I saw Francis Schaeffer speak about A Christian Manifesto on an old episode of the Corral Ridge Hour, which is what gave me the idea to use his book for a source. I admit that I thought much of what he had to say about losing our inaliable rights and our religious liberties to be a little shrill to say the least. Boyd makes excellent arguments that I never got to touch on concerning the church taking up the power of the government and losing religious liberties. In short, he believes that the church using the government to impose its agenda is a dangerous temptation and idolatrous when it has done so, and that Christians shouldn't be concerned with fighting for their religious liberties as the church has thrived the most under intense persecution and lost its distinctive radicalness when it has become a national religion. Boyd simply points to empty churches in Europe to back his claim. And finally, Boyd says that the Christianity that was so much a part of the founding of this country is nothing more than a civil religion and not the Christianity of Jesus.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are two distinct differences between the United States of America and the Roman Empire. The first is that Christians in America are not forced to worship any god. The U.S. is a country of religious freedom. The second difference is that its citizens are invited to participate in the political process. Democratic freedom is a privilege the early church in Rome did not have. Because of these distinctions Christians are faced with the question of how their faith should influence their political involvement or whether they should be involved at all. The American political arena is generally divided between conservatives and liberals. This division carries over to American Christianity dividing Christians into a religious Right and religious Left. Historically, evangelicals have sided with the Right, while mainline denominations have often sided with the Left. Among the many differences between these two sects, there are two I want to highlight: the view of the United States and the Christian values that take priority in political participation. By focusing on these differences I believe I’ll get an accurate picture of how these two perspectives view the role of Christians in politics.
In the late 70’s and early 80’s, the group collectively known as the religious Right began taking shape in America. They represented politically-active, conservative, Christians. They formed a strong allegiance with the Republican Party, and are commonly given credit for electing Ronald Regan as president. The political organizations that were key players in the rise of the religious Right were The Moral Majority and The Christian Coalition. Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson and D. James Kennedy were its central figures. Falwell and Kennedy have both passed away in recent years.
A book written in the early 80’s which had a strong influence on leaders in the Religious Right and covers the philosophical, historical and theological underpinnings behind it was A Christian Manifesto by the late Francis Schaeffer. Schaeffer essentially says that Christianity is at war with the religion of Secular Humanism for the soul of America. In this book, Schaeffer argues that materialistic humanism is taking over America; destroying the family; removing Judeo-Christian values from the public square; and threatening the concept of inaliable rights. It is doing this, Schaeffer argues, because at the core of materialistic humanism is the belief that all reality is based on random chance and, therefore, there can be no “certain inaliable rights.” They are completely arbitrary (Schaeffer 1982).
Historically, Schaeffer promotes the view, which is common among those in the religious Right, that America was founded on Judeo-Christian values. The conservative Christian belief that America is a “Christian nation,” and that Christians must “take back America for God” come from this historical perspective. Therefore, those of the religious Right carry a generally positive view of the U.S. Schaeffer (1982) reflects on the United States’ Christian past, writing: “Most people do not realize that there was a paid chaplain in Congress even before the Revolutionary War ended… And from the very beginning, prayer opened the national congress… They knew they were building on the Supreme Being who was the Creator, the final reality (p. 33).” And concerning the founding of America on Judeo-Christian values and the influence of materialistic humanism Schaeffer (1982) writes: “What we find then as we look back is that the men who founded the United States of America really understood that upon which they were building their concepts of law and the concepts of government. And until the takeover of our government and law by this other entity, the materialistic, humanistic, chance world view, these things remained the base of government and law (p. 39).” So there is a fundamental understanding that America was once a basically Christian country, but secularism has corrupted it.
Sunday, May 11, 2008
Friday, May 9, 2008
Christianity and Politics: Three Current Perspectives in Light of Jesus, the Early Church and Rome- History Pt 2
According to scholar, Richard Horsley (1997), “Although some would still view Jesus as an innocuous religious teacher, it is becoming increasingly evident to many that he catalyzed a movement of the renewal of Israel – a movement over against Roman rule as well as the Jerusalem priestly aristocracy (p. 1).” Israel was called to be the light of the world, reflecting God’s image to all of humanity, but she had failed miserably. With choosing 12 disciples, representing the original 12 tribes, Jesus was renewing Israel. He was the Moses figure leading a new exodus declaring the imminence of the kingdom of God (Wright 1999). In Jesus declaring that God’s kingdom was at hand, he was denouncing the empire of Rome. Jesus taught not to resist violence with violence, and he engaged with the ruling class. Therefore, Jesus rejected the violent ways of the Zealots; unlike the Herodians, rejected Rome as Israel’s governing authority; and in his teachings, rather than separating themselves like the Essenes, called Israel to live out their true vocation, united in their calling, as God’s representatives amongst the Romans. This isn’t to say that Jesus did not care about politics, or believed Israel was to be separate from it. But, because the Gospel is transformative on every level, in Israel living out God’s kingdom, they would be a new community with a new economy and a new kind of politics that transcended Rome.
