Brett Johnson's Blog

September 18, 2025

This has been an emotional week for many. I am about to head onto a university campus and a church campus next week to speak with young people and anticipate being asked about the life and death of Charlie Kirk and what the implications might be. My tendency as a luminary is to wait and see, ponder for a year or more, and give it time to see the outworkings. This long-fuse approach will miss the immediacy of a historic moment. I have therefore contemplated, spoken with friends and dialogued with people from various walks of life and ages and stages and perspectives. I have asked for understanding and, even though I am scratching the surface, have observed seven responses and/or outcomes.

Apathy:

Some view this as just another event. Last month it was Sydney Sweeney‘s blue jeans, and this month it’s Charlie Kirk’s assassination. Those responding with apathy do not see this as the 9/11 moment of this generation, a MLK-type moment, or a JFK moment. It gets tucked away with train murders and school shootings as another bad moment in a broken world.

How is it possible that some can feel nothing about a murder that has this degree of visibility? Apathy can be fueled by believing the rhetoric claiming that Charlie Kirk was a hateful person who despised certain groups of people and advocated for the Second Amendment, so it is no wonder he died by violence.

Some feel justified in parking this in the “not important“ file because someone on social media said or they personally perceive that Charlie Kirk seemed to be speaking a harsh truth, or a truth harshly. They disagree with his views, so they don’t feel sympathy for his death. The didn’t like his manner, so ‘what goes around comes around.’

Another strand of thinking that fosters apathy is “what-about-ism” where the logic goes, “Yes, this is a bad thing, but what-about-XYZ…” We have seen TV personalities reverting to this line of questioning. “Yes, but what about immigration/tariffs/you name it.”

Anger:
Most people who feel anger believe theirs is a “righteous anger.” ‘I am mad, but I am justified in feeling this way.’ The Anger-response I have observed falls into four categories:

Anger at the grief and affection poured out for someone with whom the angered one had no affinity or alignment. ‘Why does Charlie Kirk deserve flags flown at half mast? Aren’t people making too much of a fuss? Why should I have to express grief?’
Anger at the “cause” he championed. He challenged the thinking of university professors and politicians, and he challenged the young to think. More specifically, Charlie Kirk mobilized voters who elected Trump, and this in itself probably caused some to feel they have justified anger.
Anger at the Christ he served. Kirk said that, at the end of the day, the thing that is most important is to have a relationship with Jesus Christ. This, he said, is more important than settling on a political or philosophical position.
Then there are those who are angry at the “leftist” (as opposed to liberal) movement (or cadre of left-like-thinkers) that killed him. Charlie himself was clear that he could dialogue with liberals, respect their positions, agree to disagree and still have good relationships. He posited that leftists were not the same as liberals. Some have anger at “them,” the perhaps undefined leftists, who fostered a climate where killing someone in cold blood for holding a different belief is acceptable.

     Anger seldom allows us to think fairly, logically or clearly.

Alarm:
Others I have spoke with are alarmed in their contemplation that today, in the USA, someone can be martyred for their beliefs. They are asking, ‘What are the implications for the future of such a nation? How has the polarization of society allowed someone to feel justified in putting a bullet to the head of another human because they disagree with them?’

Is a society still civilized when political leaders and the media can advocate violence as something that is justified, and then excuse themselves for their own hateful rhetoric? Even worse, they richly accuse those across the aisle, telling them to tone down their rhetoric. You will find examples of violent rhetoric in both political directions.

At the same time, there is alarm that the First Amendment right to free speech is being trampled on in government’s response to those who celebrate the death of Charlie Kirk. Is it overreach?


America:
There is a resurgence in thinking about America, the USA as a nation, in a positive light. Charlie Kirk believed America is good, it is redeemable, it is not bad (systemically racist, greedily capitalist, etc.). One doesn’t have to apologize for being an American. This was Charlie’s message, and young people are believing it. He challenged the notion that socialism or cultural Marxism is the solution, and he appeared to be against the universities that caused millions of students to believe that America needed to be torn down or shaped into an image different from what the Founding Fathers had in mind.


 Amplification:
A clear outcome of the assassination of Charlie Kirk is that his messages are being amplified. He has gone from 6 million followers on Instagram to about 13 million at the time of this writing. His personal YouTube channel has over 1.2 million new followers and Facebook has added about 3.4 million followers. These numbers will be out of date tomorrow, of course, but they remind me of the Kiergegaard quote:

“The tyrant dies and his rule is over, the martyr dies and his rule begins.”

   Soren Kierkegaard, The Journals of Kierkegaard

Jesus Christ himself said, “You will know the truth and the truth will set you free.”  The truths Charlie Kirk spoke are being amplified among millions.

Activation:
“I am Charlie.” This event is causing people around the world to make their choice not between political parties but between evil and good. Many are deciding to commit to a life of love, dialogue, truth with grace… truth with courage. According to some reports, Turning Point USA had more than 54,000 students contact them in six days to inquire about how to get involved with an existing chapter, or how to start a TPUSA chapter on their campus.
“This is America’s Charlie Hebdo moment. Violence wielded against ideas, a man punished for his ‘blasphemies’, gunfire cutting down discussion. And so, we should say of Charlie Kirk what we said of Charlie Hebdo: Je suis Charlie.” Brendan O’Neill


Awe:
“I immediately knew that this was not a surprise to the Lord… revival is spreading across the world. Atheists are going out and buying Bibles and people who have never gone to church before are going to church,” Rachel-Ruth Lotz Wright, Billy Graham’s granddaughter.
Could this be the beginning of what scripture calls the latter rain, an outpouring of the Holy Spirit that prepares people for Christ’s return? Those who have spiritual eyes may well be seeing the seed of a matter that sparks a movement that becomes a worldwide revival. Revivalists and watchers of the times are observing to see whether, since the death of Charlie Kirk, revival has broken out in a quiet yet clear way. Is there an historic shift taking place? Charlie Kirk was indeed an apologist, but was he also an apostle? Will the blood of the martyrs spur an awakening that spills beyond the boundaries of organized religion and predictable politics to allow the ecclesia to rise up and engage appropriately yet deliberately in society? Is the name of the organization he founded, Turning Point, prophetic? Is now the time? Is his own name prophetic: Charlie means warrior, and Kirk means church or ecclesia.

“I don’t think they realize it yet, but murdering Charlie is going to be remembered as the day where we finally woke up to what this fight really is.” Nick De Freitas

 

Where might things go from here?

It is beyond my paygrade to predict the longer-term results of the assassination of Charlie Kirk. Will the impact of his debates die down, or will his martyrdom launch a movement? When I first heard of the shooting and then of his death I thought of David Livingstone who had just one convert in Africa during his lifetime. At his funeral a wave of new missionaries was launched. It has taken me a week to ponder preliminary thoughts on this matter, so the advice I give to myself (and you are free to appropriate it for yourself) is still partially formulated.

Do not be apathetic. Ask God how he sees the times we are in right now. Recognize that Jesus wept over a Jerusalem that did not recognize what was happening. They were so busy with their own religious and political goings-on that they missed Jesus.
“Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were not willing.” Jesus in Matthew 23:37
Don’t let anger drown out reason. What I oppose in others is often a symptom of an error I have not dealt with in my own heart.
“Come now, and let us reason together,” Says the Lord. Isaiah 1:18
If I am angry, I must make sure such anger is not fueled by cherry-picked soundbites that other angry people have extracted, often out of context. (And, if you are reading this and are angry at Charlie Kirk, I challenge you to subscribe to his channels and watch at least 50 hours of his unfiltered interactions with others. I often find that when people are opinionated about someone, they have not actually taken the time to gain a firsthand account.)
If God is willing to reason with me, I cannot abandon reason and reach for a rifle.
Sometimes it is good to be alarmed; implicational thinking is important. We are seeing the outworking in society today of ideologies that have eaten away at the foundations of the USA. “For years, Kirk warned that it had become dangerous to speak openly if one held conservative views. Many dismissed that claim as theatrical. Now, it looks like prophecy.” Jonathan Sacerdoti The future of nations still hangs in the balance, so I must be alert and informed.
Regarding America, or any other people or nations, a worldview that does not allow for redemption is not from God. As a Christian, I must acknowledge historical and foundational ills, and I must not subscribe to a fatalistic mindset that does not see people as God intended them to be. The essence of things is that people are created in the image of God, and no person or people is guilty by virtue of their identity or history. And God is the God of new beginnings, and he still has purposes for the USA, and I cannot decry it as a fundamentally flawed society. God receives a surround-sound of praise when people from every tongue, tribe and nation come to him. Jesus is the Hope of the Nations; if I don’t have hope for my nation, do I have my eyes on politicians, or on Jesus?
I must amplify the message of Jesus Christ and this is often best done with my mouth shut and my ears open. As a person who knows God, I am part of the ecclesia, the governmental structure of heaven that sits apart from but is relevant to earthly government, and I don’t need to defend or promote a particular political party. (I can be engaged and not fear being called a Christian Nationalist, for those already reaching for a label.) I must have an ear to heaven particularly as it pertains to NewGen and their freshly-fueled enthusiasm for God so that I don’t miss something God is doing in this generation. I must not be a blinded Jerusalemite who misses God incarnate in His hour. I must turn up the volume on courageous truth and avoid the popularized soundbites of palatable error.
 It is fine to say “I am Charlie” if I see Jesus in Charlie and I am in Jesus. (Note: If I am judging Charlie and questioning his faith and his motives and his methods I may well be a stumbling block to a generation who are gasping to know the Jesus Charlie Kirk knew.) Movements can be manufactured; moves of God can be missed. My task is to be part of a promise my Father made to my Lord when he said, “Your people will volunteer when you call up your army. Your young people will come to you in holy splendor like dew in the early morning.” Psalm 110:3
I must stand on tip-toes to see what God is doing. I must go to scripture and admit to Jesus that I see in part. I must ask God to polish skepticism and intellectualism off the scratched lenses of my spectacles so that I see when the Ancient of Days is doing something new. “Listen carefully, I am about to do a new thing, Now it will spring forth; Will you not be aware of it?” Isaiah 43:19

 

What about those who grieve?

