This blog serves as an outreach for Pastor Randy Powell of the First Baptist Church of Franklin, PA. Feel free to ask questions or send me an e-mail at pastorpowell@hotmail.com
Have you ever received a Christmas gift that you absolutely hated? One that you can't wait to return, one that you struggle to pretend you're happy for?
Joseph was given a Christmas gift that he didn't ask for, the way he responded to this unexpected gift show why God chose him to be the dad here on earth to the long-awaited Messiah.
Perhaps you've received an amazingly unexpected and wonderful Christmas gift at some point, whatever it was, it can't begin to compare with the one given to Mary
I find Caravaggio's The Incredulity of Saint Thomas to be a fascinating painting. One of the reasons why is that the text of John's Gospel, which is the basis for the moment the painting portrays, never actually says that Thomas touched Jesus' wounds, only that he declared he wouldn't believe that Jesus had risen from the dead without doing so. The painting aside, the episode of Thomas' doubt is deeply illustrative of how God deals with doubt throughout the scriptures. Again and again we see heroes of the faith depicted as having doubt: doubt in themselves, doubt in what they've been told by angels, even doubt after working miracles in God's name. From Abraham's twice invoked "she's really just my sister" routine in Genesis, to Moses' attempt to put the responsibility on his younger brother instead of himself in Exodus, to Gideon's repeated requests for confirmation in Judges, to Elijah's exhaustion because he thinks he's the only one fighting for God in 1 Kings, to Esther's hesitancy to step forward in Esther, and finally Zechariah's doubt while standing in the Temple itself talking to the angel Gabriel in Luke, we see these great men and women who accomplished amazing things by the power of God, expressing their doubt and hesitancy.
And here's the key thing: In none of those instances does God search for the 'smite' key {A reference to one of my favorite Far Side cartoons} and ditch the person expressing how they really feel. Instead, in each case God offers a second chance in the form of reassurance and patience until the person with doubt is able, thanks to this act of grace from God, to overcome it and continue fulfilling their purpose in God's plan. The point is, they were still useful to God.
How does the Church treat doubt? I'm not talking about those who deny the Trinity or the Virgin Birth, for example, thanks to heretical teachings, that's false conviction not doubt, but rather those who have genuine doubts about God, his will or purpose, because the life they've lived has brought these feelings into focus. Too often the Church can feel like the last place you would want to admit that you're struggling with doubt, anxiety, fear, even anger toward God. It feels like a judgmental place, a place where, "nobody has doubts, but me." Why? Not because that's true, not because you're the only person who has been wounded by life, but because for whatever reason we choose to portray faith as an all-or-nothing proposition. In reality, faith is a journey, a commitment, the kind of thing that can take a hit, get knocked down, but then rise once more and continue on, even if the person holding onto it has some scars from the experience. Faith isn't made of glass, it is capable of dealing with reality, looking at difficult questions with humility, and acknowledging when we don't have all the answers. Why? Because faith is primarily a relationship with God, not an intellectual pursuit on our part. Yes, our minds are involved, we need to know and accept who God is and what God has done for us in order to have faith, but that faith is IN God, a person, not a concept or construct, a person (who just so happens to be the Creator of the universe, a key thing faith has going for itself).
If you're having difficulties, if your faith feels battered and bruised, you won't be alone if you go to church, God be merciful on us if those you find there make you think you are, because you're not, they may not be willing to admit it, but a number of the people sitting, singing, and prayer with you know just how you feel because they were there once too, and maybe still are. In the end, God isn't going to give up on you, for each and every person who faith and hope are in Jesus Christ is an adopted child-of-God, we're safe in our Father's arms, especially when we have to ask God to 'hold us tighter'.
In addition to his expected role as Messiah of king, Jesus added that of prophet and priest, but even more remarkably, that of servant as well. As God's chosen savior, a marvel in that because of Jesus' divinity it was in reality God choosing himself, Jesus served here on earth with remarkable self-control and compassion as he worked to establish God's justice on earth, a process that his death and resurrection secured the final victory for, and one that he will conclude when he returns in power and might.
