Introduction

Hope, in the world; don’t hope in the world.

Hope is one of the most important and most often neglected aspects of Christian theology. We talk about hope and we think about hope and we use the word probably multiple times a day, every day. Hope, as an idea and as a word is, probably, one of the most common theological terms used in routine speech. While love is probably the most used, hope comes in a strong second.

And yet, I don’t think that Christians, broadly speaking, know what hope is, in a theological sense. Sure, we know what it means as a routine noun – but as a theological expression of the Biblical concept – that’s a different story altogether. Because the reality is that theological hope and routine hope are not in any way, shape, manner, or form, the same thing.

Just as not as the world gives, gives Jesus peace, in the same way not as the world gives, gives Jesus hope. The hope that comes from Jesus is not different in quantity but in quality. He has an altogether different kind of hope. But, unfortunately, this word is so laden with cultural meaning, it’s hard to get at what the Bible means when God speaks of hope. If we want to move forwards in understanding my thesis that there is a difference of monumental importance between “hoping in the world” and “hoping, in the world” we’re going to need to understand hope.

Put simply, Christian hope is the confident expectation of some future good. It doesn’t mean desire, although desire and hope have a large Ven-diagram overlap. Yes, we desire the things we hope for but not all desires are hopes. Some things we desire, but have no confident expectation that the thing we desire will ever come to pass! I’ve preached on this, at length, so I don’t want to spend much time defending my assertion. So, instead of trying to defend this with word studies and exegetical arguments I want to simply show that philosophically hope can’t be desire, or pie in the sky wishing, it has to involve a confident expectation.

Hope is one of the 3 that abide in the believer, along with faith and love. If Hope could be in something deceptive – something that will never happen, then it’s a deceitful hope. It’s a lie. And since hope comes from God, then hope can’t be a lie because it’s impossible for God to lie!

Now, you might say, “well, OK, but maybe as humans we are putting our hope in the wrong OBJECT, just as we can put our faith and our love in the wrong object.” And of, course, I would agree and then thank you for proving my point. Hope that won’t come true isn’t godly hope because God wouldn’t give us a reason to confidently expect something that will never happen. Hoping for something that will never happen is worldly hope. Worldly hope is just a desire. Godly hope is confident expectation. So, with our understanding of hope, let’s try to unpack what I mean when I say that there’s an eternal difference between “hoping in the world” and “hoping, in the world.”

The Argument

Recently my wife and I went on a vacation to Lancaster. We loved it. I, being a Mennonite, found it fascinating to see Mennonite culture celebrated. I found it saddening to see it commercialized in a kitschy way. But more than that, I was reminded of the subtle but powerful pull that that lifestyle has for a lot of people.

I could EASILY see myself running away to live on a sustenance farm – away from people. I could see myself living in a commune, like the Hutterites, or a Monastic Community. I could very easily go and isolate myself. I could very easily and very happily move my stuff to the middle of some vast forest and live in my library, reading and writing and never having to see or deal with anyone in the world ever again. I could move far enough away that elections wouldn’t matter, socialism wouldn’t matter, taxes wouldn’t matter, riots wouldn’t matter. Sitting in the silent peace of my mountain library I would just exist as a happy hermit.

Or at least that’s my dream.

So why don’t I do it?

3 reasons. 1, God commands me not to. 2, It is exceedingly selfish and sinful. 3, it wouldn’t really bring me satisfaction. And this is important for us to understand. We can’t just run away from the world. We have to engage with it. We live in it, for goodness’ sake, we have to deal with it. Christians need to engage with the culture and with politics if for no other reason than because we need an entre to show people Jesus. Obviously there are other and some better reasons to engage, but at a baseline level, we can’t just live in isolation because then we won’t have a witness – we won’t be able to rightly testify to Christ by word and deed. We are to be IN the world, but not OF it.

This is crucial. So, let’s think about this. If this is a command – which I take it to be. The it is a sin to be in the world AND of it – those would be worldlings, AKA unbelievers. There are also those who are not in the world, but not of it – those would be true believers in isolation. And then there are those who are not in the world AND ARE of it – those would be false believers living in isolation. And those are sinning the worst! Shockingly, in some ways, it might be worse for your soul to live in a Christian commune as a pseudo-Christian than to live a life of open and gross immorality. The worldling who is in the world, at least isn’t a hypocrite. But the Monk who denies the Master IS!

I see the appeal of running away, I really do – but in the end, it’s disobedient, cowardly, and purposeless…it may also make you a Pharisee, twice a son of Hell!

