Category: Politics

The recent elections in America raise some difficult issues for followers of Yeshua.  I would like to go deeper into a larger question.  That question is whether or not we can be “all in” with a political party.  As an observer of politics since the Nixon-Kennedy election, I have watched the change among white Evangelicals from the majority being Democrats or at least voting for Democrats to being Republican voters.  How did that happen?  Evangelicals were quite favorable to Roosevelt.  My Evangelical relatives spoke of Roosevelt with reverence, and that includes my mother. (I am Jewish through my father).  They saw the Democrats as the party supporting policies that would advance ordinary people, modest people like most Evangelicals were at that time.  They also felt a responsibility for the poor. Many were immigrants’ children and had the experience of hard knocks.  My own view is that the big change came due to social issues.  The right tax rates, money supplies, banking policies, and other matters of economic policy were too abstract for so many.  There was more trust for national leaders.   When the Democrats supported abortion, easier divorce, and then became pro-gay or LGBTQ as it is known today, there was a great Evangelical shift.  This is understandable.  The Black community and many Hispanics (they are more divided than Blacks) saw government support for lifting their community as more important than abortion, gays choosing to marry, or easier divorce since one could choose not to have a divorce or to live a gay life.  The issues of being supported to overcome poverty was considered a greater issue than the others.  So Black Evangelicals stayed mostly Democrat.  

I am very much on the side of the Republicans on the social issues, but my views on many other issues are more nuanced.  We have to look at things from a biblical worldview perspective.  There are first the issues of principle and then the empirical issues of what works.  Here are some Biblical norms that few talk about but should.

1. The Gospel is primarily spoken to and for the poor, the oppressed, and the captives.  (Luke 4) This is in line with the prophets who deal with two primary sin areas that bring the judgment of God.  The first is idolatry. The second is the treatment of the poor, the needy, the widow, the orphan etc.   
2. A study of the Bible brings out the fact that human beings are fallen, prone to evil and greed.  Therefore, the Bible is oriented against the great concentration of wealth and power in the few or a controlling oligarchy.  Such concentrations will not turn out well.
3. The Bible enjoins a broad distribution of wealth while allowing growth in prosperity by diligence.  However, because wealth is primarily in land, that is re-distributed and returned to ancestral families every 50 years.  That is the great equal opportunity idea of the Bible, the Year of Jubilee.  Note the prophets railing at those who had added field to field and built large houses on large estates and did not obey the jubilee law.
4. The Bible requires leaving gleanings, the corner of the field, and a partial tithe for support for the poor. 
5. Loan sharking is absolutely forbidden.
6. The Bible enjoins a strict sexual morality and family order. 
7. All of this is based in the fact that every human being is created in the image of God and to be treated with respect and dignity.  The courts of law and justice must show this truth.  

These are the principles.  Then there is the empirical reality.  The development of economies in the world are so very different than the older agrarian economies.  We now have wealth connected to huge corporations and industrial enterprises, many multi-national.  Modern governments in developed societies have produced huge bureaucracies.  The question for society is what is the best system of economic organization for lifting the greatest number of people, providing adequate income for gainful work that treats employees with dignity.  In a modern society, we also deal with health care and its availability and delivery.  The problem with socialism is that it leads to greater poverty and does not produce the creativity and drive to increase the wealth of the society.  The problem with capitalism as it has developed is that it has produced huge disparities of wealth distribution where there is too much power in a few and many are exploited.  They then control the government through lobbies and contributions.  Unions have been helpful, but some unions are now part of the problem.  Some unions have negotiated packages that are bankrupting cities with six-figure pensions.  This is unfair to people with no unions or weaker unions.  I think teachers’ unions are now destructive and have produced a destructive monopoly.  An education for decent vocations is a crucial issue and hence competition is crucial. 

Can free enterprise be designed that limits obscene wealth and power concentrations while allowing the motivation of reward for enterprise?  Can this success be of greater benefit to the many?  Can we see profit-sharing, stock for employees, and more for employees?  Also, how shall we deal with robotics?  What if there are just not enough jobs; will there be a robotic dividend for people.  The idea of greater leisure due to robots was the talk of futurists decades ago.  They speculated on a much shorter work week. I think Andrew Yang who runs for mayor of New York is thinking about these things.  Higher minimum wages may lead to job losses and robot replacements.  Do Evangelicals wrestle with these issues?

Then finally we think of reforms in-laws and penalties for crime.  Can we think more deeply about the fact that the Bible has no prisons for non-capital crimes, but requires restitution with penalties?  It is justice but restorative justice.  How should that orient us to reform in the justice system? 

I often think that because people do not credit the Torah and the authority of the Hebrew Bible, they miss the important teaching of the Bible and its principles for societies.  These are reasons why I cannot really be totally at home with political parties.  These parties are coalitions of interest groups.  Many of the positions of political parties are for the sake of gaining the support of those interest groups and for the sake of keeping politicians in power.  But the policies on issues in these parties do not cohere with each other.  Have you ever thought about how arbitrary it seems that a party’s policies on different issues do not form any coherent whole?  Only the Bible can give a coherent whole on issues and then pursue the truth empirically as to what works best in implementing the principles. I try to wrestle with some of this in my book “Social Justice.”

