The History of Theocracy

Part 1 of Dominionism: The Damnable Heresy of the Last Days.

Christian theocracy is not a new phenomenon. It has a long and unpleasant history, and the United States was deliberately created to avoid it.

“2 But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.

² And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of.

³ And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not.”

-II Peter 2:1-3

“If they can get you to believe absurdities, they can get you to commit atrocities.”

-Voltaire, 1765[i]

⁵¹ And it came to pass, when the time was come that he should be received up, he stedfastly set his face to go to Jerusalem,

⁵² And sent messengers before his face: and they went, and entered into a village of the Samaritans, to make ready for him.

⁵³ And they did not receive him, because his face was as though he would go to Jerusalem.

⁵⁴ And when his disciples James and John saw this, they said, Lord, wilt thou that we command fire to come down from heaven, and consume them, even as Elias did?

⁵⁵ But he turned, and rebuked them, and said, Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of.

⁵⁶ For the Son of man is not come to destroy men’s lives, but to save them. And they went to another village.

-Luke 9:51-56

During the days of Vietnam, which one combat veteran described as “the most immoral war the United States has ever fought in,”[ii] a statement by an unnamed Major summed up the absurdity of US policy with a now-famous phrase—“it became necessary to destroy the town to save it.”[iii]

In this story above, we have the Apostle John no less, the future “Apostle of Love,” wanting to call down death and destruction on those who “did not receive” them. John, dubbed by Jesus at that point as being one of the “Sons of Boanerges” (Thunder), no doubt thought it would be cool to replicate what Elijah the prophet did to two companies of soldiers sent to arrest him (II Kings 1). In his youthful zeal and inexperience with his own deceitful heart (Jer 17:9), John may not have realized that in wanting to do that to that village, he would be ironically playing the part of a calloused soldier himself, not a prophet being falsely arrested (II Kings 1:9-15).

What is it about human beings that we are so unconscious of the deceitfulness of our own hearts? Indeed, it is “I the Lord [Who] search the heart, I try the reins, even to give every man according to his ways, and according to the fruit of his doings” (Jer 17:10).

Anyone who has “walked with the Lord” for long, knows what this process is like. God is forever not just challenging our motives, but asking us, “How readest thou? What Biblical principle is applicable to the situation you, your culture or your generation is facing? Are you being the best ambassador of the Kingdom you can possibly be? Are you making Me look good?” Simple things like that.

Whatever Happened To The Great Commission?

He deals with us this way because Jesus Christ gave His Church only two broad mandates to carry out. One, to evangelize or preach the Gospel (Mk 16:15) to the ends of the earth (Acts 13:47; Rom 10:18).[iv] And two, to make disciples, or teach them “all things as I have commanded you” (Mt 28:20; Col 1:28; Heb 5:12, etc).

Of these two sides of this Great Commission, we all understand that preaching is the easy part. In fact, all human beings love to preach. We preach to those around us about one thing or the other all day long. Ask any parent having to deal with a stubborn child. It’s the part about teaching that is so difficult, because the moral issues of life are not as simplistic as they may look, and because it’s so hard to live it all out.

In other words, we have to practice what we preach, walk the talk, and model the life. I don’t recall Jesus Christ ever being called “Preacher,” but He was always addressed as “Teacher,” because that’s essentially what He was/is.

It should be “conventional wisdom” by now, so many centuries since the launch of the Great Commission, that once an area is thoroughly evangelized, the emphasis has to be on modeling the Kingdom before the world. The epistles alone are full of commands about how we are to behave toward “them that are without” (i.e., the outside world—Coloss 4:5). We are not to “run after mobs” (Ex 23:2), tearing things up and down in the name of religious and political fanaticism. Indeed, we are exhorted to flee even “the appearance of evil” before the world (I Thess 5:22), till they have “no evil thing to say of you” (Titus 2:8).

The reason church membership is shrinking in America is not because of a lack of preaching. Indeed, there’s a “church on every corner” in this country. Nor is it because Jesus Christ is unpopular. He was like a rock star when He walked the earth (Mt 4:25; 15:30, etc), and still could be today (Mt 5:16, Jn 12:32), if only Christians did a better job of imitating Him and modeling true Kingdom values. Instead, what they get is this constant, daily diet of right-wing griping, grievance, paranoia and self-righteousness, and it turns them right off.

