Greg Boyd, in his newest book, The Myth of a Christian Religion: Losing Your Religion for the Beauty of a Revolution
, takes no prisoners, minces no words, makes his points, states them clearly, and calls the reader to decision.The issue for him has to do with whether we want to participate in what he calls the religion of Christianity or the Jesus revolution.
How central to the gospel and to the Christian faith is following Jesus? Is a Christian someone who follows Jesus? Or, would you define "Christian" in another way? How would you define it?
Boyd is like many: his own maturation in the faith led him to see the problems with the Church when held up against the standard of the Gospels. He learned the problem in three ways: the bloody history of the Church, the centrality of the example of Jesus in the Gospels/NT/early Christianity, and Moral Majority, which showed to him many things, not the least of which was their crusade to take back the country -- and Boyd didn't think that approach came from Jesus. Jesus didn't seek change through assuming or gaining political power. He sought change through the cross.
"History teaches that the best way to destroy the Church is to give it political power" (13).
What is the Moral Majority's "theory" on the relationship of State and Church? What is Boyd's? What is the Kuyperian view? We need to discuss this so I'm counting on folks to pitch in...
His discovery is the discovery of the kingdom in the Gospels. "To the extent that any individual, church, or movement looks like that [Jesus], it manifests the Kingdom of God. To the extent that it doesn't look like that, it doesn't (14). He defines kingdom as reign, as God's reign, and any time someone submits to God's reign the kingdom is present.
The Christian religion focuses too much on what one believes. But the bride of Christ is married to Christ in its love. Obeying Jesus is the only way a person can be called a Christian. This kingdom is a new kind of Life.
Those who submit to the Jesus, who is the Head, form the Body. The Head and the Body form "Giant Jesus."
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Subscribe
Joe James-
"I mean, ultimately the state is going to have to confess that it is self-serving and unfaithful to the way of Christ... right?"
As a separate entity? Yes. All the individuals involved? No.
Any institution can be seen as a self-serving in some sense, including businesses. Yet do we want to totally avoid them?
Your question, "I wonder though if there is a way that Christians can have a meaningful witness to the state without defiling itself", is the heart of the matter. There are no easy answers, but I don't think it means we should not try- especially if we see it as 1 more mission field, rather than a way to gain power.
the "Right" gets more attention because it is undoubtedly the "majority report" amongst evangelical christians.
the "substance" of the Right's positions are not really what's being critiqued.
it's the "how", the means, by which they have done their work that is worthy of critique.
Rick -
Agreed. This may seem like a "left field" question, but as I read your responses, I am curious to know if you think the American Empire ought to repent of it's foundational sins (genocide, murder, greed, racism, slavery, etc) and if you do think so, then what would such repentance look like, concretely speaking?
Peace -
Joe
Joe James-
Interesting question(s), especially since it would mean using the power of government for moral restitution. I can't say I have "concrete" solutions, since they are complex situations.
But overall, I would first hesitate to call it the "American Empire", since "Empire" can bring to mind harsh regimes such as Rome. There have been bad characters in American history, but there also have been quality characters. But the U.S., with all its faults and mistakes, still strives for worthy goals such as freedom and liberty. That cannot be overlooked. However, I get the spirit of your wording.
I wonder if a government entity, a secular entity at that, can "repent", or is that a responsibility for individuals within government.
This then brings up the issue of legal action. If a nation "repents" for past sins, then what does that mean (legally) for those today who had nothing to do with those situations? We need to be careful on that front.
All that being said, I think affirmative action was and is a step in the right direction. Clearly there is more to do on the racial front, but it is also clear that great gains have been made. I always think that the racial situation in the country is not as bad as some make it out to be, but nor is it a good as others make it out to be. I do think more focus should be made to make sure African-American communities are being adequately equipped so they can have access to equal opportunities. Still much to do, but there is a trail of progress in recent decades brings hope.
In regards to Native Americans, I think they have not had sufficient focus put on their situation. They have not been properly equipped- not by a long shot. In short, $ and training is needed in those communities.
In regards to greed, that is a matter of individual hearts. We can only look at the actions/consequences that come from greed (some mentioned above), but we cannot hold an institution such as government responsible for "greed".
To sum up, if I had to look at what actions should be done, it would be to make sure those communities that are still suffering from such injustices are allowed and provided the necessary focus and resources so they (quickly) can have equal access to the vast opportunities ("life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness") the U.S. provides.
But again, your question is good. Hopefully Christians can lead the way towards further progress in healing those areas and situations.
Rick -
Thanks for your response. Well said... I agree with most of what you said. I wish we could talk in person about that word "empire" Ha!
Peace -
Joe James
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.