Not long ago, President Barack Obama stated that, “At a certain point you’ve made enough money.”  There were howls of protest.  The more libertarian of Republicans pushed back hard and asserted that however much money a person can make within the laws of the land was perfectly in order and no one should think otherwise.  Many believers being Republicans got on the bandwagon against his words.  It was socialism! A few years before that the Supreme Court in the Citizens United case threw out by 5 to 4 the limits on contributions by corporations and unions to organizations involved in political activity.  The campaign finance law had the backing of some Republicans and Democrats. On the Republican side, Senator John McCain was the most known. Again, some of the conservative Republicans embraced the court decisions since as the court said, such limitations of contributions limited speech.  Those supporting the law said that, on the contrary, such big money drowned out the speech of the rank and file voters.  

For a time this seemed to favor Republicans but the last election showed big money by far more greatly given to Democrats. 

Then forward to the campaign of 2020.  Elizabeth Warren argued that the level of wealth held by a few distorted the economy and politics of the nation.  For a long time, she held out against contributions from the corporations of the rich.  Then Bernie Sanders railed against the billionaires.  Most Republicans pushed back hard.  Warren talked of a wealth tax to be assessed on the net worth of the individual.  How would it be assessed?  After all, wealth fluctuates as values go up and down over the course of a year.  Yet strangely the superrich mostly supported the Democrats in the election.  For decades conservatives argued that the wealthy becoming more wealthy is no problem since they have to invest their wealth and that creates economic expansion for everyone.  But there are other issues. 

I personally believe that the issue is wrongly framed between socialism and free enterprise.  Rather I think what is really happening is that the superrich project themselves as being for greater socialism to keep the leftist populists at bay while they work to control more and more wealth and power and take the nations where they desire.  What is really desired by them is a technocracy where the wealthiest oligarchs control the direction of societies.  To do this, they have to control media, communication of all kinds (including social media) and control the elected bodies through enormous campaign spending and buying politicians.  It is crony capitalism at the highest level while projecting a socialist agenda to keep others at bay.  It is a level of control that is unprecedented. Corporations now have more income than good size nations and have more power.

Recently a news organization reported on Bill Gates of Microsoft and Big Pharma fame, becoming the largest landowner in the United States. Why would he be buying all that land?  It then was reported that Gates is calling for an end to eating meat.  He is for synthetic meat and vegetarianism.  He is so super-rich that he can afford to buy huge tracts of land at higher than going prices and then take them out of meat production.  There will then be less land for cattle and the price of meat will soar.  Only the very rich will be able to afford it.   His wealth can change the direction and eating habits of the whole nation.  A case can be made for vegetarianism and the greater prosperity of the world, but do we want to see it come from such control versus communicating through education and debate.  That process is too slow for Bill Gates.  As Lord Acton of England famously said, “Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”  The world may be moving toward world government control by super-rich oligarchs, and democratic checks and balances will only be a facade.  There are some very good books on this.  

As we look at what is developing, are we so sure that the push back against Warren and McCain was really right?  Does the Bible speak to these issues?  And is the concern about the superrich and their political and cultural power only a concern for Democrats or is there a biblical response? 

In the 1970s John Howard Yoder, the famous Mennonite New Testament scholar wrote a book entitled The Politics of Jesus.  The book amazingly had material that supported Messianic Jewish theology. I used it in my book Jewish Roots.  Yoder argues that the year of jubilee principle is a key to understanding Yeshua and the Bible.  Since wealth in agrarian societies was concentrated inland, the redistribution of land to the families of the original ownership clans precluded the concentration of the wealth of Israel in a few.  The prophets spoke strongly against its violation.  Today wealth is concentrated in capital and corporations.  Can there be a free enterprise that brings expanded prosperity for the many and precludes the over-concentration of wealth in a few?  There can be and in some ways, this had happened at times in history.  However, should there be a limit to the vast wealth and power of a few and the ability they have to dominate and control?  Should there be new businesses so money is more decentralized and should stock in large corporations be such that they cannot be controlled by a few?  Should there be limits on political the power of a few so that the many have greater speech and power?  There should be a conversation among Bible believers and serious study on the implications of the jubilee.  Think of it.  A billion dollars is one thousand million.  Can you imagine having to your own account 1000 million dollars?  Then think of this ten times over, ten billion dollars equal 10,000 million dollars!  We now have individuals who have to their own account over 150 billion dollars. Is that a bit frightening?  At a certain point, you do have enough money.   This is an enormous centralization of power and wealth, and I for one think free enterprise needs reform.  Those who believe in the Bible know that when we promote the Gospel and traditional morality and experience we face the push back that it is hate speech.  When we want to educate our children, these super-rich oppose us and want to drive us all in a particular direction of education that is not based on a biblical.  When we see what has happened with social media and the elite controls, I wonder if there could be common ground between some Democrats and populist Republicans on these dangers.  Let’s seriously study the year of jubilee as foundational.  Again, I do touch on this in my book Social Justice. 

