Be Careful Who You Argue With Publicly

 

Here is an old tale from an old book giving a good solid warning about why you should be careful with who you argue with in public,  

“CHAPTER XXII.

Of how perilous a thing it is to meddle with men of the world; and of the lady who undertook to cross-question the Marshal de Clemont

Fair daughters, I will give you an instance of how dangerous a thing it is to meddle with men of the world, and such as are never at a loss for reply. For, assuredly, to play practical jokes with them is losing game. There was once a famous feast, where were many great lords and ladies, and, among others, the Marshal de Clermont; than whom no man was deeper verged in the ways of the world ; a weightier or a readier speaker, or could show himself to more advantage in the presence of lords and ladies. And there was also there a certain great lady, who said to him before them all, “Clermont, to give you my mind, you have much to thank God for ; you are, beyond a doubt, a gallant Knight, and good looking to boot; and of parts, to admiration: and so, you would be all but perfection, were it not for that cantankerous and ill-natured tongue of yours, which never will be quiet." And, “Madame, may I ask," said he, “if this is the worst you have to tell of me ?” “I will allow it is," said she. "Now," said he, “just let us look quietly at this matter. Madame, it would appear to me, that is, if rightly considered, that I have not so malicious a tongue as yourself; and I will tell you why. You have spoken of me, and reproached me with the worst that you know of me; whilst I, the worst that I know of you, I have kept to myself. So, Madame, what injury have I done you? I am not, you see, so ready with my tongue as you are." And, when the lady heard this, she wished that she had held her peace, nor striven with such man ; and this, for reasons which I need not mention, but which were enough commented on. And it is an old saying, that, as too much impetuosity knows no discretion, so it is advisable to hold one's tongue in time. And this is an excellent example. For it is better, for the most part, to keep still, and to carry one's self forbearingly, than to be too ready to pick quarrel with those who have their answer on their tongue's tip, and will not stick to allow more to be gathered, they care to express. And, from all this, look well who it is you are to speak to, and in no way incense them; for the strife of such is wondrous perilous.”[1]

This is an incredible response. To use someone’s own words to rebuke them so skilfully without having to result to any form of insult or jeer. Be careful in how you judge people, be careful of how you speak about people in front of others, and be especially careful about picking an argument in public, it might not go your way.

List of references

---

[1] Knight of the Tower Landry, pp42-43.

Palestine Was Never A Nation?

 

Image: Unsplash

People who say there was never a Palestine or Palestinians, sound like this to those of us who know world history:

"There never was a nation of Australia. It was simply a colony of Britain, that was taken from Indigenous tribes in the 18th century. There were no Australians, there never was an Australia. It was simply a vastly empty land which was mostly unused and left barren. We decided to put it to good use. The people calling themselves "Australians", in the Queensland, NSW's and Victorian city camps are merely refusing to integrate into the southern continent of the Middle Kingdom. They are just the sad lost counsins of Britain that refuse to face the reality of the 21st century world."

Chinese Diplomat, 2084. Standing out the front of The CCP head quarters in AustraChina. This is how you sound when you say Palestine never existed and was never a nation. 

But Palestine is a nation:

“There are people who wrongly, but adamantly, say Palestine never existed as a nation. Many who say this know that Palestine is an ancient designation of the land of Canaan, that originates from the Greeks, and derives from Philistine. They also are aware that the Romans renamed the province of Judea, Syria Palaestina (Palestine) after another large rebellion of the Jews was defeated in 132 AD. Of course, those who recognize the Philistines as ancient invaders into the land of Israel, are not keen to ascribe the name Palestine to the land they consider to be the right of the Israelites. So, many who hold this view easily fall for the statement that Palestine was never a nation. But this is incorrect, for most of the A.D. era a people lived in the province of Palestine, first mostly Christian, then Christian and Arab Muslim, then mostly Muslim, but still many were and are Christian. They had survived different invasions, wars, shifts of Empire from Rome, to Byzantium, to Arab Muslim Empires, then a large Turkish Muslim empire. Many converted to Islam over time, some held onto their ancient Christian heritage. They built churches, some as ancient, almost, as Christianity itself, some built mosques, also very ancient.”[1]

These people were Palestinians, as I explain in that piece. I understand why people make the assertion “Palestine never existed”. They are under a mental, and sometimes religious, spell which causes them to ignore or excuse information which completely contradicts their understanding of the region. To some degree we are all susceptible to these kinds of “word spells”. But many of them can be dissipated by a broader understanding of history.

