Systematic Theology – Work

The Eschatology of Work

Professor: Dr. R.J. Rushdoony

Subject: Systematic Theology

Genre: Speech

Lesson: 11 of 19

Track: #11

Year:

Dictation Name: 11 The Eschatology of Work

[Rushdoony] Well if there are no questions let us begin with prayer.

Oh Lord our God unto whom all glory belongs, we come into Thy presence knowing that the heathen rage and take counsel together against Thee and Thy kingdom. Grant oh Lord that Thy power, Thy judgment may prevail; the powers of darkness be overthrown and Thy kingdom stand forth in all its glory. Make us instruments of Thy kingdom; make us ever faithful in season and out of season in Thy service. Grant oh Lord that the churches that are oppressed here in this country and behind the iron curtain may find strength and freedom through Thy word and by Thy Spirit. Make us ever instant in prayer for those on the front lines. In Jesus name, amen.

Our scripture this morning is I Corinthians 12:14-31 and our subject “The Eschatology of Work”, I Corinthians 12:14-31, the eschatology of work.

“14 For the body is not one member, but many.

15 If the foot shall say, because I am not the hand, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body?

16 And if the ear shall say, because I am not the eye, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body?

17 If the whole body were an eye, where were the hearing? If the whole were hearing, where were the smelling?

18 But now hath God set the members every one of them in the body, as it hath pleased him.

19 And if they were all one member, where were the body?

20 But now are they many members, yet but one body.

21 And the eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee: nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you.

22 Nay, much more those members of the body, which seem to be more feeble, are necessary:

23 And those members of the body, which we think to be less honorable, upon these we bestow more abundant honor; and our uncomely parts have more abundant comeliness.

24 For our comely parts have no need: but God hath tempered the body together, having given more abundant honor to that part which lacked.

25 That there should be no schism (or division) in the body; but that the members should have the same care one for another.

26 And whether one member suffer, all the members suffer with it; or one member be honored, all the members rejoice with it.

27 Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular.

28 And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues.

29 Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Are all workers of miracles?

30 Have all the gifts of healing? Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret?

31 But covet earnestly the best gifts: and yet shew I unto you a more excellent way.”

As we have seen there is a difference between a hierarchy and an elite. A hierarchy means a sacred rule, it is work oriented, it is governed by the world of God. An elite privilege and leisure oriented. For people to accept the fact of hierarchy in life means to accept a given variation of responsibilities in society. Paul speaks of this in {?} I Corinthians 12 verse 14 following; he says the life of the body depends upon diversity. If the body were all eye or all foot or all head it would be a monstrosity, an impossibility. For one member of the body to war against the other and the hand to claim credit, or the eyes against the feet or the heart, is an absurdity. Each depends upon the other, together they form a unity, a living being. If one member suffers, Paul says, the whole body suffers because it is a unity; and so he says, is the church. Now Paul is speaking here of a unity of functions, a variety of organs making up one organism, each having its function, its work; but all sharing a common life, a common purpose in Christ.

Now the unregenerate lack any sense of oneness except in sin. The redeemed of course are still given to divisiveness because of sin, and because of their imperfect sanctification. But they also have the Holy Spirit and His call to unity. Their being thus moves to the unity in Christ and a recognition of a hierarchy of callings. No church, no community functions better than when each knows his place in the hierarchy of functions. Some are called to be the head, others the hand, the feet, and so on. When we accept our calling we accept our responsibilities. We respect the status of others, both those above and below us from the human point of view. We recognize that the rise and fall in status in a Godly society is a free one, it is in terms of performance, in terms of how we do our work under God.

The idea of hierarchy, sacred rule literally, presupposes two facts; first that position depends upon God’s authority and order, not on mans. There is a given sacred order in all of creation. Mans order must seek to follow God’s order, for as under Humanism some men create the idea of order and give themselves first rank, first place in that order. The scientists of course feel that they should govern society, and so do the politicians; and whatever area of life you turn to men feel that they should have the headship. In a Biblical, in a Godly society, order is hierarchical, it is in terms of Godly authority. Second, the Biblical doctrine of creationism means that man was created a covenantal being. Whether man is in sin or in grace he is a covenantal creature, he is governed by the covenant, he is judged or he is blessed in terms of it, and God’s law surrounds him, God’s covenant law, and is the basic fact of life. One requirement of the covenant is that humanity must become one body in Christ. That one body must be governed by its head, Jesus Christ, and its unity benefits all equally. And the joy and the victory of the head, Jesus Christ, is the joy and the victory of all.