The recent election in the United States has divided believers over claims that Christians were in idolatry of Donald Trump as a savior figure; also added to this claim was the charge of the error of “Christian nationalism.”  This is now a pejorative term.  I won’t here speak to the former claim; I know Trump supporters who were over the top in their adulation and also know Trump supporters who were in my view very balanced. The issue of Christian nationalism is an important one. The accusation is not helpful since many who make the accusation have not defined it with sufficient precision such that it could lead to a fruitful dialogue.  I think some do not realize that some use the term nationalism as fostering the sovereign nation state idea over against a one world government idea.  It does not imply as liberals accuse conservatives of white nationalist supremacy, though such folks do exist. 

Let us note some definitions.  People mean very different things by the term. They argue from foundationally different definitions.  I will list some. 

1. Christian nationalism is a nationalism that is Christian and can be applied to any nation. It is like Christian education, Christian Art, or a Christian business. It is a nationalism that is truly Christian. It means that citizens should be loyal to their nation, should seek the good of their nation and should seek to bring its laws and culture into conformity to the Law of God. In addition, they should measure their nation by God’s law and affirm that which is good and beautiful in their culture(s) by God’s grace but reject what is bad.  For Reformed Theology, we are to seek to see that God’s Law is established in every sphere of human life in every nation.  
2. Then there is the specifically two varieties of Christian nationalism applied to the United States in addition to the above definition.   
   1. There is first the idea that God in his providence and shown by the Christian roots of the country, brought into being a special nation whose laws and government were more in accord to the Law of God and Christian principles.  We should therefore be loyal and seek to preserve and foster these values and have respect and patriotism for the nation.  Most American Christians historically, I think, have been Christian nationalists in this sense. Washington, Adams, and Lincoln were Christian nationalists.  Washington’s Farewell Address, emphasizing the importance of Christian values and faith for the nation to succeed is an amazing address. So are the words of Adams and many others.  Those Christians who fought in the Revolutionary War and the Christian founding fathers were Christian nationalists.  Many who fought in the great wars were also such. 
   2. The second idea is that America is a nation in covenant with God like ancient Israel and a nation of special favor to the extent that it keeps God’s Law.  

I will not at this point evaluate these two varieties.  Some British Christian nationalists had similar thoughts about Britain and some 19^th century Russians about Russia and Russian Orthodoxy Christianity based in Moscow, the 3^rd Rome.  I do not think that Christian nationalists in these two senses should be attacked for a wrong nationalism. Their differences should be accommodated in the Body of the Messiah.

1. Then there is a “Christian Nationalism” that is really an “unchristian nationalism” if one overlooks the sins of the nation and exalts the nation in an idolatrous way.  It sees the nation as such a manifestation of truth that it ignores the relative nature of all gains in this fallen world and the more important answer to our situation in the righteousness of the Church, revival, and the ultimate answer for righteousness in the return of Yeshua.  We ultimately will see history move toward the great battle of good and evil, and nation states will not attain sufficient righteousness to be virtuous in those dark days.  This nationalism ignores the importance of the health of the Church.  The foundation of society is a healthy, growing, and discipled people of God.  A wrong Christian nationalism does not face the issue of the centrality of revival and the health and influence of a godly Church as the key and central issue, not the nation state. This is really Christian nationalistic chauvinism, and inordinately favors the nation. 
2. Then last is “Anti-nationalism.”  In this view, the Church is called as a people apart and is to not be involved in the political and civic concerns of the nation.  Many of the pacifist peace churches historically fit this description: Mennonites, Amish, and Church of the Brethren Anabaptists. Yeshua’s words that his Kingdom was not of this world are interpreted in terms of a counter cultural withdrawal.  Some Dispensationalists also fit within this position and said that human societies are a “sinking ship.”  We should not be concerned about the sinking ship but should get people into the lifeboats so they will go to heaven. 

For me there is a deeply important history that is very much a part of my own biography.  As a skeptical student at Wheaton College during the Viet Nam War, I watched the parade for Veteran’s day led by the Army ROTC and the patriotism that was characteristic of Wheaton College historically.  I also noted the streets filled with protestors, and even some in the Wheaton chapter of the Students for a Democratic Society (SDS).  Yes, Wheaton had a chapter.  I was sad about this and sad about how pained was the Admiral President of Wheaton, Dr. Hudson Taylor Armerding.   Some years of searching followed on the issues of nationalism and war and peace.   My roommate was a Mennonite, one of the well know pacifistic denominations. I studied their literature and began to doubt the importance of allegiance to the state.  I was disturbed that in European wars Christians fought Christians believing in the propaganda of their own nation. I even registered for the draft as a pacifist, though this registration was rejected as too late in my life!   The issues of the Holocaust and Israel plus Reformed Theology helped me to what I now think is a more balanced position.  I was also helped by the writing of H. Richard Niebuhr’s, Christ and Culture.  I also read the book of one of the proponents of the idea that America had a special covenant with God, Peter Marshall Jr., The Light and the Glory, maybe the best defending the idea of America as covenant with God nation.  His father was the famous Chaplain of the Senate, Peter Marshall Sr.  His mother was the famous writer Catherine Marshall.

