When I was growing up, it was a "that's obvious" commonplace that "Western Civilisation" is real (and distinct from others), that we here in the Caribbean are a part of it. Also, that it is on the whole a great benefit to humanity -- "warts and all," "good, bad and ugly" notwithstanding. As well, that, historically, it is rooted in the Christian synthesis of our inheritance from the famous triad of cities, Jerusalem, Athens and Rome; with of course the earlier Fertile Crescent Civilisations -- especially those of the Nile and Mesopotamia river valleys at the deeper level. Often, in Sunday School, we would learn of how Nimrod, was a founder of River Valley civilisation, and that he demonstrated the mixed blessing nature of civilisation, a good thing in many ways, but with a domineering strong man and rebel against God in leadership.
 |
| King Tutankhamun's Cartouche: in Egyptian Hieroglyphs |
That was then.
 |
| A "remembers" |
– Moral and theological vision: Augustine’s City of God; the Holy Bible itself, the central book of our civilisation (so much so, its name, literally is The Book, as Arabic remembers today: Al Kitab);
– Law and political order: Cicero’s works; Alfred’s Preface to the Book of Dooms (explicitly citing the Decalogue in founding the Common Law); Justinian’s Corpus Juris Civilis, framing Roman and later Napoleonic law;
– Reason, Mathematics and formal knowledge: Euclid’s Elements (Geometry & Math Education); the enduring intellectual influence of Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle;
– Historical consciousness: Herodotus and Thucydides (with Josephus deserving honourable mention); the long shadow the Peloponnesian War casts on democratic governance;
– Language itself: over half of English vocabulary deriving from Latin roots (≈29% directly, ≈29% via French)—including the word civilisation itself --
. . . are increasingly sidelined and forgotten, or have been treated as suspect — or are even taken as grounds for offence. (For example: dead, they are; "white," we would call most of them; males, yes . . . but that sort of ad hominem claim is distractive; it does not legitimately sideline their massive importance.)
Civilisation itself is now often seen as a dubious notion, little more than an excuse for oppressive domination and racist supremacism. In Christian circles, echoing this in key part, many would now deny that our Faith is pro-civilisational, choosing instead to emphasise that we are called to be a counter-culture -- to which, I must first say, such as by being “ . . . the light of the world. A city [Latin, CIVITAS] set on a hill cannot be hidden"? [Matt 5:14]
Something has gone wrong, and . . . forgive, my noticing . . . is trending worse. So, pardon but in absence of someone more suitable, I now take up Voddie Baucham's fallen torch and compose the following; as an initial step towards a "first, rough draft," Acts 27, Fair Havens "steering word."
To begin, as Jesus hinted at in his opening remarks for his epochal (indeed, civilisation-foundational) Sermon on the Mount, a city on a hill that shines out in a darkened world is a point of hope, refuge, rescue, restoration, renewal, even resurgence. Where, even the seemingly simple word, "city," is loaded with meaning, as:
DEFINITION: A Civilisation is a city-based culture. That is, a civilisation is a level of culture for a society or cluster of societies that has advanced enough to have urban concentrations of people, and so an economy with high specialisation of production of goods and services; with, ability to sustain itself from one generation to the next. Such, has need for significant agricultural surplus (often, based on hinterlands or trade), adequate water supply, administration, education and training or apprenticeship, facilitation of trade, government, defence and hosting of arts and culture, with a predominant vision of itself in the world, hope for the future and memory or record of the past (typically, religiously rooted). Writing and written calculation systems are strong enablers, but are not strictly necessary. These factors are what allow a large population to thrive, and for people to live with some dignity, sense of belonging and hope for their posterity; though, of course there will be many challenges including poverty, family breakdown, public health, economic recessions, war, disease, natural disasters and more. Where, too, Old Kingdom Egypt and the Andean and Meso American Civilisations show that such does not strictly need a mass base of tool grade metalworking technologies using copper, bronze (tin or arsenic -- yes, arsenic), or iron; sophisticated stone technology is adequate.
Already, this grounds the basic legitimacy of any civilisation, however imperfect it is; and, even if it is significantly resistant to proposed reformation: as, long-term, multigenerational survival means that what is proposed must pass a stiff test for it to be prudent to take the risk of step-change. Yes, radicals, conservativism, amelioration, hard-to-swallow compromise and patient prudence (such as the apostle Paul exercised at Fair Havens) are needed survival mechanisms for a civilisation not addicted to voyages of dubious merit whenever "a sweet little south wind" blows. Where, too, despite risks of corruption, abuse, injustice, incompetence or profligacy, government is a necessary function for a viable city. Thus already, we see a distinction between prudent reform and radical demands.
In short, Civilisations, however imperfect, share a common basic legitimacy.
Including, therefore, that in-common civilisation we inhabit: rooted in the legacy of Jerusalem, Athens and Rome; formerly termed "Christendom"; but, now usually styled "Western Civilisation." Need for reform, progress, amelioration, sustainability, curbing corruption, strengthening justice and general welfare etc. indeed point to room for improvement; but -- on pain of mass chaos and disruption predictably causing mass death and decline -- such inevitable struggles do not delegitimise and stigmatise our civilisation or require its immediate dismantling and instant replacement or hurried "fundamental transformation" by whatever radical new utopian order is fashionable in a given day. The track record of many such attempts (as "predictably" implies) has not been good. So, too, a common "cancel culture" tactic: "gotcha" delegitimisation, marginalisation, demonisation and dismissal, is fundamentally misdirected (and too often, slanderously misanthropic). Radicals of all stripes, kindly take due note.
Just so, likewise, conservatives: there is no excuse to refuse to correct manifest injustice, or to unduly drag out change and so prolong oppression (including, under labels like "amelioration," or "apprenticeship").
Indeed, it is a major Judaeo-Christian legacy in our civilisation, that
The 4/5-Sector view of $$$ & 7M's of Influence
Repentance, Renewal & Reformation Thesis: As a part of the Judaeo-Christian legacy, responsible analysis, fair-minded critique (as opposed to slander), moral concern, creative beneficial innovation and honest enterprise, irenic public spiritedness [= neighbourliness to the whole community or even the entire brotherhood of man], lawfulness, willingness to compromise, amelioration of evils, repentance, renewal and willingness to undertake prudent, balanced reformation are deeply embedded in our civilisation's core values. (NB: These values are directly related to sustaining a business confidence climate that enables J-curve, compounding growth takeoff that helps societies break out of the infamous Malthusian immiseration trap. [This thesis is thus directly relevant to the Caribbean's lingering slow growth, leaky tyre effect economic woes: when the mustard tree becomes sturdy amidst a dry and sun parched land, the birds can safely nest in it. Indeed, it is further linked, that the simple Keynesian four/five sector model, from the angle of money flows, is looking at the same hills as the seven mountains of influence map does -- e.g. we see households/families, governments, business & finance directly; education, media, arts tend to split across these sectors, churches are non-profit "firms," etc.])
The question before us, then, is not whether civilisations change—they always do—but whether they possess the moral and institutional resources to change without self-destruction. (The hard lesson, taught by Acts 27.)
So, then, striking that "happy medium" -- between stubborn clinging to a business as usual [BAU] trend potentially headed for a cliff's edge; and, potentially over-hyped, perhaps even more unsound (but often quite attractive . . . ) radical alternatives [ALT] -- is the sustainability dilemma faced by policy makers and by the formal and informal influencers who collectively make up "the elders in the gates" of the city. (So, too: governance -- making the big decisions well and making them stick long enough to work [or else, recognising that we must now stop "throwing good money after bad"] -- is a notoriously "wicked hard" wisdom-challenge. One, where, cutting us off from the hard-bought sound lessons of history, just does not help.)
Framing the problem this way, now helps us to set a calmer, more balanced atmosphere for the reflections that will follow.
Next, portions of this work were developed with the assistance of an AI system, ChatGPT 5.2; a "radical" move. I note this explicitly, not as some sort of "Python washes whiter" claim to enhanced authority, but as a matter of intellectual honesty and due attribution; guided, by my conscience. That is, I am using the AI much as earlier scholars used concordances, libraries, reference works or research assistants—as a fallible but powerful accelerator, and as a source that I attribute, having cross-checked and adjusted as I thought advisable. Responsibility for truth, judgements, mistakes, and for weight of argument remains mine.
Also, as use of an AI has sometimes become cause for automatic questioning and challenge [and given our need not to be left behind as a region . . . ], let me pause to note on the emerging age of AI Oracle Universal Turing Machines [AIO-UTM's] as a new computing paradigm; one, that is strong enough to trigger a new industrial revolution,
Yes, conversational English is now a major programming language, where a globally networked AI allows us to [a:] use natural language prompting, to [b:] interface with a vast, curated digitised information base and [c:] with the AI's programmed ability to synthesise automatically from that base in response to prompts. Yes, fallible and not at all inerrant, but much the same holds for parents, teachers, peers, profs, experts, Unis, pundits, news agencies, published books, dictionaries, encyclopedias, technical reference works, academic reports or papers and the like: for, GIGO, garbage in garbage out, is inevitable in human systems.
 |
| Tut's Dagger |
Likewise, I think it advisable to propose a further thesis in light of the just past post on systematised Civic Theology,
Christ Pantokrator, C6 AD
Thesis/"micro-theory," on the apostolic operations principle (& mandate): the mature church acts as an embassy of the kingdom of God and its good news, the gospel (with its integral ethics), in society. This includes that at the level of strategic operations, certain senior missionaries [Latin-derived; historically termed apostoloi, from the Greek; later rendered apostles or envoys] and their teams, sent out by base churches, operate to plant the church, strengthen and renew it in a community under the 4R's process: repentance > renewal > revival > reformation.
As Eph 4:9 - 24 summarises (being, the operational form of the church's discipling mandate), this necessarily involves bold evangelistic, prayerful intercessory-prophetic, cogently argued truth-focused conscience-appealing peaceful apologetics and caring pastoral engagement with the lived order of a community, its habitual lifestyles, its institutions of influence, its predominant worldview(s) and associated moral-cultural and policy agendas; just, to call us to (repentance + renewal) [= discipleship], cf. vv 17 - 24.
