God’s Provision in Jonah’s Life, and Ours

God’s Provision in Jonah’s Life, and Ours

I recently read through Jonah in one sitting, and yet again it reminds me why it’s one of my favorite books in the Bible. It’s got a kind of honesty about it that makes it endearing. You think, this guy is not unlike all of us! And the Bible makes no apologies for telling his story.

Speaking of the Bible, we call the different writings in our Bibles books, and the word bible, τὰ βιβλία in Greek, means a collection of books, but many of the “books” in our Bibles are very short. Jonah has only four chapters and is a quick but compelling read. It starts right away with action. God calls Jonah to go to Nineveh, and he runs away in the opposite direction! He doesn’t just walk, or saunter, or slither away, he runs! I love how honest the Bible is about human rebellion and sin amongst God’s own people. The portrayal of those people is not flattering to say the least, which is one reason the Bible has such verisimilitude and credibility. It reads real and seems real because it is in fact the accurate story of this people whom God has called to bring salvation to the world. Only, it doesn’t quite work out the way they envisioned it, Jonah being a prime example. To use a semi-vulgar word to express this, Jonah is pissed about God planning to have mercy on this pagan nation who are the sworn enemies of his people. 

What stood out to me this time through was the word “provided” in my NIV, used four times as the story rushes along. Some other translations use appointed. The Hebrew word has these meanings:

  1. (properly) to weigh out
    2. (by implication) to allot or constitute officially
    3. also to enumerate or enroll

In other words, God is calling the shots here. I like the word provided because it implies what is being supplied or made available is meant to help that person. It’s not just God telling us to do something because He said so. God commands us for our Good and His glory. As I was reading, Romans 8:28 leapt to mind:

And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose.

And Paul is making sure we understand this isn’t speculation, isn’t something we wonder about or should have any doubt about, but something we know.

God’s Provision for Jonah
Jonah in his rebellion decides to run away from God’s express command, hitching a ride on a ship specifically to run “away from the presence of the Lord.” We’re familiar with the story, but it’s the little details that make it so powerful.

Not long into the journey a violent storm arises and threatens to wipe out the ship. As the crew is throwing things overboard to try to save the ship, Jonah goes down into the hold and of all things, falls asleep! The man was depressed. And why not. He knows this is God rebuking him for his choice. The men go down to get him and see he’s asleep and they are shocked. How in the world can this guy be sleeping at a time like this? Being ancient people they cast lots to see who’s to blame for the storm, and of course it falls to Jonah. When they ask who he is, and where he comes from:

And he said to them, “I am a Hebrew, and I fear the Lord, the God of heaven, who made the sea and the dry land.

He’s almost blasé. He obviously doesn’t fear this God enough. After he tells the men what he did, they are terrified. So when they ask what they must do to mollify this Creator God, he says to throw him into the sea. I’m sure they think this will only make this Creator God angrier, so they try harder to save the ship which makes the storm worse. Then despite their inclinations, they throw him overboard, and of course the storm calms immediately. Chapter 1 ends with telling us what happened to Jonah next:

17 Now the Lord provided a huge fish to swallow Jonah, and Jonah was in the belly of the fish three days and three nights.

Ah the big fish. These is where the skeptics sign off. Surely this is metaphorical because nobody could live three days in the belly of a big fish like a whale. Impossible! As if anything is impossible with Almighty God, He who created everything out of nothing and controls every molecule by his infinite wisdom and power. Yet, the text doesn’t say Jonah was alive in the belly of the fish. I’ve always assumed he was until I came across this short video which lays out the argument that Jonah died. I always assumed he was alive because the text says that “Jonah prayed to the Lord his God from the belly of the fish,” and if he prayed he was alive. But when Jonah prays he says, “out of the belly of Sheol I cried, and you heard my voice.” Sheol is the realm of the dead. Also, Jesus affirms Jonah’s ordeal in the big fish as a symbol of his death (Matt. 12:40) and implicitly of his resurrection. If Jesus was dead while he was “in the heart of the earth,” so Jonah was dead in the belly of the great fish. As Jesus was brought back to life, so was Jonah. Either way, the story works as a picture of God’s ultimate redemptive plans in Christ.

God’s provision of a big fish for Jonah is meant to get his attention, something we sinners always seem to need if we’re going to finally quit running away. It works. Chapter 2 is Jonah’s prayer of lament and repentance after which the fish vomits him on to dry land. It seems kind of extreme that the Lord would have to put one of his own people through this, but as the great 19th century poem by Francis Thompson declares, He is The Hound of Heaven. The first stanza fits perfectly:

I fled Him, down the nights and down the days;
   I fled Him, down the arches of the years;
I fled Him, down the labyrinthine ways
   Of my own mind; and in the midst of tears
I hid from Him, and under running laughter.
             Up vistaed hopes I sped;
             And shot, precipitated,
Adown Titanic glooms of chasmed fears,
   From those strong Feet that followed, followed after.
             But with unhurrying chase,
             And unperturbèd pace,
     Deliberate speed, majestic instancy,
             They beat—and a Voice beat
             More instant than the Feet—
     ‘All things betray thee, who betrayest Me’.

To one degree or another, this is every Christian’s experience. Jesus was given his name because he came to save his people from their sins (Matt.1:21), and God’s plan of redemption would never be left up to his creatures. Somehow, some way, he will always “get his man,” or woman. But God’s “provision” for Jonah wasn’t done yet because Jonah was a reluctant convert. Chapter 3 starts with, “Then the word of the Lord came to Jonah a second time.” God is willing to give Jonah a second chance, and he’d best listen this time lest the big fish swallows him for good.

Jonah was reluctant because God was calling him to preach to Israel’s hated enemies, the Assyrians. It would only be a generation later that the Assyrians would wipe out the northern kingdom of Israel in 722 BC. That wouldn’t have surprised Jonah. So we can imagine him thinking, “Why in the world would the Lord want to have mercy on this people, on Israel’s enemies?” Jonah goes through the city for three days, as he was in the belly of the big fish, preaching God’s judgment to come, and to his horror they repent so God relents and doesn’t bring judgment upon them. I love to read Jonah’s response because it reads so real (4:1):

But to Jonah this seemed very wrong, and he became angry. 

God, how dare you have mercy on these people! They aren’t supposed to get a second chance. I read some time ago the kind of evil and horror the Assyrians were capable of, and Jonah’s response is not unreasonable, but his job isn’t to think, only to obey. Jonah tells us exactly what he feels:

He prayed to the Lord, “Isn’t this what I said, Lord, when I was still at home? That is what I tried to forestall by fleeing to Tarshish. I knew that you are a gracious and compassionate God, slow to anger and abounding in love, a God who relents from sending calamity. Now, Lord, take away my life, for it is better for me to die than to live.”

Just kill me now! Then God’s provision kicks in again to try to get His message across to Jonah, that he has no right to be angry (4:4). Jonah goes outside of the city to see what’s going to happen to it, hoping God decides to bring calamity after all. As he’s there, God provides three things: a plant to grow and provide shade for Jonah which makes him “very happy”; a worm to eat the plant, no more shade; then a scorching east wind and hot sun so Jonah grows faint. Unhappy again, he hopes God would just take him out of his misery and kill him. As the king of the universe He should for his rank insubordination, but He is the gracious and compassionate God Jonah so despises.     

