Do not pad your prayers.

Matthew 6.7-8.

Right after Jesus taught his followers, in his Sermon on the Mount, to keep our prayers private, he added,

Matthew 6.7-8 KWL

7“You² who pray, ought not babble like the pagans,

for they think they will be listened to

because of their many words.

8So you² ought not be like them!

For your² Father knew what need you² have

before your² asking of him.”

“Babble” comes from the verb βαττολογέω/vattoloyéo, “to stammer [one’s] words.” It’s about padding one’s prayers by repeating ourselves too much.

I didn’t grow up Pentecostal; I became one as an adult. The first time I ever heard a Pentecostal pray, I was a teenager, and was not at all used to the way most of us pray. I thought, “You’ve got to be kidding me.” ’Cause a whole lot of us have the embarrassingly bad habit of babbling.

Father God, LORD God, we thank you Lord Jesus, we thank you. Oh Abba Father, we just wanna thank you LORD God, and praise your name LORD God, because LORD God, Lord Jesus, your name is great LORD God Abba Father praise Jesus. Oh Lord God…

And so on. Most people when they’re at a loss for words, stammer a filler word like “uh” or “um.” We Pentecostals swapped that out for a “LORD God” or three. So let’s see… that’s eight LORD/Lords, seven Gods, three Fathers, three Jesuses, and two Abbas; and we haven’t even got to the request yet.

Yes this is what Jesus is talking about. I’ve heard plenty of Pentecostals try to claim it really isn’t; that Jesus is actually talking about hypocrisy. There’s a myth Ovid recorded in his Metamorphoses about the god Hermes and an old man named Váttos; Hermes swore him to secrecy, then approached him later in disguise and offered him a bribe to spill the secret. When Váttos ratted Hermes out, Hermes turned him into a rock. That’s a clear example of hypocrisy, isn’t it?

But we don’t derive the meaning of the Greek word βάττος/váttos from this myth; we get it from Hesychius of Alexandria and others, who say it means stammerer. Jesus is talking about stammering. If he meant hypocrisy he’d have said hypocrisy; Jesus is never shy about condemning hypocrisy!

The lesson therefore is do not pad your prayers. Get to the point. Jesus demonstrates in the very next passage with the Lord’s Prayer, which is not a long prayer, not a padded prayer, and gets to the point! Whereas we think, like the ancient pagans mistakenly did, that short prayers are not serious prayers; we gotta make ’em longer. And we do not. Jesus showed us we do not. Follow Jesus.

Study the prophets and be holy.

1 Peter 1.10-16.

There are a few popular, but greatly mistaken, Christian beliefs which Simon Peter debunks in today’s portion of his first letter. The first is obviously that we don’t need the Old Testament ’cause we have the New; that the only things we need to study are in the New Testament, and the Old is out of date, or even nullified.

The second is that the Old Testament prophets only prophesied about the events of their day. That whenever we say, “This Old Testament passage is clearly a Messianic prophecy,” we’re taking the passage out of context, because the OT prophet was only speaking of the king of Jerusalem in his day; he wasn’t at all thinking of the Messiah to come, the King of Kings, our Lord Jesus. We’re just reading Christian beliefs and wishes into his statements, instead of looking at the author’s actual intent.

Peter reveals nope, the Old Testament prophets were speaking of Jesus… because the Holy Spirit who inspired the prophets, is the very same Spirit of Christ who empowers us. These prophets foresaw, to varying degrees, a coming Messiah whose rule would never end. They wanted to know about him; they asked the Spirit about him; they foretold him because the Spirit answered some of their questions. Yes, they were totally talking about the events of their day, and totally speaking to the people of their day, but they still foretold of Christ Jesus, and the salvation he’d bring the world.

And this, among other things, is why we need to study the Old Testament—or “the Prophets,” as Jesus and the people of his day called the portions of the bible written after the Law of Moses. You want a greater picture of who Jesus is, and what he came to earth to do? Yeah, you read the New Testament; of course. But you also look at what the Spirit said through the Old Testament prophets.

1 Peter 1.10-16 KWL

10The Prophets search for and study this salvation—

those who prophesy of the grace God grants you²,

11these investigators making clear what or when

the Spirit of Christ within them foretells

of Christ’s sufferings

and the glories after that.

12This is revealed to the prophets—

not just to themselves;

they minister these things to you².

They’re proclaimed to you²

by those who share the gospel with you

empowered by the heaven-sent Holy Spirit.

God’s messengers set their hearts

upon looking into these things.

13So buckle up your² minds,

sober up,

and trust till the end

in the grace being brought to you²

in Christ Jesus’s revelation.

14Be like obedient children,

not falling back on your² former ignorance and desires,

15but according to the holy One who calls you².

Become holy yourselves², in every way of life.

16This is why it’s written,

“You² will be holy because I am holy.” Lv 11.44

I should note: In verse 12 I translated ἄγγελοι/ángeli, which is typically translated “angels,” by its literal meaning “messengers.” Popular Christian culture likes to claim the Holy Spirit revealed the mysteries of Jesus and salvation to us Christians, but not to the angels, even though they totally yearned to know it. Thing is, there’s no legitimate biblical basis for this belief; just misinterpreted verses. In fact the angel Gabriel totally knew about these things—and Gabriel’s the one who shared some of it with the prophets Daniel, Zechariah, and Mary. This angel knew the mysteries first; I wouldn’t be at all surprised if all of ’em knew it first. After all, darn near all of them appeared to the shepherds to announce our Savior had been born.

Anyway, for this reason I’m pretty sure Peter meant any messenger of God should wanna look into these things, whether angels or humans. You should wanna know. Every Christian should! So, as Peter continues in verse 13, buckle up!

Special revelation in the present day.

Most Christians understand that God continues to reveal himself to humanity. I would say he constantly reveals himself; he’s constantly talking to people. Plenty of Christians have a conversational prayer life with God. As for those who don’t: He works around our hesitancy or ignorance. He’ll drop an idea in our heads, and we might think it’s one of ours, but it’ll be way better, way more fruitful, than any of ours. He’ll give you a dream you can’t forget, or one of his many prophets will tell us something that pokes us right in the conscience… along with the Holy Spirit, who pokes us there an awful lot too.

Every time God answers a prayer, every time he performs a miracle, every time he gives out a message for another person—whether it’s encouragement or divine knowledge—in every interaction, we see more examples of what God can do, and God’s good character. We learn more about God.

True, there are cessationists who insist God stopped doing all that stuff in bible times; who insist the only way we can learn about God is by reading and quoting and studying bible. And I’m not gonna discourage getting to know that bible; it’s how we confirm the God who’s actively doing stuff among us, is the very same Holy Spirit whom Jesus promised to send us. But what evidence do cessationists have that God doesn’t specially reveal himself anymore—that instead he’s forsaken us—other than out-of-context bible verses?

Well none. Just their own prejudices against people who claim they had God-experiences. Just their terror of the very idea that Christianity isn’t under their control at all; that in fact the Holy Spirit has his own agenda, and because they’ve been denying his activity they don’t actually know him as much as they’ve been claiming; and because some of ’em have been calling his activity devilish, turns out they’ve been blaspheming him.

Funny thing is, I grew up among cessationists. And even they will talk about God’s current activity. They’ll talk about looking at nature and deducing God from it. Awesome discoveries from the Hubble and Webb telescopes reveal what God made. Awesome scientific breakthroughs reveal God’s intelligent design. A newborn baby or a really cool sunset both reveal God’s current activity. So if God’s continually revealing himself through nature… then he is continually revealing himself, isn’t he? Gotcha.

Premillennialism: Jesus is gonna rule the world.

PREMILLENNIALISM 'pri.mɪ'lɛn.i.əl.ɪz.əm noun. Belief after Christ Jesus’s return, he and his saints will reign on earth a thousand years.