I would also encourage someone to pick up a map of Europe from the mid-19^th century, then the early 20^th century, then the mid-20^th century and then again today and observe that Palestine is older than some of the other nations on that map, at least as a nation state[2]. It would also be beneficial to look over some ancient maps of Europe and Asia and observe how many ancient countries no longer exist that lasted for far longer as political entities than Australia has as either a colony or as a nation state. 

Here are a couple of maps to illustrate this:

Above: A Map of Napoleon’s Empire in 1810, and wider Europe.

Below: A Map of Europe in 1991.

Notice the vast differences in the countries named across Europe? 

Maps are constantly changing because nations rise and fall and some become empires and some become slaves of other Empires. That Palestine is now called Israel, and that Palestine was a province in several empires, does not mean Palestine was never a nation. Nations are often formed when empires collapse. Just spend some time looking at maps online and you will observe how often they change and how quickly and drastically, especially when empires fall. What is now a collection of different Arab nations in the Middle East was not that long ago the Ottoman Empire, new nations have risen in the place of that multinational state, among them one called Palestine. The same thing happened in Europe when the Roman Empire fell, and the various Holy Roman Empires fell. It is the way of the world.  

Once you have spent some time looking at these maps, you can cap off your study by exploring some of the sources in the piece quoted above, so that you can see just how ancient Palestine itself is. Palestine is a nation and it has deep, historical roots in the land between the continents, as do the Jewish people. 

Be careful, also, what rhetoric you use to argue against the existence of this or that nation in this world. You might find your logic being used against you one day. It is not outside the realm of possibilities that Australia will one day soon be dominated by China, and that this could go very poorly for the Australian people. Would it not be a terrible irony if your own logic about Palestine was one day turned against you in this nation?

List of references.

---

[1] https://younggospelminister.blogspot.com/2020/07/palestine-is-nation.html

[2] Though it is an impoverished state and not universally recognized, many nations do recognize it as its own legitimate country.

What Does Jesus Say About Who Are The People Of God?

 

Image: Unsplash

It's very simple: those who do the work of the father and believe him are of God. Those who reject him are of the devil. This is true of all people who reject him. There are no exceptions.

"39 They answered him, “Abraham is our father.” Jesus said to them, “If you were Abraham's children, you would be doing the works Abraham did, 40 but now you seek to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God. This is not what Abraham did. 41 You are doing the works your father did.” They said to him, “We were not born of sexual immorality. We have one Father—even God.” 42 Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God and I am here. I came not of my own accord, but he sent me. 43 Why do you not understand what I say? It is because you cannot bear to hear my word. 44 You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father's desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks out of his own character, for he is a liar and the father of lies. 45 But because I tell the truth, you do not believe me. 46 Which one of you convicts me of sin? If I tell the truth, why do you not believe me? 47 Whoever is of God hears the words of God. The reason why you do not hear them is that you are not of God.”

John 8:39-47

Jesus originally said this to the Jews, likely the Jewish leaders, who opposed him. But it applies to any people who reject Jesus. They set themselves against God. 

So for those who say Israel are the people of God because Satan clearly hates them, you really need to take a step back and think. That the devil hates and tries to hurt a nation does not prove they are God's people. Satan hates all nations and he will stoke up war wherever he can. 

Many African countries are constantly at war, especially in the north. Why? Satan hates them. Europe was constantly at war until after World War 2. Why? Satan hates them too. Eastern Europe is the centre of slave trade and sex slavery in the world, it was constantly raided by enemies and to this day conflic keeps happening there. Does this make them God's obvious people? No, but it is certain that Satan hates them too. 

A broad view of the world and history dispels a lot of myths and reveals Satan is no respecter of any nations. Mulism countries are invaded and attacked more than Israel, does this make them God' people? No. That would be a silly position. Satan hates all people, even his own who reject Jesus, which means people of all nations who do so. 

