Supporting: love, joy, peace, patience, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, sobriety
Opposing: Secularism, Humanism, Anti-Family Sex, Hedonism, Autonomy, Totalitarianism, and Mass Death
America's Founding Fathers were familiar with this vision: "Vine & Fig Tree" is the worldview that made America "the greatest nation on God's green earth." It could be called "The Original American Dream."
|
Two centuries ago, the “Vine & Fig Tree” vision transformed America into the most prosperous and admired nation in human history. Tragically, we then experienced The Paradox of Deuteronomy 8: God blessed us, but we forgot God and said, "My power and the might of mine hand hath gotten me this wealth” (Deuteronomy 8:17), and then God judged our pride by turning our prosperity into bankruptcy and admiration into ridicule and hate. The United States is now despised around the world as a self-centered post-Christian bully.
George Washington's Diaries are available online at the Library of Congress. The LOC.GOV website introduces Washington's writings with these words:
No theme appears more frequently in the writings of Washington than his love for his land. The diaries are a monument to that concern. In his letters he referred often, as an expression of this devotion and its resulting contentment, to an Old Testament passage. After the Revolution, when he had returned to Mount Vernon, he wrote the Marquis de Lafayette on Feb. 1, 1784:
This phrase occurs at least 11 times in Washington's letters.
|
|
Page Smith was a historian, winner of the Bancroft Prize, earning his M.A. degree in 1948, and Ph.D. degree in 1951 from Harvard. In his book Religious Origins of the American Revolution (Scholars Press, 1976), Smith writes about graduates from the older Harvard, like Samuel Adams (1740), John Hancock (1754), and John Adams (1755). He says the passage in the book of Micah about “every man…under his vine and under his fig tree” was
the most potent expression of the colonist’s determination to be independent whatever the cost,…having substantial control over his own affairs. No theme was more constantly reiterated by writers and speakers in the era of the Revolution.
The American Revolution might thus be said to have started, in a sense, when Martin Luther nailed his 95 theses to the church door at Wittenberg. It received a substantial part of its theological and philosophical underpinnings from John Calvin’s Institutes Of The Christian Religion and much of its social history from the Puritan Revolution of 1640-1660, and, perhaps, less obviously, from the Glorious Revolution of 1689.
Put another way, the American Revolution is inconceivable in the absence of that context of ideas which have constituted radical Christianity. The leaders of the Revolution in every colony were imbued with the precepts of the Reformed faith.
The Westminster Standards are the highest expression of "the Reformed Faith." Indeed, Smith adds, in early America, the Reformation
left its mark on every aspect of the personal and social life of the faithful. In the family, in education, in business activity, in work, in community and, ultimately, in politics, the consequences of the Reformation were determinative for American history.
As remote or repugnant as Puritanism may be to some, Smith says “it is essential that we understand that the Reformation in its full power was one of the great emancipations of history.”
America became the most prosperous and admired nation in history because it was a Calvinist Theocracy. <-- Check out that link. You were trained by your government-approved teachers to be offended and appalled at that claim. And it is unfortunate that Calvin and his progeny were not consistent Christian Theocrats. They tried to combine "Jerusalem and Athens." Instead of a pure "Theocracy," which literally means "God governs," they wanted clergymen to govern.
We are working to create an online "university" which can be put on a hand-held electronic device for billions of Muslims and billions of "Christians" around the world. It will give the student the Bible-based education that America's Founding Fathers received when they were children.
At Vine & Fig Tree University we're trying to duplicate the now-extinct Harvard University -- a Bible-based Christian university founded by the New England Puritans to promote the Christianity of the Protestant Reformation in the New World -- which is now an atheistic university at war with the original goals of Harvard.
Graduates of today's government-run "public" schools have been brainwashed into believing that Harvard's original Christian worldview is not as good as today's secular worldview. Nobody wants an education approved by the Protestant Reformers and the New England Puritans. Nobody is searching in Google to find a university that teaches what Harvard's Founders wanted students to learn in 1636 -- and nobody knows as much about the Bible and social virtues as Harvard expected high school applicants to know before their first college class.
But at Vine & Fig Tree University we believe that Harvard's Founders were not perfectly consistent with the teachings of the Bible. So we seek to reform the reformers. We want to be more pure than the Puritans. But our reforms are viewed as heretical, and we only incur additional wrath from those who already oppose the original Founders of Harvard.
After 1647, students wishing to enroll in Harvard were required to give their assent to the Westminster Standards in order to be admitted as a student. Probably nobody who will be starting as a Freshman at Harvard this Fall has studied the Westminster Standards, much less agrees with them. Applicants to Harvard in the early 1600's had a much higher level of academic attainment than graduates of atheistic public schools -- victims of educational malpractice -- in the early 2000's. And high school students in the 1600's already had a Biblical worldview before their first day of college.
The Westminster Confession of Faith and the Larger and Shorter Catechisms were written in the 1640's. They reflect the growth of Protestant theology that began in 1517 with Luther's "95 Theses" and continued under men like John Calvin.
John Frame says
The assembly’s Confession of Faith, completed in December, 1646, is the last of the classic Reformed confessions and by far the most influential in the English-speaking world. Though it governed the Church of England only briefly, it has been widely adopted (sometimes with amendments) by British and American Presbyterian bodies as well as by many Congregational and Baptist churches.
B.B. Warfield, professor at Princeton in the late 1800's, wrote of the Westminster Standards,
[T]hey are the final crystallization of the elements of evangelical religion, after the conflicts of sixteen hundred years. . . . [T]hey are the richest and most precise and best guarded statement ever penned of all that enters into evangelical religion . . . .
Richard Gardiner, in his impressive collection of "Primary Source Documents Pertaining to Early American History," lists many sources which introduce the average Secular Humanist to the now-unknown religious foundations of American Revolution and Government. Among these sources are the Westminster Standards. Gardiner says of them:
 The Westminster Confession of Faith (1646) In addition to being the decree of Parliament as the standard for Christian doctrine in the British Kingdom, it was adopted as the official statement of belief for the colonies of Massachusetts and Connecticut. Although slightly altered and called by different names, it was the creed of Congregationalist, Baptist, and Presbyterian Churches throughout the English speaking world. Assent to the Westminster Confession was officially required at Harvard, Yale, and Princeton. Princeton scholar, Benjamin Warfield wrote: "It was impossible for any body of Christians in the [English] Kingdoms to avoid attending to it."The
Westminster Catechism (1646) Second only to the Bible, the "Shorter Catechism" of the Westminster Confession was the most widely published piece of literature in the pre-revolutionary era in America. It is estimated that some five million copies were available in the colonies. With a total population of only four million people in America at the time of the Revolution, the number is staggering. The Westminster Catechism was not only a central part of the colonial educational curriculum, learning it was required by law. Each town employed an officer whose duty was to visit homes to hear the children recite the Catechism. The primary schoolbook for children, the New England Primer, included the Catechism. Daily recitations of it were required at these schools. Their curriculum included memorization of
the Westminster Confession and the Westminster Larger Catechism. There was not a person at Independence Hall in 1776 who had not been exposed to it, and most of them had it spoon fed to them before they could walk. |
The Shorter Catechism begins with this notice:
| Agreed upon by the Assembly of Divines at Westminster, with the Assistance of Commissioners from the Church of Scotland, as a Part of the Covenanted Uniformity in Religion Betwixt the Churches of Christ in the Kingdoms of Scotland, England, and Ireland.
and Approved Anno 1648, by the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland, to Be a Directory for Catechising Such as Are of Weaker Capacity, |
"Weaker capacity." Like 5-year olds.
The "Larger Catechism" is described as "a Directory for catechising such as have made some proficiency in the knowledge of the grounds of religion." Like 12-year olds. A Protestant Bar-Mitzvah.
90% of the "Pastors" of today's churches do not know as much about theology as the average 8th-grade American in 1776.
The word "Theocracy" is a frightening boogeyman in our day. Many people are disturbed by the idea of a government official entering a home and dictating what children should learn when it comes to religion. Harvard University and the Westminster Standards were both designed to promote a Christian Theocracy. Neither one embraced the modern concept of "separation of church and state," which more accurately means "separation of God (religion, Christianity) and Government." Harvard/Westminster stood for the proposition that both Church and State must be "under God." Vine & Fig Tree University questions whether "the State" -- which is a Monopoly of Violence -- can ever truly be "under God," that is, obedient to God's Commandments. Similarly concerning the institution called "the church." The Westminster Assembly, predominantly Presbyterian, was strongly opposed to Roman Catholicism, yet in many ways is still very similar to Roman Catholicism in structure and power-dynamics. John Milton said "New Presbyter is but Old Priest writ large."
The Bible says all believers are priests and kings:
Revelation 1:6
Jesus Christ has made us kings and priests to His God and Father, to Him be glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen.Revelation 5:9-10
And have redeemed us to God by Your blood And have made us kings and priests to our God; And we shall reign on the earth.
Roman Catholics claimed to have priests; Harvard and Westminster denied this.
Harvard's most notable graduates in its first 200 years -- Samuel Adams, John Hancock, John Adams, etc. -- denied the claim of "the divine right of kings."
Vine & Fig Tree University contends that we are all priests and kings, and nobody is a priest or a king.
Vine & Fig Tree University denies the modern concept of "separation of church and state." We believe in "the abolition of church and state." We believe in an orderly self-governing society, and a truly religious society, without the institutions of "church" and
"state."
Both Harvard and Westminster believed in the institutions of "church" and "state" because "the church fathers" did. Not everything "the church fathers" believed came from the Bible. "The church fathers" believed many things because Aristotle and Greco-Roman humanism taught them to believe these things. One of the primary purposes of Vine & Fig Tree University is to strip away Greco-Roman humanism and go back to the Scriptures. At many points the Protestant Reformers and the New England Puritans wanted to "reform" and "purify" in this way, but they were products of their time.