[Premillenarism 'pri.mɪ'lɛn.ər.ɪz.əm noun., premillennial 'pri.mɪ'lɛn.i.əl adjective.]

As I’ve written before, all my life I’ve been a part of Evangelical churches which taught premillennialism: They all believed when Jesus returns, it’s to literally set up God’s kingdom here on earth.

It’s a literal interpretation of Revelation 20:

Revelation 20.4-6 NRSVue

4Then I saw thrones, and those seated on them were given authority to judge. I also saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for their testimony to Jesus and for the word of God. They had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its brand on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ a thousand years. 5(The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended.) This is the first resurrection. 6Blessed and holy are those who share in the first resurrection. Over these the second death has no power, but they will be priests of God and of Christ, and they will reign with him a thousand years.

Since Revelation consists of apocalyptic visions which aren’t meant to be taken literally, most Christians don’t take this passage literally either, and are amillennial: They figure the millennium represents the Christian Era, i.e. right now, and Jesus and his saints kinda rule over it; then Jesus will end the world at his second coming, and off we go to New Heaven. Amillennialists say we premillennialists are claiming a metaphor is literally gonna happen. It’s like claiming when Jesus returns, a giant mustard tree has to grow in Jerusalem for the birds to nest under.

And I actually agree with them: We can’t interpret this passage as if this is how things are literally gonna happen. But we can interpret it—same as we interpret Revelation 21’s descriptions of the New Heaven and New Earth—as how things are sorta gonna be. Jesus conquers the world, Rv 19.11-16 takes out the Beast and his armies Rv 19.17-21 (whether you consider the Beast a specific political leader, or all the corrupt systems currently ruling the world), chains Satan and imprisons it in the Abyss, Rv 20.1-3 then resurrects his saints so they can serve Jesus, and Jesus rules the world. Rv 20.4-6 And since Jesus conquers the world before he personally takes over—and the world surely hasn’t been conquered by Christendom, much less Jesus—it stands to reason these are future events. Jesus’s millennial reign is not now. It’s later.

Oh, and it likely doesn’t last a literal millennium. The apostle John no doubt used that word to describe a significantly long time. But if it lasts 100 years, 1,000 years, 10,000 years, or Jesus is planning to rule this world till our sun finally goes nova, we Christians ought not be picky.

Get in the closet.

Matthew 6.6.

The reason Jesus addresses public prayer in his Sermon on the Mount is to discourage hypocrisy. That’s what you saw in public places in Israel: People conspicuously praying so that others would see them, and think them devout.

Whereas Jesus told his followers that if you legitimately want to pray, make it a private conversation.

Matthew 6.6 KWL

“You¹, whenever you¹ pray,

go into your¹ private room, closing your¹ door;

and pray to your¹ Father in private.

And your¹ Father, who sees what’s done in private,

will pay you¹ back {in the open}.”

Ἐν τῷ φανερῷ/en to faneró, “in the open,” was added to Matthew by the Textus Receptus, both here and in verse 4. It’s not in the oldest copies of Matthew; it was added in the fourth century. Again, since Jesus is bringing us our compensation at his return, Rv 22.12 this isn’t a problematic addition. Still, Jesus didn’t say it.

The KJV translates ταμεῖόν/tameión as “closet,” and the NET as “inner room.” Your average middle eastern house would have two rooms—the main room, which you could access through the front door, and the smaller back room, which you could only access from the inside. Guests could enter the main room, but only family went into the back room: It was private. That’s the tameión. Wealthier middle easterners would have a number of ’em in their homes, and use them for storage—hence the KJV’s translation “closet.” But it doesn’t have to be a closet. Just someplace private.

Now, why would you have to go someplace private to pray, when it’s much easier to speak with God in your mind, and not aloud? Simple: Ancient middle easterners didn’t pray like that. They prayed aloud.

You’re talking to God, right? Which means you’re talking to God. Not thinking at God. I know; a lot of Christians pray silently, and for many of us it’s the only way we pray. Most of the time it’s not appropriate to pray aloud. If you prayed aloud at work, people’d think you’re weird. If you prayed aloud in public school, some idiot would complain about it. If everybody in church simultaneously prayed aloud, it’d get loud (and in ancient times, when people prayed aloud, it absolutely did get loud).

In general, we’re encouraged to pray silently, and that’s understandable in a lot of places. But Christians get the wrong idea and think we’re always to pray silently. No we’re not.

Lookit how Jesus demonstrates prayer in the scriptures. When he went off to pray, even by himself, privately between him and the Father, other people could overhear him. Like in Gethsemane. Mt 26.39, Lk 22.41-42 The reason we even have records in the bible of people’s prayers, is ’cause these folks weren’t silent. They spoke.

I should add: Praying in your mind is much harder than praying aloud. Because the mind wanders. (By design! It’s how the creative process works.) In the middle of our mental conversations with God, stray thoughts pop into our heads. In a verbal conversation, we can choose whether we’ll say such things aloud, but in a mental conversation, we can’t do that: There they are. We just thought ’em. They interrupted our prayers, like a rude friend who thinks he’s being funny, but isn’t. Ordinarily we ignore those thoughts. In mental prayers, we find it really hard to. Even the best-trained minds struggle with that. And a lot of Christians get frustrated with it, so they give up and pray seldom, if at all. Don’t do that. If you lose your train of thought all the time during prayer, stop praying silently. Pray aloud. It helps a lot.

“But what,” Christians object, “about privacy?” Discussions between us and God are often sensitive. We don’t want people listening in on our conversations, like they do when we answer our mobile phones at the coffeehouse. We want privacy. That’s why prayed in our minds in the first place. And this is precisely why Jesus talks about praying in private.

Simon Peter and the kingdom we inherit.

1 Peter 1.1-9.

Simon Peter wrote a few letters before his death under Nero Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus in the 60s. We have two of ’em in the New Testament—one which he wrote to the Christians of what is now Türkiye, and another which he wrote to Christians in general.

Some commentators think he wrote his letters under persecution, and some think he wrote ’em before. And of course that’s seriously gonna influence the way we interpret the letter. When Peter writes about “the testing of your faith” in verse 7 of today’s passage, we’re gonna wonder whether he’s writing about the usual difficulties of daily life in a largely pagan culture… or whether he’s writing about full-on tribulation, as the Romans tried to round up people whom they thought were terrorists. Nero blamed the Great Fire of Rome in 64 on them, and hunted them down like ICE hunts immigrants; to put ’em in island concentration camps like he did John, or to execute them like he eventually did Peter.

I mean, 1 Peter can be applicable in both situations—under life’s usual trials, or under a fascist purge. Most scriptures are flexible like that. But we don’t know which of the two the west Asian Christians were going through, and I’m gonna presume Peter wrote it before the persecutions… otherwise there’d be way more about persecution in the letter.

Now, some Christians insist it had to have been written during persecution, ’cause Peter talks so much about the second coming of Jesus. But that’s because Peter expected the second coming to happen in his lifetime. He was off by a few millennia, but he didn’t know that. All he knew was he was right there when Jesus got raptured into heaven, and the two men told him and the Eleven he coming back in the same way. Ac 1.11 He saw Jesus get transfigured. He knew this future kingdom of Christ is coming. He was excited about it! We should be excited about it! So this comes out in his letter. Doesn’t take persecution to bring it out of you.

1 Peter 1.1-9 KWL

1Peter, apostle of Christ Jesus,

to the “foreign” elect of the Diaspora—

of Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia,

Asia Minor, and Bithynia.

2By God the Father’s foreknowledge,

in the Holy Spirit’s holiness,

into obedience—

and the sprinkling of Christ Jesus’s blood—

may grace to you², and peace, multiply!

3Blessed are you God,

father of our Master, Christ Jesus.

By his great mercy he makes us born again,

into a living hope

through Christ Jesus’s resurrection from the dead.

4Born again into an inheritance,

unspoiled, untainted, unfading,

under guard in the heavens for you² all.

