Tag: Faith

How We Set Boundaries On Who Is Our Neighbor and the Least of These

God expands our boundaries to correspond to His purposes

kevingdrendel3 Comments

I am writing today about the Parable of the Good Samaritan and the Parable of the Sheep and the Goats in light of the Old Testament passage that introduces what Jesus called the second greatest commandment: love your neighbor as yourself. (Leviticus 19:18) If you have read anything I have written lately, you know that I have have been meditating on this theme.

How People Misinterpreted “Neighbor”

When Jesus encountered a First Century expert in the Law, the issue became: Who is my neighbor? The Parable of the Good Samaritan was the response from Jesus. The backstory to the Parable of the Good Samaritan reveals how First Century Jews misread Leviticus 19:18 to limit who they considered neighbors. It reads as follows:

“Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against anyone among your people, but love your neighbor as yourself. I am the Lord.“

Just 16 verses later (in Leviticus 19:34), Moses hints at a broader, more expansive meaning to the rule to “love your neighbor as yourself”:

“The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.”

Distinguishing Among Jews and Gentiles

In the time of Jesus, Jews distinguished between Abraham’s descendants and everyone else (Gentiles). They limited neighbors they were instructed to love to those from among their people because they interpreted Leviticus 19:34 in light of Leviticus 19:18. They interpreted “from among the people” to include descendants of Abraham, and they likely included those foreigners who lived among them and observed their religious practices, but they did not go further.

The Hebrew word translated “foreigner” in verse 34 is ger. It generally means “sojourner, stranger, foreigner, alien,” and it literally means “a guest.” (See Biblehub) Ger is derivative of guwr, which means “to sojourn, dwell, reside, live as a foreigner,” with connotations of being a guest, shrinking & fearing, and being afraid.

According to the topical Lexicon, gurw centers on “the act of taking up residence as a non-native, a ‘sojourning’ that is self-conscious of impermanence and dependence on the goodwill of the host community.” The sense of this word as scholars have come to understand it is of foreign guests who dwell permanently among the people and conform to the requitements of the Mosaic Law. I believe First Century Jews would have had a similar understanding of the concept of neighbor that defined who they were to love.

By the First Century, there were two categories of people: Jews and Gentiles. We know from historical records that some Gentiles lived harmoniously with Jews and more or less subscribed to Jewish religious customs as they were allowed to engage with them.

The Samaritans as Others

There were varying degrees to which Gentiles could be incorporated into Jewish community. Some Gentiles were circumcised, converted to Judaism, and were fully integrated into Jewish community. The largest group of Gentiles who lived among the Jewish community, however, were the “God-fearers”. They were welcome in the temple and synagogue. They participated in prayer and instruction. They ethically aligned with Jewish community, but they were not circumcised, not bound to the full Torah, and were not considered covenant members of the Jewish community.

These Gentiles who believed in God as the Jews did, who worshipped God as the Jews did, and who lived in harmony with biblical, ethical requirements were accepted in Jewish community. They more or less represented the ger in Leviticus 19. They, like the ger, were considered neighbors who must be loved.

The question posed by the expert in the Law in Luke 10 reveals that the scope of who is a neighbor was limited, but with some sense of uncertainty, in the First Century. That uncertainty was settled by Jesus in sharing the Parable of the Good Samaritan.

Samaritans and Jews Opposed Each Other

Samaritans were ethnically Hebrew. They descended from the northern tribes of Israel. They were descendants of Abraham, but they were deviant, ritually impure, and estranged from First Century Jews.

They were people who remained in the land after the exile to Babylon and integrated with the conquering Assyrians. They opposed the return of the exiles who rebuilt the Temple. They rejected Temple worship. They rejected the Levitical priesthood returning from Babylon, and they had their own religious practices.

The hostility between the Jews and the Samaritans was mutual. They were closely related by kinship, but they disagreed sharply over theology, religious practice, and heritage. They were estranged, avoided each other avoidance, and clashed (sometimes violently).

Insiders and Outsiders

Though the Jews would accept the Gentile converts and God-fearing Gentiles into Jewish community, Samaritans and other Gentiles were excluded. They were the people the legal expert’s question was about: Who is my neighbor? They were not from “among the people.”

Many people in the Jewish community, like the expert in the law, had a theology that excluded Samaritans and most Gentiles from the definition of “neighbor”. Their mistaken interpretation and bad theology created insiders and outsiders.

