In arguing for Christian nationalism, Douglas Wilson might seem to be advocating the establishment of a Christian theocracy like the Puritan theocracy in the Massachusetts Bay Colony. But I have argued that careful readers of what Wilson has written about Christian nationalism will see that he never clearly advocates anything like Puritan theocracy, and he hints that he is secretly rejecting theocracy and supporting the Lockean liberalism of religious liberty and toleration.
One obvious objection to what I have said is that Wilson is very clear in embracing a postmillennial eschatology that he sees in the 20th chapter of the book of Revelation, which prophesized that Christians would someday, prior to the Second Coming, rule over the world for a thousand years; and surely this means that all nations would be under theocratic rule.
My response is to point out that when Wilson lays out his postmillennial interpretation of Revelation, he never says that the millennial rule of Christians over the world will be theocratic in the sense that Christians will take political power over all governments and use that power to coercively enforce the Mosaic law of the Old Testament. He does say that the millennial dominance of Christianity over the world comes from the Christian evangelization of the world, which began with the preaching of the early Christians, and sometime in the near future, Christians will succeed in converting most human beings to Christianity. But he never says that Christians will adopt the Bonaparte Option, which is the theocratic option, so that Christians will put in power "a Christian prince with some backbone, willing to knock a few heads" (FAQ, 134). His silence suggests that his Boniface Option is simply a slightly more aggressive Benedict Option, in which Christians organize themselves into voluntary groups that promote Christianity, but without seeking the political power to coercively enforce theocratic rule over others.
MILLENNIALISM
The 20th chapter of Revelation (or the Apocalypse) is the most controversial chapter of the most controversial book in the Bible. Like much of the Bible, Revelation is so obscure that Christians have fought over its interpretation for over 2,000 years without ever reaching agreement about what it means. The book was written by John (probably the apostle John who wrote the Gospel of John), who reports a series of mystical visions in which Jesus Christ revealed to him prophecies of what was to come.
Perhaps the best survey of the leading interpretations of Revelation is Steve Gregg's Revelation/Four Views, Revised & Updated: A Parallel Commentary (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 2013). Wilson mentions this book as "an enormous help to me" in his book When the Man Comes Around: A Commentary on the Book of Revelation (Moscow, ID: Canon Press, 2019). Wilson thus invites his readers to compare what he says with what Gregg says; and if they do, they will see that Wilson refuses to endorse postmillennial theocracy.
There are four major views of Revelation as a whole, and three major views of the Millennium in chapter 20. A preterist (from the Latin word praeter for "past") believes that most of the prophecies in Revelation have been fulfilled in the past--during John's life or shortly thereafter. A historicist believes that most of the events forecast in Revelation are happening now in the present. A futurist believes most of those events are yet to come in the future. An idealist believes that these events are not literally true but rather they have symbolic meaning as part of a dramatic story that conveys transcendent truths, such as the conflict between Christ and Satan.
Revelation 20 is the only chapter of the Bible that speaks of the 1,000-year reign of the saints on the Earth that is commonly called the Millennium. This chapter raises one of the ultimate questions of the Bible--whether, how, and when God's kingdom is established on the Earth.
The three major approaches to interpreting Revelation 20 are distinguished by how they determine the timing of the Millennium in relation to the Second Coming of Christ. The premillennialists say that Christ will return before the Millennium, and thus Christ will directly rule over this thousand-year reign of the saints on Earth.
The postmillennialists say that Christ will return after the Millennium, and thus the millennial reign of the saints on Earth will be the fulfillment of the original gospel mission of the Christian Church to evangelize the whole world.
The amillennialists say that there is no millennium if it's understood as the literal rule of the saints for a golden age of 1,000 years, because Revelation 20 should be understood symbolically or spiritually as the ultimate victory of the Christian Church in propagating Christianity, with the 1,000 years understood symbolically as the entire period from the First Coming of Christ to His Second Coming.
Wilson identifies himself as a preterist and a postmillennialist. As a preterist, he believes that most of what is prophesized in Revelation was concerned with events of the first century. John says that the Revelation of Jesus Christ that appeared to him in his visions was "to show unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass" (1:1). Surely, Wilson insists, "shortly come to pass" must mean that most of the events foretold were to happen either during John's lifetime or shortly thereafter.
But still, as a postmillennialist, Wilson is a futurist in seeing that the Christianization of all or most of the world must lie sometime in the future, perhaps a few hundred years from now, but before the Second Coming.
