I would like to touch on a topic that will impact Seventh Day Adventists prophetically more than any other. The issue of separation/union of church and state in the United States.We are currently observing a burgeoning relationship between the church, represented by various Pastors, priests, and lay leaders of the Christian faith in the U.S., and government, represented primarily by those ruling from the White House, particularly the former President of that nation, Donald Trump. Of course, not all churches are okay with this arrangement. Many are very opposed to any union whatever between the Christian faith and the civil power, including our own church.
Liberally represented among those Christian leaders that were formerly attending White House events, (including Bible studies, prayer breakfasts etc) were those in support of Zionism, the re-establishment of Israel in the Middle East. (Interesting to note that there is a large segment of Jews not in favor). These Christian Zionists firmly believe that the recently established (1948) nation of modern Israel is a prophetic event, the major sign of the second coming of Jesus. Anything less than full political support for Israel in providing arms, and finance, and global support in the U.N., is considered rank heresy by these Christian leaders. This seems to be a very convivial relationship thus far. Israel has never been stronger, the only nuclear armed country in the Middle East, a nation that is far more of a threat to all her neighbours than vice versa, both political parties in the U.S. awash with Jewish money, and a former U.S President more than willing to reciprocate evangelical support in the voting booths with political moves on the world stage, such as moving the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to the Israeli capital, Jerusalem. The promise given by the President to evangelicals in the lead up to the 2016 election seems to be coming to pass. “I will give you power”. The church to my mind is not in need of political power, but spiritual. However, the church, reluctant as it seems to take a stronger hold upon Christ and trust Him to deal with the deficiencies in society and the glaring moral decay that is so rampant, seems set to use political power… That is law… In order to”bring the nation back to God”.
The recent spate of news articles and interviews on MSM regarding the controversial Project 2025 reveals some serious concerns within American society as to what it all means. There is so much to discuss in that document (over 900 pages) I can only suggest you do some research yourself and decide whether the agenda is not only good for the nation, but constitutional.
A little over two hundred years ago one of the founding fathers of the United States Benjamin Franklin, said the following…
“When a religion is good, I conceive it will support itself; and when it does not support itself, and God does not take care to support it so that it’s professors are obliged to call for help of the civil power, ’tis a sign, I apprehend, that it’s cause is a bad one”.
Thomas Paine said…“Persecution is not an original feature in any religion; but is always the strongly marked feature of all law-religion, or religions established by law”.
I find those two quotes above highly significant particularly in the context of Seventh Day Adventist eschatology (last day/end- time theology). We are a prophetic church. We see prophecy in an almost unique perspective, which offers us a unique view of the identity and characters of last days entities or personalities. The first beast of Revelation 13 for example we hold to be representative of the Papacy. The scripture describes one characteristic of this beast as having the “feet of a bear”. (Vs 2)
This particular descriptive of this composite beast takes us back to Daniel chapter 7 in which is described four beasts representing 4 distinct empires of the old world. These empires from antiquity have passed down characteristics that today are not only an echo to the past, but a revelation of the present. This revelation is of the very ‘Antichrist’, whose character and practice lies in direct contradistinction to the character of the true Christ.
So how does the feet of a bear characterise the Papacy? We understand that the bear represents Media-Persia. Reigning over a vast territory won in battle against Babylon, Media-Persia is not described in great detail in scripture, but what scripture does reveal concerning this empire is highly significant. In Daniel 6 we read a familiar story. Daniel was at the head of a shortlist to be Prime Minister of the entire Media-Persian empire second only to the King. His fellow Princes (there were 3 altogether and Daniel the chief) as well as a coterie of CEOs and mid-management didn’t like having Daniel in charge over them. The King wanted ‘no damage’ in the accounts of the empire. (Dan.6:2) Thus Daniel, having ‘an excellent Spirit’ and therefore honest, faithful, and without fault’ (vs4) was not one to condone corruption. This clearly did not suit the other rulers and overseers, as they wanted to take advantage of their position, and having an honest boss was not on their agenda. So they made up a law, a religious law, by which to trap Daniel and thus cost him his life. ( Note that Revelation 13 also reveals a coming religious law to be enforced by the state power to bring an end to the lives of faithful Christians) As we know however, God had other plans. God was not going to stand by and watch His beloved Daniel pay the ultimate penalty for observing all righteousness. So why is all this so significant, and what does it mean for us today?
America, on the verge of an impending presidential election, seems to be preparing itself to create an image to the papal beast and it’s rule of law.
Three times in the sixth chapter of Daniel is mentioned a particularly important characteristic that pertains in particular to Media-Persian law. “Now O King, establish the decree, and sign the writing, that it be not changed, according to the law of the Medes and Persians, which altereth not”.
“Then they came near, and spake before the king concerning the king’s decree; Hast thou not signed a decree, that every man that shall ask a petition of any God or man within thirty days, save of thee, O king, shall be cast into the den of lions? The king answered and said, The thing is true, according to the law of the Medes and Persians, which altereth not.”
