Tag: political power

The Words of Amos to the Faithful Remnant of God’s People in the US Today?

The pairing of the church and state is not a wedding made in heaven

kevingdrendelLeave a comment
Mountain fortress overlooking a stone bridge and river gorge at twilight

I have been reading Embrace the Tension by Tommy Nixon. He has resonated deeply with me, especially in this time. Christians in the United States seem to be living in a golden moment with a president openly engaging Christians and a popular segment of the church celebrating a symbiotic relationship with the president and his administration.

We don’t have to look too closely, however, to be concerned. Many prophetic voices have distanced themselves from this expression of Christianity. They stand outside the structure of this church and state power duo sounding an alarm. The foundation of this relationship is power and influence, and the fruit of the Holy Spirit is missing,

Satan tempted Jesus by offering him all the power of the kingdoms of the world, and Jesus flatly turned him down. When Jesus’ own followers attempted to seize him by force and make him king, he escaped into the hills. When Pilate confronted Jesus about the confusing things he was hearing – Was Jesus really king of the Jews? – Jesus told him that his kingdom is not of this world.

Jesus explained to Pilate that his power was given to him by God. If Jesus had come to take over, his followers would have risen up and seized control, but that isn’t why he came. He came to good news to the poor and to die on a cross. He came to introduce people to the Kingdom of God that is here now – growing in the midst of the kingdoms of this world – though the reign of the Righteous King is not yet.

Jesus will not reign as king until he comes again at the end of the age. In the meantime, he was clear that his followers are to be salt and light in the world. The church has no mandate to take over the kingdoms of the world. The church is commissioned to make disciples – followers of Jesus. 

Tommy Nixon recalls in his book the church at Antioch. They were diverse, but not for diversity’s sake. They were diverse because Jesus loves and came to save the world. They were unified, but not for unity’s sake. They were unified in Christ and in his purposes. They had power, but not for power’s sake. The power they wielded was found in taking up a cross and following Jesus. They experience the joy of the Holy Spirit, but not for joy’s sake. They experienced the joy of the Holy Spirit in the midst of a world that was orientated against what God was doing.

A dramatic change in the church took place when Constantine became king and issued the Edict of Milan, proclaiming religious toleration for Christianity within the Roman Empire, followed by the Edict of Thessalonica, in which Christianity was made the state religion. This is how Tommy Nixon characterizes the change:

“What seemed like a triumph for the church was the beginning of a dangerous compromise. The same empire that once persecuted followers of Christ now embraced Christianity as its own. The gradual fusion of the church with the state followed, leading to the kingdom becoming the empire. Political power and cultural dominance diluted the gospel message. It was no longer good news to the margins; it was a tool to maintain control.

Embrace the Tension: Choosing the Radical Middle Instead of Picking a Side by Tommy Nixon, page 142

If we make an honest comparison of the church before the 5th century and the church after the first century, we can see the influence that state power had on the church. Before the church had any power it was persecuted and marginalized, but it revolutionized the Roman world in the love of neighbor and the love of God. The church was subversive in the best possible ways, led by people authentically walking the path of its suffering Savior, preaching good news to the poor – as Jesus did.

From the 6th century on, the became wedded to state power and than more deeply embedded in state power. Church and state became inseparable, and the corruption of the Church ensued. We call those years the Dark Ages for good reason.

Not everything was dark, of course. God was still at work in His church and in the world, despite the evil and corruption that litter the annals of this period of the history of the Church. The Crusades and the Inquisition are among the rotten fruit that grew in the name of Christ, though God always preserves a remnant in every age.

Tommy Nixon is nothing if not brutally honest and authentic:

“We see the effects of this today. In the United States, the surge of Christian nationalism and the conflation of faith with political ideology reveal how deeply the empire has shaped our perception of what it means to be a follower of Christ.”

Embrace the Tension, page 142

Once again, a segment of the Church flirts with the power and influence of Empire. In this context, Tommy Nixon refers to the Book of Amos. Amos was a prophet in Israel in the 8th Century BC. He warned Israel, that was once the oppressed living in slavery, that it had become the oppressor. Idolatry and injustice were rampant, and God was giving them an opportunity to repent and turn from their waywardness.

