In 2008, Dominionist Apostle Johnny Enlow published a book entitled, "The Seven Mountain Prophecy." In this book, Enlow claims that God is preparing a "spiritual tsunami" to sweep the nations and reclaim our culture for Christ. He describes seven culture-shaping areas of influence over each society; media, government, education, economy, family, religion, and celebration (arts and entertainment), that are the keys to taking a nation for the kingdom of God (i.e. imposing Christian theocratic rule), and establishing Jesus as the Ruler of nations before His return.
The Scripture which this "Seven Mountain Prophecy" is allegedly based on is Isaiah 2:2, which says, "In the last days the mountain of the LORD's temple will be established as chief among the mountains; it will be raised above the hills, and all nations will stream to it." (New International Version)
The Early Church Fathers, who were the ancient teachers of Christian orthodoxy, never interpreted Isaiah 2:2 as a "mandate" for the Church to take over government, education, the economy, the media, etc., and impose Christian theocratic rule over nations and their societies. Instead, they saw Isaiah 2:1-4 (and Micah 4:1-3) as a prophecy that had already been fulfilled by the Advent of the Lord Jesus Christ, the giving of the New Law (i.e., the New Covenant), the preaching of the Gospel by the Apostles, and the conversion of the Gentiles to the Christian faith.
St. Justin Martyr (c. 110-c. 165) in his treatise "Dialog with Trypho," wrote this: "But that the Gentiles would repent of the evil in which they lead erring lives, when they heard the doctrine preached by His apostles from Jerusalem, and which they learned through them, suffer me to show you by quoting a short statement from the prophet Micah, one of the twelve [minor prophets]. This is as follows: 'And in the last days the mountain of the Lord shall be manifested, established on the top of the mountains; it shall be exalted above the hills, and people shall flow unto it.'" (Isaiah 2:2, Micah 4:1)
St. Irenaeus (c. 120-c. 202) in Book IV of his treatise "Against Heresies," wrote this: "...but from the Lord's advent, the new covenant which brings back peace, and the law which gives life, has gone forth over the whole earth, as the prophets said: "For out of Zion shall go forth the Law, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem;" (Isaiah 2:3, Micah 4:2). He goes on to say, "But if the law of liberty, that is, the word of God, preached by the apostles (who went forth from Jerusalem) throughout all the earth, caused such a change in the state of things, that these [nations] did form the swords and war-lances into ploughshares, and changed them into pruning hooks for reaping the corn, [that is], into instruments used for peaceful purposes, and that they are now unaccustomed to fighting, but when smitten, offer also the other cheek, then the prophets have not spoken these things of any other person, but of Him who effected them. This person is our Lord, and in Him is this declaration borne out."
Tertullian (c. 160-c. 230) in Book III of his treatise "Against Marcion" wrote this: "In these very words Isaiah says, 'And it shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the Lord,' that is, God's eminence, 'and the house of God,' that is, Christ, the Catholic temple of God, in which God is worshipped, 'shall be established upon the mountains,' over all the eminences of virtues and powers; 'and all nations shall come unto it; and many people shall go and say, Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, and to the house of the God of Jacob; and He will teach us His way, and we will walk in it: for out of Sion shall go forth the law, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem.' The gospel will be this 'way,' of the new law and the new word in Christ, no longer in Moses."
St. Augustine (c. 354-c. 430) in his famous work "City of God," wrote this: "And hence, when our Saviour, so long after, had taken flesh of the seed of Abraham, He says of Himself, ' I am the way, the truth, and the life.' This is the universal way, of which so long before it had been predicted, 'And it shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the Lord's house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it. And many people shall go and say, Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, to the house of the God of Jacob; and He will teach us of His ways, and we will walk in His paths: for out of Sion shall go forth the law, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem.' This way, therefore, is not the property of one, but of all nations. The law and the word of the Lord did not remain in Zion and Jerusalem, but issued thence to be universally diffused."
By studying the writings of these ancient teachers of Christian orthodoxy, we can clearly see that they never interpreted Isaiah 2:2 as a "mandate" for the Church to impose Christian theocratic rule over nations and their societies in order to establish Jesus as Ruler of nations before His return.. Therefore, this misinterpretation and misapplication of Isaiah 2:2, by Dominionist Apostle Johnny Enlow, is at best poor exegesis, and at worst outright heresy.
Monday, May 23, 2011
Wednesday, May 18, 2011
Is Jesus Really Against The Minimum Wage?
On March 26, 2011, at an event called "Rediscover God in America Conference," pseudo-historian and Dominionist advocate David Barton said the following words:
"Jesus has an entire teaching on the minimum wage. Is Jesus for or against the minimum wage? Well just as a hint, Jesus did not like the minimum wage. He's got a whole teaching against it."
This alleged "teaching of Jesus" against the minimum wage comes from a twisted and unorthodox interpretation of the parable of the landowner and laborers, found in the Gospel of Matthew. (Matt. 20:1-16) According to Barton's website "Wallbuilders," in an article entitled "The Bible and Taxes," Barton claims, "The parable of the landowner and laborers (Matthew 20:1-16) is applicable to the employer/employee relationship and the issue of wages." He goes on to claim, "There is an implication that the landowner had a right to determine the wages his workers received, as well as an implication that the workers could accept or reject the landowner's offer of work."
