Why plans to build a "Christian" Nationalist Retreat Center in Franklin, PA is not a good idea for the local churches or our town.

The view from the Allegheny River Retreat Center

My wife and I moved to Franklin in January of 2012 when I was called to be the new pastor at the First Baptist Church of Franklin (the one next to the Sheetz station, the red brick one, not the other one).  In the years since we've come to know Franklin and Venango County as a place that has a lot of positive things going for it, and as a good place to raise our daughter.  I've worked closely during my twelve years here with my neighboring churches, with charities (including of course Mustard Seed Missions, which I helped to found and serve as the President of), and local government officials.  I think I have a solid understanding of what this community needs moving forward, and what it doesn't.

For example: Franklin (and Venango County) would benefit if the new owners of Joy Plant #1 are able to find good tenants who will hire a significant number of workers at a living wage; that seems like a fairly obvious one.  As a second example, we are blessed in this community to have Emmaus Haven, the Christian charity that runs the men's shelter in Siverly, but our community's people will benefit when Emmaus Haven is also able to open a shelter in our county to house women with children.  Thirdly, we would benefit from an influx of doctors, nurses, dentists, police officers, and all the other professions that we, like most rural communities in this generation, need more of.  The list could go on an on, but let me end it with this, our town and our county need to continue to have churches that preach the Word of God, maintain the faith handed down to us from our ancestors, and work together to help those in need in our community.  At present, this is something we have, a tremendous resource, and something worth every effort that I and thousands like me put into maintaining what we collectively refer to as The Church.

On the flip side, there are numerous things that could change about Franklin and Venango County that would not benefit the people of our community, things that would be a detriment to the efforts of Christians and non-Christians alike.  For example: While some might celebrate the jobs that a casino would bring, or the tax revenue, the dark side of gambling's affects on individuals and families would not benefit our community (that one is unlikely to come here is a blessing).  A second example of the kind of developments that would be unhelpful to the health and vitality of our community would be the opening of a strip club, the closing of one of our libraries, or the loss of another significant employer.

None of the preceding thoughts are all that controversial.  We all want our community to have good jobs and a safety net for those in need.

Which after a long-winded introduction brings us to the topic at hand, which is the proposed "Seven Mountain training center."  Would it benefit Franklin or Venango County if this dream were to become a reality?  It would not.  That may feel like a very definitive statement, even a judgmental one coming as it does from a local pastor, but my belief on this matter comes from a lifetime of experience within the Church, a career of serving local churches, and an understanding of history, both secular and religious.  Given that the future is unknowable, and what is better or worse for a community can be a subjective question (as our recent bruhaha over the Witch Walk demonstrated in spades), I will certainly understand those who don't see this in the same way that I do, but everything that I know about the Church, the Gospel, America, and democracy tells me that "Christian" Nationalism is a bad idea, and that Seven Mountain Dominionism is a particularly dangerous form of "Christian" Nationalism.

Why am I talking about "Christian" Nationalism attempting to come here to Franklin, PA anyway?  When did this happen?  In June of 2023, The Atlantic published an article written by Stephanie McCrummen about the efforts of Tami Barthen and her husband Kevin (the article is almost exclusively about Tami) who moved to Franklin, PA in 2017 looking to buy a retirement cabin, but instead bought the former Vision Quest property where they are in the process of turning it into a retreat center for "Christian" Nationalists under the name Allegheny River Retreat Center.  The website for the planned retreat center doesn't mention anything (that I could find) about the theological and political nature of its purpose, but given the daily social media postings from "prophets" associated with the New Apostolic Reformation that populate both Tami's page and that of the ARRC, and her stated intention to make the property a "Seven Mountains training center," it seems only fitting that the churches and community of Franklin and Venango County take notice of this effort.

{The Watchman Decree: 'Christian' Nationalism's 'name it and claim it' dangerous prayer.  I wrote this on 8/23/22 to explain why Seven Mountain Dominionism is so dangerous to the Church and to America.  For those unfamiliar with the term, Seven Mountain Dominionism is a subset of "Christian" Nationalism, a specific type of effort at turning the country into a "Christian Nation."  Throughout this essay I have continued my habit of putting the "Christian" in "Christian" Nationalism in quotation marks, not because it is a generally accepted grammatical practice, but in deference to my own dislike of the association of this movement, historically and today, with the love and peace of the faith and practice that I hold dear.  There is nothing authentically Christ honoring about Christian Nationalism.}

Some of you may have met Tami and/or Kevin, I have not, and they may indeed be pleasant people to share a meal with, and in their own way be faithful Christians who are seeking to honor God with their lives.  My purpose in writing is not to cast dispersions upon them, as people, I don't have any basis for judgment either way, nor any reason to share it if I did.  Rather, it is the ideas behind Seven Mountain Dominionism (and "Christian" Nationalism) that are dangerous.

I was unaware of this effort to open a retreat center or this article about it until last week.  I contacted Tami via FB instant messaging, after seeing that she has the article pinned to the top of the Retreat Center's FB page and also uses an image of it on her business card, to let her know that I would be writing an article about this proposed retreat center from the perspective of someone who believes strongly in the Separation of Church and State as well as Religious Freedom (two ideals that are anathema to the "Christian" Nationalist movement, as they are to Fundamentalists in every religion). I asked her if she wanted to clarify anything from the article.  In the ensuing conversation with instant messaging, Tami indicated that she had never heard of the New Apostolic Reformation (she shares multiple posts daily from that movement's prominent and nationally known leaders), that in addition, "I don't know what Christian Nationalism is," and stated that you cannot judge someone by a magazine article (which, again, she displays prominently inviting others to read it).  In the end, Tami told me that my "tone" was accusatory, but declined to state anything from the article that she believed was a mischaracterization.  That's the long way of saying, I tried to offer the people behind the Allegheny River Retreat Center the opportunity to disclaim their apparent connection to Dutch Sheets, Lance Wallnau, the New Apostolic Reformation, and/or "Christian" Nationalism, but was rebuffed. 

To read the article from the Atlantic, click here: THE WOMAN WHO BOUGHT A MOUNTAIN FOR GOD, by Stephanie McCrummen, The Atlantic, 6/20/23

To read the article from the  Atlantic, together with my response to it, click here: A response to: "The Woman Who Bought a Mountain for God", a nationally published article (on 6/20/23) about "Christian" Nationalism in Franklin, PA

I have written much over the years about the dangers of "Christian" Nationalism both to the Church and to the government, and especially to the rights of those who don't conform to the particular definition of the Church that would then be backed up by governmental coercion.  In fact, I'm still working on my series: Listen to the Word of God: 62 Scripture passages that refute 'Christian' Nationalism.  I've made it to number 30, Listen to the Word of God: 62 Scripture passages that refute 'Christian' Nationalism - #30 - John 17:16 & 18:36, but it'll be a while until I can work all the way to #62.

Let me make a few brief distinctions between the type of patriotism that can honor God and the "Christian" Nationalism that endangers the Gospel, the Church, and any nation it attempts to control.

1. There is a key difference between prayer for the government that hopes to make our democracy better for all who live in this land...and "Christian" Nationalism's willingness to overthrow the government and end democracy in order to win.

2. There is a key difference between working with, or conversely protesting against, the government as an exercise in freedom...and "Christian" Nationalism's claim of a God-given right to rule in his name over everyone else.

3. There is a key difference between influencing culture and the government for the better, seeking to make them more moral and righteous...and claiming that only you, and those like you, have the answers as to what that culture and government should be, and that those who disagree are in league with the Devil.

I am fully in favor of the first half of those three statements, and in fact I've done my share of all three.  But that's not what the committed "Christian" Nationalists have in mind when they envision what America would look like under their rule, they have the second half of those statements in mind.  

