Should Xians be concerned with this?

August 22, 200810:38 am Honzo Comments

I try to stay out of politics as much as I can. However, I did leave some feedback on a column over at Worldview Network that I bloged about the other day. Much to my surprise, it survived moderation and even received two responses. Since all of this reflects how I see the Kingdom of God and the Kingdom of America interacting, I thought I’d copy the discussion here.

My first comment:

How much should Christians be involved in political affairs? I don’t see Jesus or Paul or anyone of the New Cov era getting involved with Rome’s invasions or defense. I wonder (and I am not sold either way) if we followers of the prince of peace should be concerned with advancing and defending America’s political, economic, and cultural power and instead be concerned with showing God’s love to the world though our deeds and actions and rhetoric. What do you think?

First Reply by Lou

JESUS CARED FOR ALL

Are we not to lead all men to Jesus Christ. Would that not include people in the government, people of the government, and people for the government. I try to show the Way of Jesus Christ by all that do or do not do. Jesus was concerned for every single person and died for all. Should I be unconcerned about one group trying to take the property of others or even one group trying to take the life of the poorest and weakest and most innocent of the humans here on this earth. We know that most of these illegal immigrants have a religion that is hostile to true Christianity. Our government is giving this nation away to those who have not shed any blood, sweat, or tears for it. Should we not protect the innocent in this matter. I do care about a van load of children being killed by Mexican trucks that can not even read our signs let alone obey our laws. Lou

Second Reply by John

answer

Well, Christianity is giving. If we say we have love and aren’t involved in the affairs of the world, do we have love? You say Jesus was not involved in the affairs of the world, however, he battled the world, the world systems, and their beliefs. This is why He is hated and why we are to be hated. Jesus also said to give unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s. He said this because governments are instituted by God and we are to be salt and light, defend righteousness, and be bold. To put this all together, I would say faith and love requires action. As for the USA, we still should defend the good and proactively try to change the bad. The principles of freedom and democracy are biblical and worth defending, bondage (Egypt) is the alternative and the unsaved seek it. John

My Response to John and Lou:

Hey, Thanks for the gentle feedback Lou and John. I appreciate your thoughts. So, Lou, you rightly say that Jesus cared and died for all. I think we should very much be concerned about one group taking the lives and livelihood from another group of people. What I am not sure about is if war with that first group of people is the best way forward. Why are we upset with one group taking from another? Because it denies the image of God present in the second group. Our challenge is to respond to the situation that shows Christ’s love for both the attackers and the attacked. How do we as citizens of the Kingdom of God help the situation without denying the images of God in the attackers? Christ loves and died for them as well. I am not advocating any sort of easy solution, but rushing to defend them through killing their enemies seems to fly in the face of what Jesus advocates.

Lou, you also talk about how most illegal immigrants are hostile to Christianity and suggest that on this basis we keep them out. (I might be misrepresenting you on this point, so let me know if I am, for that is not my intention.) Assuming for the moment that this is the case, I love the idea of having people move in around me that are hostile to Christianity, for there are more opportunities to grow the Kingdom of God and help restore interpersonal relationships and to help them get to know their creator and to trust in Him for their salvation.

John, I completely agree with you when you say that we need to be involved in the affairs of this world. I agree wholeheartedly. I think we disagree in terms of how we go about doing that. I see us as citizens of the Kingdom of God first and American citizens second. As such, I think that Christians as a group and individually should act from our primary membership, as citizens of God’s Kingdom, not America’s Republic. Jesus did confront the world, but he did not battle it (in terms of physical aggression, that is). He used teaching, aid, and relationships to transform the world. We should, as citizens of His Kingdom, employ the same tactics. We are called to be good citizens, to be sure and God has instituted the governments of America (and Iran and China by the same logic). But we are to be citizens of God’s Kingdom first and to our local political systems second. I think (and I could be wrong) that God’s Kingdom would be better served if we acted via God’s Kingdom rather than via America’s interests and methods.

What do you think?

Edit in Admin

Henry Imler

Hank,

When I wrote that comment, I had just gotten back from running and had to get ready for a dinner date with Meredith and Scott and his wife :. not a lot of time and clarity went into the comment.

In regards to the last part of your comment, there is a substantial difference between "regenerate men" (and women) and creating/allowing/tolerating a structurally sinful society. Christians as a body have failed to bring about God's justice on earth. I don't think that the impetus is disputable nor is our collective failure in dispute (but it may be...). That is what I am getting at here. I am not questioning their salvation, but I am stating that christians in europe created and allowed the slave trade. In addition to that many theologians of all stripes bought into the colonial worldview, which is horrific. Again, not saying they were not real Christians, just that they failed miserablly in this regard (but again, know that I am not lifting us up over them or anything - we are failing miserably right now.)

