Winter Lecture Series 2016 Covenant Church of Naples ı PCA

Dr. Robert Petterson

1di·a·logue noun \ˈdī-ə-ˌlog, -ˌläg\

a discussion or series of discussions that two groups or countries

have in order to end a disagreement: a conversation between

two or more people trying to find mutual understanding.

DIALOGUE THREE

Another Dialogue Between Old Truths and New Realities

Opening Pandora’s Box 3 3333333

DOES CHARITY BEGIN AT HOME OR ABROAD?

AMERICANISM OR INTERNATIONALISM

2

WHAT’S BEHIND THESERIES TITLE?

Pandora’s Box is a story from Greek mythology. According to myth, Pandora was

the first woman on earth. Zeus presented her with a beautiful jar containing all the

evils known by the gods. Pandora was told not to open it, but curiosity got the best

of her. By opening the jar, those evils escaped and spread across the earth. That

myth has spawned a well-known phrase: Opening Pandora’s Box—the “can of

worms” we never open because what comes out causes distress.

But the box must be opened if there is to be a dialogue between new realities and

old truths. Old convictions, that have long been the underpinnings of our Western

Christian culture, are under withering attack, or being disregarded as irrelevant, by

neo-relativists. The once unthinkable is now the new normal. Increasingly, older

conservatives and traditionalists feel like strangers in their own land. Baby

Boomers find themselves increasingly at odds with their millennial children. The

old generation gap has been replaced by the new values gap. Monumental social

changes that once took centuries now happen in a matter of 5-10 years. Parents and

children find themselves trying to communicate ideas in languages, technologies,

and feelings that are foreign to each other. This has produced debilitating

polarization in the postmodern American culture.

One of the greatest differences is that conservatives often speak the language of

conviction. Progressives tend to speak the dialect of compassion. In an age that

increasingly says “I feel” rather than “I think,” the compassion argument regularly

trumps the conviction or truth argument. It is our contention that progressives need

to listen to the conviction argument and conservatives must hear the compassion

argument. Truth without compassion is barren; compassion not based on truth is

fraudulent. Compassionate truth is the goal of this dialogue.

Opening Pandora’s Box 2 continues last year’s series, to present six additional

areas of massive sea changes where the values gap is widening, and polarization is

increasing. We believe that we must first listen and dialogue rather than shouting

each other down or writing each other off. That is why this series has as its subtitle,

Another Dialogue Between Old Truths and New Realities. But this can only happen if

we have the courage to open Pandora’s box. May what was said of this ancient

Israeli tribe, be said of Christians today:

“From Issachar (there were) men who understood the times and knew what

Israel should do.” —I Chronicles 12:32

3

HISTORY’S WARNING

The Spanish philosopher and poet, George Santayana made the oft-quoted

statement, “Those who forget the lessons of history are doomed to repeat its

mistakes.” History has a bad habit of

repeating itself because people have a

bad habit of repeating the same mistakes.

The current dilemmas facing America,

particularly in its twin problems of

saving the world from itself and

protecting itself from the encroaching

world, is as old as civilizations and

empires that have long ago been swept

into the dustbin of history.

In today’s edition of Opening

Pandora’s Box, we consider two issues

that divide America and are critical to the

2016 Presidential debates: U.S.

involvement in the world and protecting

of our borders. We especially need to

see this from a biblical perspective.

We also learn from history. There’s no

better place to look than at the rise and

fall of the ancient capital of Western

European Civilization, Rome.

The United States has the world’s

longest boundary between a First World and Developing World country. Yet the

2,000-mile border that separates us from Latin America pales next to the ancient

Rome’s 6,000-mile border with the rest of its world.

To understand how Rome’s expansion increased the size of its borders until they

became unmanageable, and how the unabated flow of barbarian peoples into the

Roman state led to its ultimate decline and death, we recommend, The Fall of the

Roman Empire, A New History of Rome and the Barbarians, by Peter Heather,

Oxford University Press, 2006. This Oxford history professor is the world’s

leading authority on the barbarian waves that swept into Europe between the First

and Fourth Centuries, leading to the ultimate demise of Rome. Its 459 pages [not

counting footnotes and indexes] can be taxing but rewarding. But we will give you

the fruit of Dr. Petterson’s labor’s in a Reader’s Digest sort of shorthand.

EXPANSION: THE PAX ROMANA

From its humble beginnings as a rustic village on the banks of the Tiber, Rome

grew to be the greatest empire that the world had ever seen. At its apex under

Emperor Trajan [98-117 AD], Rome was the biggest city on earth. Its empire

covered 5 million square kilometers, covering Europe, most of the Middle East, and

4

all of North Africa. Twenty-one percent of the world’s population lived within its

borders.

What caused Rome’s expansion? Was it a rapacious greed to seize what

belonged to others? Maybe, at times! More often, it was a desire to bring order

and peace to a violently turbulent world. Roman legions soaked the world in blood

in order to make it a

safer place. They

called their new

world order the PAX

ROMANA [Latin for

“The Peace of

Rome”]. If the blood

of martyrs was the

seed of the Church,

then the blood of the

vanquished was the

seed of the one

world order that rose

in the wake of Roman conquest.