For now, the calling of God's people is to imitate his self-control and compassion as we continue his mission of furthering God's justice on earth.
Luke 22:24-27 New International Version
24 A dispute also arose among them as to which of them was considered to be greatest. 25 Jesus said to them, “The kings of the Gentiles lord it over them; and those who exercise authority over them call themselves Benefactors. 26 But you are not to be like that. Instead, the greatest among you should be like the youngest, and the one who rules like the one who serves. 27 For who is greater, the one who is at the table or the one who serves? Is it not the one who is at the table? But I am among you as one who serves.
Six months before he won the World Heavyweight boxing champion title, Cassius Clay, soon to be known as Muhammad Ali, released an album of poetic verse (a generation before this type of thing would evolve to become rap and hip hop). The album, was entitled I am the Greatest. Ali co-wrote the lyrics with comedy writer Gary Belkin, it sold 500,000 copies and was nominated for a Grammy. In 1977, NBC aired a cartoon entitled, I Am the Greatest: The Adventures of Muhammad Ali that featured the boxer as a global adventurer with a tag-along niece and nephew; it was cancelled after 13 episodes. When you try to think of ego run amok, any number of politicians, athletes, actors, and billionaires may come to mind, the list of famous people with a reputation for self-absorption is sadly long and diverse, but few of them could compete with the persona that Muhammad Ali portrayed to the world during his boxing career.
Here's the thing, setting aside a few mega-church pastors whose popularity and private jets might convince the unwary to think otherwise, the path to effective and God-honoring leadership in the Church of Jesus Christ has always been, and will always be, through humble service. Have there been those in positions of power within the Church, like Cardinal Richelieu (made famous by Dumas' portrayal of him in The Three Musketeers), for whom Church 'service' was a means-to-an-end, a path to self-aggrandizement? Of course there have been, we'd be shocked if a Church made up of people, some redeemed but still flawed, and others only pretending to be true believers, didn't have within its ranks any number of scoundrels. But, and this is key, every such person seeking their own benefit and not the will of God, everyone covered in pride, has been working AGAINST what Jesus created his Church to be.
Which brings us once again to 'Christian' Nationalism. This movement is predicated on the belief that there is only one solution, only one possible path, to cure whatever malady 'Christian' Nationalism decides to wage war upon (sometimes literally), and that one path, or worse yet one and only one leader, just happens to be themselves. Power must be gained, it must be acquired, even through unethical or illegal means, because they alone can bring about the Golden Age that God must bless them with if/when power is fully in their hands to order society to their liking. This egotism run amok neither respects the ways in which power has corrupted the Church in the past, nor does it consider in humility that God is at work all over the world, in every generation, and not just this generation in this land.
The greatest? 'Christian' Nationalism may be willing to hoist someone onto everyone else's shoulders confident that he/she must be a savior, but this cannot be an extension of the Church, or even a partnership of convenience, for it ignores one of the fundamental defining characteristics of the Church: humility and service.
Having brought good news to the exiles of Judah in Babylon, the prophet Isaiah now calls upon them to share that news, shouting it from the mountaintop. Likewise, when the Advent of Jesus brought forth a greater fulfillment of Isaiah's words, the Good News was shared by the shepherds, later by John the Baptist, and eventually by Jesus' disciples following his command to take the message of forgiveness and hope to the ends of the earth.
What is our calling? Take the Good News to everyone who needs to heart it.
Luke 18:9-14 New International Version
9 To some who were confident of their own righteousness and looked down on everyone else, Jesus told this parable: 10 “Two men went up to the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. 11 The Pharisee stood by himself and prayed: ‘God, I thank you that I am not like other people—robbers, evildoers, adulterers—or even like this tax collector. 12 I fast twice a week and give a tenth of all I get.’
13 “But the tax collector stood at a distance. He would not even look up to heaven, but beat his breast and said, ‘God, have mercy on me, a sinner.’