A Big Quest

In this series, I want to do a deeper dive into the religious side of what’s been dubbed Christian Nationalism, also known as Dominionism, Kingdom Now, Christo-fascism and the like. Here in America, it’s embodied in this MAGA America political/religious juggernaut that is currently attempting to overthrow the two and a half-century Founding Fathers’ experiment in common man democracy they once so gloried in, whether they realize it or not.[v]

We are talking here about

• Government of, by and for the People (“We the People…”, democracy).
• A rule of law and not of kings.
• A clear delineation between Church and State.
• Freedom of speech versus the suppression of dissent.
• The truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, versus propaganda, myth, narrative, and dogma.
• Equal opportunity and fair play, versus the concentration of wealth into the hands of a few (oligarchy/plutocracy).
• Knowing what you believe in, and standing up to bullies and thugs, versus cowering before them.
• Defending the Western democratic freedom paradigm against the autocracy of Communism (the Cold War), fascism (World War II), or the Vladimir Putins of the world (for example).

Indeed, the list could go on and on about “traditional American values,” versus this surreal, mongrelized “transformation”—another big Evangelical buzzword—taking place now right before our eyes.

The Many and Much-Polluted “Streams” of Christian Nationalism

Secular people especially, or anyone with a sense of self-respect left at least, are just mystified by how MAGA Evangelicals can stomach, much less vote for a man like Donald Trump, who incorporates everything they claim they so not believe in.[vi] The answer is pretty simple, once you understand the power of absurdities. They create a logic that is the road to hell if you let them.

One is the idea that poor broke-back God has to resort to the Devil’s tactics to do the Lord’s work. Yet to God, the means by how you get somewhere is just as important as the end. MAGA America is using the democratic process to end democracy for fascism, and doing it by deceiving the public as to what they are and what they want to do. Another is the absurdity that only conservative values are legitimate, and anyone who can protect the “conservative agenda” is better than “a godless liberal.” Yet liberalism and conservatism as principles are both found in equal weight in the Bible, and are necessary to a functioning democracy.

I hear this all the time on “Christian” radio, that they feature “the finest of conservative minds,” as if it’s the only legitimate philosophical response to anything. Yet every person every day makes decisions that are more or less “liberal” or “conservative,” based on a wide range of factors, such as who you’re dealing with, what mood you’re in, Is this faith or is it presumption?, etc.

In my own backstory, I’ve had extensive experience wrangling with the Word of Faith/Prosperity “gospel,” and the NAR (New Apostolic Reformation) during the 1980s and 90s. Since then, I’ve been more focused on watching political developments in coordination with the end-time prophecies, especially since the election of Trump, and haven’t so much kept up with the religious side, the Christian Nationalism phenomenon. As I put it in my last post, I tended to see the Evangelicals as dupes of economic and political powers (which they most certainly are), but discounted their influence as drivers of the madness of our times all the same.

But apparently, they are no small factor. The outing of Mike Bickle as a decades-long seducer of young, sometimes underaged women, shocked me out of my stupor, although it explained many things. Back then, I intently studied the excesses of the Latter Rain and the NAR (New Apostolic Reformation), but have since failed to keep up. I also thought of it as something of an oddity at the time, and not that important. I’ve come now to realize how central the Prayer and Worship movement fits into the logic of the NAR, the NAR into Dominionism, and the utter bondage it all represents for the Church and the world.

In this series I want to dismantle piece by piece, concept by concept, the religious side of this drive to fascism, the end-times totalitarianism that Christians have been forever fearful of, but could never accurately envision or articulate. In the process, I know I will not be able to cover every cockamamie notion that’s ever popped out of their mouths, or obscure group spewing forth their ignorance of US history especially. But I will try to cover the major elements or “streams” of thought that make up Dominionism. These include:

• the history and logic of theocracy within Christianity
• America as the New Israel and Redeemer nation, theonomy, and the Christian right in general
• The heretical Charismatic concept of faith, the death of Christ, and the “authority of the believer” that Dominionism is built upon
• the counterfeit restorationism of the New Apostolic Reformation

I Object, Your Honor!

There are people in the American Christian nationalism movement that would tear me limb from limb for my characterization of their ambitions for America as “theocracy.” It’s all part of the new Trumpian spirit of aggression, shaming, outrage and deceit they have internalized.

And ignorance. Because yes, they may be technically right. Strictly speaking, a theocracy is a government with a literal Deity at its head! An example might be, um, Israel after the giving of the Law of Moses (I Sam 8:7-18). The Law was pretty much Israel’s “Constitution,” with God as its literal Head, with just a number of circuit-riding judges as His officials.[vii]

Like to try that bare-bones model on a modern-day superpower? It was God’s preferred choice you know? I mean, it is “Biblical, after all.” You do want America to be guided by the Bible, don’t you?