God asks him if he’s justified in being angry about the plant, one he had nothing to do with growing, and he says he is. Then he tells the Lord:

“And I’m so angry I wish I were dead.”

There’s no resolution in this little book, and the story ends with God asking him a rhetorical question. Jonah had nothing to do with the plant growing, nor did he with the great city of Ninevah. The Lord asks why He shouldn’t have concern for the people and even the animals of such a city. That’s it. Story over. 

God’s Provision in Christ
It’s fascinating that Jesus would use the story of Jonah to point to God’s ultimate sacrifice for the sins of His people, and his own brutal death and burial. As is the crucifixion, the story of Jonah is one of God’s mercy, something we find hard to comprehend exactly because it’s God’s mercy. Why would God have to do something so horrible just to have a relationship with His people? His judgment and ultimate justice requires it, but he decided to do it because of His mercy. As Paul says of the crucifixion, and Jonah could relate (I Cor. 1:23):

We preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles.

All Christians believe God is sovereign, the king and ruler of the entire universe, of all things visible and invisible, but most Christians have a hard time believing He is sovereign over the salvation of His people. God choosing whom He will save doesn’t sit well with them, and that the Hound of Heaven never fails.

God, however, is a choosing God, not a God who waits for the choosing of his creatures to accomplish his redemptive plans. He chooses Noah, then Abram, then Jacob, Moses, and eventually David through whom He will bring about a Messiah who will be prophet, priest, and king. We see this choosing God in the story of Moses asking God to show him His glory (Ex. 33):

19 And the Lord said, “I will cause all my goodness to pass in front of you, and I will proclaim my name, the Lord, in your presence. I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. 

God is the one who decides who will get his mercy, and as with Jonah, to us it can often appear unfair. God’s nature is to be the one who initiates the relationship to save, and at that moment in history God chose to have mercy on the people of Ninevah.

None of us can conceive of why God would create a world in which he would allow a fall to happen, and thus have sin and death enter his perfect created world, but here it is. He told Adam, the day you eat of the tree I told you not to eat of it, you shall surely die. The moment he listened to his wife and took and ate some of the fruit, everything changed. In my study of philosophy and world religions, I discovered that the only plausible explanation for evil and suffering and sin is found in Judaism and Christianity, and this is it. God never had to create anything. Unlike Islam where God is a solitary monad, alone, in Scripture a Triune God is revealed who can have existed perfectly content without other beings, but he decided otherwise.

When He did create these beings, both angels and humans, they had to be genuinely free and able to chose obedience or rebellion. Any real relationship that isn’t robotic requires such choosing and the free will to choose. God being God knew the risk, and what would happen, but there was clearly no other way. The devil chose rebellion and treason first, then when God made man the devil was allowed to take man down with him. However God already had a plan for that, a provision if you will, and that was He Himself in the person of His Son becoming a man and being the required sacrifice for that rebellion and treason. It’s so bizarre yet strangely plausible enough to enable us to believe it with integrity. The evidence, historical, philosophical, textual, archaeological, personal is so overwhelming that after 2000 years over two billion people believe it. They agree with me and the argument of my book, Uninvented, that there is absolutely no way it could be made up, mere invention of the human imagination.

That’s where Jonah and the crucifixion and God’s provision in our salvation come in. Who could ever make up such stuff? The ancient pagan gods were not known for their mercy, to say the least. They had to be placated in all kinds of silly and horrific ways. Read the prophets. A big fish swallowing a man for three days who vomits him out so he can go preach repentance and mercy to his bloodthirsty enemies? Really? If you want someone to believe your story, you don’t make this one up. Then this same God coming Himself, becoming one of his creatures to take their place so justice could be done and the relationship restored? Seriously? No wonder Paul calls the cross foolishness to the Gentiles, the pagans, and a stumbling block to the Jews. It’s absurd! But true.

When Jesus said we are to love our enemies, he provided the first example by loving us, even unto death on a cross. I’m sure to Jonah that would have “seemed very wrong.” In the ancient world you didn’t love your enemies, you killed them! Who would say something so stupid? Jesus! Again, nobody in the ancient world makes up something like that. The concept of sacrificial love was unknown among ancient pagans, Greek or Roman or any other peoples. Jews alone among ancient peoples knew about “loving your neighbor as yourselves” (Lev. 19:18), but nobody could comprehend the Creator God becoming a man to love us! He Himself is our provision. Out of that provision flows true human flourishing and ultimate fulfillment, flows the fruit of the Spirit, love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control, material blessings in this life, and spiritual blessings forever more.

What Distinguishes Amillennialism from Postmillennialism?

What Distinguishes Amillennialism from Postmillennialism?

While I very much appreciate my optimistic amillennialist brethren, or what I call practical postmillennialists, it’s important to understand that being optimistic, or not, is not what separates these two eschatological perspectives. It’s more than merely seeing the glass half full. On a surface level that is non-theological or biblical, it can appear the two have much in common, but our eschatological optimism is the result of something much deeper than a desire to see things turn out the way we want. Having an optimistic perspective with a fundamentally pessimistic theology is like running up hill. When you believe things are going to the proverbial hell in a handbasket, one way ticket, it’s tough to maintain a positive outlook.

As those of you who are familiar with my work will know, I was born-again into the Late-Great-Planet-Earth late 1970s, which meant I accepted the dispensational premillennialist outlook on eschatology and the world. Things were getting increasingly worse, quickly, and the Rapture was happening any day, so be ready to go. Such newspaper eschatology got wearisome after a while, and even after my stint in seminary, I wasn’t really keen on eschatology. That lead me to adopt a kind of eschatological agnosticism, what I later heard termed pan-millennialism. Or it will all pan out in the end, as indeed it will, but that’s a copout.

Because I was a recovering dispensationalist, I was convinced God didn’t see fit to reveal much that wasn’t confusing about eschatology, so why bother. But would God really want to confuse us and leave us in the dark about a topic as important as how it all ends? Where everything is headed and how we get there? Sure, every orthodox Christian agrees, that as the creed says, Jesus will come from the right hand of God “to judge the living and the dead.” We know God will usher in a new heavens and earth where sin and suffering and sorrow will be no more, and he will wipe every tear from our eyes. The question is whether it is true that the world is going to hell in a handbasket and Jesus comes back like Batman to save the day. That’s what I used to believe, and what most Christians believe. Or alternatively, did God begin establishing His kingdom at Christ’s first coming, and like a mustard seed and leaven it is slowly and inevitably growing throughout the entire earth to eventually usher in the final sin free and reconciled kingdom on a new heavens and earth when Christ returns. These are the questions which most Christians would never ask, and if you ask it they think you’ve been drinking too much of the funny juice.