By the time of the Apostle Paul, an entire religion revolving around Caesar had developed. Rome was brutally conquering the known world and expanding its empire. Caesar was declaring that he was Lord and Savior. According to Horsley (1997): “During the 50’s the apostle Paul moved systematically through eastern Mediterranean cities … proclaiming “the gospel of Christ…” Yet by then “the gospel of Caesar” had already become widespread and well established in those very cities (p. ?).” Horsley goes on to say that the cult of Caesar was incredibly pervasive in all of the places Paul visited (Horsley 1997). Caesar, essentially, was controlling his empire, not just with military might, but with celebrations, imagery, symbols, games and a religion devoted to him. Paul’s message was dangerous because he was saying that Jesus was the true Lord and Savior, that Jesus brings peace and that Caesar is a fraud. Paul was latching onto his distinctly Jewish belief that God is intimately involved with human affairs. Concerning this, Wright (2002) says: “Simultaneously, and precisely because of the inner dynamic of just this Jewish tradition, Paul was announcing that Jesus was the true King of Israel and hence the true Lord of the world, at exactly the time in history, and over exactly the geographical spread, where the Roman emperor was being proclaimed, in what styled itself a “gospel,” and in very similar terms (p.5).”
Paul was not only declaring a different gospel, but the communities Paul was starting were living out this new gospel as well. In an empire filled with hierarchy and extreme social stratification, Paul says in Galatians: “There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ.” Cahill claims that this is the first time in recorded history where egalitarian ideals are spoken of (Cahill, 1999). Paul is saying that, according to Christ’s gospel, everyone is equally valued.
Christ’s gospel also transcended economic stratification that was pervasive in Caesar’s Empire. In Acts chapter four, those in the early church sold their possessions so that no one among them was in need. Imagine living in a world where you believe Caesar brings peace and economic security, and coming upon communities claiming that Jesus is Lord and Savior. And under this Jesus, everyone is equal, generous and meets each other’s needs. In a world where religion, economics, and politics were one, this was how the first Christians interacted with their government, Caesar and his empire.
By the time of the Apostle Paul, an entire religion revolving around Caesar had developed. Rome was brutally conquering the known world and expanding its empire. Caesar was declaring that he was Lord and Savior. According to Horsley (1997): “During the 50’s the apostle Paul moved systematically through eastern Mediterranean cities … proclaiming “the gospel of Christ…” Yet by then “the gospel of Caesar” had already become widespread and well established in those very cities (p. ?).” Horsley goes on to say that the cult of Caesar was incredibly pervasive in all of the places Paul visited (Horsley 1997). Caesar, essentially, was controlling his empire, not just with military might, but with celebrations, imagery, symbols, games and a religion devoted to him. Paul’s message was dangerous because he was saying that Jesus was the true Lord and Savior, that Jesus brings peace and that Caesar is a fraud. Paul was latching onto his distinctly Jewish belief that God is intimately involved with human affairs. Concerning this, Wright (2002) says: “Simultaneously, and precisely because of the inner dynamic of just this Jewish tradition, Paul was announcing that Jesus was the true King of Israel and hence the true Lord of the world, at exactly the time in history, and over exactly the geographical spread, where the Roman emperor was being proclaimed, in what styled itself a “gospel,” and in very similar terms (p.5).”
Paul was not only declaring a different gospel, but the communities Paul was starting were living out this new gospel as well. In an empire filled with hierarchy and extreme social stratification, Paul says in Galatians: “There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ.” Cahill claims that this is the first time in recorded history where egalitarian ideals are spoken of (Cahill, 1999). Paul is saying that, according to Christ’s gospel, everyone is equally valued.
Christ’s gospel also transcended economic stratification that was pervasive in Caesar’s Empire. In Acts chapter four, those in the early church sold their possessions so that no one among them was in need. Imagine living in a world where you believe Caesar brings peace and economic security, and coming upon communities claiming that Jesus is Lord and Savior. And under this Jesus, everyone is equal, generous and meets each other’s needs. In a world where religion, economics, and politics were one, this was how the first Christians interacted with their government, Caesar and his empire.