They didn’t listen, of course. Within 30 years of the ministry of Amos, the northern kingdom was exiled to Babylon.

Though Amos spoke at a low point in the history of God’s people, he ended with a message of hope. He spoke of a day when God would “restore David’s fallen shelter,” and “repair its broken walls,” “restore its ruins,” and “rebuild it as it used to be.” Amos 9:11-12

I don’t think that God intended to restore the nation of Israel exactly as it was; God intended to restore Israel as He designed it to be. Amos says God would do this so that his people would “possess the remnant of Edom and all the nations that bear my name.” God’s blessing and promise to Abraham was always to extend to all the nations.

We see the reality of this, of course, in Jesus. He came first to the lost sheep of Israel, but his ministry extended far beyond the remnant of Israel. It extended to all of us and to all of time.

God’s ways are not our ways. He sent his only Son into the world that all who call upon his name will be saved – in Israel, Judah, Samaria, and all the world: the United States, the United Kingdom, the United Arab Emirates, Afghanistan, El Salvador, China, and to all the islands of the world.

Tommy Nixon concludes his assessment of the church in America by saying. “It doesn’t have to be this way.” We don’t need to devolve into the corruption of state power. “We can continue to be the rebels, but we have to be honest about the rebellion. The church needs a lot of work, but you and I are the church. It is time to be brave and own our hypocrisy and do something about it.”

Tommy Nixon speaks truth when he says, “The church is the problem,” but our hope is in the fact that “the church is also the solution.”

It’s time for the church to be the church, to repent, and to get back to what it means to be followers of Christ, fellow cross bearers, suffering servants in the way of Jesus, who live out the kingdom of God in our daily lives, preaching good news to the poor, suffering with those who suffer, mourning with those who mourn, and sharing the good news of the kingdom of God to anyone who will hear.

Jesus could have taken over the kingdoms of the Earth, but he knew who it was who had the present authority over the kingdoms of the world. The will of God was to introduce His kingdom on Earth and to raise up an army of suffering servants who would pray and live into the reality of the kingdom of God on Earth as it is in heaven.

We are tempted by the same things that tempted Jesus, and we should reject them the same way Jesus rejected them. His kingdom is not of this world. We have missed the mark in our attempt to protect the power and influence we have gained in this world at the expense of being like Jesus – the ambassadors of his kingdom.

Just as Amos prophesied it is not too late. It is not too late for the remnant of God’s people in this age – the church – to be the body of Christ, representatives of Jesus in this world. We do not need earthly power and influence. As a matter of fact, earthly power and influence will corrupt the whole thing. It always has, and it always will until the day Jesus comes again. As God told Amos, God will do what He says. We only need to be faithful.

When the Church Loses Its Prophetic Voice

Biblical Authority, Political Power, and the Temptations of Influence

kevingdrendel2 Comments

The failure of the German Protestant church to mount a decisive resistance to Nazism has long troubled western Christian conscience. Historians rightly warn against simplistic explanations, but one conclusion has proven difficult to escape: long before Hitler rose to power, the church’s theological confidence had already been weakened. When the state demanded ultimate loyalty, many pastors and congregations lacked the moral clarity and will to refuse.

The nineteenth-century Tübingen School of theology did not cause Nazism. Its scholars were not proto-fascists, nor did they anticipate racial ideology or totalitarian politics. Yet their historical-critical approach to Scripture unintentionally contributed to a Protestant culture in which the Bible increasingly functioned as an object of study rather than a source of commanding authority. When political myth replaced moral truth, the church was unprepared to stand against it because the church had long ago lost its biblical, moral footing.

History does not repeat itself mechanically. The present American situation is not Weimar Germany, and the MAGA movement is not Nazism. Still, history can illuminate how the happenings within the church influence how the church interacts with political culture. That raises a difficult but necessary question for American evangelicals today: what weaknesses in our own theology and habits of thought have made many of us susceptible to the distortions of political power?

