John Gordon reviews Ruler of Kings: Toward a Christian Vision of Government, by Joseph Boot (2022)

Greek influences on Christian theology

Walking by human philosophy vs walking with God

Humanism: the fruit of a Greco-Roman worldview.

Basic assumptions of the Greek worldview

Whom will it serve?

You don’t have to be a prophet, or even a believer, to recognise that deep divisions are wracking Britain today. The 2016 Referendum exposed some of these. People are starting to realise that ‘politics as usual’ is no longer possible: we have entered a period of unprecedented turmoil and upheaval: what we have frequently referred to on Prophecy Today UK as part of the ‘shaking of the nations’.

While the spiritual forces underneath this shaking may be black and white, so to speak, how all this bears out in individual thinking and behaviour was never going to be clear-cut, because human beings are complicated. For instance, the unforgiving binary options of the Referendum masked complex concerns and ideological standpoints on both sides, which has been a point of frustration for many.

But despite this complexity, the oppositional worldviews underlying the battle for the soul of the West are gradually becoming more and more apparent. At the polls and in virtually every sphere of daily life, people are increasingly being forced to choose, one way or the other.

Political Polarisation

It may have taken a generation for the cultural Marxism being preached in universities to filter down into mainstream culture, but that project is now nearly complete, enabled and encouraged by a political establishment purporting to take the centre ground. Those who accept this radical left-wing worldview are lining up on one side of the debate; those who react against it on the other. Because the worldviews at stake are vastly opposing, we are witnessing a general movement away from the political centre towards the extremes.

This polarisation is visible in the recent EU election results, which saw centrist parties lose considerable ground to parties both farther to the left (e.g. greens, ultra-liberals) and farther to the right (e.g. nationalists). Whether ordinary citizens are becoming more radical in their politics, or simply expressing frustration, the result is an empowering of parties farther outwards on the political spectrum.

We are witnessing a general movement away from the political centre towards the extremes, underlain by worldviews that are vastly opposing.

Dig a little deeper than left-right divisions, however, and the battle lines are really being drawn up either around the defence of the ‘old order’ that emerged from Christendom (including the nation-state system, a strong family unit and the importance of individual freedom from state interference), notwithstanding its imperfections, or around its destruction and replacement with the inverse (i.e. globalism, anti-life and anti-family movements including LGBTQ+/radical feminism/abortion/euthanasia, and the subjection of the individual to increasing state control).

All this means that wherever one sits on a variety of hot-button issues, it is increasingly difficult to forge a compromise path or remain neutral. This is especially the case for Christian institutions and ministries, who ostensibly hold the truth. The time has come to nail some colours to the mast.

Oceans Apart

The reality of this was exposed strongly this week with news of a vicar in Essex resigning, from both his positions as governor of a CofE primary school and local vicar, over the promotion of transgender ideology. The school had allowed a child under 12 to announce his gender transition to his class, without any agreed procedures and without informing other parents, but with the full support of the diocese. The Revd John Parker submitted his resignation letter, in which he expressed concerns that children are being “sacrificed on the altar of trans ideology”.¹

Mr Parker is one of many clergy and lay Anglicans who have borne the CofE’s drift away from biblical principles and into radical left-wing identity politics (the schools issue being just one manifestation of this) for as long as they can, hoping and praying for change from the inside, but who have finally decided that enough is enough.

These defectors are seeking spiritual safe havens in other denominations or breakaway Anglican groups, including GAFCON (Global Anglican Future Conference, an international Anglican body championing traditional biblical teaching), while the CofE establishment has drifted ever farther out to sea, lured by siren calls of ‘compassion’, ‘tolerance’ and ‘welcome’.

Across the vast distance that has opened up in between, calls for unity, dialogue and peaceful disagreement sound ever-more faint and hollow. It is difficult to see any other future for the CofE than one of disintegration, barring some drastic repentance, especially within the upper tiers of its leadership.

Mr Parker is one of many clergy and lay Anglicans who have borne the CofE’s drift away from biblical principles for as long as they can, but have finally decided that enough is enough.

