Was Machiavelli Wrong?

There is nothing more difficult to take in hand, more perilous to conduct, or more uncertain in its success, than to take the lead in the introduction of a new order of things.

Niccolo Machiavelli, The Prince, chapter 6.

Was this ever true? Since anyone can point out shortcomings of the current order, it seems far easier to persuade the public that a new initiative will make the world better.  The harder task is to continue existing activities, imperfect though they be.

The Washington Metro illustrates this. Since it started in 1969, it has since accumulated a deferred maintenance liability of billions of dollars. [Deferred maintenance is the practice of postponing maintenance activities such as repairs on both real property (i.e. infrastructure) and personal property (i.e. machinery) in order to save costs, meet budget funding levels, or realign available budget monies.]  Simultaneously, there is massive construction to extend the silver line, recently brought to Reston, as far as Dulles Airport and beyond it to Ashburn. The cost of this extension is estimated at $5.6 to $6.8 billion. The metro board is struggling to close the operating budget (approx. $1.7 billion in 2015) which doesn't support desperately needed O&M, so services are cut which further reduces revenue from ridership. On top of this come revelations about pencil-whipped inspections and other lapses in basic O&M practices. Metro's future is very much in the hands of its leadership. Perhaps this is not a death spiral, but it illustrates the comparative difficulty of continuing the existing regime vs. a new initiative.

Turning to the spiritual realm, it is sometimes easy to persuade people to turn to Christ. The gospel is good news! Jesus invites a change of allegiance that offers real benefits. The gospel is not about lifestyle improvement, but that God loves us and Jesus died to deliver us from our sins. However, He has constructed the world in such a way that leaving our sins to practice righteousness pays off tangibly.

The challenge is that after passing miraculously through the Red Sea to escape the Egyptian army (a type of baptism and escape from the power of sin), we have to march through the desert. God's purpose in this process is to get us to abandon the behaviors, attitudes, and practices that were ingrained into us when we were slaves to sin (Egypt). He calls and leads us to moderate and ultimately abandon all self-related attributes: self-centeredness, self-indulgence, self-righteousness, self-sufficiency, and self-will; these all have to go. Jesus is so serious about this that He will bring it to pass through His sovereign power. If we receive His pastoral care willingly, we experience far less pain and drama than if we force Him to drag us kicking and screaming across the goal line. Once we receive Christ, those are our only real alternatives. He will have His way.

There seem to be three phases to living and growing in Christ:

•      Childhood - learning the milk of the faith and experiencing God's grace. (Hebrews 5:13-6:2)

•      Adolescence - discipline and growth - learning hard lessons (Hebrews 12:4-11)

•      Maturity - forsaking all else for the sake of knowing Christ. (Phil 3:8-11)

If Machiavelli was speaking metaphorically about Jesus, the Prince of Peace, then he misunderstood how hard it is for us to stay the course in growth to Christian maturity. Alternatively, if he was writing about how hard it is for Christ to change us, to transform us into His likeness, he is dead-on. Perhaps the reason for this ambiguity is that in the Renaissance world continuity meant not changing, but in God's kingdom the essence of continuing the Christian walk is change - transformation - as God works in our life.

Why is this so important to God? In one of His letters to Wormwood (a low-level demon), C.S. Lewis has Screwtape (an overseeing demon) write that God wants to fill the universe with loathsome little replicas of Himself. That astute observation hints at God's purpose in our lives. He does not want robots or servile slaves, but free moral agents who voluntarily choose to take on His values, character attributes, and behavior. God's patience and perseverance in this matter is drawn from the infinite reservoir of His divine purpose: Ultimately, the life of the Trinity will be reproduced, for eternity, in the lives of those who receive Him.