We have a good community here in Franklin and Venango County, it isn't perfect, we all know that, but it is one of the better places to live in our world today.  Working to maintain it is important to us all.  That being said, this is America, if they can raise the millions the project will need, the Allegheny River Retreat Center may indeed become a beacon of "Christian" Nationalist training that attracts speakers and guests from all over the country.  I'm not proposing that anyone take action to try to stop them from fulfilling their dream, and certainly don't want anyone to harass Tami or Kevin online or in-person, in part because I do believe in everyone's freedom of religion, including those who don't reciprocate.  Maybe this "prophecy" of what this retreat center could become will result in a functioning enterprise here in our town, maybe it won't.

No matter what happens next, the answer to falsehood is truth, the answer to darkness is light, and the answer to hate is love.  I truly believe every bit of that sentence.  So, if the planned "Seven Mountain retreat center" becomes a reality, my response to this militancy will be truth, light, and love, I won't respond with anything else even though I know in my heart, my mind, and in my soul, that this is not a good idea for our local churches or our town.

There certainly isn't time here to make the case that "Christian" Nationalism is the destructive force that I know it to be, I have however written and taught on this subject for years, so anyone seeking to learn more about this movement and how dangerous it is to the Church and America can simply continue reading some of the links below.

Here is a six hour seminar outlining what the Biblical relationship is between the Church and human government: What Every Christian Should Know About: The Church and Politics

Scripture Abuse: 2 Chronicles 7:14, idolatry, nationalism, and antisemitism

The irrefutable rejection of Christian Nationalism by the New Testament

The blasphemous "One Nation Under God" painting by Jon McNaughton

Sermon Video: The Debt you cannot repay: Love - Romans 13:6-8a

After telling the followers of Jesus that they have an obligation to pay their taxes, along with other things they may owe to those in authority like respect and honor, the Apostle Paul broadens the conversation to show us that we should discharge all of our obligations to the people in our lives.  Sometimes these things are material (money, time, labor) and sometimes they are intangible (dignity, kindness, hope), in each case we ought to stive to do our part.  However, there is one debt that we cannot possibly repay, yet must continue to strive toward doing so anyway: the debt of love.  We owe God an infinite debt of love (How could it not be infinite when the price paid for our ransom was the blood of Christ?), but rather than focus that effort of love on God who is not among us and has no needs, we are told to consider ourselves in debt permanently to each other, as fellow brothers and sisters in Christ, with respect to love.

Sermon Video: Crime and Punishment from God's point-of-view, Romans 13:3-5

What does an ideal government do with respect to crime and punishment?  The Apostle Paul was well aware of the shortcomings of human governments, all of them fail to varying degrees to live up to the standard of being God's servant in this category, but there is still value in understanding what the responsibility of a government should be even when they fall short.

Sermon Video: A God honoring rebellion? Romans 13:1-2

In these verses the Apostle Paul lays out our responsibility as Christians to the human governments that we live under.  His statements are general principles rather than specific applications, and are based upon the reality that all authority ultimately rests with God (thus every human authority is a delegated one).

Church history has examples for us of the Church working to maintain the status quo, even when that state was unjust to most of its people, and examples of the Church standing with the oppressed and rebels, and bearing the consequences.

Rather than firm answers, this passage reminds us of the prayer, study, and deliberation that ought to go into our desire to live out our calling to be Christ-like in this world.  God-honoring Christians may arrive at different answers to these questions, what we all must do is respect God's authority enough to wrestle with them when we choose to act either for or against a particular governing authority.

The Bible doesn't mandate that Christians support Democracy, BUT preventing the Evil that Autocracy would unleash in America does

 

The Bible doesn't support Democracy.  Then again, the Bible doesn't denounce it either.  In fact, the Bible mentions Democracy not at all.  Most people familiar with the Bible and world history would assume this already, but there are numerous modern topics that were not part of the conversation in the Ancient World.  The Bible doesn't address any of these topics directly.  How could it?  What language would it use, and how could the original audience possibly understand it if it did and thus be edified by it?  Remember, the portions of scripture that collectively make up the Bible were first given to specific people on specific occasions, for specific purposes.  Because it is God's Word it has meaning and application beyond those initial considerations as part of its enduring quality, but not without them.  In other words, "It cannot mean for us what it never meant for them."  

The Bible was written in a world that knew only variations of one-man rule (occasionally one-woman rule).  Emperors, Kings, Chieftains and the like, some kind and benevolent, some vain and cruel.  It did not know Communism, Republics, Constitutional Monarchy or Democracy {The short-lived experiment in 'pure' Democracy in Athens being, if anything, a cautionary tale thanks to its demise, and by the time Rome became a part of the story in the New Testament it had long since ceased to be a Republic}.  As such, the Bible neither supports nor condemns modern concepts related to other ways to govern a nation.  This gives Christians freedom of conscience when considering what type of governmental system they prefer.  Instead of commands in this area, the Bible gives Christians principles to seek to apply such as the Golden Rule, "Do to others as you would have them do to you." (Luke 6:31) or "He has shown you, O mortal, what is good.  And what does the Lord require of you?  To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God." (Micah 6:8)

That being said, there is a growing trend in the West (Hungary is already there, but also Poland, France, and America) of Christians (a mix no doubt of self-professed cultural 'Christian' and genuine disciples of Christ) supporting Autocratic tendencies in government.  In response to societal pressures and fears, a growing number of Christians are beginning to prefer a 'strong man' type leadership to the leadership derived from fair elections.  In other words, they would rather have their team win without democracy than risk losing with it.  There are increasingly supporting having the policies they champion imposed by any means necessary, regardless the legality of the methods or the rights of others.  The most common rationale is to view modern politics as a war, one in which it doesn't matter how you play the game, only whether or not you win or lose.  In this view, democratic norms and morality are naïve, only power matters because the stakes are too high {There is much Christian Apocalypse related imagery and reasoning here as well.}

I have written often about the dangers of choosing power over principles, might over right, but what about the danger of choosing Autocracy over Democracy?  Are Christians obligated as a matter of morality to support, even defend, the modern concept of liberal democracy?

The answer is yes, and the reason doesn't have to involve a philosophical discussion regarding governance.  One need only ask this question, "If democracy falls, what will replace it?"  History has shown, repeatedly, that the answer is: something less just, less fair, and more prone to evil.  It would be the height of folly to believe that this time it will be different.  That we can hand power over to one man, one family, or one cabal, without watching our society descend into persecution of those who oppose the regime.  Until the invasion of Ukraine, it was fashionable in some Christian Nationalist circles to view Vladimir Putin as a 'savior' of Christianity against the forces of Islam and Liberalism.  As the mass graves in Ukraine, the rape of a country previously at peace attest, autocrats are no friend to Christian morality.  There is NO scenario where the American system of elections, of sharing power based upon their results, is replaced by one in which 'our team' has permanent rule that does not involve a massive increase in Evil.

Perhaps some Christians are thinking, "this time it will be different, you'll see."  They're wrong; both history and human nature make trusting the leadership of a nation to an autocrat to be a folly, but let's move to a 2nd line of reasoning: Do Unto Others.  Would you want to be on the losing side of an Autocratic regime?  Would you want your rights taken away by 'them', your role in choosing your nation's future reduced to nothing?  The answer is no, it would be tyranny and you would hate it.  HOW then can any Christian support the notion that Autocracy is just fine when my team wins if they would violently oppose it if the shoe was on the other foot?  If Christian Nationalists are not willing to live with permanent rule of the Democratic Party, how can they cheer on the notion of permanent rule by the Republican Party?  To do so, those trending toward autocratic methodology must consider the people on the other side to be less than us: they are less than those of us who are the 'real Americans'.  An ethic that follows the teachings of Jesus Christ, that views every person as your neighbor that you must 'love as yourself' cannot tolerate this dissonance.  In fact, to embrace us over them, even to see the world as divided into these competing camps, is to begin to walk down the road that negates the truth that every person is made in the image of God. {Yes, the world is divided into Redeemed and Lost, Sheep and Goats, but those are not the lines being drawn here, this is political not spiritual warfare}

Can a Christian, in good conscience, turn against Democracy in favor of Autocracy?  Not if he/she loves their neighbor whom such a system would harm, as Jesus commanded us to do.