The mad, the mourning, the motivated—there are many emotions. Romans 12:15 comes to mind.

Bless your enemies; no cursing under your breath. Laugh with your happy friends when they’re happy; share tears when they’re down. Get along with each other; don’t be stuck-up. Make friends with nobodies; don’t be the great somebody. The Message

Pray for the Kirk family: parents, the extended family, and his precious wife and children. Theirs is a long journey ahead.

Today in my bible reading I happen to be at the passage where Jesus is giving his followers the heads-up that he is going to die. (John 14:15-31) He knew death, resurrection and eternity were just around the corner and Jesus said these things:

“I leave you peace”
“So don’t be troubled”
“Don’t be afraid”
“when it happens, you will believe”

To be sure, Jesus Christ was unique in his death, resurrection and ascension but the principles he shared are still relevant. In the upside-down kingdom a grain of wheat must die to produce a harvest and those who lose their lives find life.

None of us knows precisely whether our life on earth will be short or long, but we can know our purpose and calling. If even our purpose is unclear, our love need not be unresolved or misdirected. Since we do not know when our time on this planet will expire we must predetermine to be found doing what He told us to do when our end comes: that, I believe, is part of Charlie Kirk’s legacy. He was doing what his Father told him to do, even though he knew it was dangerous. And he obeyed with joy. His Lord and Savior set the example; Charlie Kirk emulated Him.

“But the world must know that I love the Father. So I do exactly what the Father told me to do.”

I love, so I do.

Whatever one believes about the message and manner of Charlie Kirk, in one short week we have seen thousands consider their own lives in light of his life and death, and many have resolved to love God, their families and their neighbors better. The apathetic have been activated, the casual have become courageous, the listless have become lovers. 

Some who opposed Charlie Kirk have no doubt dug their ideological trenches deeper; this is to be expected. Some who venerate him will conscript Charlie Kirk to their cause and draw their own lines in the sand. I don’t think Charlie Kirk died so people could win philosophical battles; his life goal, as I understand it, was to point people to a relationship with Jesus. If you are tempted, like Peter the apostle, to draw the sword and cut off an ear, put your sword away. The kingdom that receives blueprints and instruction from heaven mysteriously combines truth with grace, the works of God with the miracles of God. Its adherents wield love and redemption and hope while not compromising on the principles of God and the person of Jesus Christ.

Millions around the world have been stirred with emotion since Charlie Kirk was murdered, and they don’t know why. A life lived the way Charlie Kirk lived cuts through the clutter and causes us to face an eternal truth: there is good, there is evil (forget about left and right for a moment) and our lives are lived for consequence, not for comfort. How, then, will I live? How, then, will you live?

 

Image Used: Cheney Orr/Reuters

From Enlightenment to Marx: Tracing the Family’s Role with Dr. Charlie Self

In a recent conversation, I interviewed Dr. Charlie Self, and we delved into the historical and philosophical shifts in views on the family, from the pro-family stances of Enlightenment thinkers to the Marxist critique of family as a capitalist construct. Our discussion, rich with historical insights and modern implications, explored the decline of traditional family structures, the church’s role, and the challenges facing families today. This short article is not a substitute for the podcast but Cliff Notes on which you can hang your thinking as you listen.

 

The context for this conversation is threefold:

A recent Blog and podcast I recorded on Generation O: the strategy to mass-orphanize a generation (https://www.brettjohnson.biz/blog/generation-o)

The increased polarization in society fueled by algorithms and ideologies: is this something new, or is it as old as the hills?

The repentance needed by the Boomer generation for the ways in which they contributed to the present-day feelings of hopelessness among NewGen/Generation O.

 

With that as background, I have been giving thought to the source of these things, and Charlie offers a historical perspective that gives us reason to think deeply.

 

Enlightenment Thinkers: Champions of the Family

The Enlightenment, spanning the 17th and 18th centuries, celebrated reason, liberty, and the family as a cornerstone of society. Dr. Self and I discussed how thinkers like John Locke, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, and Charles Montesquieu viewed the family as a natural, voluntary unit essential for nurturing virtuous citizens and preserving social order. Locke saw marriage as a consensual compact for mutual support and child-rearing, laying the foundation for individual rights. Rousseau emphasized the family’s role in moral education, while Montesquieu tied it to the stability of various government forms. Charlie Self highlighted religious movements like the Bohemian Brethren, Moravians, and Methodists, which reinforced the family’s importance, alongside figures like Bishop Comenius (the father of modern education) in the 1600s, who championed nurturing children within biological families. This pro-family ethos, rooted in the concept of subsidiarity, positioned the family as the primary unit for fostering human dignity and agency.

 

We dug into the connection to business and property ownership and how children were grown into fellow-owners of family businesses.

 

The Marxist Shift: Family as a Capitalist Tool

Our conversation turned to the 19th century, where Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels reframed the family through historical materialism. In works like The Communist Manifesto and The Origin of the Family, Private Property, and the State, they argued that the family evolved with economic systems, culminating in the bourgeois family under capitalism—a tool for perpetuating private property and class oppression. Marxists saw monogamy as ensuring legitimate heirs, relegating women to domestic labor, and described the rise of male dominance as a “world-historical defeat of the female sex.” We noted how this distorted Enlightenment ideas, rejecting the family’s spiritual and social value as bourgeois ideology, setting the stage for modern anti-family sentiments. “Marx is part of the unholy trinity of Marx, Darwin and Freud.” Marx envisioned a classless, materialistic society with no place for spirituality or the family. He hated the Methodist revivals, private ownership and the family. In places where economic development had flourished Marxism did not do well. What you have with Marxism is a secular version of the kingdom of God. The breaking of nuclear family bonds increases the need for government or bureaucratic interventions.

 

The Challenges of the Present Generation

“This is a new and accelerating phenomenon from the 1960s.” We then explored the disintegration of traditional family structures over recent decades, accelerated by the Boomer generation’s prosperity in the 1960s that gave them time to think about issues. A second factor was the separation of sex from reproduction and fueled individualism. “The environmental crisis is still the overarching crisis that is used as a weapon against individuality, family and free markets.” We go into this is in some detail.

 

A third thing Charlie touched on is what he referred to as “the Leviathan of public agencies.” I raised the topic of ruling or technocratic elites which Woodrow Wilson amplified and Charlie shared good insights on “the tyranny of the expert.”

 

Increased government intervention, Dr. Self noted, often undermined family autonomy. This trend, echoing Marxist collectivism, lacks tools to build enduring alternatives, leaving younger generations hesitant about marriage and childbearing amid environmental and economic pressures.

 

Balancing Individualism and Community

We discussed the tension between individualism and collectivism, with Dr. Self advocating for a balanced approach that respects personal freedom while fostering community through spiritual “fathering and mothering.” He distinguished between the equality of individuals before God and legitimate functional authority, a nuance often lost in modern rejection of hierarchy. I echoed his call for repentance from past mistakes and the creation of welcoming spaces that empower individuals within supportive communities. Local initiatives, grounded in biblical and anthropological truths, emerged as a key source of hope for rebuilding functional families and societies.

 

Conclusion: A Path Forward

My interview with Dr. Charlie Self illuminated the family’s enduring significance, from its Enlightenment roots as a nurturing institution to its contested status in modern ideologies. By revisiting biblical principles, embracing local initiatives, and leveraging tools like AI, we see a path to restoring hope and dignity to families and communities. Our discussion challenges us to rethink the family’s role in shaping a virtuous, resilient society, grounded in faith and action. Hopefully, the conversation sheds light on the historical roots of our current societal predicament and prompts us to empathy and action. “When we yield to the kingdom of God... we have to find community.”

“Let’s build a world of fathering and mothering that is empowering and not controlling, that is bringing the best of lifelong learning while being open to the new insights of the very people we are mentoring.”

 

There is an anti-God strategy alive and operational, perhaps more than ever today, but it is not new: it is the plan of God’s enemies to make people orphans. 

