding the Capitol Hill riots: once the narrative was set that Trump “incited” the attack on the Capitol, he was decried by voices throughout the Anti-Trumpism movement, especially within the church. As more details emerged (and continue to come to light), showing the President’s distance from the event, the evangelical Anti-Trump crowd has contorted around the facts yet again, claiming he probably still had influence in planning the event.

Along with the loss of commitment to the truth is the unfortunate reality that so many in our society have become downright lazy in how they obtain their news. Admittedly, most people simply don’t have the time or leftover energy to be doing the work that news media ought to do (and used to do). But we do in fact live in an age where much of the news media has proven itself to be untrustworthy, and it is a necessary task of those who would be responsible citizens, especially within the church. If believers do not have the capacity to acknowledge truth, even when it is uncomfortable, then we cannot have a credible voice in the public square. Since the church is responsible for the much more powerful and significant gospel narrative, failure to rightly handle truth will be a serious detriment to the community of faith. Anti-Trumpism fails in its understanding of the great conversations of faith and freedom that have both served as foundational to our nation and history, and which can contribute today.

Second, Anti-Trumpism presents a spiritual danger in its giving rise to the tendency to question the validity of faith in others. Mostly this done implicitly, but every now and again it becomes explicit. It is unfortunate that social tensions can rise to the point of making political judgments the plumb line for one’s faith commitment as a whole. There seems to be a growing acceptance of this idea that agreement with Trump on anything simply exposes an individual’s lack of understanding or commitment to biblical faith.

The biggest offender of calling into question the genuineness of other people’s faith was former editor-in-chief of Christianity Today, Mark Galli, who in December 2019 published a rather standard Anti-Trump editorial in which he openly called for those who supported the President to remember who they are and who they serve. Implication: you cannot be politically supportive of anything this man says or does without compromising the centrality of your Christian commitment. Although this sort of rhetoric ought to be completely out-of-bounds for discussions within the church, Galli’s piece was lauded by many evangelical Anti-Trumpists as a bold statement. In reality, his comments were so poorly reasoned that the piece has already been tossed aside, and Mark’s fifteen minutes as a media darling are expired.

What we see in this second danger is that it comes from a rise of modern day public propheticism within American evangelical circles, using a rather formulaic approach to provide the individual (or group) to make an openly Anti-Trump statement using language that makes it appears that this person is, in reality, above the fray and thus speaking for God. Galli’s article is a prime example of this, even though the substance of his statement is no different than what one can find in other mainstream leftist commentary. Christianity in America needs to come to grips with the reality that our nation is in much more critical need of pastoral voices than pseudo-prophetic ones.

Third, Anti-Trumpism presents a spiritual danger in the perpetuation of moral double-standards in our society. Yet again, it appears that a leftist political maneuver has been adopted into evangelical language. There has been a multitude of moral concerns surrounding President Trump, most of which have been shown false and a few that have some degree of validity. Personally, I find him just as human as any other person who has held the office, with a life including behaviors that I can choose to accept or reject. So, yes, there are more than likely moral deficiencies that a committed Christian can identify. I have no particular problem with this, except that the Anti-Trumpism movement has so hammered this person while being very silent on other immoral public behavior in our country. The old political adage rings true: “If you don’t have standards you can’t be held accountable to them.”

The Christian ought to have clear moral standards, even though numerous believers on both sides of the political aisle have often lost sight of them. The Bible doesn’t give us clear answers for every ethical question for this life, but it does provide a worldview to properly approach and explore any issue. When so many would-be prophets from the Anti-Trump position join in wave of criticisms of the President’s faults, while at the same time remaining silent on the left’s numerous and repeated encouragement of lawlessness and the destruction of cities, then the church is being asked to serve as a shell for a political party. Christians can stand against immorality whenever and wherever it occurs, but being selective as we have seen from Anti-Trumpism is being irresponsible with the message of the gospel.

Fourth Anti-Trumpism presents a spiritual danger in aligning men and women of the gospel with morally reprehensible leadership. I am aware that this is one of the core concerns of the Anti-Trump movement, and perhaps this is an indication that no politician is completely above reproach. But the growing anger at the President and the push to have him removed from office at all costs has swept many evangelicals into its undertow. As a result, there has been both implicit and explicit advocating of a political candidate (and his running mate) who have repeatedly made racist comments, who ave openly supported riots and looters (both verbally and financially), who advocate for eight-year-olds to have the ability to choose their own gender, who have made egregious personal attacks on their political opponents and their families, that have been a part of an administration that started illegal wars, have supported ideas and policies that go against religious freedom, among other things. 

The 2020 election made it clear that not everyone is willing to have an open and honest conversation about these matters if it would potentially harm the efforts to oust Trump from office. So, through the Anti-Trump movement has allowed for the strange bedfellows of leftist politics and evangelical Christians. I do not believe that those evangelicals who helped push through this leftism have a real sense of the spiritual danger they have invited into the nation’s leadership.