As followers of Yeshua, how committed should we be to our nations or American or Israel?  Is Christian nationalism wrong? Here is some historical perspective.  Favoritism for ethnic identities is an old and universal trait of humanity.  It goes back to favoring one’s family, clan and then the tribe out of which ethnicities grew.  Ethnic wars were ubiquitous in history, and sometimes an ethnic group would gain power and control other groups.  Sometimes there was genocide and sometimes subjection.  Sometimes related ethnic groups would be unified in a larger governing arrangement.  What we call nation states is a more recent development that came to its height in the 19^th century.  The idea of sovereign nation states in relationship to other such states was seen as an ideal arrangement.  Such states were made up of ethnic groups who were close enough in language and culture to join in larger nations. Some came into order like Italy in the 19^th century.  It was thought important that everyone was a citizen of a nation state. Patriotism to one’s nation state was considered very important in producing a coherent national order. Some nation statues thought of themselves as especially glorious states.  One thinks of the pride of the French or the glory of the Hapsburg Empire, Austria-Hungary.  A trip around the large circle in front of Buckingham Palaces shows the monuments the glory of British Empire rule.  It recalls the graduation march we all know written by Elgar, “Land of Hope and Glory” where Elgar touted British rule as the hope for civilizing the world.  He was soon disillusioned by World War I.  The United States has its own mythos (I mean in a positive sense) about its God chosen destiny. 

There are two things to bring into balance.  First the Gospel to an extent relativizes one’s commitment to one’s nation as of secondary importance comparted to the commitment to Yeshua and the Kingdom of God which is to influence all aspects of life.  As such, the transcending fellowship of all believers form all ethnicities and our union together is a more important point of loyalty and unity than our membership in an ethnicity or nation state.  This is very threatening to a regime like China where the highest loyalty should be to the state and its rulers.  The Gospel brings us into a commitment to a multi-ethnic fellowship.  The teaching of H. Richard Niebuhr is also important.  It was especially written for missionaries but applies to us all.  We are to affirm the unique beauties and cultures of nations when these cohere with God’s standards of truth, beauty and goodness.  This good is there by God’s common grace, the grace given to every people (as contrasted to salvation grace).  We are to see the good redeemed and transformed in Messiah, but we are to discard that which is bad.  A balanced ethic loyalty or national loyalty can see biblically to do this.  Inordinate and idolatrous commitment will blind to the evil and aspects that are not in accord.  John Dawson in his writings speaks of a redemptive purpose for every ethnic group.  The book of Revelation chapter 21 show that every nation (ethnos) has a unique glory to bring into the New Jerusalem. 

The Law of God is the norming norm by which we evaluate the condition of the nation, its history and origins. True commitment to our nations is a commitment to see first the Body of the Messiah grow in numbers and health in discipleship.  From that foundation it is to influence the nation toward embracing the Law of God.

I want to now apply all this to the United States.  We are justified in honoring the biblical roots of the nation.  The godly Pilgrims and Puritans did seek to make the Colonies like ancient Israel, a people in explicit covenant with God, under the Lordship of Yeshua and embracing biblical Law for its civic and cultural life.  This had enormous influence on later American law and culture. Then in 1776, the Declaration of Independence affirmed something that no one outside of biblical influence could affirm.  It was that all men (human beings) were created equal and given inalienable rights by God.  The nation was based on an idea of liberty and equal rights before God. That is amazing.  In a sense there was a covenantal dimension in acknowledging God.  There were covenantal origins and certainly the Christian community was in covenant with God. But sadly, this did not carry though in the Constitution, which was in many respects, amazingly biblical both in the laws and the recognition of the danger of concentrated power which fallen man could not be trusted to wield.  It built in checks and balances to preserve freedom.  Freedom of speech and religion were enshrined as foundations. That freedom was mostly for varieties of Christianity and Judaism. Other religions were not contemplated. However the Constitution did not explicitly acknowledge the Lordship of Yeshua or the God of the Bible.  Yet, many state constitutions did. Until more recent years, the doctrine of the separation of religion and state (Church and state) was not applied to states. God also was not separated from civll government and its accountability to God. States assumed the Christian faith, but there was special recognition of the Jewish people as in line with these values.  Lincoln’s words affirmed both the Declaration from a Christian foundation and Constitutional government.  Therefore, there are grounds for special respect for the history and origins of the nation.  Our British friends might question the legitimacy of the break from the United Kingdom, but the nation that was formed in so many ways was a Bible Law based Kingdom.  This was affirmed by a 19^th century Supreme Court decision.  That is the good part.  The national mottos, “In God We Trust,” and “Out of Many, One,” especially present a nation not based on a common ethnicity but on shared values.  One could be any ethnicity and join. These are covenantal aspects both in the nations origins and in such statements but short of a full covenant. 