Journalism, Demonstrations, and Discourse

Politicians and Journalists

The words of the wise heard in quietness are better than the shouting of a ruler among fools. Wisdom is better than weapons of war, but one sinner destroys much good. (Ecclesiastes 9:17-18, NASB)

Would Solomon more likely characterize journalists as "the wise" or "fools"? The President clearly thinks the latter, with considerable justification. He manipulates the media effortlessly.  For example, the day after his inauguration, he focused them on the petty matter of crowd size, and for two days the media would talk of nothing else. A lot was happening in the world, but anyone who could stomach turning on the news was subjected to an endless barrage of "experts" endlessly blithering about the obvious. Apparently the pundits couldn't get past it. I think the best description of that round is TKO by the President.

The President issued executive orders on immigration, just as he promised during the campaign. His supporters expected nothing less. Flash mobs at the airports are not expected to say anything wise, and venting emotions is unlikely to have any effect other than letting the flash mobbers feel good about themselves. They showed up. They held signs. They chanted. (Endorphin addiction in action.) No one of the mobs spoke to the issue raised by the President and his supporters. How can we tell, in a flood of immigrants claiming refugee status, which ones are ISIS plants seeking to enter, lie low, and eventually carry out acts of terror in the (unjustified) claim the of holy war.

The techniques for establishing credible fake credentials have been standard fare for centuries in the espionage community. The response to the events of September 11, 2001 was a very mechanical system designed to check the identity of airline passengers against watchlists, and prevent the introduction of dangerous items into the airplane. Neither that system nor any proposed system of vetting travelers and immigrants can know the heart of the subject. The best they can do is evaluate the actions and associates of a person. Similar personnel screening procedures for national security clearances still allow the occasional Eddie Snowden to sneak in. One sinner indeed destroys much good.

The real challenge is to develop a more effective means of countering the propaganda and recruitment by Islamic extremists of potentially sympathetic young men. Of the most notorious recent massacres - Orlando, Sacramento, Fort Hood - none of the shooters had a green card or a visa; all were born in this country to immigrant parents. If there is a strategy or plan on this front, it has not been publicly aired.

What of the plight of refugees? Isn't there the slightest bit of irony in worldwide uproar about the policies of the U.S.? "You've got to take them!" seems to be a demand or command from the politically correct around the world. This isn't speaking truth to power, but impudent and childish rebellion against authority, worthy of an adolescent. The refugees themselves offer pleas, but lack standing to plead their case.

In matters of faith, we often come to God with petitions for His intervention in our circumstances.  We also lack standing, apart from the invitation of Christ, to make our pleas to God. The essence of prayer is not some formula and certainly does not consist of making demands. Often cited is the framework that includes adoration (worship), confession, thanksgiving, and supplication (petition). At the core of petition seems to be a linkage of our circumstances to the glory of God. This linkage is unique in every circumstance because God is infinite variable and delights to reveal Himself and the glory of His holiness in the perfect response. Our challenge in prayer is to find that linkage through communion with the Holy Spirit, and then petition God for it.

This is the language of faith, utterly alien to political discourse. (I'm not really suggesting that demonstrators are engaging in political discourse, only feel-good venting.) But for refugees, there is a need for a process of dialogue, of petitioning the Powers That Be, of linking their circumstances to the values and principles of the U.S. We will never know their hearts in this life, but perhaps we can establish a common understanding.

Paying Others' Bills

Who pays the bills for the Peter Pans - those who refuse to grow up and accept responsibility? Is it fair to make everyone to pay for those choosing destructive behaviors?  Do those paying the bills have any standing to influence or control unhealthy choices? Is there a moral hazard that subsidizing consequences enables self-destruction, or that bill-payers will be tempted to play God? How can we address the root causes of self-destructive addictions? These are broad questions, so let us start with the payment aspect of this issue: Bills are paid by insurance companies (costs borne by the general class of insured), the government (taxpayers), and uncompensated victims and service providers. Make no mistake - institutions who pay collect funds from others or shift the burdens to others.