Just before Jesus went to the cross to die, he made this statement: “I will not leave you orphaned.” (MSG) When you read “I will not leave you alone like orphans,” how does it strike you? I confess that the verse didn’t really grab me in any particular way. I didn’t grow up feeling like an orphan. I am the last of five children so we had a large household with lots of people around. My parents were hospitable and we had no lack of friends. I grew up with plenty of aunts and uncles and cousins. So I did not feel alone, nor did I feel like an orphan. I figured these words were probably just a statement from Jesus to get his disciples through the upcoming week which would, of course, be emotionally taxing.

Since the orphan theme has not been a big one in my life, this verse about comforting people who feel like orphans seemed nice, but not very relevant to me. Until I saw it differently…

I recently asked myself, “Why would Jesus insert the statement about orphans in a key passage where he is talking about a pivotal moment in history?“ It was then that I realized that this was not a personal comfort statement, but an intelligence briefing. It revealed the strategies of Satan and the malicious intent of God’s number one enemy.

I will not leave you as orphans [comfortless, desolate, bereaved, forlorn, helpless]; I will come [back] to you. John 14:18 AMPC

Looking back in history, it would be fair to say that the devil is an orphan. Lucifer was kicked out of heaven for various reasons, including unrighteous trade, and became an entity cut off from the Father of all creation. Someone with no father could be described as an orphan. Since then, Satan’s strategy has been to not only replicate orphans, but to rip people out of a relationship with Father himself. And then, those who are severed from fathers become orphans.

Orphans are not attached to nothing

The strategy of creating orphans does not just leave people with nothing in the place of the Father. The tactic is to replace a legitimate father with an illegitimate father-substitute. At the governmental level, socialism and collectivism result in the state becoming the parent. In the realm of education, the professor or the Dean, or the educator becomes the authority figure. In a gang, the gang leader becomes the replacement for a real father. In a tribe, the tribal leader or chief becomes the parental substitute. In a bad church, whether small, medium or mega, the pastor can become the orphanage director and the congregants get a bowl of soup twice a week. The insidiousness of the orphan-making process is that it appears to offer independence from authority, yet in its place, a worse and counterfeit authority is installed.

Now, think about some of the societal Giants that plague the human race. Which societal giants have as a deliberate objective the creation of orphans? What would you put on the list? 

Would human trafficking make the list? I think so. Children are taken away from parents, and women in particular are promised more and taken into captivity. Cruel traffickers and pimps promise freedom but deliver destruction.
What about nationalism? Surely, when you replace family ties and affections for a political hero or leader, or when the identity of a nation supersedes the fundamental building block of society, which is the identity of a family and the identity of a community that is devoted to God, then we are creating orphans.
Wars quite literally create orphans, so they are in satan’s toolbox.
Single parenting: government incentives sometimes discourage marriage and the phenomenon of absentee fathers or fatherlessness is fuel in the tank of societal orphanization.
Media that routinely portrays fathers as stupid, Friends and the fellowship of perpetual youth, Modern Family. Etc. I asked Grok (AI) a question in this regard and here is the finding:

Based on multiple academic studies, content analyses, and media critiques spanning the last 50 years (roughly 1975–2025), the portrayal of fathers in TV shows has trended toward negative or non-positive depictions (e.g., incompetent, foolish, absent, emotionally disconnected, or ridiculed). While there's no single, comprehensive statistic covering every TV show due to the subjective nature of "negative" and the vast volume of content, aggregated findings from reliable sources suggest that approximately 50–80% of TV shows featuring fathers as central or recurring characters portray them in a negative or non-positive light, depending on the era, genre (e.g., sitcoms vs. dramas), and specific metrics used. This estimate is higher in recent decades (2000s onward) and particularly pronounced in family-oriented comedies, where fathers are often the butt of jokes. ... This trend isn't politically correct to highlight, but evidence substantiates that TV has increasingly marginalized fathers, potentially harming societal views of masculinity and family dynamics.

Would pornography make the orphan-makers list? I believe it has the same destructive outcome, emasculating men and locking them in a fictional world where they don’t have to encounter real but less-than-perfect women who might challenge their shrinking masculinity. 
What about churches and mega churches? Actually, this question applies even to tiny churches or home churches in instances where the church has become less of a household and more like an orphanage with the pastor, minister, or priest being the orphanage director. My brother, Doug, alerted me to this back in the early 2000s when he himself was leading a church. He realized his people, rather than taking care of their own households, were expecting him to do the job. He had become the orphanage director.

2020 Hindsight

The problem with 2020 hindsight is that we still do not have hindsight on what happened in 2020. 2020 was, of course, the year associated with the worldwide pandemic. It has had many lingering effects, some of them even medical, but many of them cultural. Actually, calling the calamity that crystallized during the COVID pandemic a “lingering effect” is like calling the Titanic a minor boating incident. What 2020 did was bring to a culmination a society-wide polarization that began centuries ago with the Enlightenment (a deceptive branding). But it had its roots in the ancient strategy of the devil of making orphans. If we don’t understand this, we are in danger of our favorite political or cultural bent becoming complicit in the tidal surge of orphanization.

This is not a uniquely Western challenge. Apart from the wars in Africa that have left millions as orphans, the philosophy of "ubuntu" can be used to promote collectivism over the nuclear family which can be incorrectly labeled a colonial construct.

The recent history of mass-orphanization

Let’s remind ourselves that Jesus gave us a key to recognize that anything that creates orphans comes from the opposing team, not from heaven. In the Garden of Eden, Adam and Eve became orphans, cut off from their creator and father. “You don’t need Father-God” is a lie from the father of all lies. Perhaps the countering of this untruth is why, throughout scripture, God reveals his heart for widows and orphans in particular. The psalmist says, “God sets the lonely in families.”

In the last 250 to 300 years, philosophies have evolved in society that have slowly weakened the primary place of the family in society. Some Enlightenment philosophers, such as Jean-Jacques Rousseau, John Locke, Montesquieu and Adam Smith, were definitely pro-family and monogamous marriages. They offered fair critique of dysfunction and church overreach, however. Other philosophers, including Voltaire and Kant, were less clear on family. Rousseau did express views that the “general will” of the collective could override families. Such views were picked up by socialists and communists who furthered the philosophy even saying that family was a capitalist tool for inheritance and exploitation. Successive waves of anti-authority, anti-parent, and anti-establishment have been quite common. It is not that every single generation has got worse, as there have been some cultural backlashes and corrections, but the persistent dripping tap of anti-God philosophy has undermined the foundations of society. One should try to determine when the spirit behind these shifts is aimed at bringing about legitimate freedoms and when it is producing orphans.

I plan to do a few podcasts with historians, educators, cultural commentators, and marketplace leaders to unpack what I have just summarized in a paragraph. There were positive and negative aspects to the Enlightenment, as there are with many societal shifts. The focus of this short blog is this one strategic thrust: orphanization. 

Fatherless America

Around 1997 our business, The Institute, conducted a large project for Prison Fellowship Ministries. They were dealing with the problem of “fatherless America,” where they had a database of about 600,000 children whose parents were incarcerated. These kids were likely to become the future prison population of America, and we were devising a care system to increase the density of responsible adults in the lives of such children with a view to avoiding the inevitable path to prison. Easy to view this as a problem that belongs to “them,” but harder to see when the causes and symptoms are more culturally acceptable than a stint in prison. The problem that we have today dwarfs the challenge that those in prison ministry face. The challenges are far more widespread and intertwined in society across age groups and social strata. No generation is exempt.

X+Y+Z+A = O

This hypothetical formula only goes back to GenX, GenY, and GenZ, which is a short-term view of history, of course. Millennials and Boomers are not exempt from the wiles of the Orphaner. The simple formula simply highlights a common thread that has been woven into generations. No era is exempt from the orphan-intending schemes of the devil. Allow me to illustrate.

We returned from Germany not that long ago, where we had insightful conversations with young men who had bad relationships with their fathers. Who were their fathers? Their fathers were the men who returned from the Second World War, not only scarred by what they saw, but carrying the shame of having “lost” a war. There was no pomp and returning pride as we saw with my father and his generation of British, American, and Allied soldiers returning home. Our parents did not talk of the hardship of war, but mostly wrapped difficulty in a flag of victory. This did not seem to be the case for the German fathers returning home. To this day, it is frowned upon to talk about the positives of Germany because one does not want to appear to be nationalistic. The net result is a generation of young men today who have a desperate need for fathers who were not fully present.

This is not unique to Germany, of course, and I have seen this in the US as well. Some years ago when we were living in the San Francisco Bay area and were concerned about the spiritual condition of the city, a group of us gathered in a hotel room overlooking Union Square. As we prayed, I received the insight that many young men flocked to the city to take up jobs in Silicon Valley and the surrounding Bay Area. Over a period of about 10 years, I noticed these young men becoming older, but in their behavior, they were similar to what they were in college, except that they had more money and more toys. What they really longed for, although they didn't necessarily see it, was spiritual fathers who could call them out and help them step up to the next level. The problem, however, was that when people became fathers, they left the city. The net result was a city full of aging young men who didn't go through the godly migration from children to young men to fathers to elders. Many were orphaned spiritually while successful materially.