Thus, discipleship is counter-cultural: it involves thoughtful recognition of "the futility (rooted in hardened hearts)" of rejection of God and The Way of the truth in love . . . compounded by sinful addiction to "[the] practice [of] every kind of impurity." Then -- through "learn[ing]" "the truth [that] is in Jesus," we instead "put off [our] old self" and seek "to be renewed in the spirit of [our] minds," thus "put[ting] on the new self, created after the likeness of God in true righteousness and holiness."
Where, too, we should not overlook The Great U, of vv. 9 - 10: " . . . He [Christ] who descended is the one who also ascended far above all the heavens, that he might fill all things" -- yes, too, Christ is Pantokrator, All-Powerful Cosmic Lord of all, worthy of our fealty. In this repentance and renewal based, discipleship-driven process, as Acts (especially, 3:17 - 21 --
[NB: Is 57:14 - 16, esp. v. 15 . . . thus says the One who is high and lifted up, who inhabits eternity, whose name is Holy: “I dwell in the high and holy place, and also with him who is of a contrite and lowly spirit, to revive the spirit of the lowly, and to revive the heart of the contrite"], cf. Neh 8:1 - 12 as a detailed case)
. . . shows (and history also reports, cf. analysis here, ), the Spirit of God is poured out in "seasons of refreshing" [= revivals], ranging from one or a few people, to many thousands. Where, too, Eph 1:22 - 23 adds, that "the church . . . is his body, the fullness of him who fills [everything in every way]." That is, as we go about the ordinary business of life, the spiritual-moral transformation of the gospel naturally, peacefully influences the community at large, for the good: the city on the hill shines in the night.
One potential result of this is that, if and as a growing, "critical mass" of people are renewed through discipleship and a walk of truthing it in love, purity and godly empowering, wider community views and cultural balances naturally shift and reformations may follow. This shows the shining city on a hill/mustard tree shelter effect in action. Historically, widespread (revivals + reformations) in combination are sometimes termed awakenings, given their repeated, spiritually powerful, remarkable culture-transforming impact.
Obviously, too, as one man's revival is another man's rebuke, and as Acts repeatedly outlines, there is therefore significant likelihood of not just misunderstanding and fear, but of mass anger or even riots -- or, worse -- organised and ruthless discrediting, opposition or persecution from hostile power centres.
However, the force of the gospel is not seen in domineering human power moves and counter-moves, but rather in the loving redemption and spiritual-moral energised by the gospel, leading to a message, lifestyle and mission of godly peace.
This invites tabulation:
Accordingly, let us posit a Civilisation, Initial Synthesis Thesis that builds on the Civic Theology frame already put on the table and the Civilisation definition above, as we turn to the arc from Acts 17 - 27:
Thesis (Civilisation Initial Synthesis and microcosm/yardstick voyage of folly case study): The Apostle Paul, of blended cultural inheritance (a diaspora Jew from a Hellenistic Greek city and centre of learning, and Roman citizen), acting under the apostolic operations framework, c. AD 50–59, as recorded in the textual arc of Acts 17–27 is pivotal for restoring what has been missing in our theologising. For, in these chapters we see the historical provenance of the beginnings of a civilisation-forming synthesis — the moral vision of Jerusalem, the philosophical and cultural legacy of Athens, and the legal-political order of Rome. Where, ground zero seems to be the three year period in Ephesus, during Paul's third Missionary Journey, c. AD 53 - 57 (in which he presented a deeply impactful seminar series for two years). Romans, c AD 57 and Ephesians, c AD 61 likely contain select summaries of the main themes of those seminars, though there are gems elsewhere, e.g. 1 Cor 14:7 - 9 states an endorsement of the central law of logic, the principle of distinct identity, focused on intelligible thought, teaching, knowledge and communication. Behind these aspects, of course, lie deeper, older civilisational roots of the Fertile Crescent and especially the Exodus arc. The Acts 17 - 27 arc also culminates in a real-world momento de verdad and microcosm case study that serves as a lived out counterpart to Plato's parables of the Cave and the Ship of State; making it an attractor for civilisational dynamics -- repeated voyages of folly. Yes, Acts 27.
What Luke–Acts preserves, then, is not merely early Christian history. It is:
THESIS (First, rough draft of history record, of Synthesis foundations): The first contemporaneous, eyewitness-anchored account of the first stages of a centuries-long, dynamic, Christian synthesis that . . . through the power of recognising that we are morally governed, conscience-guided creatures under intelligible core natural law (and so, face its arguable roots of reality import) . . . re-founded Western civilisation -- primarily at the level of moral ontology, political prudence, and historical meaning -- transforming the legacy of the Imperial era classical world into the base for Western Civilisation as it has come down to us.
Yes, "the first, rough draft of history." This phrase (often attributed to journalism), fits Luke with uncanny accuracy:
Luke writes c. AD 57 - 61, before outcomes are settled
before Christianity has political power,
before the AD 66 - 74 Jewish War (much less the onward Diaspora/Kitos double uprising AD 115 - 118, and the final calamity, the Bar Kochba uprising, AD 132 - 136),
centuries before the AD 325 & 381 creed-drafting Councils of Nicaea,
long before Augustine,
long before Christendom emerged as Church leadership became "the last man standing" to preserve the classical legacy after the Western Roman Empire collapsed and the plague of Justinian hammered the continent; closely followed by Islam to the South and East, and the Vikings, to the North . . . then, the Mongols, from China to Hungary. (It took almost a thousand years for Europe to recover, worsened by the even more deadly return of the Black Death, from 1346 - 53 on; killing ~25 - 50 million, up to half of Europe's then population. The Eastern, "Byzantine" Empire, lasted until 1453.)
Long before, once the Moorish invaders were defeated in 1492, the Iberians led in the maritime breakout of the West -- "discovering" the previously generally unknown Americas and rounding Africa to reach India . . . it seems, under Pharaoh Necho II, c. 600 BC, Phoenician sailors, sailing for Egypt, had circled Africa the other way. Thus, the Iberian breakout from 1492 on led, warts and all, to the global world we live in today.
Oddly, there IS one flash of Amos 3:7 - 8 insight, c 6th Century BC, in Daniel 2. Yes, Nebuchadnezzar's dream of the proud edifice of successive militaristic empires of man, then: "Dan 2: . . . 33 its legs of iron, its feet partly of iron and partly of clay [--> obviously, a prophetic vision of the Roman Empire]. 34 As you looked, a stone was cut out by no human hand [--> not by might of armies with swords loudly clashing, nor by cunning domination of economies and societal institutions, nor the drum-rolls of deceitful propaganda, but by the grace of heaven sent, Is 53 wounded healer Messiah and his breakthrough gospel that calls out " . . . saying, “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel.” {Mk 1:15}], and it struck the image on its feet of iron and clay, and broke them in pieces. [--> at the absurd altar of a cross, carrying out politically connived judicial murder one fatal Friday, but resurrection Sunday was coming . . .] 35 . . . the stone that struck the image became a great mountain and filled the whole earth . . . . 44 . . . the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that shall never be destroyed, nor shall the kingdom be left to another people. It shall break in pieces all these kingdoms and bring them to an end [--> the principle of domineering overlordship will be broken], and it shall stand forever [--> God's kingdom, seemingly weak in the face of dungeon, fire, sword and worse, is instead eternal]." Luke, and Paul, would doubtless take quiet eschatological hope from that.
So, he is writing inside the uncertainty but with prophetic vision, not from hindsight.
That is exactly why:
dissent is raw,
institutions are ambivalent,
mobs are chaotic,
elites are divided,
and prudence is tested under pressure.
This is history before it hardens into ideology.
That is why what he records feels different from later theological and historical reflections. It is not yet systematised. It is reportage; reportage that helped pave the way to a future in our times which Luke could not have imagined. Which in turn lets us recognise Acts 17 - 27 for what it is, a ringside, living memory report on the chain of chaotic, but revealing events that drove the first stages of the synthesis that shaped our civilisation as we have inherited it.
Where, Luke does not describe the Judaeo-Christian synthesis abstractly. He tracks it geographically, historically and institutionally:
Athens (Ac 17, cf. 18 - 20, AD 50, 51 - 57)
Philosophy, metaphysics, epistemology
Ignorance at the root of reality being exposed: the altar to the unknown god
This opens the door to the Ethical Theistic vision: God as root of reality
Selective engagement with Stoics, sidelining Epicureans
Abstract theism, God as creator of humanity, as Lord of history and creator of nations are tolerated
It is when Paul turns to the Man God has ordained, who is eschatological judge, manifested through resurrection of the dead with 500 witnesses, that they react sharply
But, the verdict of history is plain: the apostle held the future, and the gospel reshaped the path of history
Jerusalem (Acts 21 - 26, Ad 57 - 59)
Torah, Temple, ancestral law, cf. Lev 19:15 - 18
Resurrection as the fault-line, again: Paul speaks here as a Pharisee (his ancestral Party), and challenges the oligarchic, wealthy and institutionally entrenched Sadducees (who denied resurrection)
Mob dynamics and factional capture of governance: then, alliance of elites and the mob to attempt assassination as Judea's fault lines lead on to a bloody, suicidal rebellion of folly AD 66 - 74
Failure to heed the Neighbour Love governance & justice principles of Lev 19:15 - 18
Rome (from Ac 21 on, note chs. 24 - 28, AD 57 - 62)
Law, procedure, legitimacy, iron empire (with cracked, iron and clay feet)
Appeals, hearings, precedent
Christianity framed as lawful, rational, non-seditious, pro-civilisational
Christianity grounds the built-in, conscience-attested core law of moral government . . . acknowledged by the Romans (e.g. Cicero) . . . in the inherently good, utterly wise Creator God, an eternal, supreme being, worthy of our loyalty and upright service, manifested to us in the face of Jesus of Nazareth, Pantokrator: "promised beforehand through his prophets in the holy Scriptures [--> cf. Is 53] . . . descended from David according to the flesh . . . declared to be the Son of God in power according to the Spirit of holiness by his resurrection from the dead" [Rom 1:1 - 4, cf 1 Cor 15:1 - 11.]
