What Enticed Israel to 'Go After Other Gods?' Part 4

 The story of God’s prophet, Elijah, and his opposition to King Ahab and Queen Jezebel in Northern Israel is a story of boldness and fear.  It is an appropriate story to consider a fourth reason that Israel went after other gods.  The previous discussion of people in authority leading others astray now focusses on fear in the face of abusive power and the violent control of others.  People can and do use their power to control others to make them do what they want.  At times leaders justify their use of power over others by claiming that it is for a just cause.  King Ahab and Queen Jezebel could have come up with various reasons to justify their opposition to God: openness, tolerance of other religions (which required intolerance of monotheism), diversity, and inclusion.  Whatever the reasons, though, they oppressed God’s people and prophets. In this political and social context, God’s people were intimidated and fearful.  The reason people went after other gods was more than yielding to peer pressure or following bad leaders.  In this case, fear was at the heart of Israel’s apostasy.

In the story told in 1 Kings 16.29-19.18, Ahab sought to enforce religious change in Israel.  He married a foreign wife who introduced Baal worship.  When Elijah prophesied that there would be a drought, God told him to hide himself from the king.  God first hid him by the brook Cherith east of the Jordan, where he was fed by ravens, and then with a starving widow from whom Elijah asked food.  The dramatic story is one of weakness and dependency on God over against abusive power by the king.  The situation turned even worse when the widow’s child died, but God raised the child from the dead through Elijah.  The widow then knew that Elijah was a man of God and ‘that the word of the LORD in your mouth is truth’ (1 Kings 17.24).

The theme of fear continues with the story of King Ahab’s right hand man, Obadiah.  Obadiah was caught in the sort of circumstances people often find themselves in, when they have the right heart and devotion to God but are in an institutional situation that requires them to follow a bad leader or administration.  He feared the Lord, but he was over Ahab’s household (1 Kings 18.3) and feared the king.  Queen Jezebel had ‘cut off [killed] the prophets of the LORD,’ and Obadiah secretly hid and fed one hundred of them in a cave (v. 4).  Parties were sent out to surrounding nations to capture Elijah, who was held responsible for the drought in Israel.  When they returned to say that he was not there, they were forced to say so under oath.  The degree of fear is illustrated when Obadiah encounters Elijah on the road as he searched, on the king’s orders, for a place to graze the palace horses.  Elijah told Obadiah to return to the king and tell him that he was found.  However, Obadiah feared that, as soon as he left to do so, God would whisk Elijah away and Ahab would kill Obadiah when the prophet was not found.

When Elijah met Ahab, he called for a religious show-down between the Baal cult and God on Mt. Carmel.  Four hundred and fifty prophets of Baal and four hundred prophets of Asherah (1 Kings 18.19) gathered on the mountain with the one prophet of the one God.  Running throughout the Elijah narrative is the intimidation of being the one person to stand against the power of both the crowd and the king.  This goes well beyond peer pressure and is outright intimidation and fear for one’s life.  The contest on Mt. Carmel was over which God would send fire from heaven to consume a sacrifice.  When the true God sent fire, the crowd acknowledged that He alone was God, and the false prophets were slaughtered (18.41).  Then Elijah prayed for rain, and it came (cf. James 5.17-18).  It came dramatically, but in the sense of a small cloud slowly approaching in a clear sky before the ultimate deluge (1 Kings 18.41-46).

Despite the remarkably brave and successful story of standing up against authority in obedience to God, Elijah feared Jezebel, who threated his life (19.2-3).  Elijah went to the Southern Kingdom of Israel, Judah, and hid himself in the wilderness a day’s journey from Beersheba.  There, he asked God to take away his life.  Recognising that he could not rise above a corrupt system, he declared to God that he was no better than his fathers (19.4).  God’s response to Elijah was to strengthen him for the journey to Mt. Horeb, or Sinai, where Moses had met with God for the Ten Commandments.  Once there, Elijah explains the situation to God.  While he was jealous for the Lord, the Israelites had forsaken their covenant (the one made with them by God at that very place where Elijah now stood), thrown down God’s altars, killed His prophets, and sought the life of the sole survivor, Elijah (19.9-10).

God responds by revealing Himself to Elijah as He had revealed Himself to Moses (cf. Exodus 34.5-7).  Moses learned that God was merciful, forgiving, and showed steadfast faithfulness to His covenant people despite their sin.  At the same time, He was just and would not let sin go unpunished.  Now Elijah learned that God would not be found in power—in the power of a rock-splitting wind or an earthquake or raging fire—but in a low whisper (19.11-12).  Just as God showed Moses that He was both merciful and brought justice, so to Elijah He shows that He is both in the low whisper rather than in power and would bring justice—the house of Ahab would be overthrown and Baal worshippers put to death.  The system of power and intimidation is not where one finds God, and God will destroy it when it produces false religion and injustice in the land.