14 “I tell you that this man, rather than the other, went home justified before God. For all those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted.”
You're probably wondering right away, how on earth is he getting from the Chicken Dance to the Parable of the Pharisee and the Tax Collector? Stay with me, there's a method to the madness.
The Chicken Dance performed at weddings is a glaring example of how idiosyncratic culture can be. The things people wear, say, and do at weddings, and the celebrations afterwards, vary greatly depending on where on the planet and when in history we look. Future generations may look on in horror at the prominence of the Chicken Dance at American weddings and see it not as a whimsical bit of nonsense, but a sign of some deeper disturbance that confirms what they think of our culture from their point-of-view. Personally, I'm not a fan, evidently others love the silliness of this dance. In the end, there probably isn't anyone who thinks of the Chicken Dance as a moral imperative either way, but much of our cultural heritage, the things we hold near and dear to our hearts as THE way they must be done, are just as morally neutral as the Chicken Dance.
The Pharisees that Jesus contends with so often in the Gospels had elevated their own cultural expression, based on Mosaic Law, but still just their own viewpoint as to exactly how that Law should be interpreted and applied, and made it normative for everyone, period. In other words, the Pharisees were so convinced that they were right, about everything, that they scorned the way that fellow Jews worshiped God as something between insufficient and outright sacrilegious. They were far too sure of themselves, and it showed. It takes confidence like that to be militant, to hold that you know exactly what the government, society, or your religion needs and nobody else has a piece of the truth, nobody else can be trusted, they must all be opposed and crushed if they disagree with you.
Here is where 'Christian' Nationalism comes in. It has decided that one particular expression of the Church, from one time and place, should dominate not only all other current expressions of the Church, but the entirety of society as well. It is only our own pride and ignorance that would allow us to think that Anglo-Saxon Protestant Christianity as expressed in America {that's a pretty specific sliver both globally and historically} deserves total power in society over both other variations of orthodox Christianity currently alive America and also over those following other religions, or none at all. If you think that 'Christian' Nationalism can equally embrace all facets of the Church and America today, you don't know how power in this world works, sharing is not in its nature.
Do I think that I'm following God correctly according to the scriptures and the wisdom of Church history? Of course I do, otherwise I wouldn't be an American Baptist I'd be something else. But I am far from being prideful enough to think that there is no possibility that I'm wrong on some aspects of the way that my faith is interpreted from the scriptures and expressed in the life that I'm living. My brothers and sisters in Christ here in America that follow different traditions have things to teach me, not to mention the majority of the Church that isn't American, Protestant, White, or Western.
'Christian' Nationalism doesn't exist without certainty of its own superiority to everything else. Unfortunately, much of that certainty is based upon a particular cultural expression, not timeless truth, and it fails to reckon with God's work not only throughout history, but throughout the world today.
The prophet Isaiah offers a word of hope and comfort to the generation to follow that will experience the destruction of Jerusalem and the Babylonian Exile: "Comfort, comfort my people, says your God." Why? In the aftermath of tragedy, where does the comfort come from? The Promise of God.
Isaiah was told to encourage them that their exile would mark the extent of God's wrath and that he would soon send forth those to prepare the way to return to Jerusalem and rebuild the Temple.
Matthew calls upon Isaiah's words 500 years after the Exiles took comfort from it to proclaim that John the Baptist had fulfilled the prophecy a second time when he prepared the way for the Messiah, offering a message of repentance prior to the beginning of Jesus' public ministry.
Lastly, in any generation, we live by faith just as our ancestors did, we too take comfort from our knowledge that God keeps his promises, that no matter how we feel about the present or the future, God is working in our world. Our calling is to remain faithful, here and now, knowing that like always God's word will stand.
A stump has all sorts of depressing metaphorical implications about life cut short and hope dashed, but the prophet Isaiah chose the stump because life can return to it once more. The long-awaited Messiah is Isaiah's topic, speaking of his righteousness, justice, and faithfulness alongside his power and might. While Jesus embodied these qualities during his time among us on earth, the kingdom he will establish when he returns will transform that localized impact into a global phenomenon.