However, there is yet a sense that the CofE has not capitulated completely, but is still being pulled in both directions. The Lambeth 2020 international meeting of bishops, for example, is being boycotted by both conservative GAFCON members and ultra-liberal bishops who think the Church is not going far enough in its ‘welcome’ of gays and lesbians.

The Archbishop of Canterbury’s weak attempts to appease both sides in the sexuality debate have failed to give strong leadership one way or the other, permitting the gradual permeation of the Church with LGBTQ+ ideology in a way that has angered both pro-LGBTQ+ activists (for not being fast or far-reaching enough) and those trying to remain faithful to Scripture. In other words, attempts to forge a middle-ground, compromise position have only made matters worse, fuelling polarisation – just as we have seen more widely in national politics.

The Time is Now

All this is really to say that the era of easy ways out – of fudging compromises, of appeasement and of sitting on the fence – is all but over. But perhaps that is not a bad thing, for, “I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either one or the other! So, because you are lukewarm…I am about to spit you out of my mouth” (Rev 3:15-16).

The Church in all quarters badly needs to choose whom it will serve (Deut 30:19; Josh 24:15), heeding James’s warning that “whoever chooses to be a friend of the world renders himself an enemy of God” (4:4). The disagreements in which the CofE is mired result from it befriending a worldly ideology that stands in total opposition to God. This ideology cannot save, and only leads to division and disintegration. As with the Church, so with the nation.

Our study this week looks at Jeremiah, the ‘weeping prophet’, and expresses hope that in our day we will see people who humbly cleave to the Lord’s council, grieving over the nation and daring to speak prophetically from that place to both king and priest. If ever Britain needed such prophets, it is now.

Meanwhile, may the faithful continue to rally – not primarily to one political party or another, but to the Lord and his word, just as the Levites rallied to Moses (Ex 32). Therein we will find salvation, security, hope and light which will radiate out through us to the nation.

References

1 Read more at Christian Concern.

Paul Luckraft reviews ‘Reading the Bible with Rabbi Jesus’ by Lois Tverberg (Baker Books, 2017).

This book is the third in a worthy series on how understanding the Jewishness of Jesus can transform your faith. The previous two (Sitting at the Feet of Rabbi Jesus, Walking in the Dust of Rabbi Jesus) are equally commendable, as the author always puts across important information in an accessible manner.

This third volume, as its title suggests, is more about the Bible that Jesus had, showing us how he would have understood it. The contrast is clearly demonstrated between our Greek/Western understanding and the Hebraic approach that is so necessary if we are to unlock the treasures within God’s word.

Emmaus Road Experience

The author’s aim is to provide us with an experience akin to that of the disciples on the Emmaus Road (Luke 24) when Jesus explained what they were missing by not having a complete picture of their scriptures.

The book is divided into three main sections. Part One is called ‘Repacking our Mental Bags’ and is intended as a starter to help us begin our journey into the Bible as Jesus knew it. Part Two, ‘How the Bible Thinks’, guides us further along the path into Hebraic thinking and how the ‘big picture’ ideas contained within the Bible are essential to an understanding of its message. The third part is entitled ‘Reading about the Messiah’ and aims to show him through Hebrew eyes.

Tverberg contrasts our Greek/Western understanding with the Hebraic approach that is so necessary to unlock the treasures within God’s word.

Although these are useful divisions there is no reason why the book cannot simply be enjoyed chapter by chapter and dipped into according to time available and the desire to learn certain aspects more thoroughly than others.

Going Deeper

Each chapter ends with ‘Tools and Reflections’ and ‘Thoughts for Going Deeper’. The book concludes with three useful appendices, one on the books of the Tanakh (Old Testament), one on Bible translations and, perhaps most helpfully, one containing ‘Thirty Useful Hebrew Words for Bible Study’.

There are good endnotes and recommended resources for further reading. In addition, there is a companion website which has a free PDF sample chapter to download (effectively the first 20 pages of the book).