Satan hates his own servants, he does not care about his own. He hurts them and tries to hurt every nation he can. Under the Ottoman Empire the region now called Israel, but then called Palestine, was at peace for some time. Now it is at constant war. Some regions get peace for a time, like us in Australia at the moment. But before settlement indigenous tribes in Australia were at constant war with each other. Satan is a murderer and loves to hurt people. 

Being hated by other nations is not proof of anything, except that Satan hates the nations and will stir up strife, war, and terror where he can. And where there is hatred and strong divisions he has easy work doing it.

Pray for peace as much as you can. Because the devil is roaming like a lion looking for people to devour and he loves using war to rack up souls.

It’s Not Just The Schools

 

Image: Unsplash

It is interesting to listen to conservatives try to explain why things like patriotism and nationalism have seriously declined in our nation. For instance this discussion on Sky News, where they put the blame on education,

“IPA senior fellow John Roskam says an “entire generation” of young Australians have been taught to be ashamed of their country.

His comments come amid low enlistment numbers in the country’s defence forces.

Mr Roskam revealed the Institute of Public Affairs conducted a poll last year among Australians aged 18-25 which found only 32 per cent would fight for their country if it was attacked.”[i]

This is a staggeringly low number of Australians who are willing to fight for their own country. But the numbers are not really that shocking when you consider a few other points.

For the last couple of decades Australia has engaged in a mass immigration experiment to grow our population and inflate the economy with incredible numbers of people coming in each year. The result of this is that as of 2021, 29.1% of all Australians are actually born overseas. When you consider that many of these people have had children while here, this means that a large percentage of Australians are only first or second generation citizens.[ii] The largest group of these people is from England, where our culture predominantly comes from, but since 2011 the largest increase in immigrations comes from India, and many immigrants come from other nations as well.[iii]

Now the views of these immigrants will be diverse, but immigrants do not magically change their culture, practices or ideas when they come to a new country. This fact was on full display this week where disturbing Palestinian protests happened across Australia, and the western world, in support of the attack on Israel from last week. I don’t want to get bogged down in discussing the ongoing conflict in Israel, it is a tiresome discussion; this conflict is several generations old and should not concern Australians. However, this conflict has been big news here in part because Australia has immigrants from both sides in the Middle East and as these Palestinian protestors show, immigrants do not change their views when they change locations, they bring their politics with them. 

How is a country with such divisive perspectives represented amongst their citizenry supposed to unite for the purpose of something like self defense? Considering the focus on making Australia multicultural over the last few decades, is anyone really surprised that so many young Australian citizens want nothing to do with fighting for this country? We are a nation divided by deliberate policy choice. 

Add onto this the fact that since 2001 Australia has tightened its alliance with the United States and gotten involved in disastrous wars across the world. Many Australians are sick of these wars and want nothing to do with any more foreign conflicts. There is a big difference between defending your country and being used as auxiliary forces in an imperial war in the Middle East or somewhere else, but very few Australians would be willing to risk signing up for the defence forces to defend our country, because they would be concerned about getting caught up in another stupid foreign war far from our home land and interests. For several decades Australians were told that being sent to Afghanistan was defending their nation, or going to Iraq was defending their nation. But more and more people have seen through these forever wars and want nothing to do with them.

All this being said, that does not mean that education has nothing to do with this problem. Australians have been taught to be less patriotic. But alongside of this they have been taught that anyone can be Australian if they have the right paperwork, it has nothing to do with heritage or nationality anymore, it is simply a matter of what your passport says, and therefore, it is simply a matter of whoever the government says is Australian, is Australian? How can anyone get patriotic about this situation. This is statism not patriotism. 

Say what you want about Israel, but they have focused on creating a country there for their own people that has a vision to be a bastion of Jewish culture, and they have enacted policies to hand this tradition down to the future generations. It is easy to see why this has been far more successful in building a patriotic culture, than the approach of our nation for the last few decades. Maybe we should pay attention to that? 

