The Higher Culture

scaleThe lesser culture is always drawn to the higher culture (or the perceived higher culture).

Christianity always creates the higher culture, and as long as Christians hold strong to their beliefs, that higher culture will remain strong.

Sin is the disease of the world and Christianity is the immune system. But what happens when a previously Christian society turns it back on its beliefs? The immune system becomes an autoimmune disease — which is worse than the original disease that society suffered from before Christianity came in.

Today in the west, progressive leftist ideology is seen as the new higher culture. It is nothing more than a counterfeit Babel though. Nobody 30 years ago was thinking that we needed things like gay marriage (as one example). But now, if you speak out against gay marriage you will be labeled a hateful homophobic knuckle-dragger who is stuck in the primitive wasteland known as “The Wrong Side of History” where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth.

If Christians want to shape the future of the western world and plant more churches, they will have to rise up to the difficult call of creating the higher culture once again. It’s harder now than before. To bring a higher culture into a pagan culture is easier than doing it in a post-Christian culture where the blessings and benefits of Christianity are still enjoyed by the very people who are ignorantly rejecting its foundations.


Three Viewpoints of Eschatology

For my students…

There are three points of view one can adopt when considering the return of Jesus.

The first is to believe that the world is going to get worse and worse until Jesus comes back, when, He will judge the world and pour out His wrath on sinners. Currently, many people who lean to this viewpoint believe the return of Christ is near. Mostly in the west, where Christianity is being abandoned, will you find people holding this view.

Second, you can say that God already poured out His wrath on sinners two thousand years ago, onto Jesus, and after Jesus rose from the dead we began to live in a new creation, and the world has been getting better and will continue to do so until Christ’s return. People who hold to this view tend to believe that the return of Christ is many years away, possibly thousands of years away.

And third, one can believe that, just like riding a roller coaster, sometimes the world will be good, and sometimes not. Jesus is coming back, but the roller coaster ride won’t end till He does and it won’t indicate when He will.

Technically speaking, the first is called Premillennialism, the second is Postmillennialism, and the third is Amillennialism.

Obviously these are very brief descriptions, and there are variations to each viewpoint.

The term “millennium” is found in Revelation 20, and refers to a thousand year reign of Christ. In the first viewpoint the millennium (taken to be a literal thousand years) comes after Christ’s return and takes place on the earth. With the second viewpoint, the millennium (usually not taken as a literal thousand years) will happen before Christ’s return and will take place on the earth. And in the third, the millennium (not a literal thousand years) is happening now, but in heaven.

Predisposed to Rule

crownA question often asked about the Adam and Eve story is: Why did they fall? And why so quickly? If all was perfect and wonderful, why did they fall at all?

The answer usually given revolves around free will. God wanted them to truly love Him, and they couldn’t do that without free will. Okay, fine, they did have free will. But that doesn’t answer the question of why they chose to fall.

Free will is like gravity. Gravity is a powerful force in the universe, and it effects everything. But, when compared to other forces, gravity is relatively weak. Free will is like that – it is a force in your life, but it is weak compared to other forces in your life.

For example, take two men: one is an alcoholic who hasn’t had a drink in three days; the other has only tasted alcohol once and it nearly made him puke – he hates it. Lock both men in a room containing only a full bottle of whiskey. Both men have free will – they can both choose to drink or not to drink, but we all know which man will drink. One man is predisposed to drink while the other is not. The force predisposing the man to drink is stronger than his free will. That doesn’t mean he can’t choose not to drink; it just means he probably will choose to drink. That’s an imperfect example of course, but it helps us to understand why Adam and Eve chose to disobey God and eat of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil.

What was the Tree of Knowledge? Read 1 Kings 3:6-9:

“And Solomon said: ‘You have shown great mercy to Your servant David my father, because he walked before You in truth, in righteousness, and in uprightness of heart with You; You have continued this great kindness for him, and You have given him a son to sit on his throne, as it is this day. Now, O Lord my God, You have made Your servant king instead of my father David, but I am a little child; I do not know how to go out or come in. And Your servant is in the midst of Your people whom You have chosen, a great people, too numerous to be numbered or counted. Therefore give to Your servant an understanding heart to judge Your people, that I may discern between good and evil. For who is able to judge this great people of Yours?'”

Also read 2 Samuel 14:17; Deuteronomy 1:39; Hebrews 5:12-14. All these passages show us that a knowledge of good and evil (the ability to discern and judge between good and evil) is a sign of maturity and kingly rule.

Just as the alcoholic is predisposed to choose to drink, Adam and Eve were predisposed to choose to rule. It was not a bad thing for them to want to do this, God created them that way (Genesis 1:26). But, to rule requires wisdom – an ability to discern good from evil. Adam and Eve, at the beginning, were like little children and not ready to to rule fully (Deut. 1:39). God did start them on the path of rule in the confines of the garden, but they had to mature to a point where they could rule outside of the garden.