The Roman vision was as old as the dream of Nimrod who established Babylon

as the first One-World government in Genesis 10&11. The book of Revelation

speaks of the beasts [which Daniel’s prophecy earlier predicted with startling

accuracy] as a synonym for Babylon. The beast [Babylon] has a fatal wound. It

has died again and again, only to rise from the dead in a new incarnation: Egypt,

Assyria, Babylon, Persia, Greece, Rome, Byzantium, Islam, the Holy Roman

Empire, Napoleon, the British Empire, the Third Reich, the Communism, ad

infinitum, ad nauseam until the final great Babylon one-world government at the

end of time. In every case these Babylon reincarnations have all claimed that

they were enforcing their worldviews to unite the nations and make the planet

a safer place. After slaughtering more than a million people, Alexander the Great

on his deathbed issued a proclamation saying that he had done it all for world

peace. As Christians we should always beware of the Pax Babylonia, Pax

Hellenistica, Pax Romana, Pax Britannia, or Pax Americana. If there can be a

Babylon on the Euphrates, Nile,

Tiber, or Thames, there can surely be

a Babylon on the Potomac.

THE INFLUX OF IMMIGRANTS

The culture and wealth of Rome

was superior to anything that the

world had to offer. Even Israel was in

decline under the stifling regression

of the temple elite. As Rome

expanded through both diplomacy

and war, the peoples of the world saw

the superiority of its legal system,

5

military and economics. Rome was a cultural juggernaut. People in its outposts

wanted to go to the capital. Think about modern colonial powers. Cities like

London, Amsterdam, Paris, Berlin, Madrid, and Washington D.C. are filled with

immigrants from the places where they have expanded their military power and

colonies.

Increasingly, Roman

cities were predominately

populated by slaves,

servants, and immigrants

who had come to make it

rich. At its height, less

than 25% of its populace

were Roman citizens. At

first, foreigners and aliens

were successfully

integrated into Roman

culture. Most everyone

learned Greek, the trade

language of the day. They

took on Roman values and customs. Though the borders were some 6,000 miles

long, the Pax Romana stood the test of time for some 300 years [about the time of

modern day America]. This lesson should not be lost on us: as long as

immigrants were conformed to the language, laws, and culture of Rome, the

Pax Romana was a reality [at least in Europe]. Even the first waves of

barbarians who illegally crossed the borders, were integrated to some extent into

Roman society.

BORDERS TOO BIG TO MANAGE

Oxford Professor, Peter Heather, in his ground-breaking Fall of the Roman

Empire chronicles the cause of the final demise that led to the European Dark Ages:

wave after wave of barbarian hoards—Saxons, Goths, Visigoths, Huns, Vandals,

and other nomadic people groups surged westward from the steppes of Central

Asia, forced to escape other warlike people pressing in on them. Like locusts, these

nomadic hoards stripped the land bare, and then moved on, drawn by the green

pastures and prosperous civilizations to the west. We get an idea of the scale of

these ancient barbarian incursions from today’s headlines of the massive floods of

refugees streaming into Europe from

the Middle East. Think about a million

people who have streamed into

Germany. [Ironically, today’s Germans

are descended from the Aryan hoards

who came east the area of India during

the Roman days looking for security of

Roman Europe].

SORRY, MR. TRUMP, WALLS

DON’T WORK

6

The Romans tried to build at least one wall: Hadrian’s Wall in Northern England

to hold back the Picts, Saxons, and other fierce barbarians invading from the north.

The wall suffered the same fate as the Great Wall of China [That wall was built at

the cost of millions of lives and trillions of dollars in today’s money to insulate

China from its version of barbarians. Yet Mongolian invaders bribed the wall’s

gatekeepers to throw open its doors, and their hoards rode through the greatest

“White Elephant” in history unhindered to plunder China]. The same thing

happened to Hadrian’s Wall. The fluid borders of Roman Europe were too large to

be patrolled by Roman legions. The cost of border control was prohibitive. The

people groups crossed in numbers as large as a quarter million or more at a time.

They were well armed and determined to enjoy [and even plunder] the fruits of

Roman civilization. Few had any intention of assimilating. Most didn’t have the

ability to [so foreign was their culture and world view].

A DIVIDED ROME

By the year 408 AD, Roman Europe was a patchwork of at least thirteen barbarian

nations within a nation. No longer was it E Pluribus Unum [one people out of

many] but separate groups speaking alien languages, holding to different laws, and

foreign customs. All gave lip service to Rome but few were loyal. Less were

willing to pay taxes even as the burden of managing the chaos increased. What

these newcomers did want were Roman social services and handouts, further

draining the economy. The situation that plagued Rome is being repeated in North

America and Europe today.