As with most narratives, various lessons might be learned.  In these stories of Elijah, one of the lessons is about standing up for God in the context of power and intimidation.  To do so involves experiencing fear but remaining steadfast nonetheless.  When Elijah fled to the river Cherith, his livelihood was threatened.  A brook gave him water, and ravens gave him food, by God’s grace.  Obadiah faced fear of his employment, being over Ahab’s household, and of his life.  Elijah overcame his fear of the religious establishment—the false prophets on Mt. Carmel—but he was fearful of Queen Jezebel, who threatened to kill him.  Fear is the result of threats and intimidation from those with power.  At the end of Elijah’s ministry, he learns that God is not found in the halls of power but on the remote mountain in the wilderness.  He is not found in the destructive power of winds, earthquakes, or fire but in a low whisper.  God is not in some systemic power of an administration, but He does bring His mercy, like a small raincloud approaching slowly after a severe drought, and He does bring His justice, like the overthrow of King Ahab’s dynasty.

The lesson of fear in 1 Kings 16.29-19.18 has various applications.  It explains why Israel went after other gods, first and foremost.  People are fearful of the loss of their basic needs, like food and water.  They are fearful of the loss of their jobs.  They are fearful that those in power, whether religious or political, will take these away.  They fear for their lives.  Such lessons can apply to very different circumstances.  Consider two examples.

The Chinese Church is experience its ‘Ahab moment’ as new regulations come into effect that place the Church under the thumb of the Communist Party in an absolute way.  Consider how Nanjing Union Theology Seminary has succumbed to this exercise of power over Christianity and the Church.  It says on its website that some faculty, the dean, pastor, and executive vice-president have recently been educated in patriotism ‘in order to further carry forward the Christian tradition [sic!] of loving the [Communist] Party and patriotism, strengthen the education of Chinese excellent traditional culture, and enhance the understanding of the Sinicization [enforced enculturation] of Christianity…. The co-workers earnestly studied the important thoughts of Xi Jinping's new era of socialism with Chinese characteristics and the strategy of governing Xinjiang.’[1]

In a very different context, consider a second example of how fear in the face of power is experienced at a seminary turning to the woke pressures of Progressive Evangelicalism in the United States of America.  Wokism is cultural Marxism, so there are, in fact, parallels with the previous example that could be explored.  The seminary in view, which I will not name, received its new president a few years ago, just before the cultural revolution took hold in the country driven on by fears of being called a ‘racist’ when diversity, equity, and inclusion became the new cardinal virtues of society and then by governmental imperialistic measures during the Covid pandemic.  Added to these external forces, the seminary was in dire financial decline.  As a result, the board gave the new president its blessing to take drastic measures.  The financial crisis was a gift to bring about a little Marxist-like, woke revolution for the Progressives.  First, several faculty and staff were removed under the claim that the budget had to be cut.  (This had little effect on the budget, but it weakened the one department that caused consternation to those wanting sweeping change.)  Second, the non-theological department of counselling was strengthened, which gives greater authority to Progressivism through the social sciences than theology.  Third, the new president brought in a number of new administrators to oversee his policies—despite the claim that the seminary was in financial trouble and needed to downsize its staff.  Fourth, some of these new appointments were from existing faculty, thus rearranging the power dynamics of the faculty itself.  Some previously minor faculty members rose to positions of authority.  Thus, certain members of the community experienced empowerment and affirmation while others experienced intimidation and fear.  One might say that this is inevitable in times of change, but it is only so when relationships are experienced through power structures rather than the way of God.  Fifth, an atmosphere of intimidation was introduced into the seminary in countless small ways, such as by introducing diversity training from a secular agency (as though a seminary needed to get its ethics from the culture) in the manner of higher education institutions kowtowing to the woke agenda.  Sixth, a quasi-theological/ethical veneer was pasted over the changes to give them added authority.  This was done by claiming that the secular value of ‘diversity’ needed to be affirmed over a commitment to training for certain ecclesiastical constituencies or a commitment to academic excellence.  Even on syllabi, faculty were required to include ‘diverse’ authors (the faculty approved this proposal).  The seminary had to face its reason for existence: did it exist to survive financially or to accomplish its original mission of training ministers and missionaries for the Church?  Of course, every seminary will answer this in some way that involves the answer, ‘both.’  But this seminary tried to wrap these together by trying to sell its campus and move into the nearby city.  When this was not feasible, it justified itself in a new way.  In a complex twisting of purposes, finances drove vision, and mission was defined by woke values.  Seventh, the seminary powers sought to find a way to work with rather than against the post-Christian culture in which it found itself.  One applicant in counselling explained the task of counselling did not involve telling people God’s way but helping people to live consistently with their choices, such as homosexuality.  Some staff members promoted the Marxist, anti-family, racist movement of Black Lives Matter, with those uncomfortable with this aggressive culture intimidated lest they be accused of racism.  Finally, it should be said that, at this seminary, well before the new administration brought its woke agenda on board, the seminary suffered over decades of fear and intimidation for other reasons.