Ideas have consequences and the consequences of the demoralization of Australian identity and ethnicity and culture are starting to have devastating effects. For those of us who love our country, this is horrible to see, even though it was also eminently foreseeable.

 

List of references

---

[i] Sky News, https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/other/only-32-per-cent-of-young-people-would-fight-if-australia-was-attacked/ar-AA1i5O1h?ocid=emmx-mmx-feeds&PC=EMMX01

[ii] https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/people/population/australias-population-country-birth/latest-release

[iii] https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/people/population/australias-population-country-birth/latest-release

A Pre-Millennial Case for Investing in the Future of Your Nation

 

How does a Christian’s eschatology impact how they invest in the future of their family, church, and nation?

This has become a prominent question in recent times in part because of the rise of postmillennialism in the English-speaking nations, particularly in Reformed circles. But also because of a reaction against ridiculous end times ideas and cooky end time predictions that have made a lot of Christian ideas about the end of the world targets of easy mockery[1]. It is common especially for those with postmillennial views to argue that premillennial theology gets in the way of building a sustainable and long-lasting Christian civilisation and therefore we need to get back to the postmillennial views of the medieval past to reclaim our once great glory in the Christian West. I have heard this discussed in many contexts from prominent theologians all the way through to friends of mine in conversations and in online discussions. What I would like to do in this piece is show that premillennialism, particularly historic premillennialism, is not at all inconsistent with building into the future of your nation and working for the good of society in general and for a Christian society in particular. 

Before we do this, it does need to be acknowledged that there is a strong streak of a bunker or escapist mentality amongst those who believe in a 7-year tribulation and a following return of Christ for the millennial reign, and particularly if they hold to a pre-tribulation secret rapture. There is a kind of Christian who always thinks that the end is immanent, who is especially certain that the rapture will happen somewhere in September of every year,[2] and every time there is some kind of conflagration in Israel, Iran or Russia, they are certain that these are the final days.

There is a kind of Christian who thinks that there is not really any point to investing in the future because this world is going to end soon, and they would see the building of a multigenerational cathedral as a waste of money because all this is about to end any way. There is a kind of Christian who is obsessed with predicting the time of the rapture, with watching the signs around national Israel and Palestine and who really does believe that this world is only going to get continually worse, “so let’s just close ourselves off from society.” This is a very pessimistic and defeatist theology[3] and it should be rejected. It is also completely understandable why so many Christians filled with the hope of the gospel are rejecting it today.[4] Many Christians are hopeful for good things for our nations and they look forward to new advances of the gospel in the future and refuse to accept that the Church of Christ will be defeated by this world.

I think it is vital to show that none of these pessimistic outlooks is inherent to historical premillennial theology. I think there are a few different ways to demonstrate this, but first I need to define some terms.

Historical premillennialism is a belief about end times that can be traced back explicitly to Irenaeus, the Church father, and his early writing Against Heresies, and one could argue even further. It is generally accepted as a dominant view in the primitive Church. In brief it is the idea of a tribulation period, of several years towards the end of the age, the return of Jesus Christ at the end of that tribulation period where he returns to set up his millennial reign on earth, with a final battle at the end of that millennium, before the heavens and the earth are made new for our eternal existence in them.

Dispensational premillennialism is very similar but has some notable differences. Its major difference is the distinction between the Church and Israel, a view which stands against the teaching of the Church throughout history. Prior to the 19^th century, the Church had always seen itself as the continuation of God’s people stretching back to Abraham[5]. Dispensationalists, however, see a sharp distinction between Israel and the Church, and believe God has separate plans for the two.

Related to this doctrine is the belief that the Church will be raptured out of the tribulation at the start or in the middle of the tribulation period. The reason this doctrine is related to the distinction of the Church from Israel is because in dispensational thought the tribulation serves two purposes, to wake up lukewarm Christians who will be left behind after the rapture, and to wake up Israel for whom the tribulation is designed to be their discipline. Some dispensationalists call the tribulation ‘Jacob’s trouble’, because they believe it is in this time that Jacob (Israel) is stirred to wake up and look upon the one whom they have pierced and many Jews will then turn to Christ in this time.