Vine & Fig Tree University and "The Great Commission" is not about promoting any particular church or denomination, nor any particular nation. The only legitimate "church" is the Body of Christ, and the only legitimate nation is "the holy nation" spoken of in 1 Peter 2:9.
Here are the chapters of the Westminster Confession, with links to the section below where we compare the Westminster Standards with the core values of Vine & Fig Tree University:
| Chapter 1 — Of the Holy Scripture | Chapter 12 — Of Adoption | Chapter 23 — Of the Civil Magistrate |
| Chapter 2 — Of God, and of the Holy Trinity | Chapter 13 — Of Sanctification | Chapter 24 — Of Marriage and Divorce |
| Chapter 3 — Of God’s Eternal Decree | Chapter 14 — Of Saving Faith | Chapter 25 — Of the Church |
| Chapter 4 — Of Creation | Chapter 15 — Of Repentance unto Life | Chapter 26 — Of the Communion of Saints |
| Chapter 5 — Of Providence | Chapter 16 — Of Good Works | Chapter 27 — Of the Sacraments |
| Chapter 6 — Of the Fall of Man, of Sin, and of the Punishment Thereof | Chapter 17 — Of the Perseverance of the Saints | Chapter 28 — Of Baptism |
| Chapter 7 — Of God’s Covenant with Man | Chapter 18 — Of the Assurance of Grace and Salvation | Chapter 29 — Of the Lord’s Supper |
| Chapter 8 — Of Christ the Mediator | Chapter 19 — Of the Law of God | Chapter 30 — Of Church Censures |
| Chapter 9 — Of Free Will | Chapter 20 — Of Christian Liberty, and Liberty of Conscience | Chapter 31 — Of Synods and Councils |
| Chapter 10 — Of Effectual Calling | Chapter 21 — Of Religious Worship, and the Sabbath Day || work six days | Chapter 32 — Of the State of Men after Death, and of the Resurrection of the Dead |
| Chapter 11 — Of Justification | Chapter 22 — Of Lawful Oaths and Vows | Chapter 33 — Of the Last Judgment |
The Puritan Church-State of Massachusetts created Harvard in 1636, and in 1647 created "public schools." The purpose of both was to promote widespread understanding of the Bible. Bible-educated citizens would then help create and maintain a Christian Theocracy. The Founders of Harvard believed that it was necessary to create a "civil government" to promote religion and civic order. They did not understand how religion and social order could be promoted by a Market Freed from threats of government force. Vine & Fig Tree University exists to promote this "paradigm shift." It will not take thick textbooks and long classroom lectures to do this. It simply requires taking the most basic precepts of the Bible seriously and consistently. This is not complicated or "tricky." It doesn't require high levels of intelligence. It takes high levels of ethics. Just be a consistently moral person, and ignore the "experts" who say the Bible is outdated or "utopian."
You will not graduate from Vine & Fig Tree University unless you can assent to the following doctrines:
These propositions might seem at first glance to be perfectly reasonable and perfectly acceptable to any church.
But Vine & Fig Tree University pursues these doctrines with relentless logical and Biblical consistency.
If you think about these doctrines, and practice or meditate on them with logical consistency, they are astonishing, and then they are offensive. Most pastors don't want their congregations thinking about these things too much. They want their congregations to feel good.
If you take these doctrines seriously, you will be considered a "heretic." I've been told by many people that I'm not even a Christian because I believe these things.
Let's think about these simple propositions like Bereans (Acts 17:11). You'll see why no pastor wants a Vine & Fig Tree University graduate anywhere near his church.
Here is the foundational text for Vine & Fig Tree University:
|
Micah 4:1-7 1 But it shall come to pass, |
This is also the foundational Bible passage for America. This is the original "American Dream."
Here are the key concepts in Micah's prophecy:
Micah 4:1-7 |
Key Concepts |
| 4 for the mouth of the LORD of hosts hath spoken it. | 0. Bibliolatry: God speaks, we worship the Word |
| 1 But it shall come to pass, | 1: Calvinism/predestination: "It shall come to pass" |
| in the last days | 2: Preterism: "in the last days" of the Old Covenant |
| that the mountain | 3: Creationism: The "mountain" = Eden |
| the house of the LORD | The temple of the LORD: Where is it today? |
| shall be established | This has already happened (Acts 2:36) |
| in the top of the mountains, and it shall be exalted above the hills; |
U.S.A/U.S.S.R./U.K etc. are all rival mountains |
| and people shall flow unto it. 2 And many nations shall come, and say, |
4. Optimillennialism: "Peoples will stream; nations will come" This is currently happening. |
| Come, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, and to the house of the God of Jacob; and He will teach us of His ways, and we will walk in His paths: for the Law shall go forth of Zion, and the Word of the LORD from Jerusalem. |
5: Theonomy: "the Law of God"
4 for the mouth of the LORD of hosts hath spoken it. |
| 3 And He shall judge among many people, and rebuke strong nations afar off; |
6: Theocracy / Christocracy: "He shall judge" |
| and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up a sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more. |
7: Pacifism: "swords into plowshares" |
| 8: Archistlessness: no war = no state || Jesus is the One True Archist | |
| 4 But they shall sit every man under his vine and under his fig tree; and none shall make them afraid: |
"dwell safely" - "none afraid" |
| Family Education | Family Business |
| 9: Patriarchy: "His Vine"
10: Education: Family does the teaching of God's Law 11: Character: We teach God's Law because |
12: Agrarianism: Vine & Fig Tree
13: Property/Communism: Compulsory sharing is theft, but sharing is Christian |
| 5 Although all people will walk every one in the name of his god, we will walk in the name of the LORD our God for ever and ever. |
11: Character vs. "Mass Formation Psychosis" standing alone against public lawlessness and unbelief |
| 6 In that day, saith the LORD, will I assemble her that halteth, and I will gather her that is driven out, and her that I have afflicted; 7 And I will make her that halted a remnant, and her that was cast far off a strong nation: |
14. Socialism/Community: the ones "God has afflicted" |
| and the LORD shall reign over them in mount Zion from henceforth, even for ever. |
15: Eternity: "forever" The Kingdom that Christ inaugurated in "the last days" of the Old Covenant lasts forever. |
During the typical 15-week semester, we will always come back to 15 Core Values found in Micah's the “Vine & Fig Tree” prophecy.
|
|
Let's combine these themes from Micah's prophecy with the chapters of the Westminster Standards.
Micah's Prophecy |
Westminster Standards |
Vine & Fig Tree University |
The Westminster Shorter Catechism famously begins:
I say "famously" because 300 years ago, every literate human being in North America and the entire English-speaking world could have answered that question from memory. Rick Warren began his multi-million best-selling book The Purpose Driven Life with the four words "It’s Not About You." Those are good words, and yet the book really was all about the reader. And the reader's church. John M. Frame writes,
Satan's temptation in Genesis 3:5 is "Ye shall be as gods," determining good and evil for yourselves. History shows that when man obeys God, life is heavenly; when man is his own god, as John Adams put it, “this world would be something not fit to be mentioned in public company — I mean hell.” John Milton, in his work Paradise Lost, put these words in Satan's mouth:
“But his subjects hated him and sent a delegation after him, saying, ‘We don’t want this man to rule over us!’” (Luke 19:14) |
| Micah's Prophecy | Westminster Standards | Vine & Fig Tree University |
| "It shall come to pass" | Chapter 3 - God’s Eternal Decree | How does Micah know what will "come to pass?" Answer: God told him (see "Bibliolatry" below). How does God know what will "come to pass?" Answer: He predestined it. God is omniscient, and knows the end from the beginning (Isaiah 46:10), because the future has already been created.
Some say that predestination "makes man a robot." But you and I both know that we are not robots. We were created in the Image of God. We have the capacity for reason, to plan for the future, to compose and appreciate symphonies. We understand God's Commandments, and we have a moral obligation to obey them. We know that as we get in the car and drive to the prostitute's house, that we should turn the car around. We know that God is just to hold us responsible for our actions. In the end, "every knee will bow and every tongue will confess" that we made the choice to sin and God is just and fair to hold us accountable. These things cannot be said about the other animals. Omnipotence is the basis for omniscience. God knew what every atom in the universe would do before He created them, because He created everything that way. Nobody was there to force God to create the world in a way God did not want it to be. God knew what He was doing. God is Sovereign, but God is also Love. This has tremendous implications for our actions in history. Calvinism: "Liberty Under God"
Futurists say that "prophecy" reveals a grim future. War, Great Tribulation, the Antichrist, and Armageddon are all predestined (though not all futurists would use that word -- but what's the difference between "prophesied" and "predestined?"). Micah does not say that tribulation and annihilation has been predestined, but a Vine & Fig Tree world has. |
| Chapter 2 - God, and of the Holy Trinity |
The Sovereignty of GodI believe in God. There are a lot of people in churches on Sunday morning who say "I believe in God," but what evidence is there of this on Monday through Saturday? I believe God is the creator. The Bible says God created everything there is, probably no more than 10,000 years ago. (Yikes! A "creationist!" A "fundamentalist!") There is an unbridgeable gap between the Creator and the creature (Romans 1:25). The Westminster Confession and Catechisms set forth a "Calvinist" doctrine of God. Many people hate that term. I believe in "the Five Points of Calvinism." Calvin would not have let me in his church. Calvin would have put me to death. If I were to describe what I think God is like, most people would say they don't believe in that kind of God. And they're even more offended that I try to impress this "Calvinist" theology into every area of my life, even "secular" areas, including Monday through Saturday. Predestination Before the Creator created all that is, the Creator knew the end from the beginning (Isaiah 46:10; Revelation 1:8; Revelation 21:6, 13). God knows the future because God created it. The future has already been created. This is called "predestination," meaning the the destination of the creation was designed and set in motion before ("pre") it was even created. The path of every molecule and sub-atomic particle in the universe was set in motion, and is carefully and lovingly conducted by God through history to its predestined end. The thoughts I think and the feelings I feel are wave-particles of energy and chemicals that travel across the synapses of my brain and through my heart and "reins." All predestined by God. Some say my belief makes man a "robot." But God did not create man as a robot. You and I both know that we are not "robots." God created man in His Image. That means when I think and plan, when I paint a picture or compose a symphony, when I build a log cabin or a skyscraper that can house 25,000 people, I am engaged in the wonder-filled task of exercising dominion over the earth (Genesis 1:26-28), something animals do not do. No matter how glorious I think man is, by virtue of his being created in the Image of God, there are those who feel that my conception of God "violates" human "free will." "Arminians" call me a "Calvinist." They don't want me in their churches.Conventional "Calvinists" call me other terms, but join the Arminians in ordering me far from their churches. When God created everything that exists, there was nothing else to say to God, "You shouldn't create everything that way." Nobody put any pressure on God to change anything He was creating, because nobody else had been created yet. Psalm 135:6 Daniel 4:35 God is the Director of a cosmic play. |
|
| Chapter 9 Free Will | The Myth of "Free Will" | |
| That's a place to transition to the second of my propositions. I believe that if you believe in "free will," you do not believe that the Bible is the Word of God.