Now life in a hierarchy militates against envy because each rejoice in what is their place. Halmud Shook {?} in his book on envy has called attention to the fact that Christianity has alone been successful in combating this evil and its destructive force. Envy always grasps at privilege, it equates life with it. The envious feel that if someone has something more than they do it is evil. The only one entitled to more than everyone else is the envious person; he feels he should have everything because being a sinner he sees himself as his own God. As a result envy is anarchistic, it seeks privilege for itself and denies it to others. To accept our place in God’s hierarchy means that we recognized that only work, only calling, can lead to improving our place; that only by doing God’s will will we gain greater status in the sight of God and man.

Moreover, to accept our place under God’s rule, under God’s law, which is what hierarchy means, is to be free of envy and of the guilty created by envy. The sad fact is that when you have an envious people they are easily conned into guilt, they are made to feel guilty about all the worlds ills. An envious person can be made to bleed for the poor people in India without doing anything for them. Or for the misery of the people, let us say Egypt, and again without doing anything for them except ask congress to do it. The envious are very readily made to feel guilty because they have a burden of guilt already, and as guilty people they can be induced to deepen their guilt trip for almost everything because they know their shortcomings before God; however much they may suppress it. And guilt is a paralyzing force. Guilt does not lead to action, only to a greater sense of guilt. The missions to the poor and to the needy the world over are largely manned by Christians.

Envy and guilt lead to inaction and are destructive of work. But Godly work is purposive, it is governed by an eschatology, a purpose, a goal, a victory. It is interesting that George Orwell, who is very much in the news these days because his 1984 is selling 60,000 copies a day of late, and all his books are currently again in print. Great deal of attention is being paid to his book about 1984. The Sunday supplements are full of articles about 1984, is it coming to pass, or is it not? Pro and con, and all of them forget that when it was published in 1948 what Orwell was saying when he simply transposed the date was that this is already here, it’s developing to its logical conclusion. Orwell was not a Christian and therefore he was pessimistic. But it is interesting that on March 3, 1944, in an article of that date he spoke about the decline in any belief in a life after death. He made it clear he did not believe in it, nor did he want to. At least so he said. But, he said, humanism and socialism had a problem until they came up to some answer to the belief in life after death; because, he said, this is what gives man a goal. This is what says that there is a difference between good and evil, that there is a consequence to a life of virtue and to a life of evil; and it gives a moral framework to the world. And so he said until we come up with answer to this, socialism and humanism generally are in deep trouble.

The decline in a belief in life after death, he said, was exercising its destructive force. It was breaking the back of a system of good and evil. This is very true. The loss of faith in life after death leaves only one kind of immortality, or semi-immortality, the life of the state. And so the state as the continuing organism becomes more and more powerful because men are going to die and they are just manure for the future; and socialism, the state, becomes mans hope, and man becomes more and more expendable.

When we began our studies in the theology of work we began with Psalm 126 verse 6, let’s look at that again. “He that goeth forth and weepeth, bearing precious seed, shall doubtless come again with rejoicing bringing his sheathes with him.” You will remember that the presupposition here is a time of famine. A man has only so much seed left, and he has to figure “how am I going to survive? Without sowing seed, we will not eat, there is sure death ahead. But how much seed can I sow and still have enough grain so that the family can eat between now and harvest?” And so to go forth sewing in such a time was something that made a Godly man weep for fear of miscalculation. For fear that the weather would delay the harvest. And of course in such a time those who felt no hope simply kept their grain and ate it, hoping that somewhere, somehow, a miracle would be forthcoming and grain would be abundant and cheap from somewhere without their act of faith. So that a man who went out in such time to sow was doing it as an act of faith, an act of faith in God’s world. It was Godly work because they placed their hope in the future, that in God’s future these things would happen.

