There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn’t true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true. —Soren Kierkegaard. "…truth is true even if nobody believes it, and falsehood is false even if everybody believes it. That is why truth does not yield to opinion, fashion, numbers, office, or sincerity–it is simply true and that is the end of it" – Os Guinness, Time for Truth, pg.39. “He that takes truth for his guide, and duty for his end, may safely trust to God’s providence to lead him aright.” – Blaise Pascal. "There is but one straight course, and that is to seek truth and pursue it steadily" – George Washington letter to Edmund Randolph — 1795. We live in a “post-truth” world. According to the dictionary, “post-truth” means, “relating to or denoting circumstances in which objective facts are less influential in shaping public opinion than appeals to emotion and personal belief.” Simply put, we now live in a culture that seems to value experience and emotion more than truth. Truth will never go away no matter how hard one might wish. Going beyond the MSM idealogical opinion/bias and their low information tabloid reality show news with a distractional superficial focus on entertainment, sensationalism, emotionalism and activist reporting – this blogs goal is to, in some small way, put a plug in the broken dam of truth and save as many as possible from the consequences—temporal and eternal. "The further a society drifts from truth, the more it will hate those who speak it." – George Orwell “There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn’t true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.” ― Soren Kierkegaard
How do you react to difficult feedback? Do you accept the critique as being for your own good? Or do you write it off, suspecting the messenger of unfair motives? By the time we get to Ezekiel, a lot of hard words have been spoken against Israel. It’s easy to wonder if God had their best interest in mind. The attentive ear will listen to the words of the prophet Ezekiel and hear the note of redemption.During Ezekiel’s day, the political invasions God promised were starting to become reality. Even so, Israel wasn’t taking the hint. They were asking all the wrong questions. “Our offenses and sins weigh us down, and we are wasting away because of them. How then can we live (v. 10)? Facing strong punishment, they wondered how they would ever recover. Like a person facing bankruptcy due to their poor decisions, or a confiscated driver’s license they wondered, How or when will life go back to normal?Thankfully the Lord presented the answer right away: Turn! This one word sums up the Lord’s purpose in judgment. His goal was to compel His people to turn from their godless behavior and turn to Him, the source of all joy. Today, we might use the word repent to describe a change of mind that leads to a change of action.God was not judging Israel because He enjoyed it (v. 11). Rather, He was punishing them because He wanted them to live. To really live meant loving Him above all other things (Deut. 6:4). In the New Testament, God makes the same plea. Jesus says, “Those whom I love I rebuke and discipline. So be earnest and repent” (Rev. 3:19).
Go Deeper We too need to hear the call to repentance. It doesn’t mean you are not a child of God, it means you still sin and need to change. Pray that the Lord will give you a spirit of repentance to hear, turn, and really live! Extended Reading: Ezekiel 33
Pray with Us Merciful God, give us a spirit of repentance! Teach us to turn away from sin and turn to You with all our worries, hardships, and trials. May we hear Your voice even in the “valley of the shadow of death.”
Revelation 21 In these lessons we focus on heaven as the place where God and His redeemed people will dwell forever.
Theme
A Description of the City
John begins to describe some of the other details, and he talks about this great wall all the way around it. A wall would symbolize protection, and so you have an image there of our eternal security and safety. He talks about the twelve foundations. Why twelve? Well the reason is that they relate to the twelve apostles of the Lamb in verse 14. And the reference to the twelve apostles goes along with the twelve gates in the city, which represent the twelve tribes of Israel. This shows us the kind of base upon which this heavenly community is established.
It’s the same thing Paul talks about in Ephesians 2:20, that the church is established upon the doctrine of the apostles and the prophets. And what’s this doctrine? Although certainly it refers to the revelation of the Gospel, yet if you single out any one doctrine, our direction would turn to the doctrine of justification by faith. This is foundational because even though in the Old Testament period, all of those saints might not fully have understood the means of justification through the work of Jesus Christ, it was, nevertheless, upon that foundation that their faith was built. And so as John begins to unfold this imagery for our understanding, he’s saying not merely that this community of the saints in glory is a secure thing, but it’s a community of those who have come in the way God has provided, namely, through faith in Jesus Christ, the Lamb slain from before the foundation of the world on the basis of whose death, through faith, those who are sinners are justified and enabled to stand before the holy God.
He has another set of imagery that he uses here, and it’s the imagery of jewels or precious stones. Since there are twelve of them, I think this probably has some kind of reference to the breastplate of the high priest, described in Exodus—symbolism certainly that would be known to any Jewish reader. The high priest had a breastplate made of gold, and on that breastplate, embedded in the gold, were twelve jewels that represented the twelve tribes of Israel. And when the high priest went into the Holy of Holies on the Day of Atonement, he wore the golden and jeweled breastplate, which represented the people of Israel as he entered into the presence of God through a sacrifice on their behalf. And here those jewels were embedded in the city, laid into the foundation, as it were, because God has prepared that for those who come in that way.
In verse 22 John talks about something that apparently surprised him. He saw the city come down from God out of heaven, with all the brilliance of its walls, its streets of gold, and all those other things. But when he looked for the temple that would be expected to be there, he discovered there was no temple. And the reason there was no temple is that God and the Lamb were the temple. Why is this significant? Well, a temple was a place of sacrifice. It was a place of approach to God, where the sacrifices were made for the people’s sins. But in the new Jerusalem there’s no need for that anymore because this is the company of the redeemed, those from whom sin has been removed, and for whom sacrifices no longer need to be offered. God is there, and the communion with God is intense, and immediate, and eternal. And from God and the Lamb there goes forth light; and from their throne flows the river of the water of life, from which we are to drink and live forever.
Study Questions
What is the meaning behind such things as the wall, the foundations, and the gates?
Read Ephesians 2:19-20. Explain how the church is built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets.
How might the presence of jewels be understood?
What surprising thing does John discover about the new Jerusalem? Why is this the case?
Application
Application: Jonathan Edwards made it a point to regularly take time to meditate on the glories of heaven. How might that benefit us as we seek to live for God in our own unrighteous culture?
For Further Study: To consider some other themes that characterize heaven, download for free and listen to a message by James Boice on John 14:3, entitled, “Heaven.” (Discount will be applied at checkout.)
That his sovereignty is incontestable, and he is the owner and absolute Lord of all.
The heavens, even the heavens are yours, Psalm 115:16(ESV) and all their hosts. The earth is yours and the fullness thereof, the world and those who dwell therein. Psalm 24:1(ESV) In your hand are the depths of the earth, and the heights of the mountains are yours also: The sea is yours, for you made it, and your hands formed the dry land. Psalm 95:4-5(ESV) Every beast of the forest is yours, and the cattle on a thousand hills. Psalm 50:10(ESV) You are therefore a great God, and a great King above all gods. Psalm 95:3(ESV)
In your hand is the life of every living thing and the breath of all mankind. Job 12:10(ESV)
Your dominion is an everlasting dominion, and your kingdom endures from generation to generation: You do according to your will among the host of heaven and among the inhabitants of the earth; and none can stay your hand or say to you, “What have you done?” Daniel 4:34-35(ESV) or “Why have you done that?”
That his power is irresistible, and the operations of it cannot be controlled.
I know, O God, that you can do all things, and that no purpose of yours can be thwarted. Job 42:2(ESV) Power belongs to you; Psalm 62:11(ESV) and with you nothing is impossible. Luke 1:37(ESV)
Then Jesus said to them, Give to Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God’s.
Mark 12:17
I remember reading some time ago of a brilliant young lawyer who had been raised a pagan and had no use for Christianity. Someone had given him the New Testament, and he was reading it through. When he came to this account in Mark, he read this question with great interest, for he himself had recently been involved with just such a dilemma. When the full impact of Jesus’ actions hit this man, he was utterly astonished. He dropped the Bible and said to himself, That’s the most amazing wisdom! For our Lord did not try to answer the question directly. In that wonderful way He had, He called for a coin—He had to borrow one, for He had none of His own—and held it up. Whose picture is on this coin? He asked. They said, Caesar’s. He said, All right, then, it must be Caesar’s money. Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s. But God has His stamp upon you, so render to God the things that are God’s.
He shows us that human authority is not only limited in duration; it is limited in its scope. It deals with only a part of people. The secular government is ordained by God. The apostle Paul tells us that plainly, and Peter says the same thing: Submit yourselves for the Lord’s sake to every authority instituted among men: whether to the king, as the supreme authority, or to governors, who are sent by him to punish those who do wrong and to commend those who do right (1 Peter 2:13-14). Peter acknowledges that God is behind secular government—even bad government. For the king that Peter referred to was none other than Nero, wretched moral degenerate that he was. Yet Peter says to honor the king as the supreme authority.
But human government, Jesus says, has only limited control over people. It has certain powers over its citizens’ bodies and minds. It can regulate our conduct to some degree and has the right to influence and regulate our attitudes and actions and what we say and how we say it. But there is one area in human life over which secular power has no control, and that is the human spirit. Secular power cannot legislate who we worship, who governs our conscience, and who constitutes the ultimate authority of life. Give to Caesar what is Caesar’s. Certain things do properly belong to Caesar; give them to him. But other things about you belong only to God, so give those to God.
The Russian author Solzhenytsin stands as an example of the wrong that is done by secular might when it tries to govern and control the worship of people. Almost single-handedly, he has defied one of the mightiest powers of earth and revealed the viciousness and the exploitation that always results when secular might seeks to invade that proscribed area of human existence, the human spirit. Jesus is saying that the ultimate issues of life belong to God, not to people, and human authority is therefore limited in its scope.
Father, thank You for this One who helps me to see things rightly, who puts things in proper perspective and makes me understand who I am, and what I am, and to whom I am responsible.
Life Application
To what extent do we need to avow and submit to human government? What are its limitations? What is the ultimate authority to which Christ’s disciples are responsible?
27They arrived again in Jerusalem, and while Jesus was walking in the temple courts, the chief priests, the teachers of the law and the elders came to him. 28“By what authority are you doing these things?” they asked. “And who gave you authority to do this?”
29Jesus replied, “I will ask you one question. Answer me, and I will tell you by what authority I am doing these things. 30John’s baptism—was it from heaven, or from men? Tell me!”
31They discussed it among themselves and said, “If we say, ‘From heaven,’ he will ask, ‘Then why didn’t you believe him?’ 32But if we say, ‘From men’….” (They feared the people, for everyone held that John really was a prophet.)
33So they answered Jesus, “We don’t know.” Jesus said, “Neither will I tell you by what authority I am doing these things.”