My Journey through Amillennialism to Postmillennialism
For whatever reason, God created me as something of an idealist with a kind of ambition where I believed if I worked hard enough I could accomplish anything. Of course that is not true, but when I was young I believed it completely. My dad used to make fun of me. My first obsession being a SoCal boy was surfing, and I just had to have that David Nuuhiwa surfboard and went to the beach to work on my surfing as much as I could. Then I moved on to guitar, and without a doubt I would be one of the greats. Eddie Van Halen had nothing on me! Being from SoCal himself, I saw him as a rival, which is kind of funny. I practiced for hours every day and got pretty good, but not close to Van Halen good. One thing my dad would never let me forget was haranguing him into get me a wawa pedal. For the rest of his life he would say to me, “You just had to have the wawa pedal.” Yeah, dad, then I could play Robin Trower and Hendrix! Then I got diverted into golf, and not only did I want to be great, but in fact the greatest in the world! Sadly, I only had the talent to be the greatest in my family. Yes, delusions of grandeur came naturally to me.

Then I went away to college and got born-again, and the idealism didn’t stop there. I was going to become a missionary and change the world like William Carey, but realized I’m to addicted to the comforts of American life. Then after college it was politics. I’d learned about what it means to have a Christian worldview from Francis Schaeffer, and was determined to apply it to all of life, and I dove into political activism. It didn’t take long to get disillusioned with that. I’d embraced Reformed theology, and went to Westminster Seminary in Philadelphia and Academia was my next rout to change the world. God rescued me from that life because I met my wife to be at Westminster, and we were married and started life together. We got involved in an Amway business, which my older readers will be familiar with, for the decade of the 90s, and that was the next vehicle to change the world, and get rich! That didn’t happen. Then in the late 2010s after I’d gotten disillusioned with politics again, I decided to start a non-profit called The Culture Project because I realized that’s the way we have to change America. That didn’t go anywhere either.

Through all these permutations of my delusions, I still maintained my idealism. Then in 2014 I embraced Amillennialism. I didn’t intend to become a pessimist, but in hindsight I see that’s what it did to me. When I embraced it through the teaching of scholar, theologian, and pastor, Kim Riddlebarger, I was so excited to learn that God actually did have something to say about “end times.” Eschatology wasn’t just a means to confusion and bickering after all. It was only after my embrace of postmillennialism in August of 2022 that I could look back and see what amillennialism did to my idealism that being dispensational and pan-mill could not.

Anyone who it familiar with my story knows it was Roman Catholic Steve Bannon and his War Room podcast after the debacle of the 2020 election who slowly turned me into an optimist. I then started to look for a theological, biblical justification for my growing optimism, and found it in the eschatological position I’d rejected all my life as a joke. I did not see that coming! It was one of the many ongoing effects of the red pill I unknowingly took when Donald J. Trump came down the golden escalator at Trump Tower in June 2015 to run for president. It’s kind of amazing to me that at almost the age of 55 I would begin to rethink so many things in my life, and change my mind more often than not. I’m an object lesson to not allow our beliefs to become so ossified that when presented with different ideas and facts and perspectives we won’t change our minds.

Prior to Bannon and still embracing amillennialism, I even got to the point where I would mock my younger self for being an idealist. I’m not changing thew world because the world can’t change. I came to believe the world isn’t changing fundamentally until Jesus returns. Sin was too powerful a force in a fallen world filled with fallen people to change, and things would get worse until Jesus returned to clean up the mess. After my “conversion” I tried to figure out why I’d come to believe this so strongly. Mind you, prior to that I still believed in the things getting worse and Jesus coming back to save the day paradigm, but it personally didn’t turn me into a pessimist. Amillennialism did.

Why Most Amillennialists are Pessimists
This is a bit of a sensitive topic because our amillennialists brethren don’t really like to be considered pessimists. I certainly would never have considered myself one of them, especially given my history, but that’s what I became. It goes with the territory. An interesting aside as we discuss this topic is that I’ve found that even though premillennial dispensationalists according to their theology should be even more pessimistic than amillennialists, they often become the most robust culture warriors while the a-mills generally don’t. You would think it might be the other way round. I’m all for theological inconsistency when it comes to this!

One thing you’ll find widespread among a-mills is Christian worldview thinking, but as I argue and have written about here, while it is a requirement for all Christians, a Christian worldview is not enough. The reason is that it is primarily an intellectual exercise rather than a theological imperative rooted in the authority of the ascended Christ at the right hand of the power of God. Things will get better and the influence of Christianity will spread like leaven in bread (Matt. 13), not because people are thinking in a Christian way about things, but because God in His power through Christ is advancing His kingdom, extending Christ’s reign, and building His church. It is not our work that makes the difference, but God working in, through, and for us. What postmillennialism is not, is positive thinking. It is realistic, biblical thinking.

The a-mills don’t see it this way. I’ll give you a couple quotes from a piece written by the man who persuaded me to become a-mill. Referring to the Olivet discourse in a piece at Modern Reformation magazine, he says:

Jesus himself speaks of world conditions at the time of his return as being similar to the way things were in the days of Noah (Matt. 24:37-38)—hardly a period in world history characterized by the Christianizing of the nations and the near-universal acceptance of the gospel associated with so-called optimistic forms of eschatology.

This assumes a futurist perspective on Jesus’ words, that what he’s talking about is his second coming at the end of time, not what a preterist like me believes, that Jesus was speaking to the generation who was listening to his words. As Jesus says just a few verses before his reference to Noah:

34 Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.

So just three verses before the passage Kim uses to refer to a generation thousands of years into the future, Jesus says it’s his generation. People try to make his words into something they are not, but in Greek, or English, or any other language you choose, this means this generation, not some other one far into the future. In another passage from the same piece, he says:

Aside from the fact that many contemporary notions of optimism have stronger ties to the Enlightenment than to the New Testament. . . the New Testament’s teaching regarding human depravity (i.e., Eph. 4:17-19) should give us pause not to be too optimistic about what sinful men and women can accomplish in terms of turning the City of Man into a temple of God.

This of course assumes postmillennialism’s case for optimism comes more from human than biblical teaching, but it doesn’t. That’s one of the reasons I embraced it, realizing I’d gotten this wrong, and the case for eschatological optimism was thoroughly biblical and exegetical. Kim is not a fan of the optimistic/pessimistic paradigm, and I respond more in depth to Kim in a piece I did previously.

Why Postmillennialists are Optimistic: The Ascension and Christ’s Kingship
It wasn’t but a few weeks after I embrace postmillennialism that I heard Doug Wilson on a video say, “Now you have a theological justification for your optimism.” Bingo! That’s what I was looking for, and God provided it. Amazing. And this optimism had nothing to do with secularism and science and human knowledge that distorted postmillennialism in the 19th century, but with God’s clear declarations in Scripture of victory in Christ. We see this through all the covenant promises and prophetic declarations in the Old Testament pointing forward to Christ. It’s easy enough to pick out the declarations of judgment, but to me they are overwhelmed by the power in contrast to the declarations of victory of God’s kingdom rule to come. Again, it is the Scriptural proclamation of victory of the plans of God that compelled me to embrace postmillennialism once my mind was opened to it, which previously was shut like a trap door I was convinced was unable to be opened.

Since that is the basis of our eschatological hope “not only in the present age but also in the one to come” (Eph. 1:21), I will end with one passage and how I now see it, and others like it, as applying to Christ’s first coming and not his second as I used to. Reading through Micah I came to these stirring words in chapter 4:

In the last days

the mountain of the Lord’s temple will be established
as the highest of the mountains;
it will be exalted above the hills,
and peoples will stream to it.