Fifth, Anti-Trumpism presents a spiritual danger as it fosters a growing acceptance of the advantages in accumulating and achieving political power. For years, Christians on the right hav been criticized for this approach, and in many cases this critique has been warranted. For the Christian there is no power or allegiance greater than the Kingship of Jesus. The Religious Right movement of the previous generation may have been an out-of-balance approach, but Anti-Trumpism is equally flawed on its own. Political power should not be the aim of the church, although the work of politics is a necessary endeavor to preserve the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity. It has been shown that conservatives in American government are actually much less concerned with gaining power than are the leftists. Christians on the right have demonstrated a firm commitment to the rule of law and the Constitution, and this is what one will find among Trump supporters up and down the line.

From a Christian point of view there is room for criticism of Donald Trump, and I am intellectually honest enough in my faith to say so. However, the onslaught of personal and political attacks that have been levied against this President is unprecedented, without a close second, and if that were all I knew about him then I would very much be opposed. But what if there was a chance that the steady diet of negativity we’ve been fed wasn’t actually the truth?

As a Christ-follower I would suppose that it would be my responsibility to look deeper, if not for the sake of my politics but for the sake of the imago Dei that affords each person the respect of being created. I would look deeper, knowing what it’s like, for myself and my family, to be personally and professionally maligned publicly for things you’ve never said nor done. Behind all of this cost-of-doing-business mudslinging that is American politics is the issue of our humanity. If we do not like how another person conducts themselves in public debate, we can choose to roll around in the mud or rise above. Politicians may do what they like, but the church ought to have a different approach.

Christ calls us each to a life more abundant, which gives us the right to be called children of God and the responsibility to change the world around us with the gospel. The constant pounding of the Anti-Trump drum within the church is drowning out the chords of unity and truth and love. Some will read this statement and say that the exact opposite is true, and I would not necessarily disagree. I submit this statement as one seeking balance, not the short-sighted victory of my political opinion.

Many will dismiss me outright as a shill for Trump: someone so blinded in his political devotion to a President that he has sacrificed his commitment to the Cross. I assure you nothing could be further from the truth. Mine is a simple assertion that the church can do much better than yelling at one another, demeaning each other’s political commitment, and assuming that roughly half of the country is comprised by idiots. In that regard, I am cutting both ways and encouraging believers to stand together, even in our political disagreements, for something of much greater value. Even through my great love for this great country I wholeheartedly understand that freedom is both a right and a responsibility, and that all things will pass away, except the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ.

The spiritual danger is actually on many sides of the church. But even these, playing the role of the Gates of Hell, cannot overcome the people of God.

The Dehumanizing Nature of Excused Riots

 

Today I was reminded of Anne Sullivan, who is remembered as being the teacher and lifelong companion of Helen Keller. For those have seen an adaptation of The Miracle Worker, there is an incredible moment when Sullivan is first introduced to Helen around the family table. The teacher was appalled by the fact that the Keller family allowed Helen to carry on as she wished, with no regard for social custom or proper behavior. The family believed that this was too much to ask of Helen, and every attempt to teach Helen to behave otherwise was met with the young girl's fits of rage. In spite of many challenges, and a lot of resistance from the Keller family, Anne Sullivan pushed forward with Helen and was finally able to make a great breakthrough.

At the very core of Sullivan's conviction that Helen Keller ought to act properly, in spite of her great physical challenges, so that she might behave like a young woman. Sullivan believed that using Helen's condition as an excuse for her behavior was actually dehumanizing as it kept her behaving as an animal. The respect that was granted to Helen was in the standard that was presented to her, a measure of expectation to which she could rise, which would enable this remarkable young lady to achieve far more than anyone had ever thought possible.

Today I was reminded of Anne Sullivan as I watched, together with many in my country, another city being looted and set ablaze by rioting thugs who are acting out of hate and rage, leaving a grand sweep of injustice upon the landscape of this nation. And when I once again heard a slew of voices working to downplay the level of destruction and even excuse the behavior as an acceptable (or understandable) reaction to a perceived wrong, I couldn't help but think of what happens when humans are allowed to act inhumanely.

There is a leftist movement in this country that is anarchist at its core, cloaked in the unarguable phrase Black Lives Matter. Those who rush to defend the riots are quick to say that this is the inevitable result of a great and systemic racism that pervades every level of American society. There is no reasonable arguing with this claim, because it is not about data and facts but rather the creation and perpetuation of a narrative. The primary vehicle of this social destruction is the charge of racism, which is no longer a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race, but rather an unwillingness to accept the leftist worldview that is being pushed.