Jesus Cuts Against Our Insider Logic

Jesus reveals how God’s Word cuts against our insider logic. Jesus interprets Scripture and compels us to view our neighbors (whom we should love as ourselves) Expansively. Our neighbors include people who are not like us, people who are heretical and (therefore) threatening to us and people in opposition to us. Outsiders.

Jesus shockingly made a Samaritan the hero in the Parable. Most Jews would not have used “good” in the same sentence as a Samaritan. Samaritans were outsiders, people in opposition to the Jews, heretics, and estranged. Samaritans were not seen as neighbors, but Jesus disavowed them of their bad theology.

We know this, but we are not immune from our own interpretive shortcomings and bad theology. We have less excuse than the Jews to hold such a de minimis view of neighborliness and love (because of the clear words of Jesus), but we can fall into the same interpretive trap.

In that context, consider the Parable of the Sheep and the Goats.

Continue reading “How We Set Boundaries On Who Is Our Neighbor and the Least of These” →

Foreigners, Neighbors, and Citizens of God’s Kingdom in the United States of America Today

Immigration is one of the most polarizing issues for American Christians today

kevingdrendelLeave a comment

“You are to have the same law for the foreigner and the native-born.”

Leviticus 24:22

That single line, given by the Lord to Moses, is often read narrowly: foreigners are subject to the same penalties as citizens. True—but incomplete. Law is not merely punitive; it is protective. If the same law binds the foreigner, the same law also shields the foreigner. Justice, in the biblical sense, is reciprocal.

The rules that apply to foreigners are embedded in the sacred Law God gave to Moses for His people. The Law even applied specific protections to foreigners:

  • Leviticus 19:9–10 — Leave gleanings for the poor and the foreigner.
  • Leviticus 23:22 — Harvest leftovers belong to the foreigner and poor.
  • Deuteronomy 24:19–21 — Leave grain, olives, and grapes for foreigners.
  • Deuteronomy 26:12 — Tithes every third year support foreigners.

The Reciprocity Built into God’s Law

Leviticus develops this principle further. In Leviticus 25, the Lord instructs Israel that if a native-born Israelite loses his land and falls into poverty, he is to be treated as a foreigner among them. Why? Because the law already required Israel to provide for foreigners in their midst. By placing impoverished Israelites into the same category as foreigners, God establishes a profound reciprocity:

The protections of the law given to the Israelites apply to the foreigners living among them. The protections given to outsiders become the safety net for insiders when they fall.

This is not accidental. It reveals something essential about God’s character: His justice is inseparable from His mercy.

Other passages reinforce the pattern of concern for foreigners:

  • Leviticus 19:34 — “The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself.”
  • Deuteronomy 1:16–17 — Judges must hear cases fairly, whether involving Israelites or foreigners.
  • Deuteronomy 10:18–19 — God “loves the foreigner residing among you, giving them food and clothing.”
  • Deuteronomy 24:17 — Do not deprive foreigners of justice.

God’s intentions are reinforced over and over:

  • Exodus 22:21 — “Do not mistreat or oppress a foreigner, for you were foreigners in Egypt.”
  • Exodus 23:9 — Do not oppress a foreigner; you know their experience
  • Leviticus 19:33–34 — Do not mistreat; love them as yourself
  • Deuteronomy 10:19 — Love the foreigner, for you were foreigners

Israel’s memory of its own foreignness was meant to inform Israel’s identity and to shape its ethics. Their past vulnerability became the foundation of their present compassion. They were never to forget who they were and to treat people as they would want to be treated.

Set Apart—But Not Set Against

God was forming a people set apart—a light to the nations (Isaiah 49:6). Yet their distinctiveness was never meant to become isolation or superiority. From the beginning, God’s promise to Abraham was expansive:

“All peoples on earth will be blessed through you.”

Genesis 12:3

Election was never exclusion. The chosen people existed for the sake of the unchosen. We are the benefactors of God’s expansive purpose today.

Jubilee and Land Ownership

Leviticus 25 also introduces the Year of Jubilee – a system of Law that reinforces the design and purpose of God. Under this system, land could not be owned permanently:

“The land must not be sold permanently, because the land is mine and you reside in my land as foreigners and strangers.”

Leviticus 25:23

Even in the Promised Land, Israel was reminded: you are tenants, not owners.

This theme echoes throughout Scripture. Humanity has lived in exile since Eden. Abraham lived in tents (Hebrews 11:9–10), because he was waiting for a city “whose architect and builder is God.” The saints of old lived as “foreigners and strangers on earth.” (Hebrews 11:13) This is the hallmark of God’s people – their ingrained identity.