Enter the serpent. Who was this serpent? I believe it was simply Satan in his naturally created form. Not all angels look alike, it would seem, and not all angels resemble men. The Cherubim and Seraphim are mighty dragon-like angels (Seraphim means “fiery serpent” in Hebrew). Satan himself is called a dragon in the book of Revelation. And why was the serpent there? Well perhaps the serpent, not yet fallen himself, was sent to Adam and Eve to be a tutor, a teacher, to show them how to rule. This would mean that Adam, Eve, and Satan all fell into sin at the same time. There’s no biblical reason to believe that Satan and the angels existed for millions of years before the creation (if there was such a thing as “years” before the creation), and that at some point in that “before-time” Satan fell.

God told Adam and Eve to increase and multiply and to fill the whole earth. Perhaps they needed a tutor who was a crafty beast from the field/wilderness (outside of the garden) to teach them what the rest of the world was like. We don’t know how long the serpent spoke to Eve, but at some point in the conversation, I believe, Satan realized what God had planned for mankind (to rule) and he became jealous.

Satan did not fall because he wanted to be like God, he fell because he wanted to be like Adam. Adam fell because he wanted to be like God too quickly.

Notice that the worst of the punishments fell on the serpent (Gen. 3:14-19), which means that he was the most responsible for the fall. It also means that he was not in the same category as Adam and Eve. God promised salvation to Adam and Eve (Gen. 3:15b), but not to the serpent.

The serpent understood that to cause Adam and Eve to fall he would need to tempt them to enter into their rule prematurely. The Tree of Knowledge was off limits to Adam and Eve, but not permanently. They would, over time, mature into the ability to eat of it. But the serpent knew that they were predisposed to rule and that that force could be used to overcome their free will to simply obey God. And he was right.

Jesus was also tempted by Satan (Matthew 4:1-11) – and in the same way as Adam and Eve, although no longer in the safety of the garden but in the wilderness itself.

Jesus came to rule (Isaiah 9:6-7), and Satan offered Him a short cut. Jesus truly was tempted to give in to Satan. He desired what Satan was offering. Jesus was, too, predisposed to rule. But, being the first mature man, He did not give in and chose to obey God first. Jesus, being the second Adam (1 Corinthians 15:45-49), obeyed God and made the way for all of us to be restored to our true purpose: to rule.

Adam and Eve’s great mistake then was not a desire to know good and evil, or a desire to be like God (those are good things), but rather, their great mistake was not trusting God and not obeying Him. Our predispositions may be stronger than our will, but our obedience to God must be stronger than all.

“If you love Me, you will keep My commandments.” ~John 14:15

Tribes, Kingdoms, and Empires (Part One)

Tribal-MarkTribal Markers

Some ideas and beliefs we hold allow for some give and take. Other ideas, however, no matter how much our opponents logically refute them, we hold on to as though our whole self-identity depended on them. Which, they do. These are our tribal markers.

How do you know your tribal markers? If you’re in a debate about what you believe, and you are willing to cede some of your arguments to your opponent, then those particular beliefs are not foundational to your identity. But, if you and your opponent reach a point at which you have no other argument to offer than to say, “You just don’t understand. My people understand. We will just have to agree to disagree.” Then you have found your tribal marker.

For example, Charismatic “speaking in tongues” is one such tribal marker. Speaking in tongues is not essential to being a christian, but it is essential to being a Charismatic. If one stops doing it, one is no longer a Charismatic. It is essential to the identity. A Calvinist’s “predestination” beliefs are tribal markers as well.

The more radical the marker, the smaller the tribe, and the less one has to use logical thought to defend it. The more a group insists upon and refines a tribal marker, the more people will be excluded from the group.

Part Two

Metropolitan Manifesto by Richard Bledsoe (Brief Book Review)


Sometimes when I finish a book I think: “If that book was a hundred pages shorter it would have been a lot better.” But the opposite is true with this one. I think it should have been at least a hundred pages longer.

There are lots of interesting ideas here, and I underlined a lot and stopped to think a lot. Some of the book is theological, some is philosophical, and some is political. It is really a bunch of different topics put together (while yet all pointing to the theology of the city), and I think many readers will not like that. Most of the ideas can greatly be expanded on, and that’s why I say the book could be longer, or be expanded into two or three more books. This is especially true for the chapter about how western history has progressed through the Bible in reverse. That idea comes from “Out of Revolution” by Eugen Rosenstock-Huessy. Huessy’s book is nearly 800 pages long, so there is a lot there. (I have not read “Out of Revolution” yet, but recently received a copy.) I don’t think most readers of Bledsoe’s book will have read “Out of Revolution”, so it would have been helpful if he had expanded on that idea more. I have read many of Bledsoe’s articles online and have listened to some of his lectures too, so that helped me to follow his thinking in this book a lot more. Here is a link to some of his lectures which go along with the book:

A good book to read along with this one is “Crisis, Opportunity, and the Christian Future” by James B. Jordan. That 63 page essay deals with the different stages of human history which Bledsoe refers to in his book.

I will come back to this book again and again, as it is filled with many interesting (and sometimes strange — but strange is good) ideas. Also, after reading this book I am looking forward to reading that copy of “Out of Revolution” I received.

Information about the book.

Other reviews.