THE SHRINKING TAX BASE AND RISING MILITARY NEED

In the 300s Emperor Constantine saw the handwriting on the wall, and moved his

capital east to Byzantium which he renamed Constantinople. Within years, the

barbarian Vandals took Spain, the bread basket of the Roman Empire. Instantly,

Rome’s richest tax base was eliminated. They then moved across the

Mediterranean and seized Rome’s colonies in North Africa. The end of the

Western Empire of Rome

was now inevitable. With a

shrinking population and

tax base from which to

recruit and pay its military,

Rome now depended on

dissatisfied foreign

mercenaries. An unpatriotic

military frequently staged

coups and established their

own emperors on the

throne. Civil order was

disintegrating and the

economy was in shambles.

Rome was ripe for the

Visigoth sack in 410 AD. “All I’m saying is that giving to the arts might improve our image.”

7

After that, Rome began its final descent into the Dark Ages. St. Augustine’s

observation after the Visigoth sack of Rome has always proven right, even in our

21st Century: The enemy of the West always comes from the East.

In the end, both Roman expansionism, to fix the problems of dangerous world

through military incursions, and their inability to protect their own expanded

borders, brought about Rome’s ultimate destruction. Does it seem eerily like our

day? Let’s discuss….

BARBARIANS AND CIVILIZATIONS

The word barbarian seems pejorative, elitist, maybe racist and surely cruel. It

would never do in a politically correct world. Yet it is instructive in the light of

historical reality. The word barbarian comes from the Latin barbaria which simply

means “those from a foreign country.” Before that, the Greek word barbaros

referred to those who were “foreign, strange or ignorant” from the root barbar

which means those of unintelligible speech. Later the Romans used the word to

describe those who did not share their values. The Romans believed passionately

in their exceptionalism, and certainly in the superiority of the Greco-Roman

civilization. They believed that the world would be a better place if it were Roman,

and were always surprised when the barbarian did not embrace their values. One

thinks of President Bush who was sure that Iraq would readily embrace American

democracy, or President Obama who was sure that the Arab Spring would change

everything for the better in the Middle East.

The barbarians [or at least those nomadic people groups who moved eastward

from the steppes of Asia] were hardly civilized. They barely eked out a

subsistence. They kept herds, lived in tents or huts, and were required to be hardy

warriors, living off the land and defending themselves from other nomadic tribes.

They built no cities, planted no vineyards, and were mostly illiterate. They

exhausted the resources of the land where they sojourned, and then moved on to

greener pastures. Sometimes they were forced to move on by other hungrier and

stronger predator hoards pushing in on them. They were ever moving westward,

looking for a better and safer place. To the civilized world they were a plague of

locusts or packs of wolves—predators to be feared. But they were at least hardy

people, forced to fight just to survive in a harsh world.

Meanwhile Civilization

On the other hand,

civilizations by nature produce

softer people. Maybe their

civilization prospered because

its founders were blessed to be

in fertile places (i.e. the

Euphrates River or Nile

Valley). Perhaps they had a

superior world life view that

8

produced wealth (i.e. the Northern European Reformation). Bounty releases people

from having to exhaust their days in subsistence living. They can afford servants to

do manual labor [or raise armies to enslave others]. They are free to philosophize,

create better order, technology, arts, architecture, institutions of learning, and a

higher order of culture. Less of the population has to be involved in war. Leisure

activities and recreation are more available. As civilization flourishes, its citizens

become softer. Even the recipients of wealthy civilizations become softer, their

blessings attract the barbarian. Romans discovered that they didn’t have the will to

fight to keep that which the barbarians were willing to fight to take from them.

This has been true of every great civilization in history.

Lessons for Today

Much of the 10/40 Window (that which is between the 10th and 40th parallel [the

Muslim/Hindu world]) has been turned into a desert. By every measure (see our

first paper on Islam) it is a region of poverty, social inequities, illiteracy, failed

governments, and terrorism. Like the people groups in Rome’s day, hoards are

trying to get out. One might argue that some of the turmoil has been exacerbated

by past European and American attempts to manipulate the region. Certainly CIA

involvement in the overthrow of a duly elected government of Iran, and the later

propping up of the Shah of Iran has had reverberating effects on today’s Middle

East. The further changing of the guard through the toppling of Saddam Hussein in

Iraq, and later an early exit by American troops, has given birth to ISIS. The Arab

Spring, endorsed and encouraged by America, has brought further instability. As a

result, hoards of people are fleeing to Europe. Pressure is brought on the U.S.

government to open our borders to Syrian and other refugees from the Middle East.

One could go on to talk about the destabilization of governments in Central

America [often by U.S. intervention and manipulations] brought about the southern

border crises in the 1970s and 80s that continue unabated to this day. Like the

ancient barbarians, hoards of people are flooding into Europe and North America.

One wonders whether, like the ancient Romans, we are too financially

overextended, entitlement oriented, and soft to stem the tide. This is a crisis that

will not go away. It must be solved for the sake of our children and grand children.

JACKSON OR WILSON

America’s conflicting views on involvement in world affairs can be summed up in

the contrasting views of our 7th President Andrew Jackson and our 28th President

Woodrow Wilson. Both were Democrats [in

fact, Jackson’s opponents referred to him as

a jackass, and thus the donkey became the

symbol of the Democratic Party]. Both were

strong Presbyterians, and their policies were

strongly influenced by their Christian beliefs.

