I published a piece two weeks ago called “How Loser Theology is Poisoning the Church,” which originally ran at Clear Truth Media. That piece “did numbers,” as the kids say.
Pastor Clary thanks for being a voice in the wilderness.
The error of Martin Luther‘s ninety-nine thesis is the pendulum swinging too far the other way from salvation by works, to faith alone.
AW Tozer said, “what comes into our minds when we think about God is the most important thing about us”.
When esteeming God, emotions are certainly an integral part of worship, but we should not be carried away with them.
The spiraling downward of our Country is the fruit of pietism in the Church. The crises/troubles that seem to be coming at an ever increasing speed, God is using to awake believers to repent of passivities and start speaking Truth against darkness.
Time is running out.
“… knowing that this is a critical time, it is already the hour for you to awaken from your sleep, of spiritual complacency…”(Rom. 13:11 ceb).
Luther’s problem was not his view of justification, but sanctification. But I believe the issue today isn’t pietism so much as it is worldliness. You can’t change the world if you copy it and think like it.
To awake from sleep is not first to act, but to see — to see Christ crucified as the revelation of glory. The “awakening” Paul calls for in Romans 13 is not about moral panic or reclaiming cultural dominance. It is about remembering who we are in Christ — that the cross already is the world’s judgment and renewal.
The “pendulum” between faith and works is a false binary, because both assume a view of salvation as something possessed or achieved. Salvation is participation in the crucified life of Christ — to become human in Him. It is neither passivity nor activism, but kenotic communion.
Time is running out, for what exactly?
To save America, or to become human?
Because the latter is the only thing God is doing.
The idea that our nation’s decline is the fruit of pietism is precisely the kind of moral mythology that distracts us from the gospel’s cosmic scope. The crisis is not that we have been too emotional or passive, but that we have forgotten that the world was already reconciled in Christ
“Faith alone” was not Luther’s error; the error is turning faith into ideology — into a badge of certitude rather than a door into love. The “Truth” Christians are called to proclaim is not a set of moral positions, but the reality that all being is grounded in self-emptying love.
The darkness "Christian Nationalist's" fear is an illusion cast by the false light of power.
"Thankfully, there is an antidote for the poison of pietism. It’s simple. Trust God, take righteous action, and assert your agency in the power of the Spirit."
Your critique of "loser Christianity" continues a concerning pattern of misunderstanding Gospel power. While your apparent concern for Christian engagement merits consideration, your proposed remedies reveal a fundamental error about how the Church truly conquers.
You correctly observe that some Christians misapply justification to avoid responsibility, imagining faith requires passivity. This deserves correction. For example, the Catholic Church teaches that grace perfects rather than eliminates human agency. Yet your alternative suffers the opposite error. Your emphasis on "asserting agency" betrays insufficient appreciation for divine primacy. Scripture teaches we must "work out our salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God who works in you both to will and to work for his good pleasure" (Philippians 2:12-13). Saint Paul captures the balance: "By the grace of God I am what I am... I worked harder than any of them, though it was not I, but the grace of God which is with me" (1 Corinthians 15:10).
Your treatment of suffering and self-denial as "doormat doctrine" represents your gravest error, revealing not tactical disagreement but fundamental misapprehension of the Gospel itself. The scandal of Christianity has always been that God's power is made perfect in weakness (2 Corinthians 12:9) and that the Cross is the instrument of victory, not defeat. Our Lord's teaching admits no ambiguity: "If any man would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow me" (Luke 9:23). This is not defeatism but the counsel of One who conquered sin and death. Christ "humbled himself and became obedient unto death, even death on a cross. Therefore God has highly exalted him" (Philippians 2:8-9).
Your characterization of introspective Christianity as "teenage girl theology" betrays worldly conceptions of masculinity alien to Christian anthropology. Scripture calls all believers to cultivate what the world might consider both "masculine" and "feminine" virtues. The Spirit's fruit includes gentleness, kindness, and patience alongside faithfulness and self-control (Galatians 5:22-23). Our Lord wept at Lazarus's tomb (John 11:35) and cleansed the temple with righteous anger (John 2:13-17). King David prayed: "Search me, O God, and know my heart; try me and know my thoughts!" (Psalm 139:23-24). This is not weakness but the prayer of a man after God's heart.