5And you² are guarded

by God’s power, through your faith,

for the salvation he prepared,

to be revealed in the End Time.

6In that, you² can jump for joy—

for now, briefly, it’s necessary to grieve

from our various temptations.

7Thus the testing of your² faith,

which is more precious than gold,

which perishes through fire,

might be found proven,

to the praise, glory, and honor

at the revelation of Christ Jesus.

8You² don’t see him;

you² still love him.

You² can’t look upon him just now,

and you believers still jump

for inexpressible and magnificent joy

9at receiving the outcome of your² faith:

Salvation of your² souls.

Unbelieving Christian leaders.

Years ago I listened to a Christian podcast in which the host interviewed an ex-pastor, whom I’ll call Trophimus. (Honestly, I didn’t change his name to protect the innocent; or in this case guilty. It’s because I just forgot his name.)

Trophimus had retired from ministry a few years before. Now he was writing books; this interview was to promote his book. Not as part of a publisher’s book tour; he was self-publishing, so he was self-promoting. The subject of his book? How he led his church for a full decade… despite the fact he no longer believed in God.

He wouldn’t call himself atheist. He’d say agnostic; he wasn’t sure God exists. Couldn’t feel or sense him. All the warm fuzzy feelings were gone. Bible and Christian literature were no help. And those Christian friends whom he shared his doubts with…

Ah, there’s the rub. Trophimus shared his doubts with no one. No counselors, no mentors, no close friends, not even his wife. I’m not sure he even talked with God about it—“Lord, I believe; help thou mine unbelief.” Mk 9.24 KJV I mean, it’s not like unbelievers never ever pray, when desperate. Maybe he didn’t feel desperate enough.

In any event Trophimus hid his doubts as best he could, went through the motions, and stuck out his job till he was ready to retire.

“So,” the podcast host bluntly said, “you were a hypocritical fraud for 10 years. Just doing it for the money.”

You could hear Trophimus bristle at that description. Absolutely not, he insisted. He wanted to believe again; really he did. He didn’t stay in his pastorate just for the money; he was hoping something might reactivate his faith. Maybe he’d see a miracle. Or hear God, or otherwise have a God-experience.

“You ever try the Pentecostals?” the host said; “plenty of God-stuff happens there.”

“No,” Trophimus chuckled. I’m guessing he never considered them. I’m Pentecostal, and to be blunt, some of us are mighty weird, so I get it. Still, if you claim you’re desperate for a God-experience, I’m gonna suspect your claims are entirely B.S. when you absolutely rule out continuationist churches where such experiences happen. But I digress.

Nonetheless, Trophimus figured being in ministry gave him a better-than-average chance of seeing God stuff. He’s not wrong, but in my experience it depends on what kind of ministry you’re doing. Are you working with seriously needy people, or are you only interacting with fairly comfortable rich people? If your people don’t have real needs, how’re you gonna witness God meeting needs? But that’s another digression.

“Okay,” said the host, “but you didn’t even tell your wife? You couldn’t trust her with your secret? For 10 whole years? She has to feel so betrayed.”

Yeah, this wasn’t a comfortable interview for Trophimus. He kept trying to justify himself, and the host was having none of it, and kept calling out his hypocrisy. I found it memorable because it was mighty cringey—and not very gracious, unfortunately. It was probably the very same judgmental response Trophimus feared the moment he outed himself.

But to be fair to the podcast host: For 10 whole years Trophimus committed spiritual fraud.

The bible as a source of revelation.

Many Christians firmly believe the only way God reveals himself to humanity, is through bible. Which contradicts what we find in the bible.

In the scriptures, God first reveals himself to humans with a God-appearance: He hangs out with Adam and Eve. Ge 3.8 It’s special revelation through regular personal appearances. Now yeah, the humans ruined those visitations… but no, their sin didn’t drive God away; sin doesn’t do that, because God is infinitely mightier than sin. The scriptures tell us God still appeared to people from time to time. And of course he became human, and interacted with people that way.

Likewise there were other forms of revelation—all of which we see in the book of Genesis:

• We got creation, for those folks who insist nature’s a type of revelation.
• We got miracles.
• We got God having conversational prayers with people. (Including, of all people, Cain, the first murderer.)
• We got prophetic dreams. (And the first guy to have one is neither Abraham nor one of his descendants; he’s a gentile.)
• We got prophets.

And the bible is a product of all these sources of revelation. People interacted with God, recorded these things, preserved them as best we can, and that’s our scriptures. That’s bible.

The difference between bible and other forms of revelation, is the bible’s been repeatedly confirmed as reliable. In its day, and many times since. Yes, even Revelation—even though its apocalyptic visions talk about the very end of history, plenty of it is about its then-present day, and that stuff came to pass. It’s why ancient Christians kept it. I can’t help that “prophecy scholars” make tons of wild claims about what they think it means, that people buy their books and believe ’em, and that their wild claims regularly don’t come true. They know not what they do, and their fans are wasting their time and money on ’em.

The fact the bible’s been confirmed is why we kept its books: Why keep supposed “revelations from God” which were unproven or disproven? Why seek similar God-experiences for ourselves? But since we’ve sought those experiences and found ’em valid, and since we’ve thus far confirmed many of the bible’s historical events in history, we Christians consider the scriptures faithful and reliable revelations of God. If you wanna fact-check it again, go right ahead; we’ve found it can stand up to scrutiny. Archaeologists still keep digging up stuff which confirms it—sometimes in ways they never expected, ’cause their discoveries put a whole new spin on the scriptures.

Now, with every other source of revelation, we still have to confirm them. We gotta watch miracles to see whether they produce the sort of good fruit we oughta see in God’s handiwork. We gotta confirm prophecy, prayer messages, and dreams, lest people were mistaken, or were tricked, or are lying. But with bible, not so much. From the time the very first books were written, all the way to today, God’s followers have confirmed and re-confirmed and re-re-confirmed the scriptures are solid. Trustworthy. Relevant. Consistent with who God is.

Postmillennialism: Conquering the world for Jesus.

POSTMILLENNIALISM 'poʊst.mɪ'lɛn.i.əl.ɪz.əm noun. Belief the second coming of Christ Jesus takes place after a thousand-year period of blessedness.

[Postmillenarism 'poʊst.mɪ'lɛn.ər.ɪz.əm noun, postmillennial 'poʊst.mɪ'lɛn.i.əl adjective.]

Most historical resources will tell you postmillennialism became the dominant way Protestants understood the End Times in the 1800s: We Christians were gonna evangelize the world! Roman Catholics would fire the pope, the Russians and Greeks would fire their patriarchs, the Turks would quit Islam, the Indians would quit Hinduism, the Jews would turn to Jesus. and everybody’d become Protestant. And once we’d done so, we’d enter the millennium.

Now, Christians of that era weren’t that naïve: All this stuff of course sounds extremely unlikely. It’d be a lot of work, and take years, to convince all these groups to become Christian. Centuries maybe; Congregationalist evangelist Jonathan Edwards, who promoted his belief in postmillennialism during the Great Awakening revival of the 1730s, figured it might not be achieved till the year 2000. It’d take an extraordinary work of the Holy Spirit—but, Edwards firmly held, it’ll happen. It’s inevitable.

And when it arrives, it’ll begin a thousand years of grace, peace, and prosperity. No more war, no more inhumanity towards one another; Christians will follow Jesus wholeheartedly, and work together to solve all humanity’s problems. With the Spirit’s help and power, we’ll the earth into a utopian paradise.

And then Jesus returns—and it’s the end of the world, and off we go to New Heaven.

This postmillennial worldview is why you’ll see a bevy of reform movements in the 1800s. Christians, spurred by their postmillennialist preachers, realized it was time to get started! Gotta ask ourselves, “What would Jesus do?” and do that. Gotta seek and save the lost. Gotta lay the groundwork for the new Christian world we’d help bring about. Gotta encourage the culture to get more Christian, more humanitarian, more righteous. Onward and upward!