Hey, I gotta go, so I will hopefully respond to the whole of your comment later (but it will prob be tommorw at the earliest)

Hank have a good one man.

henrythomasimler

Honzo,
I apologize, the question wasn't as straightforward when I wrote as when I just finished reading it again. Political affairs are a key interest to Christians for through that venue an impressive impact for Christ can be made. The world can see what true servant-leadership really is. The world will hate it because the world hates Jesus. But it will be a powerful example. I guess I was responding to the statement about your not wanting to get into politics very much and then asking the question this way, "How much should Christians be involved in political affairs?" My response would be they should get involved in the public arena and in the lawmaking process. I'm not certain about war because of how ambiguous the application of "render unto Caesar..." saying reaches. What happens when "Caesar" calls upon "his" citizens to defend "him." Is that to be rendered unto "Caesar?" Is refusing to answer that call not being a good citizen? Where does the Bible ever say we shouldn't go to war when our nation calls upon us? No the mediating Kingdom of Christ does not advance with weapons of the flesh but with spiritual weapons. But does defending the innocent people of one's own country against an unjust aggressor constitute not laying down one's life for another? Is that permissible according to the Bible? Just War and a Christian's role is very difficult to discern because nowhere is there a clear-cut passage to address the issue.

I think the critique, "Here’s the rub in your example. If all the Christians were doing their job as restorers of justice, there would not have been a slave trade to begin with in the English empire, heck, there would prob not been an English empire," is a bit unfair, I feel. Just because the RCC was "ruling" over Europe for centuries doesn't mean that those running the RCC were truly regenerate men living for the cause of Christ. I would say they were simply because when Evangelic movements arose, the RCC sought to not just oppose in debate but threatened the lives of those who sought to be true Christians, indeed taking many of those lives. It would be a long and drawn out process to just get into position to have the influence to restore justice in a noticeable way. They were the targets of the ruling "church." I could just be overreacting to your critique. If I am, forgive me.

The following paragraphs confuse me,

Also, you mention that theologians flocked to engage this political issue. You are very right - Christian theologians flocked to defend and to rail against the legal right to own slaves and to trade them like cattle. This underscores my point.

You give a nice example where a person puts the responsibility of the kingdom of God over and against the best interests of his earthly political realm. I think that bolster’s my point. Also, there is a huge difference between advocating the strengthening of political power (see the content of what I was responding against) and trying to correct fallen governments."
How does this "underscore" and "bolster" your point if my previous post does not respond to the issue of war?

And finally, your closing statement about earthly power corrupting I anthropologically have to disagree. Human beings are corrupt and use earthly power according to that corrupt nature. Earthly power is not corrupt in and of itself because it can be used for good, again see the example of William Wilberforce.

Scott

Wow, that link is really fantastic (although I had to ignore the WHEREASes).

Honzo

Hank,
Read me closely, especially my responses to their initial response. One person is advocating war for the defense of other peoples and the other closed borders and defense against other cultures. This is where I am coming from. I am not necessarily saying that we need to be completely ignorant of political matters, we just need not to sell ourselves over to the needs of the "empire."

In my reply to John, I say that as long as we are primarily citizens of the Kingdom of God (i.e. looking out for its interests first) then we can be citizens of the "Kingdom" of America second.

Here's the rub in your example. If all the Christians were doing their job as restorers of justice, there would not have been a slave trade to begin with in the English empire, heck, there would prob not been an English empire!

Also, you mention that theologians flocked to engage this political issue. You are very right - Christian theologians flocked to defend and to rail against the legal right to own slaves and to trade them like cattle. This underscores my point.

You give a nice example where a person puts the responsibility of the kingdom of God over and against the best interests of his earthly political realm. I think that bolster's my point. Also, there is a huge difference between advocating the strengthening of political power (see the content of what I was responding against) and trying to correct fallen governments.

Also, consider that earthly power always corrupts. Its all over the stories of the Old Testament, it is reflected in the saying of Jesus, we see it all over the history of humans.

henrythomasimler

Honzo,
Have you considered the example of William Wilberforce and his crusade to end slavery in the UK at the turn of the 18th century? He was a Christian man in British Parliment, thinking of leaving the government to pursue a pastoral ministry and do religious work. But because of his theology--he wrote a book on the doctrine of justification which title eludes me at the moment--and the advise of fellow believers (e.g. John Newton) he ended slavery in the British Empire. He advanced the cause of Christ using the political arena. I think his example of how to engage the political, economic, and cultural issues of a nation is the way to go.

As a side note, Granville Sharp, a contemporary and fellow advocate of the abolition of British slavery of Wilberforce, is the same Granville Sharp who uncovered the rule of the article + substantive + καί + substantive speaks of the same thing--the Granville Sharp rule and construction (cf. Titus 2:13, 2 Peter 1:1, 11).

Theologians flocked to engage this political issue and I think that we as Christians today should do the same. We should not shy away from political issues that concern us as citizens of the mediating Kingdom of Christ.

Theology for the Masses

Should Xians be concerned with this?

Recent Comments

Categories

Tags

Author Blogs

Biblical Resources

Biblical Studies

Biblical Studies Blogs

Blogroll

Christian Commentary/News Publications

Philosophy Resources

Theology Blogs

Theology Resources

Pages

Categories

Meta