Your critique of Christians who water down truth for secular approval contains valid observations, but your cure threatens worse than the disease. The antidote to cowardly people-pleasing is not prideful indifference but careful attention to how we represent Christ. Saint Peter exhorts Christians to "have a good conscience, so that, when you are abused, those who revile your good behavior in Christ may be put to shame" (1 Peter 3:16). Saint Paul adapted his approach while never compromising the essential message (1 Corinthians 9:19-23).
The fundamental error underlying your project is your conception of power itself. Our Lord's kingship is "not of this world" (John 18:36). When offered all kingdoms by Satan, He chose Calvary over conquest (Matthew 4:8-11). This was not weakness but ultimate power, for "God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong" (1 Corinthians 1:27). The early Church conquered Rome without armies through holy lives and faithful witness under persecution, even to martyrdom. The blood of the martyrs, in fact, is the seed of the Church.
As Saint Paul reminds us, "though we live in the world we are not carrying on a worldly war, for the weapons of our warfare are not worldly but have divine power to destroy strongholds" (2 Corinthians 10:3-4). Our battle is "not against flesh and blood, but against the principalities, against the powers" (Ephesians 6:12).
What you call "loser theology" is actually perennial wisdom of Christian saints who understood that the way up is down, the first shall be last, and those saving their lives must lose them (Matthew 16:25). Saint Francis conquered more territory through radical poverty than Crusaders through sword. Saint Thérèse influenced more souls through her "little way" than most bishops through prominence. These were victors in the only battle ultimately mattering.
The Gospel remains what it has always been: foolishness to those perishing but God's power to those being saved (1 Corinthians 1:18). What the world needs is not Christians playing the power game better than pagans, but Christians so transformed by the Gospel they offer something genuinely different. We need saints, not strategists; martyrs, not manipulators.
Our Lord's final words before Ascension promised not political power but witness power: "You will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be my witnesses" (Acts 1:8). The power He promised was power to bear witness, suffer well, love enemies, and lay down life for the Gospel. This is not weakness but strength; not losing but winning; not folly but God's wisdom confounding the wise.
The future belongs not to Christians asserting themselves more effectively but to Christians dying more completely to themselves. In that death lies the only victory worth winning, and in that Cross lies the only power worth possessing.
Interesting commentary. I am totally with you on number four. I went to a seminary and top part-time there and they were doing exactly as you described, always looking for approval from those to the left of them. As a result, they have pretty much gone the way of critical theory an accommodation to the dominant culture. I don’t teach there anymore.
Here's a couple of paragraphs from my forthcoming book about this:
Agency is the God-given ability to act, to shape our world. When God told Adam and Eve to be
fruitful, multiply, fill the earth, subdue it, and have dominion (Gen 1:28), he expected them to
exercise agency to accomplish the work. This command is called the “Creation Mandate,” and it
can only be obeyed via agency-equipped humans.
The Creation Mandate was a call to explore, discover, dig up, strip away, combine, shape, and
reform their environment. Presumably, they would take the earth’s raw materials, design new
tools, plow soil, grow food, build houses and cities, discover God’s world through science,
invent things, create things, develop art, and appreciate beauty. The planet was one, giant gift of God, handed to man and woman with a bow on top, and a command to draw out all the
incredible potentiality this planet has to offer. All those tasks require agency. God created man in his image, which means man has the innate ability to “image God” in his work. Thus, God gave a command and equipped his people with the faculties required to do so. Human agency is a reflection of God’s ultimate, sovereign agency.
Saying Tim Keller and Ray Ortlund have “loser, pietistic theology” says far more about your lack of understanding than their potential theological weaknesses.
Delete and spend some time with the Lord. You’re in grevious error.
Honestly, have Evangelicals ever read any history of Christianity beyond the Bible and the Protestant Reformation?