1He then began to speak to them in parables: “A man planted a vineyard. He put a wall around it, dug a pit for the winepress and built a watchtower. Then he rented the vineyard to some farmers and went away on a journey. 2At harvest time he sent a servant to the tenants to collect from them some of the fruit of the vineyard. 3But they seized him, beat him and sent him away empty-handed. 4Then he sent another servant to them; they struck this man on the head and treated him shamefully. 5He sent still another, and that one they killed. He sent many others; some of them they beat, others they killed.
6“He had one left to send, a son, whom he loved. He sent him last of all, saying, ‘They will respect my son.’
7“But the tenants said to one another, ‘This is the heir. Come, let’s kill him, and the inheritance will be ours.’ 8So they took him and killed him, and threw him out of the vineyard.
9“What then will the owner of the vineyard do? He will come and kill those tenants and give the vineyard to others. 10Haven’t you read this scripture: ” ‘The stone the builders rejected has become the capstone; 11the Lord has done this, and it is marvelous in our eyes’?”
12Then they looked for a way to arrest him because they knew he had spoken the parable against them. But they were afraid of the crowd; so they left him and went away.
13Later they sent some of the Pharisees and Herodians to Jesus to catch him in his words. 14They came to him and said, “Teacher, we know you are a man of integrity. You aren’t swayed by men, because you pay no attention to who they are; but you teach the way of God in accordance with the truth. Is it right to pay taxes to Caesar or not? 15Should we pay or shouldn’t we?”
But Jesus knew their hypocrisy. “Why are you trying to trap me?” he asked. “Bring me a denarius and let me look at it.” 16They brought the coin, and he asked them, “Whose portrait is this? And whose inscription?” “Caesar’s,” they replied.
17Then Jesus said to them, “Give to Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God’s.” And they were amazed at him.
18Then the Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came to him with a question. 19“Teacher,” they said, “Moses wrote for us that if a man’s brother dies and leaves a wife but no children, the man must marry the widow and have children for his brother. 20Now there were seven brothers. The first one married and died without leaving any children. 21The second one married the widow, but he also died, leaving no child. It was the same with the third. 22In fact, none of the seven left any children. Last of all, the woman died too. 23At the resurrection whose wife will she be, since the seven were married to her?”
24Jesus replied, “Are you not in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God? 25When the dead rise, they will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven. 26Now about the dead rising—have you not read in the book of Moses, in the account of the bush, how God said to him, ‘I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’? 27He is not the God of the dead, but of the living. You are badly mistaken!”
For by one offering He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified. (10:14)
The new sacrifice was effective because it gives believers eternal perfection. Again, it must be emphasized that perfection is eternal salvation. To make perfected here mean “spiritually matured” would not be consistent with the context. The death of Jesus Christ removes sin forever for those who belong to Him. We are totally secure in our Savior. We need cleansing when we fall into sin, but we need never fear God’s judgment on us because of our sin. As far as Christ’s sacrifice is concerned, we have already been sanctified and perfected—which is why He had to sacrifice Himself only once. Now where there is forgiveness of these things, there is no longer any offering for sin (10:18). The forgiveness is permanent because the sacrifice is permanent.
MacArthur, J. F., Jr. (1983). Hebrews (p. 256). Moody Press.
14 Once more the writer emphasizes that Christ has offered one offering that saves men. Clearly this is of the utmost importance for him. So he comes back to it again and again. The conjunction “because” introduces the reason for the statement in v. 13. As in v. 12, “one” is in an emphatic position; the perfecting of the saints came by one offering and by one alone. The writer does not say that Christ’s sacrifice perfects the people but that Christ does this. His salvation is essentially personal. We have seen a number of times that the author is fond of the idea of “perfecting.” He applies it to Christ (see comments on 2:10) and also to his people. The process of salvation takes people who are far from perfect and makes them fit to be in God’s presence forever. It is not temporary improvement he is speaking of but improvement that is never ending. As in v. 10, the author uses the concept of sanctifying, or making holy, to characterize the saved. The present tense (hagiazomenous, “those being made holy”) poses a small problem that has been solved in more than one way. Some see it as timeless; others think of it as indicating a continuing process of adding to the number of the saved, others again of those who in the present are experiencing the process of being made holy. The last-mentioned view is not likely to be correct because, as we have noticed, the idea of sanctification as a continuing process does not seem to appear in Hebrews. But either of the other two views is possible. Those Christ saves are set apart for the service of God and that forever. The writer, then, is contemplating a great salvation, brought about by one magnificent offering that cannot and need not be repeated—an offering that is eternal in its efficacy and that makes perfect the people it sanctifies.
Morris, L. (1981). Hebrews. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Hebrews through Revelation (Vol. 12, p. 101). Zondervan Publishing House.
14 The terms used in v. 12 (“one sacrifice,” “forever”) are repeated again, but the tenses of the verbs suggestively reflect the tension just noted in vv. 12–13. On the one hand, he “has made perfect” (perfect tense, for an act completed, “a definitive consecration of man to God in the present” [Peterson, 153]), but on the other hand, the beneficiaries of his sacrifice are “those who are being made holy” (present tense, of an ongoing process). In v. 10 the author could declare that through Christ’s sacrifice we “have been made holy” in the sense that the vital transaction has been completed. But in our actual experience it remains to be fully implemented, just as Christ’s decisive victory still leaves room for a period of “waiting.” If this perspective seems logically untidy, it is pastorally essential; to focus (as some Christian groups have been prone to do) on the once-for-all “perfection” without recognizing the reality of our continuing struggle with sin is a recipe for frustration and disillusionment.
France, R. T. (2006). Hebrews. In T. Longman III & D. E. Garland (Eds.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Hebrews–Revelation (Revised Edition) (Vol. 13, p. 131). Zondervan.
14 Christ, then, by his self-oblation has accomplished once for all what generations of Levitical sacrifices had never done. After hundreds of years those sacrifices were no nearer the attainment of their aim than they had been at the beginning. Nor can this contrast between them and the death of Christ be dismissed as an apt conceit of our author’s, elaborated here for apologetic purposes. Its force was tacitly acknowledged in Christian practice. Many, probably most, of the early converts to Christianity had been accustomed to a form of worship in which animal sacrifices played a part; this was so whether they had previously been Jews or Gentiles. That their new form of worship had no place for such sacrifices was in itself a recognition that they had been rendered forever obsolete by the death of Christ. “Those who looked upon this death as a sacrifice soon ceased to offer God any blood-sacrifice at all.” They might not all have used the language of the Epistle to the Hebrews, but the logic of its argument was implicit in their most elementary understanding of the gospel. The sacrifice of Christ has purified his people from the moral defilement of sin, and assured them of permanent maintenance in a right relation with God. “For by one offering he has perfected for all time those who are thus consecrated” (NEB). In v. 10 the statement that “we have been sanctified” is made in the perfect tense; here, as in 2:11, the present passive participle is used. In v. 10 the emphasis lay on the unrepeatable nature of the death of Christ as the sacrifice by which his people have been set apart for the worship and service of God; here their character as the people thus set apart is simply indicated in timeless terms, because emphasis is being laid on the fact that by that same sacrifice those who have been cleansed and “perfected” are now eternally constituted God’s holy people. Three outstanding effects are thus ascribed to the sacrifice of Christ: by it his people have had their conscience cleansed from guilt; by it they have been fitted to approach God as accepted worshipers; and by it they have experienced the fulfilment of what was promised in earlier days, being brought into the perfect relation to God which is involved in the new covenant.74
Bruce, F. F. (1990). The Epistle to the Hebrews (Rev. ed., pp. 246–247). Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.
14 “For” shows that this description of Christ’s offering is given to support the definitive nature of the seat he has taken at God’s right hand in anticipation of the final Judgment. Verse 11 affirmed that those ineffective, perpetually repeated offerings were “never able to take away sins.” Verse 12 says merely that Christ’s “one sacrifice” was “for sin.” The pastor does not abandon this part of his argument without making the significance of “for sin” clear. The better his hearers understand the efficacy of Christ’s sacrifice, the more confidence they will have in the position of supreme authority he now holds. However, by postponing this description of Christ’s sacrifice until now, the pastor is able to conclude this section with a definitive statement of the benefits available for the faithful through Christ. At the conclusion of the opening part of this sacrifice section the pastor announced the uselessness of animal sacrifices to deal with sin (10:4). At the conclusion of this third and final part he affirms the potency of Christ’s sacrifice to do all that is necessary in order to bring God’s people into his presence. The hearers know that Christ’s consecration through obedience to high priesthood at God’s right hand was his perfection as Savior (5:9–10; 7:28; cf. 2:10). Thus, it comes as no surprise that by that same obedience this heavenly High Priest “has perfected” his people by cleansing them from disobedience so that they might enter God’s presence. The obedience by which he was “perfected” as Savior, able to cleanse and sustain, also “perfected” them as the cleansed, able to obey through his sustenance. He enters heaven as their representative; they, as those for whom he has provided entrance. “He has perfected” is in emphatic contrast with the inability of the old sacrifices to deal with sin (10:1, 11). This expression describes from Christ’s point of view what “we have been made holy” (10:10) meant for the viewpoint of the faithful. Both expressions refer to a cleansing from the pollution of sin that enables people to come into God’s presence. The first may put emphasis on the privilege of access to God;17 the latter, on consecration to God through the removal of sin. The pastor has used the perfect tense with both of these expressions to put emphasis on the continuing effect of that past act of cleansing or perfection. When he used “forever” to qualify the aorist verb translated “he sat down,” it emphasized the definitive and unrepeatable nature of Christ’s session. When he uses that same expression here with the perfect, it denotes the continuing ultimate validity of the effect achieved by Christ’s perfecting his people. Christ’s own are a “perfected” or “cleansed” people. This “perfecting” is of such a quality that it will never need renewal or supplementation, any more than Christ’s session might need repetition. Nothing more need be done for God’s people to be delivered from sin and brought into God’s presence. It is for this reason that the pastor urgently exhorts his hearers to persevere in their identification with the faithful people of God. To fall away in apostasy is to separate oneself from this people whom Christ has “perfected” and thus to abandon the only cure for sin that brings access to God. The description of God’s people as “those who are being made holy” emphasizes this need for continual participation in the benefits available to Christ’s “perfected” and “cleansed” people. The sanctifying work of Christ is not only definitive (10:10), but continuous (2:10). Thus, the present tense of “being made holy” is not timeless, iterative, or progressive, but simply continuous. If the pastor wished to describe the state of his hearers, we would expect the verb “to be perfect.” There is nothing in the context that suggests the repeated entering of people into the state of holiness as they are converted.20 Nor has the pastor been discussing the progress of believers in moral perfection. He is describing the continuous reception of grace from Christ, “the one who makes holy” (2:11). Reception of this grace enables God’s people to receive necessary forgiveness and live a life of faithful obedience (4:14–16) so that they can continue in fellowship with the people of God once-for-all “perfected” by Christ. The pastor does not want his hearers to forget that their continued holiness, expressed in faithful obedience, is totally dependent on the benefits regularly and perpetually received from their High Priest seated at God’s right hand. Thus, his great concern is that his hearers “draw near” to receive these benefits from the Son enthroned with all authority for their succor. This final statement makes the benefits of the “high priest” we now “have at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven” (8:1) abundantly clear. Thus the pastor draws his grand symphony toward its conclusion.