A CDC study estimated that excessive alcohol use cost the U.S. approximately $249 billion in 2010, of which 72% was lost productivity, 11% was healthcare, 10% was criminal justice, and 5% was motor vehicle crash-related costs. The study estimated that this averages to $2.05 per drink. A 2011 DOJ study of the economic impact of illicit drug use on American society, based on 2007 data, estimated criminal justice costs at $61 billion, health care costs $11 billion, and productivity costs of $120 billion, totaling $193 billion. Since these data are ten years old, it seems likely they have increased. A recent CDC fact sheet estimates that nearly $170 billion is spent annually on healthcare costs attributable to smoking, plus $156 billion in lost productivity due to premature death and exposure to secondhand smoke, totaling $326 billion. With an estimated 271 billion cigarettes sold in the U.S. annually, this averages to $1.20 per cigarette. A study by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and the Trust for America's Health estimated that the annual healthcare cost of obesity is somewhere in the range of $147 to $210 billion. The causes of obesity include diet, exercise, genetics, and disease. The annual total of all these is just under $1 trillion.

Given these costs to society, what is an appropriate response? The primary option to the status quo would be to encourage, incentivize, or force people to change their behavior. Public service announcements abound.  Some vices are taxed although perhaps not to the level of their social costs, and seldom are those tax revenues used to offset the costs of the use of the products. Higher taxes could potentially further discourage costly behaviors, but not illegal activities, such as use of non-prescription narcotics. The "war" on drugs over several decades evidences that laws and law enforcement can only go so far. In some states, death from opioids exceed deaths from motor vehicle accidents. Because of the multiplicity of causes, no simple tax levy could be tied to obesity, although a tax on dietary sugar and fat, or a subsidy of healthy foods such as fresh produce might be partly relevant.  If society as a whole pays these bills, does it subsidize and enable self-destructive behavior? Should freedom allow individuals to do things that are self-destructive regardless of whether they pay the whole freight or are not held accountable for the consequences?

Turning to the spiritual realm, how does God encourage, influence, or coerce our behavior? In the Bible, God pleads with us to walk with Him and do the things He asks. These are for our own best interests. He often rescues us from our follies. But there comes a point, if we do not listen, at which He allows us to reap what we have sown. God does not enable sin, but tries to deliver us from it. Jesus' parable of the prodigal son (Luke 15) epitomizes that He also allows us the freedom to choose poorly.

When the Israelites failed to obey God after leaving Egypt, He sentenced them to wander in the wilderness for forty years.  The entire generation of adults (except Joshua and Caleb) lacked the faith to respond to what God had already done in delivering them out of Egypt. (Numbers 14:29-35) He trained the next generation by feeding them manna daily for forty years, and they entered and conquered the promised land. (Joshua 24) After the reign of Solomon, the Israelites rebelled against God. The prophets warned and pleaded with them. Ultimately, the Israelites were taken into captivity and learned through hard labor to take God's words seriously, just as the generation that left Egypt did. (2 Chronicles 36:13-21) As Matthew Henry observed in his commentary on Nehemiah 10:31, "Those are stubborn children indeed that will not amend the fault for which they have been particularly corrected."

In the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5-7) Jesus invited His listeners to enjoy blessings that appear esoteric because they are spiritual. He gave approximately twenty commands, most of which are impossible for us to perform on our own. Jesus described the blessedness of those who are in God's kingdom, which is only possible by the empowerment of the Holy Spirit. The book of Acts shows the early church struggling to establish the kingdom of God against tremendous opposition. Sadly, some chose to live in the flesh. Ananias and Sapphira experienced what seems like an Old Testament judgment for their conspiracy to lie to the Holy Spirit. (Acts 5:1-10) Where was God's grace in their situation? In 1 Corinthians 5 Paul dealt with a situation of brazen immorality: Sin has consequences. Those outside the church God deals with, but sin tolerated within the church was a cancer that must be surgically removed. It was for the sake of the church, but he also directed them to deliver this brother to Satan so that his spirit could be saved.