Although much of this material is available in other books, Tverberg, co-founder of the educational En Gedi Resources Center, has the skill to take us back into the world of Jesus so we can listen afresh to what he said and see anew what he did.

‘Reading the Bible with Rabbi Jesus: How a Jewish perspective can transform your understanding’ (hardback, 285pp) is available from Amazon for £14.99. Also on Kindle.

Trump vs Macron and the battle for all our futures.

These days, I am routinely and necessarily suspicious of the BBC. So when Auntie reports a major international speech given by the most powerful man in the world by poking fun at him, it makes me want to listen to the speech in full and see what I’ve missed!

The speech was given by President Donald Trump to the annual UN General Assembly meeting in New York. The UNGA brings together in one room world leaders of vastly different political backgrounds, from 153 nations. Since a lot of politicking is done off-camera, the podium is the tip of the iceberg; a nonetheless vital indicator of a more extensive reality just below the surface.

Podium Wars

It is fascinating to watch Trump’s speeches and the reactions of other world leaders. Ever since his arrival on the world scene, things seem to have become more threatening and unstable – or more exciting and hopeful, depending on your perspective. He has certainly succeeded in exposing to the air an ideological war that has been raging in the West for decades.

As with ‘populist’ movements like Brexit, such an open challenge to the left-wing secular humanist orthodoxy is usually decried (by left-wing secular humanists) as divisive. But what else should be expected of any attempt to stand against the prevailing direction of Western politics?

And if Trump embodies one side of the ideological war, the other is embodied by French President Emmanuel Macron, whose UNGA speech was essentially a point-for-point rebuttal of Trump’s. This article looks at some of the key issues over which they tussle, putting them both into biblical perspective.

Polar Opposite Views

President Trump dedicated much of his speech to a solidly conservative defence of nationhood, vowing to “never surrender America’s sovereignty to an unelected, unaccountable global bureaucracy” and to reject “the ideology of globalism.”

His argument was that whilst supra-national organisations like the UN have “unlimited potential”, they cannot and should not replace the “beautiful constellation of nations”, since “Sovereign and independent nations are the only vehicle where freedom has ever survived, democracy has ever endured, or peace has ever prospered.”

If Trump embodies one side of the ideological war for the West, the other is embodied by French President Emmanuel Macron.

Meanwhile, President Macron took the podium to exalt the virtues of global government as the only way to solve mounting international crises and ensure prosperity for all. He argued that “nationalism always leads to defeat”, blaming it for two world wars, genocides and countless worsening global emergencies.

He then claimed that we are witnessing a “crisis of the Westphalian world order" (i.e. a world of individual sovereign states) and “this is a turning point” where we need “a new world order” based on “new rules” and “a re-forging of the global collective system”.

Trump addresses the 73rd session of the Assembly, 25 September 2018.While Macron waxed lyrical about international co-operation, Trump criticised the dangerous lack of accountability of global institutions (e.g. the ICC, the WTO). Declaring that they have “no jurisdiction, no legitimacy and no authority”, he then proclaimed:

America is governed by Americans…we believe in the majesty of freedom and the dignity of the individual. We believe in self-government and the rule of law. And we prize the culture that sustains our liberty - a culture built on strong families, deep faith, and fierce independence.

Macron denounced this thinking as ‘isolationism’. He argued that populist movements championing democracy are mere expressions of frustration from groups ‘left behind’ by the modern world. To combat this, he argued, what is needed is not insular nationalism, but more and better globalism.

These are just a few examples; I recommend comparing the full texts of both speeches (links below).

More Than Different Opinions

Importantly, Trump and Macron do not simply represent different opinions about how government should be done: they embody two diametrically opposed worldviews.

Underlying Trump’s defence of national sovereignty is a biblical valuation of individual dignity and freedom, as given by God. From this starting point, the role of government is to protect and encourage individuals, not least by investing in the structures (also God-given) that enable them to flourish, such as the family, the rule of law and the nation itself.