Didn’t think so. A lot of social, economic and political development has made for a very complex world since then. Of course, what the Israelites wanted back then was a tangible, flesh and blood king, because laws and God were like, you know…so abstract (8:19,20).

So, what we could do therefore is liberalize out, if you’ll forgive the term, the definition of theocracy to the next level down in ambition, to include religious leaders as heads of state. Iran is one example of the half-dozen nations in the world even approaching this level of a theocracy.

Next down are a number of countries one could classify as having an official state religion. There are currently about 7 Buddhist nations like that, 36 Christian (including Great Britain, out of which we emerged), 25 Islamic states[viii], and putatively Israel, with their Orthodox Judaism.

So, technically they can claim they are right. Maybe they just want to make “Christianity” the official religion of America. But of course, whose version of Christianity will prevail? Just looking through that list of official Christian nations, reveals a wide range of historical, (mostly Protestant) expressions, not to mention several hundred other denominations world-wide.

Nor as if the destruction of 237 years of American Church/State separation wouldn’t be radical enough! But it’s obvious from their published plans that what they want is a form of fascism. They want to force their “values” down the throat of the rest of the populace.

I know this sounds like a descent into a Kafka-esque abyss of madness. That’s because it is. But by understanding these things better, we can see why all this does not add up to a right portrayal of the Gospel, to the point of creating a militant yet apostate end-times MAGA Church-nation (Rev 17:3).

Is America A Christian Nation?

“The government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded upon the Christian religion…”
-Article II of the Treaty of Tripoli, 1797, signed by the devout Christian, President John Adams, and ratified by a Senate full of Founding Fathers.

Amazingly, Christians are poised to throw away all the blessings of the Western democratic, freedom paradigm we are all still enjoying, and to do it for someone like Donald Trump, no less! For Dominionists to make up a controversy where there is none, is typical of their pattern of murmuring and complaining, of making much ado about, well…little at best (Jude 1:16).

For instance, to whine that the Founding Fathers never intended a clear separation between Church and State shows just how ignorant they are of how “America” as an idea got here. Screaming about how “the Church should rule and not the wicked,” or even to complain about democracy, is to act as if theocracy has never been tried before in Church history, and to disastrous effect.

You can take just one assertion, endlessly promulgated by David Barton and his revisionist American history fans, that “America has been from its start, a Christian nation.” It’s a subtle half-truth at best, in that a fuller statement is, “The United States is a secular Christian nation.” Yes, its culture and dominant religion may be Christian (Protestant more specifically, in terms of its ideals), but its governmental structure is secular, and deliberately designed to be that way by the Founding Fathers.

A parallel statement might be something like, “Iraq under Saddam Hussein, was a secular Islamic nation.” The culture may have been Islamic, but his government was secular, meaning, among other things, that under Saddam you could open up a church or a synagogue in Baghdad. It also means he was no friend of Al Queda, nor had a hand in 9-11, no matter how successfully the Bush-Cheney administration psy-opped the American public into believing so.

In fact, although Iran is not a secular Islamic state but theocractic, it too allows a 20,000-member Jewish community, there since the days of Esther, to have their synagogues and a guaranteed seat in their Parliament, just so they won’t feel left out. Compare that to what the Zionist state is doing to the mosques of Gaza.

Thus, the Founding Fathers deliberately sought to create a secular, religiously-neutral government. They discussed and avoided establishing any one denomination to be the official religion of the US, similar to what England had with the Anglican Church. Nor did they seek to prohibit the free exercise thereof of course. In fact, they saw religious conviction as essential to the prosperity of a moral and free people.

Yet, all this is seen by MAGA Christianity as an affront to a God Who is about to rain judgment down upon us unless we officially acknowledge Him. They’d rather talk about Christianity than go through the difficulty of actually living it. They’d rather acknowledge Him than actually obey Him. They’d rather preach at others than actually demonstrate the Gospel of grace and redemption before a watching world. No wonder they follow after a fraud who promises to “be their retribution”!

Church/State Separation Is No Myth

America as a political entity did not appear in a vacuum. It was the result of the evolution of religious/political ideas over centuries that had their origin as far back as Jesus’ famous statement about “rendering unto Caesar” (Mt 22:15-22; Mk 12:13-17; Luke 20:19-26).