This saga of truth or consequences is incomplete without the capstone of Paul's theological explanation. "There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, for the law of the spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and death." (Romans 8:1-2) Empowerment by God to do things that are good and true and holy and loving has no worldly counterpart. The world may encourage, exhort, educate, train, punish, coerce, or incentivize people to do the right thing, but only God through the Holy Spirit comes Himself inside the Christian believer to give the power to do so. Since this is voluntary, Paul pleads with his readers to allow God to do this. (Romans 12:1) We have been given a glimpse of heaven, and are invited to enter. Who paid the bill? Jesus. Jesus is not going to fix our healthcare system, or miraculously deliver from their folly those who reject Him. We can spend enormous amounts trying to alleviate consequences and reform others, but until we begin building the kingdom of God, we will not have the wherewithal to pay the bills. This does not mean political rule by believers. The kingdom of God is built in our own lives when we cooperate with God to allow the Holy Spirit to make us like Him.

Plutocracy's Real Risk

Pundits and partisans studiously avoid discussing the real risk that having a plutocrat as President brings. The political establishment seems unnerved by the election of a non-career politician to lead the United States. Is this a fundamental shift in governance? Career politicians have for decades, maybe centuries, sold access and influence to raise campaign funds. Whether the wealthy (e.g. George Washington) hold office, or they manipulate the political process as did the so-called robber barons of the 19th century, plutocracy is not a novelty. But there are intensified risks, particularly for a well-managed and flourishing economy.

Digressing a bit on politics, the impetus to govern has its roots in God's mandate to Adam before the fall, to rule over the animals, fish, birds, etc. (Genesis 1:26 & 28), and to tend the garden (Genesis 2:15). This mandate extends to making things right in the affairs of humankind implicitly in Genesis 1:28. When Adam and Eve were fruitful, filled the earth, and subdued it, this implied some form of group cooperation. The response to this universal command manifests itself in almost uncountable ways, as people care for animals, tend gardens, and try to rescue people and right wrongs. Zookeepers and veterinarians, gardeners and farmers, first responders, missionaries, and those who operate soup kitchens manifest this divine charge. This drive seems universal even among unbelievers, who take up the same practices, without a spiritual connection to God. It was written into our human psyche at the very beginning. Political leadership does well to keep this priority in perspective.

Paul described the proper role of government in Romans 13:1-7, referring to the Roman Empire.  Government bears the sword to enforce the universal mandate that individuals do what is right and abstain from what is wrong. Not surprisingly, attempts by government to reach beyond its divine mandate lead to disaster for both the ruler and the ruled. Governmental overreach will ultimately consummate in the kingdom of the antichrist at the end times (Revelation 13), but human history has already given us many examples, which I am sure immediately leap into the reader's mind.

We can be strongly tempted, when obeying God and carrying out His mandate, to play His role and perhaps receive the credit due only to Him. Playing God tempts both believers and unbelievers, and relates closely to the risks associated with wealth in our individual lives. Although the wealthy have devoted a significant part of their lives to finding ways to acquire riches, God commands them to join His earthly enterprise. The Bible warns

•      even when a man has abundance, life does not consist of possessions (Luke 12:15);

•      the riches and cares of life will choke the seed of the word of God (Luke 8:14);

•      the wealthy will be tempted to trust in riches instead of God (Deuteronomy 8:11-18); and

•      seeking wealth will open the door to temptation (1 Timothy 6:9-10).

Instead, Jesus encourages us to use earthly wealth to purchase eternal approval and heavenly dwellings. (Luke 16:1-9)

Aristotle wrote that the ideal ruler would be a philosopher-king a few centuries after Solomon had demonstrated both the merits and limitations of a wise king. Aristotle missed the spiritual dimension. Solomon's success and failure provides an excellent example of the risks associated with wealth. He started off well (2 Chronicles 6-7), but forty years of worldly success and the recognition that came thereby, and the multiplicity of his wives, turned his heart towards idolatry. (1 Kings 11:1-13) The kingdom flourished in his reign, but divided and nearly erupted in civil war shortly after his death, along the lines of his spiritual waywardness. (1 Kings 11:11 ff) Unfortunately the people of Israel suffered for Solomon's idolatry and disobedience, but that is the nature of governance.