Underneath Macron’s ‘new world order’ is precisely the opposite: a firm belief in the pre-eminence of the universal rather than the individual. The role of government is then to impose freedom from the top down, not by protecting units like the family and the nation, but by subordinating them to a ‘universal’ moral and political system:

I believe in universal values…I think there should be unconditional protection of our values…Let us address the crises, let us work together…mindful of the principles guided by our history and the principle of universality and universalism.

Under Trump’s defence of national sovereignty is a biblical valuation of individual dignity and freedom, as given by God. Underneath Macron’s ‘new world order’ is precisely the opposite.

Digging even further down, underneath these different claims lie very different visions for humanity’s future, and very different beliefs about human nature and God.

Macron’s vision is the realisation of a world where poverty, disease and conflict are gone, climate change is reversed and prosperity is enjoyed by all. Appealing though all this sounds, it is grounded in a utopian fantasy: the creation of heaven on earth, without God, humanity dictating its own morals and working out its own salvation.¹ Both history and Bible prophecy testify to the terrible ends of such millennial dreams.

Trump’s world-view is not nearly so grandiose. He does not assume that a universal utopian vision is necessary, possible or desirable, but instead concerns himself with unleashing individual potential: enabling people to make the best of a fallen world, responsible for their own lives before God.

This does not preclude impulses to international co-operation; it just does not prescribe them as the way to humanity’s ultimate self-realisation.

The Spiritual Dimension

These two men and their two speeches remind me that ultimately there are really only two worldviews, or two directions in which to move: to pay respect to the God of the Bible and his created order, or to write God out of the picture, revising the world accordingly.² Whichever side wins out will change the lives of millions, even billions of people.

The biblical context of all this, of course, is the spiritual battle spoken of in Ephesians 6:10-19. This invisible battle is for the hearts, minds and eternal destinations of all mankind. It is therefore fundamentally a battle for the freedom of the Gospel to be proclaimed, heard and accepted. Satan’s strategy is to deceive with counterfeit offers of salvation and freedom, working meanwhile to close down opportunities for the truth to be heard.

One day, Macron’s vision of a ‘new world order’ will be realised, temporarily (Rev 13), though Satan’s attempts to achieve this through history have so far been allayed. By God’s grace, until the appointed time the Holy Spirit is acting as a restraint, safe-guarding our freedom to proclaim the Good News:

For the secret power of lawlessness is already at work; but the one who now holds it back will continue to do so till he is taken out of the way. And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will overthrow with the breath of his mouth and destroy by the splendour of his coming. (2 Thess 2:7; also 2 Pet 3:9)

In these two men, and in these two speeches, we are reminded that ultimately there really are only two worldviews.

For Believers

Why is it important to understand the battle raging between our political masters, especially if God ultimately scoffs at their posturing and plotting (Ps 2)? It’s important because it should jolt us out of complacency and galvanise us:

• To make bold use of our Gospel freedoms while we still have them,
  
• To take care that we are not deceived into aligning ourselves with ideologies behind which lie the ‘powers of this world’s darkness’,
  
• To be deliberate in applying God’s truth to our political thinking and acting, and
  
• To pray with understanding, listening to the heart of God and (if so called) yielding ourselves to the vital ministry of intercession.
  

It is a mistake to poke fun at Trump instead of listening to what he has to say. This is a debate – nay, a war – about human nature and purpose, and ultimately about God. Ephesians 6 makes no provision for Christians sitting on the side-lines: it is a call to arms.

Listen to/read the full speeches:

• President Trump: text / video

• President Macron: text / video (quotes taken from the latter)

Notes

1 In this schema, the major evil is not sin, but the freedom which has allowed inequalities to flourish and resources to be abused. The only solution, therefore, is the submission of freedom to the ‘greater’ goals of equality and unity. The biggest potential threats to this are sovereign nation-states or movements of people that might use their independence to deviate from this agenda.

2 Nowhere do these worldviews clash more voraciously than on Israel, although I have not included this example here. Israel will always be at the crux of the global battle for truth and freedom, because she stands for the inevitable fulfilment of God’s covenant purposes and the soon return of Messiah.