Paying taxes to Rome was deeply unpopular in Judea at the time, and Jesus’ biggest nemesis, the Pharisees,[ix] wanted to trap Him on the issue. So they took some Herodians, their sworn enemies no less, with them to go “catch Him in his words” (Mk 12:13). If Jesus endorsed tax resistance, the Herodians could accuse Him to the Romans of leading a revolt against Caesar. If He endorsed paying taxes, the Pharisees could accuse Him of not being a super patriot like they were (but really weren’t—Mt 23:29-31).

So, Jesus, perceiving their hypocrisy (Mk 12:15), asked for a coin and said, “Whose image and signature is this?” They said “Caesar’s,” and He famously replied, “Render therefore unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s” (Mt 22:21). In this simple axiom, Christ summed up the relationship of Church and State for the rest of this fallen age. Coins are very physical things and very pertinent to economic, material life. God has given to the State authority to regulate[x] the economy under its jurisdiction (among many other things), with a monopoly right to enforce it with “a sword” (i.e., coercion—Rom 13:4).

As I’ve offered up before, my definition of politics is, “practical solutions to collective social problems.” Its instrument is the State, which makes and enforces the laws of a society and is ordained by God, whether you like that or not (Rom 13). You can sloganeer all you want about “Don’t tread on me!,” but God has given to the state the right to very much tread upon you if you flout the law (13:4)! The extent of the state’s authority, its intrusiveness, its efficiency, etc., is the butt of never-ending debate. But the concept is of God, and I think that’s all Paul is saying there. He is not necessarily endorsing Nero as His choice for the earth, even though God can use abusive rulers at times (Luke 2:1).

This is one of the ways the Christian Right justifies supporting Trump, that “sometimes God uses even ‘godless rulers’ like Cyrus to bless His people” (Ezra 1). True. But it’s not a plan for governing. It’s one thing to be stuck with a Nero. It’s another thing to vote him into power! The idea that Joe Biden, a devout Catholic no less, is a tyrant compared to Donald Trump, a pretend Christian, is just pure bunk.

Thus, the purview[xi] of the State is the things of this life and of this earth. The purview of the Church is the things of eternity, of the spiritual world, the soul, the origin of the universe, the meaning of life, the destiny of all humans, etc. The one pertains to the physical world, the other to the spiritual world. The two might deal with overlapping interests, but they each have very different spheres of influence and oversight. When the two are combined together, fanaticism on the one hand and compromise on the other are always the result.

This is what Jesus meant by “the Kingdom of God is within you” (Luke 17:21), that His Kingdom is limited for the time being to the hearts and souls of those who believe (Gal 4:9), while God is harvesting “a people for Himself” (I Pet 2:9; Rev 7:9, etc). His Kingdom is “not of this world” (Jn 18:36), neither of the spirit of this fallen world (I Jn 2:15), nor presently on this literal earth, nor of this present age (aeon, Mt 24:3). Only when the King comes back at the end of this age (Mt 13:39,40), will there be the setting up of a literal political kingdom ruling over the earth out of Jerusalem (Zech 14:16), after the Second Coming (Rev 11:15; 19:14).

It is not to say that Christians, like any other religion, don’t have the right to participate as citizens, run for office, or other civic rights and responsibilities. It is to say that politics and religion are two separate things, at least until the incorruptible, infallible King returns. Thus, any attempt to bring in “the Kingdom Now” is fraudulent and illegitimate, a betrayal of God and humankind, and always results in fanaticism, abuse and apostasy (Mt 7:15-23; Jude 1:12, etc).

The Epistemological Crisis Of The Early Church

Nevertheless, this is largely the story of the history of Christianity, how it fell, how it was restored, and why that restoration is an ongoing process.[xii] In a broad overview, for the first three centuries, Christian churches in the Roman Empire especially, underwent a series of 10 vicious persecutions led by 10 different emperors.[xiii]

During this time, churches were very de-centralized and disorganized, but pure in their devotion and powerful in miracles. They were in essence, fellowships rather than authoritarian cults, and progressive communities way ahead of their time.[xiv] They democratically elected their deacons (Acts 6:3-5), but also looked for a Divine “calling” on those aspiring to be elders and the higher clergy (Eph 4:11).

Aside from persecution, the early churches had pressure from heretics like the Gnostics, creating a crisis of authority as the Twelve Apostles[xv] began to die off. This crisis revolved around who would resolve doctrinal disputes. A general rule of thumb emerged that it was the bishops (pastors, elders) who carried on as the successors to the Apostles (“Apostolic Succession”), with the most prominent men in the most prominent cities of the Empire having the most authority to “speak for God.” As the process of centralization into one institution based in Rome continued to evolve, this led “logically” over time to a “bishop of bishops” or a Pope.

