Wisdom and government

John Whitehead, an American civil rights attorney with a long and distinguished career battling for freedom and justice, in his recent book, A Government of Wolves: The Emerging Police State (2013), has warned that the citizenries of the West are being conditioned to accept the usurpation of their liberties by civil government and its bureaucrats:
 

"Americans are finding themselves institutionalized from cradle to grave, from government-run daycares and public schools to nursing homes. In between, they are fed a constant, mind-numbing diet of pablum consisting of entertainment news, mediocre leadership, and technological gadgetry, which keeps them sated, distracted, and unwilling to challenge the status quo. All the while, in the name of the greater good and in exchange for the phantom promise of security, the government strips away our rights one by one – monitoring our conversations, chilling our expression, searching our bodies and our possessions, doing away with our due process rights, reversing the burden of proof and rendering us suspects in a surveillance state." [1]
 

Illustrations of this retreat from wisdom and freedom proliferate weekly, from extremism disruption orders in Britain to Toronto bureaucrats banning a Christian band from singing in a city square, because, allegedly, singing praise to Jesus in public is illegal proselytising, whilst Islamic festivals, pro-pot marches, pride parades and Hindu celebrations are warmly welcomed. The diet of media pablum was never more apparent than in the recent Canadian elections. English commentator and Member of the European Parliament Daniel Hannan, reflecting on the recent federal election in Canada, said: "Justin Trudeau, the new Canadian PM, is like a depilated Occupy protester: pro-tax, anti-business, pro-pot, anti-American." [2] We might add, pro-stimulus (i.e. inflation), pro-climate change propaganda and swept to power on promises of 'security', from daycare to pensions.

At the same time, the emerging Canadian dynasty is one with a history of serial adultery and fornication, together with Islamic and Marxist sympathies – a dynasty that brought every aspect of the sexual revolution into Canada in the late sixties, opening the flood gates to abortion, sexual perversion and the destruction of the family, manufacturing a Charter that has been used to browbeat Christians ever since. Many Christians are left scratching their heads and asking what has happened to wisdom and virtue in our culture.
 

Until relatively recently, two of the characteristics that would have been looked for and prioritised when selecting religious, political and legislative leaders in the Western world were wisdom and virtue. Because of the deep influence of Christianity in the Anglosphere, both competency and character mattered as qualifications for leadership. This was because, for the most part, the peoples of the Anglosphere themselves considered wisdom and virtue to be noble aims and core goals in the character development of the young through family life and education. The word 'virtue' comes from a Latin word and originally meant strength, courage and moral excellence. The words in the biblical languages of Hebrew and Greek translated as 'virtue' essentially mean moral strength, a prudent use of one's abilities and a general competency.
 

Wisdom is a related and central concern of the Bible. Wisdom (Gr. sophia), in biblical terms, is not simply the accumulation of information. Rather, it encompasses the practical knowledge of how to regulate one’s relationship with God, prudence in dealing with others, judiciousness in the handling of circumstances and skill or expertise in the application of knowledge to the diverse areas of life. Wisdom is such an important theme in Scripture that in the book of Proverbs the very voice of God is personified as wisdom, and Christ himself, in Paul’s letters, is described as the one in whom are hid all treasures of wisdom and knowledge (Col. 2:3). We are told in the scriptures that wisdom is a blessing (Prov. 3:13), the foundation of a good life (Prov. 24:3) and so the principal thing to seek, prize and treasure (Prov. 4:7). In the New Testament, the apostle James reveals the importance of Christians praying for this wisdom and God's willingness to supply it to those who ask him: "If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask God, who gives generously to all without reproach, and it will be given him" (Jas. 1:5).

 

We should also note that, in Scripture, the wisdom that God gives is not limited to one area of life – such as wisdom for your personal life with your family or for church-related activities. Rather, all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge are available in Christ (Col 2:3). In God's written word, the Holy Spirit has deposited the true, foundational principles for life and peace, virtue and excellence in each area of life. In 1 Kings 10:24 we read of the wisest head of state in the ancient world, noted author of the book of Proverbs King Solomon, who had famously asked God for wisdom above everything else. The result was that "King Solomon surpassed all the kings of the world in riches and in wisdom. The whole world wanted an audience with Solomon to hear the wisdom that God had put in his heart" (1 Kings 10:23-24).
 

