Apocalypse Soon

The book of Revelation paints a grim picture of life on earth during the period immediately preceding the return of Christ. Two figures (besides Jesus Christ) figure large in this narrative: the beast, and the harlot. The beast is shown in chapter 13 as a political figure who controls the economy of the world and also controls the lives of his subjects. The harlot is described in chapter 17 as immoral, reveling in wealth, and thirsty for the blood of the saints. Many additional details are provided, and over the ages innumerable commentators have attempted to identify contemporaneous events, individuals, and institutions with these details. 

The important features of these passages are the attributes and characteristics of human behavior and society that demonstrate rebellion against God. Through the ages there have been some aspects of society like these. Whether any particular age will be the fulfillment of the second coming of Christ will probably only be obvious in retrospect. But the judgment of God falling on society for its rebellion is not reserved for the end times, except in its terminal severity. In fact, the consequence of sin is death, unless a person goes to the cross of Christ and seeks forgiveness from Him. In many cases these cause and effect threads are purely natural, such as  fornication, violence, theft, drug and alcohol abuse, and so on. It is therefore the mercy of God that His intervention crushes these sins in society, to preserve the possibility of human life at all. Simply put, humans are designed to live in a society that operates according to God's principles, and any society that rebels against them is unlivable. 

We have the spectacle today of the emergence of social norms that tolerate almost every sin except murder and theft. And even though not considered normative, these last two occur far too frequently. Consider that the death rate from the use of opioids now exceeds that of traffic accidents in the United States. In times past drugs were used to induce wildly divergent behaviors (such as the cult of the Assassins, who were reportedly named for their use of hashish to get individuals to allow themselves to commit murder in a drugged stupor.) Nowadays these drugs serve initially as pain relievers, but quickly become addictive masters and ultimately murderers of their users. 

The complete abandon with which young people engage in sexual activity probably dates to the 1960's. The unavoidable consequences of this lifestyle choice were manifested recently when the father of an accused rapist said his son shouldn't have to go to jail for twenty minutes of "action". But that is only one manifestation of today's culture. Whether one examines the illegitimate birth rate, STD's, or the divorce rate in the West, it is hard to see how a society such as ours can escape God's judgment. He doesn't even have to manifest Himself, but simply let cause and effect run its course. 

A discussion of the ramifications of current economic practices might start with the business practices born of greed and envy, but let judgment fall evenly. Unless one chooses to follow the advice of Paul in I Timothy 6:6-10, anyone in any economic circumstance can envy those with more, or seek to gain more by taking advantage of others. Whether one practices false advertising or writes exploitive contracts, or simply shirks promises made, the principle is unchanged. Neither government regulation nor government ownership and operation of industry or agriculture will remedy it.

The bottom line on all this is the paradox that after a lengthy and hard fought primary season, we have two Presidential candidates that most people don't want to vote for. One promises to fix things by more government regulation, more taxation, more redistribution. The other promises to fix things by less government regulation, less taxation, less redistribution. A stark contrast! But the problem is that neither can deliver because these are not problems the government can fix. If we persist in rebellion against God and His ways, we will reap what we sow, and no politician or government program can save us from that. Jesus may not return to earth any time soon, but we will have tribulation in this world.

There is one more point, after the bottom line has been calculated. Apocalypse means unveiling. In the book of Revelation, it refers explicitly to the unveiling the of Jesus Christ. In the prayer that Jesus taught His disciples in Matthew 6:9-13, Jesus specifically mentioned His kingdom twice. Where is His kingdom on earth? 

God's kingdom on earth is being built invisibly right under our noses. There are ministries, present in every major city in the U.S., not part of any human government, that minister to the poor and those who are dealing with the consequences of sin. These ministries do not promise worldly success to those that the devil has chewed up and spit out, but they offer peace with God. This kingdom that is being built is invisible to the world because, as Jesus said, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God. (John 3:3) God's kingdom is unveiled to those who seek Him. When the world system has failed, crashed, and burned, what remains will be visible.

Metaphor Confusion

The interpretation of the many symbols and metaphors in the Bible results in considerable theological confusion, or perhaps division is more apt. Many are the items interpreted literally by some and symbolically by others.

One of the more enduring differences revolves around the Lord's Supper, initiated and commanded by Christ at the Last Supper. Generally Protestants view the bread and wine (or grape juice) as symbols of the body and blood of Christ, a reminder to remember the sacrifice of Christ upon the cross and by faith show it until He comes again. Catholics take the statements of Christ to be that the elements become the very body and blood of Christ through transubstantiation, citing Jesus' words that His body is true meat and His blood is true drink. By faith, Catholics hold that the spiritual reality is not detectable by material changes in the elements, but is a greater mystery of the church.

