One of the major talking points of Dominionism is the success of the Great Commission. Their argument goes that since Christ has triumphed over His enemies and we know that all the promises are fulfilled in Christ, the Great Commission must be successful. The statement itself is absolutely true but the question must be asked - how is success defined? Answering that question is key because success itself is a vague term. Take a simple example of a corporation. Its leadership might determine that success is increasing its revenues by 10% over the year. Now that the leadership has set a clear target, at the end of the year one can gauge their success. If they increased their revenue by 9%, they have failed and if they increased it by 10.5% or 12% or 100% they have succeeded. The point being that the clear metric set by the leadership on what success is, defines it. In the same way when we speak of fulfilment of Biblical prophecies and therefore the success of the Great Commission, we ought to consider them through the lens of Christ and the apostles. We’ve already considered some of their hermeneutics earlier in this work. How does that apply to the Great Commission?
Tag: Two-Kingdom Theology
The New Covenant and Antithesis: Part 5 – Kingdom Ethics – Non-Violence, Restoration and Reconciliation
We have already seen how God established a system of retributive justice to govern the created order in the Noahic Covenant. This is an outworking of the very nature of God, which is Justice. Since God is Just, every act of injustice and unrighteousness must be punished by Him. This punishment is proportional to the injustice or unrighteousness committed (Gen 9:6). This was the principle God established for the governing of His kingdom on earth in the Old Covenant (Ex 21:23-25, Lev 24:18-21, Deut 19:21). However, Christ Himself declares that this principle of justice does not characterise the citizens of the kingdom of God in the New Covenant (Matt 5:38-42).
The New Covenant and Antithesis: Part 4 – Kingdom Ethics – Power, Stability and Money
The Old Covenant Israelite theocracy was typological of the heavenly kingdom. In that covenant we see that the Lord made several promises of earthly prosperity to His people, if they were obedient to Him - “And the Lord shall make thee plenteous in goods, in the fruit of thy body, and in the fruit of thy cattle, and in the fruit of thy ground, in the land which the Lord sware unto thy fathers to give thee” (Deut 28:11). We have also seen how all of these earthly blessings were typological pointers of the eternal blessings we have in Christ, with the apostle Paul saying that all the promises of God are yea and Amen in Christ (2 Cor 1:20). They were thus typological of kingdom blessings and not an end in and of themselves. Since the kingdom of God is not of this world and doesn’t claim worldly territory, worldly wealth no longer serves as a covenant blessing to its citizens. Christ Himself teaches this when He declares, “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's” (Mk 2:17). The implications of that statement are important to understand. Christ isn’t saying that worldly wealth is an intrinsic evil but He is declaring that it is not something that is part of His kingdom.
The New Covenant and Antithesis: Part 1 – Pilgrim Identity
The Lord instructs His disciples on their antithesis from the world in saying - “If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you” (John 15:19). It is because the Christian does not belong to this world, that its citizens hate him. According to our Lord, this hatred is to be an expected aspect of the Christian life and not one that we will see abated in this present age. In fact Christ emphasises this pilgrim separation in His prayer for His people (John 17:14-16). The Christian is not of the world even as their king is not of the world (John 17:16). Looking at this through a kingdom lens helps us understand why Christ emphasises that both He and His people are not of this world. It aligns with the theme that the Scriptures have drawn out so far, that the world belongs to Satan and is under a curse, awaiting destruction.
The New Testament and the Magistrate
Since the transformation of this present world is a key goal of Dominionism and Postmillennialism, its adherents consider influencing the civil magistrate to be an important part of the Church’s witness. Hence, they appeal to several passages of Scripture to support their goals. These passages are often in the Old Testament and involve a flawed hermeneutic of reading covenantal statements outside of their context, applying what was meant for Israel to modern nation states. The New Testament on the other hand doesn’t provide any support for their tendencies so their appeals to it tends to be quite limited.
Redemptive Kingdom Structure in the Old Covenant: Part 2
The Abrahamic Covenant placed Abraham and his descendants in constant antithesis with the people of the world. However, broadly speaking God didn’t regulate the day to day activities of Abraham’s life. There was no specific law given to him. Apart from circumcision there were no external cultural requirements. The covenant itself required separation and distinction from the world, but the details of that were less regulated and we see that Abraham and his descendants often fell into sin and temptation as they interacted with the world. What this implies is that the Abrahamic Covenant, foreshadowing the ultimate end of the present created order in the final judgement, doesn't regulate the things that are passing away as they are not being redeemed.
The Abrahamic Covenant and Antithesis
The covenant with Abraham can be contrasted with the Noahic Covenant because it is rather specific. It does not concern all men, rather it specifically concerns Abraham and his descendants. Unlike the Noahic Covenant it is religious in nature and calls for Abraham’s descendants to be distinct from the people around them. This establishes a principle that we have seen already drawn upon prior to Abraham, that God’s people are in antithesis or opposition to the people of the world. They are to be a distinct people and to serve their God. This distinction was to be in both worship and ordinary practice.
The End of the First World and New Beginnings
The Great Flood was a cleansing of sorts. Peter compares what is experienced in Baptism to the preservation of Noah and his household in the flood (1 Pet 3:20). The future judgement will not be a cleansing with water but a purging with fire. It won’t be a reboot of this present material order, either in its fallen state or in its Edenic form. Rather the form of the new order that God will create from the ashes of the old will be grander and even better than anything Adam could even hope to comprehend in the Edenic state.
A Primer on Two Kingdoms Theology
The purpose of this article is to provide the Christian with an alternate framework with regards to our interactions with the world than those popular today (various forms of Dominionism). A framework that recognizes the Church’s antithesis with the world as a consistent reality for this present age that is passing away. A framework that was widely held by Christians prior to the Constantinian Shift as evidenced by the writings of the Apostolic Fathers and was continued by Medieval Separatists and Non-Conformists like the Waldensians. The basis for this framework is that the Scriptures teach that the present world is composed of two distinct kingdoms that are antithesis to each other. These two kingdoms have very different purposes and cannot be reconciled one to another.
Eschatology Matters: A Primer on Apocalypticism
In the past week, I've run across a surprising number of posts and articles by figures popular in the Dominionist stream of Christianity on the significance of eschatology. The central thesis of these writings is that Premillennialism and Amillennialism, having no optimistic theology of victory for this present age, do not produce in their adherents the right kind of attitude to win the "Culture War". Since Postmillennials look forward to the promised victory of the Christ in this age through the work of the Church, they are rightly equipped and motivated to engage the culture and take dominion for Christ. It is certainly true that our theological positions have serious practical implications. One need to look no further than the Hyper-Grace Christianity prevalent in Evangelicalism today. It has made having a "messy" Christian life normal and even ideal. Christians more often desire to associate with David's moral failings (ignoring the majority of his life) than with those who are called in Scripture perfect and upright, like Daniel, Joseph, Job and David (in the rest of his life apart from Bathsheba). Thus, the authors of these writings are absolutely right in pointing out that our theological positions affect our actions. Going beyond that though, it was unsurprising that these writings were full of optimistic presuppositions that have no basis in Scripture.
Deo Vicit Mundum 