The Early Church Fathers, who were the ancient teachers of Christian orthodoxy, never applied the parable of the landowner and laborers to secular employer/employee and wage issues. Instead, they saw this parable as an allegory; speaking of different people being called to faith at different ages, and then being rewarded with eternal life after completing their faithful service as "laborers" in the Lord's "vineyard" i.e. the Church, from the time of their conversion until their death.
Tertullian (c.160-c. 230) in his treatise "On Monogamy," identified the "one denarius" spoken of in this parable as eternal life.
St. Gregory Nazianzen (c. 329-c. 389/390) in his treatise "The Oration on Holy Baptism," identified the "vineyard" spoken of in the parable as the Church; and wrote, "For from the day and hour at which each believed, from that day and hour he is required to work."
St. John Chrysostom (c. 349-c. 407) in one of his "Homilies on the Gospel of Saint Matthew," identified the 'vineyard" as the "injunctions of God and His commandments," the time of "laboring" as this present life, the "laborers" as "them that in different ways are called to the fulfillment of the injunctions," and "early in the morning, and about the third and ninth and eleventh hours," as "them who at different ages have drawn near to God, and approved themselves."
St. Jerome (c. 347-c. 420) in his "Letter to Oceanus," identified the "denarius" as salvation by quoting from the parable; "In the Gospel he who envies another's salvation is thus addressed, 'Friend, is thine eye evil because I am good?'" (Matt. 20:15)
St. Augustine (c.354-c. 430) wrote the following words in his Sermon XXXVII, "...the parable may be seen to have and explanation in respect even of this present life. For they are as it were called at the first hour, who begin to be Christians fresh from their mother's womb; boys are called as it were at the third, young men at the sixth, they who are verging toward old age, at the ninth hour, and they who are called as if at the eleventh hour, are they who are altogether decrepit; yet all of these are to receive the one and the same denarius of eternal life."
This is the interpretation given to the parable of the landowner and laborers by the ancient teachers of Christian orthodoxy. Therefore, the misinterpretation and misapplication of this parable, by individuals like pseudo-historian and Dominionist advocate David Barton; is at best poor exegesis, and at worst outright heresy.
"Jesus has an entire teaching on the minimum wage. Is Jesus for or against the minimum wage? Well just as a hint, Jesus did not like the minimum wage. He's got a whole teaching against it."
This alleged "teaching of Jesus" against the minimum wage comes from a twisted and unorthodox interpretation of the parable of the landowner and laborers, found in the Gospel of Matthew. (Matt. 20:1-16) According to Barton's website "Wallbuilders," in an article entitled "The Bible and Taxes," Barton claims, "The parable of the landowner and laborers (Matthew 20:1-16) is applicable to the employer/employee relationship and the issue of wages." He goes on to claim, "There is an implication that the landowner had a right to determine the wages his workers received, as well as an implication that the workers could accept or reject the landowner's offer of work."
The Early Church Fathers, who were the ancient teachers of Christian orthodoxy, never applied the parable of the landowner and laborers to secular employer/employee and wage issues. Instead, they saw this parable as an allegory; speaking of different people being called to faith at different ages, and then being rewarded with eternal life after completing their faithful service as "laborers" in the Lord's "vineyard" i.e. the Church, from the time of their conversion until their death.
Tertullian (c.160-c. 230) in his treatise "On Monogamy," identified the "one denarius" spoken of in this parable as eternal life.
St. Gregory Nazianzen (c. 329-c. 389/390) in his treatise "The Oration on Holy Baptism," identified the "vineyard" spoken of in the parable as the Church; and wrote, "For from the day and hour at which each believed, from that day and hour he is required to work."
St. John Chrysostom (c. 349-c. 407) in one of his "Homilies on the Gospel of Saint Matthew," identified the 'vineyard" as the "injunctions of God and His commandments," the time of "laboring" as this present life, the "laborers" as "them that in different ways are called to the fulfillment of the injunctions," and "early in the morning, and about the third and ninth and eleventh hours," as "them who at different ages have drawn near to God, and approved themselves."
St. Jerome (c. 347-c. 420) in his "Letter to Oceanus," identified the "denarius" as salvation by quoting from the parable; "In the Gospel he who envies another's salvation is thus addressed, 'Friend, is thine eye evil because I am good?'" (Matt. 20:15)
St. Augustine (c.354-c. 430) wrote the following words in his Sermon XXXVII, "...the parable may be seen to have and explanation in respect even of this present life. For they are as it were called at the first hour, who begin to be Christians fresh from their mother's womb; boys are called as it were at the third, young men at the sixth, they who are verging toward old age, at the ninth hour, and they who are called as if at the eleventh hour, are they who are altogether decrepit; yet all of these are to receive the one and the same denarius of eternal life."
This is the interpretation given to the parable of the landowner and laborers by the ancient teachers of Christian orthodoxy. Therefore, the misinterpretation and misapplication of this parable, by individuals like pseudo-historian and Dominionist advocate David Barton; is at best poor exegesis, and at worst outright heresy.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)