In one case, the queen of Sheba (likely an Egyptian queen), having heard of Solomon’s great wisdom, came to test him with difficult questions:

“She came to Solomon and spoke to him about everything that was on her mind. So Solomon answered all her questions; nothing was too difficult for the king to explain to her” (1 Kings 10:2-3).
 

Moreover, we see in Scripture (i.e. Proverbs, Ecclesiastes and Song of Songs) that the wisdom Solomon had was zoological (or, scientific), economic, political, philosophical, ethical, cultural, marital, familial and much more. It is therefore a serious mistake to limit the wisdom of God to one small area of life (my personal piety), as though mere human wisdom is competent for regulating social order, education, law and other cultural pursuits and disciplines. It was God who put wisdom into Solomon's heart to answer all kinds of questions and to rule wisely.

In fact, we are repeatedly told in the Bible that it is by wisdom that God himself sustains and governs all things in all of creation (Prov. 3:19; Jer. 51:15). If that is so, how can we as mere mortals dispense with God's wisdom even in the building of houses (Prov. 24:3), let alone in the government of human affairs? Thus, in the biblical worldview: "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom and the knowledge of the Holy One is understanding" (Prov. 9:10). Wisdom and virtue, then, or what we might call collectively good character, are the most important attributes for all leaders to display, since our leaders both publicly set the example for others and are entrusted with responsibility in various areas of government in human society.
 

There is, of course, another possible approach to life. Over against the way of wisdom, human beings in their individual lives and within their social order can pursue the way of folly. As a consequence, people will find themselves with leaders who will play the fool for them. Few worse things can afflict any people than to be led by fools. To understand folly biblically one must see it as the opposite of God’s wisdom. In Scripture, wisdom is the path of life and light, and folly is the way of death and darkness.
 

The fool in Scripture is not an uneducated dunce or an illiterate ignoramus – in fact, the world has an abundance of brilliant and gifted fools. Rather, the path of folly is the one which rejects or denies the reality of God and so determines to live, work, plan and govern in studied ignorance of him. First, the fool nurtures in his heart the desire that there would be no God (Ps 14:1). But there is much more to folly than this. It is the implications that flow from this position that constitute that path of foolishness.

In a telling passage concerning the coming of righteous rulers and just government, the prophet Isaiah shows that what characterises the fool is speech that is not informed by God’s wisdom; a mind that plots iniquity; a lifestyle that is godless; a heart that spews out falsehoods about God and ultimate issues (or speaks religious falsehood); and an imprudent and self-centred outlook that destroys the vulnerable or deprives those in need, leaving people impoverished (Is. 32:6). By contrast: "A noble person plans noble things; he stands up for noble causes…. The result of righteousness will be peace; the effect of righteousness will be quiet confidence forever" (Is. 32:8, 17).
 

Clearly, to forsake the source of all wisdom, God himself, is to be a fool who ruins his life and the lives of others who come under his sway – no matter what human credentials that fool may have. Such a person depends solely upon his own ideas, intellectual powers and native strength, not on the wisdom of God.
 

This means that, in an essentially spiritual world (that is, a world that is intimately related in all its diversity to God), they are spiritually blind and in obstinate rebellion against God, his truth, purposes and ways. This leads to the hostility of fools toward all those who represent God's wisdom, since they are an inconvenient reminder of the fool’s rejection of the living God and his truth, which they suppress in unrighteousness (Rom. 1:18). Indeed, for Paul, this deliberate suppression of the knowledge of God is the root cause of what makes a person a fool. So Paul declares: "Claiming to be wise, they became fools" (Rom. 1:22).
 

It is interesting that the paradigmatic example of the fool in Scripture is drawn from a social and political situation in which a wealthy businessman of bad character manifests his hostility to one of God's wisest servants.
 