Other theological stumbling blocks include the use of buildings as a metaphor for the church, and the relationship of human lovers, including romantic dynamics, to symbolize the depth and intensity of the love God has for His people.

We cannot resolve centuries-long theological disputes easily and do not plan to try. The more immediate and practical issue is the use of metaphors in politics. In particular, one of the presidential candidates routinely and frequently speaks metaphorically, generally with hyperbole for additional spice, and seems incredulous that pundits and commentators do not understand him. One example: the statement that President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton founded ISIS. A literal interpretation is absurd. But the substance of the claim merits discussion. Did the withdrawal of all US troops from Iraq in 2011, combined with the support of Syrian rebel groups, create the conditions that were the incubator for the growth of the so-called Islamic State? Can this strategic error be ignored because no one takes the claim seriously except certain narrow-minded strategists? How can we improve our strategy if we refuse to examine failures? The usual Santayana quote* applies here.

Metaphor and hyperbole are not new. I was forced to learn about them in junior high school English class. To focus on the literal statement is to evade the need to seriously examine the substance of the issue. I do not expect the use of metaphor to diminish. Its purpose is clearly to impel an emotional, visceral response to the issue at hand. Whether talking about national security or economic policy, metaphors capture the attention of potential voters on a level that intellectual discussion does not. Perhaps metaphors are best understood as a test of our willingness and ability to see beyond purely logical argumentation to engage a wholistic view of life. But, like satire, metaphors can cut two ways.

Satire is a technique employed by writers to expose and criticize foolishness and corruption of an individual or a society by using humor, irony, exaggeration or ridicule. The challenge of interpretation is that if the satirical work includes enough of its object's substance, and there is merit to the substance, the listener may think the satirist is advocating that position by repeating it; or alternatively the listener may dismiss the satirist entirely as mocking something which is praiseworthy or sound. But if the satirist does not include the substance of his target's position, his work will be dismissed as being superficial, mocking only the nonessential attributes such as mannerisms, without making any real case about the real issue.

Satire and metaphor are different sides of a coin. That is they both are artistic or verbal tools used to make a point by invoking a seemingly irrelevant but broader context for a logical argument. But they both carry risks, and their users would do well to consider Jesus' words: suum omnes enim qui acceperint gladium gladio peribunt

*  "Progress, far from consisting in change, depends on retentiveness. When change is absolute there remains no being to improve and no direction is set for possible improvement: and when experience is not retained, as among savages, infancy is perpetual. Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

Jorge Agustín Nicolás Ruiz de Santayana y Borrás, The Life of Reason, VOL 1.

Where has God's Glory Gone?

What does politics have to do with Christianity's view of God's glory? Before shaking your head in disgust at the thought, consider first what God's glory is.

A theory proposed by the church fathers, not as a definition of God's glory but merely as a description of His nature and character, stands as a candidate for an explanation of His glory. They pointed to the unique combination of holiness and love in God, and more specifically in Jesus. This explanation comprises the perfect holiness of God, who can do no wrong based on His purity, and His unconditional love, which will do anything and everything He can to bless His children. If His holiness were above His love, He would end up alone like a prudish prig who cannot have any close relationships because all have sinned and fallen short. If His love were to trump His holiness, He might wink at sin (as we are tempted to do with our children) which would compromise His holiness. But God's divine nature can allow neither of these. God's solution to the problem of mankind's sin is found in the offering of Jesus on the cross as the atonement for sin. God's love and holiness are thus both fully satisfied. This reconciliation of two uncompromised absolutes is glorious.

There is one potential further aspect to God's glory. In Revelation, the twenty four elders that surround the throne of God are shown worshipping Him because He created all things.

Going back to the very beginning, there is a fundamental logical impossibility that the universe exists. We observe cause and effect in our universe. Tracing that backwards, the concept that everything has a cause, and that cause has a cause, and so on, leads to infinite regression. But the second law of thermodynamics points the arrow of time forward, as the direction of ever increasing entropy. Backwards, entropy decreases. But it can’t decrease forever because of the third law of thermodynamics. So there had to be a beginning. And before that? How did the universe come into being? Even Aristotle knew that he needed an immovable mover to make sense of all this. But the Bible very simply says, in the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.  This tells us two things. First, that God must have existed previous to the existence of the universe that we know. Second, that God is not subject to the law of universal causation that this universe is. That is the fundamental answer to the problem of existence. If we ask, 'If the universe was created by God, where did God come from?' the only possible answer is that God is not subject to this limitation, and therefore is utterly outside our experience.

