|
Click here for audio: |
Micah 4:3
And He will judge between many peoples
And rebuke mighty, distant nations.
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.
The word "anarchist" comes from two Greek words meaning "not an archist."
Q.: What is an archist?
A.: A bad person. A person who lacks Godly character. Seeks to be god, impose vengeance, regulation by threats of violence.
Let'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:
For the Lord is our Judge,
The Lord is our Lawgiver,
The Lord is our King;
He will save us
It was a mistake for Israel to want an earthly king to replace God (1 Samuel 8). We are to worship and serve the Creator, not the creature (Romans 1:25).
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, 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.
But Jesus called them to Himself and said to them, "You know that those who are considered rulers over the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones exercise authority over them. {43} Yet it shall not be so among you; but whoever desires to become great among you shall be your servant. {44} And whoever of you desires to be first shall be slave of all. {45} "For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many." |
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
This isn't just a "fringe" idea. In fact, "Anarcho-Preterists" go much further. They claim:
From cover to cover, the Bible is an "Anarchist Manifesto" and urges mankind to eradicate the institution of "civil government" or "the State." It will take approximately 90 minutes for me to lay out my arguments and for you to follow them Biblically in a loving (1 Corinthians 13:5-7) way.
Every government on earth agrees: The Bible is an "Anarchist Manifesto."
Theocracy is the necessary precondition for anarchism. The abolition of the State requires society-wide moral elevation. Not because we can only survive and thrive in the absence of the State only if there are no bad guys to threaten us, but because the people who worry in this way will never vote against violence unless they first trust God.
If you take Jesus seriously, you will not only be a "pacifist," but you'll be an "anarchist" -- that is, an advocate of no "elected representatives." No "civil government." "The Bible as our only law book."
If Jesus commands you to
why would you not obey the command to beat your swords into plowshares? Why would you not be a "pacifist?"
Jesus said, When the enemy government enslaves you for one mile, Go a second mile (Matthew 5:41).
If you take this verse seriously, it means "national defense" is a sin.
But nobody takes Jesus that seriously. That's "taking things to an extreme." Well, it's taking things to 100%. We believe in obeying Jesus with 100% of our heart, 100% of our soul, 100% of our mind, and 100% of our strength (Mark 12:30).
We believe God should be the government over every area of our life. Being pacifists, and letting God govern us, is the path to Utopia.
If you approached your next door neighbor and demanded money, and threatened to lock your neighbor in your basement with a psychopath who will repeatedly sodomize your neighbor if your neighbor doesn't give you the money you demand, your neighbor would rightly conclude that you are a criminal. "The Government" does this. "The State" is an organized crime syndicate. It claims the right to commit the acts that you and I would call "crimes." Systematically. As an institution. As a monopoly. Every political science professor in every university on planet earth will agree that the essential nature of "The State" is a Monopoly of Violence, or a monopoly of crime. No other criminals are allowed by "the State" to compete against the State in its commission of crimes. (Ironically, no criminals claim to have a right to your patriotic devotion to their immoral practices. Only "the State" demands that from you.)
The Prophet Micah says we should beat our swords into plowshares and not engage in war any more.
That is a prescription for "anarchy." That would eliminate "The State."
Virtually every political theorist in the last two thousand years has said that the central justification for "the State" is to protect citizens against invasions. Typically this means in "war." But Jesus says we are not to resist foreign invaders. We are not
to make the wives of foreign invaders widows.
The median income in China is about $2,000 USD. Half the population makes more, half the population makes less. Suppose the U.S. beat our swords into plowshares and took the approximately one trillion dollars we spend on the military each year and gave it to the Chinese people, with a letter that said "It's nice living in a Christian capitalist nation. You all should try it." That would double the income of hundreds of millions of Chinese people. It comes out to about $714 for every man, woman, and small child in China. Would China bomb the U.S. if we beat our swords into plowshares and did this?
In short, you are commanded to be the slave of other nations. You can do so voluntarily, as a charitable act, out of love, or even in fair, tariff-free trade of your productivity for theirs, or God will send them to invade you and destroy you.
There was actually never any danger that Russia would bomb the United States during "the Cold War." Socialist economies are always dependent upon the vastly more productive capitalist economies. But if the U.S. was taken over by Russia or China, how would you know? What would be the most visible evidence that the machinery of the U.S. government was suddenly being administered by Chinese Communist satraps appointed by the People's Republic of China? Is there really a noticeable difference between the socialism-fascism we now live under in the U.S. "Republic" and the socialism of the "former" Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, or the People's Republic of China? All of these "Republics" ban the Bible and the Declaration of Independence from their "public" schools. Does it really matter which atheist runs a tyrannical government, whether Caucasian (as in the U.S. and Russia) or Asian?