Tuesday, May 6, 2008
Christianity and Politics: Three Current Perspectives in Light of Jesus, the Early Church and Rome- History Pt 1
My sources for this part were N.T. Wright, Thomas Cahill and Richard Horsley. Wright has been the most enlightening for me when it comes to the historical Jesus. Horsley is big on viewing Jesus and Paul against the politics of Caesar and Rome rather than viewing them against Judaism. I find this stuff extremely interesting. My understanding of Christianity has been greatly changed by learning about the historical context of Rome, so I apologize if anyone reading this finds it boring.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Jewish people lived in the promise that their god, YHWH, had chosen them to be his instrument in saving the world. They were a nation that would bless the nations. Yet, the Jewish people spent an enormous amount of time as conquered people, under the oppressive thumbs of various empires. Most notably, they lived as slaves under the Egyptians, and after their stint oppressing their own people under Solomon and subsequent kings; they were captured by the Babylonians in 597 B.C (Wright 1999). After their exile in Babylon, they were freed by the Persian king Cyrus and allowed to return to their homeland, where they rebuilt their temple (Cahill 1999). Fast forward to Jesus’ day, and the Jewish people lived under the oppressive Roman Empire. Rome ruled over the Jews via a puppet government, the Herods, who were part of a Jewish line known as the Hasmoneans (Cahill 1999). In sum, this was the political and religious conundrum of Jesus’ day: The Jewish people, chosen by the one, true God over heaven and earth to be his means in saving the world, were living under the rule of pagans. While they were technically free, they might as well have been back in Egypt.
The ministry of Jesus was set against an explosive backdrop where the spheres of religion and politics completely overlapped. Unlike our day, there was no concept of separation of church and state. N.T. Wright (1999), a new testament scholar and bishop of Durham, puts it this way: “And the popular frustration with the overall rule of Rome and the local rule of the priests and Herod brought together what we must never separate if we are to be true to the biblical witness: religion and politics, questions of God and of the ordering of society. (p. 36)” Israel’s religious identity and Roman imperialist oppression were interconnected.
During this period, there were at least five different Jewish factions: the Pharisees, the Sadducees, the Herodians, the Zealots and the Essenes. And out of these sects there were at least three divergent views on how to deal with the Romans: complicity, violence and isolation (Wright 1999). The Herodians and the infamous tax collectors worked with the Romans, becoming wealthy and powerful on the backs of their fellow Jews. This enraged the Zealots and, mostly, Zealot-sympathizing Pharisees who took the view that Rome needed to be conquered (Wright 1999). The Zealots were freedom-fighters and continually turning out new messiahs and attacking the Romans. The third way came from the Essenes, who took to the desert, lived in caves, assiduously studied the law and waited on God’s judgment (Cahill 1999). It doesn’t take a stretch of one’s imagination to find similarities and parallels with these Jewish factions and the religious factions in our day. Westboro Baptist Church, headed by Fred Phelps of the infamous “God Hates America,” and “God Hates Fags” campaigns, share the extreme zeal and intense anger of the Zealots. The tendency of the some Christians to retreat into their own little communities and sub-cultures resembles the Essenes. And the Christian Right and Christian Left in their, at times, intense alignments with the Republican and Democratic parties can look like the Herodians. Jesus, however, sided with none of these views.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Jewish people lived in the promise that their god, YHWH, had chosen them to be his instrument in saving the world. They were a nation that would bless the nations. Yet, the Jewish people spent an enormous amount of time as conquered people, under the oppressive thumbs of various empires. Most notably, they lived as slaves under the Egyptians, and after their stint oppressing their own people under Solomon and subsequent kings; they were captured by the Babylonians in 597 B.C (Wright 1999). After their exile in Babylon, they were freed by the Persian king Cyrus and allowed to return to their homeland, where they rebuilt their temple (Cahill 1999). Fast forward to Jesus’ day, and the Jewish people lived under the oppressive Roman Empire. Rome ruled over the Jews via a puppet government, the Herods, who were part of a Jewish line known as the Hasmoneans (Cahill 1999). In sum, this was the political and religious conundrum of Jesus’ day: The Jewish people, chosen by the one, true God over heaven and earth to be his means in saving the world, were living under the rule of pagans. While they were technically free, they might as well have been back in Egypt.