Cockerill, G. L. (2012). The Epistle to the Hebrews (pp. 450–453). William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.
10:14 / The efficacy of Christ’s single sacrifice is such that he has made perfect forever those who are sanctified by his work. As throughout the epistle, the word perfect is not to be understood as moral perfection, but as the complete realization of God’s saving purpose. To arrive at this one sacrifice (cf. v. 12) and to experience its benefits are to arrive at the goal anticipated from the beginning of God’s gracious activity among his people. As this sacrifice has a teleological character, so those who are being made holy by it have (cf. the cleansing of the conscience in 9:14) arrived at the fullness of salvation, the telos, promised and foreshadowed by all that preceded in the old covenant. It is for this reason that the results of this sacrifice last forever (cf. 7:25; 9:12, “eternal redemption”), in contrast to the temporary effects of the levitical sacrifices.
Hagner, D. A. (2011). Hebrews (p. 160). Baker Books.
Ver. 14. Perfected for ever them that are sanctified.—
Perfection in faith:— I. THE CHILDREN OF GOD ARE HERE INTENDED, UNDER THE TERM “SANCTIFIED”; they are described as sanctified persons. There are two meanings to the term “sanctified.” One is, “set apart.” God has set apart His people from before the foundation of the world, to be His chosen and peculiar inheritance. We are sanctified by God the Father. There is a second signification, which implies not the decree of the Father, but the work of the Holy Spirit. But the word here, I think, includes both of these senses; and I must try to find a figure which will embrace them both. And what is the apostle speaking about? In the ninth chapter he is speaking about the tabernacle, and the candlestick, and the table, and the shewbread, and the sanctuary, and the golden censer, and the ark of the covenant overlaid with gold, and the pot of manna; he is talking about priests, and holy things; and he is declaring that all these things of which he speaks were sanctified things, but that though they were sanctified things, they wanted to be made perfect by the sprinkling of blood. Now I believe the sanctification of our text is to be understood in this sense. II. IN WHAT SENSE ARE WE TO UNDERSTAND THAT CHRIST HAS PERFECTED THESE THAT ARE SANCTIFIED? When the golden vessels were brought into the temple or into the sanctuary, they were sanctified the very first moment that they were dedicated to God. No one dared to employ them for anything but holy uses. But they were not perfect. What did they need, then, to make them perfect? Why, to have blood sprinkled on them; and, as soon as the blood was sprinkled on them, those golden vessels were perfect vessels, officially perfect. God accepted them as being holy and perfect things, and they stood in His sight as instruments of an acceptable worship. Just so was it with the Levites and the priests. As soon as ever they were set apart to their office; as soon as ever they were bern, in fact, they were consecrated, they belonged to God; they were His peculiar priesthood. But they were not perfect until they had passed through divers washings, and had the blood sprinkled upon them. Then God looked upon them in their official priestly character, as being perfect persons. Here is one sense of the text. The apostle says that we who are the priests of God have a right as priests to go to God’s mercy-seat that is within the veil; but it were to our death to go there unless we were perfect. But we are perfect, for the blood of Christ has been sprinkled on us, and, therefore, our standing before God is the standing of perfection. Our standing, in our own conscience, is imperfection, just as the character of the priest might be imperfect. But that has nothing to do with it. Our standing in the sight of God is a standing of perfection; and when He sees the blood, as of old the destroying angel passed over Israel, so this day, when He sees the blood, God passes over our sins, and accepts us at the throne of His mercy, as if we were perfect. Therefore, let us come boldly; let us “draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water.” And now we will have one more thought, and then I shall have given you the full meaning of the text. In the seventh chapter, the nineteenth verse, there is a word that is a key to the meaning of my text, and that helped me all through it. “For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did, by the which we draw nigh unto God.” Then with this, compare the tenth chapter and first verse, “The law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year, continually make the comers thereunto perfect.” There is the word “perfect”; and we have it in the text; “for then,” says he, if they had been perfect, “would they not have ceased to be offered.” Why offer any more, if you are a perfect man? “If the sacrifice made is perfect, the worshippers, once purged, should have had no more conscience of sin.” Now mark. The Jewish sacrifice was never intended to make the Jew’s moral character any better, and it did not; it had no effect upon what we call his sanctification; all the sacrifice dealt with was his justification, and the perfection would be sought after; the perfection is not of sanctification, but of official standing, as he stood justified before God. Now that is the meaning of the word “perfect” here. It does not mean that the sacrifice did not make the man perfectly holy, and perfectly moral, and so forth; the sacrifice had no tendency to do that; it was quite another matter. It means that it did not perfectly make him justified in his own conscience and in the sight of God, because he had to come and offer again. But now behold the glory of Christ Jesus as revealed to us in our text. “Those sacrifices could not make the comers thereunto perfect.” They could not feel in their own conscience that they were perfectly justified, and they wanted fresh offerings; but I see the slaughtered Lamb on Calvary. Years ago I sought Him and I found Him. I do not want another Lamb; I do not want another sacrifice. I can still see that blood flowing, and I can feel continually that I have no more conscience of sin. (C. H. Spurgeon.) The one perfect offering:—1. The act is to perfect, which may be to a thing perfect; and seeing the end of Christ’s sacrifice is man’s full happiness, thererefore to perfect is to make us perfectly and fully happy. 2. The subject of this consecration are the sanctified. 3. The effect is glorious and most excellent, and includes regeneration, justification, reconciliation, adoption with the inferior degrees of them all, and also the resurrection and eternal glorification. And surely so rare an effect must have some excellent cause; and so it hath, and that is, that one offering of Christ. (G. Lawson.)
Perfected:—The word “perfected” falls with a strange sound on those who are experiencing daily their sad imperfections. But the Christian is a strange paradox. We are unknown, yet well known; chastened, yet not killed; dying, and, behold, we live; poor, yet making many rich; having nothing, yet possessing all things. Let me speak to you then of this twofold aspect of the Christian. You may be caught up into the third heaven, and yet the abundance of this revelation will not burn up the dross that is within you, or kill the old man, the flesh which warreth against the spirit. We have died once in Christ, and in Christ are accepted and perfect; but our old nature is not dead, the flesh in us is not annihilated, there is still within us that which has no pleasure in the will and ways of God. Painful this struggle will ever be, though God is with us, and our joy is greater than our pain. We have in us the death of Adam, and we have in us the resurrection of Jesus Christ. By the one we are broken and tormented through sin, and darkness, and sluggishness, and earthliness, and gloom; by Christ we are raised, and strengthened, and comforted. We sin, we fall, we carry about with us a mind resisting God’s will, criticising it, and rebelling; and we shall experience to the very last breath we draw on earth, that there is a conflict, and that we must strive and suffer in order to be faithful unto death. (A. Saphir.)
Importance of the death of Christ:—Speculate on it how we may, the death of the Lord Jesus Christ is presented to us in the New Testament as the everlasting reason of every happy relation between sinful man and the moral government of God. (R. W. Dale, LL.D.) By one offering:—As our burnt-offering, Christ became our righteousness in full consecration; as our peace-offering, our life; as our sin-offering, the expiation for our sins; as our guilt-offering, He made satisfaction and plenary reparation in our behalf to the God on whose inalienable rights in us, by our sins we had trespassed without measure. (S. H. Kellogg, D.D.)
Exell, J. S. (n.d.). The Biblical Illustrator: Hebrews (Vol. 2, pp. 98–100). James Nisbet & Co.
The Lord hath heard my supplication; the Lord will receive my prayer. (Psalm 6:9)
The experience here recorded is mine. I can set to my seal that God is true. In very wonderful ways He has answered the prayers of His servant many and many a time. Yes, and He is hearing my present supplication, and He is not turning away His ear from me. Blessed be His holy name!
What then? Why, for certain the promise which lies sleeping in the psalmist’s believing confidence is also mine. Let me grasp it by the hand of faith: “The Lord will receive my prayer.” He will accept it, think of it, and grant it in the way and time which His loving wisdom judges to be best. I bring my poor prayer in my hand to the great King, and He gives me audience and graciously receives my petition. My enemies will not listen to me, but my Lord will. They ridicule my tearful prayers, but my Lord does not; He receives my prayer into His ear and His heart.
What a reception this is for a poor sinner! We receive Jesus, and then the Lord receives us and our prayers for His Son’s sake. Blessed be that dear name which franks our prayers so that they freely pass even within the golden gates. Lord, teach me to pray, since Thou hearest my prayers.