God challenges us to overcome the risks associated with wealth to serve Him. Not that there is virtue in poverty, because wealth can be greatly used for God's kingdom purposes, but many temptations of the rich do not tempt the poor; they have no choice but to rely on God. Blessed are we if, at any level of worldly provision, we rely as much on God. While economic success may tempt political leaders to play God or the people to worship mammon, we individually risk succumbing to this temptation daily. Plutocratic national leadership – a rich President – cannot mitigate this risk.

The Trauma of Advent

The pain that accompanied Jesus' birth is a perfect type for the heralds of the arrival of God's kingdom. In the Christmas season we pass quickly over the stigmatization that Mary experienced as an unwed mother (Matthew 1:19-25); the slaughter of the innocents (Matt. 2:16-18); the nomadic life of Joseph and Mary as they left home, not to return for some number of years, their first stop as homeless people borrowing a barn for Mary to give birth (Matt 2:13-15, Luke 2:1-7); and Simeon's  warning to Mary of more pain to come. (Luke 2:34-35)

There are three dimensions of resistance to the coming of God's kingdom: the world, the flesh, and the devil. Each is overcome through striving and pain.

If the world made Joseph and Mary homeless, it is that we learn through struggle that God is our source and He will provide. No doubt the gifts of the Magi (Matt 2:11) helped fund the young couple through their sojourn in Egypt. Nothing is recorded of the daily providences that must have been their experience, as for many of the modern-day homeless. Provision in God's kingdom is of divine origin, but it does make us uncomfortable, if not painful, to be destitute and completely dependent on God, even though that is our true condition in the spiritual realm. Jesus later reflected on His divine homelessness. (Matt 8:20)

In our natural state, the comforts of food, shelter, family, society, go beyond mere provision. Simeon's prophecy to Mary of the emotional pain she would later endure goes beyond the stigma she had already experienced as an unwed mother. In that day, the penalty for sex outside of marriage could have been stoning, and certainly was social ostracism, unlike the present day. Mary's pregnancy outside of wedlock would have been considered irrefutable evidence, since even Joseph needed an angel to convince him of the virgin birth. The Bible only hints at Mary's pain when she stood beneath the cross watching her firstborn Son die. (John 19:25-27) Crucifixion was deliberately the most painful, drawn-out death by torture that the Roman Empire could devise, and even Jesus dreaded it. (Luke 22:42-44) But He also knew that it was the only way to redeem us from our sin. Paul later reflected on the state of fully reckoning the value of the knowledge of Christ to be the loss of all earthly things (Philippians 3:8-11).

The devil's opposition to the advent of Christ into the world (Matt 2:16-18) was foreshadowed by his effort to prevent Moses from rising to lead Israel out of Egypt. (Exodus 1:16, 22) The final arrival of Christ's kingdom on earth will come at great cost, in terms of the slaughter of believers, (Revelation 6:9) This apocalyptic bloodbath will evidently be greater than that recorded in church history from the time of Christ to the accession of Constantine to be Emperor. Not that persecution of Christians ended in the third century; the voice of martyrs continues to this day, perhaps in greater numbers than ever, as the devil attempts to suppress the fulfillment of the Great Commission.

Most of us do not experience pain of this magnitude in our daily lives, yet God deals with all His children fairly. There are a couple of common principles exhibited. Firstly, perhaps less important, is that the government is not God and cannot take God's place, and is vulnerable to being an instrument of the devil. Having godly men and women in government can perhaps deter the latter risk, but the government can never provide the daily, individual attention that we all need. But the second, more important principle is that God deals with us as sons, and therefore we must be taught to take on His nature. (Hebrews 12:1-13) The advent of God's kingdom into our individual lives is going to bring pain.

At Christmas, we often celebrate peace on earth, good will to men (Luke 2:14). Henry Wadsworth Longfellow reflected on this tension in his 1863 poem about the bells of Christmas Day. In the seventh stanza he records God's response to his despair over the consequences of man's rejection of God's advent and provision. In the midst the of the civil war in the no-longer-United States, he wrote that the bells pealed "God is not dead nor doth He sleep. The wrong shall fail, the right prevail." The coming of Christ into the world is God's answer, painful though it may be.

