New theology of civics

[EarlyActs]

A new theology of civics has been written by J Baird: KING OF KINGS. I've only looked at some reviews and it seems to 'have done its homework.' I searched here at CCCF for references to civics and don't find any that would be a theology of them. I might have had luck putting in Romans 13.

I believe that a solid understanding of Ps 2 and 110, quoted so often by the apostles, would be that the kingdom/reign of God is current since the enthronement. That was what the resurrection was (Acts 2; Eph 1; Phil 2) and that event was the Davidic event foreseen.

While upholding all existing government structures, it appeals to all of them, all around the world, to honor Christ 'lest he be angry with them' and to progress toward that which is right for their subjects. Romans 13 is especially strong here. By not taking on an external form, the reign of Christ is imperative without being an empirical reality; it is what should be done. It is not a statement that 'everything is under control' nor that there is some perfect time in normal history (before the NHNE) when this could take place. 2 Peter 3 and the end of the Rev confirm this.

 

[Josheb]

A new theology of civics has been written by J Baird: KING OF KINGS. I've only looked at some reviews and it seems to 'have done its homework.' I searched here at CCCF for references to civics and don't find any that would be a theology of them. I might have had luck putting in Romans 13.

I believe that a solid understanding of Ps 2 and 110, quoted so often by the apostles, would be that the kingdom/reign of God is current since the enthronement. That was what the resurrection was (Acts 2; Eph 1; Phil 2) and that event was the Davidic event foreseen.

While upholding all existing government structures, it appeals to all of them, all around the world, to honor Christ 'lest he be angry with them' and to progress toward that which is right for their subjects. Romans 13 is especially strong here. By not taking on an external form, the reign of Christ is imperative without being an empirical reality; it is what should be done. It is not a statement that 'everything is under control' nor that there is some perfect time in normal history (before the NHNE) when this could take place. 2 Peter 3 and the end of the Rev confirm this.

I tend to agree but think it critically important to 1) understand because Jesus is God, there has never been a point anywhere in creation when/where Jesus was not already King and Lord, and 2) our understanding of any passage about kingship (such as Ps. 2 and 110) occurs within that context. What has changed is soteriology, not divine sovereignty.

Therefore, in that regard, Christian "civics" has always been a function of living by faith (which is how the righteous have always lived) commensurate to the work of God in people's lives (individually and corporately). I suspect (let's call it a work in progress in my thinking ) that as the cultural mandate/great commission are fulfilled the diversity from one legal system to another and another will lessen and greater homogeneity will exist.

 

[Josheb]

Without having read Baird's book and basing this opinion solely on a few summaries and reviews, I think Baird may have the premise backwards. It's Christianity's job to foster, promote, create godly government, not any government's job to promote Christianity.

Imagine...

1. a government body of 100 people with no Christians in its legislature
2. a government body of 100 people with ten Christians in its legislature
3. a government body of 100 people with fifty Christians in its legislature
4. a government body of 100 people with 75 Christians in its legislature
5. a government body of 100 people with 100 Christians in its legislature

Which governing body would function the best? Do not be quick to say, "Number 5, of course!" because history has shown Christian-only governance to be quite messy and often extremely dysfunctional. Let's add a caveat to that list...

1. a government body of 100 people with no one claiming to be Christian in its legislature
2. a government body of 100 people with ten people claiming to be Christian in its legislature
3. a government body of 100 people with fifty people claiming to be Christian in its legislature
4. a government body of 100 people with 75 people claiming to be Christian in its legislature
5. a government body of 100 people with all 100 people claiming to be Christian in its legislature
6. a government body of 100 people with 100 actual Christians who actually listen to and obey the Holy Spirit in its legislature

Which governing body would be consistent with whole scripture?


If Baird did not cover these concerns, then his book is wanting. Interesting premise, though. I might pick it up and (put it on my stack of to-be-read books) and read it.