The point of these two examples is to show how powerful authorities can create such an atmosphere of fear that those within the system are fearful.  A seminary professor, for example, is fearful of losing his or her job—there are very few seminary positions available.  In a bad economy, one may try to survive by obeying the rulers rather than being outspoken or even resisting.  In China, any real Christians remaining in the state Church will live in an atmosphere of fear and have to make very uncomfortable compromises at the very least.  In a seminary such as has been described, at some point seminary faculty and staff have to decide whether they simply have a job or are fulfilling God’s calling on their lives.  (And some can do so by saying that they are there for the students, not the seminary--though the ethos of fear in the face of power cannot be avoided.)  One reason so many in Israel went after other gods was simply fear, fear in the face of power others held over them in the government, religious circles, and culture.



[1] See the seminary’s website: http://www.njuts.cn/wen.asp?id=1455(accessed 7 August, 2023).

What Enticed Israel to 'Go After Other Gods'? Part 3

Without Bibles, the Old Testament people of God had no basis on which to question the representation of Yahwism by religious authorities.  Priests, prophets, Levites, and even kings could say what true theology, ethics, and worship entailed, but they most often misrepresented these to the people.  King Josiah himself had to learn about the true faith from a discovery of the Law in the temple (2 Kings 22-23).  Upon doing so, he deposed or slaughtered the idolatrous priests as part of his religious reform (2 Kings 23.5, 20; 2 Chronicles 34.5).  The priests had made offerings to Baal, the sun, moon, constellations, and heavenly hosts (2 Kings 23.6).  Not long after Josiah, Judah’s wicked King Zedekiah, with unfaithful officers and priests, led the people in following the ‘abominations of the nations’ (2 Chronicles 36.14).

In the northern kingdom, King Jeroboam set up two places of worship with golden calves and non-Levitical priests (1 Kings 12.31; 13.33; 2 Chronicles 13.8-9).  Israel’s priests under King Ahab served Baal.  When Jehu gained power, he had them struck down (2 Kings 10.11, 19).  After Israel fell to Assyria, priests served various gods, including YHWH, in a syncretistic religion (2 Kings 17.32-33).  Religious syncretism rather than uncompromising devotion to God was the norm in both kingdoms of Israel.

Isaiah decries the state of the priests and prophets, saying they reel with strong drink (28.7).  Jeremiah repeatedly addressed the corruption of officials, priests, and prophets.  He said,

         The priests did not say, ‘Where is the LORD?’

                        Those who handle the law did not know me;

            the shepherds transgressed against me;

                        the prophets prophesied by Baal

and went after things that do not profit (Jeremiah 2.8, cf. v. 26; 5.31; 6.13; 8.10; 13.13; 14.18).

Again, we read,

Both prophet and priest are ungodly;

            even in my house I have found their evil,

            declares the LORD (Jeremiah 23.11; cf. 32.32).

Lamentations attributes the blood of the righteous to the hands of prophets and priests (4.13).  Ezekiel explains that God’s exiling Judah was due to total corruption of the priests, officials, prophets, and people:

Her priests have done violence to my law and have profaned my holy things. They have made no distinction between the holy and the common, neither have they taught the difference between the unclean and the clean, and they have disregarded my Sabbaths, so that I am profaned among them.  27 Her princes in her midst are like wolves tearing the prey, shedding blood, destroying lives to get dishonest gain. 28 And her prophets have smeared whitewash for them, seeing false visions and divining lies for them, saying, ‘Thus says the Lord GOD,’ when the LORD has not spoken. 29 The people of the land have practiced extortion and committed robbery. They have oppressed the poor and needy, and have extorted from the sojourner without justice. (22.26-29).

Other Old Testament prophets confirm the wickedness of Israel’s priests and prophets.  Zephaniah, for instance, says that Jerusalem’s officials, judges, prophets, and priests were all sinful.  ‘The priests profane what is holy; they do violence to the law’ (3.5).  We often speak of the sinfulness of ‘Israel’ and of God sending them into exile for their sins, but great blame must be laid at the feet of priests and prophets who misled the people.  They failed in their duty to represent God’s law and speak His words to the people, preferring rather other religions and their own wicked ways.  The people followed them.