This is God’s world, it accomplishes God’s purpose. This is true not only of God’s blessings, but of His curses. God’s curses are eschatological also, that is they lead to a conclusion under God, they glorify God, they vindicate His justice. The tower of Babel was an elitist society; it was brought to confusion by God. The story is a reassuring and a comforting one because it tells us that every tower of Babel that men build, including the towers of Babel in our day, will be brought down, will be brought to confusion. The tower of Babel was a stepped pyramid. Each floor was smaller than the other, and recessed; so the top story was one room whereas the bottom story was a huge one, it was a ziggurat. As you looked at it from the distance it looked like a ladder going up towards heaven.

Now it is interesting that some of the old documents of free masonry claim that the freemasonry movement descended from the survivors of the builders of the tower of Babel. It also ties in with the dream of rule which is inherent in Freemasonry. Albert Pike, who wrote Morals and Dogma said, and I quote, “When the brethren meet they are at labor.” So that work is associated with their rituals, with their pretentions. Work is also associated in Morals and Dogma with social change, with cleansing the world of the old order and the old religion. This is an elitist dream, and to often dream have a like elitist goal. The goal is institutional, it is churchy, it is not unto the Lord; and the scope of God’s eschatology is reduced to an institution. But God centered work moves in terms of Psalm 126 verse 6, a trust in the orderliness of God’s word, and that he that goes forth sewing shall in due time reap.

As a result it is a false doctrine to divide work between sacred and secular, as though only one kind of work is under God’s blessing and is a part of God’s realm. The division between sacred and secular work is nonsense. Work has been secularized, outside the circle of the church, by making all non-ecclesiastical work non-sacred and non-holy; and yet anything done unto the Lord in any area of life and thought is sacred, not profane. In fact the clergy can be profane and often are when they are unfaithful to their calling. Indeed any and every area of life can be either sacred or profane. There’s too much profane thinking today, thinking which is outside of God. Profane means literally outside the temple, that is outside the province of God; and modern man has made everything profane.

The fact of a hierarchy of functions does not mean a hierarchy of importance in the purposes of God. Paul makes this abundantly clear in I Corinthians 12:14 following, and he says the various parts of the body cannot say “I am more important than the rest” because they are one life together; and in a truly hierarchical society, that is a society truly ruled by God’s word, by God’s law, all function as one body. Paul speaks of the unity of the body. The liver, for example, may never be seen, but there is no life without it. The heart is not seen, but man will die if his heart is destroyed. Elitism wants to make a world in its own image, it cannot tolerate what is the essence of a body, unity in diversity. It’s not without cause that as elitism has arisen in the modern world, so has one of the wildest dreams man has ever had, cloning, cloning. What’s the goal of cloning? Well before cloning ever became a scientific concept it was a science fiction concept. You have an elite that creates a world of clones out of docile, cow-like human beings when they find them, stamps them out endlessly to create its worker class while the elites sit on top and use everyone. That’s the impulse behind the investigation in cloning, it is an elitist dream. And this is why it is so destructive of life and society for an elitist element to propagate their ideas and to claim scientific or academic or political respectability for them.

Now some would limit Paul’s idea of the body to the church, it is clear that he is speaking here of the kingdom of God. But the kingdom of God then was limited to the church, which was to go out and conquer the world. Very, very important here is the perversion of the Biblical word “church”. In the Greek New Testament it is Ekklesia, a form of Ekalao {?}, to call out. Well a lot of Christians would immediately agree “oh yes our church is called out, it is separated from everybody.” But that’s not the meaning of Ekalao. Called out meant to be drafted, an army muster, an army draft. So the church is called out like an army to be the army of God. This is why Paul speaks of putting on the whole armor of God. This is why many hymns have a military imagery “like a might army moves the church of God” the draftees of God. The church is an army, it is a barracks room where men are trained to go out to do God’s will, to bring all things into captivity to Jesus Christ.

This is the eschatology of the church, a church must be God’s army. And an army is not mustered to go out and lose, you can skip all the battles if you’re programmed for defeat. Consider the absurdity of those who have eschatologies in the church of defeat; what they are saying is the church was called out and lose the world, not to conqueror it. What they are prescribing for those whom they draft into the army is that “get yourself ready to be raptured out of the world, because we’re losers here.” This is the eschatology of defeat, not of victory. This is why the church today has lost its impact on the world, because it is no longer moving like a mighty army certain of victory under its head, Jesus Christ. It is committed to defeat, but it has been mustered out to go into all the world and disciple all the nations, teaching them all things, said the Lord, that I have commanded you. Only so can it be truly a church. Let us pray.