This successful man, the leader of a large and rich household with many workers, deliberately, needlessly and with profound ingratitude insults and causes deep offence to God’s servant, the king-designate David, and his military men. This is in spite of the fact that David had protected and shown favour to the servants of this man, whilst they were exposed and vulnerable in the wilderness shearing their flocks. When David later sends word seeking the small favour of hospitality – a meal for himself and his warriors – his servants are harshly treated, David's actions and status are disgracefully impugned and they are sent away with nothing but insults.

The businessman's name is Nabal, and the fascinating account is found in 1 Samuel 25. The name Nabal is actually Hebrew for 'fool', and so Scripture takes this incident as an illustration of great folly. Fortunately, Nabal has a wise and prudent wife named Abigail, who is informed by one of Nabal's servants of what has happened to David's men during their request for hospitality. The young man tells her: "Now consider carefully what you must do, because there is certain to be trouble for our master and his entire family. He is such a worthless fool nobody can talk to him" (1 Sam. 25:17).
 

This wise and virtuous woman goes quickly to the wilderness to meet David with gifts and words of wisdom and kindness, asking forgiveness for the insults of her husband, because Nabal can only live up to his name and "stupidity is all he knows" (1 Sam. 25:25). Her actions save her house and preserve Nabal's men from the sword. In any event, Nabal himself loses everything, following a drunken party shortly after this incident. The following morning he has a seizure and a few days later is struck dead by God.
 

This incident is important, because it illustrates well the biblical meaning of wisdom over against folly, as well as its application and scope. It is significant that the context for this classic example is not the challenges of personal relationships within a worshipping community – that is, it is not 'churchy' wisdom (though wisdom is important everywhere). The setting is one of social and political significance and involves matters of culture, custom, diplomacy and government. For in this account of Nabal, the wisdom of a prudent woman who honours God and those who represent him is contrasted with a rich and powerful fool who lives as though God is of no consequence and the cause of the Lord's servants unimportant. Nabal's course is the way of death, Abigail's is the way of life.
 

What characterises the actions of Nabal in the biblical narrative can likewise be seen in many leaders today, whether they lead in ecclesiastical, social or political life – Nabal is a pragmatist. In response to the request of David's diplomatic delegation, Nabal says:

"Who is David? Who is Jesse's son? Many slaves these days are running away from their masters. Am I supposed to take my bread, my water and my meat that I butchered for my shearers and give them to these men? I don't know where they are from" (1 Sam. 25:9-11).
 

Notice that Nabal's pragmatic response manifests nearly all of Isaiah's marks of the fool. First, he speaks words uninformed by God's wisdom. Second, his inaction is not just lazy, it is iniquitous. Third, his life is clearly godless, as is manifest, not only here in his attitude toward God's servant, but also later, by his drunken stupor. Fourth, his heart is dismissive of David, so that his rhetoric about the king-designate is pure falsehood – as though David was an idle slave running away from his master, not the anointed and God-ordained king of Israel being persecuted by evil men. And finally, he is depriving those in need, sending them away empty, whilst implying that all his resources are his and from his own hand, not from God and by his mercy. Nabal's heart and actions therefore seek to make the world morally 'neutral' by conducting his affairs without reference to God and his wisdom. Nabal locates the right and best within the sphere of his own desires, what he perceives to be the best outcome for himself.
 

Pragmatism, whether ancient or modern, always replaces wisdom in the governments of fools, because it is a view of life that seeks to establish the meaning of ideas and events only in reference to human experience and not to God and his law-word or purpose. At best, truth and meaning are relativistic and empirical, emerging by examining the practical consequences of actions as desirable or undesirable in terms of human preferences. The American philosopher and pragmatist William James, in A Pluralistic Universe (1909), claimed that meaning must be remade as we construct new concepts out of our new experiences of the world.