The problem with false prophets or dreamers could not be resolved by whether they worked wonders or their prophecies were fulfilled.  (Israel had known enough of this in Egypt.)  The test for a true prophet was theological and ethical: were they enticing people to go after other gods and serve them (Deuteronomy 13.1-5).  False prophets might prophecy in the LORD’s name, present a false vision, or practice worthless divination, but none of this was proof of their prophecies.  They could be lying or self-deceived (Jeremiah 14.14).  They could ‘commit adultery and walk in lies’ and ‘strengthen the hands of evildoers’ (23.14).[1]

Lessons from Israel ring true today as well.  Those entrusted with responsibility to present true faith to the people often use their authority to represent an entirely different faith.  While people can read Scripture for themselves in our day, too few people are familiar with the Bible and even fewer are able to interpret it.  With sermons focussed on pithy little messages for daily living, little teaching takes place in the Church.  Even in a literary and educated culture, people are like sheep in the hands of unfaithful shepherds.  What causes those with authority and responsibility to distort the theology and ethics of the Church is another question, but the fact is that this is only to be expected if the lessons of the Old Testament remain instructive for later generations.  The early Reformers understood this, calling for continuous reformation of the Church.  Such reformation must continually involve a challenge to bishops, priests, elders, teachers, prophets, and Church administrators (whatever the terms used in a particular denomination) rather than uncritical following of what they represent as the faith.  Their faith is, often enough, not the faith once for all delivered to the saints, as Jude wrote in what were still early days of the Church:

Beloved, although I was very eager to write to you about our common salvation, I found it necessary to write appealing to you to contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints. 4 For certain people have crept in unnoticed who long ago were designated for this condemnation, ungodly people, who pervert the grace of our God into sensuality and deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ (Jude 3-4).

As Jesus warned, ‘Matt. 7:15   “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves’ (Matthew 7.15).  Paul’s final message to the Ephesian elders similarly warned,

I know that after my departure fierce wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock; 30 and from among your own selves will arise men speaking twisted things, to draw away the disciples after them (Acts 20.29).

The distortion of true faith and ethics by religious authorities is a sad fact.  This was not only a major cause of Israel’s going after other gods but also of the abandonment of the faith throughout Church history and today.  The antidote to this lies at hand.  ‘Lord, give us ministers of Your Word who are faithful and true.’



[1] The problem of false prophets continued in Jesus’ time and in the early Church: Matthew 7.15; 24.11, 24; Mark 13.22; Luke 6.26; Acts 13.6; 2 Peter 2.1; 1 John 4.1.

A Short Wait at the Sorting Place

[a short story]

‘Where are we?’ he asked.

‘Some sort of waiting room, I think.  Just before you arrived, a person sitting over there was called in to that room.’  She nodded to door 1.  There seemed to be about twenty closed doors down the hallway that one could see behind the receptionist.

‘Do you know what goes on in that room?’

‘I think people go into one of those rooms to sort out what happened to them.  Someone called this whole building the "sorting place."  At least, that is what I have picked up from some conversations.  In the room, some people also sort out people's future "accommodations."  Whenever someone comes out of a room, two or more people escort him or her away.  I’ve seen one person very happy and another who actually looked terrified.'

‘I don’t feel frightened,’ said the boy.  The girl looked at him.  ‘Neither do I.  It was strange to see this.  A curious place.’

The waiting room magazines looked well worn, months old.  They were a little odd and uninteresting, being pages of shapes coloured in with black ink.  Neither picked one up.  They sat silently for a while, trying to look at something.  Nothing was interesting to see.  There were no pictures on the walls.  They watched the receptionist, who occasionally wrote something in a large book.

‘What happened to you?’ the boy finally asked.  ‘That is, if you don’t mind my asking.’

She smiled.  ‘Not at all.  I don’t really know, to be honest.  I remember falling asleep.  I was in the hospital, in the neonatal intensive care unit, to be precise.  Next thing I know, here I am!  How about you?’

The boy shuddered.  ‘I can’t really explain.  I know a few things.  I was oh so comfortable.  Then, suddenly, a needle was inserted into my umbilical cord.  The drug burned through my veins with searing pain.  I lost consciousness.  And now, here I am.’

An orderly came out of room 2 and approached the receptionist.  ‘Please enter this into the record, but the next case is also related.  We need to switch these two as well.’  She pointed in the book.  ‘You might want to wait a bit on that room 2 schedule.’ 

The orderly approached the baby girl.  ‘You will be after the boy as something has come up.  I’m sorry for the extra wait.’

‘What’s happening?’ the baby boy asked.

The orderly looked at them kindly.  ‘We’re sorting this out.  You are in a good place, though.  We just have some questions to ask various people and some information to give. We are getting all the records straight.  Then we’ll take you to the proper place for each of you, but neither of you have any reason to worry about anything now.’  As the orderly spoke, the children felt comfort and love.

‘But what happened to us?’ asked the girl.

The orderly looked at the receptionist.  ‘They want to know what happened to them.’  The receptionist nodded and came over.  ‘What happened to you does not matter and is something you will soon forget.  We will tell you, though.  This is part of the sorting process.  You need to know that nothing was your fault, and you will be perfectly fine now.’  As she spoke, the children felt an overwhelming sense of joy.

Both children stared at her.  Their quizzical looks were really about what caused such a sense of joy, but the receptionist thought that they still wanted an answer right away about what happened to them.

‘OK.  I can tell you briefly, but you will know much more after your name is called to go to your room.  You,’ she said to the girl, ‘were in the NICU unit of a hospital.  You were born two weeks ago.  A very bad nurse who is killing babies on the unit killed you.  Nobody knows this down there yet, but it will all get sorted out.  Everyone will be sorted when it is time.’