We praise Thee oh God our Father who has called us out to be members of a world conquering army, an army whose victory is determined from all eternity. Make us faithful therefore to Thy word and ever mindful of our responsibilities, and as faithful workers, as faithful soldiers, of Thy kingdom we may be more than conquerors through Christ our King. In His name we pray, amen.

Are there any questions now about our lesson?

Yes?

[Audience member] It’s always interested me, this passage in Corinthians you know, the one and the many, because it’s really the solution to the problem of knowledge as we’ve talked about before, and that you tie in Genesis and the creation mandate is important, it’s, you know, Moses solves the problem of knowledge at first verse of the Bible when he says “in the beginning Elohim” or “in the beginning God” and Calvin says it’s a first argument in his commentary on Genesis, for the trinity. The whole unity of God’s purpose, it seems to me like is destroyed when we forget that one on the many. We can talk about purpose, but unless we’re talking about the purpose of the whole body in all of its diversity then we start isolating things and fragmenting them, and portioning them off into “this is Christian and that’s non-Christian.”

I think one of the most important doctrines that we’ve abused or allowed to be abused has been that creation mandate, and in so far as the whole of the body is concerned.

[Rushdoony] Herman Dooyeweerd {?} in one of his books said that if you begin not with God but some point in creation, something within the universe, you’re going to absolutize it, and then try to bring everything under the dominion of that one thing; and you create a tyrannical order. You create an absolutism of something that is a created aspect of the world.

Any other questions or comments?

Yes?

[Audience member] When you’re speaking of eschatology as a defeat in churches who hold to that persuasion, is it still common place for these churches and members of the church to be almost resentful, or indeed resentful, of any other point of view, any other eschatology in particular, a postmillennial eschatology, do they react as if it’s unscriptural when you say that the church should be victorious?

[Rushdoony] What has been happening of late is that postmillennial thinking is seeping into all circles. As a matter of fact recently in one major city there were two important planning sessions by prominent evangelical church leaders and the gist of their planning was to begin to recapture this country and the world for Christ. In both meetings my name, I am told, was mentioned, and postmillennialism, and there was a general consensus of opinion that there premillennial thinking was beginning to get soft & weak and they were thinking in terms of victory, but I don’t think they want as to be open about it, so they are becoming victory oriented.

A lot of the old hostility to postmillennialism is being replaced with a predisposition to it.

Yes?

[Audience member] Some are going the other way, I think another hymn that the new Episcopalian hymnbook is throwing out is the Battle Hymn of the Republic, the other one I think I mentioned last week is Onward Christian Soldiers, there are some denominations that are just running in the wrong direction.

[Rushdoony] Yes, now those are the modernist ones who are dying on the vine, they are big churches with little congregations and even smaller pastors. [Laughter]

[Same audience member] Well that might be another sign of what you’re saying though, that there is a change, because at major turning points you’ll see those who are wrong getting wrong-er, many of them, and that’s not inconsistent with the reality that in some denominations they are turning towards the truth.

[Rushdoony] Yes.

[Audience member] I think some of those modernist churches are more {?} than anything, that way they don’t offend anybody.

[Rushdoony] [Laughs] Any other questions or comments?

Yes John?

[John] One thought that I had was when you were talking about men setting up a rule and then assigning themselves places in this conception that they have. We talked a lot about the social security which I call social insecurity, program being a Ponzi scheme and that’s exactly what that sounds like because what you do in a Ponzi scheme or chain letter is to develop the game and put you put yourself at the top in a particular order. And that might be one reason that the governments try so hard to clamp down on chain letters and Ponzi schemes, because they don’t want people seeing them and realizing that the government is the same thing as that which is being attempted to be suppressed.

[Rushdoony] Yes, social security has an eschatology of disaster. [Laughter]

Well let us bow our heads now in prayer as we conclude.

Our Lord and our God we thank Thee that Thy word is truth and Thy government is total and perfect. Give us grace to move in terms of Thy word and Thy rule, and grant that by Thy Spirit we may always be joyful and triumphant in Thee. In Jesus name, amen.