Three things wrong with this description.

First and most obvious, Christianity historically teaches us Jesus can return at any time. But postmillennialism holds off that return for a thousand years after the millennium starts. So, because we obviously haven’t been working on it, if we can’t get the millennium started till the year 2265, Jesus isn’t returning till 3265. He’s a thousand-plus years away; not near.

Second, this particular postmillennial trend was largely an American Evangelical thing. Yes, there were Evangelicals outside the United States who were postmillennial… but more often they were amillennial, same as the Orthodox and Catholics. They figured the millennium of Revelation 20 represents the Christian Era, i.e. right now. Jesus is seated at the right hand of the Father, Ro 8.34 reigning right now. And when he returns, it’s to end history and the world, and take us to New Heaven. There’s no special utopian millennium coming; Jesus is coming. Again, he can return at any time, y’know.

Third, the people who not only held a postmillennial view, but promoted and pushed it really hard, weren’t only doing it to further the cause of Christ. Weren’t always primarily doing it for Christ Jesus either. A significant segment of their plans were—and still are—political.

’Cause if Jesus isn’t coming back to personally reign over the millennium… who’s gonna do that? Who’s gonna be in charge of the novus ordo seclorum? Well, Christians. Which Christians? Well… them; the postmillennial proclaimers. Or at least those fellow Christians who absolutely agree with them about how the new world order’s gonna be run.

What you’re regularly, invariably gonna find just beneath the surface of postmillennialism, is a political plan for a theocracy, a government by and for Christians. Not by and for every Christian; it’s gonna favor one particular branch, sect, or denomination of Christianity. If the leader of a particular postmillennial group is Baptist, it’s gonna look mighty Baptist. If he’s Catholic, very Catholic. If she’s Presbyterian, super Presbyterian. If he’s involved in the New Apostolic Reformation, it’s gonna be riddled with NAR teachings and terminology.

And if she’s a white nationalist, it’s gonna very much be that. Doesn’t matter that God’s kingdom is described in the scriptures as including “every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation;” Rv 5.9 they figure those other peoples are gonna be conquered subjects, second-class citizens who get grudgingly included in their millennial kingdom, but certainly can’t be granted any real power within it. Like blacks in the United States during the Jim Crow era, or Indians under the British Empire.

Yeah, the dirty little secret of postmillennialism is the more we look at the way these folks plan to run the millennium, the less Christian it gets.

The street-corner show-off.

Matthew 6.5.

Since I’m going through Jesus’s Sermon on the Mount, and these next passages have to do with prayer, I’m gonna discuss them in lieu of my usual posts on prayer. Beginning with the first of Jesus’s teachings on the topic, in chapter 6:

Matthew 6.5 KWL

“And whenever you² pray,

you’ll² not be like the hypocrites,

because they love standing up to pray

in synagogues and street corners

so they might be seen by people.

Amen! I promise you² this

is the compensation they receive.”

Throughout history, people have prayed publicly for various reasons. Some noble, some not. Today, Jesus gets into the not. They’re not legitimately trying to speak with God, nor publicly calling upon him for help and inviting everyone else to join their prayers. (And even these prayers can be done hypocritically.) This is purely so they can be seen praying. They wanna look religious. Usually more religious than they actually are.

Nothing annoys Jesus like hypocrisy, which is why he tries to discourage his followers from doing anything which smacks of hypocrisy. But you know some of us do this anyway.

Now the way the ancient prayed, typically, was standing up, heads and eyes and arms and hands raised to the sky, and praying aloud. They didn’t kneel, bow their heads, fold their hands, and pray mentally but not audibly. That practice arose in the middle ages. That was the posture European kings demanded of those who approached them—and since Jesus is King, people figured it’s appropriate. But the ancients faced the sky where they imagined God is, lifted their hands to get his attention, and spoke with him. This posture made it really obvious they were praying. Don’t need to get loud; just assume the position.

Jesus singles out the people who prayed in really public places. Like synagogue. Which is not a Jewish church like it is nowadays; it’s a Pharisee school. You went there to hear rabbis teach, and ask ’em questions. Prayer times took place throughout—before, after, and during the lesson—and they’d be short. But often people would stand right outside the building and make a public display of prayer, “getting right with God” before they went in. Or similarly praying this way after the lesson, ostensibly to thank God for the wisdom they just received… or maybe to ask him to straighten out some wayward rabbi. Whatever; the point was they were making it nice ’n obvious they talked with God. Presumably a lot.

Jesus also brings up ταῖς γωνίαις τῶν πλατειῶν/tes yoníës ton plateión, “the corners of the [wide] streets,” the most important busy intersections in town. Plenty of people walking past; plenty of people to witness you praying, nice and loud so God could hear you over all the other noise. (As if he’s in any way hard of hearing.)

In both cases, people might not have had the time, nor interest, to listen to the petitioner with his hands in the air. That wasn’t the point anyway. It’s not about being heard—not even by God!—but seen.

The way Christians pray nowadays, typically doesn’t assume the ancient posture. Usually our heads are bowed, eyes closed. Sometimes hands get raised, if the folks in the group have any Pentecostal influences in their background. But generally we’re not as noticeable when we pray. Unless we get loud… or unless there are a lot of us, like when a bunch of people pray in front of public buildings, around a flagpole, or in Congress.

But in these places, same as with the people Jesus critiqued, the point was to be seen and noticed by other people. Not so much God. And that’s what Jesus objects to.

For whom are you doing charity?

Matthew 6.1-4.

The second chapter of Jesus’s Sermon on the Mount begins with this teaching, only found in Matthew:

Matthew 6.1-4 KWL

1“Be careful to not do your² righteous deeds

in front of people for them to see.

Otherwise you² certainly get no compensation

from your² heavenly Father.

2“So whenever you¹ do for the needy,

you¹ ought not trumpet it out before you¹,

same as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and the streets

so they might be praised by people.

Amen! I promise you² this

is the compensation they receive.

3Now when you¹ do for the needy,

don’t let your¹ left hand know

what your¹ right does,

4so your¹ works for the needy

might be private.

And your¹ Father, who sees what’s done in private,

will pay you¹ back {in the open}.”

“In the open” in verse 4 was added to the text in the fourth century, and found in the Codex Washingtonianus and the Textus Receptus. It’s not in the oldest copies. Yet since Jesus is described as bringing us our compensation at his return, Rv 22.12 he may very well repay us in the open.

Superficially, Jesus’s teaching appears to contradict what he said about us being the world’s light—“that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven.” Mt 5.16 KJV But the obvious difference between that and this, is motive. As Jesus says in verse 1, watch out lest your good deeds are “in front of people for them to see,” i.e. done for public acclaim, not out of goodness, and definitely not for God. Done out of hypocrisy, not actual devotion. If you’re doing ’em for public praise, bad Christian!—human praise is all the compensation you get. That’s the context.

Jesus’s word “compensation” (Greek μισθὸν/misthón) means something we earned; “the worker is worthy of his misthú/wages.” 1Ti 5.18 Yet lots of bibles, following the KJV, translate it “reward,” which’ll give people the false idea this is something we didn’t actually merit, like when we get a reward for finding a lost item or missing person. When the King James was published in 1611, “reward” still meant compensation for your troubles. Workers don’t win their wages; they earn ’em.

Various stingy Christians claim God owes us nothing when we do good deeds. ’Cause we should be doing ’em anyway, right? And yeah, we should. True. But they’ve got a really lousy attitude about how God’s grace, and therefore our grace, should work. We’re not just God’s kids, who work for him for free. We inherit his kingdom. We have a stake in it; it’s also our kingdom. We should want to see it succeed, and the only way for that to happen is for us to follow the Boss’s vision. And God doesn’t skimp on our wages.