‘And you,’ she said to the boy, ‘were not yet born.  You were only ten weeks since conception.  Your mother decided to, as she put it, “terminate her pregnancy.”  You don’t have to be afraid as she cannot hurt you anymore.  Everything gets sorted.  We’ll be calling both of you shortly.  Sorry for the wait.’

‘Calling us together?’ they both asked at the same time.

‘No, no.  Everyone has his or her own sorting.  You will both be called to room 3 when your time comes, but one after the other.’

The receptionist and orderly continued with their duties as someone suddenly appeared in one of the chairs, to the boy’s amazement.  ‘Is that how I arrived?’ he asked.

‘Yes.  All of a sudden, you were sitting beside me.  I’m glad you are here,’ said the girl.

The new arrival was causing a stir.  She was a woman of about 330 months old.  ‘What am I doing here?’ she demanded.  She approached the receptionist.  ‘What is this place?  Why am I here?  Where’s my doctor?’

‘This is not a hospital,’ the receptionist explained.  ‘You are at the sorting place.  Someone will be with you shortly.’  Just then, door 2 in the hallway opened and shut as a man was taken in the other direction by two attendants.  He was sobbing.  The woman looked shocked or frightened, or possibly mad.  ‘What is going on?’ she insisted.

‘Not to worry.  We’ll call you in just awhile and you will have all your questions answered.’

The woman, however, raised her voice.  ‘I do not want to wait.  What is a sorting place?  I need some better answers and I need them now.’

An attendant emerged from door 2.  ‘Please have a seat, and I will give you a few answers.  We can prepare you a little while the room is readied.’  The door was left open a little.  The children could see a file on a desk and four people in robes. 

The attendant and woman sat down at one of the tables in the waiting room.  ‘In a few minutes, we will meet with you and your life will be sorted.  That will determine the next steps.’

The woman stared at the attendant.  ‘My life sorted?’ she exclaimed.

‘I am sorry to inform you that you are dead.’

‘What?!  How is that possible?’

‘What you termed a ‘pregnancy termination’ had some complications.  There was bleeding, some error….  You died.  Now you are here to have your life sorted before we proceed with your accommodations.  Our team is assembling the information we need right now, and then you will be interviewed.  This won’t take long.’

‘I’m dead?  You are telling me that I am dead?’

‘Yes, this is the sorting place ….’

‘Yes, Yes, I heard you before.’  She looked around.  ‘Those people there, are they also dead?’

‘Quite right.  You must not approach them.  They are innocents.  There is only sorting of their cases, not any sorting of acts that they did in life.  We treat their kind of cases differently.’

‘Innocents?’  There was a quiver in her voice.

‘Yes, they were children when their lives ended.’

‘They do not look like children.’

‘No.  What you see is the presentation of their life.  They were virtually the same age.  One ten weeks, the other 43 weeks.’

‘So young to have died,’ said the woman.

The orderly looked at her.  ‘The older child had a weak heart.  A nurse at the hospital has been killing babies who are struggling to live.  She was killed by the nurse this morning.’

‘Oh, that is just awful.  How terrible.  Did the other child die the same way?’

‘Well, he was also killed, but by his mother.’

‘What?!’  She was shaking.  ‘How can people be so wicked?’

‘As I understand it,’ the orderly looked at a file in her hands, ‘the mother claimed that she was exercising a right to do what she wanted with her own body.’

An orderly emerged at that moment from room 3 and approached the boy.  ‘Will you come with me?’ she asked.  The boy hopped off his seat.  ‘I’ll see you later, then,’ he said to the girl.  She smiled, ‘Yes, yes.  We will see each other shortly, I am sure.’

The orderly shielded the boy from the woman at the table as they passed by and walked to door number 3 on the hallway.  As the boy passed by, the woman experienced a feeling she had never known before.  It was not physical, of course.  But it was like something physical, or perhaps emptiness of soul, a great void of purposelessness, a sense of loss.  Yet there were shadows around this void, feelings of threatening chaos around purposeless existence where there is only self and no engagement, let alone friendship or worship.  And then there was an overwhelming feeling of guilt and shame.

The woman gasped.

‘We can go now,’ said the orderly to the woman.  ‘We are just over here in room 2.’

‘It was my right,’ she muttered.

‘The Author and Giver of Life is the only one to make a claim like that.  We must not confuse a right with a choice.  You made a choice, and it took your child’s life.  You were what you called ‘Pro-Choice.’  Now you will be able to give an account of your choice to end your child’s life as it was just beginning.  May I suggest as you do so that you remember this: the Author and Giver of Life is very pro-life, and He judges peoples' choices justly.’

The girl overheard this.  The ‘Author and Giver of Life.’  She felt what might be described as a beam of eternity pass through her, leaving her with a sense of new life and total peace.  The receptionist looked up and shielded her eyes.  She looked away, smiling.