Repeated failures of justice (through procedurally delaying freeing a patently innocent man and even hoping for a bribe), but --
there is enough of the Rom 2:14 - 15, built-in core, conscience attested law, that Paul pivotally appeals from Jerusalem's failure to honour Lev 19:15 - 18, to Rome's Ac 25:16 due process rule -- here stated by Nero's delegate! (Admittedly, speaking with the voice of Seneca and Burris before Nero went demonically insane . . . ) -- "it is not the custom of the Romans . . ."
Paul does not blend these worlds sentimentally or as an armchair, seminar room academic. He tests them under forensic stress, with his life on the line.
That is synthesis by ordeal.
regarding Built-in, Creation order Moral Government
and its worldview implications
[thus, reshaping the moral-cultural-policy agenda
by the power of truth in love, not by swords loudly clashing,
nor by stir of rolling drums and bad songs of propaganda]
From key Biblical excerpts
And, as for the core insights on moral government and its worldview-transformational consequences, it will help our reflections if, right away, we cite key elements of the moral-logical vision:
Exh., A (Roman Custom re due process): Acts 25: 16 I [Felix] answered them [v. 2, "the chief priests and the principal men" in Jerusalem] that it was not the custom of the Romans to give up anyone before the accused met the accusers face to face and had opportunity to make his defense concerning the charge laid against him [--> due process, with right to hear and answer charges as first plank of justice].
Exh., B (The jurisprudential context of the Golden Rule, violated by its guardians, the Jerusalem leadership): Lev 19: 15 “You shall do no injustice in court. You shall not be partial to the poor or defer to the great, but in righteousness shall you judge your neighbor. 16 You shall not go around as a slanderer among your people, and you shall not stand up against the life of your neighbor: I am the LORD.
17 “You shall not hate your brother in your heart, but you shall reason frankly with your neighbor, lest you incur sin because of him. 18 You shall not take vengeance or bear a grudge against the sons of your own people, but you shall love your neighbor as yourself: I am the LORD.
Exh., C: (The Pauline endorsement, c AD 57, of the intelligible, conscience-guided core built-in, natural moral law): Rom 2:14 For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. 15 They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts [--> core, intelligible natural law], while their conscience also bears witness [--> conscience as a guide], and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them [--> moral government is built in, reveals itself in morally freighted rational conflict, raising the need for the inherently good and utter wise as root of reality bridging the is-ought gap] . . . .
13: 8 Owe no one anything, except to love each other, for the one who loves another has fulfilled the law. [--> neighbour love, the premise of law; where, too, God is our first neighbour and host] 9 For the commandments, “You shall not commit adultery, You shall not murder, You shall not steal, You shall not covet,” and any other commandment, are summed up in this word: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” [--> the golden rule, from Lev. 19:18; cf. Matt 7:]12 & 22:34 - 40] 10 Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfilling of the law.
Illustrating, core Logic. W = {A | ~A}, etc.
Exh., D (The c. AD 55, "Rhetoric 101" Language/Communication form Pauline statement of The Law of Distinct Identity, which has non-contradiction and excluded middle as close corollaries): 1 Cor 14:7 If even lifeless instruments, such as the flute or the harp, do not give distinct notes,
[--> distinct, recognisable identity, W = {A | ~A} so LODI: A = A i/l/o its core characteristics, and LNC: no x in W is both A AND ~A; also, LEM: any y in W will be A or else ~A but not both or neither . . . ]
how will anyone know what is played? [--> requisite of communication & meaning] 8 And if the bugle gives an indistinct sound, who will get ready for battle? 9 So with yourselves, if with your tongue you utter speech that is not intelligible, how will anyone know what is said? [--> requisite for intelligible language] For you will be speaking into the air. 10 There are doubtless many different languages in the world, and none is without meaning, 11 but if I do not know the meaning of the language [--> language as the vehicle for meaning and knowledge, thus teaching], I will be a foreigner to the speaker and the speaker a foreigner to me.
Exh., E (The c. AD 56 Pauline, first duties statement of communication ethics): 2 Cor 4: 1 Therefore, having this ministry by the mercy of God, we do not lose heart. 2 But we have renounced disgraceful, underhanded ways. We refuse to practice cunning [--> denounces deceit and dishonesty] or to tamper with God's word [--> sound interpretation], but by the open statement of the truth [--> truth as a first duty] we would commend ourselves to everyone's conscience [--> truth appealing to conscience as the means of Christian civilisational influence] in the sight of God [--> God, the just judge].
Exh., F (The c 50 AD, Pauline gentle but devastating opening remarks to the Areopagus council, guardians of the West's emerging knowledge tradition): Acts 17: 22 So Paul, standing in the midst of the Areopagus, said: “Men of Athens, I perceive that in every way you are very religious. 23 For as I passed along and observed the objects of your worship, I found also an altar with this inscription, ‘To the unknown god.’ [--> thus, on the first point of knowledge, roots of reality, the Athenians had to maintain a monument to their ignorance] What therefore you worship as unknown, this I proclaim to you. [--> The worldview shift now enters, stage right] 24 The God who made the world and everything in it, being Lord of heaven and earth, does not live in temples made by man, 25 nor is he served by human hands, as though he needed anything, since he himself gives to all mankind life and breath and everything. [--> Creator principle] 26 And he made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth [--> brotherhood of man principle, answer to racism], having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place [--> Divine providence & pivotal moments -- kairous -- principle], 27 that they should seek God, in the hope that they might feel their way toward him [--> grope, even blindly] and find him. Yet he is actually not far from each one of us, 28 for “‘In him we live and move and have our being’; as even some of your own poets have said, “‘For we are indeed his offspring.’
Exh., G (The c AD 62 - 65, Pauline prayer instruction to Timothy -- cf. 1 Tim 1:3 " . . . remain at Ephesus" -- regarding praying for general welfare): 1 Tim 2: 1 First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all people [--> the common good is God's general will], 2 for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life [--> good government and sound community order are God's will], godly and dignified in every way [--> thus, reasonable welfare and general economic well-being are God's will]. 3 This is good [--> underscores, this is God's general will for the community], and it is pleasing [--> double emphasis] in the sight of God our Savior, 4 who desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. [--> a good community order supports the growth of the gospel, and the church's growth principle is educational: as more and more people learn the warrant for and substance of the gospel; stirred by conscience, many respond to it] 5 For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man1 Christ Jesus, 6 who gave himself as a ransom for all . . . . 7 For this I was appointed a preacher and an apostle (I am telling the truth, I am not lying), a teacher [--> educational frame of Christian service] of the Gentiles [= nations] in faith and truth [--> people are to come to confident trust in gospel truth; such trust cannot be forced].
Technically, this is already enough, given the tabulation, exhibited key principles and well-established credibility of Luke as an historian, whose method is given in his primary thesis statement:
Luke 1: 1 Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the things that have been accomplished among us, 2 just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses [--> credibility of eyewitnesses, here, including women especially] and ministers of the word have delivered them to us, 3 it seemed good to me also, having followed all things closely for some time past [--> i.e. having done due diligence], to write an orderly account [--> that is, classical era style History, not myths or novels etc.] for you, most excellent Theophilus [--> a name that, providentially, means, Friend of God], 4 that you may have certainty [--> responsible warrant] concerning the things you have been taught [--> the general report of the church is accurate].
However, there is much depth in the details, as Luke well knew, which is why he taught the informed reader by setting out the well-founded key facts and telling details from c 4 BC to 61 AD, in order -- History, as world-reshaping education. Unknown to him, those facts and details, 2,000 years later, help us understand the power of the Christian Synthesis that created Western Civilisation as we have inherited it.
So, now let us focus, starting with the encounter with the Areopagus Council, in Acts 17:
When Paul was driven out of Macedonia, he went to Athens, to wait for his travel companions. While there, he was deeply disturbed to see that famous centre of learning utterly full of idols (and, it seems, noticed one altar that did not have an idol atop it). Like Socrates, four hundred years before, he began to discuss with passersby in the market and was invited to present his views before the Areopagus Council, which in former days had tried Socrates; now, it was the guardians of knowledge, divided in two great Parties, Epicureans and Stoics. There, just as a great lion harried for too long turns at bay and vexes his pursuers, the apostle spoke, powerfully and decisively, right from his famous subtly devastating opening:
An Altar to unknown god(s), Rome
"As I passed along and observed the objects of your worship, I found also an altar with this inscription, ‘To the unknown god.’ What therefore you worship as unknown, this I proclaim to you . . . "
Paul’s appearance at Mars Hill is often dismissed as a speech composed or heavily edited by Luke, or is treated as a missionary curiosity, or even as an amusing anecdote of naive missionary zeal encountering sophisticated thought. Then, it is inferred that we should only preach the "simple" gospel. Instead -- given Luke's historical credibility -- it is plausibly a summary of Paul's first direct confrontation with the epistemic elite of the Greco-Roman world.
The Areopagus was not an emotively manipulated crowd. It was a body charged with safeguarding what counted as legitimate knowledge, somewhat like the senate of a modern university. Paul’s opening move is thus devastatingly restrained but telling: he forces acknowledgement of the fact of a publicly maintained altar “to an unknown god” and builds from that single concession. Not, the likely opening of the expected "spermologos" simpleton with a few bits and pieces of half-digested learning, seeking to make a quick buck from the masses.
The epistemic crisis he opened with, arises not from irrationality, but from recognised ignorance at the root of reality.