As the fathers under the Law (besides the verity of the sacrifices) had two chief sacraments, to wit, circumcision and the Passover, the despisers and contemners whereof were not reputed for God’s people a, so we do acknowledge and confess that we now in the time of the gospel have two sacraments only, instituted by the Lord Jesus and commanded to be used of all those that will be reputed members of His body b, to wit, baptism and the Supper or table of the Lord Jesus called the communion of His body and blood. And these sacraments (as well of the Old as of the New Testament) were instituted of God, not only to make a visible difference betwixt His people and those that were without His league, but also to exercise the faith of His children and by participation of the same sacraments to seal in their hearts the assurance of His promises and of that most blessed conjunction, union and society which the elect have with their head, Christ Jesus. And thus we utterly damn the vanity of those that affirm sacraments to be nothing else but naked and bare signs c. No, we assuredly believe that by baptism we are engrafted in Christ Jesus to be made partakers of His justice by which our sins are covered and remitted d. And also that in the Supper rightly used, Christ Jesus is so joined with us e that He becomes the very nourishment and food of our souls. Not that we imagine any transubstantiation of bread in Christ’s natural body and of wine in His natural blood (as the papists have perniciously taught and damnably believe), but this union and conjunction which we have with the body and blood of Christ Jesus in the right use of the sacraments is wrought by operation of the Holy Ghost, who by true faith carries us above all things that are visible, carnal, and earthly, and makes us to feed upon the body and blood of Christ Jesus which was once broken and shed for us which now is in heaven f and appears in the presence of His Father for us; and yet notwithstanding the far distance of the place which is betwixt His body now glorified in heaven and us now mortal in this earth, yet we most assuredly believe that the bread that we break is the communion of Christ’s body g, and the cup which we bless is the communion of His blood. So that we confess and undoubtedly believe that the faithful, in the right use of the Lord’s table do so eat the body and drink the blood of the Lord Jesus h that He remains in them and they in Him, yes that they are so made flesh of His flesh and bone of His bones that as the eternal Godhead has given to the flesh of Christ Jesus (which of its own condition and nature was mortal and corruptible) life and immortality i, so does Christ Jesus, His flesh and blood eaten and drunk by us, give to us the same prerogatives j. Which albeit we confess are neither given unto us at that only time neither yet by the proper power and virtue of the sacrament only, yet we affirm that the faithful in the right use of the Lord’s table have such conjunction with Christ Jesus as the natural man can not apprehend. Yes and farther we affirm that albeit the faithful oppressed by negligence and manly infirmity do not profit so much as they would in the very instant action of the Supper, yet will it after bring forth fruit as lively seed sown in good ground. For the Holy Spirit (which can never be divided from the right institution of the Lord Jesus) will not frustrate the faithful of the fruit of that mystical action, but all this we say comes by true faith which apprehends Christ Jesus who only makes His sacrament effectual unto us. And, therefore, whosoever slanders us, as that we affirmed or believed sacraments to be only naked and bare signs, do injury unto us and speak against a manifest truth. But this liberally and frankly we must confess, that we make a distinction betwixt Christ Jesus in His natural substance and betwixt the elements in the sacramental signs. So that we will neither worship the signs in place of that which is signified by them, neither yet do we despise and interpret them as unprofitable and vain, but do use them with all reverence, examining ourselves diligently before, that so we do because we are assured by the mouth of the apostle that such as eat of the bread and drink of that cup unworthily are guilty of the body and blood of the Lord Jesus k.
This reading plan serves as a primer for C. S. Lewis’s classic work of Christian apologetics, Mere Christianity. Each day, for four days, you’ll be introduced to one of the four major sections that Lewis divides his book into, followed by reflection questions and relevant Scripture passages.
For a deeper reading it’s recommended that this reading plan be followed by a full, close reading of Mere Christianity.
Mere Christianity brings together Lewis’ legendary broadcast talks during World War II. In it, Lewis introduces the main beliefs of the Christian faith and discusses topics of: right and wrong, human nature, morality, marriage, sins, forgiveness, faith, hope, generosity, and theology.
Day 1: The Moral Law — The Reality of Right and Wrong
“Men ought to be unselfish, ought to be fair. Not that men are unselfish, not that they like being unselfish, but that they ought to be. The Moral Law, or Law of Human Nature, is not simply a fact about human behaviour in the same way as the Law of Gravitation is, or may be, simply a fact about how heavy objects behave. On the other hand, it is not a mere fancy, for we cannot get rid of the idea, and most of the things we say and think about men would be reduced to nonsense if we did. … Consequently, this Rule of Right and Wrong, or Law of Human Nature, or whatever you call it, must somehow or other be a real thing — a thing that is really there, not made up by ourselves. And yet it is not a fact in the ordinary sense, in the same way as our actual behaviour is a fact. It begins to look as if we shall have to admit that there is more than one kind of reality; that, in this particular case, there is something above and beyond the ordinary facts of men’s behaviour, and yet quite definitely real — a real law, which none of us made, but which we find pressing on us.”
“…Christianity simply does not make sense until you have faced the sort of facts I have been describing. Christianity tells people to repent and promises them forgiveness. It therefore has nothing (as far as I know) to say to people who do not know they have done anything to repent of and who do not feel that they need any forgiveness. It is after you have realized that there is a real Moral Law, and a Power behind the law, and that you have broken that law and put yourself wrong with that Power — it is after all this, and not a moment sooner, that Christianity begins to talk.”
Reflection Questions
Have you had any recent interactions with anyone whose actions have not been in keeping with what we think of as basic human morality or code of conduct? What was your gut reaction to this experience? How did you respond? How did you expect others to act?
Think of some words that describe how everyone should treat one another. What do you notice about these words? Are they specific to a particular time or culture, or are they universal to humanity in general?
What do you think the reality of a Moral Law tells us about God’s character? What do you think we can learn about God simply by reflecting on our innate notion of right and wrong?
Day 2: ‘Mere’ Christianity — The Central Christian Belief
“Now before I became a Christian I was under the impression that the first thing Christians had to believe was one particular theory as to what the point of [Christ’s] dying was. According to that theory God wanted to punish men for having deserted and joined the Great Rebel, but Christ volunteered to be punished instead, and so God let us off. Now I admit that even this theory does not seem to me quite so immoral and so silly as it used to; but that is not the point I want to make. What I came to see later on was that neither this theory nor any other is Christianity. The central Christian belief is that Christ’s death has somehow put us right with God and given us a fresh start. Theories as to how it did this are another matter.”
“We are told that Christ was killed for us, that His death has washed out our sins, and that by dying He disabled death itself. That is the formula. That is Christianity. That is what has to be believed. Any theories we build up as to how Christ’s death did all this are, in my view, quite secondary: mere plans or diagrams to be left alone if they do not help us, and, even if they do help us, not to be confused with the thing itself.”
“…the Christian is in a different position from other people who are trying to be good. They hope, by being good, to please God if there is one; or — if they think there is not — at least they hope to deserve approval from good men. But the Christian thinks any good he does comes from the Christ-life inside him. He does not think God will love us because we are good, but that God will make us good because He loves us; just as the roof of a greenhouse does not attract the sun because it is bright, but becomes bright because the sun shines on it.”
Reflection Questions
Consider how Lewis describes the central Christian belief: “Christ’s death has somehow put us right with God and given us a fresh start.” What struck you about his wording? Did it surprise you in any way?
So far in Mere Christianity, Lewis has almost entirely avoided quoting Scripture directly. In fact, he’s appealed primarily to his audience’s reason and human sense of morality. What do you think this says about his specific audience and context? How does this approach differ from other explanations of Christianity you’ve encountered?
In the third excerpt above, Lewis presents the idea that the Christian “does not think God will love us because we are good, but that God will make us good because He loves us.” What do you think of this idea? Have you ever encountered Christians who don’t seem to have a sense of God’s love? If so, how as that shaped your view of Christianity? How, if at all, has that shaped your view of God?
Day 3: The Golden Rule — Christian Morality Summed Up
“The first thing to get clear about Christian morality between man and man is that in this department Christ did not come to preach any brand new morality. The Golden Rule of the New Testament (Do as you would be done by) is a summing up of what every one, at bottom, had always known to be right. Really great moral teachers never do introduce new moralities: it is quacks and cranks who do that.”
“The second thing to get clear is that Christianity has not, and does not profess to have, a detailed political programme for applying ‘Do as you would be done by’ to a particular society at a particular moment. It could not have. It is meant for all men at all times and the particular programme which suited one place or time would not suit another. And, anyhow, that is not how Christianity works. When it tells you to feed the hungry it does not give you lessons in cookery. When it tells you to read the Scriptures it does not give you lessons in Hebrew and Greek, or even in English grammar. It was never intended to replace or supersede the ordinary human arts and sciences: it is rather a director which will set them all to the right jobs, and a source of energy which will give them all new life, if only they will put themselves at its disposal.”
Reflection Questions
When Lewis talks about “The Golden Rule of the New Testament,” he’s referencing Matthew 7:12 and Matthew 22:34-40. Read those two passages now. What do you think of Lewis’ assertion that “The Golden Rule … (Do as you would be done by) is a summing up of what every one, at bottom, had always known to be right” and that Christ wasn’t preaching anything new? In what sense do you think he’s right?
Imagine a world in which humans did a better job of following the Golden Rule. Make a list of some of the things that would change from the way things are now. Be as specific as possible. If people followed the Golden Rule, how would countries interact with each other differently? How about different political or religious groups? How would we resolve our differences?
Day 4: ‘Mere’ Theology — Seeking the Deeper Truths and Mysteries of God
“Doctrines are not God: they are only a kind of map. But that map is based on the experience of hundreds of people who really were in touch with God — experiences compared with which any thrills or pious feelings you and I are likely to get on our own are very elementary and very confused. … If you want to get any further, you must use the map. … Neither will you get anywhere by looking at maps without going to sea. Nor will you be very safe if you go to sea without a map.”
“All sorts of people are fond of repeating the Christian statement that ‘God is love.’ But they seem not to notice that the words ‘God is love’ have no real meaning unless God contains at least two Persons. Love is something that one person has for another person. If God was a single person, then before the world was made, He was not love. Of course, what these people mean when they say that God is love is often something quite different: they really mean ‘Love is God.’ They really mean that our feelings of love, however and wherever they arise, and whatever results they produce, are to be treated with great respect. Perhaps they are: but that is something quite different from what Christians mean by the statement ‘God is love.’ They believe that the living, dynamic activity of love has been going on in God forever and has created everything else.”
Reflection Questions:
Lewis compares “spiritual experiences” or experiences of God with going to sea and theology as the map that shows you how to navigate the sea. What do you think of this analogy? Are there certain topics within theology — or the study of God — that you wish you knew more about? If so, what are they?
What comes to mind when you hear the phrase ‘God is love’? In light of what Lewis explains in the second excerpt above, how has your concept of the phrase changed — or has it changed?
In part four of Mere Christianity, Lewis covers a lot of theological ground — everything from the concept of our oneness with God to the doctrine of the Trinity — explaining that Christianity is necessarily very complex because reality is very complex. Throughout the whole book, C. S. Lewis starts with the simplest and most essential aspects of Christianity and gradually leads the reader into the deeper complexities and mysteries. What about Christianity — whether or not you are a Christian — seems most difficult for you to accept or understand? What intrigues you the most? What fascinates or worries you? It might be worth making a list of questions you have about God, the Bible, Jesus Christ, and the Christian faith.
Mere Christianity explores the core beliefs of Christianity by providing an unequaled opportunity for believers and nonbelievers alike to hear a powerful, rational case for the Christian faith. A brilliant collection, Mere Christianity remains strikingly fresh for the modern reader and at the same time confirms C. S. Lewis’s reputation as one of the leading writer and thinkers of our age.
Persecution. It’s a hot topic in pop-evangelicalism these days in the wake of Pastor James Coates’ arrest in Canada (please don’t forget to pray for him, his family, and his church).
Though Pastor Coates’ arrest was heartbreaking, one good thing that has come out of it is that the online discussion about it has pulled back the curtain on just how much biblical ignorance is running rampant out there among professing Christians on the issue of persecution.