Christianity was spread by Catholics, and Christendom was born, not only through the severe hardships and danger of Catholic missionary work over thousands of miles, through monks hand-copying the Bible a zillion times, and through regular Catholics doing great works of mercy and evangelization, but also by many, many Catholics — both priests and laypersons — standing up *very bravely* to pagan societies, to pagan morals, and to heretics in positions of power, and often getting killed for it. However, as Tertullian said, God ensures that “the blood of martyrs is the seed of the Church.”
I highly recommend the Catholic history book “Triumph: The Power & the Glory of the Catholic Church,” by HW Crocker III. Prepare to be amazed.
This would have been interesting if you actually knew what grace is. “For Jesus always lives to intercede for those who are drawing near to God through Him.” Drawing near to God is NOT a passive activity.
I have 5 teen boys at home. I pray fervently they are the kind of men who reject pietism and walk worthy of their calling and get into all the right kind of trouble.
What I hear you saying is that agency means God gives us a kind of delegated power — like He winds us up and sends us out to do things for Him. Almost like a chain of command: God acts on us, then we act on the world. Am I hearing you correctly?
I do not “explain away” any text of scripture. I strive to account for all of scripture in my writing. In John 18:36, Jesus said his kingdom is not of this world. The word “of” means his kingdom does not originate on earth but originated in heaven. I will put the question back to you. Do you believe that Jesus’ kingdom has nothing to do with this world? If not, then what is our duty to this world?
Forgive me for my inflammatory approach in the last comment.
Our duty is to glorify God and to make disciples (teach people to obey Jesus). I don't see any call to political power in the NT until Jesus returns. The kingdom of Jesus is invisible until then.
If you want to see a nation of Christians (and what Christian doesn't?), the "Christians" part must come first. We make disciples, and the heart of the nation is transformed. People are changed from the inside out.
I agree that our duty is to glorify God and to make disciples. Christians typically assume making disciples is always of individuals and never of larger groups. I used to think this myself. However, Matthew 28:18 says "make disciples of all nations," which would include more than making individual converts.
Being salt and light as Jesus commands means speaking and living God's truth in public. That's why its good for Christians to be in power. It's good to have Christians in various industries acting in God honoring ways, is it not? Wouldn't you rather work for a godly CEO than a pagan? Wouldn't you rather have godly teachers in schools than pagan? Wouldn't you rather have a man of God on the presidential ballot than a pagan?
That's all I'm saying. Christians can and should pursue power and should not let pietistic thinking prevent them from doing so.
In Mat 28:19 (not 18), it says "...disciple the nations, baptizing them..." It cannot be talking about the nations as collectives of people, because how do you baptize a nation?
It's probably fine for individual Christians to have positions of power. What is not fine is to try and establish Jesus's political kingdom for Him. In my knowledge of history, Christianized governments always become (or start) corrupt and/or tyrannical and thus tarnish the Name they claim to uphold.
You have a narrow and strange definition of pietism. I can't figure out what exactly you mean by it, except "the thing people I disagree with do."
Where in the NT do you see Christians authorized or encouraged to seek political power?
1 Tim 2 v1-4. Paul’s testimonies before governors and ultimately Caesar. The goal at the very least is to convert pagan rulers to Christ. And if they were Christian, they should enact Christian laws and pursue Christian foreign policy and Christian economic policy. Failing to do so would be denying their conscious and their knowledge of virtue and truth. For a Christian to govern unChristianly is a betrayal of their role and the duties before God
Jonathan, I see the points you are making and can agree with some of them. I think what I see Mike saying is that we all have gifts and instead of not using them like a piteous Christian, we need to look to the Holy Spirit to use them. Too often the Christian looks at power and either shy’s away from it or goes the other way and abuses it. Humility is the key, without it, the Holy Spirit can’t do a good work in us or through us. And then meekness (power under control) is another attribute we need to embrace. So all that to say, discipleship is a lost art in Christian circles, although it’s making a comeback. We tend to focus on making converts. Big difference. We all have gifts and then we all have “tasks laid out before us” some are called to be politicians not for the sake of establishing Jesus’ kingdom, He can do that by Himself, but he does in fact ask us to partner with Him in his pursuit of restoring creation.
Jonathan, you asked the question, "Where in the NT do you see Christians authorized or encouraged to seek political power?"