When Paul presses the implications — accountability, embodiment, resurrection — the response is laughter, polite deferral, and disengagement. No riot. No refutation. Simply dismissal. Save, for a named few, who were the beginnings of the church that would shape the future. Indeed, the speech, today is on a bronze plaque affixed to the Hill, and the road passing by is at first Holy Apostle street, then it becomes Dionysius the Areopagite Street. For, here, the torch was decisively passed, and carried forward, transforming a civilisation: the needed moral core was put on the table, yes, the IS-OUGHT gap is real, as we undeniably are morally governed, conscience-guided creatures and on pain of self-discredit of our reasoning and choosing among what Rom 2:15 calls our "conflicting thoughts," that sense of moral government cannot be simply brushed aside as a psycho-socially conditioned illusion that merely functions to promote survival by promoting cooperation.
Indeed, more broadly, reducing our rational cognitive capability to survival-driven programming on a "wetware" computer runs into the GIGO challenge, garbage in, garbage out. Leading, inexorably to, no credible base for thought or reason to be regarded as in any sense shaped towards truth rather than survival. This philosophical extrapolation frequently drawn from neuroscience trends of our own time, like acid, quietly -- and fatally self-referentially, incoherently -- eats away at the foundations of reason, and especially of moral government, leading inexorably towards a deadly rot: fundamentally nihilistic cynicism. For, if our beliefs were indeed selected only for survival rather than truth, then the belief that this theory is true would itself have no special claim to credibility. And, it didn't require modern biochemistry or neuroscience to figure this out, the Areopagites knew, instantly, that Paul's opening words put his finger on the fatal structural crack in their system of knowledge: its roots.
Instead, here, Paul puts forth the only serious worldviews alternative, then or now, that does anchor reason on truth, and conscience guided moral government on a serious candidate root of reality capable of bearing the full weight of ought:
"What therefore you worship as unknown, this I proclaim to you . . . . [God] made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place, that they should seek God, and perhaps feel their way toward him and find him . . . . The times of ignorance [and blind groping] God overlooked, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent, because he has fixed a day on which he will judge the world in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed; and of this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead [--> implicit: with 500+ eyewitnesses, one of whom stands before you here today]."
Luke, clearly, records this because it sets the pattern: a civilisation may be cultivated, plural, and rhetorically agile, yet structurally incapable of hearing a truth that exposes its fatally cracked foundations. And yet, that missing truth now enriches us to understand the reality root source of our very nature as responsible, rational, significantly free, morally governed, conscience guided creatures; transforming the very fabric of knowledge.
 |
| The plumb-line speaks, decisively |
Creation-Creator Thesis: I: we are created . . . as rational, responsible, significantly free & thus morally governed, conscience - guided creatures . . . II: by the inherently good, utterly wise creator God, a necessary (so, eternal), supremely (i.e. maximally) great being; III: who is thus, worthy of our fealty and of our rational, responsible service of doing the good that accords with our evident, morally governed, conscience guided nature.
Knowledge-Credible truth-Warrant Thesis: Following Plantinga et al., knowledge, arguably, is best viewed as warranted, credibly true (so, reliable) belief. That is, knowledge requires warrant, which rests on our cognitive senses that are evidently and often successfully designed for and directed at truth, acting properly, in a conducive environment and delivering adequate, objective, reliable support for credible truth. So, following Willard et al.,
"To have knowledge . . . is to be able to represent something as it is on an adequate basis of thought or experience, not to exclude communications from qualified sources (“authority”). This is the “knowledge” of ordinary life [--> knowledge belongs to the people], and it is what you expect of your electrician, auto mechanic, math teacher, and physician. Knowledge is not rare, and it is not esoteric . . . . [K]nowledge authorizes one to act, to direct action, to develop and supervise policy, and to teach." [cf. pp. 4, 19 & 20: Dallas Willard & Literary Heirs, The Disappearance of Moral Knowledge, Routledge|Taylor& Francis Group, 2018. That legitimate authority, of course, means that knowledge will predictably be attacked nowadays, by those caught up in the common projection that flattens thought, life, history into oppressive power relations, often overlooking how this then becomes self-referentially incoherent.]
 |
If.
A big, hard-to-swallow word.
So, we see why it took centuries of cultural, intellectual and power struggles; but in the end, this prevailed at length. In our time it is still the only reality root answer strong enough to move us beyond blind groping.
But, are we inclined to heed the plumb-line, or laugh at it -- or, crush it?
In Paul's sobering c AD 57 words to the Romans:
Rom 1:19 For what can be known about God is plain to [people], because God has shown it to them. 20 For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse.
21 For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened.
22 Claiming to be wise, they became fools, 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things
[--> Now, we know the sorts of crooked yardstick images Paul saw, not just in temples, but on every street-corner in Athens! (With, that one, utterly telling "exception.") But, are what we have today in our august museums, or in lush, million dollar full colour documentaries with posh accent presenters figuratively clad in lab coats one whit better regarding the ultimate root of our reality as rational, responsible, conscience-guided, morally governed creatures? Even, before we get to further pointed questions about how complex DNA code -- yes, blatantly: language! --
[--> computing, relies on the use of symbols to encode data, structured as verified information, i.e. knowledge, thus too the wisdom behind algorithms . . . a powerful "something" that cannot credibly come from the "nothing" of fantastically lucky noise effecting a blind, needle -in- a- cosmic-scale- haystack search
{ . . . yes, that's why we see crooked yardsticks like "methodological naturalism" imposed as roadblock ideological assumptions dressed up in lab coats; they are designed to block the manifestly obvious best candidate explanation: design. Lest this sound . . . do you hear, the crooked yardstick effect creaking into action? . . . like an empty accusation or rant from the outside (never mind, my own scientific background), kindly consider a rare moment of candour from within the modern scientific establishment itself. For, when an argument is routinely marginalised and dismissed without being substantially and cogently answered on the merits, the issue is rarely its weakness [or, it would have been long since "hit for six"], but the yardstick-gatekeeper by which it is measured.
So, if you doubt me, let us pause, and slowly, slowly, s-l-o-w-l-y, actually listen to and hear the force of the eminent scientist, Lewontin's notorious but apt cat-out-of-the-bag admission:
"[W]e are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes [--> uh, huh: "meow!"] to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations [--> meow!], no matter how counter-intuitive [--> meow! meow! meow! . . . woof! woof!], no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. [--> meow! woof!] Moreover, that materialism is absolute [--> meow! meow! woof! woof! woof!], for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door." [--> meow! woof!] [ “Billions and Billions of Demons,” NYRB, January 9, 1997.]} ]
. . . came to be written in the heart of the living cell, or how our observed universe came to be so fine tuned to facilitate C-Chemistry, aqueous medium, complex, terrestrial planet life forms credibly capable of rational, responsible, conscience guided, morally governed freedom? Just asking for a friend, or two.]
. . . . 28 And since they did not see fit to [retain God in what they deemed to be "knowledge"], God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done.
They were "without excuse" — with far less evidence, fewer tools, and dimmer light; and a fortiori, we are without excuse.
From Athens, Paul then went to Corinth, and there he joined with Aquilla and Priscilla, tentmakers, allowing him to spend a prolonged period in that city. There, too, he was hauled before Gallio, accused of "persuading people to worship God contrary to the law." Before Paul could begin to answer, Gallio -- Seneca's elder brother -- stopped the proceedings: "If it were a matter of wrongdoing or vicious crime, O Jews, I would have reason to accept your complaint. But since it is a matter of questions about words and names and your own law, see to it yourselves. I refuse to be a judge of these things."
This won a precious decade and a half of freedom for spreading the gospel; but also, it marks a stand for an important issue, freedom of conscience and expression. (If only, Rome, Jerusalem and later years would have listened to Gallio. If, only.)
That, after a return to base in Antioch, brings us to Ephesus, our ground zero:
So far, Athens exposed the problem; Corinth secured the breathing space; Ephesus would now test whether sustained truth could reform a civilisation at scale.
Let us tabulate, as a map of what we have won, after some hard digging:
The Ephesus Thesis (Paradigmatic Case): Ephesus represents a uniquely instructive civilisational test case: a major cultural, religious, intellectual, and economic hub in which a coherent worldview was publicly taught, examined, contested, and embodied over a sustained period, two to three years. Unlike Athens, where Paul reasoned briefly with philosophers, or Corinth, where legal restraint secured breathing room, Ephesus provided the conditions for prolonged, structured discipleship engaging belief, conduct, vocation, institutional power, and public morality. The result—documented in Acts 19 and later distilled in Ephesians 4—was not mere individual conversion, but a measurable disturbance of economic systems, religious practices, and cultural norms. Ephesus therefore functions as ground zero for understanding how repentance and renewal, when reaching critical mass, can precipitate broader reformation without coercion, yet not without conflict.
Ephesians 4, written almost a decade later, provides a significant analytical context for this process:
Instantly, Christian mission is not ethnic replacement, coercive domination, or private spirituality — but faith-driven, covenant-based, blessings of Abraham-driven moral-spiritual renewal; with public, institutional, even civilisational and global consequences. This corrective to racist hostilities and to linked arrogant apostasy, sadly, is an urgent necessity today.
-
Credibility: the Ephesian, Ground Zero Christian Synthesis thesis, tabulations and diagram are now shown to not be dubious, readily dismissible novelties invented on the spot, but are instead grounded in documented teaching resources for the church, coming from the apostle's own hand AT THE TIME.
-
Transparency: This anticipates and answers the "paper trail," transparency challenge, as the source goes right back to c AD 57. The Christian Synthesis framework (and even the Ephesus ground zero suggestion!) cannot responsibly be brushed aside as a novel interpretation without basis. Paul, was intentionally developing the synthesis of Jerusalem, Athens and Rome, in the risen Christ, with focus on faith-covenant going back a further 1800+ years, to Abraham in Genesis 18. Which, also puts family-based, covenantal moral-spiritual transformation anchored in God's documented promises as the heart of the synthesis. (This should warm the cockles of Sunday School superintendents' hearts, everywhere!)
-
Academic Responsibility: This gives readers a path to verify and explore deeper — essential for serious civilisational and theological discussion. Where, as the highlights and scripture references clearly document:
- the 4R's elements, repentance > renewal > revival > reformation are baked in, they are not just a clever, optional mnemonic device.