But what does this have to do with hope? Well, the reason I bring this up is because all sincere Christians STRUGGLE, and I mean struggle, to walk that line of being IN the world and not OF it. We recognize that God has commanded us to live, work, play, eat, drink, and be merry in this world – with worldlings – and try to testify to Christ. We recognize that we need to live our lives among sinners in a sinful culture with sinful values and also not become like them, but help them be transformed into the image of Christ. What does this mean practically? This is a hard question, and, unfortunately for those who like black and white, largely a matter of individual conscience.

But what should become obvious is that we, as citizens of Heaven, still have responsibilities here on earth. We recognize that while our Mission is to make disciple-making disciples, part of that means striving to spread God’s Shalom, even in a lost and dying world. We seek to Edenify the world, even though we know it’s a failing task! Why? Because we’re stewards and the stewardship we’ve been given includes this lost and dying world. Because we’re stewards of our life, liberty, time, talent, treasure, sexuality, intellect, emotions, wills, influence, friendships, churches, communities, and everything else – that everything else encompasses out earthly citizenship. If everything about me is a sacred gift from God that I’m to steward, then so is my American citizenship. Since my American citizenship is a sacred stewardship, then I have a stake in politics. I have a responsibility to God about whether and how I vote. I have a responsibility in how I help to shape this Republic. And I believe that the American Republic, for all it’s flaws and evils, is still the best place on God’s earth today – if for no other reason than that it’s the best house on a bad street. America has, has had, and always will have problems, and serious ones. But that doesn’t mean that it cannot be improved, and it certainly doesn’t mean I shouldn’t strive to improve it. My personal hero William Wilberforce saw very clearly the problems with 18th Century England. He was aware – yet he worked to make England like Eden. In the same way, I want America to be a nation that loves and serves God – not with lipservice, but in truth. I want a nation of righteous laws, ruled by righteous people. I think that this is an OBJECTIVE good. It is objectively good to have godly laws governing the godly. And I believe that America CAN be revived. I believe she CAN turn to Christ. I believe that the ship can be saved and we can reform and we can right things and that if we turn to Christ, and stop sinning, and do good, then America’s best days might be ahead. I’m hoping, in the world.

But that doesn’t seem to be the trend. America seems to be dead-set and determined to murder babies, outlaw Christ, and play the Socialist game. We’re falling towards secular paganism, aka Wokeism and it looks ugly. The Academy is godless and going woke…and this includes the public school system at all levels. Culture is godless. And more and more young people are godless. I’m not hoping in the world.

You see, on one hand I have the confident expectation that if we repent and turn to Christ He will save our nation. But I’m not hoping that worldlings will suddenly do godly things without becoming godly! My hope isn’t in this world.

Last night’s election can be interpreted in a whole host of ways if you’re a Christian. And although we don’t know the results, yet, one thing stands out very clearly to me: God gives nations leaders they deserve – and sometimes even better leaders than they deserve. But, on the whole, a godless, feckless, murderous, adulterous, greedy, and corrupt nation should expect leadership that will be godless, feckless, murderous, adulterous, greedy and corrupt. When we live in a nation that is full of sin we should expect to be punished for that sin. And one of the most, if not the single most, common ways for God to punish a nation and national sin is to allow natural consequences to play out. In other words, God let’s us reap what we’ve sown. When we sow to the flesh, we reap corruption – and sometimes, by His grace, we get slightly less corrupt corruption than we deserve; but God is not mocked and one of the things that is an invincible bulwark against mockery is human nature. Godless people cannot be trusted to make good political decisions. How can they be? How can a person who hates God, the Author of Life, the Giver of all Good Gifts, the Font of Wisdom, He who knows the End from the Beginning, the Almighty – if you hate and reject Him what should you expect to get?! If you separate yourself from the Light why should you not expect darkness.

Whatever happens after the votes are tallied 2 things are clear.

First, Christians have placed far too much hope in the world. Far too many Christians’ behavior demonstrates that they see America’s problems as primarily political and not moral. And since they see them as political, they believe that Abortion, Cultural Disintegration, and Socialism are political phenomena. They are not. The are theological phenomena with political ramifications. Theology is the Essence and Politics are the Accidents. We fail to see the theological root of our problems because we’ve put our hope in this world.

Second, America becoming a Socialist state may be the only path to revival. I’ve been saying for years that I do not believe there will be revival in this nation until there is persecution. So, while Christians lament that a majority of adult humans would vote for a party of unfettered infanticide, riot apologetics, Socialism, and Wokeism, remember that God is in control.

Remember that God works out all things for the good of those who love Him and are called according to His purpose. Will an America reshaped in the image of Joe Biden, Kamala Harris and all their ilk be an objectively worse place to live? Absolutely. But fertile soil is full of feces and death. Perhaps the best thing for the Gospel in this country is for us to face mistreatment and persecution. Will that be objectively better for the godless woke worldlings? No. It will only heap up their sin to the full measure. It will redound to their more complete condemnation. But for believers it may be the crucible which purifies us.