In a way, it’s understandable. American citizens (and many citizens of other Westernized countries as well) alive today have grown up with the guarantee of freedom of religion, codified in our Constitution. Until the last ten years or so, finding the proverbial needle in the haystack would have been much easier than finding an American who had experienced actual Christian persecution at the hands of her government.
To us, the persecution of Christians has always been something that happened thousands of miles away in far off, uncivilized, unsophisticated lands. “That could never happen here,” we mused thankfully, and promptly pushed the matter out of our thoughts.
But it can happen here. It’s already happening here. And it will increasingly continue to happen here.
And so, it’s a good thing that the issue has come to the forefront now, while we still have time to develop a biblical theology of persecution and prepare to act on it.
Let’s examine four popular misunderstandings about persecution, and what the Bible has to say about it.
1. The degree of persecution does not equal the definition of persecution.
“That’s not persecution. Persecution is being burned on sticks.”
I forget what the “that” was in this comment I recently saw on social media, but the “burned on sticks” part stuck in my memory. Whatever the “that” was, it some sort of unpleasantness aimed at a Christian for his faith, but it was much less intense than being burned on sticks.
But that diminished intensity doesn’t mean “that” wasn’t also, in fact, persecution. It only means “that” was less painful, less inconvenient, less life-altering, less terrifying persecution than the persecution of being burned on sticks.
I think maybe people don’t understand the difference between the definition of persecution and the degree of severity of persecution. Persecution is like stealing. Taking a paper clip from your office isn’t as severe as embezzling millions of dollars, and doesn’t garner as severe a consequence, but both are, qualitatively, and, definitionally, stealing. When you take something that isn’t yours, without permission that’s stealing, regardless of the value of what you take, and regardless of the consequences that follow.
The Bible doesn’t give a cut-and-dried definition of Christian persecution – i.e. there’s no one verse that specifically says, “Persecution is _____,” – rather, we glean the definition from looking at examples of it in Scripture. And, actually, if we look at it on a spiritual level rather than a temporal, tangible, earthly level, the definition of Christian persecution is rather simple: Christ is always right. Satan is always wrong. Any time Satan opposes Christ, that’s persecution.
Christ is always right. Satan is always wrong. Any time Satan opposes Christ, that’s persecution.Tweet
If you are obediently following God’s Word, standing with Christ and His Word, and you face opposition for that – regardless of the official reason given for the opposition (more about that in a sec) – you’re being persecuted, whether it’s somebody responding to your Christian worldview Facebook post with an “angry face” emoji or somebody executing you for sharing the gospel.
The Bible says in 2 Timothy 3:12:
Indeed, all who desire to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted.
If the definition of persecution is being “burned on sticks” – martyrdom – then this verse of Scripture isn’t true. Millions of Christians living godly lives in Christ Jesus have lived and died without being martyred. Yet this verse says all will be persecuted. Since we know this verse of Scripture is true, that means persecution has to include lesser forms of mistreatment of Christians.
We should never say that somebody calling you a booger head for being a Christian is as bad as, painful as, or difficult as being burned at the stake, but both are, qualitatively, persecution, just in different degrees of severity.
2. We must think about persecution on a spiritual level, not a tangible level.
For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places.Ephesians 6:12
We’ve simply got to wrap our minds around this concept if we’re going to properly understand persecution.
There is an entire, real spiritual realm that we cannot see, hear, or touch. And in that realm, Satan and his minions are constantly rebelling against God and attempting to, for lack of a better word, “attack” God and thwart His purposes.
And what better way to really stick it to God than by using His own Creation against Him? People made by God in His image. People He loves so much that He sacrificed His only Son for them.
Because we can’t see Satan and his demons, he “puts on flesh” by using his children – his slaves – to do his bidding.
So when we see, for example, governmental officials placing restrictions on the church and giving Covid as the reason, we’re not seeing reasonable, uninfluenced people altruistically doing what’s best to protect others. That’s just the deceptive window dressing Satan wants us to see. That’s his sleight of hand to distract us from what’s really going on in the spiritual realm: he’s attempting to attack God and His people and thwart God’s plan for the church. And he’s using God’s own creation – people and government- to do it.
In this whole debate about Pastor Coates and whether or not he should have obeyed the government’s Covid regulations, and whether or not he should have gone to jail for refusing to obey them, and whether or not his imprisonment is actually persecution, one of the things Christians are failing to grasp is that, in God’s economy, the government has no right or authority to place any restrictions on the church in the first place.
In God’s economy, the government has no right or authority to place any restrictions on the church in the first place.Tweet
Stop myopically looking at one itty bitty little tree, and back up and look at the whole forest: God is King of the Universe. He purchased the church with the blood of His Son. He founded it. He owns it. He is the head of it and rules over it.
The government is God’s servant. A servant has no right to override his master’s commands:
God commands us to meet together in person1. His servant, the government, has no right to say otherwise or to punish people who are obeying God by gathering rather than man by not gathering.
God says: proclaim the gospel to the wholecreation and make disciples of them, come, allwho are thirsty, and whosoever willmay come. He casts out no one who comes to Him.
His servant, the government, has no right to issue an edict that only a select few may enter the church to serve the Lord with gladness, come into His presence with singing, enter His gates with thanksgiving, and His courts with praise, when God has said, “Make a joyful noise to the Lord, all the earth.” God does not place capacity limits on who may come into His church. The government certainly has no right to do so.
Open your spiritual eyes, sisters. Look beyond what you can see in this tangible realm, and grasp the bigger picture. This isn’t about what your physical eyes can see. Persecution is about spiritual warfare.
3. Satan is a deceiver.
Have you ever heard the old saying, “The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn’t exist.”2? Well, it’s true and he pulls that trick on various levels with various people. It’s not just on the macro level with atheists or lost people who are convinced Satan is just a mythological character. There’s also the micro level of the sleepy-eyed Christian who has forgotten that Satan is the underlying inspiration for every unholy act in the world. (And we’re all prone to that forgetfulness from time to time.)
That’s why Satan doesn’t march right up to Christians and say, “Hi, I’m the Prince of Darkness. Wouldn’t you like to sin against God today?”. He’s smarter than that. He knows if he presents himself to you as what he really is, and sin as what it really is, you’d see right through him and stay away from him.
There may come a point in time in the West at which the government clearly and overtly says, “Christianity is against the law, and if you’re a Christian, you’ll be executed.”
But that time is not now. That’s the last leg of the race for Satan. And you don’t get to the last leg of the race without first having stretched, put on your running shoes, and run the first, second, and third leg of the race. And that’s where we are right now: at the beginning of the race.
At the beginning of the race, Satan has to con you into believing there are good reasons for the havoc he’s wreaking on the church, and he’ll even disguise himself as an angel of light and dress up his reasons in the costume of Christian-ese to do it. And that’s exactly what he has done as he has persecuted God’s church with Covid regulations3:
It’s for your safety…
It’s for the safety of others…
It’s loving your neighbor…
The Bible says you have to obey the government, no matter what…
And…
James Coates wasn’t arrested for preaching, he was arrested refusing to obey Covid regulations.
Again, put on your spirit realm thinking cap and your spiritual eyeglasses and see what’s really going on here. Satan doesn’t give a flying flip about Covid regulations, or the virus itself, or how many people it kills or doesn’t kill. His mission (though futile) is to destroy God’s church, and to oppose, rebel against, and attempt to thwart God’s plans and purposes at every turn. And he will use anything he can get his hands on to do that – especially deception that veils what he’s really doing.
Don’t believe me? What capital crime did the Roman government officially charge Jesus with and execute Him for? It wasn’t for preaching or being a “Christian”. It was for insurrection. Because in Rome’s eyes, there was only one King of the Jews, and it wasn’t Jesus.
And what about the riot in Ephesus? When the Ephesian business men grabbed Gaius and Aristarchus, they didn’t say, “We’re about to beat you senseless because you’re Christians.” Nope, it was, “It’s the economy, Stupid.” They were riled up at the Christians because they were losing money.
And when Paul was arrested in Acts 21, the reason given was inciting a riot, not his beliefs or practices as a Christian.
And when Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego were thrown into the furnace, the capital charge was not: “These men worship the one true God,” The official charge was that they refused to obey the king’s unbiblical law – which as the governmental “servant of God” he had no right to make in the first place, nor to punish God’s people when they obeyed Him rather than man. Selah.
Need I go on? Search your Bible. Search the nightly news. You’ll find many instances in which Satan sets the stage with elaborate props of perfectly logical sounding reasons why God’s people are being attacked, while backstage, he’s singing second verse, same as the first – I hate God and I want to kill what He loves.
He wants you to think pastors are being arrested and fined and sanctioned because of Covid regulations, or that Christian businesses and organizations that won’t get on board with the government’s sexual perversion agenda (let the reader understand) are violating anti-discrimination laws, but that’s not the real reason. They’re being arrested and fined and sanctioned because Satan wants to obliterate the church.
If you are walking in obedience to the Lord and you face opposition or restriction, that’s persecution, regardless of the “official” reason given.
4. Knowing the consequences ahead of time doesn’t mean it’s not persecution.
“James Coates had been warned multiple times that he was violating Covid regulations and he kept doing it, so he can’t cry ‘persecution’ now that he has to pay the piper.”
Um…seriously? Have you ever read your Bible? Persecution is not defined by whether or not you know what the consequences for your actions will be ahead of time. I would even argue that most victims of persecution in the Bible knew what they were in for, and they chose to obey God rather than evil men anyway.
The Apostles had already been beaten and imprisoned for preaching the gospel, so they certainly knew they were in for more of the same when they went out and preached again.
Persecution is when Satan attempts to attack God and His people. It has nothing to do with whether or not the Christian being attacked knows what consequences his actions will bring.
Knowing the consequences ahead of time and obeying God anyway doesn’t mean you aren’t being persecuted, it means you’re a Christian.
There’s a lot of misinformation floating around out there about Christian persecution. If you’re a genuinely regenerated Christian, you will face some level of persecution at some point in your life. That’s a promise from Scripture. It’s important to be prepared for that so you can respond in a godly and obedient way, because responding to persecution by refusing to bow to man over God and doing so with a holy, humble, honored attitude is a testimony to the world, and an encouragement to your brothers and sisters, that Jesus Christ is King, and that He alone is worthy to rule and to reign.
1The Greek word for “church” in the New Testament is ekklesia. It literally means a gathering or an assembly. The church, is, by definition, a gathering together – in person – of “the called out ones” – Christians. Watching a church service online is a blessing when you are temporarily Providentially hindered from being there in person, but it is not the same as going to church, as we are commanded, and it is not a biblical substitute for going to church as we are commanded. It is not church at all, because where there is no gathering, there is no church.
