Andy Glover, meditating on this phrase, refers to his ‘kingdom’ emphasis. He refers to transformation within all sectors of society; something which I have gradually grown to understand and have written about before. (Are our churches ‘charismatic lite’? – Andy Glover – Fresh Streams)

This challenges the traditional and dominant view across evangelicalism for the past century, that the sacred- secular divide is to be maintained and reinforced. This reflects a ‘dualistic’ approach to the spiritual and material ‘worlds,’ which I believe is not correct.

The proper approach starts with, I think, the most important phrase ever written – ‘the word became flesh’ (John 1.14).

The Lord Jesus ascended in bodily form into Heaven; the man in the glory; with the promise that all who are ‘in Him’ shall be ‘with Him.’ Their future existence will not be purely ‘spiritual,’ lacking the physical. There will be a new heaven AND a new earth. Isaiah and Peter (ie; OT and NT) refer to this.

Therefore, today, in daily life, we eat and drink, we rise and tire. We experience physical reality and seek to invade all spaces with the gospel of Christ. I read of a Church in Essex, UK, with raised vegetable beds adjacent to its building, described as ‘a fun way of learning to grow your own veg.’

Just as Christ overturned the tables of money changers in the temple area; and challenged the scribes and Pharisees who wanted to stone the woman caught in adultery, but not the man, so we seek to bring His kingdom into all the dark places of the world.

I had long struggled with Stephen’s sermon in Acts 7. Why did he refer to Abraham and Joseph and Moses, but only mentioned David very briefly, and nothing of Joshua and Samuel?

Then I realised; Stephen answered the allegations made against him. The Sanhedrin heard ‘false witnesses’ say: “This man never ceases to speak words against this holy place and the law, for we have heard him say that this Jesus of Nazareth will destroy this place and will change the customs that Moses delivered to us.”

The phrase ‘this holy place’ betrayed a misunderstanding of the Old Testament. The holy place was, in reality, wherever God was present with His people; Abraham in Mesopotamia, Joseph in Egypt, Moses in the desert. The people had become obsessed with ‘this holy place.’ In the words of Stephen, they ‘always resist the Holy Spirit’ (v51). Their focus was entirely wrong – a land, Israel; a city, Jerusalem; a building, the temple. Actually God calls us to know Him through Jesus Christ. Location is not a problem.

The people that Stephen referred to, Abraham, Joseph, Moses, enjoyed God’s presence and blessing outside ‘this holy place.’ We might add Shadrach and Meshach and Abednego to this list; they knew the presence of the fourth person in the furnace, one ‘like a son of the gods.’ Under God’s sovereign influence, Mordecai and Esther similarly introduced the feast of Purim across a pagan empire (Esth 9.29-32).

Jesus sent His followers, the Twelve and the Seventy (Luke chapters 9 and 10) as sheep into the midst of wolves. He instructed them not to expect a warm welcome everywhere. Yet the message of life and hope is delivered to draw many to Christ.

The expectation from this chapter is that (1) the people of God will expect to find themselves in a hostile situation and (2) the people of God will bring blessing into that environment.

Many Psalms clearly refer to us approaching God in His dwelling place, or communing with the ‘saints.’ But others relate to our interaction with the world around us, the world to which we do not belong. By ‘the world,’ I do not mean the physical planet on which we live, but human-kind, living in ignorance of God, or in rebellion against God. This is ‘the world’ that God so loved (John 3.16). It is this world which is foreign to the Psalmist and to those of us who read the Psalms.

We belong first to the kingdom of God; we recognise its principles take precedence over those of the kingdoms of this world. Reading Psalm 119.49-56 in light of this conflict and then perhaps the entire psalm. This stanza mentions ‘my suffering’ (v49), ‘the arrogant’ (v51), ‘the wicked’ (v53): even among the people of God, many did not live as the people of God. So the Psalmist finds himself, as it were, in a foreign land, amongst his own people.

His practice, habit, routine, in response was to obey (v56).

Many of the Psalms are written in explicitly hostile situations. Psalms 52-54 are good examples of this. They show the reaction of the godly to the ungodly. In Psalm 52, this is an individual, namely Doeg. Psalms 53 and 54 refer to the ungodly more generally.

Psalm 52.8-9, David refers to the house of God and the company of the godly. Whatever our challenges, we will find strength amongst God’s people, and an opportunity to give testimony and hear testimony.

One theme is of victory and confidence. The Christ-follower is not to fear the hostile environment. The steadfast love of God endues all day (v1). The righteous shall see (the defeat of the wicked) and fear and even laugh at him (v6).

What started as slaughter (Doeg had killed the priests; see 1 Sam 22) led here to a declaration of victory.

Psalm 53 describes more generally the depravity of mankind. The apostle Paul picks this up in Rom 3.10-18. Naturally, each of us is corrupt in every aspect of our person; our speech, our thoughts, our ambitions, etc. Yet, as the psalmist concludes, salvation will come; God will restore our fortunes. We will rejoice and be glad.

Psalm 54 was written when David was fleeing from King Saul. The king, who was supposed to uphold God’s ways, setting an example for the people, had departed from these ways and sought to kill ‘the man after God’s own heart.’

Sometimes the hostile environment is personal. But God remains ‘my helper’ (v4). The conclusion is deliverance and victory (v7).