There were other complicating factors, of course, including some of the negative spin-offs of feminism and the labelling of toxic masculinity, which caused some men to retreat to their basements with their video games or online distractions. Disconnection from a healthy, real-life experience is a symptom of being orphaned.

Remember the Orphan

Jesus promises, “I will not leave you all alone like orphans.” Somehow, especially in this era, the outcome of independence, addiction to social media and online stuff, feelings of economic hopelessness, coupled with hyper-social-responsibility where one takes on despair because of climate change, immigration, AI, etc., people feel less empowered and more orphaned. Women’s empowerment has all sorts of consequences: emasculation of men who shy away from stepping in and stepping up, the myth of perpetual youth, and big government stepping in to become a source, provider... an orphanage director.

Things that appear to be empowering often leave one disconnected, alone. Canceling those you don't like, unfriending, self-care, boundaries that keep "toxic" people out, narrowing the selection of your friend group to only those who fit your profile... these have some positives and are sometimes necessary strategies. They can also lead to participating in homogenous collections of orphans if we are not thoughtful.

My Call to Action

This is a topic that breaks my heart. I wish I had seen it more fully a long time ago. In the bigger picture, “making orphans” is the work of the orphaned: it is Satan making people in his image. Knowing this, as I encounter things in life, especially things that look good or seem right, I have to ask, “Does this make orphans, or children of God? Is this a strategy of the enemy, or a force for the Kingdom of God?” Lord, increase my discernment.

God has given me some tools to help counter the rising orphan tide. I am glad for this, but I wish I had seen this broad strategy sooner. 

Parents, leaders in all spheres of society... each of us has to evaluate whether we are being who we should be to produce daughters and sons vs. orphans. We have to step up, eradicate convenient dichotomy, see and know people, live authentically, care deeply and live from the heart of the Father of all mankind. And if you need resources to help you do this, I can help.

"Practice hospitality." This crisp commandment must be obeyed more than ever today. Invite people into your home. Have inter-generational gatherings. Invite people that don't fit a narrow profile. And when people come over, listen.

Father God, Father of Lights, Head of Humankind... I appeal to you as Father, the Ultimate Father... draw the generations that follow me to yourself. As a young man, I felt my most important task was to properly reflect you to my children. Now my heart breaks for the generations that feel estranged from you for many reasons. Forgive me for where I have contributed to their aloneness. Set the lonely in families. Cause spiritual fathers and mothers to open their hearts and homes. Reconnect the generations. In Jesus’ Name.

The term “kingdom business” is common today, it was pioneered by a small group over 40 years ago when it was not a “category.” Today, many Christians in the marketplace are engaged in what has become a movement, and in a movement, it is easy to come by the language of the genre without moving into its reality. So it's crucial to understand the different paths one can take – and the dangers that lie on some of them. Many years ago, my brother said to me, “The problem is that you are teaching Promised Land principles to people who want to stay in Egypt.”

 

This blog draws from a recent podcast where I shared about the "Judas Syndrome," drawing lessons from the life of Judas Iscariot. Scripture makes a shocking statement: Satan entered Judas. But this was not as a sudden fall, but a predictable decline that offers profound insights for modern businesspeople - https://pod.co/brett-johnson-1/223-3-kingdom-paths-avoiding-the-judas-syndrome-with-brett-johnson

 

The Predictable Decline of Judas

Judas's journey began when he approached Jesus to join the group. Appearing more financially savvy than the other disciples, who were mostly fishermen, he was appointed treasurer – essentially the CFO or asset manager of the group. He was also responsible for managing funds for the poor.

 

However, despite his position, Judas was greedy and often stole money from the bag he managed. He masked this greed with a facade of compassion, famously objecting to Mary pouring out expensive oil, demanding that the money should have gone to the poor. This was a cover-up as he didn't truly care for the poor, but was a thief. His colleagues didn't question him because he was "the finance guy."

 

A critical lesson from Judas is this: his natural gift for finance was not sanctified. Instead, he brought his "old operating model" or "modus operandi" into the new context of following Jesus, but didn’t transition to kingdom principles. Just as one doesn't put new wine into old wineskins, a kingdom business cannot operate effectively using a secular operating model. Many educated professionals entering "kingdom business" risk bringing their old ways of thinking and operating, using kingdom jargon like "human flourishing" and "glory of God" without fundamentally changing their core business model. In the podcast, I mention a telling observation I had when speaking with a "Christian company." This highlights a common issue in the marketplace movement today.

 

When I examined the operating model, I said to the Chief Spiritual Officer, as he called himself, “So apart from this and that, you're no different than the Pagan company down the road.” He was shocked.

 

Judas had an expectation that Jesus would be a political and economic deliverer, freeing them from Rome's yoke. He saw the potential for scale and growth, like a shrewd businessperson. But as time went on, things didn't pan out as he expected, and he became offended. While he might have loved Jesus and the disciples, he probably loved himself and money more, and he didn't buy into the fact that the kingdom of God operates differently.

 

His offense led him to choose "mammon over Jesus." As a smart business guy, he then approached the Pharisees, recognizing their need to get rid of Jesus. He executed a clear sales process: identified their need, offered a solution (delivering Jesus), and secured a prepayment of 30 pieces of silver.

 

The self-deception in Judas's life was profound, starting with small acts of stealing and escalating to judging Mary for her worship. Even at the Last Supper, when Jesus revealed his betrayer, Judas feigned innocence, asking, "Surely I'm not the one you're talking about, am I?". When Jesus gave him the bread, a symbol of fellowship, Satan entered Judas, marking the culmination of his predictable decline. He went out into the night, both physically and spiritually.

 

Three Paths in Kingdom Business Today

The Judas Syndrome highlights a crucial caution for us businesspeople who are attracted to Jesus but struggle with changing our established ways. When challenged to transform our operating model from a "Babylonian system" to a "kingdom of God's system," we tend to fall into three categories.

 

Path A: The Comfortable Conformist

This is the largest group. They love Jesus and the idea of kingdom business, but they don't want their operating model fully transformed.
They pretend not to understand Jesus's call for radical change, preferring to join Christian groups that don't stretch their thinking and practices too much.
They might tithe, donate, or serve on church boards, but they avoid initiatives that require them to "leave town" or "play away games."
Their business purpose is simply "to glorify God," donate some money, and be ethical without fundamentally altering their operations.
Like Peter, who wanted Jesus out of his boat, they want Jesus in their lives, but not to "change the operating model of my business."
Abraham's father, Terah, serves as an example, settling halfway to his destination rather than completing God's call. "The Broad road, the comfortable road, the easy to follow, the good coffee and donuts road is Group A...".

Path B: The Offended Betrayer

Judas is the "patron saint" of this group. These individuals get offended when God doesn't meet their expectations.
They might think following Jesus means guaranteed revenue increases or an absence of problems, and they get disillusioned when it proves costly or difficult.
They cling to the "MBA way" or "professional way" as superior to "the Father's way," often buying into secularism that separates God and business.
When things don't work out as expected, they question the kingdom's operating model, become self-righteous, and choose their own way over God's. This path, like Judas's, leads to destruction.

Path C: The Transformed Disciple

This group learns from Jesus and undergoes transformation. They embrace Jesus's "upside-down kingdom," which often contrasts with conventional business school teachings.
Every challenge becomes an opportunity to grow, change, and renew their thinking, rather than taking offense.
They believe God is good all the time, even amidst troubles, understanding that Jesus promised both life and trouble.
They are committed to change, consecrated, and continuously growing in steps of obedience.
They understand the threefold commission: to disciple ethnos (people groups), reconcile cosmos (ordered world, systems like banking or education), and reach eschatos, which we find in Acts 1:8. We understand people groups, and perhaps we understand the transformation of whole spheres or sectors (though I would argue we avoid this is being too grandiose), but do we understand “eschatos” other than geographically? Often, the last thing to be touched, the lowest places to be reached, the things furthest away from Jesus’ way are our core business practices. They are often “farthest, final (of place or time):—ends of, last, latter end, lowest, uttermost” when it comes to kingdom transformation.

"If your sales cycle is out of order. If your product development cycle doesn't include hearing God and what he has to say, if your marketing doesn't include the miraculous, if your business purpose doesn't include the nations, it's probably not a kingdom business." 

For this group, a true kingdom business must have a purpose that includes the nations, aligning with God's desire for people from every tongue, tribe, and nation to know Him. It must also seek to reconcile things which can be ordered, and it must reach to the furthest, both geographically and systemically.

 

Choosing Your Path

The broad, comfortable road is Path A, but the "called out ones" are on Path C. We are challenged not to settle for the comfort of Path A and not get offended and end up in Path B, but instead, be part of Path C. This means following Jesus even when it's costly and you don't fully understand, allowing your heart to keep changing and growing. It means embracing a “great commission” that goes beyond people, includes remote locations, and importantly, does not shrink from every facet of the operating model (that which brings order and can be ordered) into alignment with God.

 

Our job is far from done. To give Jesus the return on investment He deserves, we must be willing, ready, and prepared to rise to His challenge, avoiding everyday mediocrity. Which path will you choose for your business? I encourage you to listen to the podcast for a deeper dive into this topic.