There are numerous variations of these views, but these basic descriptions will serve our purpose for distinguishing the two views. It is important to make this distinction, because not all forms of premillennialism are the same. Some are influenced by American evangelicalism, and some versions go back to the primitive Church in ancient Rome.  

The Great Falling Away

Premillennialists across both of these broad categories will agree on many particulars. For instance, generally speaking premillennialists believe that there will be a great falling away, or apostasy in the final days. This is taught clearly in several passages of scripture. For instance, 2 Thessalonians 2:1-3,

“1 Now concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered together to him, we ask you, brothers, 2 not to be quickly shaken in mind or alarmed, either by a spirit or a spoken word, or a letter seeming to be from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has come. 3 Let no one deceive you in any way. For that day will not come, unless the rebellion comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction,…”

Here Paul is saying that before Christ returns there will be a great rebellion, where the man of lawlessness, often referred to as the antichrist, is revealed. Jesus taught precisely the same thing as Paul,

“9 Then they will deliver you up to tribulation and put you to death, and you will be hated by all nations for my name's sake. 10 And then many will fall away and betray one another and hate one another. 11 And many false prophets will arise and lead many astray. 12 And because lawlessness will be increased, the love of many will grow cold. 13 But the one who endures to the end will be saved. 14 And this gospel of the kingdom will be proclaimed throughout the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come” (Matt. 24:9-14).

Jesus is saying precisely the same thing as Paul. In the latter days there will be a tribulation and a great falling away. Now, of course amillennialists and postmillennialists believe these passages too, they just apply them to different times and contexts. I do not intend to debate over the merits of these varying applications here. What we would like to discuss for this piece is the implication that these passages contain for premillennialists. Postmillennials will say that premillennial eschatology is inherently pessimistic because it believes the church will be defeated in the end, and then rescued at the last minute by the return of Christ, rather than the church handing Christ a largely Christian world when he returns. You could read these passages this way, and many do.

But I want you to think about a couple of things. Firstly, the implication that a great falling away will have ramifications for the whole world, and particularly Christians in all the world, necessitates that there will first be an incredible advance of Christianity to every corner of the globe. Jesus appears to imply this, “14 And this gospel of the kingdom will be proclaimed throughout the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.” For this falling away to have the implications it does, this necessitates a very successful and very missionally active church which has already won large proportions of the world to Christ.

Secondly, consider what we learn from history here, we all know the principle, “Hard times create strong men, strong men create good times, good times create weak men and weak men create hard times.” The direct result of a nation becoming largely Christian is always inevitably an increase in productivity across society and a corresponding increase in prosperity. This has been observed all throughout history. What Christianity did for medieval Europe far surpasses anything that Rome achieved. What has also been observed is how every single one of these Christian nations has become decadent in its prosperity and fallen away in one measure or another, and the cycle of hard times again begins. It stands to reason that this principle will continue until Christ comes to make things anew and finally rids the world of the corrupting forces of sin and evil.

Ergo, one can believe in an incredibly triumphant church and still a great falling away. How long will history last? I have no idea. But if the church continues as it is today it will one day encompass the world in very large measure, and because prosperity will increase this will coincide with a lot of people being born and many, many people being saved. In contrast the time period of the final great falling away is incredibly short, maybe 3 and a half to 7 years, depending on how you read scripture. If there is another 100, 200, or 1000 years of history, how many billions of people will be saved in this time? If even a billion rebel in the final period due to the decadence caused by the prosperity that the righteous create, this is till far fewer than those who could possibly be saved. The numbers of the saved could be staggering.

Also consider this, according to Revelation 7, even in the great tribulation countless numbers of people are being saved. In fact, right up until Revelation 18 and the judgement of Babylon the offer is being made for people to come out of Babylon and trust in the Lord. So even the worst period of history in the world sees a great revival. So where is the room for pessimism? I see no room for pessimism, unless you are among those who cling to the things of this world over Jesus.  

The more influential and powerful the church gets, the more the devil will rise up to try and destroy it, and the more he will be defeated by those who have the testimony of how the lamb of God saved them. There is no room for pessimism here, and no reason not to build for the future because we have no idea when this final period will be and we know that while we are on this world we have a job to fulfil. Which leads to my next point.

