[26/06/16 Please note, these are my own personal views, and do not as such represent the views of Grace Baptist Mission.]
There have been a number of posts in recent days saying that the best motivation for voting #Remain on Thursday is to see the work of the gospel advance in Europe. I am startled that almost all those Christian Remainers blogging have made this highly pragmatic argument the deal-breaker in making their decision. Will Brexit be bad for mission in Europe? Well, let’s think carefully here.
The mission agency I work for has been helping support missionaries in Europe for 50 years. We sent missionaries into Spain when Franco was in power, into Belgium and France before we entered the EEC (as it was then) and long before free movement was introduced. We sent missionaries into Austria and Latvia a decade before either of those countries joined the EU. No one had their visas refused. One missionary did get arrested, but that was in Franco’s Spain in the early 1970s. We thought it was normal for missionaries to have to apply to get a visa before entering, as they do in Peru, Kenya and the Philippines. Governments have the right to control their immigration, and as Christians we play by the rules.
Then along came free movement in the EU under the Maastricht Treaty, and UK missionaries were spared the tedium of the visa queue. But don’t think that that means you are free from all bureaucracy. In France, missionaries needed to get a Carte de Sejours into the late 1990s, and if today you want to serve in Greece, Cyprus, Bulgaria or Romania for more than 90 days, you need a residency permit. Continue reading “Would Brexit be bad for mission in Europe?”
‘Jim, the way the British are debating the European Union is shallow and non-biblical’, said my Italian friend. ‘You are just talking about the economy, and how Brexit will affect jobs, and it’s very shallow and disappointing.’ I am not quoting him verbatim here, but that was the sense of what he said. That criticism has motivated me to start this blog. Whether the principles I am blogging here meet with his approval, I have no idea. But he was right to challenge us to think more deeply. So, having set out in previous posts the principles of a biblical understanding of nationhood, and the dangers of race-hatred and idolatrous nationalism, in this post I want to come to the big question: how do we evaluate the European Union in the light of such biblical principles?
First let me rule something out. I do not believe that the EU is the woman wearing a crown of twelve stars (like the EU flag?) on her head in Rev 12:1. That is unquestionably the church, not some evil empire, and need not distract us. The descriptions of Babylon in Rev. 17-18 have attracted more attention. Is the EU the great whore of Babylon? The characters of the vision in Rev. 17 are difficult to identify, and across the centuries Babylon has variously been identified with the Roman Empire (by the early church), the Roman Catholic Church (by the Reformers), and more modern empires in Europe by more recent interpreters. I think we should read this vision in more broadly typical terms, with Babylon as the personification of evil and rebellion against God in all its manifestations. If you are a North Korean Christian, you won’t be much worried by the EU, and likewise Zimbabwean Christians may see other regimes reflected in Rev. 17-18. It’s good to ask yourself how Christians around the world read such visions before we rush to judgement.
However, when we turn to Genesis, the history worked out in Gen. 10-11 gives us material that is clear, much less disputed, and I think can be applied to the decision we face. The EU is not the whore of Babylon, but it does manifest some characteristics of the Babel project that should alarm us. Continue reading “Brexit – return to God’s plan for nations”
The tragic death of Jo Cox MP has had a cauterising effect on political debate over the last couple of days. Politicians seem embarrassed for the way they have been treating each other in the referendum debate. Perhaps now, cooled tempers can allow us to think respectfully and with humility about the great judgement we each have to make this week. So far the debate has focused mainly on three issues: the future trajectory of the economy, democracy, and immigration. You can read the tea leaves how you please on the first, have a reasoned argument about accountability on the second, but it is immigration that really raises the blood pressure. So let me here make my contribution to the debate as a Christian who believes passionately in biblical nationhood, but who is appalled by racism and nationalism.