Unless of course we’re not working for God, but for our own gain. Unless we’re not making him any profit, but swiping all that profit for ourselves. This is what Jesus addresses in this lesson: Hypocrites who only do good deeds to make themselves look good. Ostensibly they work for God, but really they’re growing their own little fiefdoms instead of his kingdom.

There are three hypocritical practices Jesus objects to in the Sermon: Self-serving public charity, self-serving public prayer, and self-serving public fasting. Today I deal with the charity.

Civic idolatry.

CIVIC IDOLATRY 'sɪv.ɪk aɪ'dɑl.ə.tri noun. Worship of one’s homeland, its constitution, its government, or its leaders.

[Civically idolatrous 'sɪv.ɪk.(ə.)li aɪ'dɑl.ə.trəs adjective, civic idolater 'sɪv.ɪk aɪ'dɑl.ə.tər noun.]

In 1776 the Parliament of the United Kingdom, insisting they had every right to tax the British colonies of North America to fund the Seven Years’ War (1756–63), violated the colonies’ charters which had guaranteed them self-governance under a common king—much like the British Commonweath nowadays. It’s as if the UK Parliament of today taxed Canada, Jamaica, or the Bahamas.

By that point, after the Glorious Revolution, the British kings were largely ceremonial, same as today. King George Hanover 3 didn’t have the political might to do a thing about the situation. So he of course sided with his Parliament; but he went further and declared the colonies outside his protection. The Americans’ Continental Congress, colonial delegates representing 13 of the colonies which later became the United States, interpreted this to mean they were now independent states. On 4 July (or 2 July, depending on which founder you talk to) they officially declared themselves independent.

So today’s Independence Day in the United States. This week, Americans are gonna set off tons of fireworks, eat a lot of barbecue, and express a whole lot of patriotism. American Christians included. As we should.

However, many American Christians regularly cross a line between the proper familial love of one’s homeland, and descend into outright worship of the United States. Yep, full-on idolatry. We also call it civic idolatry. It’s when love for our country stops being reasonable and fair-minded: We treat it, its symbols, its values, and its institutions as sacred and holy. It’s when we treat contempt for it, or even fair-minded constructive criticism of it, as heresy and blasphemy. Civic idolaters might call it other things, like “unpatriotic” or “subversive” or “seditious” or “treasonous” or “traitorous,” but yeah, they mean blasphemy. ’Cause how dare we speak poorly of the United States?

Civic idolaters are also gonna do their darnedest to say they worship God, and God alone; not the United States. But y’notice they too often confound God and country, and blend ’em together as if they’re the same thing.

• When we attribute things to the United States which are only legitimately true of God, we got idolatry.
• When we claim things about our country which are only legitimately true of God’s kingdom (“This is a Christian nation!” or “Jesus reigns over this land, and American laws should reflect this!”) we got idolatry.
• When our nation or our politics take precedence over the actual growth of God’s kingdom, we got idolatry.
• When our political principles actually defy Jesus’s teachings, we got idolatry.

Hey, sometimes in our dual citizenship with God’s kingdom and the world, we gotta pick a side. But every time we choose the world, it’s idolatry.

Special revelation: God’s gotta tell us about himself.

Last week I posted a piece on general revelation, the idea we can deduce God, and what he’s like, by looking at his creation. And, of course, why that’s largely rubbish: Every religion tries to deduce a bit of what God’s like by looking at nature. In so doing, every religion gets God wrong. In a thousand different ways.

Yeah, I know, “The heavens declare the glory of God,” etc. Ps 19.1 might be one of your very favorite verses. You’ve got framed posters of photos from the Hubble or Webb telescopes on your wall, captioned with that very memory verse. Makes you feel all warm and fuzzy about how you can love both science and God. And… big whoop. The glory of the heavens suggest the glory of their Creator… and that’s all.

Nothing about the Creator’s motives. Nor his character. Nor his love. Nor whether the mighty power he used to make the Big Bang go bang, has any limits on it. Obviously it’s vast, but how vast? Many a Christian will insist the infinity of space clearly reveals an infinite God, but… does it? ’Cause it’s empty infinite space; the Creator apparently didn’t put anything in it! Does empty space—truly empty, containing nothing whatsoever—even properly count as a thing God created?

True, the heavens declare a mighty Creator. Yet more than one pagan myth actually claims the Creator expended all his energy in the act of creation, and completely burned himself out. He created the universe… then ceased to be. Faded away. Is no more. Leaving behind his creatures; the mightiest of which, whom the pagans called gods, warred over who might rule everything the Creator left behind. Again, in these myths, nothing about the Creator’s motives for creating. Nor character, love, anything. His only purpose in these stories is to make the cosmos, then vanish.

Or, according to the 18th-century deists, God made the cosmos, then went away. Didn’t die… but he’s not around anymore, for he’s chosen not to interact with humanity (or at least they’ve rejected all the testimonies of those who had God-experiences). We might encounter him in the afterlife, but they were entirely sure we oughtn’t expect to in this life.

Bluntly, creation tells us what God made, but we know no more about his person than we know about Thomas Edison from incandescent light bulbs. So how are we to learn about God?

Duh—he’s gotta tell us.

And that’s what we Christian theologians mean by special revelation—the stuff God deliberately, personally reveals to humanity. What we know about God does not primarily come from looking at his handiwork and making (really, jumping to) conclusions. It comes from God himself.

Amillennialism: You’re in the millennium right now.

AMILLENNIALISM 'eɪ.mɪ'lɛn.i.əl.ɪz.əm noun. Belief there will be no thousand-year reign of Christ Jesus and his saints on earth.

[Amillenarism 'eɪ.mɪ'lɛn.ər.ɪz.əm noun, amillennial 'eɪ.mɪ'lɛn.i.əl adjective.]

All my life I’ve attended Evangelical churches, and all these churches have been premillenial—they believe Jesus is coming back to rule the world. Some of them believe the Darbyist interpretation of the End Times, and some don’t; it all depends on how hard the pastor or church leadership wants to preach Darbyism. But all of ’em figure after Jesus comes back, the thousand years after that is gonna be a time where Jesus finally sets things right, and it’s gonna be awesome.

And it just dumbfounds my fellow churchgoers when I tell ’em most Christians don’t believe this. Usually because every Christian they know is premillennial; they don’t know anybody who believes otherwise.

They actually do, but they’re not aware they do. I’ve found amillennials usually don’t talk about the End Times. They talk about heaven. ’Cause that’s what they think Jesus is gonna do when he returns: He’s gonna destroy the world, then take us to heaven. Earth doesn’t get an extra thousand years to straighten up; humanity doesn’t get an extra thousand years to repent. This is the time for you to repent; the current era is your last chance. Jesus’s return is the end of history, the end of time, the end of the world.

2 Peter 3.8-13 NRSVue

8But do not ignore this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like one day. 9The Lord is not slow about his promise, as some think of slowness, but is patient with you, not wanting any to perish but all to come to repentance. 10But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, and then the heavens will pass away with a loud noise, and the elements will be destroyed with fire, and the earth and everything that is done on it will be disclosed.

11Since all these things are to be destroyed in this way, what sort of persons ought you to be in leading lives of holiness and godliness, 12waiting for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be set ablaze and destroyed and the elements will melt with fire? 13But, in accordance with his promise, we wait for new heavens and a new earth, where righteousness is at home.

Simon Peter’s description of the End does refer to a millennium—in verse 8 he says a millennium and a day are all the same to Jesus. Otherwise there’s nothing about a millennial reign. Jesus returns in the “day of the Lord,” and then boom, the heavens are gone, the elements burn up, and off we go with Jesus to New Heaven.