Many nations will come and say,

“Come, let us go up to the mountain of the Lord,
to the temple of the God of Jacob.
He will teach us his ways,
so that we may walk in his paths.”
The law will go out from Zion,
the word of the Lord from Jerusalem.
He will judge between many peoples
and will settle disputes for strong nations far and wide.
They will beat their swords into plowshares
and their spears into pruning hooks.
Nation will not take up sword against nation,
nor will they train for war anymore.
Everyone will sit under his own vine
and under his own fig tree,
and no one will make them afraid,
for the Lord Almighty has spoken.
All the nations may walk
in the name of their gods,
but we will walk in the name of the Lord
our God for ever and ever.

With my futurist assumptions I automatically saw this, and the many other passages like it, as of course applying to Jesus’ second coming. Swords into plowshares? Not in this fallen world! Now I realize that’s exactly why Jesus came, to bring, as the shepherds proclaimed, peace on earth, good will toward men. If you compare the ancient world into which Jesus was born to the modern world as brutal as it can still be, it is peaceful in comparison, all because of the Prince of Peace. Just because the peace has yet to seep into every nook and cranny of existence, doesn’t mean the peace hasn’t been slowly coming all over the world since the resurrection, ascension, and Pentecost. No Christian would deny that peace has come to personal relationships and families, but it isn’t limited to that. The modern world shaped by the life, death, resurrection, and ascension of Christ is utterly different than the ancient world into which Jesus was born.

It is also clear, as it is in many other such passages, that they are speaking of life in a fallen world, not a perfected sinless and restored world. References to disputes among nations imply sin still exists. So does the possibility of being made afraid, or nations walking in the name of some other god. The kingdom’s coming is a painfully slow, mostly imperceptible process until you look in the rear view mirror—it nonetheless transforms wherever it goes. Maybe in a decade, or even a century, it doesn’t look like much transformation is happening, but look back 2000 years and the transformation is as obvious as a volcano in full bloom. Reading the Scripture, especially the Old Testament, with transformation expectations, can bring a new appreciation for what Christ is doing in our day,

 

 

Marriage and the Great American Baby Shortage

Marriage and the Great American Baby Shortage

The decline of Christianity with the rise of secularism in America has had disastrous consequences. At the center of this sad state of affairs is the decline of the family from which all civilizational and human flourishing emerges, as I wrote about recently. Sadly, not only are families increasingly dysfunctional, but many young people are no longer even getting married, let alone having families. The latter likely contributes to the former, given many people never experience or witness families that work and are blessed as God intended them to be. American, and Western culture in general, is like a dense secular moral English fog people negotiate every day pretending it’s a sunny day at the beach in the south of France. Like a wet blanket, the morass of secularism clings to people who aren’t even aware it exists. Secularism has infected Christians as well, often when it comes to having children and how many to have.

For secular people having rejected God’s revelation in creation, Scripture, and Christ, they walk through life virtually blind, stumbling into things they can’t see, wondering why they are so miserable. Christians, on the other hand, have been given the user’s manual directly from the Creator, and having children, bringing other beings into this world, giving them life, is the greatest blessing we as those created in God’s image can have. Hearing about the blessing of having large families, lots of children (let’s say five, six, seven kids), is something I’ve never come across in any church I’ve attended in 47 years as a Christian. It wasn’t until I embraced postmillennialism in August 2022 (as anyone who reads my work consistently knows, and is getting tired of hearing) that I came across a Christian community that extols large families.

Over the years I’ve heard sermons on raising kids, but not having more kids. I don’t remember, but I’m sure I’ve heard sermons that on Psalm 127 where Solomon proclaims the blessing of lots of kids.

Behold, children are a heritage from the Lord,
    the fruit of the womb a reward.
Like arrows in the hand of a warrior
    are the children of one’s youth.
Blessed is the man
    who fills his quiver with them!
He shall not be put to shame
    when he speaks with his enemies in the gate.

I’ve long wondered why so many Christians seems to want fewer rather than more rewards, or who don’t seem to want to seek God’s blessing by filling their quiver full of them. There are several reasons for that, not least is that it’s hard and scary. The sacrifice can be immense. My daughter and her husband had three under three this entire year, and their oldest turned four in just last week. It’s exhausting, but they wouldn’t give it up for the world. My daughter already laments how fast it’s going, and as many of us already know, in the blink of an eye it’s over.

Another reason is that most pastors, let alone Christians, do not believe having large families is in fact a biblical imperative. Rather, the mindset is that having children is just another “lifestyle choice,” as marriage itself is increasingly for secular young people. I argue that it is in fact not a choice but something God expects of his people if He’s given them the ability to do it. Which brings us to culture.

The Importance of Culture
We went to a church for a number of years and seeing so many families with just two children distressed me. Such parents have no idea how much that secular fog I mentioned influences them and their decisions to have children and how many. I knew a Christian guy some years ago and he and his wife decided not to have any children, and he thought that was okay! That blew my mind. I know this fog influenced us when we were younger and starting to think about having children. My wife wanted two because she came from a family of two, and I insisted on three, given that’s what we had in our family. I got my way, but it never occurred to us that 5 or 6 kids was even an option. With the old 20/20 hindsight that is life, if I knew then what I know now . . . . We were caught in the secular fog like most others.

Given we live at the end of 300 to 400 years of secular cultural development in the West, the great Everest challenge today for the Christian church is not being subsumed by that culture, and in turn developing a distinctly Christian culture. Not a sub-culture which is easy and often done, but transforming the secular culture into a Christian one. That’s where the Mount Everest metaphor is apropos. As the tallest mountain in the world at 29,000 feet, for all but the most seasoned and expert climbers Everest is an insurmountable challenge. The culture can appear just as formidable given secularism has been the dominant plausibility structure in America since the 1960s. Plausibility structure is a phrase I’m confident you’ve never heard in church before, or even outside of it. Plausible is a word we are familiar with, “having an appearance of truth or reason; seemingly worthy of approval or acceptance; credible; believable.” It’s something that seems real or true. The structure is the culture in which we live, and the meanings the culture conveys in all its myriad ways will seem real or true to us. Whether these things are real and true or not is irrelevant, only that the culture makes them seem so.

At its most basic level, culture is whatever human beings create, but for our purposes culture is an amorphous set of influences. Christian sociologist James Davison Hunter in his book, To Change the World, states that, “culture is a system of truth claims and moral obligations,” and that, “culture is about how societies define reality—what is good, bad, right, wrong, real, unreal, important, unimportant, and so on.” Culture affirms certain values and propositions, while it denies others, it embraces certain beliefs, while it eschews others; culture is never neutral. Our modern concept of culture derives from a term first used in classical antiquity by the Roman orator, Cicero: “cultura animi.” In Latin, cultura literally means cultivation. We could say culture cultivates. Culture is an indoctrination factory.