2Quote attributed to 19th century French poet, Charles Baudelaire
3Please understand, I’m not saying that if you have to stay home from church temporarily to stay healthy that you’re automatically deceived or unsaved. Remember, we’re talking about the long term, big picture of Satan’s agenda here, not individual trees in the forest.
Why are COVID restrictions on gathering size persecution, but fire codes limiting gathering size are not? Glad You Asked (~23:21) at A Word Fitly Spoken
I did not have an opportunity, before I wrote this article, to listen to James Coates’ last sermon before he was arrested, but he does a much better job of explaining the government’s roles and responsibilities, and exegeting Romans 13 than I ever could. Please give it a listen:
And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. (John 10:28)
We believe in the eternal security of the saints. First, because they are Christ’s, and He will never lose the sheep which He has bought with His blood and received of His Father.
Next, because He gives them eternal life, and if it be eternal, well then, it is eternal, and there can be no end to hell, and heaven, and God. If spiritual life can die out, it is manifestly not eternal life, and that effectually shuts out the possibility of an end.
Observe, further, that the Lord expressly says, “They shall never perish.” As long as words have a meaning, this secures believers from perishing. The most obstinate unbelief cannot force this meaning out of this sentence.
Then, to make the matter complete, He declares that His people are in His hand, and He defies all their enemies to pluck them out of it. Surely it is a thing impossible even for the fiend of hell. We must be safe in the grasp of an almighty Savior. Be it ours to dismiss carnal fear as well as carnal confidence and rest peacefully in the hollow of the Redeemer’s hand.
saying, “Father, if You are willing, remove this cup from Me; yet not My will, but Yours be done.” (22:42)
The goal of all true prayer is that God’s will be done. Those who genuinely feel the affliction caused by sin and temptation are motivated to submit to Him. In Psalm 40:8 David exclaimed, “I delight to do Your will, O my God,” while in Psalm 143:10 he pleaded, “Teach me to do Your will, for You are my God; let Your good Spirit lead me on level ground.” Jesus’ model prayer teaches those who address God in prayer to say, “Your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven” (Matt. 6:10; cf. Luke 11:2). The apostle John wrote, “This is the confidence which we have before Him, that, if we ask anything according to His will, He hears us. And if we know that He hears us in whatever we ask, we know that we have the requests which we have asked from Him” (1 John 5:14–15). Submission to God’s will is foundational to prayer. Jesus’ request, “Father, if You are willing,” highlights once again the contrast between His temptation and those of believers. He submitted to the Father’s will that He be made sin; believers pray that they might submit to God’s will by forsaking sin and embracing holiness. Mark records that Jesus addressed the Father using the intimate, endearing, affectionate term “Abba” (Mark 14:36), revealing the earnestness and intensity of His plea. No Jew would ever call God Father, let alone Abba. But the Lord uses this affectionate, personal term to refer to God, pleading for His intimate love to rescue Him if He wills. The word “cup” is frequently associated with judgment in the Old Testament (Pss. 11:6; 75:8; Isa. 51:17, 22; Jer. 25:15–17; 49:12; Lam. 4:21; Ezek. 23:31–33; Hab. 2:16; Zech. 12:2). Here it also refers to the agony, guilt, and wrath associated with God’s judgment of Jesus on the cross. Some have imagined that the Lord’s plea, “if You are willing, remove this cup from Me,” was a sign of weakness on His part. But it was not weakness that prompted this request, rather the opposite. His absolute holiness demanded that He recoil at the thought of bearing sin, guilt, judgment, and wrath. No other response was possible for the eternally sinless Son of God. Jesus accepted that the cross was God’s plan. In John 12 He said, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless a grain of wheat falls into the earth and dies, it remains alone; but if it dies, it bears much fruit” (v. 24); “Now My soul has become troubled; and what shall I say, ‘Father, save Me from this hour’? But for this purpose I came to this hour” (v. 27); “And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to Myself” (v. 32). In Mark 8:31 “He began to teach [the disciples] that the Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders and the chief priests and the scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again” (cf. 9:31; Luke 9:22, 44). On the final journey to Jerusalem Jesus
took the twelve aside and began to tell them what was going to happen to Him, saying, “Behold, we are going up to Jerusalem, and the Son of Man will be delivered to the chief priests and the scribes; and they will condemn Him to death and will hand Him over to the Gentiles. They will mock Him and spit on Him, and scourge Him and kill Him, and three days later He will rise again.” (Mark 10:32–34)
In spite of experiencing satanic assaults beyond the capacity of the human mind to experience or conceive and agonizing over the prospect of bearing sin, Jesus fully submitted to the Father’s will for Him to be the sin offering (2 Cor. 5:21) so that redemption of God’s elect would be accomplished. Therefore He prayed, “Yet not My will, but Yours be done.” Jesus soon demonstrated the reality of that submission when He said to Peter, “Put the sword into the sheath; the cup which the Father has given Me, shall I not drink it?” (John 18:11).
MacArthur, J. (2014). Luke 18–24 (pp. 303–305). Moody Publishers.
42 It is fitting that Luke, who throughout his gospel stresses Jesus’ conscious fulfillment of the purposes of God, should now emphasize Jesus’ concern for the will of God. “If you are willing” (ei boulei, v. 42) is absent from Matthew and Mark at this point, though they do have the rest of v. 42. As in Matthew 20:22 and Mark 10:38, Jesus uses the “cup” as a metaphor of his imminent passion. Some, however, have imagined that this metaphor implies that Jesus faced death with less bravery than others have faced it. (But to shrink from a painful death is not necessarily cowardice; the highest bravery may consist in being fully cognizant of impending and agonizing death and yet to embrace it voluntarily.) At any rate, it has been suggested that the cup Jesus feared was that he might die from the strain he was under before he could willingly offer himself on the cross. But this view fails to recognize that Jesus would not have been as concerned with the physical pain of his death as with the spiritual desolation of bearing our sin and its judgment on the cross (2 Co 5:21; 1 Pe 2:24). Moreover, in the OT the wrath of God expressed against sin was sometimes referred to by the metaphor of a “cup” (e.g., Ps 11:6, where the NIV translates kôs as “lot” rather than “cup”; cf. Ps 75:8; Isa 51:17; Jer 25:15–17).
Liefeld, W. L., & Pao, D. W. (2007). Luke. In T. Longman III & D. E. Garland (Eds.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Luke–Acts (Revised Edition) (Vol. 10, p. 320). Zondervan.
22:42 Father, if you are willing, take this cup from me. Luke has reduced to a single prayer the threefold prayer and return to the disciples related by Matthew and Mark. The Old Testament prophets spoke of a “cup” of God’s judgment (e.g., Isa. 51:17–23; Jer. 25:15–29), and Jesus saw his coming suffering in that light (Mark 10:38–39; John 18:11). The cup is given by God, and the metaphor perhaps is used to indicate that Jesus’s coming death will involve for him a vicarious experience of God’s judgment. It was this prospect, not only the physical suffering of death, that appalled him. But if that was the only way, Jesus will not allow his natural revulsion to overcome his commitment to his Father’s purpose of salvation.
France, R. T. (2013). Luke (M. L. Strauss & J. H. Walton, Eds.; pp. 351–352). Baker Books.
Greenland framework reached: Much has been made of President Donald Trump’s insistence that the U.S. “needs” to own Greenland, the island territory currently under Danish rule. It appears some of Trump’s pointed rhetoric was simply the art of the deal. Following a meeting with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, Trump announced that he was pleased with a framework for a future deal over Greenland that will benefit all NATO nations if completed. In light of this framework, Trump now says he will not impose 10% tariffs on the NATO nations that sent a pitiful number of troops to demonstrate their resolve. Trump’s announcement came hours after the EU voted to pause the U.S.-EU trade deal agreed upon last year, saying it could not proceed unless Trump dropped the new tariffs.
Contemptible Clintons: By votes of 34-8 and 28-15, the House Oversight Committee passed resolutions holding both Bill and Hillary Clinton in contempt of Congress over their refusal to comply with subpoenas to testify on Jeffrey Epstein. Committee Chair James Comer praised the bipartisan vote, saying, “This shows that no one’s above the law.” Comer further expressed his confidence that the full House will vote to hold the Clintons in contempt. Comer also defended the Committee’s rejection of the Clintons’ offer to testify privately off the record, observing, “Former President Clinton has a documented history of parsing language to evade questions, responded falsely under oath, and was impeached and suspended from the practice of law as a result. The absence of an official transcript is an indefensible demand.” Should the House vote to hold the Clintons in contempt, they risk potential jail time.
Bringing back mental institutions: “[I] signed an executive order to bring back mental institutions and insane asylums,” President Trump said this week while recounting his first-year achievements. “We’re going to have to bring them back. … You’ve got to get the people off the streets.” The order he’s referring to was signed in July, and it directs federal agencies to assist states in moving toward institutional treatment for vagrants (homeless people) with mental health or drug issues, rather than the “housing first” model. As is often the case, Trump sounds a bit harsh, but he’s right. Liberals say they’re “compassionate” for not institutionalizing people, but the reality is that some people end up living under overpasses and in tents on the streets or in the woods by your local gas station. True compassion is recognizing the dignity of all people and working toward what’s best for them.
Mexican cartel members face justice in the U.S.: It appears that when enough political pressure is brought to bear, the Mexican government can take bold action against the cartels that wield tremendous power in that nation. In December, the Mexican government raided multiple drug sites controlled by a Sinaloa cartel leader and seized 1,500 kilograms of fentanyl. That Sinaloa leader, Pedro Inzunza Noriega, and 36 other human traffickers and arms dealers who are members of various cartels were delivered by Mexico to the U.S. to face justice on Tuesday night. The Mexican government used its National Security Law to hand the criminals over to the U.S. Justice Department and signaled that Trump’s threatened military actions against cartels may not be needed.
Self-deportation bonuses: Homeland Security Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin broke down the ongoing deportation efforts on “The Sitdown With Alex Swoyer” podcast this week. Over 100,000 self-deportation bonuses have been paid out to illegals who opted to take the Trump administration’s offer of $1,000 and a plane ticket. That means at least $100 million has been paid out in bonuses, though there was a surge over the holidays when the administration briefly raised the bonus to $3,000. Paying illegals to self-deport may seem strange to Americans, but McLaughlin explained that it’s “a 70% savings, at least,” compared to the average $17,000 cost to arrest, detain, and deport illegals forcibly. McLaughlin said that more than 600,000 illegals have been deported at a rate of about 2,500 a day. ICE’s officially available numbers only show about 118,164 forcible deportations, with the rate sitting at 1,200 daily.