Like I said, most Christians believe this is how things’ll turn out. Roman Catholics, Orthodox, Ethiopians, most of the mainline churches, and even a number of the Evangelical churches: They don’t bother to make lessons or form doctrines about the millennium. Because it’s in Revelation, and Revelation is a bunch of apocalypses which aren’t meant to be interpreted literally. Any “prophecy scholars” who do so, are irresponsible scholars who have no idea what they’re doing. Forming doctrines based on apocalypses?—which Jesus deliberately obscures because they aren’t meant to be interpreted until they happen? That’s not biblical interpretation; that’s projecting your own paranoid fears upon the scriptures, and proclaiming that instead of God’s kingdom.

Whereas Peter wasn’t describing an apocalypse. He was telling his readers how things are definitely gonna unfold. Our Lord returns, boom, New Heaven.

Praying the scriptures.

It’s a popular Christian practice to drop little bits of bible into our prayers. Kinda like so.

Father, we come to you because you tell us “if my people, who are called by my name, seek my face, I will hear from heaven,” and we recognize “your word won’t return void,” so we call upon you today, Lord. Hear our prayers, meet our needs, heed our cries. “Give us today our daily bread.” Amen.

We pray the Lord’s Prayer of course. Sometimes we pray the psalms. Sometimes full psalms—yes, we can pray entire passages from the scriptures. Many of the more famous rote prayers consist of lines lifted straight from the bible and arranged to sound like a prayer.

We do this for all sorts of reasons. Sometimes not-so-legitimate ones, like we want our prayers to sound more bible-y. That’s why we’ll trot out the King James Version English with its “thee” and “thou” and old-timey verbs. If it’s old-fashioned we figure it’s more solemn and serious and holy. It’s not really—but people think so, which is why they do it.

Or we covet the bible’s power. We quote bible because the bible is God’s word… and since God’s word is mighty and powerful, maybe quoting it in prayer is also mighty and powerful. Maybe those words can make our prayer requests mighty and powerful, and we can get what we want because we’re tapping that power.

Or we’re padding our prayers. Short prayers are fine, but way too many Christians think long prayers are, again, more solemn and serious and holy. So if our prayers are too short, maybe we can stretch ’em out by throwing in a dozen bible verses. Plus they’ll sound bible-y, plus they’ll tap the bible’s power; we can do this for all three inappropriate reasons.

But don’t get me wrong; there are appropriate reasons to include bible verses in our prayers. Really good reasons.

Be indiscriminate in loving other people.

Matthew 5.44-48, Luke 6.31-36.

Probably the most important trait Jesus wants to see in his followers is grace, which Evangelicals tend to describe as “unmerited favor,” but I define as “God’s generous, forgiving, kind, favorable attitude towards his people.”

Because the attitude is a significant part of it. You can grudgingly or apathetically grant unmerited favor to people, as you might’ve seen clerks or bureaucrats do when you beg ’em for stuff. Sometimes they don’t wanna, but they realize it’s in their best interests if they do it, so they roll their eyes, and do it. And sometimes we appreciate it… and sometimes not, ’cause we think we do merit some favor out of them.

But God’s attitude isn’t, “Ugh, you humans; here.” It’s love. He’s eager to give us his kingdom. He’s happy to. Lk 12.32 He wants us in it! Including even the ungrateful, selfish, most obnoxious Christians you can think of. Or pagans.

And Jesus wants us to share this attitude, which is why in his Sermon on the Mount and Sermon on the Plain, he tells us his followers to love our enemies. He doesn’t have to order us to love our friends; we already do. But now we gotta love the people we don’t wanna love. Because God loves ’em—and if we wanna be legitimate children of God, we gotta start acting like our Father for once.

Matthew 5.44-48 KWL

44“I tell you²:

Love your² enemies!

{Bless your² cursers.

Do good to your² haters.}

Pray over {your² slanderers

and} your² persecutors.

45This way, you² might become children

of your² Father who is in the heavens,

since he raises his sun over evil and good,

and rain over righteous and unrighteous.

46For when you² love those who love you²,

should you² expect compensation for that?

Don’t taxmen do the very same thing?

47When you² greet only your² family members,

what more do you² do than others?

Don’t pagans do the very same thing?

48So you² will be consistent,

just like your² heavenly Father is consistent.”

Luke 6.31-36 KWL

31“Same as you² want

that people might do for you²,

do likewise for them.

32If you² love those who love you²,

in what way is this grace from you²?

For sinners also love those who love them.

33When you² do good for those who do good for you²,

in what way is this grace from you²?

{For} sinners do the same.

34When you² lend to those

from whom you² expect similar treatment,

in what way is this grace from you²?

Sinners lend to sinners

so they might receive the same treatment.

35Regardless, love your² enemies.

Do good, and lend expecting nothing.

Your² compensation will be abundant.

You’ll² be children of the Highest,

for he is kind to the ungrateful and evil.

36Be compassionate

just like your² Father is compassionate.”

Millennium: When Jesus rules the world.

MILLENNIUM mə'lɛ.ni.əm noun. Thousand years.

2. One of the thousand-year periods after Christ’s birth: The first millennium, the third millennium, etc.

3. Where one thousand-year period ends and another begins.

4. [theology] Christ Jesus’s reign on earth, represented in an apocalypse as a thousand-year age.

[Millennial mɪ'lɛ.ni.əl adjective.]

Whenever Christians talk about being “premillennial” or “amillenial,” no we’re not criticizing millennials, the kids born after the year 2000. We’re talking End Times theories. (We’ll use other terms to criticize millennials.)

The idea comes from Revelation. In one of its visions of Jesus’s second coming (oh, you didn’t know there are multiple visions of the second coming in Revelation? Y’oughta read it sometime), Jesus returns, brings us Christians back from the dead, throws Satan into the abyss for 10 centuries, and rules the world. At the end of that time, Satan gets out, starts a fight, Jesus ends it, judges the world, and ends the world—to be replaced by New Heaven/Earth.

Shall I quote the vision? Yeah, why not.

Revelation 20.1-10 NRSVue

1Then I saw an angel coming down from heaven, holding in his hand the key to the bottomless pit and a great chain. 2He seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years 3and threw him into the pit and locked and sealed it over him, so that he would deceive the nations no more, until the thousand years were ended. After that he must be let out for a little while.

4Then I saw thrones, and those seated on them were given authority to judge. I also saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for their testimony to Jesus and for the word of God. They had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its brand on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ a thousand years. 5(The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended.) This is the first resurrection. 6Blessed and holy are those who share in the first resurrection. Over these the second death has no power, but they will be priests of God and of Christ, and they will reign with him a thousand years.

7When the thousand years are ended, Satan will be released from his prison 8and will come out to deceive the nations at the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog, in order to gather them for battle; they are as numerous as the sands of the sea. 9They marched up over the breadth of the earth and surrounded the camp of the saints and the beloved city. And fire came down from heaven and consumed them. 10And the devil who had deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet were, and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.

At face value, it looks like Jesus is literally gonna reign over earth, as the human king of a political kingdom, for a literal thousand years. If Jesus returned in 1988 (he didn’t; I'm just picking a not-all-that-random example) it means the actual end of the world will take place in the year 2988. Mighty long time from now. But as resurrected Christians, who’ll no longer die, we’ll be alive to see it.

But bear in mind: This millennium is part of an apocalyptic vision. It’s not a literal millennium; apocalypses aren’t a literal anything. We honestly don’t know whether it represents a thousand-year stretch of time, a significantly long time-period, or just a significant time period of any length whatsoever.

Hence Christians have come up with various ideas of what it looks like, and generally I’m going over the main three. Handy-dandy chart time:

Three possible timelines of the future. That’ll make things clear as mud.

General revelation: How to (wrongly) deduce God from nature.

GENERAL REVELATION 'dʒɛn(.ə).rəl rɛv.ə'leɪ.ʃən noun. The universal, natural knowledge about God and divine matters. (Also called universal revelation, or natural revelation.)

2. What the universe, nature, or the human psyche reveal to us about God.

A number of Christian apologists love, love, LOVE the idea of general revelation. And I always wind up on their bad side, because as a theologian I have to point out it’s a wholly unreliable form of revelation. It’s so useless it actually does pagans more good than Christians.