The New Testament continues the theme:

  • Philippians 3:20 — “Our citizenship is in heaven.”
  • 1 Peter 2:11 — “I urge you, as foreigners and exiles…”

The Apostle John saw in vivid detail what Abraham and the saints of old only saw from afar:

“Then I saw ‘a new heaven and a new earth,’ for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and there was no longer any sea. I saw the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God.”

Revelation 21:1-2

Our true home is the New Jerusalem – where Jesus has prepared rooms for all of his people. The Kingdom of God is not of this world. The biblical story reframes our identity: no matter where we are born, God’s people live as resident aliens awaiting a better country and a City the architect and builder of which is God.

The American Tension

The United States is not ancient Israel, and the Mosaic Law is not our civil code. Yet the heart of God revealed in Scripture has not changed. The law written on stone has given way to the law written on hearts (Jeremiah 31:33), but its moral trajectory remains.

Continue reading “Foreigners, Neighbors, and Citizens of God’s Kingdom in the United States of America Today” →

The Importance of Our Identity as Citizens of Heaven: Moses, Aliens, and Strangers

Our identity as Christians informs (or should inform) how we see the world

kevingdrendelLeave a comment

The importance of identity is not just a 21st Century trend. The significance of a person’s identity dates back to the Ancient Near Eastern culture preserved in the Bible.

Parents commonly named their children based on prominent identity markers. For instance, Isaac and Rebekah named their second born, Jacob, who was born clinging to his two brother’s ankle. Jacob (Ya’aqov in Hebrew) meant “supplanter,” “heel-catcher,” or “he who follows on the heels of.” The name became part of his identity not just literally; it corresponded with actions to acquire his older brother’s birthright from his father by manipulation and deception. (Gen. 25:26; 27:36; and Hos. 12:2-4)

God often gave people new names to go with their identity in relation to God. After a personal encounter with the Lord, God gave Jacob a new name: Israel, which meant “struggles with God,” “wrestlers with /God,” or “God prevails.” (Gen. 32)

The naming of children and God renaming people according to some key characteristic associated with their personal identity, or a new identity God gave them, is a common theme in the Bible. Groups of people were known by ancestral names, like Israelites, Amalekites, Hittites, etc. Thus, I find significance in the name Moses gave his first born child: Gershom.

Moses was the son of Hebrew parents, but he was placed in a basket in the Nile when Pharaoh ordered the killing of all male Hebrew babies. The Pharaoh’s own daughter found Moses and adopted him, though she allowed him to be nursed by a Hebrew woman who turned out to be Moses’s mother.

Moses grew up in the privilege of the Pharaoh’s house. He was educated in all the ways of Egypt, learned to read and write, and was familiar with Egyptian history, culture, religion, and philosophy. He was Hebrew by birth, but he was Egyptian by upbringing.

Moses must have known that he was Hebrew. It was probably obvious by his facial features, and he might have even been circumcised. He was schooled in Egyptian ways and thinking, but he was probably painfully aware that he was not Egyptian by birth.

One day as he observed an Egyptian beating a Hebrew man, Moses stepped in and killed the Egyptian. I believe Moses identified with the Hebrew man because of his Hebrew ethnicity. He fled into the desert in Midian for fear of punishment from the Egyptians for the murder.

In Midian, he was accepted into the family of a Midianite, married a Midian woman, and settled down there. When his wife, Zipporah, gave birth to a son, “Moses named him Gershom, saying, ‘I have become a foreigner in a foreign land.’” Exodus 2:21-22

Moses named his first son Foreigner because he identified as a foreigner himself. Despite being raised as an Egyptian in Pharaoh’s family with all the privilege associated with the royal household, Moses could not escape the fact of his Hebrew heritage. That knowledge influenced his personal identity.  That identify as an outsider – a foreigner – was reinforced in his persona when he settled in Midian to the extent that he extended that identity to his firstborn son.

I find significance in that story and in the realization that Moses identified so poignantly with being a foreigner. That same identity – of being foreign – defined the Hebrew people enslaved in Egypt. It remained with them as they wandered 40 years in the Levant wilderness, and, God sanctified that identity for the Israelites in the Mosaic Law:

“When you reap the harvest of your land, do not reap to the very edges of your field or gather the gleanings of your harvest. Do not go over your vineyard a second time or pick up the grapes that have fallen. Leave them for the poor and the foreigner. I am the Lord your God….