Again, I put the question back to you. Where in the NT are Christians forbidden from seeking political power? And if we are forbidden from seeking political power, then why should Christians vote?
I think you're reading my piece through a narrow lens of politics. But politics is but one of many ways Christians can and should exercise power given us by the Holy Spirit.
Eph 3:16: " may grant you to be strengthened with power through his Spirit in your inner being"
1 Cor 2:4: "my speech and my message were not in plausible words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power"
1 Thes 1:4-5: "For we know, brothers loved by God, that he has chosen you, because our gospel came to you not only in word, but also in power and in the Holy Spirit and with full conviction."
I do not claim that Christians are forbidden from seeking political power. I just don't see how it fits the Church's mission. Can you answer my question?
You are the one who brought up politics in your original essay.
Of course there is power in the gospel and in the Word of God and in the Holy Spirit and in the Name of Jesus. It should be used in the sense of Ephesians 6:10-20, in spiritual warfare.
I don't get what you mean by pietism/pietistic. I understand pietism as being overly concerned with maintaining outward appearances and a standard of behavior at the expense of a real relationship with God (like the Pharisees). You are using it in some other way. How would you define it?
Keep in mind, some of these people (maybe Michael Clary himself but idk) are postmillenialist. So they really do think we will build and institute God’s kingdom before Jesus returns and then hand it over to Jesus when He comes. I do not have this view, Im a standard premill like most Protestants, but I believe our actions with the time we are given should be the same, with the same optimistic goals of building upon the foundation which is Christ.
I realize that about postmil, but I was asking them to back up their views with Scripture. Maybe I've missed something and will repent, or maybe they can't and will repent.
I am not optimistic about the success of the church, because in every time period, people have eventually failed and God needs to intervene. (Garden, pre-Babel, pre-law, law with judges, law with kings, exile, post-exile). The church age is unique because of the indwelling Holy Spirit in all believers, but I don't think it will be any different in result. Jesus is coming back. Even the millennium has rebellion at the end before the Great White Throne judgment and the eternal state when evil will finally be put in its place.
I'm not saying we should be completely passive, but we should focus on the mission of spreading the good news in an invitational way.
So, I’ll start by saying that scripture has both implicit and explicit thoughts inside the text. In the last 2 years, I started studying different Jewish/ Messianic Jews understanding of scripture. It changes the entire “book” for me. From Genesis to Revelation the entirety is about God’s plan in restoring the world. While they end up in a more progressive theology, the BEMA Discipleship podcast has been phenomenal.
Lets say God moves powerfully and 80% of the country is radically saved and became on-fire born-again Christians. If all these Christians still choose to eschew any assertive action in the world, and actively avoid all positions of power, then the God-hating 20% would still rule over all of us in service of the enemy and to the great detriment of society. I say, no matter what the percentage, have the zeal to advance the causes of Christ in the business and political spheres with the same passion as enemies of Christ. Its a democratic nation, so you may still lose, but advocate for Truth or sow righteousness as best you can against the godlessness of the unbelievers. Thats my opinion. I want revival, but lack of revival in California shouldnt stop me from being a Christ-first candidate in Montana for example.
I don't say we should not vote, or hold office. If 80% of US voters were committed and mature Christians for a significant period of time, we would have just laws and Christian office-holders but still have freedom of religion and speech.
The church age is not about coercion.
The cause of Christ is that people freely believe in Him and be saved.
You can run as a Christ-first candidate in Montana, but I doubt you will get far with that as your political platform unless you somehow convince people that Christ-first does not mean coerced "holiness." I'm afraid you'll find there is a long way to go.
Pastor Clary thanks for being a voice in the wilderness.
The error of Martin Luther‘s ninety-nine thesis is the pendulum swinging too far the other way from salvation by works, to faith alone.
AW Tozer said, “what comes into our minds when we think about God is the most important thing about us”.
When esteeming God, emotions are certainly an integral part of worship, but we should not be carried away with them.
The spiraling downward of our Country is the fruit of pietism in the Church. The crises/troubles that seem to be coming at an ever increasing speed, God is using to awake believers to repent of passivities and start speaking Truth against darkness.