The Gospel in one sentence. Think about that for a moment. God's plan to redeem humanity from sin and death, to turn humanity history from a tragedy into a triumph, can be summed up in one sentence. Romans 6:23 does this beautifully, and in it virtually word is worth our pondering.
Luke 16:13 New International Version
“No one can serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and money.”
One of the most divisive changes made to the plot and characters of the Lord of the Rings by Fran Walsh, Philippa Boyens, and Peter Jackson in the movie trilogy that premiered between 2001-2003 was the interaction between Frodo & Sam and Boromir's younger brother Faramir. In the movie version, Faramir is tormented by his father's disapproval, and while not jealous of his older brother's successes, he knows that he can never measure up in their father's eyes. This tracks closely with the novel thus far, but the screenwriters decided to change how Faramir reacts to this pressure when his men capture Frodo and Sam and Faramir learns that they are trying to take the One Ring to Mount Doom. In the movie, Faramir starts off down the path of taking the Hobbits to his father Denethor at Minas Tirith, getting so far as the ruins of Osgiliath before Sam dramatically explains to him that desire for the Ring drove Boromir mad. At this point Faramir comes to his senses, realizes that his true loyalty is to the larger effort to defeat Evil, not his father or even his kingdom, and lets Frodo and Sam go with his blessing. The movie's version is dramatic, and full of tension, but not what Tolkien envisioned.
In the novel, the scene where Faramir learns about the ring unfolds much as it does in the movie (which contains much direct quotation), but turns away sharply from the movie's hesitation when the truth about the Ring is revealed:
Faramir confesses to Frodo that he has no desire to win glory through the methods of the Dark Lord.
'But fear no more! I would not take this thing, if it lay by the highway. Not were Minas Tirith falling in ruin and I alone could save her, so, using the weapon of the Dark Lord for her good and my glory. No, I do not wish for such triumphs, Frodo son of Drogo.'
'Neither did the Council,' said Frodo. 'Nor do I. I would have nothing to do with such matters.'
And moments later when Faramir learns that the Ring is indeed in his grasp if he should so choose:
'So that is the answer to all the riddles! The One Ring that was thought to have perished from the world. And Boromir tried to take it by force? And you escaped? And ran all the way — to me! And here in the wild I have you: two halflings, and a host of men at my call, and the Ring of Rings. A pretty stroke of fortune! A chance for Faramir, Captain of Gondor, to show his quality!'.... He stood up, very tall and stern, his grey eyes glinting.
Frodo and Sam sprang from their stools and set themselves side by side with their backs to the wall, fumbling for their sword-hilts.... But Faramir sat down again in his chair and began to laugh quietly, and then suddenly became grave again.
'Alas for Boromir! It was too sore a trial!' he said. 'How you have increased my sorrow, you two strange wanderers from a far country, bearing the peril of Men! But you are less judges of Men than I of Halflings. We are truth-speakers, we men of Gondor. We boast seldom, and then perform, or die in the attempt. Not if I found it on the highway would I take it I said. Even if I were such a man as to desire this thing, and even though I knew not clearly what this thing was when I spoke, still I should take those words as a vow, and be held by them.
'But I am not such a man. Or I am wise enough to know that there are some perils from which a man must flee. Sit at peace! And be comforted, Samwise.... Your heart is shrewd as well as faithful.... For strange though it may seem, it was safe to declare this to me. It may even help the master that you love. It shall turn to his good, if it is in my power. So be comforted. But do not even name this thing again aloud. Once is enough.'
Faramir has no desire to claim the Ring as his own, unlike his more proud and headstrong older brother, and he considers his previous declaration ("Not if I found it on the highway would I take it") to be a binding oath as a matter of honor. Faramir, in Tolkien's imagining of his character, has no internal conflict when it comes to right and wrong, no desire to serve two masters, the higher purpose always holds him fast against temptation.