This seems obvious, but most people, including most Christians, don’t realize the extent that culture shapes not only what they believe, or what they like, or how they behave, but literally shapes who they are. If we don’t think in a discerning way about the culture we inhabit, we will be merely reactive rather than proactive. Culture is something we cannot take for granted or escape.

This sociological fact of human existence is why “the culture wars” are so important, and in fact crucial for obeying Christ’s injunction that his kingdom come, his will be done on earth as it is in heaven. If we don’t fight against the secular culture that influences us every moment as the water influences the fish, we will be determined by it. Even at that it can’t be fully escaped, but we can become aware of what it is communicating to us, how it is shaping us, and push back in any number of ways, including children. Having a large family is an act of cultural rebellion.

Creating A Marriage and Baby Culture in the Church
I started thinking about this when I read a piece in the Wall Street Journal about the connection between declining marriage rates and their correlation to the decline in the number of children couples are having. Chalk this up to the indoctrination of the secular culture of expressive individualism and personal fulfillment as “the chief end of man” (a la the Westminster Shorter Catechism, Q1). While conservative Christians have higher marriage rates and more children than secular couples, it’s not close to what it should be, at least in my humble opinion.

Then I read a piece in the New York Post by an American Jewish Woman with the click bait title, for me, “I took our six kids overseas — and saw a ‘family-friendly’ nation in joyous action.” I learned that prior to going to this “family-friendly” nation, they first spent a week in Greece, which is most definitely not “family-friendly.” She explains the differences in these two cultures and their people to their “large” family. I put the word large in quotes because I want to emphasize how rare six children in a family is today; it shouldn’t be, especially in the church. I encourage you to read the piece, but here’s how she starts:

If you’ve ever wanted to feel like a celebrity, turning heads everywhere you go, I recommend taking a gaggle of children to a country with a plunging birth rate. Across the European Union, birth rates are far below replacement level — and Greece is among the lowest, with the average woman having 1.3 children in her lifetime.

Touring it with six kids made me feel like I was traveling with a circus troupe. Everywhere we went, people stared. They counted the children aloud (I learned the number six in Greek, éxi,  because I heard so many people tallying how many kids we had). They smiled politely and encouragingly, but with a kind of stunned disbelief.

Greece’s birth rate has collapsed so dramatically that a family like mine, once utterly normal, now looks like a moving museum exhibit.

America, if not quite there yet, is on its way. The birth rate currently is at 1.6, which is well below the 2.1 replacement rate. In other words. Women need to have over two children on average just to tread water. If that doesn’t happen, then in several decades that country will have some very serious problems, if it even exists as all.

Now let’s look at the country they next travelled to, and as she is Jewish you probably already guess that country is Israel, a nation where “large” families are not unusual.

Then we flew to Israel. It’s only a short hop on the map, but culturally it felt like crossing a continent. Suddenly, we weren’t an oddity: We were — wonderfully, refreshingly — unremarkable. In Israel, where the birth rate is not just stable but rising, a family with six kids isn’t an act of rebellion.

Walking around Jerusalem, no one turns to gawk because families with three to even eight children are everywhere. Babies in carriers, toddlers on shoulders, siblings zipping ahead on scooters; the streets are alive with them. This isn’t a place where children are squeezed into the seams of adult life. They are the fabric.

Oh how I love this! This should be like walking into a church on Sunday, children everywhere. I know, that’s not possible at all churches, but churches with a lot of young people should be a little Israel. How does this happen? How does a culture change, go from Greece to Israel regarding marriage and children? It starts from the Pastor and leadership of the church, that’s how. Since the secular culture mitigates against life and the sacrifices it takes to raise that life, conservative Christians culture should be radically counter cultural. This is not only because civilization is at stake in the current demographic crisis, but because God wills it!

Let’s see if we can make a biblical case for natalism. That word comes from a French word meaning birthrate, and simply means having lots of babies is good! It is in fact, a moral imperative. I know this will be “controversial” to some Christians who will immediately, in the toxic empathy that is endemic in our day, point to the poor couples who can’t have children and want to, or to single people who can’t seem to find a spouse. We don’t want to make them feel bad, but truth and blessing are no excuse to feel bad. If we do we should repent because God is the sovereign Lord of marriage and the womb, as he is the sovereign Lord of all of reality.

The Biblical Case for Having Children
This case should not have to be made, but given the secular captivity of the church on this issue, it must be. There are only three express commands to have children in the Bible, the first in Genesis 1 from a passage most Christians are familiar with, but unfortunately ignore:

28 God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground.”

I recently did a post on the Dominion Mandate, so I won’t repeat what I said there, but this command was not abrogated after the fall, or after Christ. This is the NIV, and other versions translate it as, “Be fruitful and multiply.” After the flood and before God’s covenant promise in the rainbow to Noah and his sons, he twice commanded them, “Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the earth” (Gen. 9:1), and “As for you, be fruitful and increase in number; multiply on the earth and increase upon it” (Gen. 9:7). The only other place where a command to have children is found is to the exiles in Babylon (Jer. 29:6):

Marry and have sons and daughters; find wives for your sons and give your daughters in marriage, so that they too may have sons and daughters. Increase in number there; do not decrease.

The reason these are the only direct commands in Scripture to have children is that nobody would have conceived of a need to be commanded to have children, and as many as one could. That’s what families did! And to think otherwise would never have occurred to anyone in the ancient world. While industrialization diminished the incentives to have large families, until feminism, and especially until the dreaded 1960s, having children was seen as fulfilling and natural, not a burden to keep people from living their best life now.  

Contrary to our current historical moment, I grew up in the 60s and 70s, and became an adult in the 80s, when the environmental hysteria de jure was overpopulation. Masses of people were supposed to die of starvation by the 80s, and the overpopulation predictions proved to be the lie they always were. God would never have created a world that could not sustain the apex of his creation. I even had Christians over the years argue that God’s command to Adam and Eve no longer applies to us because the earth is pretty much already filled up. Nobody would say such a thing now. In fact, I see Elon Musk on Twitter/X posting all the time about the demographic apocalypse that will happen if people don’t start having more children.

The promises of God in the Pentateuch are the foundation of God’s redemptive plans on earth, and they always included children. If we do a Bible word search for words such as offspring, seed, child, we’ll see that children are integral to everything God does with and for His people, and more children was always better than fewer. And in the first Christian sermon by Peter in Acts 2, he affirms the centrality of children to his redemptive plans in the New Covenant, as he says to the three thousand people assembled, “the promise is for you and for your children.” Children are assumed as part of the deal. They are not a burden, they are not an inconvenience, they are to be a natural part of Christian families and God’s church, the more the better. My prayer is that we become more like Israel so we don’t become like Greece.

The Wide and Narrow Road Reconsidered

The Wide and Narrow Road Reconsidered

If you’re not active on Twitter, you likely won’t know about the big blow up about Kirk Cameron that happened some weeks back. On his podcast he was having a conversation with his son about the topic of Hell. They questioned the concept of Eternal Conscious Torment (ETC), and Christian Twitter went nuts. Words like heretic and apostacy were thrown around like confetti at a New Year’s Eve celebration. The other option for conservative Christians who believe in hell but question or wonder about the eternality of conscience torment is annihilationism. At some point after God’s “judgement of the living and the dead,” these people will cease to exist, they will die, forever. So the punishment is eternal, forever, but the person is not consciously being punished in misery forever. They’re dead.