Time is running out.
“… knowing that this is a critical time, it is already the hour for you to awaken from your sleep, of spiritual complacency…”(Rom. 13:11 ceb).
Luther’s problem was not his view of justification, but sanctification. But I believe the issue today isn’t pietism so much as it is worldliness. You can’t change the world if you copy it and think like it.
To awake from sleep is not first to act, but to see — to see Christ crucified as the revelation of glory. The “awakening” Paul calls for in Romans 13 is not about moral panic or reclaiming cultural dominance. It is about remembering who we are in Christ — that the cross already is the world’s judgment and renewal.
The “pendulum” between faith and works is a false binary, because both assume a view of salvation as something possessed or achieved. Salvation is participation in the crucified life of Christ — to become human in Him. It is neither passivity nor activism, but kenotic communion.
Time is running out, for what exactly?
To save America, or to become human?
Because the latter is the only thing God is doing.
The idea that our nation’s decline is the fruit of pietism is precisely the kind of moral mythology that distracts us from the gospel’s cosmic scope. The crisis is not that we have been too emotional or passive, but that we have forgotten that the world was already reconciled in Christ
“Faith alone” was not Luther’s error; the error is turning faith into ideology — into a badge of certitude rather than a door into love. The “Truth” Christians are called to proclaim is not a set of moral positions, but the reality that all being is grounded in self-emptying love.
The darkness "Christian Nationalist's" fear is an illusion cast by the false light of power.
"Thankfully, there is an antidote for the poison of pietism. It’s simple. Trust God, take righteous action, and assert your agency in the power of the Spirit."
Amen!
Another excellent article!
Mr. Clary,
Your critique of "loser Christianity" continues a concerning pattern of misunderstanding Gospel power. While your apparent concern for Christian engagement merits consideration, your proposed remedies reveal a fundamental error about how the Church truly conquers.
You correctly observe that some Christians misapply justification to avoid responsibility, imagining faith requires passivity. This deserves correction. For example, the Catholic Church teaches that grace perfects rather than eliminates human agency. Yet your alternative suffers the opposite error. Your emphasis on "asserting agency" betrays insufficient appreciation for divine primacy. Scripture teaches we must "work out our salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God who works in you both to will and to work for his good pleasure" (Philippians 2:12-13). Saint Paul captures the balance: "By the grace of God I am what I am... I worked harder than any of them, though it was not I, but the grace of God which is with me" (1 Corinthians 15:10).
Your treatment of suffering and self-denial as "doormat doctrine" represents your gravest error, revealing not tactical disagreement but fundamental misapprehension of the Gospel itself. The scandal of Christianity has always been that God's power is made perfect in weakness (2 Corinthians 12:9) and that the Cross is the instrument of victory, not defeat. Our Lord's teaching admits no ambiguity: "If any man would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow me" (Luke 9:23). This is not defeatism but the counsel of One who conquered sin and death. Christ "humbled himself and became obedient unto death, even death on a cross. Therefore God has highly exalted him" (Philippians 2:8-9).
Your characterization of introspective Christianity as "teenage girl theology" betrays worldly conceptions of masculinity alien to Christian anthropology. Scripture calls all believers to cultivate what the world might consider both "masculine" and "feminine" virtues. The Spirit's fruit includes gentleness, kindness, and patience alongside faithfulness and self-control (Galatians 5:22-23). Our Lord wept at Lazarus's tomb (John 11:35) and cleansed the temple with righteous anger (John 2:13-17). King David prayed: "Search me, O God, and know my heart; try me and know my thoughts!" (Psalm 139:23-24). This is not weakness but the prayer of a man after God's heart.
Your critique of Christians who water down truth for secular approval contains valid observations, but your cure threatens worse than the disease. The antidote to cowardly people-pleasing is not prideful indifference but careful attention to how we represent Christ. Saint Peter exhorts Christians to "have a good conscience, so that, when you are abused, those who revile your good behavior in Christ may be put to shame" (1 Peter 3:16). Saint Paul adapted his approach while never compromising the essential message (1 Corinthians 9:19-23).