“When a foreigner resides among you in your land, do not mistreat them. The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the Lord your God.“

Leviticus 19:9-10, 33-34

The Israelites lived 430 years in Egypt by the time Moses led them out of that land. Their memories of the promised land were ancient history. Their memories would be like modern Native Americans recalling the history of the United States in 1596. European settlers at that time comprised a few thousand people at most in precarious settlements in the New World inhabited by millions of indigenous people.

The Roanoke Colony had already failed, and no English settlements remained. Some Spanish missionary and military expeditions existed in the south and west, and French and Portuguese fishing camps existed in Newfoundland. Jamestown (1607), Quebec City (1608), Plymouth (1620), and New Amsterdam (New York, 1624) were not yet established.

Some 430 years later, the Native Americans may identify as outcasts in their own country, like Israelites identified as foreigners in their “home” country of Egypt. The Israelites lived there, but they were not assimilated into Egyptian culture, and they lived there without all the benefits Egyptian privileges.

Though Moses was raised with Egyptian privileges in the royal family, he never lost his Hebrew identity. In that sense, Moses identified similarly to the way Christians are taught to identify themselves in the New Testament: as people of God who are foreigners and exiles (1 Peter 2:10-11), “foreigners and strangers on earth” (Hebrews 11:13), who are now “fellow citizens with God’s people.” (Ephesians 2:19)

For Moses, though, he probably didn’t even feel at home with his own, Hebrew people because of his upbringing. He was raised separately from them. His Hebrew features (and perhaps circumcision) reminded him of his heritage. He could not escape it, but his personal connection to those Hebrew roots was not yet intimate.

Even so, the sense of foreign identify was profound enough that Moses was compelled to come to the aid of a Hebrew stranger. Moses identified with the plight of the Israelites who lived as vulnerable foreigners in a land they could not call their own.

I and my fellow Christians should have the same profound sense of living as strangers in a foreign land in this world – if, indeed, we are citizens of heaven. This realization hits home today as I watch what is happening in the streets of American cities.

Do we identify with the aliens and strangers in our country? Or do we identify with the government that has recently adopted more oppressive and strong handed tactics to deal with immigrants in this country who are not wanted here? If you are not sure these connections belong together, bear with me awhile longer.

Continue reading “The Importance of Our Identity as Citizens of Heaven: Moses, Aliens, and Strangers” →

To Go Or Not to Go to Egypt: That is the Question

The difficulty interpreting Scripture the way we might want to read it

kevingdrendelLeave a comment

How should people read the Bible? I suppose that’s an age old question. I am not here to claim that I know exactly the right way to read the Bible – a fool proof way of reading every passage of Scripture to understand exactly the right meaning of every verse (as if there is only one way), but I am certain of some wrong ways to read the Bible.

Anyone who has devoted substantial attention to the reading of Scripture and how to interpret it well has heard the terms “descriptive” and “prescriptive.” The difference between the two is deceptively simple: descriptive passages tell us what happened, and prescriptive passages tell us what ought to happen.

The Bible does not signal to us when a passage is descriptive or prescriptive. Some passages can both be descriptive and prescriptive at the same time. Some passages are prescriptive, but we need to have the wisdom to ask, “Prescriptive for who?” For the people in the narrative? For all people at all times? If we don’t ask these questions, we can make some bad assumptions and reach some bad conclusions.

My reading today gets me thinking about these things. Genesis 46:2-4 says that God spoke to Israel (a/k/a Jacob) in a vision one night, and this is how the dialogue went:

“Jacob! Jacob!”

“Here I am,” he replied.

“I am God, the God of your father,” he said. “Do not be afraid to go down to Egypt, for I will make you into a great nation there. I will go down to Egypt with you, and I will surely bring you back again. And Joseph’s own hand will close your eyes.”

This passage is descriptive. It is telling us only what happened. At the same tine, God speaks to Jacob and clearly tells him what he ought to do. Thus, the passage is also prescriptive – at least for Jacob. What God said to Jacob is clearly not a statement of what 21st Century readers ought to do. It wasn’t even a statement that other Ancient Near Eastern people of God ought to do in their own times.

Interestingly, we can see a pattern in the Bible of people going to Egypt. Abraham went to Egypt almost immediately after he arrived in the Promised Land (the land God said He would show Abraham when he was still Abram). There was a famine in the land of Canaan (the promised land), just as there was a famine in the land when Jacob and his family made their way to Egypt.