There is glory in the founding of the United States and the direction its civilization took.  However, there was one large blot.  It was slavery.  Northern leaders like John Adams wanted an end to slavery.  It came early to the Colonies and rooted itself in the South (1619).  However, to unify the nation and have sufficient strength to withstand opposition, a compromise with the South would be accepted.  This compromise was again and again made over the next 74 years when new states would enter the union.  Slavery was the great national sin.  There was glory but also shame.  In the North, the Negro was understood as equal, but in the South maybe he understood as less than in the image of God. 

The shame parts show a fallen nation.  This included white northern European prejudice when southern Catholic Europeans were considered unworthy and faced discrimination and immigration restrictions based on ethnicity. Jewish people as well faced such discrimination after the wave of Jewish immigration at the end of the 19^th century and the beginning of the 20^th century.  These continued restrictions proved deadly with the rise of Hitler.  Discrimination was allowed especially against Jews and Blacks into the 1960s.  The results of Jim Crow and discrimination were most painfully experienced by Black Americans and the effects continue to this day, though through the Gospel and better programs this population can be lifted.   We also know too well the issues of robber baron monopolies fought so rightly by Theodore Roosevelt.  Today the United States faces a similar issue with robber baron hi-tech moguls who control communication and censor and cancel believers in Yeshua who promote the Gospel and Biblical morality and law. The accumulate obscene personal wealth and power. 

The rebellion against God in the culture has grown steadily over 100 years.  Prostitution, human trafficking and the greatest purveyor in the world of pornography characterizes the United States.  The rejection of the anti-pornography laws was so destructive to marriage, family and the good morals that are necessary to a healthy society.  This has now spread to the whole world from the United States. Laws and judgments were passed that allowed for radical freedom for abortion and the loss and slaughter of untold millions of human beings; and it is called women’s health!  Our universities are hot beds of evolutionism and secular anti-God philosophies.   Billy Graham said, “If God does not judge the United States, He will have to apologize to Sodom and Gomorrah.”  This is far from the nation of the 1950s that promoted biblical values even in the public schools!  At that time patriotism was strong along with respect for biblical law.  

In the light of all this, is there a legitimate Christian nationalism? Yes.  I approach this from a Reformed perspective which I think is closest to the Biblical understanding.  I am thankful for that background in my early training.  Such a Christian nationalism functions with the following points of understanding. 

1. All men and nations are fallen in this world.  To over value any nation as righteous before God is contrary to the Bible’s teaching on that fallenness.
2. The most important thing for a nation’s prosperity in God is the condition of the Church, that it is growing, discipling well and growing in influence on the laws and culture of the nation. 
3. The special good and special aspects of the founding of the United States can be respected and acknowledged.  We are to work to preserve that which was right and good and respect our country and the meaning of its symbols that are rooted in this. 
4. We are to acknowledge how short the nation fell from its ideals and work to redress the sins of the nation.  
5. Our commitment to the righteous condition of the Church and the Kingdom of God should be paramount and the commitment to the nation’s righteousness and prosperity in God should be secondary since the first is the foundation of any lasting progress in the second.  The first is key to the second. 
6. All institutions on this earth including Church institutions will not attain full righteousness but will always manifest fallenness, yet great progress can be made. 
7. The end of all things is the ultimate battle of good and evil and the return of Yeshua. That must be the basis of our hope and not the victory of the United States or any other nation. 

We can also apply all this to Israel, a very fallen and sinful nation.  Israel is actually elect by God.  However, in working for the good of Israel and being patriotic Israelis, these seven points apply.  

Am I a Christian nationalist or a Messianic Jewish nationalist?  Only if by definition the seven points are fully embraced.  Beyond that we slip into an idolatry of the nation. And in my view, some Christians have slipped into an ungodly nationalism that is not biblical.  Let’s otherwise not divide the Body in controversy between those who are in different places in their understanding of nationalism unless we are speaking of the errors which I noted above.  

Sometimes the debates among followers of Yeshua on the political civil sphere produce a lot of smoke and little light.  I often sense that people do not really engage with the other. Maybe social media is a terrible place for serious dialogue.  I love such dialogue and have never feared to enter dialogue with people who are of strongly different opinions.  As a professor, I note that this comes with the territory.  I noted this with the pro-Trump and anti-Trump people.  They often could not dialogue.  With Joe Biden as President, I hope that people can engage in the issues and not be so much be focused on a man.  However, if we do not agree on the foundations and goals, we cannot really move forward on the empirical questions of what works and what does not work.  One of the issues with people who say they are progressive is that they do not clarify the goals to which we are to progress.  I sometimes think that the people are not yet clear on basic definitions and goals.  I repeat the definition of justice from my book Social Justice.  Justice or righteous order is an order of righteousness where every person can fulfill a good God intended destiny. Injustice is an order that prevents that destiny.  The motivation for justice is love.  Love is the passionate identification with other people that seeks their good guided by law.  Biblical love always seeks real good that is in accord with the Law of God.