I say that not on the grounds that the Bible teaches something other than "free will," but because if God cannot "violate" man's "free will," there cannot be a Bible at all. The Bible came into existence through the "violation" of man's "free will." So let's consider what the Bible says about the Bible. |
| Micah's Prophecy | Westminster Standards | Vine & Fig Tree University | ||||||||||||||||||
Micah 1:1 |
Chapter 1 - the Holy Scripture | I have numbered this theme "0" (zero) because it undergirds all the other themes.
The Westminster Confession of Faith begins with a chapter on the Bible. And rightly so. Everything taught at Vine & Fig Tree University is grounded in the Bible because the Bible is the Word of God. The Bible is the Word of God, written by the will of GodThey say "history books are written by the winners." The Bible is a real long history book. If you believe in "free will," or that God cannot "violate" man's "free will," then you cannot logically believe that the Bible is the Word of God. The words in the Bible were written by the hands of human beings, but I believe the Bible is the Word of God. God speaks through those human words. This says something God wrote the Bible using "human pens." God made their hands move the way He wanted them to move. In the Bible, the will of God is sovereign over the will of man. 1 Peter 1:21 says
Of course, it was the "will" of Moses and Isaiah and Paul and other authors to write down words. Moses wrote what God told him to write, but perhaps Moses would say he wrote those words "of my own free will." Nobody pointed a gun at Moses' head and forced him to write. But what Peter says is controversial. Even though Moses and other Biblical authors freely wrote the words they intended to write, God was doing something through them and the words they wrote. They did not write those words solely by their own "free will." Their hands moved the way God willed them to move. It's true, we can tell the differences between the words Moses wrote, the words Luke wrote, the words John wrote, and the words Paul wrote. They all had their own individual personalities and writing styles. But the men who wrote the words of Scripture had their lives — their parents, training, and life experiences — all orchestrated by God so that — guided by the Holy Spirit — they would write the exact words that God wanted to be written so that God could communicate exactly what He wanted to communicate to the human race. Their words are God's words. God's will trumps their will. Paul told Timothy that God "breathed out" His words through these human authors (2 Timothy 3:16, [theópneustos (Strong's #2315, from 2316 /theós, "God" and 4154 /pnéō, "breathe out"]). To say that the Bible is the Word of God is to say that God's will is sovereign over the will of man. Some people find this deeply offensive. God made the mouths of Moses, David, and Isaiah speak the words God wanted spoken. God made the hands of Matthew, Paul, and John write the words God wanted written. If God did not overrule the "free" and fallible will of man, how did their will to speak and write beget the infallible Word of God? I don't use the term "free will," because secular philosophers use that term to suggest that if there is a god, such a god doesn't know what's going on, and is constantly being surprised at what the will of man does. So I would never say that I have "free will" and can do something that will catch God off-guard. God knows what I think and what I feel and what I will do because He predestined it all. But I am not a rock, or an insect, or an animal, or a robot. I am a human being created in the Image of God. Amazing.Some will say that since God predestines even sin, and then punishes sinners for the sin God predestined them to commit, it would be better if sinners had never been born. They had no "free will." They had no choice. "That's not fair." And if it's not "fair," it can't be true. This claim is logical. If a man has no free will, and gets punished for what God predestined him to to, it would be better for him if he had never been born. But Mark 14:21 says exactly that: God predestined Jesus to be sinfully put to death:
That's pretty scary. Judas had no choice in whether he would be born. God created Judas without asking Judas for permission, and predestined Judas to commit a terrible sin (John 19:11). But Judas was created in the Image of God. All sinners are created in the Image of God. And in the end, every knee will bow and every sinner will admit that God's Judgment is fair (Isaiah 45:23; Romans 14:11; Philippians 2:10-11). All sinners will say "I admit. I sinned." All sinners will admit that God is just. Even though He predestined them to sin (Romans 9; Isaiah 10). Christians who oppose the Sovereignty of God and uphold the "free will" of man claim that predestination "makes man a puppet." But as I said, man is clearly not a puppet; man is created in the Image of God, and we all know this. But the Bible agrees that God's sovereignty makes man a "puppet" of God's decree. The Bible describes man not as a "puppet," however, but as a bucket of water. Well, not a bucket, but a river of water.
How is this not like being "a puppet?" "Bibliolatry"I believe the Bible is the Word of God.
The Bible claims to be the Word of God. It claims that God speaks to human beings. It claims that God used human beings the way I am using a keyboard as I write this. Let's consider first the claim that God speaks, and the Bible is God speaking to us.
Imagine that a UFO lands on the White House lawn, and an extraterrestrial being hands the President a Peace Treaty. The ET says, "Read this Treaty. It tells you how to cure cancer, end war, obtain free energy, eliminate the threat of global warming, and extend lifespans by hundreds of years. If you agree to abide by its terms, our race will help your race. If you do not agree, we will destroy you. We will wait right here for your answer." Network television will have their cameras at the White House 24/7. Commentators will be speculating endlessly about what the extraterrestrial Treaty says, and whether or not the President will accept their terms. People will cancel vacations and having children, breathlessly waiting for the decision, knowing their entire future hangs in the balance. If there are any ET's in the universe, they were created by the God of the Bible. His Word is more important than the word of any ET. But we spend more time watching CNN or FoxNews than we spend listening to the Bible, even though the news channels aren't covering anything as interesting as a UFO on the White House lawn. For some, "news" doesn't get our attention as much as sports, soaps, or celebrities. All the while, we have a book from the Creator of the universe sitting un-read on a shelf next to the Flat Screen TV. What the heck is wrong with us? The Bible is a Peace Treaty -- a Covenant -- that God is willing to enter into with those who have been in rebellion against Him. The Treaty calls for unconditional surrender on our part. The Treaty promises blessing -- "salvation" -- on God's part. The "Berean" SpiritHere is perhaps the #1 reason no church wants to be infiltrated by someone who believes the Bible was actually written by God.
The Bereans are commended for questioning the church. They heard a message from the Apostles and checked what they heard with the Scriptures. There is no entity on planet earth who wants their members questioning what the church has taught and comparing church doctrine with the Bible. Especially regarding the "heretical" ideas I'll be raising below. Even though Protestant churches champion "sola Scriptura" and the "priesthood of all believers." They don't really mean it. They don't like Bereans. We should search the Scriptures. We should do that every day. The Bible is our starting pointI am a "Bible-believing" Christian. Feel free to accuse me of engaging in bibliolatry, fundamentalism, extremism, creationism, Calvinism, Theonomy, etc. Guilty as charged. Acts 17:10-12 is one of three texts worth studying:
The Bereans appeared to be like modern libertarians, with their bumper-sticker that says "QUESTION AUTHORITY." The Apostles gave them the Gospel of Jesus Christ, but the Bereans didn't just take the Apostles' word for it, but checked what they were told against a higher authority, the Scripture. The Bereans are more dogmatic authoritarians than those who mindlessly accept the word of clergy or creeds. Additionally, the Bereans studied the Bible "daily." The verses on that link show that daily engagement with the Bible is an imperative. This attitude makes one a better Christian, as seen in our second text.
My goal in this article is to be your "friend." I hope you'll be my friend as well, and challenge my thinking in a loving way. I am not against "authorities" or "experts." I rely on them and quote them. An "expert" can be your friend and sharpen you, but you might have to pay the expert ("mentor," "professor" "seminary"). This article is free. May you be sharpened. May we be friends. Third text:
What you learned in church seems right to you. Wait until you compare it with what the Bible says. |
||||||||||||||||||
| Chapter 7 God’s Covenant with Man | Covenant as Treaty of Unconditional Surrender
How to Become a Christian by Signing God's Treaty of Unconditional Surrender |
|||||||||||||||||||
ExtremismMark 12 I love the Lord with all my heart, mind, soul, and strength. Not just part-way. That makes me an "extremist." People tell me I take the Bible to an extreme. I think I just take it consistently. At least I try. If you disagree with this -- if you want to avoid "extremes" -- then you want to be at point "M" on the chart below:
Do you want to be a Grade "A" Christian? Then you had better avoid being a Grade "Z" Christian with all your heart, mind, soul and strength.