I am indebted to my dear friend, Bill S., whose discussion questions suggested the theme of this blog.

Build the Wall? Tear Down the Walls in our Hearts!

Ask the Chinese, Hadrian, the French. History suggests that walls often do not accomplish the ends for which they were built, although as defensive fortifications they can serve a limited purpose. As a means to control the movement of people they are less effective. No human wall can separate the righteous from the evil. It is in our hearts that we build walls to keep God from us; He honors those walls, but we are the worse for it.

The Chinese began building defensive walls as early as the 7th Century BC. The Qin dynasty greatly emphasized the building project (220-206 BC), tearing down walls that divided the previously warring feudal states and completing and connecting a defensive wall along the northern frontier. The wall that remains to modern times was built mostly during the Ming dynasty (1368-1644 AD), being built of bricks and stones, rather than boards and rammed earth.  There are multiple lines of fortifications because of shifting geopolitical dynamics over the course of two millennia, and estimates of the total length of walls range from 8,850 to approximately 21,200 km, depending on what is included in the survey. The height of the sections typically seen in modern times ranges from 5 to 8 meters with width of 5 to 6 meters. The Great Wall had multiple objectives over the many centuries when it was built. Most  builders were motivated by the need for defensive fortifications against raids or conquest. The Qing dynasty (1644 - 1912 AD) built a section called the Willow Palisade in Manchuria in the late 17th century for migration control. The term "Great Wall" was adopted for the entire network during this period.

Hadrian's wall was built 122-128 AD during the Roman Empire's control of England, to control raids by the Picts. It was approximately 117 km long, ranging from 3.5-6 m high, and 2-3 m wide. Its remains are a historical artifact to this day. Its construction may have been motivated strongly by internal Roman politics, defining the limits of the Empire, more than actual utility in controlling invading raids or armies. In later years the Romans attempted to control the Scottish lowlands north of the wall, up to the Antonine wall approximately 100 km further north, but this was unsuccessful.

The Maginot Line's purpose was to keep Germany from invading France after the First World War. Constructed from 1930 to 1939, it consisted of a string of heavily fortified strong points with artillery commanding the surrounding countryside. It ran approximately 700 km from the border of Switzerland to the border of Belgium. The German invasion of France in 1940 bypassed it by invading through Belgium. According to some sources, this was part of the purpose of the wall, to force Germany to violate other nations' sovereignty if/when they invaded France, drawing them (and others, such as Great Britain) into any war with Germany.

There are a few common features  of these walls. They were built primarily to prevent military incursion by an armed invader. For this reason, they had strong points or garrisons periodically along the length of the wall, which patrolled and were able to respond to intrusions or assaults. They had gates or openings at various points, to allow for normal daily traffic of daily business, because the wall was not a total bar to commerce.

How successful were they at accomplishing their objectives? The Chinese dynasties that were in power remained so for centuries. The Ming dynasty suffered military defeats and it is hard to tell if the wall materially affected the outcome of their battles or campaigns. The Roman Empire abandoned Great Britain about 410 AD. As mentioned above, the German army made an end run around the Maginot Line, invading France by way of Belgium in 1940. The effectiveness of the Willow Palisade in controlling migration is hard to assess. Over the course of a few centuries, there appears to have been some. Was it slower than it otherwise would have been because of the wall?

Biblical accounts of walls virtually all focus on city walls, whose purpose was twofold. The primary purpose was to fortify the city against assault by an invader. Another purpose was to control the entry of individuals to the city.

The city walls of Jericho were mentioned first as an obstacle to the Israelite spies, in that they had to escape over them (Joshua 2:15) since the gates were shut. Nevertheless, everyone knows the ultimate outcome; "Joshua fit the battle of Jericho and the walls came a tumblin' down." (Joshua 6:20)

The walls of Jerusalem were symbolic of the safety and security of its inhabitants. Notably, the end of the kingdom of Judah was marked when the walls were breached, the city destroyed, and the king and his family were captured, circa 587 BC. (2 Kings 25) Nehemiah was devoted to rebuilding the walls as a means of re-establishing the security and safety of the Israelites who returned to Palestine after the Babylonian captivity circa 445 BC. (Nehemiah 2:17) The walls were again breached, and the city leveled in 70 AD by the Romans under general (later emperor) Titus.