Consider a typical urban neighborhood. Houses were built that reflect human reason: architects drew up plans; contractors built the houses according to the plans; bankers arranged financing and raised money in financial market; people live in the houses and make payments on mortgages. And it all seems makes sense. Beyond the houses are hills and the mountains, and in parks, we see trees and birds. Most people generally say that nature is far more aesthetically appealing than subdivisions. We listen to a robin sing, see birds fly. Consider the way living things come to be. The plans for them are buried in the genetic code, recorded in DNA and implemented via a very sophisticated biochemical process that converts the genes into living tissue according to the plan of the gene. Where did that plan come from? Can we  really believe that time plus chance plus natural selection resulted in a detailed plan for living organisms that science is only still learning to understand?

One of the amazing aspects of God's creation is that there is an eternity that exists and existed before God created our universe, and in which God conceived of this whole enterprise - creation, redemption, glory, and so forth in which to exercise His love - when none of it existed. We cannot fathom God's purpose or motivation in that pre-creation milieu that resulted in His decision to create. But perhaps we have a hint for the basis of the elders' worship in Rev. 4:11. This may not be the ultimate revelation of God's glory, because I suspect there are dimensions of God's existence, nature, and character that are completely outside our experience. But we can worship Him for those aspects of His glory that we do understand.

C.S. Lewis' essay on the weight of glory concluded with the observation that glory is in essence the approval of God, being accepted and welcomed by Him. In this he cited various Biblical accounts, all pointing to a common theme. Lewis did not address God's revelation of His own glory, which he took as a given.

What does politics have to do with this view of God's glory? Unfortunately our society and political system seems to center on voters' approval of candidates. The very definition of manliness is portrayed in Schwarzeneggerian terms. With no prejudice to any individual, few are those who frame their identity in Lewisian context, that is, to approve what God approves.

In the political realm, to gain voters approval, candidates put forward ideas, opinions, proposed plans of action, and broad statements of political ideology to which we respond. The reporters and political pundits of the media act as surrogates and interpreters for the electorate and so their approval is often sought (or rejected) by candidates. How base this all seems standing next to the possibility of the approval of God! And yet candidates who state that their belief system is based on allegiance to God, to living in such a way as to gain His approval, routinely do poorly at the polls. The leading candidates reflect the values and choices of the voters. Do we really want leaders who would sell their soul for the purpose of gaining an earthly crown? To paraphrase Shakespeare, the fault, dear Brutus, is not in our politicians, but in ourselves.

Joy

What experience with the Lord could bring the deep-seated joy that transcends earthly pleasures? Are there parallel sensations to touch, sight, sound, taste, or smell in the spiritual realm that will bring joy far beyond the pleasure we feel in earthly sensations? When we see Him as He is, what will it look like? Are our spirits shaped to respond with the spiritual equivalent of endorphins when He smiles on us or when we sense His close presence?

Music is perhaps a clue, as we experience pleasure in worship of God in song, in the congregation. This perhaps is recorded in the dedication of the Temple (2 Chron. 5:14).  Art and architecture provide another clue, although the beauty of the most stunning manmade creation pales compared to the natural beauty of a sunrise or a scenic mountain vista. We perhaps get a sense of the spiritual dimension of this when we read David's invitation to worship the Lord in the beauty of holiness. We don't usually think of holiness as beautiful. Most likely that is because we have heard the world's distortion of holiness as an attribute of prudish prigs who look down on everyone else. We do not see God's holiness inextricably fused with His love. We do not see that it was this love that caused God to send Jesus to the cross to rescue us from the consequences of the folly of our sin. And when we fully perceive the spiritual depth of His love and holiness, we will fall to our knees in worship, and be overwhelmed by entering into the joy of our Master.

The Biblical examples of those who see God's glory unveiled does not necessarily convey the experience of joy. The visions by Isaiah and Ezekiel, the disciples on the mount of transfiguration, and John on the Isle of Patmos of either the throne of God or the glorified Jesus  all show a response more akin to terror than joy.

Adam and Eve walked with God in the cool of the morning, and it is hard to believe they lacked the joy of being in His presence. We could guess that the reason they traded it for the sorrow of sin that came from eating of the tree of knowing good and evil was ignorance. They did not truly understand the consequences of doing what God said not to. God foresaw this. But what can we learn about God from this?