What Enticed Israel to 'Go After Other Gods'? Part 2

 Peer Pressure, Majority Pressure, and Powerful Influencers

The Jews were a people who stood out significantly among other peoples and nations.  Their very identity was wrapped up on not being like others in their belief in only one God, not having idols representing gods, avoiding any religious syncretism, not conforming to their sexual ethics, limiting themselves to certain foods, being circumcised, and maintaining certain, identifiably unique practices.  Of the last, we might mention Jewish holy days and festivals, opposition to enslaving fellow Jews, and their own legal system in general that sometimes reflected Ancient Near Eastern laws and often did not.  They were a unique people.

Being so different, Jews faced pressure to conform when they found themselves in the presence of other groups.  A polytheistic theology is far more accommodating than Jewish monotheism.  The challenge of having special food laws is mentioned in Daniel 1.  Daniel’s refusal to discontinue his prayers to God landed him in the lion’s den, and his friends’ refusal to worship the king’s image landed them in the fiery furnace.  Not conforming could have consequences.

The pressure to conform might not carry consequences.  Just being different could be enough pressure on its own.  Such pressure could come from a small circle of peers, or it could come from the majority in a given culture.  It could be a pressure others place on the individual, or it could be a pressure that the individual himself or herself feels.  When the Greek Seleucids ruled Israel and Jason purchased the high priesthood from the king, the majority of people abandoned Jewish customs and law for Greek culture.  Some young men went about in Greek hats and hid their circumcision so that they could be comfortable in the new fad of going to the gymnasia (Josephus, Antiquities 12.240-241; 2 Maccabees 4.11-12).  The high priest’s influence, not just pressure from the majority, was crucial in this abandonment of Jewish identity.

Israel’s identity was distinct in the context of other nations, but the righteous of Israel were typically a minority within the land.  This is well illustrated in the case of the 8th c. BC prophet of the northern kingdom, Elijah.  When Elijah complained to God that he was the only devout person left in Israel who had not worshipped Baal, God replied that He had reserved for Himself 7,000 (1 Kings 19.18).  The influence of the foreign Queen Jezebel, a great proponent of Baal worship, on her husband, King Ahab, and the two together on the majority of Israelites, brought about the famous encounter between Elijah and God on the one side and the prophets of Baal and Asherah on the other side on Mt. Carmel (1 Kings 18).  Influence and majority pressure go a long way in turning the hearts of people from the truth and godliness.

In the Southern Kingdom, King Josiah brought reform to the syncretistic religious practices in Judah.  Even the temple was compromised.  Baal worship was incorporated into the worship of Yahwh.  Houses for male cult prostitutes associated with the worship of Baal in the temple itself were removed (2 Kings 23.7).  Yet Israel’s fate was sealed, and just a few decades later, Judah was conquered by the Babylonians.  In various prophetic messages, Ezekiel explained God’s rejection of His people over their continuous defilement with other religions and ethical practices (cf. ch. 16, 20).  Jeremiah says, ‘I made the whole house of Israel and the whole house of Judah cling to me, declares the LORD, that they might be for me a people, a name, a praise, and a glory, but they would not listen’ (13.11).

One of the great themes throughout the Old Testament is that of standing against the pressure of the group to follow God.  Whether pressure from a group of peers, pressure from the majority, pressure from other peoples, or pressure from a person with power (kings and queens, prophets, priests, etc.), God’s people are to stand firm and remain true to Him.  The lesson learned from the Old Testament is stated by Jesus, when He said that ‘the gate is wide and the way is easy that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many’ (Matthew 7.13).  The way leading to life, on the other hand, is a way that stands against the pressures of others.  It’s gate is narrow and its way is hard (v. 14).

Sinicization: State-Enforced Enculturation of the Gospel and Church

 

In mission studies, we discuss the notion of ‘enculturation of the Gospel’ and debate what that means and what are its positive and negative aspects.  Other terms used have included ‘translation of the Gospel’ or even ‘cultural syncretism’.  The question is whether or to what extent the Gospel and the Church can be presented in understandable terms to a given culture, and to what extent they remain true to what they are with any adaptation.

In China, the discussion includes the word 'sinicization’.  The term originally had to do with what others called ‘indiginisation,’ where the emphasis fell on replacing foreign workers like missionaries with nationals.  It highlighted the ‘assimilation of minorities in the Chinese empire into Chinese culture and language.’ It now has a much more political meaning: ‘In order to be accepted as “sinicized,” they should have leaders selected by the CCP and operate within a framework of strategies and objectives indicated by the CCP.’[1] 

New articles regulating ‘religious venues’ in China are set to go into effect 1 September, 2023.  They include many stipulations that give the government complete control not only over religious ‘venues’ but, potentially, over the religions themselves.  Three of the articles are presented below as examples.[2]

Article 3 Places of religious activity shall uphold the leadership of the CCP and the socialist system, thoroughly implement Xi Jinping’s ideology of socialism with Chinese characteristics for the new era, abide by the Constitution, laws, rules and regulations and relevant provisions on the management of religious affairs, practice core socialist values, adhere to the direction of Sinicization of China’s religions, adhere to the principle of independence, autonomy and self-sufficiency, and safeguard the unity of the country, national unity, religious harmony and social stability.