Regarding meaning and interpretation, James writes: "We carve out everything…just as we carve out constellations, to serve our human purposes." [3] Somehow, out of the diversity and cacophony of human 'experience', meaning is to be remade, presumably by an elite, who believe their experience is more 'defining' than everybody else's. In such a view, the world and all human action is ethically neutral, but might be 'improved' or progressed as man, by his instrumental ideas, adjusts life in its varied aspects. In this perspective, the ethical or virtuous life is simply the adjustment or manipulation of human behaviour towards more satisfying ways of living – at least satisfying to an elite.
 

The fool, then, is quite obviously sinful, fallen man, who lives as though there is no God and cherishes an astonishing presumption that by his own 'wisdom' he can save himself and society. The fool will not admit his or her need for God. The more foolish people become in obstinate rebellion, the more they will seek the leadership and government of fools. Although this is a remarkable characteristic of the modern Western world, it is not unique to our time. The Christian order that the notable Oliver Cromwell represented proved unpopular with many, not because of its allegedly authoritarian nature (his was a government pursuing freedoms for the peoples of the Anglosphere in an age of absolutist monarchs and dictators), but because of the moral character it represented. As one historian noted:
 

"For the first and only time in modern Europe, morality and religion became the sole qualification insisted on by the court. In the whole history of modern Europe, Oliver is the one ruler into whose presence no vicious man could come, whose service no vicious man might enter." [4]
 

In the Puritans, among whom we count Cromwell, we see resistance to a mere pragmatic approach to leadership, with government conducted in terms of moral courage (virtue) and transcendent principle – its leaders seeking the wisdom of God for society and culture. More modern politicians have likewise shown an awareness of the difference between Christian wisdom in thinking about government and the mere pragmatic will of the mob or an elite. In an address to the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland, former British Prime Minister, the late Lady Thatcher, said:
 

"When Abraham Lincoln spoke in his famous Gettysburg speech of 1863 of “government of the people,” he gave the world a neat definition of democracy which has since been widely and enthusiastically adopted. But what he enunciated as a form of government was not in itself especially Christian, for nowhere in the Bible is the word democracy mentioned. Ideally, when Christians meet, as Christians, to take counsel together their purpose is not (or should not be) to ascertain what is the mind of the majority but what is the mind of the Holy Spirit – something which may be quite different." [5]
 

If wisdom is identified simply as the voice of the majority, all we have left is collective pragmatism at work within a humanistic framework, which declares the voice of the people to be that of the voice of God. The word 'democracy' comes from two Greek words meaning essentially 'people power'. Whilst we can see important instances and texts in the Bible supporting the importance of freedom under God (Ex. 6:2-8; John 8:31-32; Gal. 5:1), the consent of the people to be governed (1 Sam. 8; 1 Cor. 6:1-5; Acts 15:22) and to be represented from among the governed (Ex. 18:13-27; Titus 1:5-9), representation or a vote in itself cannot save people from themselves or from sin, nor can it preserve freedom and keep men from folly.
 

In 1 Samuel 8, when 'the people' demanded a king and the prophet Samuel was dejected because he knew that this was a surrender of freedom under God, God told him to let the people have their king, but warned of the growing and invasive powers a king would wield over them. In matters of wisdom and virtue then, the will of the people is only as good as the character of the people making their voice heard. The collective decision of the Israelites to have a king appointed was a product of the character of those people – they wanted to be like all of the other nations and found the responsibility of freedom under God too much to bear. They preferred a form of slavery to freedom. Thus, in terms of the character of leaders in every sphere, we get the kind of rulers we deserve, because the character of the people will determine the character of their leaders and government.
 

Whilst it is true that Abraham Lincoln's quote has been used in support of democratic systems and institutions for many years, what Thatcher didn't mention in her excellent speech was that these words were not original to Lincoln. He was actually quoting from the prologue of the earliest translation of the scriptures into English: "This Bible is for the government of the people, for the people and by the people." These words were penned by the Morning Star of the Reformation, the English theologian John Wycliffe in 1384. [6] Wycliffe understood that true wisdom and virtue for the government of our lives come not from kings, parliaments or popes in and of themselves, but from God's Word.
 