But here is the profound difference that

still divides American opinion. Andrew

Jackson often quoted the biblical injunction,

9

“Charity begins at home.” He felt that a strong America required putting resources

at home rather than abroad. Ironically, though he was a man of war prior to

coming to office in 1828, he steadfastly resisted foreign entanglements or wars

once in office. He felt that the nation had to build its own infrastructure to protect

itself for the future. He believed staunchly that the resources of our nation should

be used to ensure a strong future for the next generations of its citizens. Yet,

Jackson also believed that government should be kept as small as possible. He felt

that it was the duty of private citizens and institutional charities to help the

poor. He was the only president in U.S. history to eliminate the national debt.

He believed in strong border control and rigid standards for admitting others to the

nation. He believed passionately in the Judeo-Christian values that had formed the

United States, and was wary of admitting outsiders who would dilute or change

them. Though he financed scientific explorations to other parts of the world, the

bulk of his financial policies were aimed at a stronger internal America that could

stand up to the world if necessary.

On the other hand, Woodrow Wilson was a Princeton professor, who managed to

encourage America to enter World War 1. If

Wilson believed like Jackson that “charity begins

at home” he also fervently believed that it should

be extended to the world. Whereas Andrew

Jackson was more of an isolationist, Wilson was

the most prolific interventionist in American

history. He belonged to the Progressive wing of

the Democratic Party because his Christian

beliefs drove him to see government as a force in

solving the many social ills in America. He

wrote that charity should be removed from the

private domain and “made the imperative

legal duty of the whole.” He was the father of government entitlements in

America. Almost every scholar would admit that Woodrow Wilson laid the

groundwork for the modern welfare state. He constantly complained that the

legislature took too long, and government was too slow, in instituting social

changes. He was a proponent of the executive order. He once said, “The

government is only as big and fast as the man in the White House.” It was under

Woodrow Wilson that the progressive tax system was signed into law in 1913. He

believed staunchly that it was the moral obligation of government to tax the rich at

a higher rate so that the wealth could be redistributed [under “government

stewardship”] to the poor. He instituted these changes from biblical theology of

compassion for the poor. He felt that the sinfulness of the rich made it impossible

for them to take the initiative on their own to give the charity needed to lift the poor

out of poverty.

Religion also drove Wilson’s foreign policy. He did believe in the

exceptionalism of American values and culture. He had a missionary zeal to see

the rest of the world embrace these democratic values that he believed flowed out

of our biblical heritage. Some historians have referred to him as a moralistic

international interventionist. He pushed an activist foreign policy that sought to

10

promote [so might even say impose] global democracy. He actively engineered

America’s entrance into World War 1. Afterwards he traveled to Paris to initiate

The League of Nations, a precursor to The United Nations. It was one of his

bitterest defeats that a Republican-led Congress refused to ratify the treaty. In 1919

he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. During his administration, the United

States was actively involved in intervention in Mexico and Central America.

Two of his most ardent disciples, the Presbyterian Dulles brothers, also carried on

his activist intervention globally to fight Communism and install global

democracies. One was the Secretary of State under Eisenhower and the other the

CIA director. Never have two brothers affected our history today more than the

Dulles brothers. Working together, they engineered the overthrows of the

governments in Iran and Guatemala, and set in motion the destabilization of Latin

America and the Middle East decades later. Their use of American resources in

interference in foreign governments may have seemed justified in the light of the

advance of post World War 2 Communism, but they have produced chickens that

have come home to roost.

One hears the echoes of Woodrow Wilson’s moralistic international intervention

in George H. Bush’s talk of a New World Order, George W. Bush’s talk of

bringing democracy to the Middle East, or Barack Obama’s encouragement of the

Arab Spring. One would have to say that Barak Obama and Hillary Clinton

represent a Woodrow Wilson point of view [without his ardent Christianity]

while people like Paul Rand most likely represent an Andrew Jackson View. On the other hand, it would be imprudent to say that Andrew Jackson’s isolationist

approach is entirely safe in our day when the world is a much smaller and more

dangerous place. Old borders and walls [or hiding out in a country surrounded by

oceans] will protect us today. This is indeed a sticky wicket. Still, the issue [as old

as Rome] of foreign expansion and porous borders is as relevant today as it was

2,000 years ago.

AGAIN THE DIVIDE

As in so many other areas in our

cultural wars, America is divided on

both entanglements in foreign affairs

[read here, expanding our boundaries of

involvement] or in how open our

borders should be. The research is

revealing of a split in generation,

gender, religion, and politics when it

comes to these areas of Jacksonian/

Wilsonian divide.