Eschatology
Micah's “Vine & Fig Tree” vision is a prophecy about a future in which people beat their swords into plowshares and don't learn war any more.
When does this take place?
In the last 100 years, many Christians have been deeply interested in prophecy, and themes like the "rapture," the "antichrist," "armageddon," and the "great tribulation" have been on their minds. These Christians would probably agree that
swords will not be hammered into plowshares and war ended until the second coming of Christ (which the preterist says would be His Third Coming). In the meantime, we have no moral obligation to end war. "Support the troops!" these Christians might say.
The fastest growing school of eschatology is called "preterism," from the Latin word for "past." It holds that this prophecy began to be fulfilled in the past. The "establishment" of the Messiah's reign began in "the last days" of the Old Covenant, at the first coming of Christ. Christians who are waiting to be "raptured" don't usually spend a lot of time reading the books of Micah, Isaiah, Kings, and Judges. The focus on the book of Revelation and a few other prophecies they believe speak of a yet-future coming of Christ. A whole-Bible Christian finds it easy to believe that if Micah could travel through time from his day 700 years before the birth of Christ to our day, 2000 years after Christ's first coming, Micah would be astonished, and would fall on his knees in gratitude and praise to Jesus the Messiah for bringing worldwide peace. The pages of the Old Testament are filled with violence, war, captivity, and idolatry. Today there are 8 billion people on the planet -- itself an astonishing fact -- very few of whom face the prospect of war and captivity, very few of whom worship idols of stone, most of whom engage in capitalistic commerce, and enjoy a standard of living that Micah could not have dreamed of. Historians have concluded that most human beings living in Micah's day faced unspeakable violence, and a third or more died violent deaths or died from the effects of violence. Today, most human beings die peacefully, of old age. This would have been unimaginable to Micah, Isaiah, David, or Moses. The world of the Old Testament was uncivilized, and the Egyptians with their pyramids, and the Greeks with their Olympics, are no exception. It is Jesus the Messiah who has given human beings civilization:
The mainstream secular media want us to believe that the word is filled with war and viruses. But COVID kills only a fraction of a percent of human beings, as does war. Both COVID and war are created by governments. We could end the few wars that still exist tomorrow. But too many Christians do not believe we have a moral obligation to do so. In fact, some have said that any attempt to make the world a better place will only postpone the rapture and second coming of Christ, so better not get involved in social improvement.
If we eliminated this pessimistic eschatology, then another question arises: which nation will be the first to obey the command to beat swords into plowshares? Most Americans -- and everyone at the Pentagon -- will say "not us!" We expect evil nations like Russia and China and Iran to be the first to obey God's command to end war. Only after the evil nations obey God will we Americans obediently beat our swords into plowshares.
Eschatology is critical. It has to be dealt with.
No university or Bible college covers eschatology from a "preterist" perspective.
End digression.
Two simple questions:
Simple, but profound. And Vine & Fig Tree University is the only university on planet earth that requires students to research and formulate answers to these questions.
It goes without saying that you never heard the anarcho-pacifist “Vine & Fig Tree” worldview in Sunday School or church. No organized church or denomination agrees with John Adams the Theonomist and Micah the anarcho-pacifist.
As we explain elsewhere, Vine & Fig Tree University stands squarely on this proposition:
Very few church-going Christians agree with that. We explain how this is true on this website:
Most theologians would agree that the "Jesus" of today's televangelists (e.g., Joel Osteen) is not the same Jesus as that of the Protestant Reformers (e.g., John Calvin) or the Calvinist Founders of Harvard University. Perhaps Joel Osteen is just creating a "Jesus" in his own image. Maybe Calvin did too. Maybe I am too. But I'm willing to put my cards on the table so you can see what I'm holding. Maybe this will change your impression of Jesus.
"Swords into plowshares" logically implies the abolition of all "government." Every professor of political science in every university on planet earth -- even so-called "Christian" universities or "Bible colleges" -- will denounce or scoff at the idea of taking Jesus seriously in the political realm. They will warn us that taking the Bible seriously, following Jesus consistently, will lead to "anarchy."