The fundamental error underlying your project is your conception of power itself. Our Lord's kingship is "not of this world" (John 18:36). When offered all kingdoms by Satan, He chose Calvary over conquest (Matthew 4:8-11). This was not weakness but ultimate power, for "God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong" (1 Corinthians 1:27). The early Church conquered Rome without armies through holy lives and faithful witness under persecution, even to martyrdom. The blood of the martyrs, in fact, is the seed of the Church.
As Saint Paul reminds us, "though we live in the world we are not carrying on a worldly war, for the weapons of our warfare are not worldly but have divine power to destroy strongholds" (2 Corinthians 10:3-4). Our battle is "not against flesh and blood, but against the principalities, against the powers" (Ephesians 6:12).
What you call "loser theology" is actually perennial wisdom of Christian saints who understood that the way up is down, the first shall be last, and those saving their lives must lose them (Matthew 16:25). Saint Francis conquered more territory through radical poverty than Crusaders through sword. Saint Thérèse influenced more souls through her "little way" than most bishops through prominence. These were victors in the only battle ultimately mattering.
The Gospel remains what it has always been: foolishness to those perishing but God's power to those being saved (1 Corinthians 1:18). What the world needs is not Christians playing the power game better than pagans, but Christians so transformed by the Gospel they offer something genuinely different. We need saints, not strategists; martyrs, not manipulators.
Our Lord's final words before Ascension promised not political power but witness power: "You will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be my witnesses" (Acts 1:8). The power He promised was power to bear witness, suffer well, love enemies, and lay down life for the Gospel. This is not weakness but strength; not losing but winning; not folly but God's wisdom confounding the wise.
The future belongs not to Christians asserting themselves more effectively but to Christians dying more completely to themselves. In that death lies the only victory worth winning, and in that Cross lies the only power worth possessing.
Pax Christi.
Well said!
Interesting commentary. I am totally with you on number four. I went to a seminary and top part-time there and they were doing exactly as you described, always looking for approval from those to the left of them. As a result, they have pretty much gone the way of critical theory an accommodation to the dominant culture. I don’t teach there anymore.
Here's a couple of paragraphs from my forthcoming book about this:
Agency is the God-given ability to act, to shape our world. When God told Adam and Eve to be
fruitful, multiply, fill the earth, subdue it, and have dominion (Gen 1:28), he expected them to
exercise agency to accomplish the work. This command is called the “Creation Mandate,” and it
can only be obeyed via agency-equipped humans.
The Creation Mandate was a call to explore, discover, dig up, strip away, combine, shape, and
reform their environment. Presumably, they would take the earth’s raw materials, design new
tools, plow soil, grow food, build houses and cities, discover God’s world through science,
invent things, create things, develop art, and appreciate beauty. The planet was one, giant gift of God, handed to man and woman with a bow on top, and a command to draw out all the
incredible potentiality this planet has to offer. All those tasks require agency. God created man in his image, which means man has the innate ability to “image God” in his work. Thus, God gave a command and equipped his people with the faculties required to do so. Human agency is a reflection of God’s ultimate, sovereign agency.
Saying Tim Keller and Ray Ortlund have “loser, pietistic theology” says far more about your lack of understanding than their potential theological weaknesses.
Delete and spend some time with the Lord. You’re in grevious error.
Honestly, have Evangelicals ever read any history of Christianity beyond the Bible and the Protestant Reformation?
Christianity was spread by Catholics, and Christendom was born, not only through the severe hardships and danger of Catholic missionary work over thousands of miles, through monks hand-copying the Bible a zillion times, and through regular Catholics doing great works of mercy and evangelization, but also by many, many Catholics — both priests and laypersons — standing up *very bravely* to pagan societies, to pagan morals, and to heretics in positions of power, and often getting killed for it. However, as Tertullian said, God ensures that “the blood of martyrs is the seed of the Church.”
I highly recommend the Catholic history book “Triumph: The Power & the Glory of the Catholic Church,” by HW Crocker III. Prepare to be amazed.
This would have been interesting if you actually knew what grace is. “For Jesus always lives to intercede for those who are drawing near to God through Him.” Drawing near to God is NOT a passive activity.