The answer is not that evangelicalism has repeated the errors of liberal Protestantism. In many ways, we have made opposite mistakes. But the result—a diminished capacity for prophetic resistance—bears an unsettling resemblance.

Authority Dissolved: The Tübingen Lesson

The Tübingen School, led by Ferdinand Christian Baur in the mid-nineteenth century, treated Scripture primarily as a historical artifact shaped by competing early Christian communities. Biblical texts were analyzed as records of theological conflict rather than as a unified witness to divine revelation. The command and authority of Scripture was diminished, and the sacred became profane. The trajectory of the academy spilled into and watered down the vitality of Christian impact in Protestant Germany.

Clergy trained in historical criticism often hesitated to proclaim Scripture normatively. The Bible remained important, but its authority was qualified, softened, and translated into general ethical ideals compatible with modern culture. Christianity became morally earnest but theologically cautious and politically unimportant.

By the early twentieth century, much of German Protestantism lacked the confidence to say an unambiguous “No” to the state. The problem was not simply fear or cowardice. It was uncertainty—whether God had spoken definitively enough to authorize resistance when power spoke with confidence and force.

Karl Barth saw this clearly. In 1933, as the German church accommodated itself to the Nazi regime, Barth insisted that the church exists only under the authority of God’s self-revelation. Where that authority is weakened, the church becomes vulnerable to captivity by the state.

The lesson is sobering: when Scripture no longer stands above culture, culture will soon stand above the church. Today we can say of Nazi Germany and the church alike, “The grass withers, the flower fades, but the word of our God will stand forever.” (Isaiah 40:8) But, the impact was devastating on Germany, Jews, Europe, and the world at that time, and its effects rumble into the present time.

I do not want to suggest that we can equate Nazi Germany in the 1930’s and 1940’s to the United States of America in the 2010’s and 2020’s. Still, there are parallels between the exercise of State power in the vacuum left by weakened theology that bear some attention.

Continue reading “When the Church Loses Its Prophetic Voice” →

Of Powers and Principalities and Following Christ in the Midst of the Fray

The post-Christian right and post-Christian left battle for our allegiance

kevingdrendelLeave a comment

I have listened to all 30 episodes of Season 1 of the podcast, The Surprising Rebirth of Belief in God, by Justin Brierley. I have listened to dozens of podcasts, and I think this is one among the best, most well-produced podcasts I have found. The first episode of Season 2 inspires my writing today.

In this episode, Justin Brierley poses the question, “Whether the seeming rebirth of belief in God is right wing?” A return to Christian values seems to coincide with a resurgence in conservative politics, but, let’s look closer.

Is Christianity right wing? The African American church would beg to differ. Does Christianity have a right wing and a left wing? Or is Christianity another bird entirely?

At about the 45 minute mark in the podcast, Glen Scrivener identifies three strains of culture in the current western world. One strain is “blasting off into progressive liberalism.” Another strain is “snapping back to the worship of the strong”, a return to the world of Nietzsche. A third strain involves the “surprising rebirth of belief in God”, as Brierley puts it, where a trickle my become a flood, and Christian revival happens.

Scrivener is hopeful that the signs of Christian renewal in the west foreshadow revival, but he observes that these different strains of culture are moving forward at the same time, albeit in conflict with each other. They each have a trajectory that will continue into the future, and, “It will be a mess,” says Scrivener.

He believes Christian revival will happen, but he believes that progressive liberalism will also continue on its trajectory, divorcing itself more completely than it already has from nature and the Christian story. He believes that a devolution into what he calls “the default nature of the flesh” will continue as well, where might makes right.

Indeed, these things are happening now. Will they continue on the same trajectory into the future? Time will tell, but I think he is right: that there is a “post-Christian right” and a “post-Christian left” that are presently locked in a battle for the minds of the people of the western world.

I would add that the world, generally, is and will continue to be the devil’s playground until Jesus returns. At least, that is what the Bible says (millennium variations aside).