Wycliffe did not see the Bible as a privatised book, restricted to a Christian's personal devotional life or to the church as an institution. Rather, he saw Scripture as God's law-word and wisdom for all of life and recognised that without this book for the government of the people, wisdom and virtue would vanish, and liberty and godly government would die with them. The book comes before the people, not the people before the book. To put the preferences of 'the people' before the Word of God as the source of meaning, wisdom and virtue is to steadily destroy true and just government.

 

Thus, the Christian view does not allow pragmatic concerns to trump God’s wisdom or moral character; nevertheless, all too many Christians today are prepared to accept such pragmatism. The obvious challenge, however, is that an ungodly people do not want a moral universe, virtuous and wise leaders or wise government. The modern Westerner is a pragmatist, a product of progressivist education, where the only test of value is pragmatic: Is this action personally or socially conducive to my sense of welfare or social welfare, as man measures well-being? In approaching things this way, we fail to acknowledge that, when in rebellion against God, man is not just a sinner, he renders himself a fool; when acting on the principles of folly, we condemn our societies to a slow cultural death.
 

From Nabal to Nietzsche, then, pragmatism governs the fool. For Nietzsche, the solution to what he called the 'European problem' was "the rearing of a new ruling caste for Europe." [7] The way to govern and save humanity was by unleashing the new wisdom of man, living beyond good and evil – that is beyond (or transcending) God's law – in a purely pragmatic universe where truth is simply will to power, the quintessence of pragmatism. Nietzsche held that "the real philosophers however, are commanders and law-givers; they say: 'Thus shall it be!' Their will to truth is – Will to Power." [8] And so, as George Bernard Shaw put it: "The art of government is the organization of idolatry." [9] In this view, man is the new god – and that is the current temper.

 

The growing statism and elitism of the modern Western world simply manifests the truth that today we inhabit a large humanistic theocracy governed by the will of man, as a replacement for divine wisdom and true virtue. Because of this reality, governments of fools will praise the wicked. When people abandon the wisdom of God and replace it with pragmatism, when the Bible for the government of the people is rejected, instead of battling evil and seeking to suppress it, governments will praise, endorse and celebrate it and will fight against the true and the good.

Scripture is clear: "Where there is no prophetic vision, the people cast off restraint, but blessed is he who keeps the law" (Prov. 29:18). Where biblical truth disappears in public life, restraint goes to the wind. As such as Solomon wrote: "Those who forsake the law, praise the wicked" (Prov. 28:4).
 

This is the situation we are facing today. Government in Scripture and Christian history is not simply the state (civil government), it includes self-government, the family, the church, our vocations and associations, guilds as well as the civil government, which in Scripture is meant to be a ministry of justice. As we have seen, all are either worked out in terms of the principles of wisdom or will be dominated by folly. How, then, do the wise engage with a world system dominated by foolishness?
 

The first thing we must do is recognise that Jesus Christ is Lord over all government, all authority and all power. As Abraham Kuyper famously put it: "There is not one square inch in the entire universe, of which Christ cannot say, 'This is mine.'" [10] This means there is an antithesis between wisdom and folly – wisdom recognises Christ's identity and lives in terms of it; folly rejects Christ's office and lives the pragmatic life. The regenerate believer with a Christ-centred consciousness and the unregenerate rebel may well be able to work together digging wells in Nigeria, but their ultimate ends, aims, motives and cause are altogether different, so that, although God takes delight in all the work of his hands, the unrepentant does nothing that is finally morally pleasing to God:
 

"For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit set their minds on the things of the Spirit. For to set the mind on the flesh is death, but to set the mind on the Spirit is life and peace. For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God's law; indeed, it cannot. Those who are in the flesh cannot please God" (Rom. 8:5-8).
 

That is not to say that the non-regenerate rebel can never make a wise decision or manifest a virtue, for God's goodness and providence within creation and his work within history to bring all things to his desired end means that man finally is not autonomous. As Proverbs reminds us: "The Lord has prepared everything for His purpose – even the wicked for the day of disaster" (Prov. 16:4).
 