In case you're wonder, both Faramir's brother Boromir and his father Denethor fall to the temptation to put their own nation above morality. Both have a worldview that puts the continuation of Gondor above what is right for the rest of Middle Earth and are willing to commit dishonorable and immoral acts to maintain it {And, to be frank, their own positions of dominance in that kingdom, and added push from temptation}.
And here is where our ongoing discussion of 'Christian' Nationalism comes in. The movement asks us to divide our loyalties, to take our focus off of the Kingdom of God and place our energies and efforts first and foremost into securing the advancement of a kingdom-of-the-world. For Americans this is a strong emotional appeal, after all we have much to love for our country, much to be proud of, and much that we might believe it can accomplish in this world. Citizens of a less powerful, less good, nation would be tempted less to make its success their idol. Non-citizens and those neglected and abused by their society rarely feel this temptation as well. The appeal of 'Christian' Nationalism is uniquely tailored, then, toward those of us with the potential to put political power to use, those of us who can imagine what we might do if people like us were in charge. But, in the end, to the extent that participation in the power structures of this world causes in us any measure of divided loyalties, any distraction from Kingdom of God work, and any excuse to try to utilize evil in the name of good, that divided loyalty is sin. Our allegiance is bought and paid for by the Blood of the Lamb, to divide it is an affront to the God who saved us.
Our allegiance, therefore, can never be to any version of the kingdom-of-the-world, however much better we may think it is than any other versions of the kingdom-of-the world...preserving this 'alien status' is not an addendum to our calling as kingdom-of-God citizens; it belongs to the essence of what it means to be a kingdom-of-God citizen...We utterly trivialize this profound biblical teaching if we associate our peculiar holiness with a pet list of religious taboos (such as smoking, drinking, dancing, gambling, and so on). No, the holiness the New Testament is concerned with is centered on being Christlike, living in outrageous, self-sacrificial love." (The Myth of the Christian Nation, Pastor Gregory Boyd, p. 70-71, emphasis mine)
Contrary to post-modernism, American culture, and the tendency of Baptist theology, we are NOT autonomous individuals. Here's the thing, there's only two choices: (1) Continue to be a slave to sin, or (2) become a slave to God (and righteousness). That's it. "Free agency" is not a thing when it comes to your immortal soul.
In case you're wondering, slavery to God is the path to hope, purpose, fulfillment, and joy.
Luke 14:23 NIV
“Then the master told his servant, ‘Go out to the roads and country lanes and compel them to come in, so that my house will be full.
This example is a bit unusual in that the text in question does not refute 'Christian' Nationalism, rather it is a text once used to support the suppression of dissenting voices within the Church through military force. In other words, Luke 14:23 was used historically on behalf of a Church Militant.
Saint Augustine is the third most influential person in Church history after two people whose names you will undoubtedly recognize: Jesus and the Apostle Paul. Most of Augustine's contributions were massively helpful to the Church, but there were exceptions {for instance: his negative view of sex even within marriage still ripples harming Christian marriages to this day}. The most dangerous idea that Augustine embraced was that it was fitting and proper for the Roman Empire, newly on the side of Christianity thanks to Constantine, to force the Donatists in North Africa with whom he contended on an issue of polity to rejoin the Church. His example of a militant Church authority would be used more than 1,000 years later to force Martin Luther to choose between rebellion and his understanding of God's Word.
The Donatist Controversy predated Augustine's time as the Bishop of Hippo, having arisen after the great persecution of Emperor Diocletian {303-305, 1/2 of all Early Church martyrs killed during those three years} when those who had refused to worship the Emperor (risking their lives) would not allow those who had recanted their faith under pain of death to return to the Church. Augustine sided with those in favor of forgiveness, hoping to heal the rift. After a pair of councils in N. Africa failed to reach a resolution, Augustine threw his weight behind the Emperor's willingness to use the army to enforce reconciliation.
This is one of the first examples of Christian on Christian violence in the name of unity, it happened in the very first generation in which Christian had civil/military power to wield against each other.