The ministry of Jesus was set against an explosive backdrop where the spheres of religion and politics completely overlapped. Unlike our day, there was no concept of separation of church and state. N.T. Wright (1999), a new testament scholar and bishop of Durham, puts it this way: “And the popular frustration with the overall rule of Rome and the local rule of the priests and Herod brought together what we must never separate if we are to be true to the biblical witness: religion and politics, questions of God and of the ordering of society. (p. 36)” Israel’s religious identity and Roman imperialist oppression were interconnected.
During this period, there were at least five different Jewish factions: the Pharisees, the Sadducees, the Herodians, the Zealots and the Essenes. And out of these sects there were at least three divergent views on how to deal with the Romans: complicity, violence and isolation (Wright 1999). The Herodians and the infamous tax collectors worked with the Romans, becoming wealthy and powerful on the backs of their fellow Jews. This enraged the Zealots and, mostly, Zealot-sympathizing Pharisees who took the view that Rome needed to be conquered (Wright 1999). The Zealots were freedom-fighters and continually turning out new messiahs and attacking the Romans. The third way came from the Essenes, who took to the desert, lived in caves, assiduously studied the law and waited on God’s judgment (Cahill 1999). It doesn’t take a stretch of one’s imagination to find similarities and parallels with these Jewish factions and the religious factions in our day. Westboro Baptist Church, headed by Fred Phelps of the infamous “God Hates America,” and “God Hates Fags” campaigns, share the extreme zeal and intense anger of the Zealots. The tendency of the some Christians to retreat into their own little communities and sub-cultures resembles the Essenes. And the Christian Right and Christian Left in their, at times, intense alignments with the Republican and Democratic parties can look like the Herodians. Jesus, however, sided with none of these views.
Sunday, May 4, 2008
Christianity and Politics: Three Current Perspectives in Light of Jesus, the Early Church and Rome - Intro
This paper was originally going to be called "Religion and Politics," but to talk about religion and politics in America is to assume the religion in question is Christianity. I think that's kind of interesting and says something about the place of Christianity in America. I had to make the most of the limited scope I was given in writing about this. That said, I'm not sure Boyd's arguments are necessarily complete, or even that I 100% agree with him on everything, but compared to the religious Right and Left I think he sheds an enormous amount of light. So here's my intro, I'll try to post more soon.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since its inception, Christianity and political systems have been closely intertwined or at odds with one another. Christians were fed to hungry animals by the Romans; Christianity was made the official religion of Rome under Theodosius; Christians fought both to abolish and sustain the institution of slavery; many Christians insist that America is a Christian nation; and some Christians insist America is an enemy of Christ. For the past 25 years, Christian groups, in America, both on the political Left and Right have fought to inject their religious convictions into the political system; and, arguably, those on the Right have been the most successful. But I want to ask the questions: What is the role, if any, of Christians in politics, and whose perspective, in America today, looks most like Jesus and the early church? To answer these questions I will first look at Jesus’ actions and message in the context of various first-century Jewish factions and the Roman Empire; and, from there, look at Paul and the early church, also in the context of the Roman Empire. I will then examine three leading views amongst Evangelical Christians today: The religious Right, the religious Left, and view of Dr. Greg Boyd. I believe, in light of what we know about Jesus and the Jewish and first-century Christian struggle with Rome, that Dr. Boyd’s ideas best reflect the church’s role in present-day American politics.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since its inception, Christianity and political systems have been closely intertwined or at odds with one another. Christians were fed to hungry animals by the Romans; Christianity was made the official religion of Rome under Theodosius; Christians fought both to abolish and sustain the institution of slavery; many Christians insist that America is a Christian nation; and some Christians insist America is an enemy of Christ. For the past 25 years, Christian groups, in America, both on the political Left and Right have fought to inject their religious convictions into the political system; and, arguably, those on the Right have been the most successful. But I want to ask the questions: What is the role, if any, of Christians in politics, and whose perspective, in America today, looks most like Jesus and the early church? To answer these questions I will first look at Jesus’ actions and message in the context of various first-century Jewish factions and the Roman Empire; and, from there, look at Paul and the early church, also in the context of the Roman Empire. I will then examine three leading views amongst Evangelical Christians today: The religious Right, the religious Left, and view of Dr. Greg Boyd. I believe, in light of what we know about Jesus and the Jewish and first-century Christian struggle with Rome, that Dr. Boyd’s ideas best reflect the church’s role in present-day American politics.