Thus, those who are rioting, looting, physically attacking innocent people, and destroying businesses and families are dismissed as simply carrying out the inevitable reaction to this great evil that overshadows this country. In other words, the anarchist destruction is justified and thus allowed, and society's laws no longer matter to those who are in socio-political support of this hatred. Should it be surprising to us, then, that a lawless society would produce people who act inhumanely to one another? We are watching the dehumanizing of our own neighbors out of an excuse to act badly because we are afraid of holding up a standard that would regard each other as having the imago Dei. 

Those who are pushing the Black Lives Matter mantlepiece on this are, essentially, claiming that the color of one's skin is determinative of one's inability to act as a human and to use reason and intellect and can only act as raging animals to enact the change they believe is necessary. Yet, this is not considered a racist position because it is part of the narrative, even though it looks upon a large group of women and men and judges them by the color of their skin and not by the content of their character.

Some in the church are complicit in allowing this dehumanizing to occur, afraid to be socially unacceptable in opposing the hateful Black Lives Matter narrative, or looking to gain some political points by joining some anti-Trumpism that ought to have nothing to do with the matter altogether. (Once again I say that until the church can understand that Trump is not the cause, but the inevitable effect of our deteriorating national political discourse, will it have a voice worth listening to on this matter. But I set this aside for the time being.)

Restoring humanity lies at the heart of the gospel message, and what is happening in the excusing of these riots for political gain will have far greater effect than any election. I lament that so many voices in the church are jabbering on about the spirituality of the President when a far greater issue is at hand — one that actually takes precedence for the mission of the church. Restoring the imago Dei of all men and women will accomplish much more than riots or legislation or elections ever could. For the power of love is greater than the love of power, if the people of God have the tenacity for truth that rises above the muck of such hateful and dishonest rhetoric.

Perhaps our country will find its Anne Sullivan before the destruction goes too far.

Social Religion and the Lordship of Christ: A Short Reflection in Too Many Words

Last week I heard a comment regarding the current social disruptions that are occurring in the United States that left me thinking. I’m not yet going to reference the individual who made the public observation, for the sake of maybe being heard for a few more minutes. But the words had a particular impact upon me, and I have considered them from my own perspective.

Right now there is a religious movement being enacted in the American public square. It is not theocentric, as God, for all intents and purposes, has been removed from our national discourse and those who take seriously the teachings of the Bible are quickly dismissed. The social commentary that I heard pointed to this religious behavior as the inevitable outcome of trying to fill the “God shaped hole” that exists within every human life.

Having pushed away the message of the church for being too restrictive and controlling, and for being overly exclusive in its boundaries, this current movement of protest and riot and thought-policing is being adhered to with a religious fanaticism the likes of which the American church hasn’t witnessed in many generations. (If only that were not the case.)

The social religion is not being imposed from those at the top, nor are its tenets being systematized by those who push for its adoption. Our nation today is watching as a grass-roots religious movement takes hold, and which ties itself to the very fabric and foundation of our society. There are vices and virtues, transgressions and atonement, along with confession and absolution. It is, as the social commentator has noted, a religion of “wokeness” that has exploded across the country promising a better life. And this is my take on the idea.

The religion of Woke has its evangelists and leaders: those socio-political leftists (and statists) that promote the agenda through American politics and on every level of media. And they will push the narrative at all costs, ignoring a multitude of facts that expose the lies they repeat.

The religion of Woke has its sacred creed: the most fundamental is Black Lives Matter, in which there can be no derivation. Many who have tried to suggest that All Lives Matter have done so at great cost. And we judge anyone on the basis of repeating this creed, and make it an even greater sin to say nothing at all.

The religion of Woke has its atonement: those individuals (and even companies) that stray from the accepted message, even if it is for the purposes of constructive dialogue, find that they must issue their public apology and suffer the consequences of being so terribly sinful as to think for themselves. Atonement comes easier for those who are already members of the Woke, although there is never a lack of penance that must be enacted.

As I look at our current state of affairs as a society I am reminded of the Roman Empire, a complex world with complex socio-political issues entangled one to another. Historians of ancient Rome will often speak about the Imperial Cult that began to appear in the days of Augustus. Interestingly, there is no such identifiable entity that called itself the imperial cult that has ever been found in the ancient world. This is not because such practice did not exist, but rather that there was no official empire-wide systematic organizational structure that promoted a worship to Rome.

The ancient Greco-Roman world was built upon a system of sacrifices, as there were many gods and the typical ancient Roman citizen would have accepted the reality of the gods and human responsibility to act appropriately before them. What arose in this society was a grass-roots admiration and dedication to the ideals of Rome and the greatest benefactor to its citizens, the appointed Caesar. And thus, temples dedicated to the goddess Roma began to appear in the empire, and participation in their activities increasingly seen as one’s level of dedication to the Roman way of life as a whole.