 

The Pharisees held a meeting. These were troubling times in Israel given the Roman occupation, heavy taxes and religious turmoil. On top of this, there was a new guy in town claiming to be the Messiah. The religious leaders called Jesus in for cross-examination and asked an honest question, for a change. “What is the greatest commandment?” After giving his answer, Jesus told the asker of the question that he was close to the kingdom of God.

 

While he had them together, Jesus then asked the Pharisees a question. “What do you think about the Messiah? Whose son is he?”

 

Looking back in history, this is not a very hard question to answer. People with a knowledge of scripture would not be stumped by this straightforward inquiry in that, with the hindsight of the resurrection of Jesus, we can clearly see that Jesus is the Son of God AND he was the son, or descendant, of the historical King David.

 

The Pharisees, however, gave an accurate answer but it was a partial answer. They only saw from the perspective of what they understood as being true on earth. They said, “The Messiah is the Son of David.“

 

Jesus said to them, “Then why did David call him ‘Lord’? David was speaking by the power of the Spirit.  He said…” Jesus then quoted from Psalm 110, a passage of scripture that they would’ve known.

 

‘The Lord God said to my Lord:

Sit by me at my right side, and I will put your enemies under your control.’

 

Jesus went on to say, “David calls the Messiah  ‘Lord’ so how can he be David’s son?”

 

Was Jesus trying to prove that he was smarter than the Pharisees? Jesus had no ego, but he did have a desire to pull people into the truth. Remember his declaration, “I am the Truth.” One could say that it was in his best interest for the religious leaders to progress from a technical knowledge of the law to a true understanding of spiritual things.

 

Winning an argument, or seeing heaven?

If Jesus wasn’t trying to win an argument, what was he doing? This brings us to our world today where there is much turmoil and confusion in the daily news cycle. People are confused by what political leaders are doing. There is great pontification about the evils of this or the benefits of that. The truth is, much of the analysis, even by people who are Christians, is a one-eyed analysis or commentary.

 

I recently sat with a friend from Africa who said, “I used to love everything about the US, but...” and he told me the story of friends who have lost jobs in the US government or whose investments have tanked. His argument was not so much with what was being done, but the timeframe and manner in which government spending was being cut. As I listened, I could see his point where he had personal knowledge. We spoke about seeing things with two eyes.

 

“In die land van die blindes is die een-oog koning.” (In the land of the blind, one-eye is king.) The answer of the Pharisees was true if you looked at things only from an earthly, one-eyed, perspective. Jesus was indeed the son of David. However, we are called to be two-eyed people. Jesus was trying to get the people of his day to see two realities at once. He was trying to empower smart people to look at things with the eye of revelation, not just the mind of information. He was trying to elevate them into the way that they were designed to live with the bifocal perspective of heaven and earth simultaneously.

 

What did David see?

This takes us back to Psalm 110 where, in my view, David must have had the curtain pulled back on the heavenlies to see a conversation between Father God and Jesus his Son. We don’t know whether this was just an understanding from the Spirit, as Jesus attests, or whether David saw a vision, or whether he was transported to the heavenlies to see what he saw. It doesn’t really matter how he received the revelation: it was by the Holy Spirit. David walked in a spiritual reality that was two-eyed: he had his feet on the ground while he saw into the heavenly realm. “The Lord said to my Lord: sit by me at my right side until I make your enemies your footstool.”

 

Unless we are seeing the events that are happening in the world with two eyes—one that examines the realities on earth, and one that understands what is happening in the spiritual or heavenly realm—we will not make sense of today. We therefore must have not just wisdom, for wisdom is often a euphemism for earthly caution, but we must have insight into the spiritual world.

 

My challenge is I am not a prophet: I have no great spiritual insights into things present or future. I am not a seer: I have no premonition of things to come or insights into the heavenly realm. Neither am I an economic historian. I am a reader of scripture, however, and this causes me to acknowledge that there is a cosmic battle between good and evil. Jesus called his people to live in the light of this reality. This does not remove us from practical matters of love, kindness, justice and righteousness, but empowers us to live from a reality greater than political parties or leaders. The Kingdom of God supersedes Democrat, Republican, left, right, and center. Too many Christians are asking, “Did you vote for...?” and “Are you a XYZ...?” and saying, “I can’t believe you...” Lift your eyes: followers of Jesus are on the same team. There’s a battle between good and evil. Sometimes your earthly party is on the side of good, and sometimes on the side of evil. Some people in your party are on the side of good, and some on the side of evil. I have been forgiven, and daily I still do, say or think things that need the forgiveness of my Savior, Jesus Christ.

 

Not an “either / or”

Remember that Jesus had just had a positive discussion about the greatest commandment: love God, and love your neighbor. This was intensely practical. Now Jesus was saying, in effect, you must also not just look at things that are happening on the earth from a human perspective, albeit a religious human perspective. The Pharisees were schooled in the law. They knew it left and right, backwards and forwards, but there was more. Today, there are people who know politics and policy and party, but they don’t see the spiritual realm. Therefore, they can only interpret the events of the day in light of human understanding.

 

Our ability to discern spiritual things has been blunted because we are at the tail end of decades of the watering down of absolute truth. Before we point a finger at educators and politicians, within the Church there has been years of wonky thinking that has led to an anemic and biblically illiterate Christian population. It is no wonder that we struggle to look at things from a two-eyed perspective. We have lost our sense of right and wrong.

 

Paul wrote to the Philippians with the presumption that they would think and act like “citizens of heaven.”

 

As citizens of heaven, live your life worthy of the gospel... standing firm in one spirit, in one accord, contending together for the faith of the gospel, not being frightened in any way by your opponents. Philippians 1:27-28

 

It is a solid reminder that all of us who have a relationship with God through Jesus Christ are on the same team, and we are expected to live as heaven’s citizens first and foremost, not members of this or that tongue, tribe, party or nation.

 

Who sees the spiritual world?

To complicate matters, those who do have a perception of what is happening in the spiritual world are often regarded as wacky.  “They see a demon or an angel behind every bush.” It seems that sound-minded, “normal people“ are not the ones who are talking about the spiritual battles that are taking place, the cosmic fight between good and evil that sits behind the daily activities of Presidents and Prime Ministers. Tariffs are a topic, yet I have not heard one reporter in the USA ask a question about global events from a spiritual perspective. “What are the spiritual dynamics at play in the China, Russia, Iran collaboration?” “Was Russia’s attack on the Ukraine an attempt to crush the church?” “What are the spiritual forces at play with mass migration; is there a political agenda behind it? If so, how is this balanced with the biblical responsibilities regarding strangers and foreigners?” “How do tariffs and the events in the Middle East fit into the broader narrative of scripture and perhaps the end times?” “The bible has many references to aliens and foreigners: how should its principles shape how immigrants are cared for?” The moment one pens these questions the thought “conspiracy theorist” comes to mind. (Is a conspiracy theorist nowadays someone who has an alternate explanation of reality that differs from mine?)

 

I am asking myself:

Who has a trusted view on Israel without blindly endorsing all that the secular State of Israel does?
Who has a biblically based grasp of the EU and its modus operandi and strengths and weaknesses of philosophy?
Who understands the positives and negatives of Globalism and its ramifications insofar as it relates to the Kingdom of God?
Who sees the “-fares” clearly: Welfare, Warfare, Ecofare, Lawfare?
Who has a good grasp on the spiritual realities surrounding Capital and investing? Who sees the difference between Mammon, avarice, greed and capitalism?
Who sees the value of and potential in sovereign nations rightly stewarding the assets God has entrusted to them?
Who grasps the practicalities of a compassionate response to crises—of which there are many and, Jesus predicted, will be increasing—without exploiting those assisted by aid and setting them up for long-term sustainability?
Who understands the role of Government, its functions and limitations, without succumbing to the political spirit that is often the driving factor behind human events? (The political spirit knows no party preference and will gladly use politicians from any and all parties.) 

 

Two-eyed people

In essence, I am pondering the question of Jesus which asks, “How do you view me, how do you view life, how do you view what is happening in the world?” This question is not answered through the lens of political affiliation: if my tendency is to answer that way, I have probably forfeited my discernment to a political spirit. If my answer begins with Obama, Macron, Starmer or Trump, I am a one-eyed person. If I am pondering the perplexities of what is happening in the grander scheme of things, that which originates in heaven and ends there, I am on a better track. Let’s go back to Psalm 110, the passage about which Jesus asked. Ponder it yourself to see the full scale of the cosmic conflict.

 

The Lord says to my Lord:
    “Sit at my right hand,
until I make your enemies your footstool.”

2 The Lord sends forth from Zion
    your mighty scepter.
    Rule in the midst of your enemies!
3 Your people will offer themselves freely
    on the day you lead your forces,
    in holy garments;
from the womb of the morning,
    the dew of your youth will be yours.
4 The Lord has sworn
    and will not change his mind,
“You are a priest forever
    after the order of Melchizedek.”

5 The Lord is at your right hand;
    he will shatter kings on the day of his wrath.
6 He will execute judgment among the nations,
    filling them with corpses;
he will shatter chiefs
    over the wide earth.
7 He will drink from the brook by the way;
    therefore he will lift up his head.