Article 6 Places of religious activity shall establish management organizations and implement democratic management.

No affiliation shall be formed between different places of religious activity.

Article 7 The Department of religious affairs shall, in conjunction with the relevant departments, supervise and manage places of religious activity in accordance with the law, safeguard citizens’ freedom of religious belief, protect the lawful rights and interests of places of religious activity, and guide and supervise places of religious activity to standardize their internal management.

Article 30 The management organization of a place of religious activity shall perform the following duties:

(i)              To unite and educate religious citizens to love the motherland, support the leadership of the CCP, practice socialist core values, adhere to the direction of the Sinicization of China’s religions, and abide by the Constitution, laws, regulations, rules and regulations and the relevant provisions of the management of religious affairs….

An example of how these regulations take hold of a religious institution by being venues of state propaganda and activity administered by state approved officials can be seen from the website of a state registered seminary.  Nanjing Union Theological Seminary is, as stated on Wikipedia‘the flagship theological seminary of Protestant Christianity in China today … managed by the China Christian Council.’[3]  By 1962, under Communist rule, twelve seminaries were incorporated into this single seminary for training of Protestant ministers in the registered churches and ministries of China.  The seminary’s website says (in its own, rough translation into English):

In order to further carry forward the Christian tradition of loving the party and patriotism, strengthen the education of Chinese excellent traditional culture, and enhance the understanding of the Sinicization of Christianity, from July 3 to 17, 2023, some faculty members of our college will be in the dean of the pastor Gao Feng and executive vice president Chen Yilu Under the personal leadership of the pastor and the vice president, Pastor Chen Bin, they went to Xinjiang in two batches to carry out patriotic education activities.

Not long ago, General Secretary Xi Jinping visited Xinjiang and greatly encouraged the people of Xinjiang. Xinjiang is an important base for patriotism education. The faculty and staff study group of our school went to the beautiful Xinjiang to carry out patriotism education with a serious attitude of learning. The co-workers earnestly studied the important thoughts of Xi Jinping's new era of socialism with Chinese characteristics and the strategy of governing Xinjiang. They saw the great changes in Xinjiang, Xinjiang's security, national unity and social development, and deeply felt that the Communist Party of China wholeheartedly seeks happiness for the people. Seeking rejuvenation for the nation and prosperity for the country.[4]

Political enculturation of the Gospel and Church in totalitarian contexts comes across as both abusively paternalistic.  The threat posed by sinicization is mentioned in apocalyptic terms during the anti-Christian rule of Rome’s Emperors Nero (60s AD) and Domitian (90s AD) (cf. Revelation 13).  Yet the West is engaged in the same kind of control in ways fitting to its contexts as well—to the post-Christian, postmodern contexts of Western countries.[5]  We should not mistake the way in which the Gospel is regularly twisted in our own culture and how this distortion is then politically enforced in whatever culture and country where we find ourselves. 

Some examples may be helpful.  A case on government-enforced lockdowns of places of worship in Slovakia in 2021 has recently been brought to the European Court of Human Rights.[6]  Government control of children’s sex education includes both the propagation of anti-Christian morals in schools (including Church of England schools) and legal consequences for any opposing the regulations.[7]  ‘Hate Speech’ laws in Europe notoriously undermine freedom of speech and, consequently, are opportunities to use the law against Christians—as in the infamous case of Finland, where a former MP is up against the law for simply stating Christian views on marriage and sexuality.[8]  In the United States of America, redefinitions of Title IX’s non-discriminatory statute regarding ‘sexuality’ as an affirmation of and enforcement of LGBT agendas on religious institutions remain a possibility, depending on who controls the definition and implementation of the rule.

The West has not completely given itself over to state-enforced religion.  Attempts to criminalise prayer near abortion centres, where the unborn are euthanized by means of horrific executions, has become a criminal offense in England[9] but not in Germany.[10]  The government can still be a restraint on the controlling forces, which are probably still in the minority, that operate to suppress the presence and public exercise of Christian faith in once predominantly ‘Christian’ countries.  Yet the march through cultural and social institutions in the West has produced an ethos, even if not always upheld by law, that might be understood to be its own form of ‘sinicization.’

