Dual Citizens

In his book, Dual Citizens, pastor Jason Stellman attempts to set forth his understanding of how the Bible describes what is known in Reformed and other circles as how believers are to live during the period of the “already/not yet.” This refers to the period between Christ’s first and second comings. Herman Ridderbos is one of the best known presenters of this idea, which he has done in his books The Coming of the Kingdom and Paul: An Outline of his Theology. According to Ridderbos (and others), Jesus’ birth, life, death and resurrection inaugurated the presence of God’s kingdom. Believers in Jesus receive the benefits of that kingdom: forgiveness, release from sin, new life and hope. Beyond that, this concept means that God’s rule has already begun in the life of Jesus. This is the “already.” The “not yet” refers to the future consummation of that kingdom.
Pastor Stellman’s purpose in his book is to develop the implications of the already/not yet for Christian life. This is a worthy task. It deals with the essence of our lives as we await Christ’s return. Having read the book, I have some concerns about his underlying presuppositions and how he constructs his approach. My concerns are with his separation of worship and life (what he calls cult and culture), his understanding of covenant theology and his caricatures of evangelical and Christian spiritual disciplines.
Since his separation of worship and life is based on his understanding of God’s covenant(s), I will begin there. An essential element of a Reformed understanding of God’s covenants is their unity. The various covenants are part of God’s overall covenantal approach and dealing with people in general and his people in particular. O. Palmer Robertson, in his Christ of the Covenants, devotes a whole chapter to the unity of God’s covenants, particularly the covenants with Noah, Abraham, Moses and David. These covenants build on the one before them and culminate in the New Covenant inaugurated by Jesus. This Reformed understanding is contrasted with a dispensational view which does not see the covenants as a unity and posits a difference between Israel and the Church.
Pastor Stellman’s approach to the covenants seems to be more dispensational than Reformed. I say this because he posits the need for a specific geographic location as important to how God’s covenants impact the way God’s people live. Under the covenants with Adam and Moses, God had initiated a theocracy which governed every aspect of life, including cult and culture. In regard to the covenant with Moses, it was especially in effect as long as Israel was in the land given them by God. When Israel was in exile in Babylon, the stipulations of the covenant governing Israel’s relationships with others did not apply. Once Israel returned to the land under Ezra and Nehemiah, all the stipulations of the covenant were once again in effect.
In regard to the conduct of believers during the period between Christ’s first and second comings, Pastor Stellman asserts that the church, like Israel in Babylon, is in exile. In this exilic state, it is possible to separate worship from the rest of life. He specifically rejects John Frame’s assertion that it is “difficult to separate “life” from “worship” in a biblical framework.” As Pastor Stellman writes, when they [God’s people] are exiles and pilgrims, they are called to separate themselves only religiously, not culturally.” This approach seems problematical. It seems to undercut the unity of the covenants. It also seems contrary to the realities of the New Covenant and Christ’s Lordship.
Under the New Covenant, the Church is called “a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people belonging to God…” (I Peter 2:9 NIV). Paul says in Philippians 4:20, “our citizenship is in heaven…” He also tells us in Romans 12:2 to not be conformed to the world. Peter gives the same advice in I Peter 2:11-12.
The Church’s designation as a holy people and nation relates the Church to Israel. Yet, the Church is not in exile. The Church’s presence in the world is not punishment for disobedience, but for the purpose of declaring the glory of the one who brought them from darkness to life. Under the New Covenant, the church has no specific dedicated piece of land like Israel did in Canaan. All the earth belongs to the Lord (Ps. 24). Under the New Covenant, the possession of a specific piece of geography is not essential to the covenant since all the earth is the Lord’s. Thus, Pastor Stellman’s view of a separation between worship and life is without foundation. Christians are in the world to witness and they are called to be salt and light, separate from and not conforming to the world around them.
In this regard, Christians come in contact with the world around them. Like Israel, there are restrictions on how the Church interacts with the world. Christians are not to marry outside the faith (I Cor. 7:39). Believers are not to be yoked with unbelievers (2 Cor. 8:14-18). Christians are not to take each other to court (I Cor. 6). Christians were to take responsibility for each other, especially widows, orphans and any one else in need.
His book is clear about the differences between the church and the world and he makes some valuable evaluations of how the church operates in American culture. Christians in the United States must be open to suffering, be less demanding of prestige and power. Yet, in his evaluation of American evangelicalism, Pastor Stellman caricatures some spiritual disciplines that many American Christians, including this writer, find meaningful. These disciplines include a daily quiet time, listening to Christian music and retreats. He refers to these as “extra-canonical sacraments,” and hints that they are a gnostic form of spirituality (a charge that Mike Horton makes in Christless Christianity). He also implies that these practices stand in contrast to Reformed confessional understandings of Christian living, though without referring to specific confessional content. This Reformed confessional understanding centers on the local congregation where God’s Word is preached each Sunday.
Here he sets up a false dichotomy, and shows some personal bias toward American evangelicals. According to him (in Chapter 7), American evangelicals would rather practice personal individual piety than attend a local church where the Word of God is preached. Perhaps that is true in some cases, but the reality is that evangelical Christians probably attend church more than they practice individual disciplines. For me (and no doubt for many others) the discipline of a daily quiet time does not rule out attendance at a local congregation. The two practices complement each other. The practice of a daily quiet time is not to receive special revelation (as in Gnosticism) to “read, mark, learn and inwardly digest” the Scriptures, to meditate on them and to engage in daily prayer. Corporate worship is important, but it does not rule out individual worship.
In another area, he is critical of the desire of evangelicals for application in the sermons they hear. This, he says, is a desire for law not gospel. I wonder what he does with the letters of the Apostle Paul. Many of Paul’s letters can be divided into two parts: the indicative (what God has done in Christ) and the imperative (the application of the indicative). Much evangelical preaching probably is more application or “practical” and less oriented toward declaring what God has done in Christ. But the desire for application means that Christians take seriously what it means to be a Christian and how we live out our faith in the world. This would be similar to those aspects of the Law that defined how Israel was to live in a pagan environment. Given the state of American Christianity, as evangelicals like Ron Side and Jim Wallis have pointed out, American Christians need more application to know how to live as God’s holy people in the midst of a pagan society.
American Christians (as do all Christians) live as dual citizens of two worlds. Yet the Head of the Church is the Lord of the nations. Our allegiance is to one Lord. But, as Paul says in Philippians 4:20, our citizenship is in heaven. It is from the consummation of the kingdom that we are exiles and pilgrims. It is the values of God’s kingdom that are to guide us during our pilgrimage.