There is no Christian justification for preparing to kill agents of your own government

 

For years I have been disturbed to hear again and again from those who claim to be Christians, or representing a Christian background, that they need various weapons, armor, and technology to defend themselves against the government of the United States.  In essence, they are saying that they need to be capable of killing representatives of the government if/when 'they' are threatened in some way by them.  It shocks my how casually people contemplate killing police officers, FBI agents, even members of the American military over issues of taxation, land use, various rules and regulations.  The thing is, there is ZERO theological justification for this attitude in the Christian Worldview.  Sadly, rather than leaning toward pacifism and making violence a resort only of protecting the weak against the strong, the Church for much of its history has tended toward militance and only used non-violence as a fallback position.  The passive resistance of Martin Luther King Jr. and the Civil Rights Movement should have been a tried and true tactic of Christian efforts to achieve Justice rather than an aberration, it should have had precedents going back to the Early Church which was non-violent, but it did not.

The Apostle Paul led a Church that faced an increasingly hostile Roman Empire, a government more powerful compared to its contemporaries and those living within it than the American government is to its citizens, and far more willing to use violence against those people, even enslaving more than a third of them.  And yet, one looks in vain in Paul's voluminous letters for any hint that Christians should be gathering weapons and preparing to kill Roman administrators and soldiers.  If any group of Christians were going to be told to 'fight fire with fire' and 'kill in Christ's name' it would have been those who would soon face the lions in the arena, but they were not.  What command, from God, did Paul offer to them?

Romans 12:14 (NIV) Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse.

Romans 12:17-21 (NIV) Do not repay anyone evil for evil. Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everyone. 18 If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone. 19 Do not take revenge, my dear friends, but leave room for God’s wrath, for it is written: “It is mine to avenge; I will repay,” says the Lord. 20 On the contrary:

“If your enemy is hungry, feed him;

    if he is thirsty, give him something to drink.

In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head.”

21 Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.

Where is the militant attitude?  Where is the warning to prepare to fight?  The Word of God commands Christians to do the opposite from what large numbers of Americans who profess to be Christians have, by word and deed, declared their intention to do.  This is not an esoteric point of theological debate, but a core tenant of the Christian understanding of our world and our role in it.  God is the Judge, God is solely responsible (with governments deputized to protect the innocent as stewards, see Romans 13) for violence (wrath).  We, as Christians, have no legitimate reason to 'take matters into our own hands'.  When we do so, we demonstrate a lack of faith in God's sovereignty, in God's promise to reward good and punish evil, and in our commitment to judge the next life as more important than this one.  In other words, when Christians become militant, individually or collectively, embracing violence as a means to an end, they abandon the heart and soul of faith, choosing power in this life over devotion to the next.

It isn't just Paul whose words we should be following, Paul is but echoing Jesus when he told the Roman Christians, living in the very heart of the Empire that would soon be persecuting them, to "overcome evil with good."

Matthew 5:38-48 (NIV) “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ 39 But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. 40 And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. 41 If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. 42 Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.

43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46 If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47 And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48 Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

How do we go from this radical teaching of Jesus that flies in the face of our default human attitude, to "I need a stockpile of guns, ammunition, and body armor to protect myself against the government"?  Where is the love of our enemy? {Side note: that the American Government is 'the enemy' worthy of a violent response is itself a frightening thought}  Where is the willingness to sacrifice rather than respond with violence?

That our nation has those living in it so opposed to its laws that they would be willing to kill rather than follow them is nothing new, nor is it terribly surprising, most nations have at least some people violently opposed to the society they live in.  What is shocking, disturbing, and another sign of an unhealthy Church, is how little pushback is given to self-professed Christians who fall into this camp.  This is not a call for unthinking acceptance of any and all governmental policies.  In fact, the non-violent protests of the Civil Rights Movement illustrate how one can combine a Christian passion for Justice with a Christian ethic of loving one's enemy.  It is, however, a warning that the path of militancy, in the name of Christ, is stain upon the Bride of Christ, a detriment to Gospel witness, and a direct violation of the Word of God.

Thou shalt not murder is still in the Ten Commandments, being upset at the government in no way erases what God has written.

Your stockpile of weapons is a refutation of your claim to be living by faith.

Sermon Video: Jesus: Pay your taxes, and serve God - Mark 12:13-17

Hoping to trap Jesus, two rival groups that otherwise hate each other asked him if it was moral to pay taxes to Rome. Rather than answer with a Realpolitik answer, "What choice do we have?" or with rebel's "Give me Liberty, or give me Death" response, Jesus instead asks them to examine the coin and note that Caesar's face is on it. This leads Jesus to conclude that God or Rome is a false dichotomy, an attempt to force the people into a 'lesser of two evils' type situation, but God doesn't work that God. God doesn't choose any kind of evil. Instead, Jesus commands God's people to serve both their governmental authority AND God. The obligations are not mutually exclusive, they often overlap, and despite our grumbling about our obligation to the government, that which we owe to God is far more expansive, comprehensive, and stringent. After all, God demands heart, mind, soul, and body...In the end, the growing anti government attitude within American Evangelicalism is a sign of unhealthiness, a focus on pride and 'personal freedoms' over and above obligations and responsibilities, as such it is one that is foreign to Jesus' teachings in the Gospels.

An unhealthy overemphasis on politics

 

I'll admit, I've been sucked toward the rabbit hole of politics more in 2020 than any year since my youthful fascination decades ago.  With so much of consequence happening, between the pandemic, race relations, and the election, I can't be alone in this.  At the same time, the ongoing Culture War and hyper-partisanship have made our political theatre more and more toxic to those who both participate in it, and to those who observe it.

Perspective is lacking.  We need to refocus, particularly as Christians, on 'things above', {Colossians 3:1 (NIV) Since, then, you have been raised with Christ, set your hearts on things above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God.} but how do we do that?  By putting politics back in its rightful, secondary, place.

1. God directs history, not man - Psalm 2

 Psalm 2:1-6 (NIV)

1 Why do the nations conspire

    and the peoples plot in vain?

2 The kings of the earth rise up

    and the rulers band together

    against the Lord and against his anointed, saying,

3 “Let us break their chains

    and throw off their shackles.”

4 The One enthroned in heaven laughs;

    the Lord scoffs at them.

5 He rebukes them in his anger

    and terrifies them in his wrath, saying,

6 “I have installed my king

    on Zion, my holy mountain.”

The thing is, as impactful as human decisions and choices are in our own lives, and as important as our collective decisions are for the future of our nation and culture, God is still in control, both individually and collectively.  The will of God is not gainsaid by anything that human beings do, or fail to do.  The ultimate example of the futility of striving against God is the 'victory' of Satan when Jesus Christ was betrayed, falsely convicted, sentenced to death, and horribly murdered on a cross.  This apparent defeat of God's champion, whether Satan knew him to truly be the Son of God or not, was not a derailment of God's purpose in sending the Messiah, but its fulfillment.  In 'defeat', God was victorious in establishing his will, destroying both Sin and Death through the resurrection of Jesus.  Because God was able to accomplish this humanly impossible victory, he certainly can handle the simple plots of, relatively, powerless humans.  This is not a denial of human freewill, but rather advocacy for the supremacy of God's will.  God, being God, is able to give humanity freewill AND still accomplish his will.  Another example?  Joseph's time in Egypt as a slave: Genesis 50:20 You intended to harm me, but God intended it for good to accomplish what is now being done, the saving of many lives.  Likewise, note the futility of Saul of Tarsus' efforts to thwart the will of God: Acts 26:14 (NLT) We all fell down, and I heard a voice saying to me in Aramaic,‘Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me? It is useless for you to fight against my will.[b]’ [26:14b Greek It is hard for you to kick against the oxgoads.]  Whatever politics is, it is not what determines the future.  We have given it too much credit, at the expense of trusting in God.