Jack Smith to testify publicly before House: Today, former Special Counsel Jack Smith will publicly testify before the House Judiciary Committee in connection with the two cases he led against Donald Trump regarding classified documents and the January 6 Capitol riot. Both cases were dropped after Trump won the 2024 presidential election, and both served as leading examples of a lawfare campaign that was waged against Trump in the Biden administration’s failed effort to prevent him from returning to the White House. Smith, who expressed frustration over having to abandon his cases against Trump, has repeatedly sought a public hearing before Congress to make his case, despite having given closed-door testimony to lawmakers. This hearing will predictably amount to more expressions of anti-Trump political fodder than an actual informational hearing as Smith attempts to spin the narrative that he had no political bias.
Bill to block investors from buying homes: Republican Rep. Mary Miller on Wednesday introduced a bill aimed at preventing large corporations from buying up single-family houses and “crowding families out of homes.” Dubbed the American Family Housing Act, the legislation would amend the “Investment Company Act of 1940 to prohibit certain large-scale companies from purchasing single-family residences.” Miller argued, “Homeownership is the foundation of the American Dream. But today, hardworking families are competing with massive Wall Street firms that are buying up single-family homes and pricing Americans out of their own communities.” The legislation, which mirrors President Trump’s recent executive order, would require the SEC to “monitor and enforce restrictions preventing large institutional investment firms from purchasing single-family homes” and apply to corporations with “more than $100 billion in assets under management.”
House passes bill to fund pregnancy centers: With the annual March for Life happening on Friday, House Republicans passed a bill to continue federal funding for pregnancy resource centers that offer assistance and support for low-income pregnant women and mothers. The vote was 215-209; only one Democrat voted in favor of the bill. The bill’s author, Rep. Michelle Fischbach, said, “Pregnancy centers are the backbone of community-based support. The impact of their work is undeniable.” She observed that in 2024, some 2,700 pregnancy centers provided over $452 million in care services to 3.8 million women, children, and families. Fischbach also challenged Democrats who have falsely demonized these pregnancy centers to actually go and visit them and see the compassionate work they are doing. Predictably, Democrats opposed the legislation, with Rep. Danny Davis falsely framing these centers as “dangerous anti-abortion centers” that restrict “women’s reproductive choices.”
New B-2 bomber order: President Trump reminded globalists in Davos, Switzerland, of the U.S.‘s military might in a speech yesterday, referencing the B-2 bombers’ precision strike on Iran last summer that was completely undetected until after bombs were exploding and crippling that nation’s nuclear project. He also promised that the U.S. would order 25 more of the advanced bombers to supplement the 19 already in service. Some defense aficionados may be surprised that Trump would order more B-2s when the newer B-21 bomber with many of the same capabilities is expected to enter service at this time. Given that the commander-in-chief also referred to the upcoming F-47 fighter as the “first stage-six plane” rather than “sixth-generation fighter,” perhaps he was merely opting not to dive into the difference between the B-2 and the B-21.
Uvalde officer acquitted: In 2022, a mass murderer slaughtered 19 children and two teachers at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas. Our Mark Alexander thoroughly documented the assault and the problematic law enforcement response at the time. Officer Adrian Gonzales was one of the first responders, but he remained outside the building instead of confronting the killer. He was subsequently indicted on 29 counts of child endangerment, but he was acquitted yesterday. The defense argued that he was unfairly singled out because four other officers arrived simultaneously but also remained outside. Nearly 400 officers eventually responded to the scene. When a group of them, including Gonzales, did enter, the assailant fired at them, and they retreated. More than an hour went by before a law enforcement unit killed the assailant, but the jury declined to single out Gonzales for punishment.
Headlines
Trump and world leaders sign Gaza Board of Peace charter (Fox News)
Bondi cries foul on Dems’ abuse of blue slips after U.S. attorney’s exit in Virginia (Washington Times)
Things were already getting spicy in Switzerland this week, and President Donald Trump’s arrival just turned up the heat. Grab your popcorn because we have some entertainment for you.
If you thought Trump’s ego was bad, the elites at Davos are far worse. Columnist Larry Taunton dubs them the “global HOA from hell” and accurately describes WEFers as having “planetary-sized ambitions and egos to match, and not being content with annoying people individually, they maintain this exclusive club of like-minded maniacs to annoy whole populations.” Based, as the kids say. The fact that Trump and a few other key American figures popped some of their ego bubbles put a smile on my face.
Starting with America’s top hat, Canada, Prime Minister Mark Carney was still harping on the climate, claiming, “We can’t stabilize the climate unless we get to net zero [emissions].” Carney has been cozying up to China, even more than usual for him, because he’s upset that Trump would want to protect our hemisphere from the communists. He goaded that the U.S.-led “rules-based international order” is finished and “will not return.” He had noted prior to Davos that Canada’s partnership with China would position it for the “new world order.”
Trump called Carney out when he took the stage. “Canada gets a lot of freebies from us,” Trump noted. “They should be grateful, but they’re not. … Canada lives because of the United States. Remember that, Mark, the next time you make those ungrateful speeches.” Carney’s cooked.
The French got in on the action (figuratively, because they’re lousy at real fights), with nitwits like French central banker François Villeroy de Galhau opining that the “privatization of money” is a threat to national sovereignty and that the solution is central bank digital currencies. The elite atmosphere wouldn’t be complete without President Emmanuel Macron wearing his aviators inside and whining about big, mean Trump. The U.S. is undermining global governance and weakening Europe “with an endless accumulation of new tariffs that are fundamentally unacceptable,” Macron complained. “Even more so when they are used as leverage against territorial sovereignty.” He concluded, “We do prefer respect to bullies. We do prefer science to politicism. And we do prefer Rule of Law to brutality. You’re welcome in Europe, and you are more than welcome to France.” Indeed, so many people are welcome to France that they don’t have a country anymore.
Trump, in WWE fashion, body-slammed the French and all of Europe for their stupidity in believing the globalist lies. He spelled out the result of their folly: “Many parts of our world are being destroyed before our very eyes, and the leaders don’t even understand what’s happening. And the ones that do understand aren’t doing anything about it. Virtually all of the so-called experts predicted my plans to end this failed model would trigger a global recession and runaway inflation, but we are proving them wrong.” He kept them pinned to the mat, pointing out the obvious: “Certain places in Europe are not even recognizable, frankly, anymore.”
Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick joined Trump in turning Europe into the proverbial punching bag, stating point-blank, “Globalization has failed the West and the United States of America. It’s a failed policy. It is what the WEF has stood for, which is export, offshore, far shore, find the cheapest labor in the world, and the world is a better place for it.” He encouraged the other countries to implement the same policies that America First is using to protect our own people and country. He stressed the lunacy of net zero by asking, “Why would Europe agree to be net zero in 2030 when they don’t make a battery?” The truth hurts.
Citadel CEO Ken Griffin took shots at the disastrous state of America’s economy under Joe Biden’s sleepy watch: “You cannot imagine how painful it was each and every day under the Biden administration to look at what new, crazy proposal was being put into place to solve a problem that didn’t even exist.” He continued to describe the severity of the business-restricting regulatory conditions under Biden, whose decisions “were so poorly thought out in terms of economic consequences, it cost the U.S. economy dearly.” Was anything “thought out” during the Biden years? We share your pain, bro — we had to watch the clown show, too.
All the elites’ egos were bruised and noses out of joint over Trump’s threats of tariffs over the weekend if Denmark didn’t make a deal on Greenland. This is typical art of the dealmaking for him — he pushes as far as he can in order to get the best deal. He got a few more punches in on that score at Davos before an agreement was made yesterday: “After the war, we gave Greenland back to Denmark. How stupid were we to do that? … How ungrateful are they now?” He went on to say that the U.S. had fought to save Greenland for Denmark in WWII because Denmark was unable to do so.
Later in the day, Trump announced on Truth Social that an agreement had been reached after his meeting with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte and that he was reversing the tariffs set to take effect on February 1. “We have formed the framework of a future deal with respect to Greenland and, in fact, the entire Arctic Region,” he wrote. The deal is still in progress, Trump relayed, but “It gets us everything we needed to get.” He further confirmed that it would be great for America and all NATO nations but declined to say whether ownership of Greenland was in the equation. Now that this brawl is over (at least temporarily), we’ll see who Trump picks a fight with next.
Europe was hammered hard by the large U.S. delegation at Davos, and I’m here for it! But probably the best burn of the day or week goes to Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent. He noted that California Governor Gavin Newsom is “here this week with his billionaire sugar daddy, Alex Soros.” But his real gem was to say that “Newsom — who strikes me as Patrick Bateman meets Sparkle Beach Ken — may be the only Californian who knows less about economics than Kamala Harris.” The memes are already pouring in.
Lutnick and Trump are right — globalism has failed, and the future belongs to the country that puts its people first. The West will not survive if World Economic Forum policies and ideas are allowed to rule.
I’ll let Trump have the last word: “The explosion of prosperity … and progress that built the West did not come from our tax codes — it ultimately came from our very special culture. We have to defend that culture, and rediscover the spirit that lifted the West from the depths of the Dark Ages to the pinnacle of human achievement.”
Emmy Griffin: SCOTUS Skeptical in Fed Firing Case — Donald Trump is once again testing the limitations of his executive power as the president, and the justices seemed reticent to let it go unchecked.
Thomas Gallatin: Who’s Paying for Trump’s Tariffs? — A new study shows that the vast majority of the cost of Donald Trump’s tariffs is being passed on to the American consumer.
Samantha Koch: Emotion vs. Evidence: The Response to Renee Good — Political engagement is increasingly built around intense emotional reactions — particularly anger at perceived injustice and fear of societal decline.
Honoring the Sanctity of Life — In the new post-Dobbs reality, it’s still worth reflecting on the Roe v. Wade anniversary and the millions of children lost.
If you’d like to receive Alexander’s Column by email every Wednesday, update your subscription here.
Reader Comments
Editor’s Note: Each week we receive hundreds of comments and correspondences — and we read every one of them. Click here for a few thought-provoking comments about specific articles. The views expressed therein don’t necessarily reflect those of The Patriot Post.
Latest PodcastPopCon #130: Church Service Interrupted by Anti-ICE Protesters in St. PaulWorshippers at Cities Church in Saint Paul, Minnesota, had their Sunday service disrupted when leftist protesters (led by “journalist” Don Lemon) entered and began shouting, crowding around congregants, and derailing the worship service. In this episode, Thomas, Sterling, and Andrew break down what happened, why it matters, and what it says about the clash of worldviews playing out across the country.
BEST OF VIDEOS
This Is a Craven Political Calculus — Jonathan Turley discusses the DOJ’s subpoenas against Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, MN Attorney General Keith Ellison, and Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey.