The Talents and Inheritances

Theology is complex, more to the point, how people apply what the Bible says to their lives is complex. It involves more than just a literal, metaphorical or allegorical reading of Scripture. How people read and apply the bible also includes their social and family context, their education, their interests, their intelligence, their own personal biases, the national culture in which they are born, the time in which people are born and more. It is a thoroughly complex topic and I understand why some people avoid it like the plague.  

Now, someone might observe that some people hold to a particular doctrine, they may also logically deduct what the implications of that doctrine are, and how that doctrine should work itself out in the lives of those who hold to it. For instance, someone might observe a Christian who believes the coming of Jesus is immanent, therefore they logically assume this belief will impact their desire to build for the future, by diminishing that desire. What people believe matters, right? There is a sensible logic to this line of reasoning. It is neat and tidy. The problem is, though, that Christians are often not logical in how they apply scripture, they are rarely neat and tidy about it, and they are also often influenced by scripture in a much simpler way than this.  

Most Christians, in my observation, tend to hold certain truths in tension without ever seeking to work those beliefs into a systematized system of thought. They may seek to address apparent contradictions, but they are not really interested in deeply analysing the scriptures on every possible topic and working out how they interlock together. The way this works out in their life in practice is that they will know one passage says one thing and another passage says another and they will seek to put both of these passages into practice, even though one might say that this is not a logical application of one or the other verses. So, someone looking from the outside may think; well this person believes the end is near, therefore they will not be inclined to build. But the truth is a Christian is completely capable of believing Jesus will return at any moment or even tomorrow, and yet also believe they should focus on building and planning for the future, because they know there are other passages which say they should. In fact, I would argue this is a basic requirement of Christianity and the Bible is designed to be trusted in this way.

One good example of this is the parable of the talents. This is a famous parable where the master gives to three of his servants differing amounts of talents (money) to steward in his absence (Matt. 25:14-15). He then comes back at some point and evaluates how these servants have used these talents. Two have used them wisely, and the third simply buried his talent and squandered it,

“26 But his master answered him, ‘You wicked and slothful servant! You knew that I reap where I have not sown and gather where I scattered no seed? 27 Then you ought to have invested my money with the bankers, and at my coming I should have received what was my own with interest. 28 So take the talent from him and give it to him who has the ten talents. 29 For to everyone who has will more be given, and he will have an abundance. But from the one who has not, even what he has will be taken away. 30 And cast the worthless servant into the outer darkness. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth’” (Matt. 25:26-30).

The point of this parable is clear: take what God has given you in this world and invest with it in a godly way. If you choose to squander it God will judge you for this.

It is doubly significant that this passage comes directly after several passages addressing the end of the world and judgement. When you read what Jesus says about the end of the world, the way people will fall away, the fact that he is going to judge the world in a surprising way much like he did with Noah, you can see why some people might be tempted to think, “Let’s bunker down, and ride this show out.” But Jesus tells us to do the opposite. He explicitly warns us with two parables in a row to be ready for the return of Christ. But he expands on this in the second one to explain that being productive in this world with what Jesus has given us, is part of how we prepare for the return of Christ. God wants us to invest in this world and improve it. If your eschatology says you can check out and bunker down, it falls far short of Scripture. You would place yourself in the position of the worthless servant with one talent.

A balanced reading of scripture, no matter what you believe about the end of days, requires a deep and practical investment in this world for the kingdom of God. So many of Jesus’ messages about stewardship require this of his servants. He is the master and he expects his servants to be about his work, and the Scriptures give a vast array of activities which the master expects us to be involved in, and building for the future is one of them, so is witnessing, charity, seeking for biblical justice and more.

Another good example of this is Proverbs 13:22, “A good man leaves an inheritance to his children's children, but the sinner's wealth is laid up for the righteous.” As one friend I know has put it, it is ridiculous to think that a righteous person who is premillennial does not care about the future. If they know their scriptures, they know they are supposed to leave an inheritance to their children and leave the timing of the end of the world to Jesus. And a careful reading of many passages of scripture bears out this emphasis. Whatever our eschatology we are required to invest in the future of our nation and society for good. Because Christ wants his people to be a blessing to the nations around them and he wants all of us to use the gifts he has given us.