 

We are in the day of Psalm 110:3, a day when Jesus is leading his forces. We are called to a higher army. If my political allegiance causes me to be unable to objectively assess and stand for justice, righteousness and truth, I am in trouble. If I can no longer converse with friends who disagree with my perspective, I may be one-eyed. If I can easily see the flaw in their perspective and am eager to point it out, my one eye might have blind spots. If I get sucked into the political drama of the day and do not simultaneously see the Psalm 110 story of the generations, I have lost my second eye.

The sustainability of your leadership is dependent upon the source of your authority

 

We live in interesting times. Each week we see leaders around the world propose, do or say some bold or baffling things. Some of these are well thought out, but this doesn’t stop knee-jerk reactions. Some are deeply held beliefs; others are off-the-cuff “I just made this up and it sounds good for the moment” comments. In times such as these one may well ask oneself, Will this leader last? This is not a new question.

 

There was no question that the religious leaders understood that Jesus had authority. They observed the blind seeing and the lame walking. Because they had a predisposition to be skeptical, they questioned not what Jesus did, but the authority by which he acted.

 

...while Jesus was walking in the temple courts, the chief priests, the teachers of the law and the elders came to him. “By what authority are you doing these things?” they asked. “And who gave you authority to do this?” Mark 11:27-28

 

Clearly, the Pharisees were of the opinion that Jesus’ authority came from the dark side. Rather than dignify their question with a straight answer Jesus asked them a question in return.

 

Jesus replied, “I will ask you one question. Answer me, and I will tell you by what authority I am doing these things. John’s baptism—was it from heaven, or of human origin? Tell me!”

 

Jesus gave them two options: heaven or human.

 

 

In a broader reading of scripture, there are three sources: we could call them heaven, earth and the dark side. Or we could call them the 3rd heaven where God rules, the 2nd heaven where the demonic rules, and earth. When we live life we draw authority from these three places and we need to know which is which.

 

There is talk in some circles about “bringing heaven to earth.” What does that mean? Is it just talking about the blind seeing, the deaf hearing and the lame walking? What about institutions on earth crafting constitutions, policies, and governing documents that draw on universal principles, foundational principles or heaven-sourced truths? Policies, laws, statutes... these can also be sourced from nefarious places in the human make-up or from the pit itself. Ideally governing documents protect everyone equally, but greed and the love of personal gain distort foundational truths. I see some Christians so worried about “Christian nationalism” just because faith is mentioned in halls of power. In their allergic reaction to theism, they would rather create a vacuum susceptible to being filled from the pit than contemplate the possibility that things on earth can draw their authority from heaven.

 

Sustainable leaders govern based on bedrock beliefs that transcend party politics and personal peeves. So, where a leader leads from grudges, pain, hurt, ego or revenge, they will depart from eternal truths. When they invent their own truth—no matter which party they are from—they will then lack moral authority and the governed will see through it. The way that immoral leaders stay in power longer is to keep things in the dark so that they can feign a righteous position while hiding the dark sources that prop up their indefensible position.

 

 

The opposite is also true. If a government enacts laws that are consistent with eternal truths they will have the right source of authority and their leadership will be more sustainable. The same is true in a business or church. When business ethics get fuzzy and practices shady; when church teaching gets wooly, “relevant” and seeker-sensitive—then the days of leadership are numbered. Will this leader last? It depends on how well they align with truth.

 

“By what authority are you doing these things?” they asked. “And who gave you authority to do this?”

 

We have three choices. Technically we can craft company policies, values, founding principles and laws that run counter to heaven: they might give us an advantage in the short term, but they will not last.

 “Do you hear what these children are saying?”

Our social media feeds are flooded with so-called experts, reporters, influencers, and “journalists” on all sides of issues asking “trick questions” with a faulty premise trying to suck people into “their truth.” The goal is to make a lie the accepted truth of the masses. Millions take the bait—literally called clickbait—and succumb to a deception. I am not suggesting that the people asking pre-loaded questions are stupid: they are often knowledgeable in some field or other, perhaps even experts. Yet it is precisely their expertise that locks them into a pre-determined “truth” and causes them to spin a “reality” around such truth.

 

Look at the dialogue in Matthew 21 (see the parts I emphasized in italics if you miss the whole passage):

12 Jesus went into the Temple area. He threw out all those who were selling and buying things there. He turned over the tables that belonged to those who were exchanging different kinds of money. And he turned over the benches of those who were selling doves. 13 Jesus said to them, “The Scriptures say, ‘My Temple will be called a house of prayer.’ But you are changing it into a ‘hiding place for thieves.”

14 Some blind people and some who were crippled came to Jesus in the Temple area. Jesus healed them. 15 The leading priests and the teachers of the law saw the wonderful things he was doing. And they saw the children praising him in the Temple area. The children were shouting, “Praise to the Son of David.” All this made the priests and the teachers of the law angry.

16  They asked Jesus, “Do you hear what these children are saying?”

He answered, “Yes. The Scriptures say, ‘You have taught children and babies to give praise.’ Have you not read that Scripture?’”

 

The experts ask a question that presumes Jesus must agree with them: they don’t actually ask, “Do you think what the children are saying is biblical and warranted?” but besmirch Jesus by the very words in the question—you can almost hear their sneer—“Do you hear what these children are saying?”

 

There is a spirit behind this line of questioning, namely, the father of lies. Christians join in with this spirit, swallowing it hook, line and sinker without consulting the word of God. Many do so because they are biblically illiterate. Yet Jesus ends the short conversation by answering the questions directly (“Yes.”), establishing a platform of truth, then asking another question.

 

He answered, “Yes. The Scriptures say, ‘You have taught children and babies to give praise.’ Have you not read that Scripture?” 

 

The supposed expertise of the religious leaders was Scripture, so they didn’t want to say, ‘Uhm, we didn’t read that verse...’ They also offered no counter viewpoint that said, ‘Well, what it really means is...’

 

Left and Right one sees the political theater, the social media madness, the virtue-signaling outrage on topics far and wide. (How often do you see people re-post a critique of a speech, for example, without ever having listened to the speech itself?) We must ask ourselves, “How does this align with the Word of God? What is the spirit behind what the experts are saying?” Do not ask, ‘What is my truth?’ or ‘How do I feel?’ but “What does the word of God have to say about this matter?” If you are an expert, check your assumptions. If you are feeling angry, check your bias. And if you are going on a social media rant based on a premise you have concocted, make sure the premise is not something you fabricated out of your bias. If it is, repent.

 

Now, to be clear, there are times to speak truth to power. When leaders make false statements, fact-check. When someone sins against you, speak to them directly, as Matthew 18 urges. But don’t ask loaded questions that put words or meanings of words in the mouths of others. Cultivate some fear of God and set a guard on your lips. 

 

And remember, when it came to “The Experts v. The Children” the children were correct, and the experts got it wrong.

We must watch out for the dangerous theology that says, “You may be healed or saved but you have a long, long way to grow before you can go. You must first attend the Alpha class, the Bible Class, and the Hearing God, the Inner Healing, the Deliverance and the 20-week missionary training.” One of the reasons people don’t come to maturity is simple: we keep them in the Christian Nursery instead of putting them on the battlefield. I admit there have been some casualties of ill-equipped people sent out on their own, but that is why we have teams, missionary bands are what they used to be called. The far bigger danger is from the inertia, apathy, boredom and under-deployment that comes from people being told they must go through three years of training before they can be useful in the kingdom of God. 

I believe in training. We run a 20-week training on kingdom business: it is not a general coverage of business topics with a light sprinkling of Christian aspiration and ethics. It is, what some have called, a Kingdom MBA. We also have a 15-part training on Transforming Society, not to mention classes on Kingdom Economics, Entrepreneurship and more. So, I am an advocate for being properly prepared, but...

Jesus encountered people in debilitating situations: leprosy, blindness, near death, even demonized. If I were Jesus I might have enrolled them on some of the “equipping” courses listed above or at least given them some time to get grounded before telling them to do anything. Yet Jesus seemed to counter my common sense, at least in some instances. 

Then Jesus said to the centurion, “Go! Let it be done just as you believed it would.” And his servant was healed at that moment. Matthew 8:13

“What do you want me to do for you?” Jesus asked him. The blind man said, “Rabbi, I want to see.”
“Go,” said Jesus, “your faith has healed you.” Immediately he received his sight and followed Jesus along the road. Mark 10:51-52

“Sir,” the invalid replied, “I have no one to help me into the pool when the water is stirred. While I am trying to get in, someone else goes down ahead of me.”
Then Jesus said to him, “Get up! Pick up your mat and walk.” At once the man was cured; he picked up his mat and walked. John 5:7-9

When they came to Jesus, they saw the man who had been possessed by the legion   of demons,   sitting there, dressed and in his right mind; and they were afraid. ..