One of the challenges the early Christians experienced in the Roman Empire was a lack of participation in the many temples that filled the urban centers. It wasn’t so much about which gods or goddesses an individual or family emphasized for themselves, as it was that missing out on this very public religious act was a very public statement that one was somehow being subversive to the culture. In other words, in a world that did not separate religious life from other aspects of life, to get off-message with the imperial temple was to be anti-Roman, and therefore subject to intense scrutiny by those with influence and power.

It took a solid commitment for the early church to stand against the social pressures that they faced for being non-participatory in the imperial cult, or any other temple they would have encountered. These were not simply places of worship, but centers of activity that often spread throughout the city in the form of civic benefaction, feasts and festivals, games and events. It would have been much easier for these Christians to synthesize a message promoting social justice and peace than to stand firm in a gospel that gave allegiance to Jesus alone as Lord.

It would have been simpler for the early church to adopt aspects of these temples into the gospel message, especially where similar words and concepts were employed. Asclepius is a goddess of healing? Great, because healing is an important part of Christianity we can see that the two are compatible. Caesar is the one who establishes peace? Well, Jesus is all about peace on earth, so it would probably be irresponsible of the church not to participate in this temple ritual.

There were many who decided to act this way and try to synthesize the gospel message with the surrounding world. But the core of the Christian church held steadfast in its singular devotion to Christ Jesus, knowing that all of the promises of justice and peace and healing and God knows what else were not truly found in these other avenues. To participate in the imperial temple and sacrifice for the sake of peace was to adopt a cheap peace that fell short of what could be found in the gospel.
In this modern religious movement of Wokeness, which I first heard described by social commentator Ben Shapiro, there is a promise of justice being pushed by a program of inequality, and a peace that comes from appeasing those who brought about the violence that we now face, and a healing that will elude us so long as we are unable to speak the truth in our culture. This is leading to a division that is growing wider and cutting deeper than ever before, driven by the leftist and media to the point of our civilization’s chaotic destruction.

There are many proposed solutions to this mess. Mine is simple: every person in this nation needs Jesus. And it is not just a savior that we need Jesus to be, we greatly and desperately need Jesus to be the one true Lord in our lives, our homes, and our communities. And we need this to be Jesus alone, without social additions or cultural adjectives that keep him from being what he is supposed to be.
There are those who will take offense to this statement, that I am somehow claiming that leftists are not being Christian, or that leftists cannot be Christian. This is not the message I wish to convey. I am making the case that every person, regardless of their political or social positions, will come to see Jesus for who he is — and that will always offend everyone at some point.

Furthermore, I am not saying that socio-political conservatives do not distort the message of Scripture in their own way. There is as much correction that Christ could make to conservatives, but I am simply tired of populist voices in the church pretending that leftist Christians are above reproach, because they simply are not.

And then we need a church. We need a church that will hold to the truth of Scripture in all things, and who will find its strength in the power of the Holy Spirit. We need a church that will not follow the whims of our culture, nor will kowtow to the demands of those who push this restrictive agenda. We need a church to demonstrate the unity of the gospel by living together with men and women of all races, even going beyond the overly simplistic message of Wokeness that only sees black and white.
From where I write today, the Black Lives Matter movement has seized control of an entire section of Seattle, self-identifying this space as “CHAZ” (Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone). This comes in the wake of cities, like Minneapolis, smashed an smoldering from the riots and looting that we have witnessed. The “CHAZ” has implemented its own policing force, and there is a list of absurd and contradictory demands that have been issued for the government of Washington State to consider. Any logical measurement of this achievement demonstrates the sinister force at work behind what was pushed as a movement of racial justice and peace. In the six square blocks where they have their zone, there is neither justice nor peace to be found.

Perhaps this is why Christians ought to exercise caution before promoting messages and movements that arise from culture without first understanding them. Or, to consider them from a worldview shaped by Scripture and the Spirit, which would have exposed the darkness with the light of truth. Even though the ideals sound similar, one path has led to destruction and chaos, while the other leads to Jesus.

And before those who are trying to salvage some of their social parroting make the claim that what is happening in some areas of the country is not representative of the whole BLM movement, let me point out that it was a cornerstone of this present crisis that the actions of one officer (or even a very few) could be considered representative of the whole police — and even the entire nation. The objection has been raised, and overruled by the mob. The mob therefore has no claim to it now.
Regardless of what you may think of me or my faith, know that my fight for truth has a purpose: that our nation might be released from this present crisis and become the people that God knows we can be, if we live on the foundation of his Word. There are always going to be disagreements and differences among us, but whenever this level of violence rises up there must be those who do not accommodate to the noise and destruction and violence. And I am convinced there are more of these good men and women than we are being led to believe.

I pray for God’s kingdom of peace and justice and righteous would come upon each one of us, and that our nation would be healed.