Building for the future is not inherently antagonistic to premillennial eschatology, because eschatology is not the only driving force of our behaviour. The simple commands of Christ are far more significant, and they require us to live a certain way. To use our eschatology as an excuse to ignore the commands of Jesus would be to do harm to scripture.

Why Do The Righteous Hide?

I could make many more biblical arguments for this position that there is no inherent reason why premillennialism needs to lead to a bunker down theology. But I want to end by asking another question: why do the righteous hide? There is no doubt that there is a trend in conservative Christianity to move towards more independent living, less reliance on the system and more of an emphasis on building self-sustaining communities. This is true across America and Australia. It was evidenced by the boom in house and land prices in country and rural communities during the covid years. So why do people do this?

Well, Proverbs gives us an answer here, “When the wicked rise, people hide themselves, but when they perish, the righteous increase” (Prov. 28:28). Ordinary people seeking to withdraw themselves from trouble is not a new phenomenon, it is as old as trouble itself. You see this when an argument, fight or conflict breaks out in many contexts, many people seek to shrink away from it and withdraw themselves. When the wicked rule most people tend to hide themselves away, keep their heads down and stay quiet. I say most people because not all good people do this, many will seek to stand up to evil, but not all. But once hard times ease off again, the good people tend to come back out into the open. I suspect one of the reasons that we see good people withdrawing today is because of the current resurgence of evil in the West.

Paul does say, “…brothers…aspire to live quietly, and to mind your own affairs, and to work with your hands, as we instructed you,” ( 1 Thess. 4:11). We are actually encouraged to try and live quiet, stable and self-sustaining lives. Not to be troublemakers and constant agitators in society. There is a time to speak up and a time to be quiet. But, for most Christians, quiet is their preferred norm and they will gravitate towards it. Perhaps some forms of eschatology have encouraged this, but eschatology it is not the only driving force.

Consider this as well, at the heights of postmillennial theology in Medieval Europe many Christians withdrew into monasteries and nunneries. They were often driven to such a lifestyle because of their views on sanctification and soteriology, and not necessarily because of eschatology. In fact, eschatology is often orthogonal to whether people want to build into the society around them or not. I would argue people withdraw from society for a host of reasons.

I think it is very simple to establish from scripture that there is no inherent aspect of premillennial theology which says you should not invest in the future or build for the future. You may read Matthew 24 completely different to me. You may understand the millennium completely differently to me and other premillennials. But we premillennials read Matthew 24 and Revelation 20 to clearly teach that there is a second coming of Christ, that it happens before the millennium and many of us believe there will be a great tribulation before this. But we also read Matthew 25 and see that we have no justification to sit on the talents God has given us and not invest in the future of our nation, because we know our God is coming back to evaluate us. Indeed, I suspect many premillennials build and invest for the future, because they want to be found doing that when our Lord returns. Should not we all have this same motivation?

I asked one premillennial friend how he balances his view that the world may be in the last days with his political work and advocacy? He said, it is because he has a salt and light theology, and Christians are to be salt in this world while we are here. I responded, I thought so. Because this is precisely how I think about it, though I have used different wording.

Eschatology is important. It does influence how we think, but more Christians are influenced by what Jesus says about how we should live, than complex systems of how the end times will work out or by false prophets on YouTube who tell them the end is nigh this September or next September. For those Christians who are more driven by constantly studying the signs of times and who get bogged down in this, then I would say that is because they have an imbalance in their theology and that can only be corrected by good teaching. I hope this article is a part of helping with that.   

---

[1] But enough about the Left Behind series.

[2] I used to get constantly sent videos from people every year telling me why this September is the year Jesus would return. Very annoying, and no matter how many times they were wrong, they were always convinced the next year would be the year.

[3] I say theology and not eschatology deliberately, and you will see why as I make my case.