This, they really don’t wanna hear. Because they’ve pinned so many hopes on it.

Y’see, apologists love to debate nontheists—people who don’t believe there’s such a being as God, and therefore are mighty sure he’s never interacted with them. Apologists try to prove God has so interacted with them. If the nontheist can’t remember any particular events, the apologist will often point at nature and claim, “See, that’s a way God interacted with you!” God created a really impressive sunset! Or God not-all-that-supernaturally cured ’em of a disease. Or God created one of their kids. Or they had any sort of warm fuzzy feeling which kinda felt divine.

Or, if we’ve got a more philosophically-minded apologist, they’ll try to argue certain cultural or scientific beliefs in a westerner’s brain can’t properly work unless there’s a God-idea somewhere deep in that brain. Absolutes of right and wrong supposedly can’t exist unless there’s an absolute authority (like, say, God) to define these absolutes. Or the unfulfilled desire for a higher power has to be based on an actual Higher Power out there somewhere.

Apologists like to regularly tap the idea of general revelation, then use it to springboard to special revelation—the stuff God has personally revealed about himself, particularly through Jesus.

Me, I figure all this general revelation stuff is quicksand. That’s why I prefer to leapfrog it and straightaway talk about Jesus. Apologists waste way too much time trying to argue in favor of God’s existence by pointing to nature, reasoning, and the human conscience. And while they’re busy trying to sway skeptics—often unsuccessfully—you realize we coulda just prophesied over the skeptic, proving there’s a Holy Spirit who knows all and empowers prophecy, and suddenly we’re talking about the Jesus the Spirit points to. While the prophesied-upon skeptic’s head is spinning from this unexpected, dumbfounding new revelation of a God who loves her… the apologist is still trying, and failing, to convincingly explain why intelligent design isn’t merely wishful thinking.

Why is general revelation quicksand? Because every religion does general revelation. Every religion says, “Look at the universe!—how beautiful and complex it is! Surely it proves there’s a creator behind it!” Then they try to point to the being they consider the creator—but they’re not talking about the LORD. They’re not talking about Jesus. It’s a whole other god. Ọlọrun, perhaps. Or Ahura Mazda, Brahma, Amun-Ra, etcetera.

Likewise people try to deduce God from creation. We begin with the assumption creation kinda resembles its creator; that it has his fingerprints all over it, so we can sorta figure out what God’s like. Look at the people he created, and the way we think and reason. Look at the intelligence which had to go into some of the more complex things in the universe. Look at the attention to detail, the intricacy, the mathematical and scientific precision, the way everything all neatly fits together. Tells you all sorts of profound things about the creator, doesn’t it?

Well… not if you’ve read your bible. You forget this universe isn’t as God originally created it. It fell.

What’s America’s role in the End Times?

The bible, in entirety, was written before the middle east, Europe, Asia, and Africa knew the western hemisphere ever existed.

True, God knew it was there. But his apostles and prophets had no idea. And God didn’t see any point in informing them. It’s not like the Americas, nor any other yet-to-be-discovered islands in the world, were excluded from the scriptures’ various blanket statements about humanity. The LORD is God, and Jesus is King, of the whole earth. Known and unknown lands alike.

So North and South America—the Indian nations then, and the current nations now—aren’t in the bible. At all. Neither suggested nor alluded to in it.

I’m a citizen of the United States, loyal and patriotic. If you’re like me, or even just a big fan of all things American like so many of our resident aliens, I gotta break it to you: Other than the bits about “all the world,” our country doesn’t figure into End Times predictions whatsoever.

You’d be surprised (okay, if you’re American, you probably wouldn’t be) how many American End-Times prognosticators simply can’t abide that.

Blame American exceptionalism, the idea the United States is special, the greatest country in the world, the greatest country in history, and the related belief that Americans are smarter, more capable, more innovative, more talented, than the folks of any other nation. No offense to the people of other countries; that’s what we grew up hearing. We were told we grew up under more freedom that you, and if you had American-style freedom, maybe you’d do as well… but probably not, ’cause we’ve got other traits you lack. Like drive. And, to be honest, money.

We’ve been taught this exceptionalism all our lives. It’s a huge part of American-style civic idolatry. So yeah, this is a lot of the reason why we Americans behave as if we’re special: We’ve always been told we are. Even those of us who realize this is just patriotic propaganda… still kinda believe it. Look at our inventions. Our influence. All the Olympic medals we keep winning. True, maybe the reason we succeed so often is ’cause we think we’re destined to succeed, and other countries really oughta try American-style positive reinforcement like we do. On the other hand, there’s a lot of arrogance mixed up in it.

This attitude has trickled into our religion. Our End Times prognosticators figure the United States is special, doggone it, so we oughta fit in the End Times timeline somewhere. They’re not entirely sure where, but they shoehorn us pretty much anywhere they can get away with it.

The weepy person in the prayer group.

Decades ago, in my previous church, I led the prayer group a few months. At that time we got a new regular attendee, who’d come pray with us every Wednesday. And every time she prayed, sang, or otherwise interacted with God, she cried.

A lot.

We’re not talking misty eyes, or a few tears rolling down her face. Lots of Christians pray with our eyes closed, and you’ll naturally get tears when you squeeze ’em tight—but nope, this wasn’t that either. We’re talking full-on snotty blubbering. Like her child just died.

That first prayer meeting she attended, the women of our prayer meeting gathered round her, hugged her, prayed for God to comfort her, asked God to help whatever had her so sorrowful, and asked whether there was anything they could do. Took ’em the rest of the prayer meeting. And then some! I had to stick around afterward as they tried to minister to her, ’cause I had to lock the building. I didn’t get home till 10PM.

The next week: Same deal. We came to pray, and so did she. Next thing you know, she’s bawling and moaning, and the women are trying to comfort her again, and we again went overtime doing so.

The third week: One woman went over to pray with and comfort her. The rest were telling me, “Oh, she has some serious emotional issues. She needs therapy, not prayer.”

Fourth week, all the women just let her go off in a corner of the chapel to wail.

Some of you who are reading this, think this sounds just awful of us. Hey, if I were a newbie Christian, I’d think the very same thing. She’s coming to us for help, and we’re pushing her aside? Bad Christians!

Except we didn’t push her aside. We tried to help. The women who realized she needed therapy, tried to get her therapy. Found her a therapist who’d see her. Tried to line up an appointment. (Money wasn’t an issue; our church had the resources.) But the weepy person was having none of that. So the women were done—like exhausted parents who give up on trying to get their infant to sleep in her own bed, and just leave the baby in the room to cry it out. They realized they weren’t actually helping; that she didn’t want actual help. So they stopped.

A psychologist friend explained it best: You know how some people feel much better after having a good cry? That’s largely what this woman was doing.

Here’s what’s wrong with her behavior. What also made her feel much better, was having a crowd of Christians console her. And it’s not our job to do that! In fact it’s emotionally draining when we try to do that. None of the women who prayed over her, felt better about things after Wednesday was done; they worried about her all week long. Betcha she didn’t worry about them any. She just came back to get their comfort again, and again… until they realized she’s basically an emotional vampire, and decided they were done being drained.

It’s not our job to console such people; it’s God’s. He has infinite energy for that. He can actually touch us where we need healing.

I’ve seen this phenomenon a number of times since. No, such people don’t necessarily need therapy and medication. But what they’re doing is wholly inappropriate. We’re supposed to take our lamentation to God, and the Holy Spirit is supposed to do the comforting. Instead they take their emotions to us, and drain us like emotional leeches. Humans aren’t equipped to do this! We either cry along, and get just as ruined; or we clamp up and step away in self-defense… and get accused of being cold, unsympathetic, and compassionless.

Love your enemies.

Matthew 5.43-44, Luke 6.27-28.