- there is one unified spiritual-moral, nourishing root: Abrahamic, covenantal faith based transformation, centred on The Seed of Abraham [emphatically singular in Gal 3:16]
- The grafting principle emphatically means covenantal accession by faith is independent of race, etc, so those who try to suggest that those who join the covenant of Abraham who are not his genetic descendants are second class or frauds are cut off at the root. (The shades of Moses' wife, Caleb [Kennizite], Rahab [Canaanite], Ruth [Moabite], and even Uriah [Hittite] and likely a few Philistines [the 600 from Ziklag and Ittai from Goliath's hometown, Gath] are looking at you, hard.)
- Access, always, is by the crucified, risen Christ, so those who lock him out are in error; here we see broken off branches (which here are genetic): dried, but awaiting renewal and restoration by faith.
- Apostasy and contempt are condemned.
- The ethnoi are explicitly incorporated and transfused with life-giving sap, showing us yet again that the structure of the synthesis is that in Christ from Jerusalem (actually, just outside its walls) the moral-spiritual, covenantal worldview culture transformation element flows into and transforms Athens and Rome (thence, the nations as a whole).
- Thus, too, the direct, powerful relevance of 7M + worldviews aegis maps and BAU . . . sin as usual trends . . . vs the 4R repentance, reformation, God-blessed transformation alternative [ALT], as we examine particular societies at a given time from a civic theology, missional perspective.
- Thence, a need for considerable rethinking and frankly repentance in the churches, yes, the churches of the Caribbean. Much as we may see in the letters of Rev 2 - 3 . . . which start with an orthodox but "heart gone-cold" Ephesian church a generation later.
Gen 18:17 The LORD said, “Shall I hide from Abraham what I am about to do, 18 seeing that Abraham shall surely become a great and mighty nation, and all the nations of the earth shall be blessed in him? 19 For I have chosen him, that he may command his children and his household after him to keep the way of the LORD by doing righteousness and justice, so that the LORD may bring to Abraham what he has promised him.”
-
We pre-empt three classes of dismissal:
-
“This is just your framework” → No, it’s contemporaneously documented, Rom 11.
-
“This is dominionism / replacement theology” → No, "grafting in" by faith forbids both.
-
“This is ahistorical theology” → No, Luke-Acts + Romans + Ephesians converge at Ephesus.
-
-
We lock Acts 17, Acts 19, Romans 11, Ephesians 4, and Genesis 18 into one intricately intertwined deeply coherent explanatory arc, making selective proof-texting very difficult for those inclined to dismiss.
-
We frame Paul as an intentional civilisational architect, not merely a travelling evangelist—without romanticising or overstating; and what do you think, "apostle to the nations" means or requires, in the face of a global moral-spiritual crisis that at core suppresses knowledge of God and precipitates breakdown of moral soundness in the teeth of warnings of conscience-guided first duties?
-
We keeps the moral-spiritual transformation by truth in love realism front and centre, which is crucial for the Acts 27 civilisation level "voyage of folly" capstone case and for exposing the crooked-yardstick thinking and voices of folly that lead to such ill-advised voyages.
Let's therefore connect some dots and fill in some backdrop, as Luke expects that from his educated audience:
- We see, vv 9 - 10, how after three months in the Synagogue, Paul spent "two years" "reasoning daily in the hall of Tyrannus," with the result "all the residents of Asia heard the word of the Lord, both Jews and Greeks." Luke’s phrasing here, is shorthand for network diffusion through elites, traders, students, and civic leaders — exactly how ideas moved in the Roman world. (In our time, that has been amplified and accelerated by the various media.)
- Subtly connected, is v. 31, "some of the Asiarchs, who were friends of his," i.e. some of the rulers of the province became his friends -- far stronger then, than now -- and protected him from the riotous mob. This speaks, to Paul being a person of substance, with a respectable message that impressed leading men of the province, and to his diplomatic skills. That is how he won soft legitimacy and significant cultural respect.
- Likewise, Asia is only a few days' sail from Athens, across the Aegean, and Paul's encounter at Mars Hill was only a few years past; as well, Paul was holding daily seminars so widely known that his message spread across the whole province. So, why didn't Demetrius et al take the far less risky option of hiring a top-flight Rhetor and challenging Paul to a public debate, rather than stirring up a riotous public disturbance?
- Obviously, the core problem is, the polytheists had no real answer to the altar to the unknown god worldview foundation challenge (especially, our roots of conscience-guided moral government and responsible reason [cf. Rom 1:19 - 21, 2:14 - 15, 13:8 - 10]); even, as these men made their wealth from the local temple trade.
- Riots -- and/or votes for voyages of folly driven by seemingly plausible but bought and paid for, orchestrated voices of folly -- are what will happen when entrenched worldview/ agenda interests cannot answer arguments but cannot "afford" to yield to unwelcome truth or prudence. (But, as Acts 27 shows: sound reformation undertaken in good time is far cheaper than stormy shipwrecks and ruin. Also, in any reasonably orderly, lawful . . . much less, constitutional democratic state, there never can be a good excuse for rioting or for attempted mob "justice." We will see that already in Ac 21, where Paul is slandered (by opponents from Asia . . .), mobbed and nearly lynched. The sobering story of the subversion of the Weimar Republic into Nazi Germany simply underscores the point.)
- Where, too, the economic/societal disturbance making these entrenched interests uncomfortable came from changed people, voting with their feet and funds, not imposed power or riot. Any civilisation whose power classes cannot tolerate such nonviolent moral transformation and voluntary withdrawal of renewed people from an exploitive, morally failed trade has already chosen folly and force over truth, and greed over decency. It must reform, or it will go over the cliff.
- Yes, those who dismantle sound moral and spiritual foundations of their civilisation to dominate it financially -- or, more broadly, to take the commanding heights of power and influence captive to lucrative errors and evils (slavery and its kidnapping based trade comes to mind) -- cannot plausibly claim innocence or surprise when the warped, over-stressed structure fails.
- Could the answer also partly lie in the incident with the sons of Sceva, which would have been noised abroad in a centre of magical arts. Likewise it would not have gone un-noticed that former adepts -- now disciples -- publicly burned a fortune's worth of their spell-books. Lurking in the background would be recent events in Cyprus [13:7 - 12] where, Elymas, a magician of some note, had challenged the apostles before Sergius Paulus, only to suffer visible divine judgement; strikingly parallel to the fate of Jannes and Jambres as they challenged Moses and Aaron before the Pharaoh of that day. (Worth, a thought or two.)
- So, too, we see here, the message of Christ the Messiah (and, Pantokrator) as counter-culture, challenging the predominant, business as usual, lucrative agenda by way of challenging its polytheistic worldview aegis, here, the myth of Artemis. "Here," in a Greek/Hellenistic major cultural centre and crossroads for thought and commerce; under Roman lawful protection of freedom of conscience thanks to the precedent set by Gaius' ruling in Corinth. Thus, already, outlines of the Christian synthesis appear.
- This takes us back to the question in the head for this section: what does an all-time, top-20 mind of our civilisation do, with a two year series of daily seminars -- yes, hundreds of them? Luke here only outlines, clearly neither the leading Jews of Asia nor leading polytheistic business men were happy, but Paul won the friendship of some at least of the Asiarchs.
- That means, he was presenting a counter-culture worldview alternative, that it centred on Christ, and that it was impressive intellectually, powerful morally and spiritually, and marked by signs and wonders. Signs, that impressed the Magical guild-men enough for them to abandon their trade and -- now clearly seeing it as an evil -- they burned a fortune of magic books rather than sell them and give an offering.
- In short, we here see initial stages of reformation (without politically seizing the commanding heights of the society), provoking reaction by riot as those who felt the pinch of reformation and were overmatched by the altar to the unknown god challenge.
- Yes, this is clearly the 4R's challenge to the 7M framework of Hellenistic society, even to the Jewish minority. We see here: repentance > renewal > revival > reformation, affecting not only souls through evangelism and discipleship, but also affecting the full span of community spheres of influence and the dominant worldviews aegis; coming simply from public seminars held by a full ambassador of the Kingdom of Heaven and his team. (And yes, this is a rebuke to various quarrelling church streams and factions of our own time; indeed I find it personally, deeply, painfully challenging. Which, conscience tells me, is as it should be.)
So, too, while we know of men who transcribed and preached Moody's sermons, imitating his mannerisms simply did not have his impact (as, the anointing is real and material), we still want to know: what, in detail, was the sum and substance of the teaching and worldview challenge? After all, Luke, here, passes over two years of public teaching with only a few direct hints.
A first answer is that Romans, from this period [c. 57 AD], is obviously a main, though selective summary of Paul's message that he worked through in those two years; in effect, a pre-made technical appendix. One, already written before Luke would have been on the ground in Judaea to interact with key eyewitnesses for his Gospel, much less, part II, Acts. We already saw above, how Romans fleshes out the force of the Mars Hill challenge, just in the opening chapter. We also know, for 2,000 years now, Romans has been a never-failing theological motherlode. It must now also be regarded as a key summary of the first stages of the Christian synthesis which drew on the heritage of Jerusalem, Athens and Rome, leading to the civilisation as we inherited it. Indeed, as a veritable syllabus, for the Ephesian Seminars programme. And, a guide-book to 4R's reformation seminars in our own day. The School of Tyrannus, 4R-7M reformation seminars strategy approach can be taken as proven; once, there is lawful government in a community, and adequate capability is put in place on our part, with courage to face the predictable reactions of entrenched, resentful, hostile interests.
All we need to do, is to update it for a broadband Internet, multimedia, AI age.