God already had created angels. Some had rebelled, apparently beyond any possibility of redemption. Apparently, God's desire to have a people that would worship and fellowship and obey Him in on His moral level was so strong that He created mankind with the determination that if we rebelled but then repented, He would pay the price to redeem us and restore us to fellowship. We know what that price was. But we also realize how strong was His desire to create a people who would freely choose to walk with Him based on faith but also bloodied by experience.

The politics of entitlement and of anger seem to grow from a deep-seated feeling that people have been robbed or cheated, either by the government or other people. There is a fundamental error in thinking that a change in government policy or action will remedy this. We have been robbed of the joy of experiencing God's presence. And this theft was perpetrated by the evil one, that fallen angel who has tempted us to sin. We think we know right and wrong, good and evil, but we reject God's revelation and provision. As St. Augustine said, "Thou hast made us for Thyself, O Lord, and our hearts are restless until they find their rest in Thee." No politician can do this. There is only one Savior and He made must deliver us from our joyless separation from God.

I owe Hilary Clinton an apology.

I owe Hilary Clinton an apology.

For some time, I had agreed with those who blamed the consequences of the so-called Arab Spring on her policies and support of the revolutions in various nations of the Middle East, such as Libya, Egypt, Syria and so forth. And certainly she did make statements about the promise of the Arab Spring, and advocate engaging, encouraging, and standing with those who were rejecting the existing governments and demanding reforms.

Current events would suggest strongly that this movement has failed. Syria and Libya, at the very least, could be described as failed states or ungovernable anarchies. Iraq is headed that direction. Egypt seems stable largely because the Egyptian military ousted the democratically elected president, Mohamed Morsi. The rise of ISIS, and the international spread of its ideology and terrorist practices are the latest chapter in the spread of fundamentally uncivilized (or perhaps anti-civilization) ethos.

To trace cause and effect, one might go back to John F. Kennedy’s speech to the United Nations on September 25, 1961 in which, in the context of terrorism, he said,

And it is in the light of that history that every nation today should know, be he friend or foe, that the United States has both the will and the weapons to join free men in standing up to their responsibilities.

Hilary Clinton may well have had that in mind when she spoke to the Center for Strategic and International Studies on October 12, 2012, when she said (as one example).

We stand with the Egyptian people in their quest for universal freedoms and protections, Egypt's international standing does depend both on peaceful relations with its neighbors and also on the choices it makes at home and whether or not it fulfills its own promises to its own people.

Wonderful aspirations. What went wrong?

I believe the reason this all came crumbling down, and the reason I owe Mrs. Clinton an apology, is that the cause of the failure of these policies is not ignorance or misinterpretation of events on the world scene. The problem is the general failure to recognize the fundamental driving forces behind the unrest in the Middle East: the spiritual forces of darkness that seek to destroy all that is good and right and just, who are stirring up worldwide rebellion under false pretenses. Mrs. Clinton could not possibly have understood that, and even if she had, it is not in the power of the U.S. Government, or any other government, to respond effectively to it.

We often romanticize that the U.S. revolution is a prototype for throwing off the chains of tyranny and establishing a democratic government in a nation of free people. But in fact, this is a rare, almost unique outcome of revolutions. It certainly didn’t happen in the French Revolution a few years later – they got the Reign of Terror, and eventually Napoleon. Clarence Crane Brinton offered one perspective on this, (Anatomy of a Revolution), but the most straightforward explanation can be found in Peter Marshall’s The Light and the Glory.

Few are willing to accept this, but the words of our founding fathers very strongly suggests that it was the widespread evangelization and conversion to Christianity from the time of the First Great Awakening until the American Revolution that gave the people residing the these United States the moral and philosophical basis for the U.S. Constitution and the various state governments. Imperfect though they were, the unique linking of rights and responsibilities to the average citizen, a shared consensus on how political decisions could be made peacefully, and how people could live together with disagreements, only arose out of the values of the Christian gospel, accepted and practiced.

There is no real possibility that nations lacking this heritage can establish such a government. If we are looking for a way to bring political reform to those nations of the world still under tyranny, our first priority must be to bring them the gospel. The entire teaching of Christianity begins with the saving of souls as a necessary first step. But it must be followed by the building of the Kingdom of God within communities of people that does not depend on governments for its existence, nor pretend to be a government.

I can’t blame Hilary Clinton for not recognizing this. I have heard no other politician make any references to the root cause of our present worldwide turmoil. And I couldn't expect her to. I am sorry.