Mary and Joseph also went to Egypt. They were warned by an angel of the Lord to flee and go to Egypt to escape the plans of Herod to kill the Christ child. Going to Egypt is embedded in the story of Jesus, the Messiah, who was God incarnate. It doesn’t get more holy or sanctified than that! Right?

Going to Egypt seems to be an established and accepted thing for God’s people to do. Both Jacob and Mary and Joseph were told in no uncertain terms by God or His angel to go to Egypt. Though Abraham wasn’t told to go to Egypt, God blessed him with sheep and cattle, male and female donkeys, male and female servants, and camels while he was there (Gen. 12:16), and he became very wealthy. (Gen. 13:2)

If we read these passages prescriptively, we might logically conclude that anytime a famine occurs, we ought go to Egypt. We might also think that going to Egypt is always the right thing for God’s people to do.

We intuitively know, though, that going to Egypt whenever a famine occurs is not likely the right way to read these passages together. That is because they are descriptive (describing only what happened) and not likely meant to be read prescriptively – at least for us. God was being prescriptive to Jacob and to Mary and Joseph, but he wasn’t laying down a rule for everyone in all times and places to follow.

God told Jacob and God told Mary and Joseph they ought to go to Egypt, but we know that the instructions were given to these particular people in their particular contexts that are not likely applicable to us in our times and circumstances. That doesn’t mean that these stories and God’s instructions might not have some application or particular relevance for particular people in their own particular circumstance in their own times, but there is no generally applicable, prescriptive value to be gleaned about going to Egypt.

In fact, we don’t have to look very far to find some very different instructions from God about going to Egypt. It wasn’t long after Moses led the Israelites through the Red Sea to escape captivity in Egypt when they started complaining that they had it better in Egypt. (Exodus 16:2-3) As time went on, they complained often about the abundance they remembered in Egypt (Numbers, 11:5; 16:3), and they rebelled against Moses, asking for a leader to be appointed to lead them back to Egypt. (Numb. 14:2-4) Years later, as Moses was preparing the people to enter the Promised Land, God (speaking through Moses) warned the people about Egypt, saying, “You are not to go back that way again.” (Deut. 17:16)

The Prophet Isaiah warned people about going to Egypt and seeking Pharaoh’s protection. (Is. 30:1) The prophet Jeremiah said, “This is what the Lord Almighty, the God of Israel, says: ‘If you are determined to go to Egypt and you do go to settle there, then the sword you fear will overtake you there, and the famine you dread will follow you into Egypt, and there you will die.” (Jer. 42:15-16) The Prophet Ezekiel also told the people not to remember Egypt anymore. (Ez. 23:27)

Moses and the Prophets gave some clear and stern warnings about going to Egypt, yet Mary and Joseph were told years later to flee to Egypt with the baby Jesus. These things are confusing if we try to read every passage in the Bible prescriptively – even the ones with clear commands from God.

So how should modern Christians read scripture? Do we go or not go to Egypt?

Continue reading “To Go Or Not to Go to Egypt: That is the Question” →

Who Do We Obey? Augustine, Bonhoeffer, the Confessing Church, and the Guidance of Revelation

A choice between two cities

kevingdrendel3 Comments

The book of Revelation is often treated as a puzzle about the future to be solved. But for the early church—and for Christians living under pressure—it functioned as something far more prescient: a guide and encouragement to be faithful when political power demands allegiance that belongs to God alone.

That is why the story of Dietrich Bonhoeffer and the Confessing Church matters so deeply for Christians today. Their struggle was not about partisan politics or policy disagreements. It was about lordship. Who has the right to command the Christian conscience? Who gets our obedience when the state demands what Christ forbids—or forbids what Christ commands?

When Obedience Becomes Worship

The crisis in Nazi Germany was not simply that the government was unjust. It was that the state demanded moral and spiritual loyalty. National identity became sacred. Political obedience became a virtue. Silence and complicity in the face of injustice was praised as faithfulness.

Scripture warns us that this is always how idolatry works.

“No one can serve two masters.” (Matthew 6:24)

In the City of God, St. Augustine contrasts the City of man and the City of God. We owe our allegiance to the City of God, though God calls us to live in harmony, as best as we can, with the City of man. Loving God is first, but loving man is like it. We cannot love God and fail to love people who God loves and created in His image.