Foreign Involvement

Howard Wiarda’s groundbreaking research entitled Divided America on the World

Stage: Broken Government and Foreign Policy, shows that America is almost

evenly split in a three-way divide: 1) One-third is isolationist, believing that

America should not be involved in any wars unless directly attacked by foreign

11

powers. This group is heavily weighted toward the Millennial generation and

libertarians. A small percentage of Republicans hold this view. This view may

explain much of the attraction of Millennial folk to Rand Paul and Bernie Sanders

in the current primaries. 2) One-third is liberal internationalists who believe that

the United States should push human rights and democracy. This finds its support

among Millennials, Progressive Democrats, and a small percentage of Republicans.

Very few libertarians hold this view. 3) The other third is conservative

internationalists who support a strong defense and military. They also believe in

strong and decisive action to protect American interests overseas to keep the

homeland safe. This was certainly the position of George W. Bush. Ronald

Reagan held this position, but was much more prudent in exhausting diplomatic

solutions first. Generationally, 85% of Millennials either fall into the isolationist

or liberal internationalist camp. Gen X represents the national one-third divide.

Baby boomers mostly fall into the liberal internationalist or conservative

internationalist depending on whether they are progressive or conservative in

political beliefs. Builders skew heavily toward conservative internationalist.

Howard Wiarda says that this divide causes the gridlock and paralysis in

American foreign policy because as soon as one view is advanced, the other two

gang up on it. He says that these disparate views are some of the most polarizing in

the United States today. [Yet, if you read accounts of debates in the ancient Roman

Senate, you would hear the same arguments and differences]

Open Borders

The latest national survey by the Pew Research Center, conducted Sept. 22-27

among 1,502 adults, finds that most Americans (60%) oppose the idea of changing

the U.S. Constitution to prohibit children of those who are not legal residents from

becoming citizens; 37% favor changing the Constitution to end “birthright

citizenship.”

Again, Republicans and Democrats are far

apart on this issue: By 75% to 23%,

Democrats oppose changing the Constitution

to ban birthright citizenship. Republicans are

evenly divided: About half (53%) favor

amending the Constitution, while 44% are

opposed.

By contrast, large majorities in both parties

continue to favor a way for allowing

undocumented immigrants to stay in the U.S.

legally, if certain requirements are met. About

two-thirds of Republicans (66%) say people

in the U.S. illegally should be allowed to stay

if they meet certain requirements, while 32%

say they should not be allowed to stay legally. By nearly a factor of five-to-one

(80% to 17%), Democrats say undocumented immigrants should be allowed to stay

in the U.S. legally, provided certain requirements are met.

12

Admitting Refugees

Since the Islamic State attacks in Paris, concerns have grown about possible

security threats posed by the hundreds of thousands of Middle Eastern refugees

pouring into Europe. And Europeans aren’t the only ones concerned: Opposition

has not abated in the U.S. to the Obama administration’s initial plans to admit up to

10,000 refugees from Syria’s civil war.

A new Bloomberg Politics poll found that 53% of Americans don’t want to

accept any Syrian refugees at all; 11% more would accept only Christian refugees

from Syria. More than two dozen governors, most of them Republicans, have said

they’ll oppose Syrian refugees being resettled in their states. Last fall the House of

Representatives passed a bill blocking the admission of Syrian and Iraqi

refugees unless they pass strict background checks.

Though he has been vilified by cartoonists and liberal columnists as a Neo-Nazi,

Donald Trump’s bold call that the immigration of all Muslims to the United States

should cease until stiffer protocols are established for vetting these applicants, polls

show that his idea resonated with many voters [though political correctness would

not allow many to express their agreement out loud].

Again, there is a generational gap on this issue. Strikingly, the largest

demographic in favor of admitting refugees from the Middle East are Millennial

Evangelicals, particular college students. Many of them have been influenced by

popular progressive Evangelicals, Tony Campolo and Jim Wallis of Sojourners.

HOW DO WE, THEN, LIVE

One might think that these are political and social

issues, but Scripture speaks a relevant word to the

dilemmas of our day. At any rate, Christians must

think Christianly. Too many of us have our

opinions shaped more by FOX News, CNN or

MSNBC commentators. But formula answers will

not solve the pressing problems of our day. Only

the timeless words of Scripture can give us the principles by which to make

decisions. This is no more critical than in our day.

Remember the text that informs our Pandora’s Box series: “The men of Issachar

understood the times and knew what Israel should do.” (I Chronicles 12:32) 1)

They understood who they were. They belonged to Israel. 2) That meant that they

belonged to the God of Israel, and had a Holy Book inspired by his Spirit, which

gave them directions. 3) But they also knew the times. They studied culture. They

remembered the history that spawned their times. They were aware of the trends,

dangers, politics and opportunities of their times. 4) Applying the timeless truths of

Scripture to the changing times in which they lived, they came up with solutions

13

that would help them and their children navigate their turbulent world. Here are a

few on this issue of American expansionism and porous borders.

1. We are citizens of heaven.

St. Paul wrote to distressed Christians in Philippi. Just a few years before, this

ancient imperial city in Macedonia had thrown open its gates to welcome the

armies of Cassius and Brutus who had assassinated Julius Caesar. Not long after, a

battle that would change the world was fought on the Plains of Philippi. Caesar’s

nephew, Octavian, defeated Cassius and Brutus and became the first emperor of

Rome. The Republic died, and the Empire was born that day outside Philippi.