Other epistles, have key snippets -- even a brief remark in 1 Cor 14:7 on, tossed off to correct immaturity in one of Paul's congregations, lays out a whole programme of study in core logic, linked theory of meaning, knowledge (so, warrant thus too worldviews) and communication, further linked ethics, and more. That, is a topic typical of the Greeks! (Not, of "a Hebrew of the Hebrews" at that time . . . )
 |
| The Ciceronian, core natural law bridge to reformation, which also opens a door to asking, what candidate "root of reality" can best bridge the IS-OUGHT gap, thus adequately founding our view of the world; a world with morally governed creatures -- us. There is, but one viable serious candidate, the inherently good, utterly wise creator God, a necessary and maximally great being; worthy of our loyalty and of our reasonable service by doing the good that accords with our evident nature. |
(NB: For those still inclined to view the 7M mapping framework as theologically suspect to the point of locking people out, or -- on the other extreme -- to use it in an unbalanced, ill-advised power-seizing way: do you here begin to see a more balanced picture of how this fits with the c. AD 61 Eph 4:9 - 24 Great U, Jesus' filling all things goal and status as Pantokrator -- Lord of All; thence, why Paul's seminars strategy was so impactful through the 4R-7M pattern? Can we now call a truce across dividing lines, moderate views and quarrels, then let us "rope een" together and launch a C21, multimedia, Internet, School of Tyrannus Seminars programme? [Or, do we feel outgunned on the worldviews, moral-cultural and policy agendas 7M aegis front the 4R approach targets? If so, how can we upgrade ourselves for long term, reformational counter-cultural impact?])
However, sadly, this particular facet is generally overlooked, as for instance can readily be seen in commentaries on 1 Cor 14: 7 ff. Notwithstanding, though, we can now see yet another sign of how this man, in this stage of his work, was clearly pioneering the Christian synthesis that has so shaped our civilisation down to today. Something, we need to frankly and fairly acknowledge.
Which, also means that the Luke–Acts historical spine of the New Testament is not merely a "religious" document, but one of the most underappreciated civilisational classics we possess — deserving of study at the highest level, alongside Thucydides, Tacitus, and Polybius, Plato, Aristotle, Cicero, Boethius (a Christian Scholar-Statesman unjustly put to death for resisting governmental corruption, who deserves to be far better known), etc. It is extraordinarily rare to have a capable historian, positioned ringside at formative events, working in sustained proximity to a principal founding figure of a civilisation. To neglect such a resource (especially by dismissiveness to "theological bias") is not critical sophistication, but instead: historical negligence. Luke, has long since earned our respect as an eyewitness lifetime historian.
However, there is a second motherlode (apart from the one from Paul's wider school -- I think, likely Apollos -- Hebrews). Namely, the c AD 61 - 62 Ephesians, likely actually a circular letter to the churches of Asia; much the same circuit as is addressed by John c AD 95, in the letters to the seven churches, Rev 2 - 3 . . . which, begins with Ephesus!
I find, here, that the operational form of the church's mandate in 4:9 - 24, is especially instructive regarding Civic Theology [= church, gospel (including its integral kingdom ethics) and society] and Mission.
How does Paul operationalise the worldview, reformational counter-culture ideas from the framework he developed? That, is what this key text focuses. First, maturation of the church, the body of Christ (1:23, "the fulness of him who fills everything in every way"):
Eph 4:12 [The focal ministries work] to equip the saints for the work of ministry [--> the ministry of the church is the business of every believer, engaging across his or her lifespan], for building up the body of Christ, 13 until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God [--> stability of worldview, theology and discipleship lifestyle], to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ [--> we are an "already and not yet" prototype of the complete fulness to be], 14 so that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro by the waves [--> echoes Acts 27] and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by human cunning, by craftiness in deceitful schemes [--> stability in truth, prudence, the right, sound living].
This sets up a picture in miniature -- echoing Romans 1, more compactly -- of the culture to be challenged by the "city on a hill" shining in a dark world:
17 Now this I say and testify in the Lord, that you must no longer walk as the Gentiles do, in the futility of their minds. [--> the dominant worldview, its moral-cultural and policy agendas act to frustrate the design intent of the conscience-guided mind] 18 They are darkened in their understanding,
[--> crooked yardstick thinking which warps ability to respond to truth and right, cf. Matt 6: 22 “The eye is the lamp of the body. So, if your eye is healthy, your whole body will be full of light, 23 but if your eye is bad, your whole body will be full of darkness. If then the light in you is darkness, how great is the darkness!" (Also, the echo of the parable of the Cave)]
alienated from the life of God [--> needing spiritual rebirth, cf. Jn 3:14 - 17] because of the ignorance [--> not innocently acquired!] that is in them, due to their hardness of heart. [--> persistent resistance to truth, right, God causes blindness] 19 They have become callous [--> conscience benumbed, sometimes to the point of sociopathy] and have given themselves up to sensuality, greedy to practice every kind of impurity [--> sensuality driven moral impurity, so "corrupt[ing]" "deceitful desires," is addictive and enslaving].
Diagnosis, the prescription is of course, repentance and renewal, with revival, i.e. discipleship, forming a shining city on a hill reformational counter-culture in a dark world:
20 But that is not the way you learned Christ! [--> discipleship] — 21 assuming that you have heard about him and were taught in him, as the truth [--> truth has ethical facets] is in Jesus [--> "I am the way, the truth and the life"], 22 to put off your old self, which belongs to your former manner of life [--> repentance & renewal] and is corrupt through deceitful desires, 23 and to be renewed [--> directly stated! . . . "renew[al]"] in the spirit of your minds [--> sound, scriptural teaching and training cf. 2 Tim 3:14 - 17], 24 and to put on the new self [--> spiritual rebirth], created after the likeness of God in true righteousness and holiness [--> the four-point balance: love, truth, purity, holy power by the Spirit poured out (revival)] . . . . 5: 15 Look carefully then how you walk, not as unwise but as wise [--> prudence is a key facet of wisdom, reflecting and contributing to all of its many facets], 16 making the best use of the time, because the days are evil. [--> be strategic, in the face of an evil day] 17 Therefore do not be foolish, but understand what the will of the Lord is [--> heart of wisdom, implying deep learning and living of scripture]. 18 And do not get drunk with wine, for that is debauchery [--> sensual addiction], but be filled with the Spirit [--> revival is actually a command!],
As we follow down, we readily see:
- putting away falsehood and
- speaking truth to neighbour [cf. Lev 19:15 - 18]
- bridling anger
- honest labour, with generosity
- being kind, tender-hearted [a key step for reformation], forgiving
- walking in love
- avoiding sexual immorality
- avoiding covetousness
- thankfulness rather than a "filthy" mouth
- walking in the light (so what is good, right and true)
- avoid and expose works of darkness [in a centre of magic]
- reform family, employment/economic and social relations
The often under-rated, distinguished Christian Philosopher and cultural spokesman, Francis Schaeffer (who along with Loren Cunningham and Bill Bright, first recognised the utility of the 7M mapping model, back in the 1970's) adds:
-
Ideas have consequences.
-
If Christians retreat, other worldviews fill the vacuum.
-
Renewal is moral, intellectual, artistic, and social—not just spiritualistic.
Eph 6:10 Finally, be strong in the Lord and in the strength of his might.
[--> 1:19 ". . . the immeasurable greatness [--> i.e. infiniteness] of his power toward us who believe, according to the working of his great might 20 that he worked in Christ when he raised him from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly places"]
11 Put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the schemes of the devil.
[--> 4:14 "so that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro by the waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by human cunning, by craftiness in deceitful schemes. 15 Rather, speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ"]
12 For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood [--> we are not militaristic rebels or power-grabbing would-be tyrants], but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places.
[--> behind demonised, spiritually blinded, abusive rulers and influencers like the riot-sparking Demetrius, lie the deceptive schemes of invisible, evil spiritual "strong men" to be bound by Christ, so that captives of deception and evil may be set free through the saving, healing, delivering power of the gospel communicated through the truth in love]
13 Therefore take up the whole armor of God [--> even as my guards chained to me c. AD 61 wear metal armour for battle], that you may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand firm [--> to win, and to be protected from incapacitating blows]. 14 Stand therefore, having fastened on- the belt of truth, [--> if we have that, demonstrated by the prophesied resurrection with 500+ witnesses, what else can those rising up against him have, but errors and lies . . . which betray themselves through falsity, incoherence and fallacies?] and
- having put on the breastplate of righteousness, 15 and,- as shoes for your feet, having put on the readiness given by the gospel of peace. [--> peace, with God, within ourselves, with others, with creation]- 16 In all circumstances take up the shield of faith, [--> trusting God, based on his faithfulness, according to his word, in the teeth of doubt, clever rhetoric, false accusations] with which you can extinguish all the flaming darts of the evil one [--> the father of lies, whose dupes will be agents of falsity];- 17 and take the helmet of salvation, and- the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God, [--> the only offensive piece, i.e. we triumph through the power of God's word of truth]- 18 praying at all times in the Spirit, with all prayer and supplication [--> cf. 1 Tim 2:1 - 4, also directed to Ephesus].To that end keep alert with all perseverance, making supplication for all the saints, 19 and also for me, that words may be given to me [--> anointed words from God, able to break barriers to knowing and being set free by God] in opening my mouth boldly to proclaim the mystery of the gospel, [--> the gospel, formerly held in secret, is now revealed in liberating power] 20 for which I am an ambassador in chains [--> the mature church is an embassy of, the Kingdom of God, and strategic level Missionaries are ambassadors, even if held in chains] that I may declare it boldly [--> with anointing, even as first apologist and Martyr Stephen, Ac 6:10 " . . . they could not withstand the wisdom and the Spirit with which he was speaking"], as I ought to speak.
[cf. "PART, the 0th" above for the basic legitimacy of civilisation],
also, some clarifications
(Addressed briefly, so we may return to the substantive issues:)
1. “Isn’t ‘Western Civilisation’ a modern (1920s–40s) invention and therefore artificial?”
Short answer: No. Let's not confuse course or book titles for on- the- ground reality.