Revelation is encouragement and exhortation to us when the City of man exhibits the characteristics of the beast. Revelation describes the beast as a power that compels allegiance to itself in everyday life through economic pressure, social belonging, and fear of exclusion:

“So that no one can buy or sell unless he has the mark.”

(Revelation 13:17)

The issue is not technology. The issue is worship – your heart, your devotion, your allegiance.

Bonhoeffer: Discipleship Is Visible

Dietrich Bonhoeffer saw clearly what many Christians hoped to avoid: there is no such thing as private faith when public injustice is at stake. Throughout the Prophets who repeatedly warned God’s people about coming judgment, the issues were twofold: idolatry and injustice.

Idolatry and injustice always go hand in hand. Augustine said that our true allegiance is revealed by what one loves, serves, and obeys.

“Two cities have been formed by two loves: the earthly by the love of self even to the contempt of God; the heavenly by the love of God even to the contempt of self.”

(City of God XIV.28)

Injustice always flows from misdirected worship – misdirected loyalty, priority, and desire. Augustine called injustice robbery, because it robs people made in the image of God of what God intends for them.

In The Cost of Discipleship, Bonhoeffer warned against what he famously called “cheap grace”—grace that forgives sin without transforming obedience. Transforming obedience is the kind of obedience that forsakes self-interest out of love for God and man.

“When Christ calls a man, he bids him come and die.”

That call is not only about personal holiness. It is about allegiance. Bonhoeffer understood that following Jesus means concrete obedience, even when that obedience is costly, unpopular, or dangerous.

Faith that quietly accommodates injustice, he argued, is not faithfulness at all. God “upholds the cause of the oppressed,” and “watches over the foreigner,” and “sustains the fatherless and widow….” (Psalm 144:6-9) That is God’s heart, and that character marks those who love and serve Him.

“Whoever claims to love God yet hates a brother or sister is a liar. For whoever does not love their brother and sister, whom they have seen, cannot love God, whom they have not seen.”

1 John 4:20

The Confessing Church: Saying “No” to False Authority

In 1934, pastors and theologians gathered to issue the Theological Declaration of Barmen. Their message was simple and bold:

“Jesus Christ… is the one Word of God which we have to hear and which we have to trust and obey in life and in death.”

This was not abstract theology. It was a refusal to allow the state to define truth, identity, or moral obligation. It was a rejection of the idea that national destiny or political leaders could speak with the authority of God the Father. The City of man is not the City of God.

In the language of Revelation, the Confessing Church refused to bear the name of the beast. They chose instead to bear the name of the Lamb:

“They follow the Lamb wherever he goes.” (Revelation 14:4)

The Danger of Complicity

Later in his life, Bonhoeffer pressed further. He argued that the church sins not only by acting wrongly, but by failing to act when injustice reigns.

“Silence in the face of evil is itself evil.”

According to Bonhoeffer, Revelation 14 warns that worship of the beast is not limited to overt acts of loyalty. It includes participation in systems that oppose God’s justice—systems that reward conformity and punish faithfulness—systems that oppress the poor, needy, foreigner, widow, and orphan.

“If anyone worships the beast… he also will drink the wine of God’s wrath.” (Revelation 14:9–10)

This is not a threat meant to terrify believers. It is a mercy meant to awaken them. We must not give our allegiance and our heart to Empire – the beast in our age. We must give our hearts, desires, and allegiance to God alone.

Revelation as a Call to Endurance

Revelation does not tell Christians to seize power. Revelation gives us the hope that the Lamb who was Slain will prevail despite the chaos, injustice, and oppression that reigns in a world controlled the beast. The urgent message is to endure patiently and be faithful. (Rev, 13:10)

“Here is the endurance of the saints, those who keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus.” (Revelation 14:12)

Endurance means refusing to let fear, convenience, or comfort decide our allegiance or obedience. It means trusting that faithfulness matters, even when it costs us socially, economically, or personally.

Bonhoeffer lived—and died—by that conviction. We can too.

Why This Still Matters

The beast in Revelation does not always look monstrous. Sometimes it looks respectable. Sometimes it speaks the language of order, morality, and security. Sometimes it rewards the loyalty of silence.

The question for Christians has never changed: Who is Lord?

Revelation, Augustine, Bonhoeffer, and the witness of the Confessing Church remind us that allegiance is not just what we say—it is what we do, what we tolerate, and what we refuse.

“We must obey God rather than men.” (Acts 5:29)