I have no desire to debate or explore the topic because I believe God is just, and whenever difficult issues arise in life, or death, I lean on Moses’ declaration in Deuteronomy 32:I will proclaim the name of the Lord.

I will proclaim the name of the Lord.
    Oh, praise the greatness of our God!
He is the Rock, his works are perfect,
    and all his ways are just.
A faithful God who does no wrong,
    upright and just is he.

That is the hill I live and die on, and to which I give my life, my fortune, such as it is, and my sacred honor.

One of the many comments about this was regarding the wide and narrow gate and road Jesus speaks about in Matthew 7:

13 “Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. 14 But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.

The person who commented was affirming that most people will go to hell and not be saved. For all of my Christian life until August of 2022 and my embrace of postmillennialism, I believed that too. From Jesus’ words it seems obvious this is the case. I’ll never forget hearing for the first time the idea that more people will be saved than damned to hell. It sounded so strange to me, but it sounded so right given everything I was learning about my newfound optimistic eschatology. I’ll get into that below, but first let’s see why a la Vizzini in The Princess Bride, I don’t think that passage means what you think it means.

The Context of Matthew 7 and Jesus’ Ministry
People forget that Jesus was a Jewish Messiah sent to “the lost sheep of Israel,” and not to anyone else. When a Canaanite woman came to Jesus to heal her daughter (Matt. 15), first he ignored her, then replied: “I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel.” Her response to Jesus’ rejection so impressed him that he healed her daughter. Here we see both dynamics in play. On the one hand he is telling us his first mission was to Jews only, but also confirming the Old Testament witness of the blessings of God extending to all peoples and nations. Jesus used the same phrase in Matthew 10 when he sent out the Twelve, “Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans. Go rather to the lost sheep of Israel.” We get off track when we think Jesus’ words always apply equally and always to all people in all times. That is not the case.

We must remember that Jesus came in fulfillment of 2,000 years of redemptive history through the people of Israel. The promises and commandments while in some sense universal, were as Paul says about the gospel, “first to the Jew, then to the Gentile” (Rom. 1:16). As we know, he would always go to the synagogue first when he visited a city, and if they rejected him, which they often did, he would go to the Gentiles. Many Jews didn’t like that, at all. But God’s plan of salvation was never only to the Jews. It took a while for early Jewish Christians to figure this out. Even Peter had to see a vision from God and then be reminded, and even be rebuked by Paul, because he so easily forgot that it may have been the Jew first, but it was always also to the Gentile.

From the beginning, the blessings of salvation from sin were intended for Gentiles, as can be seen from God’s first calling of Abram in Genesis 12. He picked only one man on earth and said to him, “all peoples on earth will be blessed through you,” and this promise is reiterated two more times to Abraham, and then to Isaac and Jacob. In Genesis 46 and 49, the Lord tells us that his servant will be “a light to the Gentiles” (42:6 and 49:6), and the latter passage adds, “that my salvation may reach to the ends of the earth.” The same word translated Gentiles in these verses is also used in the great Incarnation passage of Isaiah 9. We’re all familiar, in the elegant language of the King James Version, with verse 7:

For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

We’re generally not familiar with the verse that introduces the transforming life of this child, which talks about God now honoring “Galilee of the Gentiles.” As we know Jesus was from the Nazareth in the region of Galilee. Most translations, for some reason translate Gentiles as nations, but it’s the same Hebrew word as Isaiah uses the in the previous two verses. The point is that the Gentiles are part of God’s redemptive plans, but their salvation will only come through the Jews. In the metaphor Paul uses in Romans 11 of the olive tree, the Gentiles are the ones needing to be grafted in. In another conversation with a non-Jew, although not a Gentile, the Samaritan woman at the well (John 4), Jesus tells her that “salvation is from the Jews,” but because of that encounter with her, many of the Samaritans came to believe in him. Salvation is from the Jews, but not only for the Jews. It is for all peoples and nations.

When we come to the context of Matthew 7, the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus is speaking to Jews and for Jews. Yes, there are universal principles throughout, but he is communicating to Jews in a Jewish context because that’s why he came as their Messiah. They are the lost sheep he is going to find. Chapter 5 very much has a Jewish flavor as he directly discusses the law of Moses, the Ten Commandments and other laws from that period of their history. Chapter 6 is mostly universal, but in the last passage about worry he contrasts the Jews he is speaking to with the pagans. Chapter 7 again is more to the Jews because he speaks of false prophets and disciples, and it is here that we read of the wide gate and the broad road that leads to destruction.

Seeing how Jesus’ life and ministry played out, his declaration about the few definitely applied to the Jews. After his resurrection and just prior to Pentecost, there are only 120 among what Luke calls “the believers.” That means every other Jew in the Roman Empire did not believe in Jesus as their Messiah. You can’t get much smaller and narrower than that! The road to destruction for the Jews was indeed broad and many entered through that gate. Even after 40 years of the ministry of the Apostles at the time of the destruction of Jerusalem in AD70, Christian Jews were a tiny minority. Taking Jesus’ prediction about only a few finding life as applying to Gentiles cannot be inferred from this text. It may be true, but Jesus isn’t saying that here.

To me, whatever the nature of hell, and it exists, God would never allow Satan to win more souls to send there. No way, no how. I used to believe that He did allow that because I didn’t understand the context of Matthew 7.

The Redemptive Plan of God and His Mighty Saving Power
Many Christians, most I dare say, believe God is stingy with his mercy and grace. I’ve often heard Christians referred to as a remnant, a reference to the few Jews saved from Israel’s rebellion in the Old Testament. I get it, the world can be a horrific place, and if we do the math in our head solely based on appearances, and history up to this moment, Satan definitely has the lead. However, we’re not at the end of the story yet, and instead of judging by what we see, I suggest we go to God’s word to see what he says about the salvation Jesus accomplished for His people on the cross.

The first thing we notice is that multitudes will be saved, and in the word God used with Abram, be blessed. The Lord uses three images to give us a sense of the magnitude of His saving work as he communicates his covenant promise to His people: stars, dust, and sand. We read of stars in Genesis 15:

Then the word of the Lord came to him: “This man will not be your heir, but a son who is your own flesh and blood will be your heir.” He took him outside and said, “Look up at the sky and count the stars—if indeed you can count them.” Then he said to him, “So shall your offspring be.”

And dust in Genesis 13:

16 I will make your offspring like the dust of the earth, so that if anyone could count the dust, then your offspring could be counted.

And after the Lord changes his name to Abraham and introduces him and his household to circumcision, he adds sand (Gen. 22):

17 I will surely bless you and make your descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky and as the sand on the seashore. Your descendants will take possession of the cities of their enemies, 18 and through your offspring all nations on earth will be blessed, because you have obeyed me.”

The Lord reiterates his multiplication promise to his son and grandson. To Isaac he says (Gen. 26):

I will make your descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky and will give them all these lands, and through your offspring all nations on earth will be blessed.