Sometimes I joke the two commands Jesus said are most important—love God and love your neighbor Mk 12.29-31 —are respectively the easiest and hardest commands. It’s really easy to love God. But the neighbors are such a pain.

Some respond with a laugh. Others disagree: For them, it’s actually a struggle to love God, because he’s invisible and unknowable. (He’s not, but they’ve never been taught how to interact with him, and their churches have been no help.) Whereas the neighbors are sometimes difficult… but sometimes not. And at least they’re visible.

Of course, sometimes their definition of “neighbor” isn’t quite what Jesus has in mind. When asked to define a neighbor, Jesus told the Good Samaritan Story, Lk 10.29-37 and deliberately picked someone Israelis would not care to identify as a “neighbor.” Samaritans were considered heretics of mixed-race ancestry, who insisted they were the real descendants of Israel, and all those Judeans down south were the real heretics. Yet in Jesus’s story, the Samaritan stepped up and helped the half-dead victim when Levites, the most Israeli of Israelis, would not.

Ask Christians who their neighbors are, and sometimes they’re fully aware of Jesus’s story, and try to love the unloveable. But most of us will only think of neighbors as good neighbors—as people who are friendly to us. The less-than-friendly neighbors “aren’t neighborly,” or “aren’t good neighbors,” and therefore aren’t neighbors. We figure they abdicated their status. We only love those who love us. Kind people are easy to love. Unkind people not so much.

In the Law, God obligated the Hebrews to love their neighbors:

Leviticus 19.17-18 Schocken Bible

17You are not to hate your brother in your heart;

rebuke, yes, rebuke your fellow,

that you not bear sin because of him!

18You are not to take-vengeance, you are not to retain-anger against the sons of your kinspeople—

but be-loving to your neighbor [as one] like yourself;

I am YHWH!

And God usually tacks “I am the LORD”—declaring his name YHWH/Jehovah—onto any commands he considers uniquely holy. Don’t hate sinners. Rebuke them, but don’t hate them, don’t take revenge on ’em, don’t stay angry with them; love them. Like God loves ’em.

Like you love yourself. Okay yeah, some of us don’t love ourselves; we got issues. But more often than not, people definitely love ourselves, and prove it regularly with selfish behavior. Now, turn that selfishness outward, turn it into selflessness, and there ya go: You’re loving your neighbor as yourself.

Pharisees strove to follow every command in the Law, including “Love your neighbor as yourself,” and were quite familiar with it ’cause more than one of their rabbis had claimed it’s one of the most important commands. Yet Pharisees were always on the lookout for loopholes, which let ’em look like they followed every command but not really. And if the LORD didn’t explicitly command ’em to love everybody, it meant there were some people they were permitted to hate. Like enemies. Hence the saying “Love your neighbor, and hate your enemy.” Which Jesus, in his Sermon on the Mount, rebuked.

And Jesus didn’t pussyfoot around. He jumped right to the hatable folks, the people who are just plain hostile and vicious towards us. Persecutors. Mistreaters. Cursers.

Matthew 5.43-44 KWL

43“You² hear people say this:

‘You¹ will love your¹ neighbor,’ Lv 19.18

and ‘You¹ will hate your¹ enemy.’

44I tell you²:

Love your² enemies!

{Bless your² cursers.

Do good to your² haters.}

Pray over {your² slanderers

and} your² persecutors.”

Luke 6.27-28 KWL

27“But I tell you² who listen:

Love your² enemies.

Do good to your² haters.

28Bless your² cursers.

Pray for your² accusers.”

The words in braces are what the Textus Receptus added to Matthew by splicing in the sayings of second-century Christians—gospel commentators like Origen, Cyprian, Clement, and Tertullian—who were trying to combine the ideas of the Sermon on the Mount and Sermon on the Plain. It’s not inaccurate to say Jesus taught us to bless our cursers and do good to our haters; he said exactly that in Luke 6. He just didn’t say it in the original text of Matthew.

The devil is a dirty liar.

Years ago I listened to a podcast where a pastor was talking about how he did what he called “spiritual warfare.” He didn’t mean resisting temptation, which is what the scriptures mean when they describe actual spiritual warfare; he means fighting devils.

Then he told a story about fighting a particular devil. A woman came to him for counseling, and in the course of talking with her, he determined she had an evil spirit in her. He demanded to speak to it. It answered. He ordered it to “be bound in Jesus name.” Then he asked it a bunch of questions about how it’s been bothering the woman. When it got started, how things escalated; things like that.

Nope, didn’t throw it out of the woman like he absolutely should have done—like Jesus did every time he realized someone had an evil spirit in ’em. I remind you Jesus forbade those spirits from speaking, Mk 1.34 but this guy got an interview out of the critter.

As I recall, he didn’t put the spirit under oath to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, like our courts of law do. Not that we should be so stupid as to think a devil would keep any such oath. Humans don’t; perjury happens all the time. To think a devil would be more honest, honorable, and oath-keeping than a human… well that’s ridiculous.

Popular fiction likes to depict Satan as “a man of his word,” because whenever humans in these stories make a deal or wager with the devil, then somehow outsmart or outperform it, it keeps its word and pays its debts. Sometimes ironically, but even so. But Satan is not a man of its word. It’s not even a man!

What it is, is a liar. Precisely as Jesus describes it:

John 8.44 KJV

Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

There is no truth in the devil. Nor in any devilish spirit you encounter. Nothing any of them tell you can be trusted. Nothing.

Everything this particular pastor got the evil spirit in the woman to tell him: As far as we know, everything it said is pure garbage. Might’ve sounded plausible and convincing—either because devils can tell a good story, or they swipe someone else’s good story and tell that. And of course devils can easily identify a sucker who’ll believe it—who really wants to believe it, like this pastor.

But again: Pure garbage. Trust nothing.

Systematic theology.

My very first theology class in college was titled “Systematic Theology.” It was an orderly overview of all the important doctrines of Christianity, and all the major topics Christian theology touches upon. Didn’t hit every topic, ’cause there simply wasn’t time. (The upper-division theology classes went into much more detail.) But like I said, the main topics:

• God and his existence.
• Revelation and how God can be known.
• The scriptures and how to base theology upon ’em.
• The trinity and God’s mighty attributes.
• Jesus’s nature, person, and work.
• Jesus’s self-sacrifice and our salvation.
• The Holy Spirit and his activity in his church.
• The church’s governance and purpose.
• Death, afterlife, resurrection, and New Jerusalem.

On this blog, I am obviously not going through theology in any systematic way. Largely I’ve been discussing topics as they come up—either going into detail about theological issues in other articles I’ve written, or prompted by someone sending an email.

So if you want an overview of all the main topics of Christian theology, you might wanna buy a systematic theology book. They tend to be written by Calvinists, ’cause Jean Calvin wrote the first Protestant systematic theology, Institutes of the Christian Religion, and systematizing theology has kinda become a big deal to Calvinists ever since. They really like presenting all their doctrines in a tidy, logically consistent package. Makes God sound all orderly and quantifiable!

Is he really? Nah. God’s way bigger than the human mind can grasp. Even bigger than the scriptures can present. Jn 21.25 Systematic theologies can only tell us so much—and same as my theology class, try to hit all the major topics, but can’t get to all of ’em.

Some of ’em try! And, when they’re trying to be intellectually honest, they also try to cover all the major Christian viewpoints about these topics, ’cause Christians aren’t universally agreed on everything. (And, unless we joined a cult, don’t have to be.) Hence some systematic theology books are huge. One of my college textbooks, Millard J. Erickson’s Christian Theology, most definitely is; the current edition clocks in at 1,200 pages. He’s thorough.

Anyway, when Christians get it into our heads to study theology, some of us want this kind of overview. I certainly did; I wanted to make sure I filled in all the gaps in my knowledge. (Or at least learn where the gaps were.) So, there y’go: Systematic theology.