Thursday, May 1, 2008
It's Done!
I am finally done with my research paper I have been working on for the past two weeks. We had to write a 7 page paper about anything we wanted, so I chose to do mine on something I was really interested in. The title of my paper is: Christianity and Politics: Three Current Perspectives in Light of Jesus, the Early Church and Rome. So yeah... it was a little longer than I expected. Last week when we needed to hand in our rough draft I had 6 and a half pages, I was half-way done, and it was in font 10... Needless to say, I did tons of revising and re-working. This was the hardest paper I have ever done, but I learned a lot about writing. The two biggest things I learned that much of the time you won't get to use some of your best material, and that outlining, structure and sticking to your outline are crucial.
I plan on posting this paper in chunks with commentary. I don't know if I'll post the whole thing, but I think it could generate interesting discussion. Until then...
I plan on posting this paper in chunks with commentary. I don't know if I'll post the whole thing, but I think it could generate interesting discussion. Until then...
Thursday, April 3, 2008
In a Few Short Sentences, Define Freedom...
That's what our research writing prof asked us to do tonight. I sat there for like 10 minutes just staring at my paper. I honestly didn't think I was going to come up with anything, but I finally ended up with this:
Working from the idea that human beings were created with an intent and purpose, freedom is the ability for one to be what one was intended to be regardless of time, place or circumstance.
Yeah, I figured that I'd just stay as vague and abstract as possible and it'll sound brilliant.
Working from the idea that human beings were created with an intent and purpose, freedom is the ability for one to be what one was intended to be regardless of time, place or circumstance.
Yeah, I figured that I'd just stay as vague and abstract as possible and it'll sound brilliant.
Drinking on the Sabbath
I listened to this story yesterday on Marketplace. Georgia is one of the few states that has leftover prohibition laws on buying alcohol on Sundays. The governor is against repealing the law saying that: "Six days is plenty to gather up. We've got refrigerators. You've got different places to store. I think we need a little relief on Sunday." Another Georgia citizen says that repealing the law is further chipping away at the sabbath.
I'm sorry-- actually no I'm not-- but this drives me bonkers. Firstly, Sunday IS NOT the sabbath!! To make one specific day of the week THE sabbath misses the point of the sabbath! But unfortunately missing the point is nothing new to many Christians in America. There's nothing magical about Sunday, yet in the minds of many there is. This is nothing more than superstition and it has nothing to do with Christianity or Jesus or God. And if Sunday is sacred to these people then fine, but don't enforce laws on the rest of the citizenry to abide by certain restrictions on YOUR special day! American IS NOT a Christians nation!
Secondly, I would argue, that the tremendous stigma that so many people, Christians or not, place on alcohol is part of the reason it's abused. Alcohol IS NOT evil, it's ABUSE is! And the more you tell kids, "no, no, no you can't drink till this specific age" the more kids are going to want to drink. And thanks to this law, the age of 21 is the sacred day when the birthday boy or girl goes out with the intent on getting as shit-faced as humanly possible! Quit putting alcohol on this pedestal and maybe, just maybe we might see less abuse. Parents should model responsible drinking habits for kids. And maybe if we were more like Europe in this area, and kids started drinking when they were 12, it would be no big deal and wouldn't lead to abuse.
I'm sorry-- actually no I'm not-- but this drives me bonkers. Firstly, Sunday IS NOT the sabbath!! To make one specific day of the week THE sabbath misses the point of the sabbath! But unfortunately missing the point is nothing new to many Christians in America. There's nothing magical about Sunday, yet in the minds of many there is. This is nothing more than superstition and it has nothing to do with Christianity or Jesus or God. And if Sunday is sacred to these people then fine, but don't enforce laws on the rest of the citizenry to abide by certain restrictions on YOUR special day! American IS NOT a Christians nation!
Secondly, I would argue, that the tremendous stigma that so many people, Christians or not, place on alcohol is part of the reason it's abused. Alcohol IS NOT evil, it's ABUSE is! And the more you tell kids, "no, no, no you can't drink till this specific age" the more kids are going to want to drink. And thanks to this law, the age of 21 is the sacred day when the birthday boy or girl goes out with the intent on getting as shit-faced as humanly possible! Quit putting alcohol on this pedestal and maybe, just maybe we might see less abuse. Parents should model responsible drinking habits for kids. And maybe if we were more like Europe in this area, and kids started drinking when they were 12, it would be no big deal and wouldn't lead to abuse.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)