I have 5 teen boys at home. I pray fervently they are the kind of men who reject pietism and walk worthy of their calling and get into all the right kind of trouble.
Would you describe “agency” as voluntaristic? By voluntaristic I mean man as a self-willed moral agent acting for God.
Agency is the God-given ability to act, to shape our world.
What I hear you saying is that agency means God gives us a kind of delegated power — like He winds us up and sends us out to do things for Him. Almost like a chain of command: God acts on us, then we act on the world. Am I hearing you correctly?
How do you explain away John 18:36?
I do not “explain away” any text of scripture. I strive to account for all of scripture in my writing. In John 18:36, Jesus said his kingdom is not of this world. The word “of” means his kingdom does not originate on earth but originated in heaven. I will put the question back to you. Do you believe that Jesus’ kingdom has nothing to do with this world? If not, then what is our duty to this world?
Forgive me for my inflammatory approach in the last comment.
Our duty is to glorify God and to make disciples (teach people to obey Jesus). I don't see any call to political power in the NT until Jesus returns. The kingdom of Jesus is invisible until then.
If you want to see a nation of Christians (and what Christian doesn't?), the "Christians" part must come first. We make disciples, and the heart of the nation is transformed. People are changed from the inside out.
Jonathan
I agree that our duty is to glorify God and to make disciples. Christians typically assume making disciples is always of individuals and never of larger groups. I used to think this myself. However, Matthew 28:18 says "make disciples of all nations," which would include more than making individual converts.
Being salt and light as Jesus commands means speaking and living God's truth in public. That's why its good for Christians to be in power. It's good to have Christians in various industries acting in God honoring ways, is it not? Wouldn't you rather work for a godly CEO than a pagan? Wouldn't you rather have godly teachers in schools than pagan? Wouldn't you rather have a man of God on the presidential ballot than a pagan?
That's all I'm saying. Christians can and should pursue power and should not let pietistic thinking prevent them from doing so.
In Mat 28:19 (not 18), it says "...disciple the nations, baptizing them..." It cannot be talking about the nations as collectives of people, because how do you baptize a nation?
It's probably fine for individual Christians to have positions of power. What is not fine is to try and establish Jesus's political kingdom for Him. In my knowledge of history, Christianized governments always become (or start) corrupt and/or tyrannical and thus tarnish the Name they claim to uphold.
You have a narrow and strange definition of pietism. I can't figure out what exactly you mean by it, except "the thing people I disagree with do."
Where in the NT do you see Christians authorized or encouraged to seek political power?
1 Tim 2 v1-4. Paul’s testimonies before governors and ultimately Caesar. The goal at the very least is to convert pagan rulers to Christ. And if they were Christian, they should enact Christian laws and pursue Christian foreign policy and Christian economic policy. Failing to do so would be denying their conscious and their knowledge of virtue and truth. For a Christian to govern unChristianly is a betrayal of their role and the duties before God
Testifying before governors and Caesar : should we assume this is for their conversion? There are other possibilities….
You actually addressed my point! Thank you.
Absolutely, if you have the opportunity, witness to kings.
It depends on what you mean by Christian laws, foreign policy, and economic policy.
In the US, leaders must still be subject to the Constitution, if they are honest (which they ought to be if they are professing Christians).
Justice, mercy, and humility would be a fitting motto (ripped off from Micah).
Jonathan, I see the points you are making and can agree with some of them. I think what I see Mike saying is that we all have gifts and instead of not using them like a piteous Christian, we need to look to the Holy Spirit to use them. Too often the Christian looks at power and either shy’s away from it or goes the other way and abuses it. Humility is the key, without it, the Holy Spirit can’t do a good work in us or through us. And then meekness (power under control) is another attribute we need to embrace. So all that to say, discipleship is a lost art in Christian circles, although it’s making a comeback. We tend to focus on making converts. Big difference. We all have gifts and then we all have “tasks laid out before us” some are called to be politicians not for the sake of establishing Jesus’ kingdom, He can do that by Himself, but he does in fact ask us to partner with Him in his pursuit of restoring creation.