2. Human nature is unaffected by governments/society - Ecclesiastes 1:9

Ecclesiastes 1:9 (NIV)

What has been will be again,

    what has been done will be done again;

    there is nothing new under the sun.

Solomon, in his wisdom, grasped that human nature doesn't change.  This may seem like a fantastic claim to post-modern individuals living in the information age in a democratic society, but the people in our modern world are no different than the people of the Ancient Near East who lived in an agrarian society of kingdoms and empires where oral history was the primary means of retaining knowledge.  As much as technology and information availability have changed since the Industrial Revolution, a pace of change that has accelerated dramatically since the invention of the internet, human nature has 'evolved' not at all.  Human beings still respond to the same motivations, still have the same flaws, hope, and dreams.  The details change, but the substance does not.

What then is the impact of the static nature of humanity on politics?  It reminds us that whatever change a new election or new form of government may bring, that change impacts the surface.  Deep down, humanity remains what we have always been.  Beings created in the image of God who have fallen from grace and are powerless to alter that state and are thus dependent upon a Savior.  Those truths remain the same, whether one lives under a despotic emperor or has the right to vote for representatives.  Don't get me wrong, humanity is better off with political freedom, those blessings are of great value, but even they don't change human nature.  Our ancestors were less free, but they were no less human, and our freedom hasn't made us any more human.

3. The Church's victory is not dependent upon temporal power (or a lack thereof) - Matthew 16:18

Matthew 16:18 (NIV) And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it.

The Church does not require power to fulfill its mission.  In fact, the more power in society that the Church has wielded, the more mixed the results of evangelism and discipleship.  While the history of Christianity in Japan is the prime example that, 'the blood of the martyrs is the seed of the Church' is a myth.  Extreme and prolonged persecution can destroy a church.  The opposite of persecution, power, is also a danger to the church.  When Calvin merged the Church in Geneva with the State, making city business into church business, it was not 'heaven on earth', nor was it sustained long-term.  Likewise, when the Lutheran Church in German was at its most elevated status, it fell prey to Bonhoeffer's 'Cheap Grace', a form of religion without the commitment of the heart.

In the end, neither persecution nor power can deny the universal Church its final destiny as the Bride of Christ.  While local churches, denominations, or even national churches may thrive or fail as time wears on, the mission of the Church is not to conquer the physical/political world, but to share the Gospel with all peoples.  We are called to be servants, not rulers, and that calling is irrevocable. 

Revelation 19:6-9 (NIV)

6 Then I heard what sounded like a great multitude, like the roar of rushing waters and like loud peals of thunder, shouting:

“Hallelujah!

    For our Lord God Almighty reigns.

7 Let us rejoice and be glad

    and give him glory!

For the wedding of the Lamb has come,

    and his bride has made herself ready.

8 Fine linen, bright and clean,

    was given her to wear.”

(Fine linen stands for the righteous acts of God’s holy people.)

9 Then the angel said to me, “Write this: Blessed are those who are invited to the wedding supper of the Lamb!” And he added, “These are the true words of God.”

The final victory was secured at the Empty Tomb, the final chapter of the story has already been written.  The ebb and flow of human striving for temporal power pales in comparison to the drama unfolding through the generations as individuals are redeemed by the Blood of the Lamb.

4. The corrosive nature of politics - Philippians 4:8

Philippians 4:8 Finally, brothers and sisters, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things.

The most detrimental thing to me, personally, during the heightened awareness to politics throughout 2020 has been the emotional pain caused by experiencing despicable human behavior being rewarded as 'good politics'.  When fellow citizens are pitted against one another, competing to outdo 'them' in duplicity and character assassination, we turn character and honor into a weakness, and make a lack of conscience or integrity a strength.  This may win elections, but it warps and degrades the electorate.  Christians, unless they choose to forgo these tactics and compete with integrity, are stained by joining in with 'politics as usual'.  

In addition to the corrosive impact of the way in which politics is waged, there is also the influence of vast sums of money.  It was Lord Acton who famously warned, "Power tends to corrupt, absolute power tends to corrupt absolutely."  The same is true with money.  Money tends to corrupt, vast amounts of money tends to vastly corrupt.  We should not be surprised by this in the least: 1 Timothy 6:10 (NIV) For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil. Some people, eager for money, have wandered from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs.

Maybe after November 3rd things will calm down a bit.  Maybe our fascination with the machinations in Washington will subside for a while and we can get back to focusing on what's happening with our families and community.  But it won't happen if we don't make it happen.  Elections matter, who governs our nation and how they govern matters, they just don't matter nearly as much as our current toxic political drama implies.

When is governmental action morally justified? The morality of COVID-19 responses to protect less than 1%.

This is a serious question, I'm actually curious about what you would answer:

Given that as of today, 10/13/20, there have been at least 214,000 COVID-19 deaths in America, and given that those numbers are expected to be nearly 400,000 by February of 2021 (that is, only 111 days from now): At what point would governmental (local, state, or federal) restrictions (shutdowns, crowd limits, mask mandates) be justified in your mind?

1% of the current US population (331 million) would be over 3 million deaths. Thankfully, we have avoided this nightmare scenario {thanks in part to mitigation efforts, both voluntary and imposed}. Should we, as a society, take self-sacrificial actions in hopes of preventing the deaths of less than 1%? Is economic hardship justified for less than 1%? Are limitations on the freedom of a country's citizens justifiable for less than 1%?

For comparison: In the U.S., about 28% of the population of 105 million became infected with the Spanish Flu 1918-1920, and 500,000 to 850,000 died (0.48 to 0.81 percent of the population in 1918, those % amount to 1.588 million to 2.681 million Americans with today's larger population)

{COVID-19 death projections}

As of today, we are approaching 1/10th of 1% of America's residents killed by COVID-19 (331,000), and should surpass that number before Christmas. Should we, as a society, take self-sacrificial actions in hopes of preventing the deaths of 1/10th of 1%?

The final number killed by this pandemic will, Lord willing, remain significantly less than 1%. What then does the Christian worldview offer to guide us regarding our level of concern for harms that may come to a small minority among us?

1. Abraham's conversation with God about Sodom and Gomorrah

Genesis 18:20-32 (NIV) 20 Then the Lord said, “The outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah is so great and their sin so grievous 21 that I will go down and see if what they have done is as bad as the outcry that has reached me. If not, I will know.” 22 The men turned away and went toward Sodom, but Abraham remained standing before the Lord.[a] 23 Then Abraham approached him and said: “Will you sweep away the righteous with the wicked? 24 What if there are fifty righteous people in the city? Will you really sweep it away and not spare[b] the place for the sake of the fifty righteous people in it? 25 Far be it from you to do such a thing—to kill the righteous with the wicked, treating the righteous and the wicked alike. Far be it from you! Will not the Judge of all the earth do right?” 26 The Lord said, “If I find fifty righteous people in the city of Sodom, I will spare the whole place for their sake.” 27 Then Abraham spoke up again: “Now that I have been so bold as to speak to the Lord, though I am nothing but dust and ashes, 28 what if the number of the righteous is five less than fifty? Will you destroy the whole city for lack of five people?” “If I find forty-five there,” he said, “I will not destroy it.” 29 Once again he spoke to him, “What if only forty are found there?” He said, “For the sake of forty, I will not do it.” 30 Then he said, “May the Lord not be angry, but let me speak. What if only thirty can be found there?” He answered, “I will not do it if I find thirty there.” 31 Abraham said, “Now that I have been so bold as to speak to the Lord, what if only twenty can be found there?” He said, “For the sake of twenty, I will not destroy it.” 32 Then he said, “May the Lord not be angry, but let me speak just once more. What if only ten can be found there?” He answered, “For the sake of ten, I will not destroy it.”