As Jesus was getting into the boat, the man who had been demon-possessed begged to go with him.   Jesus did not let him, but said,   “Go home to your own people and tell them   how much the Lord has done for you, and how he has had mercy on you .”   So the man went away and began to tell in the Decapolis   how much Jesus had done for him. And all the people were amazed. Mark 5:15-20

 

Better to risk being commissioned too quickly than inoculated and bored

The longer we stay in a learning bubble without putting truth to the test in the marketplace the more likely we will have all the jargon and buzzwords without the lived experience. This makes us more susceptible to becoming religious rather than radical. The more we are cluttered with unapplied truth the less probable we will actually “go”! Speaking to Christian businesspeople for a moment, in an age of never-ending kingdom business conferences where we can go to be seen to be with this group, or hang with a successful businessperson or investor, or glean crumbs from the table of the latest prophet of prosperity... we can go from event to event, gathering to gathering, and think we are part of a movement but never obey our “go!”

Run a self-test: what percentage of your time is spent going to events about kingdom business vs. going to do kingdom business, including transforming towns, cities and nations? Gatherings to celebrate what God is doing, to learn, to network: these can be good, but only if we are not duped into thinking that this is “do business until I come.”

 

What if “Go” preceded “be healed”?

 Sometimes our reason for staying home is to get healed, grow in maturity, build experience, gain wisdom, etc. etc. But what if the kingdom way includes “Go, and be healed as you go?” Recognize that the enemy of your soul will do everything to keep you from getting a Kingdom Passport. Until you have wheels, until you discover the pilgrim leg of the Church AND the planted; until you play home games AND away games, you are of little threat to the kingdom of darkness. Beware of making a god out of theology; it could become an idol that is an obstacle to kingdom advancement.

Every business trip can be a mission trip. Every customer interaction can be a divine encounter. Every workday can be a worship day. Every business expansion opportunity can be an invitation to expand the kingdom of God. Jesus expects us to be “open for business” and this includes “open to go.” Go before you know, and be healed as you go.

 

Dichotomy now has four ugly heads

Dr. Charlie Self, a man with three History degrees, shared on a recent Kingdom Business Community call that politics in the USA split along two lines in the early 1990s: the Welfare state and the Warfare state. Was this a consequence of a dichotomy in the Church with “the social gospel” on the one side and “the evangelicals” on the other? Or did the Church mimic politics? The dichotomous fault lines continue today about whether (as an example) to keep sending billions to the Ukraine (a decision that feeds the Warfare machine in the USA) or to rather put resources into helping US citizens. But, sadly, it is even more sinister, and if not sinister, then still sad because today we can clearly add two more “fares” to the fight.

Lawfare has reached new proportions. Instead of fighting for votes in the courts of public opinion politicians are resorting to the legal system to try to discredit, if not take out, opponents. This can be through simple acts of suing for some grievance or the more nefarious route of politicizing the court system and using it to remove someone who is a political obstacle. If the USA saw a sitting president do this in another country we would cry “Foul!” The nation would be labeled a Banana Republic and the sitting leader a dictator. Back home we call it justice.

The fourth unfair “fare” is what I am labeling “Ecofare” where proponents of a worthy cause—caring for the environment—have become radicalized and made it a religion. Then they have declared war on their own citizens who don’t subscribe to the radical extremes of their green ideology. Farmland is taken away, farmers can no longer sell certain products and even farmers who practice regenerative agriculture are in the cross-hairs of the Ecofare militia. You have to look no further than the situation in the Netherlands and Germany for examples, not to mention the confiscation of grazing lands in the USA under the misguided notion that it is better for the planet to return the land to wilderness rather than have it carefully stewarded.

Workfare: a better way

 

It is usually the case that the bad movements—the four “---fares”—come into existence because good has vacated the public place. I would like to suggest that we return to a healthy understanding and practice of work. This is “Workfare”! In my book, Work Like God in 31 Ways, I outline the nature of work and seven of work’s utility. In its original intent, work and worship shared the same word (avodah) and were integrated. Work was there to serve God, build relationships with people, take care of the planet for the common good, and discover and deploy Divine purposes.

Over time, to skip many chapters in the narrative, work became a way to amass wealth for a few. This got mislabeled as “capitalism” when it was really unbridled greed. Business, which in the Hebrew (melakah) shared the same word for ministry, became distorted. In the minds of many today, it is synonymous with corporate greed, and those who should have been proponents of Workfare left the arena with their tails between their legs. (Some even left business (melakah) to go into ministry (melakah)... which doesn’t really make sense, does it?) History goes through cycles of believing that business is bad, corporations are “the man” that must be taken down. They see the modus operandi of work is to get more for themselves at the expense of others.

Return to a Righteous Cycle of Work

 

Can Workfare overcome these four curses? Anyone with a thread of decency would not want to do exploitative work. Yet, we as humans, are designed to create, to build, to bring order and to flourish. In my book, Transforming Society, I outline a Societal Value Chain that is positive. This cycle of work is integral to human joy and societal harmony.

Raw materials are identified (or, in God’s case, spoken into being). Sometimes this includes Inspired InnovationsTM, sometimes research, sometimes experimentation. The George Washington Carver question comes to mind: “Mr. Creator, why did you make the peanut?”
Raw Materials are then collected into a critical mass: one ounce of gold does not constitute a refinery; one needs a critical mass to have Resources.
Resources are transformed into Products through work. A bunch of grapes, to a winemaker, is not a Finished Good. Lots of work has to take place to transform a ton of grapes into bottles of wine.
When winemakers get together and begin to market their wine to willing buyers, whether in their country or a faraway land, a market is developed. (Of course, it could be a buyer/agent or a customer that creates the market.) Nowadays, the markets for many goods and services are global and your customers can be anywhere.
Markets give rise to Trade.
Trade leads to Profit, and raw material + sweat + intellectual capital has led to money in the bank.
Money can get wasted, so in order for Wealth Creation to happen, there has to be Stewardship. Advanced leaders (those who have been successful and are asking, “What else do I do with my life to benefit others?”) realize their job goes beyond making money, to stewarding what they have, to generate wealth that will be multi-generational.
Stewarded wealth can then be invested for the good of humankind (that sounds grand, but insert your neighborhood, town, local hospital, or a collaborative of social entrepreneurs, and you get the idea), resulting in the creation of Societal Assets. This is where we spin out of the greedy cycle of thinking that what we can make is only for “I, myself and me.”
When a city or nation has created so much wealth that they are then able to bless other cities and nations, then they are finally getting to the promise of Genesis 12 where God shared his purposes with Abraham. “I will bless you, and you will be a blessing to all nations.”


[Source: Transforming Society, by Brett Johnson (2016) – pages 114-115 ]

Someone asked (when I shared this with a working group at the Christian Economic Forum), “How has this righteous cycle of work been corrupted?” It’s the right question because a value-creating cycle has become a value-extracting cycle that benefits a few at the expense of the many. In essence, instead of capital being reinvested in real work the majority of financial transactions in a day are money chasing money. (The motivations, schemes and mechanisms of the dark side of economics are illustrated below.)

[Source: Kingdom Economics, by Brett Johnson (2021)]

Warfare plays right into the hands of corporate greed. People are paying with their lives while the military-industrial complex makes money. Welfare, Lawfare and Ecofare all promote greater government control over the daily affairs of citizens. (Don’t believe the media rhetoric that the other political party will kill democracy: warfare, welfare, lawfare and ecofare are already on the way to killing democracy.)

Occupy until I come

The Occupy Wall Street movement protested corporate greed. What if we had a positive occupying of the workspace again? Jesus told a parable in which a master “called his ten servants, and delivered them ten pounds, and said unto them, Occupy till I come.” Luke 19:13 Modern translations say “do business” or “engage in trade” or “invest this money” or “see what you can earn with this while I am gone.” If faith-driven businesspeople occupied Main Street we would not need occupy Wall Street. If businesspeople recaptured the essence of work and its inherent wealth creation by all and generosity towards all we would not need welfare. If businesses had a holistic view of their ecosystem that included stewardship of the environment, Ecofare would not need to become a political or religious movement. If those in the judicial system feared the Judge of all and sought to live in truth without malice or overreach, Lawfare would give way to justice. 

Who am I? Do I claim to overcome the secular-sacred dichotomy, yet its divided fruits are still apparent in my approach to life? Have I drifted into one of the truth’s tributaries that sound right but are far from good? Do I have shades of a warfare capitalist, a welfare socialist, a lawfare statist or an ecofare elitist? Or am I recapturing work-as-worship and working for the good of my fellow man and producing a good ROI on my faith? Am I doing real work that adds value in the Societal Value Chain? Is my work-as-worship breaking the strongholds of Warfare, Welfare, Lawfare and Ecofare?

What's essential in an age of widely distributed knowledge?

Servant leadership is good: it encourages positive traits such as humility, empathy and putting others first. Perhaps it has been partly responsible for overcoming the “because I’m the boss” mentality of decades past. But is it enough? What if we have servant leaders, but they operate in the wrong leadership structure? What if their adopted leadership models are faulty?

I have been working with senior leaders for decades; I designed an Executive Information System (EIS) for the CEO of a major international oil company in 1981 and went on to work on shaping such solutions for the next decade. I started an EIS practice for Price Waterhouse in San Francisco, then moved to KPMG where we did a joint venture with Apple called KPMG-Exis. Information was distilled as it flowed upwards, shaped into graphics and syntheses that matched how the top leader was wired. One of the challenges, however, was we only had two categories of leaders: Entrepreneurs and Managers.