Having thus defined love and justice as I deduce it from the Bible, I would like to lay out some statements and see if we agree.

1. A just society is one that is in conformity to the principles of Biblical Law. This is not possible unless there is a revived, growing and discipled Body of Believers in the Land of sufficient numbers to form a consensus on justice.
2. The quest for justice seeks to lift people to their highest potential. In this there is the desire that people have sufficient humane employment, adequate food, shelter, medical care and education as a basic minimum.
3. The Gospel is the greatest instrument of social justice since it provides personal transformation and empowerment.  With God people are able to overcome supernaturally.  If truly appropriated, Gospel power is the greatest lifter of people.
4. The Bible requires that we treat all people as equally valued and created in the image of God. There is a biblical quality that no humanistic system can match. Indeed, the quest for equality in society is due to historic biblical influence, though today it is not recognized by secular humanists.
5. The Bible has special reference to those who are poor form the black community due to the historic injustice of slavery and the intergenerational poverty that still affects many.  The emphasis of the Church should be to come along side and help in those communities as a first priority with financial, business, educational and other help while recognizing that the Gospel is the  first priority.   
6. The intact family is one of the greatest and proven keys to lifting the poor.
7. While disparities of wealth can be part of a dynamic economy that lifts the whole society (Kennedy’s statement that a rising tide lifts all boats) the concentration of wealth in ways that are super disparate is not good.  Indeed, that there are super rich people controlling tens of billions of dollars in personal wealth brings them super power. Such concentrations of wealth lead to the fulfilment of the saying, “Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”  Economies need to be organized so that the wealth is distributed more equally and that levels of the super wealth of a few are precluded.  The political power of the super wealthy should be circumscribed.  This is in keeping with the Jubilee principle of Lev. 25 where all are to be given a new opportunity every 50 years.
8. A just society fosters stable families.
9. A just society discourages abortion
10. A just society does not have government policy that undercuts the faith and morals of Bible based people.
11. A just society enables education according to the world view and moral convictions of world view people groups.    

We can argue about how much government help should be given, how big corporations should be, how much socialism, the dangers of crony capitalism, the levels of taxation to produce the greatest lift to the most in society and much more.  But these are empirical questions, not the foundational ones.  Great justice is not possible without a revived, strong and sacrificial people of God.

The recent political upheaval in the United States has been a catalyst of discussion on the last days.  It shows the great divides in the Body of the Messiah on the issues of the coming tribulation, our cultural responsibilities, and what we can hope for in this age.  One preacher in a large network spoke of the loss of the election by Donald Trump as a temporary set back.  He said that the Church will go on to triumph in all nations.  Another wrote to me that the loss by President Trump was God’s sovereign decision and would now be the beginning of the Great Tribulation.  Some believers voted for Joe Biden so that things would go back to some kind normalcy while ending the rule of a bombastic personality they despised as bad for the country.   I don’t think normalcy will happen with the ascendency of identity politics and cancel culture. Can we shed some biblical light on the issue of the responsibility of believers to work for social transformation and the coming of the Great Tribulation?  I think so.

Many who teach on eschatology or the doctrine of the last days, begin with the question of the three main millennial views. Pre-millennialism teaches that Yeshua will return after the Great Tribulation, and then He with the saints and Israel will rule on earth for 1000 years.   The survivors of the nations that had not yet been converted will accept Yeshua’s rule and live long lives.  At the end opf the Millennium, there will be one more great rebellion and then the final judgement at the Great White Throne.  Then we will enter the New Heavens and New Earth, the Eternal Age.  A-Millennialists believe the Millennium is symbol for the present time and refers to the rule of the Church for most of this age at the end of which is the Great Tribulation, the return of Yeshua and then the Great White Throne judgment.  After this will come the New Heavens and New Earth.  The Post Millennial view is the view of radical dominion where the Church or Christians will take over the whole world and rule it without the return of Yeshua until much later (some literally after 1000 years)  For such Christians including some of the great revivalists and social warriors of the 19^th century, the Great Tribulation was past.  I do not claim that believing these different millennial views is a matter so foundational so as to claim heresy for any of them.  I want to take a different approach and then deal with the issue of our responsibility for cultural transformation.