If there had been 10 righteous people in Sodom (sadly, there were not even 10), the city would have been spared. Without knowing the population of the city at that time, it is impossible to judge how small a minority this would have been, but it seems clear that it was less than 1% (i.e. that the city contained more than 1,000 people). While this example involves divine judgement, not governmental policy, it illuminates a principle that can be applied from the former to the latter.

2. Jesus' parable of the 99 and the 1 sheep.

Luke 15:3-7 (NIV) 3 Then Jesus told them this parable: 4 “Suppose one of you has a hundred sheep and loses one of them. Doesn’t he leave the ninety-nine in the open country and go after the lost sheep until he finds it? 5 And when he finds it, he joyfully puts it on his shoulders 6 and goes home. Then he calls his friends and neighbors together and says, ‘Rejoice with me; I have found my lost sheep.’ 7 I tell you that in the same way there will be more rejoicing in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous persons who do not need to repent.

The numbers here are helpful, only 1% of the sheep are in danger in Jesus' parable, yet the shepherd leaves the 99 'in open country', not safe in a pen or with another shepherd, in order to rescue the lost 1. Once again, this is a spiritual example involving God's justice and mercy, but it too vindicates concern for the minority, even one as small as 1%.

3. Any is too many when Peter reflects on God's purposes.

2 Peter 3:9 (NIV) 9 The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. Instead he is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.

Governmental officials, not having the wisdom or power of God, have to make hard choices. They sometimes must make choices that will lead to the harm of some in order to protect others. From God's perspective, there are no 'throw away' people. All of humanity is created in the image of God. Every person has a soul, every person is one for whom Christ was willing to die.

Conclusion: From a Christian worldview perspective, whether one is a libertarian or a socialist, a Republican or a Democrat, or any other political view or allegiance, the biblical model remains clear: One is worth sacrificing for, tiny minorities have value in the sight of God.

What precautions should be taken, and who should be encouraging or ordering them is a political question. Christian men and women of good intentions can and do disagree about HOW to put our concern for those in need into action {and not just on this topic}. However, what we don't have the luxury of doing, as Christ followers, is making a cold calculation that 1/10th of 1% of Americans are not WORTH sacrificing for. That this pandemic primarily affects the elderly and those with underlying conditions is irrelevant from a moral point of view. As Christians, we remain beholden to the Law of Love:

Mark 12:28-31 (NIV) 28 One of the teachers of the law came and heard them debating. Noticing that Jesus had given them a good answer, he asked him, “Of all the commandments, which is the most important?” 29 “The most important one,” answered Jesus, “is this: ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one. 30 Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.’ 31 The second is this: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no commandment greater than these.”

The Prophet Amos: What provokes God's wrath? - Injustice and False Worship

Amos was an ordinary man, a farmer from Judah, chosen by God in the 8th century BC to go to Israel to warn the people of the impending wrath of God.  Israel was the name given to the 10 northern tribes that broke away from the Davidic dynasty following the death of Solomon (due to the arrogance of Solomon's son Rehoboam).  The Kingdom of Israel was destroyed by the Assyrian Empire in 722 BC, less than two generations after the warning given to it by Amos.

With the idea of Justice prominent in our conversations as Americans and as Christian Americans, it benefits us to consider what the Justice of God looks like.  What provoked the wrath of God against his Covenant people of Israel and Judah?  What offenses were the prophets commanded to condemn?

The text below is excerpted from the book of Amos, its nine chapters can be read in twenty or thirty minutes; please do so.  These texts appear in the order they are given, not arranged thematically.  My commentary will appear in bold after each text.

 Amos 2:4-5 (NIV)

4 This is what the Lord says:

“For three sins of Judah,

    even for four, I will not relent.

Because they have rejected the law of the Lord

    and have not kept his decrees,

because they have been led astray by false gods,

    the gods their ancestors followed,

5 I will send fire on Judah

    that will consume the fortresses of Jerusalem.”

Judah is not the focus of Amos' ministry, but his prophecy begins by announcing God's wrath against the surrounding peoples, primarily for their violence toward neighboring peoples, including the people of Judah to the south.  Judah's sin is more specific, involving idolatry and the worship of false gods.  Although Judah was a troubled society, their kingdom endured until 586 BC when Jerusalem was sacked by the Babylonian Nebuchadnezzar, they too committed the same type of sins that Israel will be charged with by Amos, and God sent them prophets as a warning in turn. 

Amos 2:6-8 (NIV)

6 This is what the Lord says:

“For three sins of Israel,

    even for four, I will not relent.

They sell the innocent for silver,

    and the needy for a pair of sandals.

7 They trample on the heads of the poor

    as on the dust of the ground

    and deny justice to the oppressed.

Father and son use the same girl

    and so profane my holy name.

8 They lie down beside every altar

    on garments taken in pledge.

In the house of their god

    they drink wine taken as fines.

Here begins the indictment: (1) selling the innocent for silver, (2) trampling the poor, and (3) denying justice to the oppressed.  The society of Israel systematically oppressed the poor, taking advantage of them both in business and in the courts of law.  These themes will be repeated throughout Amos' prophecy.  In addition, the people of Israel indulged in sexual immorality ('Father and son use the same girl') and mocked God by coming to his altar while retaining a garment taken in pledge (an act forbidden by the Law, Exodus 22:26-27).  Lastly, they were drinking wine in God's house that had been taken as fines (presumably unjust fines).  These last two point toward a pattern of false/insincere worship.  God will not be mocked.  Galatians 6:7 (NIV) Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows.  To worship God while in the middle of conducting sinful behavior, will not be tolerated.

Amos 2:11-12 (NIV)

11 “I also raised up prophets from among your children

    and Nazirites from among your youths.

Is this not true, people of Israel?”

declares the Lord.

12 “But you made the Nazirites drink wine

    and commanded the prophets not to prophesy.

God was not silent when these injustices and blasphemies occurred.  His response was to send prophets, but the people made a mockery of the Nazirites (who had taken vows not to drink alcohol) and told the prophets to be quiet.  This idea will be repeated in Amos, the powerful do not like to be reminded of their sins (anymore than the rest of us, but they have the power to silence their critics).

Amos 3:1-3 (NIV)

1 Hear this word, people of Israel, the word the Lord has spoken against you—against the whole family I brought up out of Egypt:

2 “You only have I chosen

    of all the families of the earth;

therefore I will punish you

    for all your sins.”

3 Do two walk together

    unless they have agreed to do so?

This is a key point that is often overlooked: God holds his own people MORE accountable than the rest of humanity.  When we talk about Justice, in society, we hope for equality and fairness, but when we consider God's Justice, we need to be very aware that God is both more stern and more gracious to his people.  He is willing to forgive our sins, if we repent, but highly intolerant of our immorality if we harden our hearts.  I know that many of my fellow Christians consider America to be the New Israel (Replacement theology), thinking of us in the same Covenant terms that were given by Moses to the people.  The theology of this position is flawed, and that can be demonstrated by examining Paul's letter to the Romans, but there's an important reason to be glad we aren't the New Israel: We wouldn't survive God's wrath.  Israel was held to a higher standard than their neighbors, no nation in our world today would survive such scrutiny. 