Good word, Brian.
Jonathan, you asked the question, "Where in the NT do you see Christians authorized or encouraged to seek political power?"
Again, I put the question back to you. Where in the NT are Christians forbidden from seeking political power? And if we are forbidden from seeking political power, then why should Christians vote?
I think you're reading my piece through a narrow lens of politics. But politics is but one of many ways Christians can and should exercise power given us by the Holy Spirit.
Eph 3:16: " may grant you to be strengthened with power through his Spirit in your inner being"
1 Cor 2:4: "my speech and my message were not in plausible words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power"
1 Thes 1:4-5: "For we know, brothers loved by God, that he has chosen you, because our gospel came to you not only in word, but also in power and in the Holy Spirit and with full conviction."
I do not claim that Christians are forbidden from seeking political power. I just don't see how it fits the Church's mission. Can you answer my question?
You are the one who brought up politics in your original essay.
Of course there is power in the gospel and in the Word of God and in the Holy Spirit and in the Name of Jesus. It should be used in the sense of Ephesians 6:10-20, in spiritual warfare.
I don't get what you mean by pietism/pietistic. I understand pietism as being overly concerned with maintaining outward appearances and a standard of behavior at the expense of a real relationship with God (like the Pharisees). You are using it in some other way. How would you define it?
Pietism is an emphasis on individual inner experience and piety. It tends to turn away from theology and doctrine.
What do you mean that He asks us to partner with Him in His pursuit of restoring creation? Where does He ask us, and how does He say to do it?
Keep in mind, some of these people (maybe Michael Clary himself but idk) are postmillenialist. So they really do think we will build and institute God’s kingdom before Jesus returns and then hand it over to Jesus when He comes. I do not have this view, Im a standard premill like most Protestants, but I believe our actions with the time we are given should be the same, with the same optimistic goals of building upon the foundation which is Christ.
I realize that about postmil, but I was asking them to back up their views with Scripture. Maybe I've missed something and will repent, or maybe they can't and will repent.
I am not optimistic about the success of the church, because in every time period, people have eventually failed and God needs to intervene. (Garden, pre-Babel, pre-law, law with judges, law with kings, exile, post-exile). The church age is unique because of the indwelling Holy Spirit in all believers, but I don't think it will be any different in result. Jesus is coming back. Even the millennium has rebellion at the end before the Great White Throne judgment and the eternal state when evil will finally be put in its place.
I'm not saying we should be completely passive, but we should focus on the mission of spreading the good news in an invitational way.
So, I’ll start by saying that scripture has both implicit and explicit thoughts inside the text. In the last 2 years, I started studying different Jewish/ Messianic Jews understanding of scripture. It changes the entire “book” for me. From Genesis to Revelation the entirety is about God’s plan in restoring the world. While they end up in a more progressive theology, the BEMA Discipleship podcast has been phenomenal.
I see. I will note for you that the Jewish understanding of Scripture has some large and well-documented gaps.
I will continue to study the Bible and trust the Holy Spirit to show me what He wants me to know.
Lets say God moves powerfully and 80% of the country is radically saved and became on-fire born-again Christians. If all these Christians still choose to eschew any assertive action in the world, and actively avoid all positions of power, then the God-hating 20% would still rule over all of us in service of the enemy and to the great detriment of society. I say, no matter what the percentage, have the zeal to advance the causes of Christ in the business and political spheres with the same passion as enemies of Christ. Its a democratic nation, so you may still lose, but advocate for Truth or sow righteousness as best you can against the godlessness of the unbelievers. Thats my opinion. I want revival, but lack of revival in California shouldnt stop me from being a Christ-first candidate in Montana for example.
I don't say we should not vote, or hold office. If 80% of US voters were committed and mature Christians for a significant period of time, we would have just laws and Christian office-holders but still have freedom of religion and speech.
The church age is not about coercion.
The cause of Christ is that people freely believe in Him and be saved.
You can run as a Christ-first candidate in Montana, but I doubt you will get far with that as your political platform unless you somehow convince people that Christ-first does not mean coerced "holiness." I'm afraid you'll find there is a long way to go.