If you are not an extremist in defense of the Bible, what is the guiding principle that prevents you from being a defender of tyranny, atheism and hate? Is "moderation" the Grand Principle that you believe will keep America from collapsing into chaos and lawlessness? When Jesus said "Love your neighbor," was He really just telling us not to hate our neighbor, to avoid extremes, and have an attitude of "moderation" toward our neighbor? Can Lukewarm Indifference ever be Christlike? Even if my goal were no more than "moderation," if you are at point "Z," I must be an "extremist" in the opposite direction, and advocate "A" in order to get you to point "M," because if I only advocate "Moderation," "Z + M" only brings you to point "T." Life is a tug-of-war. If you don't pull the rope with every ounce of strength you have, you're in the mud. Jesus said the struggle to overcome the world is "agonizing." I advocate "A" on the scale above. I'm trying to get you to adopt "A" as your position as well. If you're a Moderate and I move you toward "A" to any degree, I've succeeded. For now. If you follow some of what the Bible says, you are not following anything the Bible says. If you pick and choose, you are your own god. Even if you choose to follow Jesus 99% of the time (using your "free will"), it is still YOU who are choosing, you who approve of 99% of Jesus' commands, you who put yourself in the place of God and judge some of what Christ said to be wrong, you who are acting as lord of your life. You view religion as a Smörgåsbord. You pick and choose depending on what YOU like, but do not view the Word of God as an absolutely binding package deal. Everybody agrees with something Jesus said, even some real sickos. A Christian is someone who believes everything Jesus said. Nothing less than full submission counts for anything. |
| Micah's Prophecy | Westminster Standards | Vine & Fig Tree University |
| "in the last days"
And it will come about in the last days |
Chapter 32 - the State of Men after Death, and of the Resurrection of the Dead
Chapter 33 - the Last Judgment |
EschatologyOne of the most important issues in the last 100 years is "futurism" vs. "preterism," or "pessimillennialism" vs. "optimillennialism." The Westminster Confession relegates eschatology to the last two chapters of the Confession. But we believe the subject is extremely important in our day, because the subject is plagued by errors, and these errors are popularly believed and have a global impact. Millions of copies of books speculating about "the last days" have been sold in this generation. Everything about Micah's “Vine & Fig Tree” prophecy is undermined by today's erroneous eschatologies. They all deny that it is even possible -- much less mandatory -- for us to beat our "swords into plowshares" and pursue the fulfillment of Micah's “Vine & Fig Tree” prophecy. Eschatology is critical. (We wouldn't necessarily place the subject at the very top of the list, but it occurs right off the bat in Micah's prophecy, so here it is. But it deserves higher placement than the last two chapters of the Confession.) Micah says his prophecy will be fulfilled in "the last days." What does this mean? Commentators suggest two meanings:
I believe "the last days" of the Old Covenant are now in our past. We are not now living in "the last days" of the Old Covenant. The Old Covenant came to a definitive end in AD 70 when the temple in Jerusalem was destroyed. As a result, Jesus is reigning as the Christ today. |
| Micah's Prophecy | Westminster Standards | Vine & Fig Tree University |
| That the mountain of the House of the LORD Will be established as the chief of the mountains And it will be raised above the hills |
Chapter 4 Creation |
CreationismThe Bible says four rivers flowed out of (downhill from) Eden, indicating that Eden was on a "mountain" or elevated plateau. Ever since then, and throughout the Bible, the mountain has been a reminder of Eden. Was there actually a Garden of Eden in history? Are the first few chapters of Genesis a chronicle of history, or a "religious" poem of some kind? How would Jesus answer that question? If you can believe that Jesus rose from the dead, in violation of "scientific law," why can't you believe God created all things a few thousand years ago? Politicians who feel threatened by the Bible, seeing it as an "anarchist manifesto" want you to believe the Bible is "pre-scientific" and cannot be trusted. Karl Marx said his "scientific socialism" was grounded in history. Jesus grounded His teachings in the history in Genesis. Marxists and Christians have very different views of history. One of the biggest tests of Biblical character is the ability to stand against "the science" of evolution. "Listen to the science" we are constantly told. Is your faith informed and able to stand against the crowd? Evolutionism is not science; it is a religion; it is the religion of archism. It is one example of a "Mass Formation Psychosis." ("Archism" is the belief that members of a ruling class have the right to impose their will on others by force or threats of violence. Jesus said His followers are not to be archists "like the kings of the gentiles" (Mark 10:42-45). Evolutionism is a religion designed to buttress the power of archists. It's actually the theory of archism. Elitism. Racism.) We discuss "archists" below, or see this: Jesus is the Savior of the World
In what sense is Jesus the "Savior" of those who do not believe? In the sense that "salvation" in the Bible usually refers to conditions in this life, rather than conditions in the next life. God restrains the depravity of all men. The vast majority of the 8 billion human beings on planet earth are "basically good" in a way they were not before the birth of the Savior of the World. The few we call "sociopaths" are not beyond the help that can be given them by the "City upon a Hill." Sociopaths emulate archists. Christ's ekklesia [see below] needs to preach the gospel to archists and persuade them to repent of archism. The New Jerusalem is a New Creation. Micah 4:1-2 says Jerusalem (Mt. Zion, the mountain of the House [temple] of the Lord) will be "established." This is actually the creation of a New Jerusalem. This is the restoration of the conditions that originally existed in the Garden of Eden before the Fall. Evolutionary premillennialism sees a vast past and no future. It's all going to end in our day. Planet earth is a miracle, not an accident. Supernatural design, supernatural creation, supernatural administration. There is no such thing as "nature."
|
| Chapter 6 the Fall of Man, of Sin, and of the Punishment Thereof |
Thesis 13: The Fall of Man
The Fall of Man -- the Desire to "“To Be As Gods” -- “Knowing Good and Evil” |
| Micah's Prophecy | Westminster Standards | Vine & Fig Tree University |
| That the mountain of the House of the LORD Will be established as the chief of the mountains And it will be raised above the hills |
Chapter 25 the Church
Chapter 26 the Communion of Saints Chapter 30 Church Censures Chapter 31 Synods and Councils |
In the Old Testament, "The House of the Lord" was the temple in Jerusalem. The temple was where God dwelled.
But that temple was destroyed in AD 70. So what is "the House of the Lord" in our day? Catholics might say "the Vatican." Protestants might say "the local church." The Apostle Paul says Christians are the new temple of God.
Edifying People = Building the Kingdom Most Christians reject a "preterist" eschatology because of what "the church" teaches. But if preterism is true, it revolutionizes ecclesiology. Why the word "Church" is a Fine Translation of "Ekklesia"The institutional church is all about misdirection. Like a magician, it focuses your attention on something irrelevant, so you don't look at what's really going on. There's no evidence that Christians in the Book of Acts ever got together in a public building at 10:30 am on Sunday mornings. But that's what the institutional church wants us to focus on. The rest of the week, archists are killing millions and stealing trillions. More on "Church" |
Chapter 21 Religious Worship, and the Sabbath Day
Chapter 20 Christian Liberty, and Liberty of Conscience |
The Day of Rest is the seventh day. "The Lord's Day" is the first day/eighth day, commemorating the resurrection. The two concepts are distinct, but too often confused. The fourth of the ten commandments is to work six says and rest on the seventh. The fourth commandment does not say to work five days, rest on the seventh, and "go to church" on the eighth day. Clergymen emphasize the importance of "going to church" on Sunday, and ignore the importance of work as the main source of prosperity and government. Businesses create government because they foster habits and character which undergird order, which make profit possible. More on "work."
What is "WORSHIP"?The basic meaning of the word "worship" is service. To "worship" God is to serve Him by putting every area of one's life under His Law. As The New Bible Dictionary puts it, "[T]he essential concept in both the Old and New Testaments is 'service.'" John Murray writes,
Worship in the generic sense is thus service to God in every area of life; total slavery to Him Who is Lord of all. In the Old Testament there was also a more specific usage for "worship," namely, the observance of the ceremonial rituals given to a Spiritually juvenile pre-Pentecost people. These ritual observances typified worship in every area of life. Animal sacrifice, the burning of incense, attendance at temple, and other rigors were imposed on the slave-like people of Egyptized Israel (Galatians 3:24 - 4:9), and were but shadows of the worship of the New Covenant. Jesus spoke of the New Covenant form of worship in John 4. The woman at the well, having been confronted with the ethical demands of the Lord Jesus (regarding her adulterous life), attempts a "doctrinal" diversion: she asks Jesus about "worship." Putting words in Jesus' mouth, she claims that worship occurs in a certain place (Jerusalem) (John 4:20). Jesus denies it:
Here is the "Mountain" of Micah 4, the New Zion which covers the entire globe (Daniel 2:35). In the common, specific sense, "worship" means attending to the ceremonial requirements of the Old Covenant, going to a certain place (cf. Acts 8:27). But these acts only symbolized true "worship," and were necessary to prod a Spiritless people to that Christian worship which is obedience to God in every area of life. Thus, the phrase "worship service" is quite redundant! Can you find one occurrence in the New Testament of "worship" in the ceremonial/specific sense being required of Christians? Or are the occurrences of "worship" speaking of obedience in every area of life? Do any of the Greek words used for "worship" occur in any sense requiring Christians to go to Jerusalem, or a specific "mountain" to "worship" God? Would we expect centralized ceremonial "worship" to be required in light of Micah's prophecy? (If you "attend church," have you been trained to search the Scriptures to find the answers to such questions as these [Acts 17:11], or do you need to ask your "pastor"?) The New Testament is clear: the "worship" required of believers does not consist in ceremonial ritual. Colossians 2:18 says,
The Greek word translated "worship" is "religion" in James 1, where we are told,
Of course, "worship" is not limited to visiting orphans and widows, but involves obedience outside the temple, outside the synagogue, outside the cathedral, in every area of life. |
|
| Chapter 27 the Sacraments
Chapter 28 Baptism Chapter 29 the Lord’s Supper
|
Preterism and Sacraments
I don't believe in "sacraments." These Old Testament rituals were dug up and mimicked by what we call "The Roman Catholic Church." Most Protestant churches are only partially-reformed Roman churches. What we call "the Last Supper" was Jesus observing Passover with His disciples. Jesus destroyed the temple in Jerusalem at His coming in AD 70 (see "Preterism" above). Paul told Christians (many of whom were converts from Judaism) to continue observing Passover until Jesus comes. This made sense at the time, as Passover was closely connected with the temple.