Amos 4:1 (NIV)

4 Hear this word, you cows of Bashan on Mount Samaria,

    you women who oppress the poor and crush the needy

    and say to your husbands, “Bring us some drinks!”

The upper class women of Israel were as involved in crushing the poor as their husbands, laughing at the situation in a way worthy of Marie Antoinette's "Let them eat cake!"

Amos 4:4-5 (NIV)

4 “Go to Bethel and sin;

    go to Gilgal and sin yet more.

Bring your sacrifices every morning,

    your tithes every three years.

5 Burn leavened bread as a thank offering

    and brag about your freewill offerings—

boast about them, you Israelites,

    for this is what you love to do,”

declares the Sovereign Lord.

This section shows God's sense of humor.  In this case, biting irony.  The people were still obeying the FORM of correct worship while their hearts were far from God.  They oppressed the poor and needy during the week and worshiped the LORD on the Sabbath.  Such worship is not only fruitless, it actually offends and angers God.  The prophet Isaiah makes this clear, "Your New Moon feasts and your appointed festivals I hate with all my being.  They have become a burden to me; I am weary of bearing them." (Isaiah 1:14)  Once again, if America were the New Israel, it wouldn't matter how many people were in church on Sunday morning when God considered our nation's ample inequality, injustice, and immorality (sins that God's people sadly participate in all too readily).  As it is, we cannot hope to receive God's blessing as a nation if we don't address the issues of injustice in our society.

Amos 5:10-12 (NIV)

10 There are those who hate the one who upholds justice in court

    and detest the one who tells the truth.

11 You levy a straw tax on the poor

    and impose a tax on their grain.

Therefore, though you have built stone mansions,

    you will not live in them;

though you have planted lush vineyards,

    you will not drink their wine.

12 For I know how many are your offenses

    and how great your sins.

There are those who oppress the innocent and take bribes

    and deprive the poor of justice in the courts.

The pronouncement against injustice continues: (1) injustice in the courts through false testimony, (2) heavy taxes upon the poor, (3) the taking of bribes to deprive the poor of justice.  Looking at a list like this, I'm struck by the animosity toward the idea of social justice in America.  Many Christians, and a not a few prominent Christian leaders, demonize the idea of seeking equality before the Law, calling it a political ploy or a Leftist plot {See: Taking the name of the LORD in vain: PragerU's "Social Justice Isn't Justice"}.  And yet, God cares about these issues enough to make them the FOCUS of the warning of his chosen prophet that judgment is at hand.  I'm not saying that those advocating for social justice are without error (in their tactics or judgments), but how can the very IDEA of seeking equality in the face of injustice be against the will of God?  The Scriptures say otherwise.

Amos 5:14-15 (NIV)

14 Seek good, not evil,

    that you may live.

Then the Lord God Almighty will be with you,

    just as you say he is.

15 Hate evil, love good;

    maintain justice in the courts.

Perhaps the Lord God Almighty will have mercy

    on the remnant of Joseph.

How can God's people avert the disaster heading their way?  Repent and administer true justice.  This is one piece that is often missing in the discussion of America's history of racism.  IF we truly have repented of the way in which our ancestors treated Blacks, Indians, and various other minorities, we would now be actively seeking to "maintain justice in the courts."  In other words, the sincerity of our repentance, as a people, is not judged by our claims of sincerity but by the results of our actions.  Actions speak louder than words.  The verdict on whether or not America retains systemic racism will show itself in the way in which our justice system treats ALL the people.  IF we have repented, we will live in a way that proves it.  {This is what true repentance always looks like in the Bible, without follow-up actions that prove it is genuine, the repentance is not considered legitimate.}

Amos 5:21-24 (NIV)

21 “I hate, I despise your religious festivals;

    your assemblies are a stench to me.

22 Even though you bring me burnt offerings and grain offerings,

    I will not accept them.

Though you bring choice fellowship offerings,

    I will have no regard for them.

23 Away with the noise of your songs!

    I will not listen to the music of your harps.

24 But let justice roll on like a river,

    righteousness like a never-failing stream!

Harsh words from God (via Amos) about the value of the worship of the people.  God does NOT accept worship from a people mired in immorality.  Why?  Because God is holy, his people must seek righteousness, must "hate what is evil; cling to what is good." (Romans 12:9)  If they do not, no amount of worship, offerings, or singing will be accepted by God.  What is the antidote to false worship?  "let justice roll on like a river, righteousness like a never-failing stream!"  And yet, churches that involve themselves in helping the poor, in seeking racial harmony and reconciliation, often by working for a more just and fair legal system, are accused of abandoning the Gospel.  The Word of God warns us of the frailty of a path that focuses upon worship and ignores injustice, of one that claims to follow God on Sunday, but ignores the needs of the people in our community the other six days of the week.  The Gospel call for salvation by grace through faith must always remain central to our ministry, but that message is made COMPLETE (by actions that demonstrate the sincerity of our faith) when we work for righteousness in our community.

Amos 7:10-13 (NIV)

10 Then Amaziah the priest of Bethel sent a message to Jeroboam king of Israel: “Amos is raising a conspiracy against you in the very heart of Israel. The land cannot bear all his words. 11 For this is what Amos is saying:

“‘Jeroboam will die by the sword,

    and Israel will surely go into exile,

    away from their native land.’”

12 Then Amaziah said to Amos, “Get out, you seer! Go back to the land of Judah. Earn your bread there and do your prophesying there. 13 Don’t prophesy anymore at Bethel, because this is the king’s sanctuary and the temple of the kingdom.”

Was Amos welcomed with open arms?  Nope.  The leadership in Israel were not pleased with Amos' warning and told him to go home.  Why?  Because the sacred space at Bethel, and the authority of the king couldn't be bothered with hearing from God.  There is irony here, of course, that those in leadership should be most keen to hear from God, but are in fact the least.  Why?  Because their hearts are hard, and because they benefit from the oppression of the poor.  That dynamic is true in every society in human history, ours included.

Amos 8:4-6 (NIV)

4 Hear this, you who trample the needy

    and do away with the poor of the land,

5 saying,

“When will the New Moon be over

    that we may sell grain,

and the Sabbath be ended

    that we may market wheat?”—

skimping on the measure,

    boosting the price

    and cheating with dishonest scales,

6 buying the poor with silver

    and the needy for a pair of sandals,

    selling even the sweepings with the wheat.

Lastly, Amos broadens the indictment of oppression of the poor with examples: (1) the eagerness of the merchants to get back to business as soon as the Sabbath is over, (2) the dishonest business practices that cheat the customers.  I've also read that the term Economic Justice is an affront to Justice, an insult to God.  That doesn't seem to be the case here.  The prophet of God is concerned with something as commonplace as dishonest scales.  Should not the Church of Jesus Christ concern itself with the ways in which the poor in our nation are treated?  Should not issues of homelessness, housing, education, addiction, and the need for a living wage be our concern?  God-honoring Christians can disagree about HOW to address such issues, about which political or legal solutions are best, but we have been given no wiggle room as to the question of whether or not we should CARE about these things.

What does the book of Amos illustrate to us about God and Justice? (1) God cares about legal injustices, (2) God cares about economic injustices, (3) God holds the rich and powerful accountable for these injustices, (4) God will not accept worship from his people if they are involved in  perpetuating these injustices, and (5) the rich and powerful are unlikely to appreciate being called to task by a prophetic voice speaking the Words of God.  