“Then these men assembled unto the king, and said unto the king, Know, O king, that the law of the Medes and Persians is, That no decree nor statute which the king establisheth may be changed.” Daniel 6:8,12,15.
So what is the relationship of the Catholic Church regarding law?
From wiki…There are 1752 canon laws currently binding on the Catholic Church.The canon law of the Catholic Church is the system of laws and legal principles made and enforced by the hierarchical authorities of the Catholic Church to regulate its external organisation and government and to order and direct the activities of Catholics toward the mission of the church. It was the first modern legal system and is the oldest continuously functioning legal system in the West…….The actual subject material of the canons is not just doctrinal or moral in nature, but all encompassing of the human condition.
What we have my friends is one startling mirror image of the Media-Persian empire evident in Catholicism. I do not think I need to go into the nature of “Papal infallibility” or Papal supremacy in order to further accentuate the above point, some of which cannot be changed or altered.
The Catholic religion is founded on law. It is not founded on the gospel. It stands on Persian feet. It runs on Persian feet. Those feet are its foundation. A foundation based on law and judicial mandates which if not obeyed were punishable by various penalties which in the dark ages often led to death. Ironically, one of the clearest and most powerful declarations in favour of church/state separation came from the first Catholic President ever elected in America, John F Kennedy.
“I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute – where no Catholic prelate would tell the President (should he be Catholic) how to act, and no Protestant minister would tell his parishioners for whom to vote – where no church or church school is granted any public funds or political preference – and where no man is denied public office merely because his religion differs from the president who might appoint him or the people who might elect him.”
He added, “I believe in an America that is officially neither Catholic, Protestant nor Jewish – where no public official either requests or accepts instructions on public policy from the Pope, the National Council of Churches or any other ecclesiastical source – where no religious body seeks to impose its will directly or indirectly upon the general populace or the public acts of its officials – and where religious liberty is so indivisible that an act against one church is treated as an act against all.” I would suggest that the mindset of the current Catholics professing president to be quite different to Mr. Kennedy.
From a blog written by Rob Boston in the magazine Church and State…
But these were not just words. Once in office, Kennedy pursued policies that strengthened the church-state wall. He rebuffed demands from the Catholic hierarchy for taxpayer aid for parochial schools, and he backed birth control programs.
The June 1963 issue of Church & State reported that Kennedy supported federal funding of population control programs overseas. Such programs may seem commonplace today, but they were hugely controversial at the time, with the Catholic hierarchy leading the opposition. Kennedy ignored the clerics and approved the aid. Kennedy also showed considerable political courage in June of 1962, when the U.S. Supreme Court struck down official programs of prayer in public schools. Polls showed that the Engel v. Vitale opinion was widely misunderstood and very unpopular. It would have been easy for Kennedy to engage in demagoguery. He did the opposite. Kennedy appealed for calm and reminded Americans of the importance of the rule of law. Speaking at a press conference, he added, “In addition, we have in this case a very easy remedy and that is to pray ourselves. We can pray a good deal more at home, we can attend our churches with a good deal more fidelity and we can make the true meaning of prayer much more important in the lives of all of our children. That power is very much open to us.”
Glenn Archer, the first executive director of Americans United, praised Kennedy for his stands in favour of church-state separation. In his 1982 memoir The Dream Lives On, Archer observed, “His presidency was a golden age for the separation cause, and it was a stirring example of one politician who kept his promises to thepeople.” The anniversary of the assassination led many writers to play “what if” games. It’s natural to speculate. If Kennedy had lived and gone on to win a second term, would he have perhaps cobbled together a coalition with enough power to have blunted the eventual rise of the New Right (with its strong Religious Right component)?
We can’t say. But we can say that one of the tragedies of Dallas is that we lost a leader committed to the great American principle of separation of church and state. No national leader who has come afterward has been as powerful an advocate for that protective barrier as JFK was. We are all much poorer for that. Unquote.
As we observe the current political situation in the U.S.A., we can clearly see how far we are along the prophetic timeline, particularly as we consider the thoughts of the founding fathers, which been ignored, revised, and distorted by today’s religionists, and the clear and courageous stand made by Kennedy in the 60s. How is it that the intents of the founding fathers have been so roundly rejected and ignored? And what now do we have with soon to be 6 Catholic justices on the Supreme Court to interest the constitution in favor of church state union with no doubt the full backing off the Vatican and the strongly Catholic leaning party in power?
Revelation 13 speaks of a time when government will pass religious laws that will result in penalties being laid upon anyone who dissents. Adventist eschatology is still on the table. And as far as I can see it’s standing alone.
Remember the quote from Thomas Paine. A religion that is based on law is a persecuting religion. History testifies to this truth. Are we witnessing the establishment of a law based religion in America with the full support of the evangelical and charismatic churches who only a short few years ago were denying the reformation and arguing for a return to Rome? I believe we are.
Brakelite's Breach Repair, Brick by Brick. 