My new tack is not to start with the doctrine of the Millennium but the Great Tribulation.  The great consensus of historic Christianity (Catholic, Protestant and Orthodox) and Orthodox Judaism is that there will be a great Tribulation at the end of this age and then the Messiah will come (or return if you follow Yeshua).  This consensus again is overwhelming from the second century to today.  It is difficult to find serous scholars who disagree. That consensus was also, until a new view in the middle of the 19^th century, that believers who are alive at the end of this age would pass through the Great Tribulation.  Both historic Pre-Millennial and A-Millennial teachers and scholars were the same in teaching this.  For Pre-Millennialists, who believe in the election of Israel, the Tribulation is very connected to Israel, whereas this is the case for some A-Millennialists who believe in the election of the Jewish people and their special inheritance in the next age of the New Earth. (The great scholar on revivals Dr. Richard Lovelace taught this.)  A-Millennialism does not necessarily imply replacement theology though the majority historically were replacement.  The Catholic Church is still Amillennial though repudiating replacement theology and embracing the election of Israel and her key role at the end of this age.

Though I am not a Catholic and have significant issues with some Catholic doctrines, their statement on the classical view is clear and covers the consensus of historic Protestant churches as well.  We read in paragraph 676.

The Church will enter the glory of the Kingdom only through this final Passover, when she will follow her Lord in his death and Resurrection.  The kingdom will be fulfilled then, not by a historic triumph of the Church through a progressive ascendancy, but only by God’s victory over the final unleashing of evil, which will cause his Bride to come down from heaven. 

My book on the Book of Revelation is entitled Passover, Key to the Book of Revelation!  I was therefore amazed to read this statement.  What the Catechism calls progressive ascendancy is the view of postmillennialism.  The reason why the coming Tribulation is the overwhelming view of historic Church and Orthodox Jewish scholars is the overwhelming evidence of text after text.  Ezekiel 38, 39, Isaiah 25-27, 60, Joel 3, and Zechariah 14 all show that this age will end in a final battle.  Paul summarizes it well.  Speaking of the return of the Lord and our being joined to him, he states,

Let no one deceive you in any way for that Day will not come unless the rebellion comes first and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the one destined to e destroyed.  (II Thes. 2:3).

The case for no Great Tribulation in the future is based on a few verses and is not based on  a comprehensive survey of the texts.  In Matthew 28 Yeshua commanded us to go and “Make disciples of all nations.”  This is interpreted to mean that the nations will be submitted to Yeshua.  Then the parable of the Kingdom as being like leaven that permeates the whole dough in Matthew 13 is strongly emphasized.  But this ignores all the many verses that say again and again that the end of this age is the great and final battle of good and evil.

This brings us to the question of social transformation.  Yes, the postmillennialist brings a strong motivation for social transformation.  I should define social transformation.  Social transformation is basically brining the laws of society into conformity to the Law of God.   The Reformers, the classic Protestants, did believe in efforts for social transformation.  They produced great social transformation.  I think of one of my heroes in this, the Prime Minster theologian, Abraham Kuyper of Holland 120 years ago.  If we were to end this age in the Great Tribulation, what motivated them?   They were wise and knew that there could be delay.  After all, it was in their day 1500 years since the days of Yeshua on earth.  If the Christians do not seek to bring God’s Law to society, then the generations before that last day will suffer oppression and death.  Care for the condition of the generations and justice during this life, motivated them to seek righteousness in the society.  They also knew that social transformation was contingent on the health of the Church.  A weak, declining and powerless Church would not be able to effect lasing social transformation.  The Wesley revivals in England gave way to Wilburforce and the end of slavery.  This is why we must always seek the health of the Body of the Messiah first.  Repentance, revival, and the expansion of growing discipling communities are the foundation.  Righteous wholehearted commitment and life together is the absolute prerequisite for all progress.  When the numbers of committed believers who believe in social engagement are strong enough, society is changed. However, we need to always be aware that revival and health in the Body can lead to two possibilities.  The first is that it will lead to social transformation as it did in the early Church and the Reformation.  The second is that it will prepare us to fight the last battle.  We don’t know which will happen, but we don’t have to know.  We are to “Occupy until He comes.”  That means we work first for a strong Church and then social transformation.

Sometimes those who are invested in social transformation speak like post millennialists.  I question them and find that they are not really post millennialists.  They speak of Kingdom advance in the larger culture.  Amen.  However, I wish that they would bring their proclamation into coherence with the Biblical teaching on the Last Days.  It would end much confusion.

My Facebook Friends are divided between supporters of Donald Trump and those who did not support him.  Generally, the numbers seem to track with the Evangelical world since most Messianic Jews and Evangelicals supported him, but a significant minority did not. Some were ribald always Trumpers, and some were ribald anti-Trumpers, but some like me supported him with serious concerns about him.  Now that the election is over, some of my friends are depressed.  The justice issues that were in process of investigation will probably not see the light of day and the issues that so motivated us from abortion, the LGBTQ agenda, religious and educational freedom, Israel and Iran can easily be reversed.  I thought in this context that having some historical perspective might be of value.