Was Jesus talking about Church unity in Luke 14:23? Hardly, that's not even on the radar when considering the interpretation of this parable. And yet, Christians (whether or not they deserve the 'Christian' caveat) have been willing through the centuries to wield scripture as a cudgel, backing it up with force, against those with whom they disagree. The Inquisition, the burning at the stake of Jan Hus, the slaughter of the people of Magdeburg, the City Council of Zurich drowning Anabaptists, the Puritans at Plymouth hanging Quakers, and so on, all following in the footsteps of the anti-Christian notion that faith can be compelled by threats and violence, that it can be protected or saved at the point of a sword.
In case you're wondering, the use of violence against the Donatists didn't work (it never does). Four centuries later when Islamic armies rolled across N. Africa the resistance to this invasion was weakened by a Church still divided against itself. Would kindness and patience have worked to heal the rift? That's the road not taken, we'll never know, but the use of force by Christians against Christians most certainly did not.
Having described the condition of the redeemed Christian as being 'dead to sin' and 'alive with Christ' and 'alive to God', the Apostle Paul focuses on one key implication of this changed status: Sin can no longer reign in our lives.
Given that we have the power, via the Holy Spirit, to have victory over sin, we must do so. Instead of simply being a 'just say no' campaign, Paul tells us what must take sin's vacated place: the offering of our lives to righteousness.
Lastly, Paul ends with an additional reason for that we can achieve this transition from sin to righteousness, one he will develop fully in the book of Galatians: We are not under Law, but Grace.
Luke 6:27-36 New International Version
27 “But to you who are listening I say: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, 28 bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. 29 If someone slaps you on one cheek, turn to them the other also. If someone takes your coat, do not withhold your shirt from them. 30 Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back. 31 Do to others as you would have them do to you.
32 “If you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? Even sinners love those who love them. 33 And if you do good to those who are good to you, what credit is that to you? Even sinners do that. 34 And if you lend to those from whom you expect repayment, what credit is that to you? Even sinners lend to sinners, expecting to be repaid in full. 35 But love your enemies, do good to them, and lend to them without expecting to get anything back. Then your reward will be great, and you will be children of the Most High, because he is kind to the ungrateful and wicked. 36 Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful.
It isn't everyday that a 'Christian' Nationalist figure, and one of the most popular ones at that, flat out dismisses the teachings of Jesus as a plan that has "gotten us nothing." But on December 19th, 2021 at a Turning Point USA conference, Donald Trump Jr. did just that. The extended quotation is below:
“If we get together, they cannot cancel us all. OK? They won’t,” he said. “And this will be contrary to a lot of our beliefs because — I’d love not to have to participate in cancel culture. I’d love that it didn’t exist. But as long as it does, folks, we better be playing the same game. OK? We’ve been playing T-ball for half a century while they’re playing hardball and cheating. Right? We’ve turned the other cheek, and I understand, sort of, the biblical reference — I understand the mentality — but it’s gotten us nothing. OK? It’s gotten us nothing while we’ve ceded ground in every major institution in our country.”
And while the mockery of 'turn the other cheek' got some slight pushback, with baptistnews.com, churchleaders.com, and relevantmagazine.com all posting articles condemning the dismissal of Jesus' command to his disciples, there was remarkable little response from the likes of Franklin Graham, John MacArthur, Doug Wilson, James White, Robert Jeffress, or Thomas Ascol, all of whom have been quick over the years to condemn liberal derelictions of inerrancy (that is, not taking the Bible seriously as authoritative truth, when accurate these criticisms are warranted), but a Google search finds none of them saying a peep when a leader on 'our team' publicly declares that we've listened to Jesus for far too long.
{There is a separate conversation to be had about the premise: I don't believe that Jerry Falwell, the Moral Majority, or the Christian Coalition, for example, were actively 'turning the other cheek' in recent decades, rather they fought tooth and nail in the cultural and governmental arenas to which Donald Trump Jr. is referring.}
That's one of the things that 'Christian' Nationalism does to the Church. It creates excuses for when 'our team' defies scripture, even openly mocks Jesus. Why? Because we need those allies to win. It doesn't really matter if their faith is genuine, if their lives are moral or immoral, winning is everything.