What can Christians do?  This question is not new.  Several answers might be given, but I will focus on one that must be first on our list.  The book of Revelation assumes that Christians have no access to power in the context of the Church’s persecution in the 1st c. AD, and so the voices of the martyrs simply cry out, ‘How long?’ to God (Revelation 6.10).  Christians today should pray regularly for the return of our Lord Jesus Christ—‘Maranatha!’ (1 Corinthians 16.22; Revelation 22.20).  He will come as judge of the earth to establish justice.  If we put our hope in institutional powers of one sort or another to bring about justice, we only set ourselves up for disappointment.  Whether Americans hoping for justice in a change of government or Christians hoping for godliness in the Church of England, we only set ourselves up for disappointment.  The voice of the Church is one that cries to God for His justice in a fallen world.  That includes the institutions of power everywhere.

Even so, we are assured that governments can function to deliver some justice from time to time.  Christians are not anarchists, and they have reason to seek some degree of justice from legal institutions (both governmental and ecclesial).  Governments can and do restrain injustice, functioning on occasion to procure justice in a fallen world (Romans 13.1-7).  The restraint of lawlessness in this world—the restraint of those living against God’s Law, not some government’s laws—is a blessing of God’s grace in this age (cf. 2 Thessalonians 2.6-7).

However, the end of this age will be characterised by a lifting of this restraint and the horrific release of

the coming of the lawless one is by the activity of Satan with all power and false signs and wonders, 10 and with all wicked deception for those who are perishing, because they refused to love the truth and so be saved (2 Thessalonians 2.9-10).

After this period of increased lawlessness, Jesus will return.  The West is now on a trajectory in which the restraint of ‘lawlessness’ (again—living against God’s Law) is being lifted.  Whether we are living in the last days, nobody knows.  The greatest form of lawlessness is when people begin to live against not simply God’s laws as revealed in Scripture but also God’s laws as revealed in His creation—living against nature.  Living against nature is the presiding characteristic of Western, post-Christian culture.

Not only the culture and the governments of the West but also the mainline denominations (once orthodox) are increasingly hell bent on opposing God’s Law and doing so in the name of ‘social justice,’ of all things.  The post-Christian culture’s definition of social justice in terms of ‘diversity, equity, and inclusion’ have taken hold of many Evangelical institutions fearful of not being accepted.  We have moved well beyond discussing the pros and cons of the enculturation of the Gospel for missional purposes to the sinicization of the Gospel and Church by powers both human and demonic that are distorting the truth, turning everything from God, and enforcing anti-Christian legislation and culture.  As the institutions of power become, as C. S. Lewis put it, ‘That Hideous Strength,’ we who remain faithful to God not only need to resist this sinicization but should also pray for the Lord’s return.  Maranatha!


[4] See http://www.njuts.cn/wen.asp?id=1455 (accessed 8 August, 2023).

[5] See cases in England addressed by Christian Concern: https://christianconcern.com/.

[6] See press release: ‘Legal challenge to church COVID lockdowns brought to the European Court of Human Rights,’ (1 August, 2023); online: https://anglican.ink/2023/08/01/legal-challenge-to-church-covid-lockdowns-brought-to-the-european-court-of-human-rights/ (accessed 10 August, 2023).

[7] E.g., see ‘Church of England refuses to intervene or question teaching of extreme gender identity lessons in its primary schools,’ Christian Concern (20 July, 2023); online: https://christianconcern.com/ccpressreleases/church-of-england-refuses-to-intervene-or-question-teaching-of-extreme-gender-identity-lessons-in-its-primary-schools/ (accessed 10 August, 2023).

[8] Rick Plasterer, ‘Continuing Challenges to Religious Freedom in Europe and America,’ Anglican Ink (15 June, 2022); online: https://anglican.ink/2022/07/15/continuing-challenges-to-religious-freedom-in-europe-and-america/ (accessed 10 August, 2023).

[9] See: ‘Charity volunteer arrested, charged for silent prayer “thoughtcrime” near abortion facility,’ Anglican Ink (20 December, 2022); online: https://anglican.ink/2022/12/20/charity-volunteer-arrested-charged-for-silent-prayer-thoughtcrime-near-abortion-facility/ (accessed 10 August, 2023); ‘British Parliament introduces first “thought-crime” into UK law,’ Anglican Ink (7 March, 2023); online: https://anglican.ink/2023/03/07/british-parliament-introduces-first-thought-crime-into-uk-law/ (accessed 10 August, 2023).

[10] See: ‘German Court Allows Prtayer Outside Abortion Center,’ Anglican Ink (1 September, 2022); online: https://anglican.ink/2022/09/01/german-court-allows-prayer-outside-abortion-center/ (accessed 10 August, 2023);  Joachin Meisner Hertz, ‘German court strikes down laws banning no protest or prayer zones around abortion clinics,’ Anglican Ink (27 June, 2023); online: https://anglican.ink/2023/06/27/german-court-strikes-down-laws-banning-no-protest-or-prayer-zones-around-abortion-clinics/ (accessed 10 August, 2023).

The Second Week of Advent: Preparing for the peace of God

[An Advent Homily] The second Sunday in Advent carries the theme, ‘preparation for the peace of God’.   That peace comes with the birth of C...

Popular Posts