At the least, this had the effect of combining spiritual authority (the “stewardship of the mysteries of God”—I Cor 4:1) with ecclesiastical authority (church government). The Reformation challenged this, claiming that the authority of the early Apostles had been actually deposited in their writings (the New Testament), and now the completed Bible, along with the Holy Spirit, are the only two infallible “voices of God” on the earth (sola scriptura).

What this did intellectually for the world was an explosion of discovery and creativity. Instead of knowledge being limited to dogma received by faith from religious leaders, people could read the Bible for themselves, pray to God directly, think for themselves, and come up with new and innovative ideas, insights, convictions, etc.

The first consequence of this epistemological shift was the Scientific Revolution, which had been repressed by the Church with its dogma (and superstitions of the day). It was followed by the Enlightenment wherein people began to come up with political systems and concepts that were a great improvement over feudalism. More on this shortly as it applies to America.

The Theocracy Disaster

In 313, the emperor Constantine issued his Edict of Milan which legalized all religions in the Empire including Christianity, ending all this. But it also accelerated a trend already begun, of centralizing and hierarchizing the faith into one institution that eventually became known as Roman Catholicism.

This religious policy worked fine for over sixty years, until 380 AD, when emperor Theodosius I, in perhaps a very Trumpian move (Dan 11:39), “wished to pacify [the residents of Constantinople] in order to make the city his imperial residence.”[xvi] He thus came up with the self-serving idea of making Christianity the official religion of the empire, leading to centuries of corruption, abuse and compromise.

If you’re using your brain now, you might see the parallel between those 67 years and the last near-250 years of the secular American political entity known as the United States, and its policy of freedom of religion. Under this policy, a subset of freedom of speech, the Founding Fathers neither established a state religion,[xvii] nor prohibited the free exercise thereof, as long as adherents obeyed the laws of the land.

What Theodosius effectively did was open the door to a form of theocracy, the obliteration of the fine line between Church and State. The difference between what he did and today’s situation, is that today’s popular “Church leaders,” masters of the art of tickling itchy ears (II Tim 4:3), are driving this trend, insisting the United States “has always been a Christian nation,” that has been “robbed from us,” and which we must “take it back,” or else “God’s wrath will pour down upon us.”

There’s a lot of devil in the details of this last phrase about “a Christian nation” which we will get to shortly. For now, we can note that Theodosius opened the door for the 4th Century Church to get entangled with politics, with people joining the Church for all the wrong reasons—social advancement, economic interests, etc. In time this led to the Holy Roman Empire when kings were terrorized by the prospect of falling out of favor with the Church, when even the Pope had his own armies, science was suppressed, dogma and superstition flourished, dissidents and “heretics” were tortured and burned at the stake, etc.

Fast Forward

The critical mass of all this birthed the Reformation in 1517, which began to slowly restore the Church back to its original power and authority with God. It entailed a massive shift in the Church’s philosophy of authority, away from dogma and ecclesiastical hierarchies, to the Bible and the Holy Spirit, God’s two infallible representatives on earth.

I’ve already written about these momentous questions in “The Significance of the Reformation” and don’t want to go any deeper into it now. Suffice it to say here that the Enlightenment was something of a secular version of the Reformation that applied the same paradigm to politics. Previously, the rule of kings and monarchs fit right in with the feudalistic system of medieval Catholicism. Now “a rule of law and not of kings” became the standard of this new era of common man self-government.

Likewise, just as the Bible could now be interpreted by anyone who could read it, and not be dependent upon nor subject to the dogma of Church authorities, so dissent and freedom of speech, based on freedom of thought, would be allowed. The result was an explosion of scientific discovery, technological advancement, creativity and innovation, applied not just to economics, science, medicine, and every other discipline to follow, but the structure and dynamics of government as well.

Indeed, it is hard to grasp the sheer magnitude of intellectual discovery we are all born into now, ever since the advent of the Reformation and all that has followed from it. Moreover, the Reformation in my opinion, ought to be an ongoing thing, to where we the Church at least, should be pressing on, back to that simplicity, power and purity enjoyed in the early centuries (as much as it could be enjoyed living in catacombs and the like, that is!)