Continue reading “Of Powers and Principalities and Following Christ in the Midst of the Fray” →

A Tale of Two Processions, Two Kingdoms, and the Triumph of God

Two processions, two kingdoms clashing, and God’s triumph in the death of God incarnate on the cross

kevingdrendel2 Comments

Episode 124 – Statement of Triumph – from the BEMA Podcast, with Marty Solomon and Brent Billings, inspires my writing today. It was the subject of discussion for the Saturday morning Bible study I have attended off and on with an exceptional group of men for several years.

The subject was Matthew 21:1-11. The chapter heading in the NIV translation (which would not have appeared in the original text, because there were no chapter headings in the original text) is “Jesus Comes to Jerusalem as King.”

This is usually how we read it: a “triumphal” entry. We celebrate Jesus entering Jerusalem as a king. It was triumphal, but not perhaps in the way we tend to think about it. Certainly, not in the way the fledgling followers of Jesus perceived it when they witnessed it.

Marty Solomon sets the stage in the podcast. He emphasizes that Jesus rode into Jerusalem on a donkey. It was during the week of Passover, an unusually tense time in this region of the Roman world. The uneasy tension existed at that time in that region because it was home to the only group of people in the Roman Empire who refused to worship the Emperor.

The Jewish people were stubbornly true to their God. Even so, Rome allowed the Jews to have their own ruler, Herod the Great. Herod was powerful in his own right, but he was happy to rule alongside the Romans, and the Romans accommodated him to maintain stability in the region.

Even so, this small piece of real estate was problematic for Rome. It sat at the crossroads of the earth. The Hebrew people long inhabited it, but they were a headache for Rome because of their entrenched religious traditions and unabated worship of their God.

When Herod the Great died, three of his sons took over different areas of the land Herod ruled as a vassal of the Romans. Herod Philip ruled the north (Caesarea Philippi). Herod Antipas ruled the middle region, and Herod Archelaus ruled in the south (Judea).

Archelaus only lasted two years, so Rome brought in its own ruler, Pontius Pilate (the Roman Bulldog), to maintain Rome’s control over the region. Pilate didn’t live in the sacred City, Jerusalem. Pilate lived in Caesarea Maritime (Caesarea, By the Sea), a city built by Herod to honor Caesar.

The week of Passover would have been a particularly tense time in Jerusalem because Jews from all over gathered there to celebrate the feast that remembered their great deliverance and triumph over the superpower of an earlier time, Egypt. The last thing Rome wanted was for this celebration to become a rally for rebel Jews fueled up with wine and the legend of their former deliverance.

If there was any holiday that might make the Romans nervous in Judea, it was Passover. Zealots were always stirring up trouble, and Passover would be an opportune time for a Jewish revolt against the Roman rule of this territory that the Jews long held out as their own. After all, the Jews still believed this land was to be theirs again based on their understanding of prophecies about a military coup to be led by a messiah (savior) in the line of their once great King, David.

Every year at this time Pontius Pilate would head south from Caesarea down the coastal road to Joppa. He would head east from Joppa to make his way into Jerusalem. Pilate would enter Jerusalem from the west. He traveled with great pomp and a show of force, with an army of soldiers, trumpeters, heralds, banners, and pronouncements. Pilate would lead the way on a white stallion symbolizing Roman conquest and rule.

This show of power, of course, was intentional.The article, In Through the Back Door, September 24, 2022, by Terry Gau describes these yearly processions made by Pilate into Jerusalem at the beginning of Passover week. John Dominic Crossen and Marcus Borg, memorializes the historical context in their book, Last Week, setting the stage for the final chapter of Jesus’ ministry on earth. The procession is described this way:

“Traditionally, Pilate paraded into Jerusalem on the first day of Passover Week, entering the west gate – the front gate – with legions of chariots, horses, and foot soldiers, dressed for battle and armed with swords and spears.  Rome’s authority would not be questioned.  The majesty with which Pilate enters the front door of the city was meant to inspire awe and fear, respect and obedience.”

Marty Solomon imagines it this way:

“You could have heard him coming from miles away. The message he wanted to send to the Jews was clear. ‘Don’t even think about it! Keep everything under control, or Rome will crush you!’”