First-century Christians continued to observe Passover until Christ came in the power of His Kingdom, in the lifetime of those who witnessed His First Advent, to take vengeance against those Israelites who rejected Him as their Passover Lamb. Jesus the Death Angel did not pass over Israel in AD 70. The old Israel was destroyed as the new Egypt: Revelation 11:8 Jesus came in the power of a new Kingdom. The old kingdom -- the new Egypt -- was destroyed so that the New Israel -- God's Kingdom -- could be built. "Sacraments" were a part of the Old Covenant, but not the New. John the Baptist was an Old Testament prophet who foretold the coming of the Messiah and the New Covenant. Paul said he never baptized anyone (1 Corinthians 1:13-17). The Old Covenant and its sacraments were passing away (Hebrews 8:13). Most Christians see the practice of their faith occurring for one hour in a "church" building on Sunday morning. But the most important aspects of our faith should be occurring the other six days of the week. |
| Micah's Prophecy | Westminster Standards | Vine & Fig Tree University |
| And the peoples will stream to it. And many nations will come and say, "Come, let us go up to the mountain of the LORD And to the House of the God of Jacob |
The Westminster Catechisms contain more on this them than the Confession:
Day 150: The Lord's Prayer, part 3 - "Thy Kingdom Come" Day 151: The Lord's Prayer, part 4 - "Thy Will Be Done"But there isn't a separate section in the Westminster Standards on "Post-Millennialism," or as we call it, "Optimillennialism." |
We have often heard that all religions are equal; we're all headed up to the top of the same mountain, just climbing along different paths. But in the last few decades, it has become obvious that one religion is not like the others (and one religion is superior to the others). The religion of Jihadism has been in the news. This religion is not going up the same mountain as those who say all religions are equal. The religion of Jihadism wants to blow-up the entire mountain with everyone on it; even if this kills the Jihadist suicide bombers themselves. They don't believe in converting others to their religion by persuasion/reason, but by violence, forcing others to
submit to the terrorists' religion/rule.
The World must be Christianized. | "All nations, all peoples" | By persuasion/regeneration The whole planet is going to be Christianized. As we will see, Micah says this means beating "swords into plowshares." That requires a willingness to be pacifists and therefore anarchists Postmillennialism or Optimillennialism requires pacifism and anarchism. It requires an end to "nationalism." "Salvation" is not only about an individual going to heaven after dying. That's not what God's play is about. It's about billions of human beings worshiping God on the other six days of the week.
Optimillennialism is optimism about the future progress of the Kingdom of God on earth. It defies entropy, and is not evolutionary. Therefore Optimillennialism depends on Creationism. |
| Chapter 8 Christ the Mediator
Chapter 10 Effectual Calling Chapter 11 Justification Chapter 12 Adoption Chapter 13 Sanctification Chapter 14 Saving Faith Chapter 15 Repentance unto Life Chapter 16 Good Works Chapter 17 the Perseverance of the Saints Chapter 18 the Assurance of Grace and Salvation |
Much of the Westminster Confession is taken up with a very narrow examination of "salvation" or "justification." It is generally related to what happens to you after you die.
At Vine & Fig Tree University we take a "Theonomic" approach to "justification." Notice that chapter 8, "Of Christ the Mediator," is not complemented with a chapter on "Christ the King." The concept is in the Westminster Standards, but buried. |
| Micah's Prophecy | Westminster Standards | Vine & Fig Tree University |
| That He may teach us about His ways And that we may walk in His paths." For from Zion will go forth the Law Even the Word of the LORD from Jerusalem. And He will judge between many peoples And render decisions for mighty, distant nations. |
Chapter 19 the Law of God
Continued below |
The word "Theonomy" comes from two Greek words meaning "God's Law." It stands for the proposition that the entire Bible is the Word of God and we are to be governed by it. This is controversial because many Christians do not believe they have to obey laws in the Old Testament, and they do not believe they are obligated to obey God's commands during the work-week, but only on Sunday mornings or in their "spiritual life."
There is no morality without authority. Humanistic authority produces a humanistic morality. When Americans learned the Bible in public schools (and public schools were Bible schools), America was the most prosperous, most admired nation on earth. This is Biblical authority and morality.
• The God who gave you life deserves your respect Being "judgmental" vs. Hitler Micah says the law of God must be taught, and people will stream to learn God's Law. Therefore Theonomy leads to Education (#10 below). Theonomic education leads to Godly character (#11). When we obey God's Law, God Governs us Theocracy = God Governs Theonomy leads to Theocracy Our moral obligation to obey God's Commandment counters those who complain that our advocacy of predestination leaves man without "free will." You are morally obligated to choose to obey God's Law. I don't know whether you have been predestined to be obedient or not. But you know what you must do, and you will eventually admit that you chose to do what you wanted to do. Every knee will bow and every tongue will confess that our Sovereign God is perfectly fair (Philippians 2:10; Romans 14:11). Theonomy vs. Autonomy Chapter 19 of the Westminster Confession seems to endorse "Theonomy," but it actually repudiates it, and is fundamentally flawed. R.J. Rushdoony said the Confession was guilty of "nonsense" at this point. Even "blasphemy." Section 4 of chapter 19 says:
This statement is a serious error. This is based on Greco-Roman categories, not the categories of Hebrew Law, or Biblical Law. We must consider four key terms:
Israel was not a "body politic" in the conventional sense of "politics." Our word "politics" comes from the Greek word polis, which can be translated "city," "city-state," or even "empire." Babylon was a city and an empire. Rome was a city and an empire. Augustine wrote a book called This stands in contrast to "The City of Man." Israel was not a kingdom of politicians, but a "kingdom of priests" (Exodus 19:6). Israel did not become a "political" body until 1 Samuel 8, when Israel rejected God as her King (as the text explicitly reveals), choosing to emulate the pagan nations around her. It was not God's intention that Israel "mature" from a tribe-based kingdom of priests to a polis-based kingdom of politicians. The Patriarch Abraham is our model, and it was Moses' goal that Israel become Abrahamic patriarchs again (Numbers 11:29). The word "economics" comes from two Greek words meaning "law of the home." For Abraham, all law was economic law, no law was political law. "Political Philosophy" is the only college course you need to take, and the one no university offers. Abraham's priest was Melchizedek (Genesis 14:18), just as our priest is Christ (Hebrews 7). Moses gave Israel "Levitical law." When Israel disobeyed God's "economic" law, there were laws that brought cleansing, or atonement, for violations of the "economic law." The Levitical priesthood was temporary; a kind of social "training wheels." Today the Levitical laws can only be obeyed by faith in Christ, "the Lamb of God" (John 1:29). The "economic law" reflects the unchanging moral character of God. We could call this social system PATRIAGORA: The Bible says Abraham obeyed My Voice, and kept My Charge, My Commandments, My Statutes, and My Torah. (Genesis 26:4-5) In this entire body of laws, none could be called "judicial laws" or "civil laws." Moses gave laws for patriarchs (heads of families) not politicians. None of God's Law in "the Scriptures" has "expired" as the Westminster Confession erroneously claims. We still have a High Priest and a Temple to attend to. We have a King who governs us. If we don't entertain guests on the roof of our house, we don't need to build a rail around the roof, but if we do have people up there, we need to follow Deuteronomy 22:8, which some today would call a "judicial law." In generations past, when Americans understood the Bible better than we do today, American juries awarded verdicts in tort cases where safety rails were not in place, based on Deuteronomy 22:8. To say that these "expired" laws only bind governments if the government sees some kind of "general equity" is to open the door to totalitarianism. This "general equity" theory is based on Roman law, not Biblical Law. See this:
This has very important implications. This is not just about "law." This line of argument is calling for a complete re-organization of human society. "Patriarchy" is, as Gary North describes it, a "Bottom-Up Theocracy." The Duty of Man
We live in a culture that does not want to be reminded of its duties. It prefers to talk about its "rights." I don't believe in "human rights." I don't believe in "Justification by mere belief." I believe in Justification by Allegiance. Obedience (ethics) is more important than intelligence. The word "Theocracy" comes from two Greek words meaning "God Governs." Our duty is to be governed by God. "We must obey God rather than man" (Acts 5:29). We've been trained in our secular schools to fear "Theocracy." But we're not tempted to accept an Islamic Theocracy, where Allah is our national god. We've been trained to reject a Christian Theocracy. We accept a Secular Humanist theocracy, where every man is his own god (Genesis 3:5). As Augustine wrote, our job as Christians is to convert the entire planet from the City of Man -- autonomy -- into "The City of God" -- Theonomy -- a Christocracy. The Westminster Catechism contains an exposition of the Law of God under the category of the Ten Commandments. This exposition is, on the whole, wonderful. If we take these three commands seriously:
the implications are astounding. Nobody disagrees with these views in the abstract, but if I make them too practical, or apply them to the wrong people, then these views become heretical and offensive. Together these views lead me to a conclusion that everyone rejects. Passionately rejects. I used to reject it myself when I was younger. We'll consider it below. |
| Micah's Prophecy | Westminster Standards | Vine & Fig Tree University | ||||||||||||||
| Focus text: "He shall judge"
He will teach us of His ways, |
The Law (con't)
|
"Theonomy" = "Theocracy"
He will teach us of His ways, The Law-Giver is our Judge and King (Isaiah 33:22). If you don't believe in Theonomy, then you don't believe Jesus is a Christ-King. He's just a homeless story-teller. He has nothing to say to Pharaoh, Caesar, Hitler, Stalin, Trump, or Biden. Jesus cannot command them to repent if there is no Theonomy. Micah is prophesying a global Theocracy. The word "Theocracy" comes from two Greek words meaning "God Governs." God "governs" us when we obey His commandments. America was originally a Theocracy. James Madison, "the Father of the Constitution," is reported to have said,
America was originally a Christocracy. Benjamin Rush signed the Declaration of Independence and served in the Presidential administrations of John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and James Madison -- each of whom came from a different political party. And of what party was Rush?