Clarification: While the label “Western Civilisation” was formalised in early 20th-century curricula, the reality it names long predates the term. Medieval writers spoke of Christendom, or the Christian republic, or -- famously -- the City of God [shining on a hill in a dark world] and placed the cross in the centre of their key symbols; Renaissance thinkers, of Latin Europe; Enlightenment authors, of European civilisation. Churchill, at the darkest hours in 1940, of Christian Civilisation. Naming practices evolve; civilisational continuities do not evaporate when vocabulary shifts (for whatever reason).
To argue otherwise commits the genetic fallacy: here, confusing the date or source/ coiner or mere words of a term with the actual existence and true history of the thing or state of affairs described. Gravity existed eons before Newton recognised its powerful manifestations and named it.
2. “Isn’t 'civilisation' just a cover for oppression, injustice, empire, and Eurocentric racism?”
Short answer: That is a one-sided, emotive reduction.
Clarification: Civilisations are inevitably morally mixed historical phenomena; for, as Solzhenitsyn observed, the line between good and evil passes, not between classes, men and nations, but right through the individual human heart. Indeed, in the Bible's narrative, Nimrod's establishment of the first, river valley civilisation and empire is associated with many evils; and yet, the scriptures start in a garden, but end in a celestial city. So, let us take balance: as an aggregation of human thought, speech and action, like us, civilisations generate both goods and evils . . . so, too, they always need repentance, renewal, revival and reformation. To define a civilisation solely by making a one-sided litany of its real and imagined abuses, follies, errors and evils is to apply a warped standard; one, that is never used for any other large-scale human inheritance (including non-Western ones). It also invites us to ignore, neglect, or set aside the hard bought lessons and blessings of history. Let us learn, then, to not throw out the baby with the bath water.
Moreover, the very moral language used to condemn Western abuses—human dignity, conscience, universal moral law, justice beyond power—arose from within the Western-Christian synthesis itself. One cannot coherently indict a civilisation using its moral capital while denying the sources of that capital.
 |
| A Summary of the Death Toll of Communism |
 |
| This diagram is not offered as a partisan polemic, but as an historical, analytical heuristic—an aid to seeing recurring patterns of lawful and lawless power across civilisations and across millennia. As the abbreviation "NAZI" is so loaded (and its full form, Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei [NSDAP] is so little known, but crucial for objective analysis of lawless domination); I must add and emphasise a formal footnote: “National Socialism is placed here descriptively, not polemically, as a key C20 case of mass-mobilised, lawless ideological power., with 11 - 13 millions killed by genocide and responsibility for a senseless war that altogether now totals up to 60 - 75 or even 85 millions." If you still insist on the L-C-R spectrum (why, when a better alternative is clear?) perhaps the horseshoe inverted-U version helps, placing Constitutional Democracy at the bend and with the common L and R totalitarianisms lying folded together at the bottom. But then, what of the state of nature/anarchic chaos used by Locke et al as the foil to organised civil society? More importantly, we can then simply draw a band from the bend to the paired arms: autocracy > oligarchy > democracy, with state of nature floating above democracy. Yup, we are back at the historic spectrum outlined above. So, with all due respect, I offer it as a reasonable ALT to the common BAU, with apologies to Locke, Ari, Moshe et al. |
Now, let's assess, pardon -- it's key to fixing big problems with our ideological politics caused by an inadequate spectrum model:
STEP 1: The standard horseshoe model assumes:
Politics exists only within an ideological space (Left ↔ Right),Extremes converge with each other rather than collapsing into something more basic.
STEP 2: But, classical political philosophy—from Plato, Aristotle, Cicero, Moses (Exod 18), Augustine, Aquinas, Locke—starts from a deeper axis:
Order vs. disorder; lawfulness vs. lawlessness
STEP 3: Once you add that missing reference point, three things happen immediately:
- Anarchic chaos / state of nature becomes the obvious baseline threat/failure mode . . . the reason why civil government is necessary, not an afterthought.
- Totalitarian regimes are no longer “far Left” or “far Right” first—they are lawless domination systems. (Where, lawless domination, alas, is the natural state of government. The OTHER failure mode, as we saw in Ac 21 - 26.)
- Constitutional democracy, now appears in a clearer light: not, as a midpoint between ideologies, but as a hard-won, unstable achievement requiring moral-cultural and institutional buttressing.
STEP 4: So, the "bend" in the horseshoe is not “where Left meets Right” -- it is where lawless power becomes the lawful state, then democracy, and beyond, collapses toward anarchic disorder,
STEP 5: Likewise, the two arms are where we see lawless power, whether:
- mass-mobilised (Nazism, Communism),
- oligarchic,
- or personalist-autocratic.
STEP 6: That is why reformulation into:
Autocracy → Oligarchy → Lawful Democracy . . .
with Anarchy / State of Nature "floating" above democracy as the ever-present first failure mode (Seen in Ac 19.)
. . . is historically, philosophically, and governmentally superior. Once, we have civilisationally anchored, cultural-moral buttresses firmly in place to prevent the second failure mode.
This analysis, of course, is not novel. It is largely forgotten pre-modern politics common sense, rediscovered.
Not easily, but, seen through this historically anchored lens, the 4R framework—
Repentance → Renewal → Revival → Reformation—
. . . is not a theological tack-on. Instead, it describes the only known pathway by which societies move from lawless domination toward lawful order with high liberty and opportunity without violence. That's because this is how the required stabilising cultural-moral buttresses are built.
Likewise, the 7M mapping framework does not represent a strategy for domination, but a diagnostic map of where moral-cultural order must be sustained if lawful democracy is to survive:
-
Family: formation of conscience and moral agency
-
Education: credibility of reason and truth, recognising fallibility but building reliable, skilled knowledge and wisdom
-
Religion: recognising the ultimate moral authority and restraints of neighbour love
-
Government: lawfulness and sustainable liberty vs. coercion
-
Economy: trust based on that stability, contracts, and stewardship
-
Media: truth vs. manipulation
-
Arts & Culture: imagination, meaning, and hope
Acts 17–19 and Ephesians 4 show these dynamics in action:
-
Paul does not seize power.
-
He reasons publicly.
-
He challenges worldview foundations.
-
He produces repentance and renewal.
-
Cultural and economic effects follow.
-
Opposition arises precisely where lawless interests feel threatened.
In short:
- The 4R’s describe the process.
- The 7M’s describe the terrain.
- Lawful democracy is the fragile, but (if buttressed) sustainable outcome.
Short answer: Christianity is reformational, pivoting on neighbour love; not anti-civilisational (which, would be misanthropic).
Clarification: Yes, the Church is called to be a counter-culture against corruption, injustice, voyages of folly and idolatry. But this does not imply withdrawal from civilisation; rather, it implies morally powered renewal from within.
Jesus explicitly used civilisational imagery: “You are the light of the world. A city set on a hill cannot be hidden.” (Matt 5:14)
The apostolic pattern (Acts 17–27) shows engagement with cities, institutions, law, trade, learning, and governance — not flight from them.
4. “Isn’t Christendom a failed or discredited project?”
Short answer: Christendom was not a monolith, nor a single experiment.
Clarification: “Christendom” refers to a long, diverse historical synthesis — spanning over a millennium— of Christian faith with law, learning, art, ethics, technological development, learning, charity, struggles and governance challenges. It produced:
- universities,
- hospitals,
- modern science as a self-sustaining knowledge movement,
- a vision of honest work with hands and head as an expression of human dignity and of calling under God that creates wealth, builds legacy and supports those in need,
- a movable metal type printing revolution driven creation of mass literacy, thence an informed public, thus democratising forces,
- widespread public education,
- common law traditions (root of modern democracy),
- abolitionist and many other reformation and upliftment movements,
- modern, lawful state, publicly accountable constitutional government,
- human rights discourse and linked initiatives of liberation,
- and much more.
5. “Didn’t Western civilisation emerge from Greece and Rome, not Jerusalem?”
Short answer: This presents a false alternative.
Clarification: Western civilisation emerged from a threefold synthesis:
- Jerusalem: moral law, covenant, conscience, Scripture, human dignity
- Athens: reason, philosophy, logic, inquiry, rhetoric
- Rome: law, citizenship, administration, political order
 |
| British Crowns |
Short answer: Only if one begins with a defective methodology that silently begs big questions, to lock out the very worldview Luke and Paul explicitly lay on the table: that God is the creator of the cosmos ex nihilo, and therefore the author and restorer of life.
Clarification: Many modern objections to Acts, the resurrection, or Paul’s message are not actually after-the-fact historical findings at all — they are instead methodological exclusions smuggled in at the outset: fallacious, worldviews/ ideological level question-begging. For, any "gold-standard 'method' . . . " that forbids certain kinds of causes regardless of evidence is not neutral; it is already an imposed, question-begging philosophy. Chief among these is methodological naturalism treated not as a heuristic for scientific experiments, but as a de facto absolute metaphysical veto.
Luke does not share that assumption, nor does Paul, nor does Peter; they appeal to the 500+ eyewitnesses and to the fulfillment of the pivotal Isaiah 53 prophecy . . . let us hear, for example, Paul's challenge to the court in Acts 26: 8 "Why is it thought incredible by any of you that God [--> all-powerful creator ex nihilo, author of life] raises the dead?" Nor, does the Jewish or early Christian worldview. Nor, should we. Where, as C S Lewis liked to point out, a cosmos that is morally governed requires a general, predictable-intelligible, lawful order so responsible decisions can be made; but, this cannot lock out that, for good reason, God may carry out rare signpost-acts [= miracles] that are beyond the ordinary course of events; itself, a further "law of reality" . . . just, not a natural-ISTIC one. Where, too, it is a commonplace of inductive reasoning that observation of a dominant pattern, however overwhelming, cannot rule out exceptional cases. So, the imposition of a closed naturalistic circle is an a priori philosophical or ideological act, not a true act of inductive reasoning. And indeed, as God is at minimum a serious candidate, reality root, necessary being who as goodness himself roots moral government, those who would implicitly lock out God from knowledge face two linked challenges:
- How to coherently, adequately account for the credibility of our own rational, responsible conscience-guided knowing minds apart from such a reality root
- That, a necessary being [NB] would be fabric to how any possible or actualised world is framed, and so a serious candidate NB is either impossible of being (like, a Euclidean plane, square circle), or else is actual for there to be a world at all.