Revelation 20 begins with John reporting:
Then I saw an angel coming down from Heaven, having the key to the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand. He laid hold of the dragon, that serpent of old, who is the Devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years; and he cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal on him, so that he should deceive the nations no more till the thousand years were finished. But after these things he must be released for a little while (Rev. 20:1-3).
According to Wilson, the binding of Satan with a chain is a metaphorical way of saying that he will no longer have the power to deceive the nations the way he had previously. He will not be able to prevent the evangelization of the Roman Empire and then over the centuries the evangelization of the whole world. "Looking at the nations of men, he no longer has the run of the place. Rather, preachers of the gospel have the run of the place, and he can do nothing to stop them" (231). The one thousand years of Satan's binding is a symbolic image of the age of the Christian Church from the time of Pentecost to the Second Coming.
John continues:
And I saw thrones, and they sat on them, and judgment was committed to them. Then I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for their witness to Jesus and for the word of God, who had not worshiped the beast or his image, and had not received his mark on their foreheads or on their hands. And they lived and reigned with Christ for a thousand years. But the rest of the dead did not live again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection. Blessed and holy is he who was part in the first resurrection. Over such the second death has no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with Him a thousand years (Rev. 20:4-6).
Wilson says the thrones that John saw are located in Heaven. The souls of the Christian martyrs have ascended into Heaven, and there they participate in the spiritual rule of the world, in and through Christ (233). They are the priests of God and Christ who reign with God a thousand years.
By the "first resurrection" John means the resurrection of Jesus Christ, and the second resurrection is the general resurrection of the dead at the end of all human history. Christians participate in the resurrection of Jesus because "every believer who is truly converted throughout all church history is made a partaker of the resurrection of Jesus, the first resurrection" (234).
That Christians reign with God for a thousand years refers to the progressive victory of the gospel in the world from the time of the early church to the end of history. Eventually, over time the vast majority of human beings will be converted, and that's why Wilson is optimistic that in the near future all nations will be Christian nations, because most of their people will be Christians. The world will become Christianized by through the persuasiveness of the gospel.
And yet, if you read Gregg's book, you will see that some postmillennialists--particularly, the Christian Reconstructionists like Rousas John Rushdooney--say that persuading people to voluntarily convert to Christianity is not enough to create Christian nations. In addition to preaching the gospel, Christians need to take political power so that they can use governments to coercively enforce the Mosaic laws of the Old Testament: Christian nations must become Christian theocracies.
But in his commentary on Revelation, Wilson says nothing about this; and his careful readers can see this silence as evidence that he cannot endorse theocracy because he is committed to the Lockean liberalism of religious liberty and toleration.
THE OBSCURITY OF REVELATION DICTATES RELIGIOUS LIBERTY
Wilson might respond by saying that he cannot endorse theocracy as taught by the book of Revelation because that book does not teach that--or at least not clearly enough that all Christians can agree that that is what Revelation teaches. But, as I have argued in previous posts, that's the fundamental problem in taking the Bible as God's revelation of His truth--it's so obscure that Christians cannot agree on what it means--particularly, in its eschatology, in its teaching about what lies at the end of human history and in the afterlife (Heaven and Hell).
Moreover, that the Bible is so obscure that even devout Christians cannot agree on its meaning casts doubt on whether the Bible is a true revelation from God. In John 17, Jesus prays to God that all believers will be as one, that they will come to complete unity, "so that the world may believe that you have sent me." It seems that Christians would give witness to the truth of revelation by showing their agreement about that revelation. But if they cannot come to agreement, then the world can rightly doubt that the Bible is a true revelation.
This is certainly true for the Christian disagreement over the meaning of the Millennium in Revelation 20. For example, the early Christian apologist and philosopher Justin Martyr (100-165 AD) was a premillennialist, but he respected the opinions of those many true Christians who disagreed with him. In his Dialogue with Trypho, he wrote:
I and many others are of this opinion [premillennialism], and believe that such will take place, as you assuredly are aware; but on the other hand, I signified to you that many who belong to the pure and pious faith, and are true Christians, think otherwise (Gregg, 49).
This shows the reality of religious pluralism--or as Locke said, "Every man is orthodox to himself," and "Every church is orthodox to itself." And that shows the need for religious liberty rather than theocracy.
No comments:
Post a Comment