Only our Redeemer should be our Ruler. America was originally a Trinitarian Christocracy. On March 6, 1799, President John Adams proclaimed a national day of prayer in which Americans would
Everyone lives in a theocracy. Either the God of the Bible governs us, or some other god, or everyone gets to be his own god. Daniel 2 is a prophecy of global Christocracy. In the days of the Roman Empire, Daniel predicted, Christ would be born. He would crush the ancient Demonic Imperial Paradigm and begin spreading His own Kingdom over the earth. Historians have documented the on-going fulfillment of this prophecy, which continues today (though not without local and temporary ups-and-downs):
The prophet Micah speaks of the universal reign of God's Law over the earth. John Adams invited us to think about a world where human law-makers are put out of business, and God's Theonomy replaces man's law-books and creates God's Theocracy. R. J. Rushdoony wrote the following:
In principle, Adams is advocating "Theocracy." Adams is saying we should be governed by God and His Law Book, the Bible. Preterism claims that Jesus became the Christ in the past, and now IS the Christ. But to say "Jesus is the Christ" is to say that Jesus alone is the Christ. The "kings of the gentiles" (Mark 10:42-45) bitterly resent this claim. They say that John Adams, in principle, is advocating "anarchy." No, he wasn't advocating "anarchy" directly. Adams' purpose was just to praise the Bible. But nobody in government today would ever say what Adams said: We should take the Bible for our only law book. That's too "radical." It's "homophobic." Or something. Only a "domestic terrorist" would say something like this. Taking Jesus as our Messiah and the Bible as our only lawbook puts "the kings of the gentiles" out of business. Jesus can rule the nations because the Word of God is the Sword of the Lord, and is more powerful than the military sword of man:
A global Christocracy is possible because God uses His Sword-Word to change hearts and bring world peace through global obedience.
This is why we are commanded to read, study, and meditate on God's Word daily. My case for the “Vine & Fig Tree” worldview will only be persuasive if you read the verses of Scripture and let them change your mind. |
||||||||||||||
| Chapter 22 Lawful Oaths and Vows | I studied law and passed the California Bar Exam. I was completely qualified to become an attorney, but the Supreme Court of the United States has ruled that Christians -- whose allegiance to God trumps their allegiance to the government -- cannot be permitted to take the oath required of all attorneys. Details.
An oath is an act of religious worship, not a secular formality. Vows are an important tool in developing character according to God's Law. Understanding Vows |
|||||||||||||||
| Chapter 21 Religious Worship, and the Sabbath Day | The Day of Rest is the seventh day. "The Lord's Day" is the first day/eighth day, commemorating the resurrection. The two concepts are distinct, but too often confused. The fourth of the ten commandments is to work six says and rest on the seventh. The fourth commandment does not say to work five days, rest on the seventh, and "go to church" on the eighth day. Clergymen emphasize the importance of "going to church" on Sunday, emphasizing "worship" as a series of rituals in "church," and ignore the importance of worship as service/work in every area of life Monday-through-Saturday, as the main source of prosperity and government. Businesses create government because they foster habits and character which undergird order, which make profit possible.
Christ governs our lives not just on Sunday morning, but all during the week, including our business lives. The economy is where Education, Theonomy, Character, and business as sacred calling and worship all intersect. |
|||||||||||||||
Work, not Theft || Service, not "Public Service"A Jewish scholar named Franz Oppenheimer divided people into two groups. The first group he called "Economic Man." "Economic Man" engages in work, produces things of value (or provides valuable services) and gets paid, then trades that money for things other people produce. The second group he called "Political Man." These people do not produce, they confiscate. Because Christians are "pacifists," they believe in overcoming evil with good. In Romans 12, we respond to evil with food or drink, and in Romans 13 we respond to evil with gifts of money, hoping in these cases that God will grant repentance to those who do evil to us. Taxation is extortion, a form of theft. There isn't a single verse in the Bible to which any human being alive today can point to and say, "This verse assures me that if I declare myself to be the king, I can threaten you with violence if you do not give me the money I demand, and God will not hold me guilty of sin." If someone sins against you, and you do everything Jesus says to do in order to help that person repent and right his wrongs, Jesus says to "excommunicate" him (our modern terminology, not His), and treat him like someone who cannot possibly be a genuine Christian: "a tax collector" (Matthew 18:17). If there is no theft, there is no "State." "Civil Governments" do not exist without "taxation," which is theft. "Civil government" is distinguished from businesses and charities by its claim to have a right to steal.
Private Service Creates Public Order "Public Service" Creates Disorder Business is government. Employers should disciple employees (Matthew 28:18-20). Use God's Sword-Word. |
||||||||||||||||
| Let's consider next the commandment, "Thou shalt not kill." (Exodus 20:13, quoted by Jesus, Mark 10:19) That link contains the exposition of the 6th Commandment in the Westminster Larger Catechism. It is "a pacifist manifesto." |
| Micah's Prophecy | Westminster Standards | Vine & Fig Tree University | |||||||
| Then they will hammer their swords into plowshares And their spears into pruning hooks; Nation will not lift up sword against nation And never again will they train for war. |
|
I believe that God says "Thou shalt not kill." "Everybody knows" that Jesus commanded His disciples to be "pacifists," but most churches say we can't take that to an "extreme." Most churches defend some killing. If someone personally insults you, you might be a "pacifist." It's OK to be "super spiritual" in your "private" life. But if some foreigner publicly insults your secular government, you'll "support the troops" as they drop bombs and kill children. "Spiritual" in the private sector, "responsible" and "practical" and "realistic" in the public sector.
During the 20th century, hundreds of millions of human beings were murdered by atheists, many of whom attended churches regularly. During my lifetime, "Christians" who worked for "my" government killed, crippled, or made homeless tens of millions of innocent non-combatant civilians around the world. I think the United States is the enemy of God and humanity. I guess other Christians think it's OK to inflict mass suffering and terror in order to keep gas prices down. "U.S.A.! U.S.A.! U.S.A.!" "I Pledge Allegiance...." The Bible says we should beat our "swords into plowshares" (Micah 4). Most churches disagree. They cheer their members when they don the uniform of a soldier for a "New World Order." Jesus commands us to
PacifismI was born in the year of "Sputnik," the Russian satellite that inaugurated "the Space Race" which was a part of "the Cold War." I wasn't yet in high school when the Vietnam War raged, and when the nation was divided by anti-war protesters. I was raised to believe that socialism was evil and capitalism was good. I believed that the anti-war protesters were a bunch of anti-American commies. (They may well have been incited by Communists and used by Communists as tools or pawns in Moscow's attempt to bring down the American/capitalist system. But they were on the right side of an immoral war.*) The message of this sermon is that a person is not a real Christian if that person is not a pacifist. You may not agree with the conclusion, but following the argument will stimulate thought. You will be glad you gave the argument some attention. Most people would agree that a person who says we should hammer our "swords into plowshares" and "never again train for war" (Micah 4:3) is a "pacifist." Is this a "fringe" belief or is it central to the Christian faith? Consider James 1:27
If it's wrong to fail to "visit" or "watch over" widows, it is certainly wrong to create widows by killing their husbands. The United States is the greatest Widow-Maker on earth. This makes the United States the enemy of pure religion. But I had been raised to believe that all good Christians were to "support the troops." In the last section of Matthew 25, Jesus says the way you treat widows and orphans and the sick and homeless and illegal aliens and those in prison is a measure of how Christian you are. People who traumatize widows and orphans and cause them to cry themselves to sleep at night are probably "goats," not "sheep." Take an American child who has not yet entered government-run schooling and show the American child a photo of a child in Yemen or Iraq who has had her arms blown off by a U.S. bomb. That American child will know that something is wrong. Show that same photo to that same child after the child has graduated from Harvard University and has a prestigious job in the U.S. State Department. Watch the five-dollar words start flying: "Collateral Damage." "Realpolitik." "U.S. Partners and Allies." "National Security Interests." Pacifism and EnemiesSome might say that we are not commanded to take care of women and children if their husbands and fathers are our "enemies." That is, if those poor men have been conscripted at gunpoint by a tyrannical dictatorship and forced to fight against "U.S. armed forces" invading their homeland. After all, they are our "enemies." "Kill the commies." "Support our troops." But Jesus commands His followers to love their enemies.
Jesus sacrificed Himself to save His enemies.
The heartfelt desire of every true Christian is the It is better to be killed than to kill. Jesus chose to be killed rather than to kill. All of this is obvious to a child, but we adults don't buy this nonsense. "Pacifism" Defined by ChristThe word "pacifism" comes from the Latin word for "peace." It does not come from the English word "passive." Supporters of the Vine & Fig Tree worldview are active in beating swords into plowshares. The dictionaries usually give two definitions for "pacifist." First, an opponent of war. Second, an opponent of self-defense. That second definition is inaccurate. I know of no pacifist who would say that if you have a shield and someone comes after you with a sword, you cannot defend yourself against aggression with your shield. The real issue is lethal "self-defense." If your sword-bearing attacker gets tired of whacking his sword against your shield, and lies down to take a nap, the pacifist would say you should defend yourself against further attacks by running away, not by cracking your attacker's skull open with your shield. Our definition of "pacifist" is "one who keeps the commandments of Christ." Here's what "swords into plowshares" pacifism means: Jesus said ("Thou shalt not kill." Mark 10:19, quoting Exodus 20:13). John Calvin recognized that
Jesus also said "Thou shalt not steal," (Matthew 19:18; Exodus 20:13-16; Deuteronomy 5:17-20), meaning, Thou shalt not confiscate someone else's property. So can we all agree that basic Christian morality includes this:
But Jesus goes further.
Then if someone else decides to hurt you or take your stuff.
That means that if someone hurts you or takes your stuff, and you seek reconciliation, but you're rebuffed, then you cannot hire a Mafia "hit-man" to take vengeance against your unrepentant enemy. Most Christians will agree with that. But here's the kicker: If someone hurts you or takes your stuff, and you seek reconciliation, but you're rebuffed, then you cannot "vote" for a "representative" to tax your neighbor and build a "military-industrial complex" to take vengeance against your unrepentant enemy. You will vote such politicians out of office. If you vote all non-pacifists out of office, you will no longer have a "government." That claim causes many people to do a double-take. Your Sunday School teacher never put it quite like that. All pacifists are anarchists.