(Try, to imagine some distinct possible world, say, W-2*, where twoness is absent, or may cease from existing -- impossible, already just the act of distinction marked by symbolising W-2* implies twoness! Thus, the number two is a paradigm case of a necessary being. Yes, too, twoness [thence also numbers and linked structures in general: N, Z, Q, R, C, *R etc.] is seen to be an instant corollary of the first law of logic, distinct identity. That's why we can aptly define Mathematics as "The Disciplined Study of THE LOGIC OF Structure and Quantity." Yes, Mathematics is an extension of the Study of the Logic of Being, Ontology.)
In Acts 17, Paul explicitly identifies God as:
“the one who made the world and everything in it… who gives to all mankind life and breath and everything.”
Once that premise is granted—and it is not argued as a novelty but assumed as shared Jewish-theistic ground—then resurrection is not an absurdity or a “violation of nature.” It is simply restoration by the author of life.
Put plainly: If God can bring a universe into being from nothing, restoring a life from death is not a conceptual problem. It is a smaller act, not a larger one. And, ordinary men can and do know which of events X, Y and Z happen first or second or third, also we can recognise our friends. The passion week miracle does not lie in having two suppers with a friend and leader, or in seeing him betrayed and judicially murdered, but in the logic of the sequence: Jesus' crucifixion is the Y event between X: the Last Supper and Z: Easter Sunday evening's meal.
This is precisely why Paul can say that God has given public assurance of his appointed judge:
“by raising him from the dead” (Acts 17:31).
[--> This suggests (given say 1 Cor 15:12 - 28), the reality-law at work is eternal accountability, so eschatologically, all will rise to face such an audit. Jesus's resurrection, on this frame, would be a prophesied, ahead-of-time sign with 500+ witnesses; the indicative "already" that points to our "not yet." There is nothing incoherent in such a view, but obviously, it pivots on recognising Jesus' Great-U arc resurrection as a warrant for the gospel and for the creator-God behind it. This then becomes a context for seeing how warrant, reliability, trust (so, faith) and a concept of knowledge that includes the idea -- and, at least the contemplated potential actuality -- of God operates.]
The resistance, therefore, is not to evidence as such, but to the plumb-line: whether one will allow the creator–creature distinction to stand. A methodology that forbids resurrection a priori is not neutral—it has already decided the case before the evidence is heard.
Acts 25:16 underscores the point from the legal side: Paul insists on due process, public reasoning, and fair hearing. Luke expects the same of his readers. Excluding resurrection because it does not fit a preferred ontology is not critical thinking—it is question-begging.
In short, the problem is not that Luke and Paul ask us to believe in resurrection. The problem is that some modern methodologies quietly redefine reality so that life itself has no author—and then declare restoration impossible by fiat.
6. “Isn’t focusing on Western civilisation exclusionary in a diverse world?”
Short answer: Understanding inheritance is not exclusion.
Clarification: Teaching a civilisation’s history does not deny the worth of others. On the contrary, only a civilisation confident in its own roots can engage others with humility rather than guilt, fear, or ideological coercion. Moreover, we must not forget that if every time one takes time to focus on the civilisation that most strongly, most directly shaped our world, there is a demand to look elsewhere and an insistence on emphasising only its real or imagined errors, follies and wrongs, that is not responsible analysis, it is an obvious ideologically driven attempt to alienate and marginalise, forgetting hard-bought, costly lessons and blessings paid for in blood and tears. So, we need to pointedly ask, why?
Plural societies require clear, balanced inheritances and appreciation, not civilisational amnesia.
7. “Didn’t Western civilisation spread mainly through conquest and colonialism?”
Short answer: That is an incomplete account.
Clarification: Western influence spread through multiple channels:
- trade,
- law,
- education,
- medicine,
- missions,
- science,
- and yes, sometimes conquest.
8. “Isn’t 'civilisation' itself an outdated or meaningless concept?”
Short answer: Only if one ignores cities, institutions, learning, law, history and culture.
Clarification: A civilisation is not a mystical entity; it is a city-based cultural system marked by:
- specialisation of labour (which sharply boosts productivity),
- urban centres,
- education and transmission,
- the growing body of cumulative knowledge, technique and invention,
- governance and law (including reformations),
- shared historical heritage, memory and hope.
9. “Isn’t this just nostalgia or cultural conservatism?”
Short answer: No—this is diagnostic, not nostalgic.
Clarification: The concern here is civilisational sustainability: whether the moral, legal, and cultural buttresses required for liberty, justice, and self-government can survive deliberate historical erasure.
Remembering foundations and insisting that innovations show their viability is not retreating to the past; it is maintaining the conditions for a viable future.
10. “Why involve Acts 27? Isn’t that just a fairy-tale Bible story?”
Short answer: Acts 27 is a lived-out civic parable and key case study of governance gone awry, connected to two famous parables by Plato: The Ship of State and The Cave.
Clarification: Acts 27 depicts:
- expertise overridden by incentives,
- authority ignoring prudence,
- warnings dismissed as inconvenient,
- a voyage of folly, reflecting detailed, correct geographic and technical awareness,
- a real-life microcosm case study of Plato's famed parables of the Cave and Ship of State,
- catastrophe following predictable folly,
- rescue arriving by grace, not wisdom.
11. “Isn’t this too ‘big picture’ to be practical?”
Short answer: Big-picture errors produce practical disasters.
Clarification: Civilisational collapse does not begin with policies; it begins with misunderstood realities. Acts 27 shows that ignoring sound worldview-level prudent counsel and real but marginalised evidence leads to shipwreck — literally and figuratively. Also, the ship of state metaphor is so pivotal, that our very word, 'government,' via Latin, comes from the Greek term for a pivotal role: kubernetes, the steersman or sailing master. And in this case, we literally see the marginalised moral-prudential voice of Jerusalem sidelined, leading to a voyage of folly, storm and shipwreck, moderated by that Jerusalem voice coming forward at the point of despair, to be the good man in the storm.
12. “Why insist on merits-based evaluation?”
Short answer: Because dismissal is not argument.
Clarification: Labelling, triggering, or stigmatising ideas and insinuating that others are beyond the pale if they entertain them short-circuits reason; ineeed, it easily becomes attacking the person instead of facing the issue. The material presented here stands or falls on:
- historical accuracy,
- conceptual coherence,
- explanatory power,
- moral adequacy.
Short Answer: No, and while the map is not the territory, a good map is a useful guide. (One can use a map to plan a vacation trip, or . . . sadly . . . a terrorist attack.)
Short answer: No. The biblical synthesis coming from Paul's own hand, in AD 57 Romans 11 explicitly rejects replacement, ethnic erasure, and covenantal arrogance. It teaches grafting, not displacement—and it condemns both ethnic contempt and apostasy.
Clarification: Paul’s olive-tree metaphor (Rom. 11:11–24), developed during the Ephesian period, is carefully constructed to rule out the very idea of ethnic replacement. The root is not the church, nor Gentile civilisation, nor Rome—it is the Abrahamic covenant, grounded in God’s promises and nourished by faith. Some of the natural branches (from ethnic Israel) are described as broken off because of unbelief, not because of ethnicity; and crucially, they are not destroyed. Paul insists they remain capable of restoration “if they do not persist in unbelief.” Meanwhile, wild branches (the ethnoi) are grafted in by faith, not by merit, power, or cultural dominance.
This has several unavoidable implications:
-
Covenantal access is faith-based, not race-based.
-
Gentile believers do not replace Israel; they participate in Israel’s nourishing root.
-
Ethnic contempt, whether Jewish or Gentile, is explicitly condemned.
-
Arrogant triumphalism is treated as a sign of instability, not strength.
Thus, Christian mission—rightly understood—is neither ethnic conquest nor cultural erasure. It is covenantal inclusion through the crucified and risen Messiah, preserving humility, moral accountability, and hope of restoration.
and on the voyage to Rome, c AD 59:
". . . I appeal to Caesar" [Acts 25:11]
Luke, across Acts 17 - 27, is not merely a believer recording memories. He is:
An Educated Greek (language, rhetoric, historiography; it seems, Medicine)
Close companion (we-passages)
Institutionally mobile (travels with Paul)
Socially plausible, "passes" as an attendant/slave in Roman contexts
Methodologically explicit (Lk 1:1–4)
And crucially:
He is present in Judaea during the last open window when dozens of eyewitnesses — including women — are still alive and accessible.
This is pre-revolt Judaea, before AD 66 - 74 chaos obliterates archives, families, and memory networks.
That alone, already makes Luke–Acts historically priceless. Then, if Luke is tracking a civilisation-shaping synthesis, then Acts 27 is not padding. It is the field test:
Lawful authority (centurion)
Technical expertise (sailors)
Economic pressure (grain ship, early sailing)
Majority vote (In Acts, consistently, the crowd, mob or majority is not right)
Suppression of dissent
Manipulation and attempted evasion
Providential intervention
Moral authority without formal power
In other words:
The Judaeo-Christian synthesis is shown to work under real-world conditions of risk, governance, and survival.
That is not mere theology. That is scripturally informed, historically aware political anthropology. Thus, civic theology in action, ringside for the critical first stage of the Christian synthesis of the heritage of Jerusalem, Athens and Rome.
-
treat Acts as church history rather than civilisational reportage,
-
isolate “theology” from philosophy,
-
flatten rhetoric into piety,
-
and read backwards through later dogma.
But Luke is writing before categories solidify. He is reporting the moment of reframing itself.
CONCLUSION
Luke–Acts constitutes the earliest eyewitness-anchored historical record of the Judaeo-Christian synthesis in the act of reframing Western civilisation — morally, philosophically, and politically — across the decisive decade from roughly AD 50 to 59.
That, is a claim worth defending — and it can be. END