When we plan to build a wall, we need to consider its purpose, connect that purpose to the attributes it will need to accomplish that purpose, consider the broader context in which it will function, and lessons that previous walls might teach. Aside from a powerful symbol of xenophobia, why would we build a wall?. Would a wall stop people from coming here illegally? It might slow some down, but even so there are many other venues for determined people to travel. The context for this wall is broad. We already have border patrol, INS, innumerable laws, regulations, and the executive orders. We have a society with a large number of legal immigrants, and an economy in which both legal and illegal immigrants participate. We have a pluralistic culture in every dimension imaginable.

Revelation 21:10-26 describes the new Jerusalem in considerable detail, waxing eloquent on both walls and gates. Whether this is a spiritual metaphor or a literal future heavenly place (or both), the key point is Revelation 21:27.   The people of God are within it and no one who practices abomination and lying shall enter. Revelation 22:15 elaborates that outside are dogs and sorcerers and immoral persons and murderers and idolaters, and everyone who loves and practices lying. Revelation 7:9 stands in stark contrast, showing worship before the throne of God by a vast multitude no one could count, from every nation, tribe, people and language. The criterion for those God values is clear.

Entry via the gates is only possible through Christ; Revelation 21:21 shows the gates as pearls, and Jesus is the Pearl of Great Price (Matthew 13:45-46). The apostles, and the church they began by preaching the gospel, are the foundation of the New Jerusalem. (Revelation 21:14) All are invited, but only those who repent of their sin and receive Jesus as their Lord and Savior are actually able to enter. Those who cling to their sin cannot come into His presence. (2 Thessalonians 1:9) Everyone wants to go to heaven. But not everyone is willing to pay the price of surrendering to Jesus as Lord. Any wall in our hearts that separates us from Christ must be torn down, or we will not enter in.

Book Review - Life in Tension

Life in Tension, by Stephen Hiemstra, dives deep into the context and intentions of the beatitudes. The blessings (makarios) of the beatitudes provide the New Testament fulfillment of the Old Testament call to peace (shalom). In the beatitudes Jesus points out that our experience of God's shalom is hindered by our sin and lack of commitment to Him, bringing tension within ourselves, between us and others, and between us and God.

The author's numerous insights connect Old Testament and New Testament scripture, history, and culture to Jesus' timeless words. He illustrates how our lives, culture, and choices are affected by rejection of Jesus' revelations. Some examples of Jesus' spiritual truths translated into our modern lives:

•    Modern technology worsens the already heavy burden of self-centered rumination.

•    God blesses those who are willing, who beg destitution in the spiritual realm, with the kingdom of God.

•    Taking the next step to extend God's law fulfills it, not merely staying within its boundaries.

•    We can receive blessing, forgiveness, and healing through true humility; or else God will act sovereignly, which may be harder on us.

•    Pain we bear shapes our identity and transforms us.

•    For us, meekness is a fruit of the Spirit; for God, it is just who He is.

•    We are pushed to break the fundamental commandments of God's economy in our pursuit of the wealth of Pharaoh's economy,

•    In the parable of the Good Samaritan, Jesus changed the question from "Who is my neighbor?" to His own question (to us), "Who proved to be a neighbor?"

•    Hypocrisy or tension? Christians who act like everyone else are called hypocrites; those who do not are seen as judgmental.

•    We cannot end war, but we can at least express the love of Christ to the needy person who crosses our path.

•    Matthew 5:11 repeats and intensifies Matthew 5:10 with three verbs and a shift from third person to second person, as redemptive suffering is the capstone beatitude.

•    We do not naturally mourn over sin in our lives; we seek comfort, not transformation.

Jesus' bottom line calls us beyond receiving and believing truth, to allowing it to transform us.