Throughout the centuries the Church has failed to embrace Jesus' teaching on this topic of non-violence, non-resistance, and prayer for our enemies about as often and as thoroughly as any topic addressed by Jesus or covered extensively in the N.T. Our track record since Constantine's legalization of Christianity has been mixed, at best, far too often it has been awful.
And yet, now we're being told that we need to take the gloves off? We need bare-knuckle boxing because using a bit of restraint isn't good enough?
Nope. Not what Jesus told us to do, not what the Word of God commands, I don't care how important you are as a politician, or how many retweets you're getting these days, your authority falls massively short in comparison.
Psalm 46
1 God is our refuge and strength,
an ever-present help in trouble.
2 Therefore we will not fear, though the earth give way
and the mountains fall into the heart of the sea,
In the Empire Strikes Back, young Luke Skywalker is trying to convince the Jedi Master Yoda to train him, a task that Yoda deems both too late and unwise due to Luke's rashness. Luke tries to change his mind by claiming, "I won't fail you, I'm not afraid." After a nice long dramatic pause, Yoda replies, "You will be...You...will...be."
Here's the thing, I'm against 'Christian' Nationalism and embracing strongmen/autocrats to solve our nation's problems, not because I'm naïve like Luke, but because I'm sober-minded enough, and grounded in history and theology enough, to know better.
I will never embrace solving America's problems by abandoning the democratic process in favor of a 'savior', not because I don't love America as much as those advocating such a drastic move (see for example: Eric Metaxas and Rod Dreher), but because I know human history.
Autocracy has never saved a democracy.
Power always corrupts, the greater the power the greater the corruption, do you really think that one person wielding the power of the American military and economy without checks and balances, without elections and judicial review, would be a force for good in the world? We've seen how much evil has been done with the power Xi Jinping wields in China, do you think an American strongman would be any different? Only a fool would think this plan disconnected from both human nature and world history is anything but a national suicide pact.
Immorality has never helped the Church
I will never embrace 'helping' the Church by utilizing evil as a tool, not because I don't love the Church as much as those advocating such a Faustian bargain, but because I know the nature of God.
Many of those not quite willing to abandon our democratic rights have nevertheless been convinced, or have chosen to convince themselves, that the 'greater good' and the urgency of the moment demands that we abandon the luxuries of Truth, Honor, Integrity, Kindness, Mercy, and the like in favor of Realpolitik, 'might makes right', and 'win at all cost' means and measures. Only a fool would think this plan disconnected from both the nature of Evil and the Holiness of God is anything but an act of faithless rebellion. Evil is never the path chosen by God for you or for us. Choosing evil to confront threats to the Church instead of righteousness is not realistic, it is cowardly, it is faithless.
I'm not afraid of the present, there's nothing new under the sun.
I'm not afraid of what comes next, God is always in control, my faith rests in him.
I'm not afraid of the future, God's final victory is assured.
The Early Church was a tiny minority living in a hostile pagan Empire that would soon be torturing and murdering the disciples of Jesus. And yet, the Apostle Paul never even hinted at trying to overcome evil with evil, in fact he specifically rejected it {Romans 12:21 Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.}. If the disciples of Jesus, who watched their Lord be brutally murdered at the hands of evil men, and the early generations of his followers, who faced the mightiest Empire the world had ever known, were told to not lost heart, to not compromise their character, but to serve and sacrifice with righteousness and love, what on earth makes 21st century American Christians so important that our fears, real or imagined, allow us to not follow in their footsteps?
Yoda also said something else that is appropriate here, "Fear is the path to the Dark Side."
I'm not afraid, my God is King of Kings and Lord of Lords, why should you be?