There was a greater truth somewhat lost in the shadows: the metanoic organization was discussed in the early 1980s as being an organization with a different leadership construct. I was teaching an executive course at the University of Cape Town (UCT) Graduate School of Business in the early 1980s and my co-lecturer shared about the metanoic organization which he described as one with a cohort of leaders, each with their own gifts, passing the leadership baton depending on what was needed at the time. The metanoic organization was focused on vision, the future it could create, and purpose. After the lecture I told him, “I know an organization like the metanoic organization you describe.” His eyes lit up. “It is the local church where I am involved in leadership.” His eyes glazed over in disbelief. Since he was a man of the Jewish faith, however, he should have known better.

Plural Leadership is old

“There is nothing new under the sun.” The concept of plural leadership gets lost among big leadership names like Abraham, Moses and David but, in truth, the ancient Hebrew culture had a clear understanding of the group where a quorum, or minyan, was 10 adults. You needed a minyan to perform certain religious and societal functions. There was an old saying, "nine rabbis do not constitute a minyan, but ten cobblers can".   

Today we need to embrace plurality of leadership more than ever since knowledge is spread so widely to so many. (My grandchildren know more about many topics than I do; my adult children are way more accomplished in areas I know little about.) The concept of the person “at the top” being the smartest person in the room is patently outdated... but it has been outdated for centuries. To embrace the old-new (or the new-old) we will need to break the mold on current leadership constraints. Servant leadership doesn’t do it because being a servant speaks to the heart of the leader but the generally accepted construct of leaderships still says, “there are only two types of leaders: Entrepreneurs and Managers.”

Tsinghua University, Beijing

I was invited by a professor from UC Berkley to accompany him to China to speak on leadership at the renowned Tsinghua University. I sat in on his lecture the night before I was to address the masters and doctoral students. “There are two types of leaders,” he shared the party line, “Entrepreneurs and Managers.” The next evening I broke the news to them: there are five types of leaders, Luminaries, Entrepreneurs, Managers, Organizers and Networkers... LEMON.

The genesis of LEMON Leadership was the result of a failed project which The Institute attempted with a university in Hawaii. They had a team of experienced and ethical leaders, and we had a shared vision and clear set of goals of creating a leadership center strategically located in the Pacific region. Our attempt to establish the leadership center together failed for many reasons. What was confusing, however, was the completely different recall about facts, events and agreements. I could not conclude that people were lying or being devious. I eventually came to realize that my framework of two leadership types—entrepreneurs and managers—was 60% short of reality. There were types of leaders in the mix that were simply not in the books. Historically those who were not either managers or entrepreneurs were not leaders—they were, by default, followers. This fallacy wrote off more than 50% of leaders who ended up being servants to “leaders,” even servants to servant leaders! Only when the missing slices of leadership were identified did things make sense. I recognized two or three leaders were Luminaries with a view of reality that differed radically from others. Then there were Organizers who got into the weeds and tackled practicalities quickly, while Networkers worked, and sometimes overly protected their web of contacts. (In the US we call it their Rolodex.) I began to see how all five categories were distinct:

They defined work differently

Their strengths and weaknesses were valued and understood

The language they spoke and how they heard conversations became clearer

Their efforts were better appreciated, and

The vision each leadership type embraced and articulated was seen as adding to the overall picture.

You will note that “visionary” is not a type of leader. Having a vision is innate for all leadership types, but the leadership thrillers tend to focus on the vision of Luminaries and Entrepreneurs more than the vision of Managers, Organizers and Networkers.

LEMON Leadership

By now I had identified the five types of leaders that conveniently formed an acrostic, LEMON. LEMON Leadership categorizes leaders into five types:

Luminary: idea-driven, innovative, and inspirational.

Entrepreneur: Risk-taking, opportunity-seeking, and initiative-driven.

Manager: Efficiency-focused, structured, and optimization-oriented.

Organizer: Problem-finding, solution-oriented, and systems-focused.

Networker: Relationship-building, collaborative, and resource-connecting.

Organizations need all five types of leaders to be recognized, valued and included in decision-making. It doesn’t matter what industry you are in or what type of organization you are leading, all five slices of the LEMON are essential. Yet I regularly work with teams that have slices missing. Just this week I profiled a leadership team bereft of any Entrepreneurs (see pie chart on the right) and fairly skewed compared to global averages.

It is true that different industries can afford a different weighting of leadership types, yet every organization should identify and analyze the gaps between the current leadership types within an organization and the desired leadership capabilities given their purpose.

Leader, or stressor?

Max Du Pree famously said, “Leaders don’t inflict pain—they share pain.”  Yet a Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) survey in 2020 found that “84%  U.S. workers say poorly trained managers create a lot of unnecessary work and stress.”  A DDI study in 2024 found that 57% of people quit their jobs because of their boss and frustration with their manager. The remedy prescribed was “Management training,” but it is not the answer; leadership identity is. Why?

Insecure leaders are the curse of the modern workforce. Many people are promoted into management with high technical proficiency and little leadership experience. In addition, the marvel of modern corporations has taught them that your function and title determine your effectiveness when, in actuality people lead from their identity. If leaders don’t know who they are—if they don’t understand and embrace how they are wired—they will be insecure. Insecurity leads to a long list of abhorrent behaviors on both the “being too soft” and “being critical and judgmental” side. We must settle our identity as individuals; then we must understand our team. How do we do this?

Leadership Gap Assessment

An individual can easily take the online LEMON Leadership Assessment and digest their learnings. This provides an individualized report highlighting ones primary and secondary slices. Reading the book won’t hurt. If you lead a team or are part of a team the magic happens in the group assessment.

Group Leadership Assessment:

The LEMON Leadership Group Assessment informs a comprehensive assessment of current leaders in the organization, identifying their dominant leadership types and their secondary slices. Broad gaps are highlighted and sets the table for exploring new possibilities for the team.

1. Luminary:

Current Status: Identify which leaders focus on intellectual capital, frameworks and foundational truths.

Gap Analysis: Surface the propensity towards innovative thinking and long-term imagining.

2. Entrepreneur:

Current Status: Identify those leaders who are risk-takers and opportunity-seekers,  adept at gathering needed resources.

Gap Analysis: Assess the organization’s appetite for collaborative innovation and new ventures.

3. Manager:

Current Status: Assess which leaders are focused on efficiency and structure, adept at building organizational capital.

Gap Analysis: Identify areas where the current team has a lower-than-needed organizational quotient.

4. Organizer:

Current Status: Determine which leaders excel in instinctively identifying problems and coming up with quick solutions.

Gap Analysis: Evaluate the need for more rapid responses to problem-solving and system improvements.

5. Networker:

Current Status: Evaluate the number of leaders who excel in building relationships, fostering collaboration and building relational capital.

Gap Analysis: Assess the organization’s possible deficiencies in internal and external networking, marketing and partnering.

Desired Leadership Profile:

Define the ideal mix of leadership types required to meet the organization’s strategic goals. This profile should blend all five LEMON leadership types according to the unique purposes and challenges of the organization. Remember, while there are no bad leadership profiles at the individual level, the alchemy of leaders at the team level often goes awry.

Action Plan:

The Leadership Gap Assessment should lead to a tailored plan based on your organization’s particular situation. Elements of the plan may include:

Retooling leader communications: you cannot change how you’re wired, but you can change how you communicate.

Decision-making: crystalizing a decision-making process that cuts through the clutter of egos, personalities and protocols.

Hiring Strategy: Adjust hiring practices (and straighten out LEMON biases) to attract diverse leadership types that fill the identified gaps.

Training and Development: Create tailored development programs for each leadership type to address specific gaps.

Mentorship and Coaching: Implement mentorship programs where experienced leaders can guide those needing development in specific areas.

Performance Metrics: Revamping metrics to correlate with the desired leadership mix; regularly review and adjust as needed.

Culture Enhancement: Foster a culture that values and integrates all five leadership types, encouraging collaboration and mutual respect.

Conclusion:

By systematically identifying and addressing gaps in leadership types using the LEMON Leadership framework, organizations can create a more balanced, effective, and adaptable leadership team capable of driving success and innovation. The blight of insecure leaders wreaking havoc on their colleagues could be addressed resulting in improved mental health.

Finally, servant leaders will be more likely to make the adaptations necessary to embrace LEMON Leadership because they have their ego in check and are willing to seek the good of the whole above their own agenda. With a proper understanding of the essentials of plural leadership their servant leadership heart can have concomitant leadership hands and habits.

 

---

About the Author:

Brett Johnson the author of LEMON Leadership, LEMONpreneur, LEMON for Lovers and 17 other books. He is an expert in leadership development and organizational transformation. With a deep understanding of various leadership frameworks, Brett Johnson has helped numerous organizations build dynamic and effective leadership teams. Connect with Brett on LinkedIn for more insights on leadership and management.

#Leadership #Innovation #Management #ProblemSolving #Collaboration #LEMONLeadership #BusinessSuccess #TeamDevelopment #LeadershipExcellence