[4] I think postmillennialism is a natural and understandable reaction to the excesses of pretribulation dispensational theology. I also think if more people understood historic premillennialism, they’d be much more comfortable with holding it, instead of moving across the spectrum to postmillennial.

[5] Dispensationalists call this “replacement theology”. But this is completely incorrect. Replacement theology was a term developed in the 1980’s to disparage the historical teachings of the church on the issue of Israel. The majority of the church did not teach that the Church replaced Israel, but that the barrier to Gentiles joining Israel, the law, was removed and from that point on Gentiles could join Israel without having to become Jews who lived under the Mosaic law (cf. Acts 15). All the Jews who rejected Christ were in turn removed from the tree, Israel, and all the Gentiles who believed in him joined the believing Jews to be a part of God’s people. There was no replacement, only an expansion because the means of joining God’s people was far simpler.

A Simple Encouragement In “The last days”.

 

With all that is happening in Israel and Russia and Ukraine at the moment this has caused many Christians to believe that the end is immanent. Some Christians believe that everything that happens in Israel is a sign of the end times and those end times are now. While I disagree with that reading of Scripture, and so would most pastors in history have disagreed with it, whether you believe it or not here is some advice and some encouragement for times like this:

Live like Jesus could come back at any minute. And invest in yourself, family, church and society like he may not return for a thousand years.

This is how the church wins. By living like our Saviour and judge might return at any moment, so that we have an urgency in how we seek to apply his word to our lives. But also, by recognizing that no generation of the church lived without this same motivation and yet Christ has not yet returned for nearly 2000 years. Therefore, it is good to invest in the future of your people and nation because there may be many centuries before Christ returns. 

Whatever is happening in the Middle East, Israel, Russia, Europe or wherever, this is a winning formula for the Church if we live ready for his return but also with a view towards building for the future. Let us never live otherwise.

When Times Are Tough

 

In medieval England people all across society would brew beer at home. Beer or ale was a staple of the English diet. It used to be if you wanted to consume something that you would make it. This was true for beer. Some people would brew far more beer than they needed. They may have been particularly proficient at making large quantities of beer or known for making really good beer and so they would open up their houses to the public so people could come and buy their beer.

These were known as "public houses" and later simply pubs.

We still call bartenders "publicans" in England. And pubs are still a vital part of English culture, and the culture of many of its former colonies. Some publicans opened rooms to people passing through town for rent, so they could make a little extra money. This did not just happen in England there were versions of this across medieval society and in other cultures as well.

The reason I mention this is because now people in Australia are starting to bring these old practices back to life. Not because of any sense of wanting to connect with our ancient Anglo-Saxon traditions, but because times are tough and people are struggling to pay their rent or their mortgages. It is not just a matter of people having too much debt, though this is an issue for many, but many people who are struggling have no debt, a decent level of savings and are paying exorbitant rents which are causing them to go backwards financially.

So now people are considering renting rooms in their houses to strangers, or in some cases renting their entire home to strangers through services like Air BnB a couple of times a month to make some extra money.

Times are tough out there for a lot of people, especially younger millennials who have a young family and have not had the chance to build a decent asset portfolio yet – and who may never get the chance with the way the economy is going.

I find it interesting how people are adapting and changing their lifestyles to seek to keep ahead of the creeping inflation and just maintain a basic standard of living. If you were to look at incomes and assets values on paper, Australians are wealthier than they have ever been. But if you compare the buying power of today’s dollar to the buying power of our money 5, 10, or 15 years ago, you can see clearly Australians are going under, quickly. Especially when you compare what people own on average to the average level of debt that people have in a household. Australians are sinking, and our wealth is evaporating.

But people are adapting. I find it interesting to see these old ways coming back again. I wonder how they will fair in this age of over-regulation of pretty much anything people do, or any possible way that people can even make a cent of profit. The dream of owning a home is quickly becoming a phantom for most Australians. But what is more shocking is the dream of having just your family in the home, is also becoming harder and harder for some Australians to achieve.

There is a kind of prosperity which is false and Australia is experiencing it. The luck of the lucky country is running dry. I wonder how this will all turn out? When times are tough people have to adapt, but how far can this go before our way of life is extinct?