BEMA Podcast, Episode 124

Pilate would stay in Herod’s palace in Jerusalem for the week until the festivities ended. Then he would go back to Caesarea. He wasn’t there to celebrate, though. He was there to ensure things didn’t get out of control and to keep the peace.

During one Passover week under the rule of Pontius Pilate in Judea another procession took place. It may have even happened on the same day at the same time that Pilate was entering the City from the west. This procession took place on the east side of Jerusalem where Jesus, riding on a lowly, young donkey with a small, rag tag bunch of unarmed disciples entered through the east gate – the back door to Jerusalem.

“This parade was just as carefully staged as Pilate’s entry into Jerusalem. It was a counter-procession, a different vision of what a Kingdom should be, a subversive action against the powers that ruled Jerusalem. Jesus’ humble, yet triumphal, entry into Jerusalem stood in contrast to the magnificence and brutality on display at the opposite end of the city. Jesus brings peace, while Pilate brings a sword.”

In Through the Back Door

This was the backdrop for episode 124 of the BEMA Podcast and of our discussion. I sit writing at a temporary table with one chair left in my house that is all but cleaned out and being readied for sale. My future is uncertain as I recount one of the most pivotal times in human history and the dealings of God with man and its meaning for us, today.

Continue reading “A Tale of Two Processions, Two Kingdoms, and the Triumph of God” →

Contemplating the Influence of Power and Wealth on The Church

It is “a supreme paradox” that ‘the church in freeing itself from the secular itself became a state”, says Tom Holland.

kevingdrendelLeave a comment
Miniature showing siege scene of conquest of Jerusalem, 1099. Nunez de Balboa House-Museum, Jerez de los Caballeros, Spain

I am working my way through Tom Holland’s book, Dominion: The Making of the Western Mind. I have just finished the segment on Pope Gregory VII and Pope Urban II at the turn of the first millennium since the birth of Jesus Christ.

Since Jesus first told an antagonistic group of religious leaders that people should “render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s, and render unto God that which is God’s”, and for centuries afterward, the church was at the mercy of the state. Not even a generation after Jesus died, the Roman government, which controlled Judea where Jesus lived and his following sprung up, ransacked Jerusalem, scattering Jews and Christians into the countryside and beyond.

Through the first three centuries, the best the followers of Jesus could hope for was an indifferent Caesar or provincial ruler. At various times, they suffered at the hands of a Nero or more local prefects of local Roman rule in places like Lyons, Vienne or Carthage. The powerful Roman government was to be suffered and obeyed.

Christianity was illegal until Constantine decreed the prohibition lifted. Within a generation or two, Christianity was not just legal in the Roman Empire; it became the favored religion. Christian rulers became part of the governing structure of Rome, serving by the appointment and the pleasure of ruling authorities from mid-way through the 4th Century on.  

Over the centuries, the Roman Church became a player in the ebbs and flows of power and influence in western and central Europe. When Gregory VII was made Pope by acclamation of the people, however, he hid himself, not having been chosen through the usual protocols. When he was affirmed, nevertheless – his affirmation having as much to do with popular will as with political protocols, it marked the beginning of a change.

Gregory and Henry IV, the Roman Emperor, had a fitful relationship. Gregory excommunicated him three times, each time undoing it, the last time on his death bed in a remote outpost to which he been banished by the powers that be. Henry IV, for his part, declared antipopes in opposition to the papacy of Gregory, but his antipopes never rose to the position of acceptance by the people. The tide was turning.  

When Pope Urban II gathered and commissioned a vast army in the sacred duty of marching on Jerusalem to reclaim it from the Saracens who had overrun it a couple centuries earlier, the victory they attained in 1099 AD (the First Crusade) marked the completion of a transition. Carrying forward the efforts of Pope Gregory to divorce the church from the state, the goal was accomplished by the military victories won for Christendom – not by any Caesar or secular emperor, but by people marching under the banner of The Church.

Holland described the irony that, in obtaining freedom from the state, the church became a state. Holland calls it is “a supreme paradox” that ‘the church in freeing itself from the secular itself became a state”.

Continue reading “Contemplating the Influence of Power and Wealth on The Church” →