I did not take a position on the prophecies that President Trump would serve a second term.  I did come to realize in 2016 that there were credible prophecies that he would be elected in 2016.  Some of them preceded his even being a candidate or any thought that he would be a candidate.  One of the more credible words said that his election was only a temporary respite of mercy for the Church to get in order for the battles that would ensue afterwards. It seems that this was little heeded, and only recently have we seen the massive prayer that will be needed to bring revival and push back against the forces of darkness.  Even now the darkness descends quickly.  The House is discussing new rules to preclude gender language. One should not speak of mothers, fathers, sisters, brothers, aunts, uncles and girls and boys.  All language should be neutral!  This is a foundational rebellion to God’s creation order. The attempt is to enforce a new secular orthodoxy in relation in the LBGTQ agenda and to cancel anyone who does not go along.  The larger question is, will those who claim to be followers of Yeshua stand up tall at this time and proclaim the Gospel.  The Gospel is based on knowing that by the Law of God all stand condemned and in need of the atonement.  And that sin includes the behaviors affirmed by the LGBTQ agenda.  That is what gets us into trouble with the culture.

Those who were pro-Trump should not think all is lost and those who were anti-Trump should not rejoice.  Rather we have together bigger fish to fry.  I am speaking here to those who have a conservative view of how to fulfil demands of a social justice biblically defined.  The best of the pro-Trump people voted for Trump because they believed hi policies were best for lifting people into more opportunity for success.  The best of those who were anti-Trump saw the coarsening effect of his presidency as more setting back the conservative social agenda than advancing it.  So, let’s try to agree on a few keys.

First, positive social transformation has come to the world due to a growing and strong Body of Believers.  It has never come in the time of a weak declining Church electing a leader who will drive social policies consistent with the Law of God.  This is why the word that the Trump presidency was a respite was, in my view, a true word.  It may look like the nation as we knew it is now lost, but this is not so either.  Rather, we have to take the long view. We may be entering the Tribulation now (as one friend argued) or in for a long battle.  So how does the long battle look?  Or even being prepared to triumph in tribulation. Amazingly the answer is the same in both scenarios.  A thriving and growing Body of Believers eventually will lead to social reformation in the larger culture or will lead to the ultimate battle of the end.  A healthy Body of Believers is defined by revival. evangelism and discipleship.  Picture it as a triangle.  When the Body of Believers is healthy there is continuous and significant gain in people coming to faith.  Secondly, that gain is secure because there is solid discipleship in the Word of God and the training of people to walk out a godly life.  These two, depend on the power of the Holy Spirit, or revival.  In Church history when these three come together rightly the culture is eventually transformed.  In Rodney Stark’s great book The Rise of Christianity, he outlines the quality of life, discipleship and growth of the early Church for the first 300 years.  Eventually they gained such force and power that Constantine converted to Christianity. Whether one considers this good or bad (and it was certainly a mixed bag) it is interesting that later the Emperor Justinian brought the law code of the Empire into conformity to Biblical Law.  Yes, Christianity transformed the culture.  Abortion and infanticide ended and women were elevated.  And, by the way, in Starks view, up to that time, it was a very Jewish Christianity.

We see the same pattern in Protestant history.  The first great revival in the 18^th century under Jonathan Edwards brought great moral and social reformation.  So did the revivals  in the 19^th century, known mostly though Charles Finny (but there were many others).  They brought great social reform, the ending of slavery, child abuse in labor and women’s rights. The revivals elevated large numbers of people and then the whole culture. People were discipled and knew the word of God.  It is astonishing to read the writing of ordinary people from that time, before public school systems, and their knowledge of the Word and much else.

So, the issue of issues is not who is in political power but the condition of the Body in any nation.  We have massive studies by George Barna’s group and by Ligonier Center to show us that most Evangelicals have no coherent world view, about 40% do not even understand basic doctrine, are unclear on the deity of Yeshua and on salvation by faith.  Some of us hoped that that believers would progress during the last four years.  It seems only near the end was there massive prayer at the level that will be needed to be sustained so that we might press into revival. God’s priority is the condition of the Church.  What kind of government do we need for us to get things in right order?  The Chinese pray that God will give them the kind of government they need for their growth into what they are called to be like in Yeshua.  God knows that the Church needs to be rightly changed. Yes, we are concerned for the nation.  God will judge a nation corporately and we wanted to push back the darkness over the nation. It is our responsibility to do so to the extent that we can.  But far more important is the issue of the condition of His people.  Will the next years be a time to look seriously at the condition of the Church and press into God?  I hope so.  I hope it is not a time of compromise with the false ideas of the culture that will now dominate in the new political season.  I sadly see some doing that.

I should note that we are going to elections in Israel.  There we face a very different situation. Conservatives are not social conservatives in Israel, except for the Orthodox Jews.  All support gay marriage and are open to the LGBTQ agenda but the Orthodox Jews keep that from being enforced in a kind of thought control.  Conservative here means economics, strong defense and the right to settle the West Bank.  We need the same prayers here for revival, evangelism and discipleship and hopefully cultural influence to follow.