What lies ahead for the Church is the glorious fulfillment of the Feast of Tabernacles during a brief Great Tribulation, leading up to the Second Coming of Jesus Christ and the true New Age for all of mankind. Dominionism/Christian Nationalism is the rehash of past, failed errors now being recycled by a people who neither know their religious heritage, nor their political heritage, no matter how much they may plaster “Heritage” all over their propaganda fronts.

Notes:

[i] A poor paraphrase perhaps, but the famous quote as stated is true all the same. https://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/origins-warning-from-voltaire

[ii] To this day of course, such a sentiment is still being debated, but there were a number of features about the Vietnam War that have characterized the cynicism it generates. One was our dropping on that hapless people more bombs than we dropped in all of World War II, because then-Secretary of State Henry Kissinger “refused to believe a fourth-rate country like that doesn’t have a breaking point; the official US policy that as long as the daily body count of Asians were wildly greater than Americans, that “we are winning;” the Pentagon Papers which showed that the US military believed the war to be unwinnable; the influence of defense contractors for whom the war was a great financial bonanza; the refusal to switch out the M-16 for a more reliable rifle for US troops, largely because of financial interests, and on and on. Nonetheless, many right-wingers to this day refuse to face these realities. Communism was ultimately defeated because its literal unworkability did it in, just like Reagan predicted.

[iii] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_B%E1%BA%BFn_Tre

[iv] With the promise of “signs following” if He likes your message—Mk 16:17.

[v] It’s quite a sight to see MAGA Evangelicals standing up to read written pledges wherein they claim that it’s the Democrats who are destroying the Constitution, even as they line up behind a sworn dictator insisting on no limits to his powers. And yes, I guess you could ignore all the amendments to the Constitution that have accumulated the last two centuries and go back to 1787, when only white male landowners could vote, for example, and call that mendacity “defending the Constitution.” It’ stunning what lies and distortions people are willing to cling to when they want to have their own stubborn way. https://twitter.com/NickKnudsenUS/status/1547259907275075584?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1547259907275075584%7Ctwgr%5E12669026380b404e885b8ca55615c15871721ce3%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.newsweek.com%2Fevangelical-christians-viral-video-america-flashpoint-atlanta-god-1724670

[vi] Except for “strength,” which for them apparently means brutality.

[vii] It’s interesting that part of the reason modern-day Israel was on the brink of collapse and civil war (until the convenience of October 7, that is), is because she never had a Constitution, a founding document that gave them a legal, structural foundation for their government. It’s been a political free-for-all from its start, with a lot of bitter feelings of betrayal and the like, on all sides.

[viii] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_religion

[ix] The Pharisees (“Separated Ones”) were the lay followers of the rabbis, almost all of whom opposed the contrarian rabbi Jesus. They were in the middle of developing their customs, rulings and traditions that Christ said were meant to nullify and replace the actual commandments in the Law of Moses. Two years after His birth, they were codified in the Mishnah and Gemara, the basis of the Talmudic canon.

[x] That right-wing sacred cow, “the free market” is a myth. All markets are established by governments who determine what products will be legal, what weights and measures shall be used, what labor laws, commerce laws, consumer laws, etc. will be established. Government supercedes economics in God’s Kingdom.

[xi] “the range of operation, authority, control, concern, etc.” Dictionary.com.

[xii] This is different than the restoration of the apostles and prophets, which is a misguided concept.

[xiii] The Empire reasoned that unity around the upper class’s soap opera gods was necessary for its continued survival. Therefore, the proclamation by the Christians of a Supreme Being known as the God of Israel was considered a threat. Only when they eventually realized they were otherwise model citizens in the midst of a decadent and dying culture, did they get the right to worship and believe as they pleased.

[xiv] Paul and the Apostles did not want to position the churches as a revolutionary movement, seeking political power, but they were very progressive for their day. Wealthy people fellowshipped mostly with slaves. The former were not condemned for their wealth but were admonished to be generous (I Tim 6:17,18), and fair to their slaves and workers (6:2; Col 4:1). The latter were to serve their masters willingly (Col 3:22), as unto the Lord (3:23), etc.

[xv] By the 12 Apostles, we mean the men who were specially trained by Christ Himself, along with all those personalities who “framed” the New Covenant and the early Church—Paul, Luke, Mark, James, Jude, etc.

[xvi] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edict_of_Thessalonica

[xvii] Such as you have say, in Israel, which is struggling now because they never established a constitution, but they did establish a state religion—Orthodox Judaism, what I call “fundamentalist Judaism,” and its other even more severe forms, ultra-Orthodox, etc. Israel will never stop tacking to the extreme right because of this.