Octavian changed his name to Augustus [which means “I am the Greatest”] and

was declared a god by the Senate. He never forgave Philippi for harboring his

enemies. He took away the designation of imperial city, and Philippi, after

centuries of prosperity, began its descent into ruin. Today it remains an

archeological dig of ruins. But Paul had established the first church in Europe in

Philippi.

So he writes to these distressed Christians, “[Remember] your citizenship is in

heaven, from where you await a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ.” (Philippians 3:20)

His message is loud and clear. It matters little that their city has fallen out of favor

with Caesar Augustus. This demigod is not their Savior. It matters little if they are

no longer an imperial city, or that they have been stripped of their Roman

privileges. Their citizenship never was in Rome. As Christians it is always, and

ultimately, in heaven.

We are sojourners on the way to heaven. In truth, we are the exiles. Like

Abraham and his sons and daughters, we are strangers, aliens, and foreigners

looking for a city not made with human hands (Hebrews 11). Later, the Roman

state declared Christianity an illicit religion, and Christians no longer had the right

of citizenship. Overnight, they literally became illegal aliens. When we make too

much of our American citizenship and put up walls between ourselves and those we

dismiss as non-citizens, we need to remember who we are: Citizens not first of

America [or any other country] but of heaven. Our Savior will not come from the

Republican or Democratic party. Only Jesus will come to make sense out of this

mess and bring it salvation.

St. Augustine made great use of

St. Paul’s words to the Philippians

when his own parishioners came

unglued after the Visigoth sacking

of Rome in 410 AD. He said that

the cities of men [civitate homi]

were all manifestations of Babylon.

He reminded them that they had

depended too much on Rome

[which he said was always destined

to fall, as are all the cities of men]. In his monumental classic The City of God he

called Christians to remember that they belong to the Civitate Dei—the spiritual

14

Jerusalem that exists within every city of man [Babylon] as its light and salt. He

challenged the Christians of his day that they had made an idolatry out of their

Roman citizenship, and had failed to carry the gospel to both Roman pagans and

the barbarians that had crossed the borders of the Roman state. May we listen to

both Saints Paul and Augustine in our troubled times. Like the men of Issachar, we

have to remember who we are: people of Israel in the midst of pagan nations.

2. We must recognize Babylon.

Babylon is the oldest city in the Bible, first described in Genesis 10&11. It will

not fall until the last chapters of Revelation. It is the city mentioned more than any

other except Jerusalem. Jerusalem is God’s city. Babylon is the city of man. Its

number is 666. In biblical symbolism, six is the number of man and three the

number of God. 666 symbolically means man deifying himself. Babylon is really

a dream of people who believe that they can create an earthly paradise. Babylon is

the state claiming that it can do all that God alone can do—giving birth, sustaining,

protecting, feeding, and ruling with sovereign control. Sometimes it is called the

beast. Its leaders are called anti-Christs, for they claim to be saviors of mankind.

Babylon may use religion as its seduction [the Holy Roman Empire or ISIS], but it

is really a soulless animal that leaves to mark its territory, feed, and reproduce.

Thus, the prophets called Babylon “the beast.” Daniel saw Babylon, Persia,

Greece, and Rome as beasts. St. John’s

Revelation sees a great beast that will rise

up in the end time as the greatest Babylon of

all. He sees the harlot “godless religion”

riding on the beast’s back to seduce the

nations. The Bible is quick to condemn

religion and state union as an anathema to

God. It corrupts both religion and state to

unite the sword and cross [or crescent].

Beware, Christian, of putting your hope in

the civil prince or the political solution to

world problems. Only Jesus and the Gospel

can do that. Woodrow Wilson might well

have been the harlot riding the beast. He,

and others like him, might well have been

setting the stage for Babylon in America—both as an interventionist and expanding

beast [even for good democratic purposes] and as a promoter of the modern welfare

state in North America. During the election this year as you consider how you will

vote, listen carefully for the Babylonian seduction or the “Nimrod” who promises

to save us all—either by advancing a foreign military policy that seeks to establish

a Pax Americana or a social welfare system that will bankrupt our morals and

treasury.

3. Though we are citizens of heaven, we must seek the welfare of

Babylon where we live.

15

After Nebuchadnezzar had depopulated Israel and carried off the survivors of his

holocaust to Babylon, the prophet Jeremiah wrote this to the exiles:

“Also, seek the peace and prosperity of the city to which I have carried you in

exile. Pray for it to prosper, for if it prospers, so will you.”

—Jeremiah 29:7

This is critical for our day. Many Christians think that, because they are citizens

of heaven, that they can withdraw from the culture and its political and social

realities. We are not called to hide in the synagogue. We are called by Jesus to

build an ecclesia that invades and transforms the culture. We are the salt and light

in Babylon. It matters what happens to our schools, our neighborhoods, courts,

halls of congress, and White House. We have to be involved. Again those words:

“…seek the peace and prosperity of the city…” In Hebrew the word seek is active.