Myth:
Fact:
Peace through Peace, not through "Strength." | "Swords into Plowshares"
Pacifism leads to Anarcho-Theocracy Peace is possiblePeace is inevitable The U.S. is the world's superpower. Two hundred million Christians in America could bring about world peace in 2023. Details. Peace is the opposite of Violence. The State is a monopoly of violence. Therefore pacifism produces anarchism or archistlessness. |
|||||||
VengeanceNobody can read the Bible and avoid the conclusion that the institution we call "the State" is institutionalized vengeance. If someone does something you don't like, you are prohibited from taking vengeance, from confiscating his property, or depriving him of his life. You are also prohibited from hiring a "contract killer" to kill him. Wouldn't you agree? You personally didn't do the killing -- the "hit-man" you hired actually did the killing -- but you share in the guilt. You are also prohibited from "voting" for someone to be your "representative" and kill people you don't like. Every political science professor in every university on planet earth will agree that the essential nature of "the State" is violence. It claims a "monopoly on violence." Wikipedia || Encyclopedia Britannica || Oxford So |
| Micah's Prophecy | Westminster Standards | Vine & Fig Tree University | ||||
| Focus text: "swords into plowshares, never again train for war"
Micah 4:3 And He will judge between many peoples |
Chapter 23 the Civil Magistrate | So what is the result of my extreme Biblicism?
I call it the “Vine & Fig Tree” worldview. I created a non-profit organization to promote this worldview. People tell me that my extremism is "unrealistic," "impractical," and "utopian." Again, the quotation from John Adams: In his diary on February 22, 1756, John Adams, later second President of the United States, wrote this:
I believe the only law book we need is the Bible. I'll say more about this in just a minute. The Bible is a textbook for every subject, not just religion. In our day, that's one of the most offensive things anyone can say. If you said this from the pulpit, half the church would leave, and the other half would leave as soon the first half explained to them what you meant. I know my way around a law library. I've spent hundreds of hours in law libraries studying the law. I passed the California Bar Exam, but was denied a license to practice law because America -- once a Christian nation -- is now a secular nation, and Christians cannot become attorneys, according to the Supreme Court of the United States, because their allegiance to God's Law Book trumps their allegiance to Washington D.C.'s law books. Details. Not everyone is going to take the Bible as their only law book, and behave like Jesus commands all men to behave. What should we do about these people? Jesus gave us a step-by-step blueprint to follow in Matthew 18. Here's how that could work out. The Bible never commanded human beings to form "governments" to deal with criminals by taking vengeance against them. In fact, it is a sin to create a government. Creating a government is a rejection of God (1 Samuel 8). The cost to society of a government is greater than the cost to society of criminals under anarcho-pacifism. We'll return to this below. ArchistlessnessBeating "swords into plowshares" implies a theory of government, as well as a theory of eschatology.
The word "anarchist" comes from two Greek words meaning "not an archist." Anarcho-PreterismLet's examine the word "anarchism," which is even more offensive to most Christians than "preterism." Even more offensive to modern Christians than the belief that Jesus IS the Christ (today) (and we shouldn't be waiting around for a second advent of Jesus) is the claim that Jesus is THE Christ today; that in our day there is no other legitimate Christ, no other legitimate king. Nobody believes in "kings" anymore. So let's update our language.
As we will see below, Isaiah 33:22 confirms this:
As we will see below, it was a mistake for Israel to want an earthly king to replace God (1 Samuel 8). And as we will see below, Jesus prohibits His followers from aspiring to rule over others. Jesus said a Christian must not be an "archist." An "archist" is a "ruler." We here at Vine & Fig Tree invented the word "archist," deriving it from a Greek word found in Mark 10:42-45, from which the English word "anarchist" is derived. In the Gospel of Mark, chapter 10 (see more below), Jesus discovers His disciples arguing about who is going to be the "greatest" in the Kingdom of God. Their concept of the Messiah was someone who would use force and violence to vanquish the Roman occupation army that held Israel under tribute. They looked forward to the coming of a Messiah who would enlist them into a Messianic Israeli Army which would "stick it to" the Romans. But just as Micah said we should beat "swords into plowshares," Jesus said His disciples should "love your enemies," and if their soldiers conscript you to carry their provisions for one mile, you should go with the occupation forces two. (This form of pacifism completely refutes the legitimacy of "national defense.") The disciples didn't understand that Jesus' Messianic Kingdom was quite unlike the kingdoms of the world.
The word translated "rulers" comes from the Greek word from which we derive our English word "anarchist" ("a + archist" -- the first "a" is the Greek letter "alpha," known as the "alpha privative," meaning "not" -- a[n]archist -- the letter "n" bridges the "alpha privative" and the word "archist"). "Lords," "rulers" and "great ones" are "archists." An "archist" believes he has the right to impose his will on other people by force. He need not rely solely on persuasion. He need not give others anything of value in exchange for what he wants from others. He can threaten violence, and carry out those threats if he doesn't get what he wants. It would be sinful for others to engage in such violent extortion or vengeance, but the "archist" claims a "legal" and moral right to do what others must not do. Jesus clearly says His followers are not to be "archists." They are to be "servants." A Christian society is an archist-free society. We have been brainwashed in "public" schools (run by archists) to believe that an "anarchist" is:
Anyone can be called an "anarchist" by someone who wants to vilify an opponent, but most of those who call themselves "anarchist" have reached their position by their opposition to violence. I am a pacifist, therefore I am opposed to any institution of systematic violence and coercion (e.g., "the Mafia," "the State," etc.). By etymological definition, the opposite of an "anarchist" is an "archist." By being trained to believe that "anarchists" are bad, we've been subtly inculcated with the belief that those who protect us against "anarchists" (logically, "archists") are good. But the Bible says archists are bad, and explicitly prohibits us from being archists. Jesus says His followers are not to be archists. Connect the dots. www.HowToBecomeAChristianAnarchist.com Mark 10:42-45 (and other passages we're going to be considering in a moment) teaches that
All Pacifists are AnarchistsIf you oppose violence, you cannot be an "archist." A logically consistent Christian pacifist is also an anarchist, for two reasons: As I read the Bible, the bad guys are the "archists." Chapter after chapter in the Bible says "archists" are false gods. Only Jesus is a legitimate Archist. People who don't see earthly "archists" as bad guys are themselves guilty of idolatry. The Bible is an "Anarchist Manifesto." From cover to cover, the Bible condemns archists -- violent people, like Cain, Lamech, violent men that provoked the flood in Noah's day, Nimrod, and so on. These evil, violent people are the ones who created "civil governments." The Origin of "the State" ("Civil Government") - Political Philosophy 101 According to the BibleChristians who strongly oppose "anarchism" (I used to be one of them) believe the Bible prescribes (not just describes) civil governments. They believe God's Law contains laws for "governments." Every political science professor in every university on planet earth will agree that the essential nature of "the State" is violence. It claims a "monopoly on violence." Wikipedia || Encyclopedia Britannica || Oxford || More: The State as Monopoly of Violence Using the Greek word from which we derived the English word "anarchist," Jesus plainly says His followers are not to be "archists." Mark 10:42-45. We are to be servants, not "archists." "Not" + "archist" = "anarchist" Only Jesus is a legitimate Archist. People who don't see earthly "archists" as bad guys are themselves guilty of idolatry. God says "Thou shalt not steal." There is no ethical difference between "taxes" and "extortion." Here's an example of me butting-in on someone's blog and promoting my views: Godwords. "What about Romans 13?" I'm always asked this question when I say I'm an "anarcho-pacifist." Romans 12 and 13 are a unit on not resisting evil. "Bless those who persecute you" (Romans 12:14) does not mean that persecutors have God's ethical approval. They need to repent. We are not to resist evil (Romans 12:19), but to overcome evil with good gifts (Romans 12:21), even (turn the page) the most evil entity on the planet: The State (Romans 13:1ff). Paul refers to the Empire as "the Powers." Everywhere that Greek word is used in the New Testament, it means "demonic." Even the Romans believed that demons (daimones, daimoneV) guided the Empire. The message of Romans 13 is "be subject to evil." The message of Romans 13 is not "evil is good." Yes, "all things work together for good" (Romans 13:4; 8:28), even evil things, like "principalities and powers" (Romans 8:38) and their sword (Romans 8:35). But evil people have a moral obligation to repent of things that pacifists have a moral obligation to submit to. |
| Micah's Prophecy | Westminster Standards | Vine & Fig Tree University |
| Focus text: "His Vine"
And each of them will sit under his |
Chapter 24 Marriage and Divorce
|
This verse assumes "family values" taught elsewhere in the Bible in more detail.
The monogamous heterosexual family is the root of civilization. "Patriarchy" is a hated word. It doesn't mean what you think it means.
Pierre Joseph Proudhon: Patriarchy and Agrarian Jurisprudence The modern concept of "separation of church and state" -- which really means the "separation of God and the Public Square" -- denies the concept of Biblical Theocracy. This website not only denies "the separation of church and state," but promotes "the abolition of church and state." The Bible uses “Vine & Fig Tree” imagery to describe a time when we beat our "swords into plowshares" and everyone dwells peacefully under his own “Vine & Fig Tree.” The New Testament describes Christians as "sons of Abraham" the Patriarch. Abraham and Sarah were not under the rule of any State or Empire. The desire to have a creaturely king is a rejection of God the Creator as King (1 Samuel 8; Romans 1:25). The real meaning of Easter is that Jesus is now -- in 2022 -- the only legitimate King. Every king on planet earth should immediately abdicate and get a real job in "the Private Sector." This is one reason why every government in the last 2000 years has eventually banned the Bible. Even the United States, where The Supreme Court has ruled that public school teachers cannot tell students that Jesus the King says "Thou shalt not steal" (Matthew 19:18; Exodus 20:13-16; Deuteronomy 5:17-20). Creaturely kings are "false gods" in the Bible, and they correctly view the Bible as a threat to their idolatrous reign: to them, The Bible is an "Anarchist Manifesto." According to the Bible, creaturely government is "The Most Dangerous Idolatry." It will take me a while to convince you that the Real Meaning of Easter is “Vine & Fig Tree.” I'll have to persuade you to read a lot of Bible verses through new eyes. Abraham and Sarah did not "go to church." Their priest was Melchizedek, as in ours. Family = "undemocratic" says progressives When families are functional, the State is unnecessary;Archism is socially unapproved John Adams: importance of mothers The Family is God's central unit of society. The family is commanded to teach God's Law. Therefore next installment: Education |
| Micah's Prophecy | Westminster Standards | Vine & Fig Tree University |
| Micah 4:2
"Come, let us go up to the mountain of the LORD That He may teach us about His ways |
Supplemental texts:
Deuteronomy 4:9f.; 6:7f., 20f.; 11:18-21, etc. Education is something all of us must do.