SHORT CUTS
Race Bait
“They about to outlaw the idea of white supremacy and white hate. Like, they are about to be like, ‘Oh, that’s not a thing.’ … We have seen these random black bodies be strung up down south. … You embolden everybody to take off their hoods. That is what [Trump] has done.” —Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-TX)
Lawfare Tsunami 2.0
“The blue tsunami means that Congress is going to haul Elon Musk, ‘Big Balls,’ and a bunch of other people’s [rear ends] in front and say, ‘What crimes did you commit?’ And it’s going to get really serious. And the same with Trump. … We are serious about this. We are prosecuting. We’re going to uncover every document, every phone call, everything you did. We will be relentless about it.” —podcaster Jennifer Welch
“That means adding seats to the Supreme Court so that [its] immunity decision can be overturned and so Donald Trump can be held accountable for his crimes.” —former CNN correspondent Jim Acosta
Braying Jenny
“It’s time to do something about [Donald Trump], because he’s leading us into World War III.” —”The View” co-host Joy Behar
Justifying Terrorism
“ICE has led the way in their charge of going onto school properties and detaining people from places that should be just as well kept sacred. … They cannot expect residents who are feeling terrorized and sieged to be operating under any different circumstances or any different rules than they are operating in.” —St. Paul Mayor Kaohly Her
Lack of Self-Awareness Award
“ICE should not be able to storm houses of worship.” —House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY)
For the Record
“No one has a ‘right’ to disrupt church services. The civil rights of the members of Cities Church were violated Sunday at a time when their rights and the church should have been sacrosanct.” —Gary Bauer
“The Times just published an article titled ‘Protest at Minnesota Church Service Adds to Tensions Over ICE Tactics.’ It was eye-opening for the congregants who did not realize that their worship service was an ICE tactic… It is akin to saying ‘Bank Robbery Adds to Tensions Over Fiscal Policies.’ It appears that the congregants of Cities Church were a triggering gathering for traumatized anti-ICE protesters.” —law professor Jonathan Turley
“Seeing the mobs of far-left extremists roaming the streets to hunt down targets, storming a church service, stopping drivers and making them open their cars, robbing videographers of their equipment and stopping random people to demand their political loyalty — easy now to see how revolutionary, left-wing violence happened historically.” —independent journalist Andy Ngo
Well That’s a Relief
“I don’t have to use force. I don’t want to use force. I won’t use force.” —President Donald Trump regarding Greenland
Davos Mic Drops
“I think it’s very, very ironic that Governor Newsom … may be the only Californian who knows less about economics than Kamala Harris. He’s here this week with his billionaire sugar daddy, Alex Soros.” —Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent
“Globalization has failed the West and the United States of America.” —Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick
Cognitive Dissonance
“We have simultaneously been told that tariffs are great, and that they will reduce our national debt, replace income taxes and/or make us all rich; that tariffs are bad because other countries force them upon us so they deserve it, and/or tariffs are bad so threatening tariffs is part of a really effective bargaining tactic; that other countries will pay for tariffs so what are you even worrying about; that tariffs will make everything cheaper; or that tariffs will find their way back to us in the form of Biden-style stimulus checks.” —Ian Haworth
Belly Laugh of the Day
“Crazy to think JD VANCE and his lovely wife USHA are expecting their FOURTH child! If you don’t think four kids is A LOT then you’ve never run a Somali Daycare.” —satirist Jimmy Failla
ON THIS DAY in 1973, the Supreme Court handed down one of its worst-ever decisions in Roe v. Wade. Fortunately, in 2022, the Court overturned that awful precedent, returning the issue to the states, and the battle for life in the womb continues as also one for hearts and minds
President Donald Trump has issued a stark warning to Hamas as his administration sanctions groups tied to their financing. Millions of Americans are bracing for a potential snow and ice storm. Former police officer Adrian Gonzales was found not guilty of charges that he failed his duty to confront the gunman in the Uvalde Texas Elementary school shooting that killed 19 children and 2 teachers. The USS Abraham Lincoln Carrier Group is nearing the coast of Iran, ready to strike if the Commander-in-Chief pulls the trigger. President Trump is moving ahead with a deal to give the White House what it wants in Greenland. The President says details are still being worked out.
The cuisine served at White House state dinners apparently doesn’t satisfy the appetite of President Trump, who usually devours a burger before the fancy banquets begin, Yahoo News reports.
The Greenland crisis was logically always likely to end quickly, to market approval, due to European geostrategic weakness, but still herald a new world order that markets don’t understand and won’t like once they do. That’s exactly how it’s now played out.
At Davos, President Trump ruled out the use of force but gave Europe and NATO an ultimatum on Greenland: within hours, a ‘framework deal’ was struck and threatened US tariffs on eight EU countries have been removed. This reportedly echoes the post-imperial arrangement the UK has with Cyprus. The US gains time-unlimited (Trump: “Forever”) access to areas of Greenland around military bases, as well as concessions for critical minerals, and the island will host the US Golden Dome missile defense shield. There will also be a far greater, permanent European NATO focus on its defense and the Northern Passage.
Those who say TACO all the time will cluck here. Those who see Republicans serve up ‘American Greenland’ cake at a Kennedy Centre event, Trump forcing vastly higher defense spending on all US allies, being paid tariff revenues that aren’t part of any agreed FTA, receiving trillions in pledged inwards FDI which the US will direct, and putting Iran’s nuclear programme under rubble and Venezuela’s Maduro in a New York courtroom, will argue it’s Europe that yielded, and will be forced to spend even more on Arctic defence, and to move even further under a US shield and a critical minerals processing compact, not its own independent ones.
For markets, that’s the good news. The bad news is that the liberal world order is shattered.
Trump didn’t invade – and he was never going to except in some fevered imaginations. Yet he demonstrated to Europe he could, as could others in the future, and there’s presently nothing they can do about it. That’s how the world always worked until the past few decades, and it’s how it will work again going forwards.
For example, as Europe looks north-west, this week saw the US suddenly withdraw support for the Kurdish region of Syria that has thrived in recent years as it opts to back the former-jihadi Syrian president instead: there are already reports of appalling violence being inflicted on Kurds there. If Europe noticed that development to its south-east, it’s completely powerless to do anything about it if it disagrees – which isn’t clear at all either.
Moreover, on top of trade, energy, tech, finance, and NATO/Ukraine as points of relative European geostrategic weakness, once one accepts realpolitik, consider that if Europe ever ‘pivots to China’, as some have whispered, the US can ‘pivot to Russia’ and arm it against Ukraine and Europe. If Europe thinks it has that China card in its pocket, it needs to be aware that the US still has more of them.
That’s hardly the foundation for a solid Western alliance. Indeed, even with tariff threats removed, the European establishment loves America but in private evidently wishes Trump were gone – ECB President Lagarde walked out of a Davos dinner after anti-EU barbs from US Commerce Secretary Lutnick. Equally, the US President states in public that he loves Europe and his admin that they wish its establishment was gone (see the NSS). So where to from here?
Logically, leaderships could change. November 2026 looms, as does the French presidential election in April 2027. Yet some genies aren’t so easily put back into bottles.
As such, it’s down to the realpolitik of who has the best cards. Canada’s PM Carney, who didn’t meet Trump at Davos, earlier made a much-publicized speech which stated: “Many countries are drawing the same conclusions – that they must develop greater strategic autonomy: in energy, food, critical minerals, in finance and supply chains. And this impulse is understandable. A country that can’t feed itself, fuel itself or defend itself has few options. When the rules no longer protect you, you must protect yourself.” That sounds exactly like Trump.
Yet as George Magnus points out, Carney citing Czech anti-communist dissident Vaclav Havel’s ‘The Power of the Powerless’ to call out Trump and the polite hypocrisies of the liberal world order doesn’t sit easily with him heading to China to strike trade deals. That’s Trump’s game, played with far weaker cards. Today, the powerless are… powerless.
Indeed, Trump noted from the Davos stage: “Canada lives because of the United States. Remember that, Mark, the next time you make your statements.” As the Canadian press puts it, ‘At Davos, a new great game dawns for the world. Which way, Canada?’ And all of us.
In the short term, green land – because TACO, or because Europe in 2026 is Egypt of 1956. In the long term, it’s unclear – and starkly binary.
Europe and others can try to go their own way. For example, Spain just urged the EU to create a joint army. Yet that’s the same Spain that adamantly refuses to spend 5% of GDP on defence within NATO. Talk is cheap. Preparation for war, or for strategic autonomy, is mind-blowingly expensive, and the US can block these moves every step of the way. Or European disunity can block itself: the European parliament just voted for the new EU-Mercosur deal to be given judicial review, which will delay it for a year. Trump deals seem to get agreed on a handshake or a tweet.
Or Europe and others will see policy after policy directed by the US. Consider the EU just watered down its green rules to ensure it can keep flows of Qatari LNG; and symbolically, the World Economic Forum is considering moving from Davos to new places. Like Florida?
Long-term planning is going to be very hard if you don’t know who is doing it for you – the US, or Europe – or China?
Domestic politics will also twist and turn in tandem. In Australia, the opposition coalition between the Liberals and the Nationals has just shattered again for the second time in a year. This time, it may not come back together as One Nation surge in the polls.
In markets, at Davos, ‘Wall Street Chiefs Try to Lay Low to Avoid Trump’s Trolling’ says Bloomberg, which summarises the mood.
Eyes are on the Supreme Court, which in hearing oral arguments expressed scepticism over Trump’s bid to sack Lisa Cook from the Fed, with specific mention of the importance of its independence. That Trump front matters as much, if not more, than Greenland, and potentially opens up a new world order to the same extent. If he wins there it would again mean green land at first, because “rate cuts!”, but then serious questions over what/where next.
There is also relative calm in Japan, which is also in the green following efforts to stabilize things after the wild volatility in JGB markets this week. That trend, which some try to paint as “a quarrel in a faraway land between people of which we know nothing”, with no implications for sensible developed markets like Europe, is also a warning. Japan just ran its fifth consecutive annual trade deficit in 2025, and it’s that development –alongside “it’s baaack” inflation– which is undermining its ability to stabilize its markets without relying on the kindness others.
That structural threat looms ahead for many economies and is another reason why they need to not only be ‘resilient’ but to run trade surpluses —which obviously not everybody can– or find a bloc they can sit within that will support them. And sometimes that choice is made for them.
California Gov. Gavin Newsom became the focus of widespread criticism this week after a photo of him posing with billionaire activist Alex Soros at the World Economic Forum in Davos went viral, drawing sharp reactions from Trump administration officials, Republican lawmakers, and conservative commentators, as reported by Fox News.
Truth2Freedom's Blog 