It demands actions on the part of us exiles in a foreign land.

Remember the last words: “…for if it prospers, so will you.” We are leaving

behind something for our children and grandchildren. Will it be as healthy and safe

as what was left to us by our fathers and mothers? If we give way to the

worldliness of this generation [or the otherworldliness of those Christians who

retreat from their civic responsibility] then history will hold us accountable.

4. Social Compassion doesn’t demand social stupidity.

We are called to help those in distress. Matthew 25 clearly states that we will be

judged by how we deal with “the least of these”: the thirsty, hungry, naked,

stranger, sick, and prisoner. The Parable of the Good Samaritan tells us that our

neighbor is the one in need on the side of the road. Jesus loved us so much that it

put him on a cross. It was dangerous for the Samaritan to stop in the robber-

infested badlands of the Judean ravines, and help the bloodied victim of a vicious

crime.

But there is a difference in helping the hurting, and exposing your family.

Charity does begin at home. St. Paul says, “Anyone who does not care for his own

family, especially his relatives, has denied the faith. He is worse than an infidel.”

(I Timothy 5:8) As a husband or father, I must help the hurting. I must empty my

pockets, if necessary, and go the extra mile. However, I might determine that to

bring that homeless person home to my house might pose a variety of dangers to

my family. If I am to care for both him and my family at the same time, I might do

better to take him to the Holiday Inn or to a homeless shelter. In the same way, as a

pastor, I might find it to be a danger to my flock if I bring someone to the church

for help. I might indeed take him somewhere else because he poses a variety of

dangers to the flock over which I have care.

To carry the metaphor to its logical conclusion, the civil princes have a

responsibility to protect their citizens. America might give aid to refugees

oversees, but deem it prudent to keep its doors closed to those same people. Just as

a father protects his wife and children, and pastors protect their churches, so do the

fathers and mothers of a country have the same responsibility.

16

There may be various reasons to close borders or to severely restrict who enters a

country—even though these refugees and immigrants have severe needs. It may be

that some pose a medical health risk, others might be hiding among themselves

potential terrorists, still others might harm the country’s economy, culture, or

values. There might be many

risks that cause us to legitimately

close the doors of our homes or

churches to certain folk. Why

would that not be equally true in

the civil state. That doesn’t mean

that we ought not to go to those

foreign places with our services,

resources, and Christian gospel to

bring change there. If we can

stem the famine over there,

maybe refugees won’t have to

come here in such huge numbers.

5. Beware of applying the

right Scriptures to the wrong people.

The Bible clearly delineates three legitimate governments established by God.

The Family. This is the primary and most sacred government on earth. It was

first established in Genesis 2. At its heart is a marriage between a man and a

woman who, if God blesses, produce children who are under their care. Its

rulers are parents. They have been given the rod of discipline. Their final

sanction is disownment.

The Church. This too is a sacred government ordained by God. Its rulers are

pastors, elders, or bishops. They have the care of all those in their body who

profess Christ. They too have been given a weapon: The Bible. Their final

sanction is excommunication.

The Civil State. This too is a government (not always so sacred) ordained by

God. Its rulers are the civil princes. They have charge over their principalities

or nations. They have been given the sword as their weapon (Romans 13).

They too are charged with protecting their citizens from outside enemies or

predators from within. Their final sanction is exile or execution.

These three governments are not to interfere with the others, unless harm is being

done. God has set them as a system of checks and balances. Thomas Jefferson

wrote, “The measure of every good government is in how it cares for its weakest

members.” If husbands abuse wives, or parents do harm to their children, then the

church is to use the word to correct, and its means to discipline [even to its ultimate

sanction of excommunication]. The state may come in with the sword to protect

the abused members of the family and to punish the evildoer in the family. On the

other hand, if the church leaders abuse their members, then the heads of the

families must rise up to protest, remove those leaders, or remove themselves from

17

the church. The state can come in to punish pastors or priests who abuse children

or misuse their power in other ways. Just as surely, when the civil leaders abuse

their powers, the heads of families must rise up and vote them out of office. There

may even be times that call for revolt. The church must also stand against the

abuses of the state by using its weapon, the Bible, to speak out prophetically

against evil. John the Baptist stood up against Herod. Of course, the risk is always

there that Herod will use his weapon and cut off John’s head. But God has

separated those three governments so that they might be a check and balance.

When they forget their roles, trouble always comes.

This is where the issue of social welfare and open borders becomes knotty. Many

Evangelicals believe that the compassion Scriptures of the New Testament call

upon the civil government to provide social welfare and open borders. Certainly

Woodrow Wilson believed that on a federal and international scale.