And then to Jacob (Gen. 28):

14 Your descendants will be like the dust of the earth, and you will spread out to the west and to the east, to the north and to the south. All peoples on earth will be blessed through you and your offspring.

And He further clarifies the nature of these peoples (Gen. 35):

11 And God said to him, “I am God Almighty; be fruitful and increase in number. A nation and a community of nations will come from you, and kings will be among your descendants.

We can’t necessarily infer a majority from these passages, but images of stars, dust, and sand don’t exactly bring to mind God as a grinch miserly with his saving grace. Why do I, and specifically we postmillennialists, believe God will in fact save more people than he allows to be lost? Because the word that best describes God’s redemptive plans on earth is what his mighty saving power is accomplishing—victory.

An Eschatology of Victory
That is the title of a book by J. Marcellus Kik I read in the early days after my embrace of postmillennialism. I found this new theological journey I had embarked on after almost 44 years as a Christian changed not only my perspective on “end times,” but on everything. In 2024 I had the privilege of being invited to do a podcast on a YouTube channel called Eschatology Matters, which says it perfectly. What we think about “end times” shades our perspective on everything in life—past, present, and future. Eschatology, the study of end things, does indeed matter, a lot.

Prior to this shift, not only did I think more people would be lost than saved, but I believed the devil had the upper hand “down here” in this fallen world. When I was born again in the Late Great Planet Earth late 70s, I naturally embraced the dispensationalism that was everywhere at the time. Rapture theology was common. Things were getting worse, and Jesus was coming back soon. Not exactly an “eschatology of victory.” After I got burned out on such “newspaper eschatology,” I became an eschatological agnostic, what I came to call pan-millennialism because everything will pan out in the end. The Bible, or so I thought, doesn’t give us clear guidance on “end times,” so why worry about it. By the way, I put that phrase in quotes because it became dominant in the 70s to refer to what happens at the end of time, to the end of the world as we know it, as the end times. The 90s into the 2000s had the Left Behind phenomenon, so “end times” became even more engrained in the culture.

I’m generally not a negative or pessimistic person, so for most of my pan-mill life I believed we could change the world for the better, and even though I thought the devil would win on earth, Jesus would come back to save the day and usher us into eternity. As the creed says, “He will come again to judge the living and the dead.” When I embraced amillennialism in 2014 because I learned the Bible does indeed say something about eschatology, I found that it turned me into a pessimist. Either I learned or came to believe that sin and man’s rebellion were a more powerful force in a fallen world that I mistakenly believed belonged to Satan. In August of 2022 I started to understand just how wrong I had been. On this earth, in this fallen world, the gospel declares in the words of another book I read early on, Victory in Jesus. This one by Greg Bahnsen, and the subtitle says well the nature of this new eschatological perspective I now have: The Bright Hope of Postmillennialism.

I had for decades believed postmillennialism was a secular distortion of the biblical record, turning it into a belief in unending human progress, and specifically because of man’s efforts. It had nothing to do, or so I thought, with the gospel. Given the track record of us humans over the millennia, I considered it unworthy of even considering, a joke. What really surprised me was that it only took me listening to a YouTube video on a walk one Saturday afternoon to convince me it was likely true, that I had been wrong all these years, pre, pan, or a-mill.

My objective here isn’t to convince anyone of my now optimistic eschatological convictions, but to convey that how we interpret something like Jesus talking about wide and narrow gates is not only determined by the context as I argued above, but also by our eschatology, even if we don’t think we have one. We do!

 

 

The Dominion Mandate for Today

The Dominion Mandate for Today

For most of my Christian life the Dominion Mandate was not something I gave any serious thought to. For me what counted was what some call the Cultural Mandate. From early in my Christian life, I always thought we should bring our Christian worldview and thinking to bear upon all of life, but that didn’t have anything to do with “dominion,” or so I thought. Both of these mandates come from the same place, Genesis 1, but they are two different perspectives based on two different theological understandings of the church’s role in the world. For those focused on it as a cultural endeavor, it is primarily an intellectual exercise of applying a Christian perspective to the world and what we do in it. Dominion, on the other hand, implies rule and authority, not just influence. it’s taking over, becoming the boss, so to speak.

There is a third option where neither culture nor dominion is relevant, and that is the basic Pietistic Christianity of the vast majority of Evangelical Christians. For most Christians their faith is primarily a personal affair with little relevance to the wider world. I’m not talking about being personally pious, but a movement in 17th century Germany as a reaction to a dry scholastic form of Christianity. Eventually through the two Great Awakenings, revivalism, and fundamentalism, by the mid-20th century Evangelical Christianity became culturally irrelevant. Christianity was now about personal spirituality, and cultural or societal transformation was beside the point. Plus the world would get increasingly worse and Jesus would come back soon to consummate all things. This is slowly changing, but it still dominates the church. What I’m talking about here is a completely different orientation for the Christian life.

I was inspired to write this because of a book I’m reading by a new friend of mine, David Bostrom, Get Dominion: You’ve Been Called to Fulfill a Mission. The paradigm shift from a personal, Pietistic Christianity to a dominion mindset is dramatic. As I discovered, it can also be dramatically different from a worldview, cultural influence perspective. I like David’s definition of dominion: “to fulfill a mission,” a mission to accomplish. Speaking of which, the movies, and the old TV show, Mission Impossible, give us some sense of the momentous task before us. When he was given a mission, Peter Graves would listen to a small reel-to-reel tape recorder which would self-destruct after it explained the mission. He was told, “You’re mission, Jim, should you decided to accept it . . . .” and then the tape would self-destruct in five seconds. Finally, he was wished good luck. We don’t need luck! We have a mandate from the Living Creator God, Christ having redeemed the world and taken it back from Satan, and the Holy Spirit living in and through us to transform creation as Adam and Eve were supposed to do. Most importantly, the Dominion Mandate is theologically grounded in the ascension of Christ now sitting at the right hand of God “far above all rule and authority, power and dominion, and every name that is invoked, not only in the present age but also in the one to come” (Eph. 1).

What Exactly is the Dominion Mandate?
The Dominion Mandate comes from the charge God gave Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden in Genesis 1.

26 Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”

27 So God created man in his own image,
in the image of God he created them;
male and female he created them.

28 God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground.”

This is the NIV translation which uses the word rule, as do most modern translations. The term dominion mandate comes from the King James which translates rule as “dominion over.” According to Strong’s, the word means, “make to have dominion, prevail against, reign, bear; to tread down, i.e. Subjugate.” Like I said, become the boss.

For most of my Christian life I didn’t think this mandate to rule, to “have dominion over” applied to Christians; it fell after the fall, never to rise again until the second coming. This is because like most Christians I tended to over spiritualize my faith, even as a worldview Christian. Basically I thought the world belonged to the devil, and only at Christ’s second coming would he take it back. I was wrong. In fact, Christ came at his first coming to take the world back. He began an inch by inch, step by step, brick by brick process of transforming the world by extending his reign over it, and advancing his kingdom in it. Both John the Baptist and Jesus said the exact same thing as they were declaring his coming ministry: “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven has come near.” At his death, resurrection, ascension, and Pentecost, it fully came. His life on earth was the foundation upon which his kingdom would be built, and his church, his body, would carry out his reign throughout the earth, just as we’ve seen over these last two thousand years.