Social Justice?  Racial Justice?  Legal Justice?  Economic Justice?  God cared about them then, and their lack provoked his wrath.  God does not change.  God cares about them now, their lack still provokes his wrath.  The prophet Amos was called to bring to the people's attention these failings, we honor God when we do likewise in our time and place.

John MacArthur fails to distinguish between necessary and unnecessary risk, plus End Times anti-government speculation

 

As his fight with the state of California continues, John MacArthur has shown, unfortunately, a lack of understanding about how pandemics work, and in this case fails to see the distinction between necessary and unnecessary risk.

In the short video, MacArthur urges, "Go to church...go in the building, don't sit in your parking lot."  The Church of Jesus Christ is NOT its building.  If the people of God worship in a park, that is the Church.  If the people of God worship in a parking lot, in a tent, or online, that too is the Church.  I don't understand this insistence that only when the sanctuary is used can the Church be fulfilling its call to corporate worship.  The text of Scripture makes no such distinction, Matthew 18:20 (NIV) "For where two or three gather in my name, there am I with them.”  Of course, the Early Church had no public buildings, but met in homes or in public squares, down by the river, wherever they could.  The Church in China and other hostile countries is forced underground (The Early Church in Rome literally underground in the catacombs during periods of persecution) to survive, but that persecuted Church is certainly being faithful, even if they never meet in a public building.

"You're not going to kill grandma".  Once again, John MacArthur minimizes the pandemic, insisting that the risk isn't real, as the death tolls climbs past 180,000, and that with less than 25% of Americans having been infected thus far, with the CDC reporting 5,799,046 cases, which is no doubt an under-count of the true total, but still leaves room for well over 200,000,000 infections if the virus were to run rampant in America.  From this week's CDC report: Based on death certificate data, the percentage of deaths attributed to pneumonia, influenza, or COVID-19 (PIC) for week 33 is 7.8%. This is currently lower than the percentage during week 32 (12.6%); however, the percentage remains above the epidemic threshold and will likely increase as more death certificates are processed.  Whether one agrees or disagrees about specific restrictions, whether from the local government or otherwise, it serves no useful purpose to build your position upon the false-hope that the pandemic isn't really a threat.  I've responded to this misconception on his part before, when GCC first decided to meet in-person with no social distancing and no masks {John MacArthur jumps the shark with COVID-19 response}.  Evidently, John MacArthur continues to refuse to believe the 'narrative' offered by the scientific community as a whole.  This points to a larger issue within the Church in America, and Evangelicalism in particular, of hostility toward science, and a refusal to accept scientific evidence that is politically/culturally unappreciated.  {Why I signed "A Christian Statement on Science for Pandemic Times" from BioLogos}

In addition, John MacArthur offers up a false analogy, one that others have used, equating the risk of the pandemic to the risk of car accidents.  In the first place, they're not the same kind of risk.  Exposure to the pandemic can be controlled, it can be mitigated, even if only partially, thus by choosing to increase that risk, in callous ways for yourself and for others, by ignoring scientific expertise regarding social distancing and masks wearing, one is taking an unnecessary risk.  Automobile travel is a necessary risk, transportation needs to occur in some form or other.  Car accidents only become unnecessary risks when those doing so text while driving, refuse to wear seat belts, drive too fast for the conditions, drink and drive, etc.  Otherwise, car accidents are a risk that is already being minimized, as much as possible.  It is not government tyranny to post speed limits, nor to require seat belts, nor to enforce the law through traffic stops.  This entire analogy is a false one, meant to make the arguments in favor of minimizing COVID-19 risk seem ridiculous, but false analogy are just that, false.

Lastly, John MacArthur is viewing the pandemic through End Times tinted glasses, as the first round in an all out assault upon the Church by a government intent upon destroying it.  He said, "More onerous attempts to lock the Church down in the future" are coming.  The host readily agreed with this assessment.  This is, of course, speculation; the future is unknown.  This view is relatively common in the Church today, I often hear people speak as if the government is chomping at the bit to send us all to the gulag.  There's just one problem with this 'sky is falling' mentality.  It isn't based in reality.  Are there elements within the government that are hostile to Christianity?  Yes, but hardly enough to justify the hysteria.  With nearly 70% of the country's population identifying as Christians, whom does John MacArthur think will be carrying out the crusade against the Church?  Which army will enforce the closure of the roughly 315,000 churches in America, where will the several hundred thousand ministers be incarcerated as 'enemies of the state'?  If you take the suggestion to its logical conclusions, the hype falls apart.  Also, when compared to the persecution of our brothers and sisters in hostile countries in the world today, or with that of the Early Church at the hands of Rome, can we really justify Apocalyptic warnings?  The Church in America has enjoyed for centuries, and enjoys still, a place of privilege.  We are not martyrs, to claim that mantle is a disservice to those who have indeed suffered for the name of Christ.

In the end, the reality of the pandemic is not a 'narrative' that you can choose to believe or reject, it is scientific fact, it is reality.  On the contrary, the narrative being advocated here by John MacArthur is one based in End Times anticipation, anti-government sentiment, and seemingly the influence of politics.  We, the Church, can do better than this, no matter whether we are able to safely meet in-person at this time, or due to the reality of COVID-19, must continue to fellowship and worship outside of the sanctuary.  We are the Church, those called by the Spirit to redemption by the Blood of the Lamb, not the building in which we meet.

 

The theology of mandated/compulsory prayer in public schools is atrocious, its implementation would be worse.

Prayer is not a "to whom it may concern" letter.  Prayer is a conversation with God on the part of those who have a relationship with him, not a magic formula that if said by enough people will cause God rain down blessings on a land.

I write this knowing that a number of my brothers and sisters in Christ, whose motives I am not assuming or judging, will strongly disagree with this assessment of prayer in public schools.  This issue is, however, connected to numerous others respecting the separation of Church and State, the impact of politics and political tactics upon the Church, and our intended role as Christians first and Americans second.

Note: I put the word compulsory in the title alongside mandated because any practical application of mandating that prayer must be administered by public schools would naturally entail a compulsory element to force compliance upon the schools themselves (the most likely thing being the threat to withhold federal education funding) and the students (detentions, expulsions for those who refuse?).

Why is mandated/compulsory prayer in our public schools such a bad idea?

1. Prayer is already in public schools, each time a teacher or student chooses to pray.

Contrary to what you may have heard, prayer in schools (or anywhere else) has never been illegal.  How could it be?  Prayer is a conversation between yourself and God, one that nobody else is privy to, nor able to control.  In addition to the continued availability of private prayer, prayer that is student initiated and student led (See You At the Pole for example) has always been, and will remain perfectly legal.  {No, having a student lead a prayer over the loudspeaker while students are required to be quiet and listen is not the same thing}

2. We have no need to be led in prayer.

I'm not talking about corporate worship, when the people of God are gathered together and one person leads either a pre-written or spontaneous prayer, as that individual (pastor or otherwise) is acting as a spokesperson for us and focusing our group prayer in one direction; we are praying with him/her, they're not praying on our behalf; that's an important distinction.  With that caveat in place, it is absolutely clear in Scripture that because of the nature of the New Covenant, with Jesus serving as our mediator, that we can approach God directly in prayer.  We have direct access to the Father. 

Ephesians 3:12 New International Version

In him and through faith in him we may approach God with freedom and confidence.

Hebrews 4:16 New International Version

Let us then approach God’s throne of grace with confidence, so that we may receive mercy and find grace to help us in our time of need.

Romans 8:14-15 New International Version

For those who are led by the Spirit of God are the children of God. 15 The Spirit you received does not make you slaves, so that you live in fear again; rather, the Spirit you received brought about your adoption to sonship. And by him we cry, “Abba, Father.”

3. Rote, compelled, and thus insincere prayer (like worship) is not only not honoring to God, it actually offends and angers God.