Is it true that the opposite of internationalism must be racial hatred? Is the only way to avoid racial hatred to have open borders and not to care about our own culture, language and history? Continue reading “Murder, race hatred, and nationalism”
Are nations a good thing or a bad thing? After the experience of two centuries of imperial expansion, aggressive wars and genocide, you could be forgiven for thinking that nations are altogether a bad thing. Indeed, in the 2016 Brexit referendum debate, it is the power of the EU to bring nations together that is being put forward as the strongest argument for the importance of internationalism and the dangers of individual nations existing separately. So the argument goes, left to themselves, nations will always fall into conflict driven by fierce nationalism, but coming together in a transnational union will prevent that and is the sign of a mature, forward-looking approach that is on the right side of history. That certainly fits with a secular worldview that believes in the inherent goodness of humanity, but I don’t believe it fits with a biblical understanding of the human condition. Another look at Gen. 10-11 will explain why.
Just as we must read Gen. 1-2 alongside the dramatic intervention of evil in Gen. 3 to get the full understanding of the human condition, so the optimistic picture of nations spreading across the earth in Genesis 10 must be read alongside the sinister events of the Babel narrative in Gen. 11. In fact, we need to notice that there is one chilling intermission in the Table of Nations in Gen. 10:8-11. Continue reading “Babel, nations and empire builders”
Yet another blog! I know, it’s enough to make the heart sigh, and the eyeballs glaze over. But this one has been brewing for a long time, and has a set purpose, to be limited to a range of related topics in theology and mission. Let me explain what I am trying to do.
Three years ago I embarked on an M.Th. with Edinburgh Theological Seminary, funded by the Mission I work for, Grace Baptist Mission. I submitted my thesis at the end of November, and it has just been accepted. My subject was ‘Every Nation Under Heaven: The Importance of the Biblical Concept of Nations for Contemporary Evangelical Mission Practice.’ This blog will be a means of putting some of that research out there for your consideration. As I have worked, preached and studied my way through the past three years, I’ve noticed how little understanding there is of the biblical understanding of nationhood in the West. Our thinking about ourselves is shaped so extensively by post-Enlightenment individualism. Systematic theologies deal with anthropology at a purely individual level, without discussing marriage, let alone nationhood. It is absent from most confessions of faith. Yet if we are to be serious about the work of mission, understanding nationhood is crucial to the task of working out how to take the gospel into that nation and express it in a way that speaks to that nation and can be owned by that nation.
I want to challenge the secular presuppositions that shape so much of our thinking when it comes to nationhood. I am disturbed to see Christians around me in Britain discussing the Brexit referendum purely in terms of economics and the pragmatics of raw power. Continue reading “Every Nation”
What an old-fashioned question! In a globalised world, hasn’t the concept of a nation become threadbare and obsolete? Among academics and the political class, the nation-state is seen as a fairly recent innovation and one whose purpose has already failed in modern history. They argue that nation-states emerged in the American and French revolutions, spread in the 19th and 20th centuries across Europe, especially after Versailles, and then spread to the developing world in the wake of empire. However, the nation-state has seen its place eroded by the growth of international institutions and multinational companies, the advance of international law and the spread of global communications. Nations have served only to fuel violent nationalism, so the argument goes, in which case we are better off sitting loose to our national identity and pooling our sovereignty for the sake of a wider peace.
This is the argument of the liberal secularist establishment. It is based on two false assumptions. First, that the nation-state began around 1780, and is an entirely secular concept. It is assumed that by ‘nation’ we mean simply a defined territory, with a citizenship that forms the ‘body politic’, that sovereignty is vested ultimately in the people, and that nationhood consists purely in terms of political power, economics and the workings of government. Second, it assumes that nations spawn nationalism and that the wretched wars of the twentieth century that tore Europe apart in two world wars are the inevitable result. I will try to show over several blog posts that both these assumptions are wrong, and that the biblical concept of nationhood is much, much older than the French revolution.
I wish to argue that there is a biblical concept of nationhood that is part of God’s creation order, that it is a much richer idea than the secular nation-state and not to be confused with it, and that nations are still part of God’s plan and (surprisingly) will be part of the New Creation. Understanding nationhood is essential, among other things, to understanding Christian mission. Continue reading “What is a nation?”