Law-teaching all the nations through hospitality and open borders. Different from evangelism - Converting the existing generation vs. teaching the next generation "Education" includes "character" by way of "apologetics" and service. Lifelong learners / lifelong teachers
|
| Micah's Prophecy | Westminster Standards | Vine & Fig Tree University |
| Though all the peoples walk Each in the name of his god, As for us, we will walk In the Name of the LORD our God forever and ever. |
"Character" is the ability to stand against the crowd, in faith, in obedience to God. • What you do when nobody is watching • What you do when everybody is watching (and mocking) Micah highlights the importance of teaching God's Law. Ethics is more important to civilization than intelligence.
True education enables a Christian to stand against unbelief. Character and pacifism - forgiveness, nurture vs. rule |
| Micah's Prophecy | Westminster Standards | Vine & Fig Tree University |
| Focus Text: Vine and under his fig tree,
And each of them will sit under his |
The story of the Bible is "paradise lost" and Paradise Restored. The blessings God promises in Deuteronomy 28 are (on the surface) primarily agricultural. Would you be willing to live for hundreds of years in the Garden of Eden with a community of sanctified people . . . but no cell phone? Agrarianism vs. technology/industrialism: we have barely begun to weigh the evidence for and against debt-financed state-directed industrialization. See the Israeli study of Polio. "Salvation" in the Bible means the restoration of the conditions of the Garden of Eden (Genesis 1-2)
Studies in Mutualist Political Economy: Industrialism vs. Decentralism -- The Role of the State Agrarian Man vs. Industrialist Man: Political vs. Economic Man Pierre Joseph Proudhon: Agrarian Jurisprudence Compare first three chapters in Genesis with last three chapters in Revelation: Edenic imagery - Garden of Eden / City of GodWilderness vs. Garden: Garden = Order
If you don't grow your own food, you're dependent on food that must be stripped of nutrition so that it doesn't spoil as it travels vast distances and sits on the shelf at Walmart. Living off land depends on owning the land. Therefore Agrarianism is related to Property. |
| Micah's Prophecy | Westminster Standards | Vine & Fig Tree University |
| Focus text:
Micah 4:4 |
"Communism" is a word like "Theocracy" -- everyone hates the word. The Bible is individualist The Bible says "Thou shalt not steal" stuff that pertains to another. This means someone possesses something and should not be dispossessed. The world "Property" comes from the Latin proprietas, from proprius ‘one's own, particular.’ Related to the word "proper." Someone representing himself in court comes before the court "In Pro Per" or In Propria Persona. Your person is your basic property. If you turn a wilderness into a garden, the garden is your property. It was wrong for Jezebel and Ahab to steal Naboth's vine and fig tree. Naboth said to Ahab, “The Lord forbid that I should give the inheritance of my patriarchs to you!” (1 Kings 21:3) The Bible holds out the ideal of property free from princes and pirates. See the phrases "dwell safely" and "none to make them afraid" in the Bible. But the Bible is also communitarian (or some English word that substitutes for the Greek word κοινωνία, koinōnía). Christian fellowship is more than each man standing on his front porch with an AK-47 protecting his right to "private property." If you turn wilderness into a garden, you "own" the garden. How some Christians practice "communism": Bruderhof – Community of Goods America errs on the side of individualism to the neglect of "fellowship," "sharing" "community," "extended family," and other Biblical concepts.
Some opponents of archism are also opponents of private property. The French anarchist Pierre Joseph Proudhon famously said, "Property is theft." But what he meant was what Isaiah likely intended: "Woe to you who add more houses to your houses and more fields to your fields. Finally there is no room left for other people. Then you are left alone in the land" (Isaiah 5:8). Some people hire archists to prevent farmers from living off the land. Accumulation without use and productivity is not the ideal. But one individual accumulating more property than others and producing more than others and becoming richer than others need not be discouraged. See Abraham, Genesis 13:2. God's creation consists of unlimited wealth. There's more than enough property for everyone. Anarchists who are also "socialists" or "communists" |
| Micah's Prophecy | Westminster Standards | Vine & Fig Tree University |
| Focus text: the ones God has afflicted
In that day, saith the LORD, |
I was raised to believe that "capitalism" was better than "socialism." Unquestionably, freedom is better for humanity than centralized control and planning. State "Socialism" has resulted in poverty and mass death wherever it has been tried: Soviet Union, China, Cuba, Venezuela, etc.
But in 2022, young people who are unaware of the history of State Socialism in the 20th century have been victims of "Mass Formation Psychosis" and pay lip service to "socialism" and criticize "capitalism." What they criticize under the name "capitalism" is not freedom from archists. It is not 100% pure laissez-faire capitalism with 0% socialism. They are criticizing a "mixed economy." Before the rise of monopoly capitalism in the latter part of the 19th and early 20th century, critics of the State were also champions of the poor, the weak, and the oppressed. These anarchists have also called themselves "socialists." 19th-century anarchists and socialists were critical of economic policies like usury (interest of any amount secured by a legal privilege), which the Bible also criticizes. In addition to usury, anarchists and socialists like Benjamin Tucker were critical of Too often, "anarcho-socialists" have been envious of the rich, regardless of whether the rich accumulated their wealth fairly in the service of others, or by state-assisted exploitation. We can learn from "socialist" opponents of archism if we are also discerning.
"No man is an island." Community: Serving the weak rather than the powerful | The "driven out" and "afflicted"
God "afflicts" and "drives out" using "archists." |
|
Chapter 5 Providence
|
Capitalism, Not SocialismThis is the most important issue in the world today, and -- if you think about it -- it is the most important issue in the Bible. Mass Death It is the most important issue in the world today because hundreds of millions of human beings have been murdered by those attempting to impose "socialism," and the lives of billions have been subjected to poverty and tyranny, while billions of people have had their lives improved under capitalism -- the freedom to live free from socialists and other archists. Idolatry and False Religion Biblically speaking, this is evidence of whether you believe in God or not. Specifically, whether you believe in Providence. If you don't believe Jesus is the all-powerful Messiah, then you are a deist, if not an atheist, and the god of deism is a false god. The concept of "The Invisible Hand of Divine Providence" is personal, while deism eventually sifts out as evolutionary. Evolution is the impersonal and random soil in which socialism thrives. Evolution is a religion; an archist religion; a rival to the religion of Christ. Idolatry is the subject of the First Commandment, it is the #1 issue in the pages of the Bible, and socialism is idolatry. Human archism is a false god. "Civil government" is an idol. The vast majority of church-going Christians cannot understand how Jesus could be reigning as the Messiah right now -- today -- without being physically present on earth, sitting on a literal throne in Jerusalem. It is because they do not understand this that they cannot coherently explain one of the most important concepts in our world today: Why Capitalism is better than Socialism. Because they don't understand economics, they don't understand how Jesus can reign as Messiah without creating a police state. Most church-goers cannot explain why capitalism has created the highest standard of living in human history, while socialism leads to poverty and mass death. Capitalism is a pacifist economic system. Capitalism is for "Economic Man." Socialism is for "Political Man." Church-going Christians do not understand how God governs the world. Church-going Christians do not understand how God wants the world to operate. Church-going Christians do not understand the Kingdom-Reign of God and our role in it. Socialism is when your life is all about "standing up for your rights." Archism. The Bible is a capitalist blueprint for healing our world. That's "good news." And "good news" is the meaning of the word "gospel" The word "Capitalism"Some people (generally on the "left") agree with us on the moral necessity of free markets, but dislike the word "capitalism." They make good points.
|
| Micah's Prophecy | Westminster Standards | Vine & Fig Tree University |
| forever
Micah 4:5 As for us, we will walk and the LORD shall reign over them in mount Zion |
When the Vine & Fig Tree world is "established" (verse 1, fulfilled in Acts 2, esp. v.36), it is said to last "forever and ever."
PreterismThe Latin word for "past" is praeter. The word "preterism" comes from the Latin word for past, which is brought into English words like "the preterit tense" and a school of eschatology called "preterism." Saying a prophecy was fulfilled in the past is called "Preterism." According to Peter in Acts 2, and elsewhere in the New Testament, the Apostles were living in "the Last Days" of the Old Covenant. This is when Jesus was made the Christ: in the past. So where does "the second coming" come in? This may be the most controversial doctrine in Micah's “Vine & Fig Tree” prophecy. The vast majority of Christians believe Jesus will begin reigning as the Messiah (or "Christ") at His "second coming." Until then, life on earth is going to get worse and worse. I believe life on earth has been getting better and better because Christ began reigning in His Kingdom in the past. I believe "the second coming of Christ" already happened. It happened exactly when the Bible said it would happen: before "that generation" died out. It happened at the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 66-70. Jesus came a second time in judgment against those who rejected Him as the Christ. The same generation that witnessed His first coming also witnessed His second coming. It happened in the past. The claim that Jesus is the Messiah today (not just in the future) is the claim that Jesus was made "Lord and Christ" in the past. This is the "good news," or "Gospel." The Antichrist, the Great Tribulation, Armageddon, and Jesus are NotComingSoon.net |
|
|