What would mandated/compulsory prayer in public schools actually be?  Would it be sincere acts of worship?  How could it be for the millions of school children (and teachers) told to pray to a God in whom they do not believe, or told to pray in a way contrary to the dictates of their conscience?  How could these prayers possibly be genuine and from the heart?  What they would actually be is a repeated affront to God, as if God is compelled to bless our nation because we've required everyone to pray, as if God is beholden to us, and not the other way around.  God will not be manipulated, and God will not be mocked.

Jeremiah 7:9-11 New International Version

“‘Will you steal and murder, commit adultery and perjury, burn incense to Baal and follow other gods you have not known, 10 and then come and stand before me in this house, which bears my Name, and say, “We are safe”—safe to do all these detestable things? 11 Has this house, which bears my Name, become a den of robbers to you? But I have been watching! declares the Lord.

Hosea 6:6 New International Version

For I desire mercy, not sacrifice, and acknowledgment of God rather than burnt offerings.

Isaiah 1:11-15 New International Version

“The multitude of your sacrifices—
    what are they to me?” says the Lord.
“I have more than enough of burnt offerings,
    of rams and the fat of fattened animals;
I have no pleasure
    in the blood of bulls and lambs and goats.
12 When you come to appear before me,
    who has asked this of you,
    this trampling of my courts?
13 Stop bringing meaningless offerings!
    Your incense is detestable to me.
New Moons, Sabbaths and convocations—
    I cannot bear your worthless assemblies.
14 Your New Moon feasts and your appointed festivals
    I hate with all my being.
They have become a burden to me;
    I am weary of bearing them.
15 When you spread out your hands in prayer,
    I hide my eyes from you;
even when you offer many prayers,
    I am not listening.

Your hands are full of blood!

4. Requiring non-Christians to pray a Christian prayer hurts evangelism.

How does evangelism work?  What are the most effective methods for sharing the Good News that Jesus Christ has died for our sins and been raised from the dead for our justification?  An important question, and one studied and debated by those engaging in missions and evangelism both here in America and throughout the world.  The answer to that question is never: force people to read the Bible, pray, and attend church.  Why not?  Because it doesn't work.  Only God can make a planted seed grow, only the Holy Spirit can soften the hard heart of human rebellion.  The only thing that compulsory participation, in a religion that you don't believe in, consistently causes in those it is forced upon, is resentment and anger.  State mandated 'Christian' prayer demonstrates to Muslims, Hindus, or Atheists that we do not respect them as Americans, let alone as human beings, how exactly are we creating an opportunity for them to hear the Gospel?

5. A one-size-fits all prayer to God(s) that tries to please everybody, is the most likely outcome.

The last thing I want is a politician or a government employee writing the prayers that our children are required to listen to, and/or recite.  A prayer not directed at God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit is not a Christian prayer.  What kind of prayer would we be talking about?  It would have to be one mandated/written by the Federal government at the Department of Education, and thus one designed to please Christians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, Mormons, Agnostics, Atheists, and thus equally offensive to all and pleasing to nobody.  I absolutely believe in intra-faith prayer, Protestants, Catholics, and Orthodox Christians can and should pray together.  I absolutely do NOT believe in inter-faith prayer, for how can we pray together when we don't agree upon who we're praying to?

6. Focus on prayer in schools is thinking like an American 1st, a Christian 2nd.

This may be hard for some to accept, but as a Christian my citizenship is in Heaven.  That I am an American, while being an honor and a blessing for which I give thanks and a responsibility that carries with it civic duties that I take very seriously, is still in the end, only incidental compared to knowing that my soul has been redeemed by the Blood of the Lamb.  As such, I must always consider what is right in God's eyes, what is beneficial to the Church and its mission to share the Gospel, before considering what I think is right for America.  Often the two are compatible, but there is a divergence more often than many of us are willing to admit.  For example: It may benefit (at least in the short-term) America to 'win' at the expense of another nation economically or militarily, but those who live in that land are human beings just like me, created in the image of God, and thus either fellow followers of Jesus Christ, or those in need of the Gospel.  Either way, as a Christian I look at the world, and my nation's place within it, differently when I consider myself a Christian 1st and an American 2nd.  We call this a Christian Worldview, and it is something more Christians need to embrace.  Trying to revitalize Christendom, through official governmental pronouncements and symbols like prayer in schools, is a nation centric-view, not a Christ-centered view.

7. Societies with compulsory Christian behavior were NOT more Christian in their outcomes.

History teaches us, clearly, that requiring Christian behavior like baptisms, church attendance, and public confessions doesn't create the thoroughly Christian society that the outward appearance projects.  This is not a question of public morality, and has nothing to do with marriage, abortion, or other topics where Christian morality is in conflict with a secular viewpoint.  Morality is a different issue that requires a different theological basis.  We have already seen from Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Hosea (which Jesus quotes) that insincere public acts of worship have the opposite affect of what is intended by those who do them or require them.  This is born out by the clear cut examples of Spain following the Reconquista in which the Inquisition utilized threats and torture to force Muslims and Jews to convert to Christianity, and the more recent example of Dietrich Bonhoeffer's Germany, where nearly everyone was a 'Christian', having been baptized at birth, supporting the Church through taxes, and in his words so fooled by "cheap grace" that their unredeemed hearts still enthralled to sin readily swallowed the godless hatred of the Nazis.  Where did the Holocaust occur?  In the heart of 'Christian' Europe, with the help of millions of people who would have claimed that they were Christians.  Are more examples needed?  Calvin's Geneva, where the Church literally ran the town, was not sustainable (and burned heretics at the stake), nor was the Pilgrim's isolated community (Witch Trails being the most well known flaw).  As we have seen time and time again with the Amish, compelled behavior leads to rebellion, even among those who do believe.

8. Our ancestors in the faith died as martyrs to governments that tried to compel them to not worship, or to worship against their conscience; how can we do that to anyone else?

As a Baptist, this is the final nail in the coffin regarding mandated/compulsory prayer in public schools.  The Roman Empire persecuted Christians because they would not worship the Emperor, murdering untold numbers of them, often in purposefully cruel ways.  During the Reformation, and especially during the horrors of the Thirty Years War, Catholics, Lutherans, and Reformed Christians all were willing to persecute the Anabaptists who insistence upon believer baptism (the idea that the Church is not everyone in town, only those who demonstrate genuine faith) offended all sides equally.  Many of them were drowned in rivers, by those claiming to be 'good Christians' in mockery of their embrace of immersion baptism.  Sadly, years later when the Puritans came to America and finally had power over their own society, they immediately began persecuting anyone showing signs of dissent.  The United States of America was a bold social experiment in that at the time it was one of the few nations in the history of the world to not have an official state religion.  More than that, religious tolerance was enshrined in the Bill of Rights, protecting the Church from the State, and the State from the Church.
I find it ironic that many of the same voices crying out for a ban on Sharia Law in the United States (where it is not even a remote possibility with the Muslim population at 1%), and who, correctly, decry the oppression faced by our brothers and sisters in Christ in Muslim countries and in Communist China, will then turn around and call for the shoe to be on the other foot here in America.  The degree of compulsion may not be the same, nor the penalties for stepping out of line, but the idea of mandating religious behavior is.  What is morally wrong in other countries ought to be morally wrong here as well. 

Kids and teachers pray in school every day that the school is in session, when they choose to.  God is not asking us to pretend that America is a Christian nation through insincere public acts, but to transform our families, churches, and communities through deep commitments to righteous living and sustained efforts at evangelism.  What will propel the Church in America forward is not policies foisted upon an unwilling or indifferent public, but sincere worship, servant's hearts, and morally upright living on the part of God's people.  If you want to transform America, start with the Church.