In closing I’d like to quote the words of an anonymous poem that have come to mean much to me. As Americans anticipate our country going down the tubes, let’s remember that while we can hope, in this world, we must never hope in the world. We need to look to Jesus. We need to trust him that when our candidates don’t win, that He’s still in control, and He’s doing all He does for the good of His Church – to make His Bride more Beautiful!

Is there no other way, Oh God,

Except through sorrow, pain and loss?

To stamp Christ's likeness on my soul,

No other way except the cross?

And then a voice stills all my soul,

That stilled the waves of Galilee,

"Cans't thou not bear the furnace

If midst the flames I walk with thee?

I bore the cross, I know its weight,

I drank the cup I hold for thee.

Cans't thou not follow where I lead?

I'll give thee strength, lean hard on Me."

Excursus: A Discourse on Method

(If you aren’t interested in theological method you can ignore this §)…(but is it worth the risk?…)

So how do we discern what the Bible means when it speaks of hope? Well, to answer this question I’m going to explain a little about my theological method. And I hope that if you understand my method you’ll be able to use it yourself and hopefully do better theology!

First, in my method I always try to do as much apophatic theology as possible before doing any cataphatic. Now, if that sounds fancy and incomprehensible, it’s OK. There’re just fancy $4 words that I’m throwing out, for no other reason than to give you the vocab so you have a category of thought. Apophatic theology is basically theology by eliminating wrong answers. It’s the Via Negativa – the negative way. Apophatic theology tries to answer questions by eliminating wrong answers. Let me give you an example.

Pretend you’re a homicide detective and you’re on a family vacation with the kids and you decide to take an overnight train ride through the mountains and then, suddenly, DUN, DUN, DUNNNNNNN, it’s discovered that there was a murder on the train. And so, you, being a world-famous detective, set about to solve this mystery. Well, what’s the first thing you’ll do? You’ll eliminate all possible suspects to narrow down the field. You eliminate all small children. You eliminate everyone who was physically incapable of committing the murder. Let’s say the man was strangled – that takes a lot of strength, so you are only looking at men, so you can eliminate all women. And you can go on and on and on trying to eliminate categories of people and individuals by saying they CAN’T have done the murder. It’s a lot like playing Guess Who – incidentally the fun DOES end when you play Guess Who, but it’s still a very useful game for teaching children logic.

So, all apophatic theology, or apophasis, is is simply eliminating as many possible wrong answers to limit the field of potentially right answers. But only eliminating bad answers rarely gives you the right answer in theology – not on the complex and deep questions. For instance, let’s say because of all the evidence in the case, you, the master detective, you have narrowed it down to 3 suspects. Well, that’s not good enough. You can’t put all three on trial for murder and say, well, I know it has to be one ‘a them! No. Now we need cataphatic theology.

Cataphatic theology, is theology by making positive assertions, making claims that you want to defend. Let’s go back to the Murder on the Train example. Let’s say now that you’ve got it down to 3 potential killers, you decide it’s time to claim you know who the killer is. Now, of the 3 men, all three are strong enough, and had access to the victim and were seen around the victim near the time of his death. So, they had means and opportunity. But let’s say only one of them had a motive. Let’s say one of these three men was the victim’s nephew and sole heir to the Uncle’s fortune who had, DUN, DUN, DUNNNNNNN, just found out that he’d been written out of the will because of his profligate lifestyle! Yes, yes, good, good, now you have means, opportunity, AND motive. Now you’ve got a case.

Theology works just like this. Theologians try to answer questions by saying, ok, let’s think about this question – doesn’t matter what it is, and they say, OK, let’s eliminate as many answers as we can, as fast as we can and narrow the answer down to a small number of candidates (incidentally, this is a good way to play chess!) then after you’ve gotten rid of as many as possible and have your small number of candidates you weigh the evidence once again and you make a positive assertion and you develop an argument to defend your assertion. Because you need evidence. You need negative AND positive evidence. It’s not enough to look at all the people on the train and eliminate everyone but one guy and say, “well it has to be him”. No, it doesn’t. Just because you can’t eliminate him doesn’t mean he did it! Someone could have sneaked on. Someone could be hiding. You may have eliminated someone whom you shouldn’t’ve! You can’t just say, this is the only thing that it’s not not. You have to prove that it is! You need negative AND positive evidence. And you say, well, Luke, if I have positive evidence and I can prove that Nephew Billy is the killer, why do I need negative evidence? I have sufficient positive evidence! Do you? You KNOW, do you, that Billy worked alone? You know he had no accomplices? Well, prove it. Bad theology has positive or negative evidence. Good theology has both.