But that doesn’t get to the question of exactly what this mandate is, how it works, how we are involved. David in his book does a great job of making it practical for every one of us, and it is for all Christians. When we trust Christ, our salvation from sin doesn’t just reconcile us to God, but it gives us a mission to fulfill on this earth, to “have dominion over” it. Because of the rise of both secularism and Pietism, people today are adrift in the world. They are looking for meaning, hope, and purpose, but are stuck as Henry David Thoreau said, leading “lives of quiet desperation.” As Christians that shouldn’t be us! Not only has Christ given us a holiness mandate, but a dominion mandate in his creation as well. Here is how David begins his introduction:

Are you having a hard time figuring out where you fit in this world? Are you frustrated because your efforts don’t seem to have a significance you think they ought to have? Do you know deep down there’s more to life than what you’re experiencing, but can’t seem to get a handle on what it is? Does a lack of meaning or vision for your life make you feel like you’re dying inside?

It doesn’t have to be this way because Jesus imbues everything we do in this material world with spiritual significance.

The Priesthood of All Believers
In the Middle Ages prior to the Reformation, there was a stark societal dualism between the clerical class and the laity, what Martin Luther called the “temporal” and “spiritual” orders. The religious professionals, priest, monks, nuns, etc., did the spiritual stuff, and everyone else just survived and did their spiritual stuff on Sundays and holy-days. Martin Luther changed all that. The Reformation he unwittingly started began a transformation of the lives of everyday, average people, and ended up transforming the world. The dominion mandate for the most part had been lost, and now was found. We need to find it again.

In his Address to the Nobility of the German Nation (1520), Luther criticized the traditional distinction between the two orders—the laity and the clergy— and he puts his argument this way:

It has been devised that the Pope, bishops, priests, and monks are called the spiritual estate, princes, lords, artificers, and peasants are the temporal estate. This is an artful lie and hypocritical device, but let no one be made afraid by it, and that for this reason: that all Christians are truly of the spiritual estate, and there is no difference among them, save of office alone.

The Apostle Peter agrees:

But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’s special possession, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light.

In other words, there is no difference between the religious professionals and everyone else, except the calling we’ve received from God and how we serve others. Luther says it beautifully:

A cobbler, a smith, a peasant, every man, has the office and function of his calling, and yet all alike are consecrated priests and bishops, and every man should by his office or function be useful and beneficial to the rest, so that various kinds of work may all be united for the furtherance of body and soul, just as the members of the body all serve one another.

In our current day this could be expressed as, “A plumber, a doctor, a lawyer, a builder, a homemaker, has the office and function of his or her calling, and yet all alike are consecrated priests and bishops . . . “ In 1520 this was insane. No wonder the church and the government of the Holy Roman Empire wanted him dead. This would turn the world upside down! Just like the Apostle did.

Most of us in the daily grind have difficulty perceiving what we do as a “spiritual estate” of any eternal value. Part of the reason is that we have reverted to a Middle Ages mindset before Luther’s Nobility address, mainly because of the Lutherans who came in the century following his death who developed the Pietism I referred to above. Building a house, or selling a product, or fixing a car, doesn’t seem “spiritual” to us, but everything human beings saved by Christ do is spiritual! Everything we do, every single thing, is done unto the Lord (Col. 3:23). Paul puts it this way in I Corinthians 15:58 in a verse I used to read dualistically:

Therefore, my beloved brothers, be steadfast, immovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, knowing that in the Lord your labor is not in vain.

Certainly my work as a carpenter, or sales guy (what I do five days a week), or nurse, or trash collector, or you name it, is not “labor in the Lord,” right? The labor that will last forever are things like evangelism, or prayer, or Bible reading, or church, or fellowship with other Christians, but surely not grubby old work. Nope, it’s all spiritual, all labor in the Lord, and none of it is in vain. The reason is the Dominion Mandate tied to the life, death, resurrection, ascension of Christ, and Pentecost.

The Fall to the Ascension, Pentecost, and Dominion
Lastly, let’s see how the spiritual significance of everything we do is rooted in Christ’s mission on earth, and how that connects to the Dominion Mandate. At creation, Adam and Eve had everything they needed to fulfill the mandate the Lord had given them, but at some point Adam allowed Satan to slither his way into the garden as a serpent, and he broke it into a million pieces. Christ came to accomplish what Adam couldn’t. Two thousand years later and a very lot of water under the bridge, God became a man because as he says through Isaiah (63:5):

I looked, but there was no one to help, I was appalled that no one gave support; so my own arm achieved salvation for me, and my own wrath sustained me.

I write this in the season of Advent in which we celebrate the incarnation, God the Son coming down from heaven, born of a woman, becoming man, to be “pierced for our transgressions and crushed for our iniquities.” In that prophecy from Isaiah 53, we’re told that although “he had done no violence, and there was no deceit in his mouth,”

10 Yet it was the Lord’s will to crush him and cause him to suffer,
and though the Lord makes his life an offering for sin,
he will see his offspring and prolong his days,
and the will of the Lord will prosper in his hand

In other words, because of what Christ accomplished, the Dominion Mandate can now be fulfilled. We are his offspring, and because of his accomplishment, his obedience unto death, the Lord’s will for us to rule, to have dominion, will prosper in his hand. Dominion is not our work, but the Lord’s will working through us.

Most importantly, is what the ascension means for us, his people on earth, those he left behind to fulfill his mission, and to take dominion over the earth. Before Christ ascended to heaven, he told his disciples (Matt. 28) that “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Therefore go . . . .” Paul tells us in Ephesians 1 that when Christ was seated at God’s right hand in the heavenly realms, he had achieved a position “far above all rule and authority, power and dominion, and every name that is invoked, not only in the present age but also in the one to come.” This authority is what gives the Dominion Mandate its power. Christ ascended that he might send his Holy Spirit at Pentecost that he might be with us always, to the very end of the age (Matt. 28:20)

What the ascension enabled was God the Holy Spirit acting through His people to do and accomplish significant things for the advance of God’s kingdom on earth. But what cements this concept in the heart of God’s people is what Paul says a little later in Ephesians about our own spiritual resurrection from the dead (Eph. 2):

But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions—it is by grace you have been saved. And God raised us up with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus, in order that in the coming ages he might show the incomparable riches of his grace, expressed in his kindness to us in Christ Jesus.

Think about that. We are seated with him, meaning we partake of his authority in this age, and in the age to come! When we’re trying to hammer the 2×4 on the frame of that house, it’s not just a hammer and nail and a piece of wood—it’s us in Christ taking dominion! Serving that customer? We’re taking dominion!

The ancient world became the modern world because of Jesus enabling his people, his body on earth, to accomplish what Adam could not. This has profound spiritual and material implications because these are one and the same. Whatever God accomplished spiritually for His people as he reconciled them to Himself in Christ, will always have material implications. Rejecting any kind of false dualism, we need to be about fulfilling the mission we were given when we placed our trust in Christ. Everything we do is imbued with profound eternal meaning and purpose and hope. As Jesus said in John 10:10:

The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy. I came that they may have life and have it abundantly.