Here’s the problem. We have to be careful referring to Old Testament passages

because Israel was a theocracy. The church and state were one. But there are 200

Scriptural injunctions by Jesus and the Apostles to caring for “the least of these”:

thirsty, hungry, naked, stranger, sick, and prisoner (Matthew 25) But notice the

audience for those Scriptures: 1) 170 are aimed at individual Christians [the

family government]. 2) 30 are aimed directly at the church [the church

government]. 3. Exactly zero [0] are aimed at the civil government. There is a

reason for this: Jesus and the apostles know that it is at this point that Babylon is

always quick to rush in. The Caesars stay in power by offering bread and circuses

to the populace. Every Babylon [state system run amok] has promised to be father

and mother [the Nanny state], to fight the battles for its citizens, and to feed them

well at the public trough—in exchange for giving them the authority that only God

can rightfully demand. Woodrow Wilson was unknowingly [he should have

known better as a good Presbyterian] setting the stage for the Babylon that is now

the Federal Behemoth on the Potomac.

It is simply inappropriate, unbiblical, and ultimately dangerous

to our children to allow this misuse of Scripture to pave the way

for a bigger and more voracious Babylon. Unless Christians

especially [and individual citizens in general] take individual

responsibility for their own lives, Babylon will continue to take our

rights and seize our assets. Like every beast, it only lives to expand

its territory, feed on its victims, and reproduce itself in bigger

numbers.

18

6. We need to approach both our past expansionism and present

immigration and refugee crisis with humility.

Our country was founded by immigrants. Most came legally, though at a time

when it was much easier

to get into the country.

Some of us are descended

from those who came

illegally, even as

criminals escaping

justice. Others came as

invaders. Though we do

not base present actions

on the basis of past guilt,

we should still remain

humble. Our U.S.

citizenship is a gift from

God, in spite of some of

our ancestors’ actions and

our current apathy. We ought to remember that the American Indians were here

first. We shouldn’t forget that the borders with Mexico were once much farther

north, covering many of our Southern States. They were seized by force from a

sovereign Mexico by American immigrants. That doesn’t mean we should give

Texas, Arizona, New Mexico, parts of Colorado, and California back to the

Mexicans, or the Northeast back to the Native Americans. It doesn’t even mean

that we should pay reparations. It just means that we should have some humility.

The government must work out

this massive problem. We have to

elect the representatives and

President that we think will deal with

it in the best possible [and biblical]

way. But as individual Christians, we

have to remember the words of the

Old Testament prophets: “Remember

the alien in your midst.” “Treat them

kindly.” “For once you were aliens in

a strange lands.” We ought to

remember that famine drove

Abraham and Jacob down to Egypt. The Egyptians treated them badly, just as the

Canaanites treated Abraham’s family badly. God judged them for it. What does

that mean for us?

Don’t abuse the aliens in our midst, or take advantage of them.

Reach out to them with the gospel.

Welcome them into our churches, and plant churches among them.

19

Get involved in ministries that mentor, help, and prepare immigrants to

understand our Christian values and assimilate into the great American

dream.

Don’t break the laws of the land in aiding immigrants.

Check your own motives regarding immigrants or refugees. Are they

godly, angry, or self-serving.

We need to also be humbled by our own history of expansionism as a nation.

Many of the problems in the Middle East have been exacerbated by European and

American actions in the past. Many of our border problems exist because of

actions taken by the U.S. in Central America in the 60s and 70s. Guatemala, El

Salvador, and other countries were destabilized and plunged into an unending

round of civil wars that caused refugees to pour across the borders in the 70s and

80s, resulting in the street gangs in LA, and those same gang leaders deported back

to Central America [many after stints in U.S. prisons] where they have now formed

gangs that are part of bringing drugs up from Columbia to the Mexican cartel (to

sell to Americans). These gangs now control much of Central America. Violence

is rife. Many of the children who have recently flooded across our borders are

running from the violence. Sometimes the chickens of past American Wilsonian

policies come home to roost. We should not be surprised that God might even be

judging America today for the sins of her past. That doesn’t mean that we should

abandon our border laws, and retreat into isolation in a dangerous world of ISIS

and Al Qaida. It does mean that we should be humble and understand the times for

what they are. It also means that we elect civil rulers who won’t allow these things

to happen again in the future.

7. Teach your children well.

We should never forget two biblical

principles: “Know the truth and the

truth shall set you free.” (John 8:32) and

“My people are destroyed for the lack

of knowledge.” (Hosea 4:6) Until we

know the biblical principles that govern

the affairs of people and nations, we

will never be able to navigate the

minefields of our day. Unless we learn

history, and especially our own, we will

never learn from past mistakes or

understand current dilemmas. Like the

men of Issachar, we must know who we

are, where we came from, what is going

on in our day, and come up with

solutions that work. That is the point of

Opening Pandora’s Box. Yet most

churches are content to preach the

gospel of salvation (and they must do at

20

least that) and moral living, without equipping them to deal with cultural, social,

and political issues. We cannot be so heavenly-minded that we are no earthly-

good.

But we must go beyond learning for ourselves. We must train our children and

grandchildren to think biblically. We have to give them a love for history by

passing it on to them with more than just the boring facts and numbers. We must

teach them Kingdom principles so that they can learn to think and act in a Christian

way while living in Babylon. These current issues are a good place to begin

applying biblical principles. Hopefully this edition of Opening Pandora’s Box has

been a good starting place.