What, then, is the basis of our engagement with culture, with leaders and with government? Some have suggested that the basis for our participation with culture is our shared humanity with the rest of the world and a 'common grace' that means we have shared objectives. The difficulty with this is, first, that the Bible never speaks of grace but rather, goodness, patience or forbearance with respect to creation and humanity in a general sense. John Frame notes:
 

"Scripture never uses chen or charis to refer to his blessings on creation generally or on non-elect humanity. So, it would perhaps be better to speak on God’s common goodness or common love, rather than his common grace." [11]
 

In Scripture, grace is covenantal, and so the non-believer outside of the covenant is not a recipient of grace proper. What is common to man is not grace but a common curse. To base our engagement with culture on the idea of common grace presumes that the cultural task is something that begins after the Fall, is something that sinful man does and that Christians have the privilege of participating in with them, so long as it is not specifically sinful.

But that is not what Scripture tells us. Rather, we are told that Adam is given a cultural mandate (Gen. 1:26-28), and it is on this basis that we develop the cultural task and subdue creation – bringing order out of disorder. A life of wise engagement with culture is not one that develops out of a natural association with fallen man, but rather is the product of God's command to go and bring God's order out of sin's disordering of creation.
 

Culture, then, is not the detritus of the Fall, simply permitted by God (that is, not primarily the Christian's calling), but originating in the lives of unregenerate people. This would leave us with an impoverished view of culture-building where, as Klaas Schilder puts it: "There is no higher task for the Christian than timidly to eat under the table, the crumbs which fall from the table of unbelieving culture builders." [12] In fact, fallen man, in one sense, due to his rebellion, seeks to bring disorder to God's order. In that sense his work is that of 'un-culture'.

The Bible uses the term 'world-system' (John 14:30), not culture, for fallen man's approach to culture-building, for his system is one grounded in folly, not God's wisdom. In that system, the Christian does not 'participate' in the moral sense, but rather 'ministers' (John 17:18-19), for we are in the world, but not of it. Culture is therefore a 'mixed bag', because it manifests both Christian and non-Christian influence. As a result, we do not beg for a 'place at the table', but rather seek to wisely and faithfully work and witness to the truth that Christ is head of all rule and authority (Col. 2:9-10) – it is God's table.
 

After the Fall, the first couple were recommissioned with the cultural mandate. All men failed in that task, including Israel, until the coming of Christ, the second Adam – the head of all rule and authority. In him, the office-bearer of prophet, priest and king, we are restored to God's image and are called to rule with Christ in creation – turning creation into God-glorifying culture. Here culture is not a neutral activity born out of a post-Fall world, it is rather the product of a living faith in God, which does not bypass the regenerating work of the Holy Spirit.
 

Our governments and culture manifest the spiritual shortfall or deficit that makes fallen man unable to fulfil his cultural responsibilities adequately – he needs a regenerated mind and heart. Without this vital change we remain cultural pigmies.
 

In short, we are called to be salt and light. We 'engage' the culture in terms of obedience to God's command, and we do so with wisdom, virtue and in Christ-like boldness and humility. God's patience with sinful man enables us to see the antithesis of wisdom and folly, yet at the same time motivates us to work with non-believers in the historical development of civilisation, whilst maintaining our cultural work in terms of the commands of Scripture – trusting God for his kingdom to come.
 

Adam was given an office as God's co-worker, which was to govern his actions and relationships. He was to dress the garden and turn creation into a culture by godly government and rule. Christ as the divine office-holder fulfils that which our first parents failed to do and calls us to represent his interests in the earth. Renewed by the Holy Spirit, we are soldiers of culture, working in terms of God's commandment and promise of renewal for all creation. Walking in wisdom and engaging culture, working with government and rulers is our act of worship, the end of which is the glory of God.


Endnotes:


Related Links:
The receiving end of tolerance
Church leaders advocate Christian public engagement
Joe Boot: The 'privatisation of our faith'