See Also: The downward spiral of Bonhoeffer biographer Eric Metaxas
The Watchman Decree: 'Christian' Nationalism's 'name it and claim it' dangerous prayer
Sermon Video: The insanity of: "Let us do evil that good may result" Romans 3:5-8
Having explained that we have died with Christ, and been raised together with him to new life, the Apostle Paul explores how we then should live now. The first question is: Should we go on sinning? To which he answers, "By no means!" Why not? Because we have "died to sin", it no longer has the mastery over us. With the Holy Spirit's power, we can have victory over sin. It won't be totally removed in this life, but that 'old self' is gone and buried.
Luke 4:5-8 New International Version
5 The devil led him up to a high place and showed him in an instant all the kingdoms of the world. 6 And he said to him, “I will give you all their authority and splendor; it has been given to me, and I can give it to anyone I want to. 7 If you worship me, it will all be yours.”
8 Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Worship the Lord your God and serve him only.’”
How many Lord of the Rings references have I made over the years? Too many to count, and with that in mind, here's one more:
Toward the end of The Fellowship of the Ring, Frodo offers the Ring of Power to Galadriel, and elven Lord who has taken a leading part in the war against evil (first Morgoth, now Sauron) for thousands of years. What will she do if given the chance to end the fight, to take in her own hand sufficient power to put aside all doubt and fear that Evil might triumph over Good?
“And now at last it comes. You will give me the Ring freely! In place of the Dark Lord you will set up a Queen. And I shall not be dark, but beautiful and terrible as the Morning and the Night! Fair as the Sea and the Sun and the Snow upon the Mountain! Dreadful as the Storm and the Lightning! Stronger than the foundations of the earth. All shall love me and despair!”
She lifted up her hand and from the ring that she wore there issued a great light that illuminated her alone and left all else dark. She stood before Frodo seeming now tall beyond measurement, and beautiful beyond enduring, terrible and worshipful. Then she let her hand fall, and the light faded, and suddenly she laughed again, and lo! she was shrunken: a slender elf-woman, clad in simple white, whose gentle voice was soft and sad.
“I pass the test”, she said. “I will diminish, and go into the West and remain Galadriel.”
Galadriel passed the test. She chose to reject the power of domination and subjugation in favor of trusting in the hope that Frodo can somehow destroy the Ring, "a fool's hope" as Gandalf describes it, but better than the folly of embracing evil to fight evil.
Jesus, of course, does the same thing. He resists the easy path, the one without sacrifice, the one that has a deal-breaker of a caveat (worshiping the Devil), choosing instead to continue on the pre-ordained path of the Suffering Servant until the brutal end.
How then does this apply to 'Christian' Nationalism? A straightforward application, indeed. 'Christian' Nationalism's premise is that it can serve the purpose of God by dominating the kingdoms of this world, to do so it chooses to utilize the tools and methods of this world, crushing and subjugating all opposition, and somehow in the end hoping to create a nation that honors God. It would be laughable if it were not so deadly dangerous. It won't work, it cannot work. Galadriel was wise enough to see the folly of trying to overcome evil with evil, Jesus wasn't about to entertain it, let alone try it, so why have so many self-professed Christians today decided that they can get the better out of a deal with the Devil?
Paul compares how death spread from Adam to all of humanity, with all of humanity joining Adam in sin, to how life can spread from Jesus to all who put their trust in him, sharing in his righteousness.
Mark 8:36 New International Version
What good is it for someone to gain the whole world, yet forfeit their soul?
Hard to go wrong with quoting C.S. Lewis, so here goes:
“Let him begin by treating patriotism…as a part of his religion. Then let him, under the influence of partisan spirit, come to regard it as the most important part. Then quietly and gradually nurse him on to the stage at which the religion becomes merely a part of the ‘cause’, in which Christianity is valued chiefly because of the excellent arguments it can produce…once you have made the world an end, and faith a means, you have almost won your man, and it makes very little difference what kind of worldly end he is pursuing.” (C.S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters, 1942, letter 7)
The whole world isn't worth a soul, how can America be?
Are you willing to walk away from living like Jesus in order to 'save' America? Willing to lie, cheat, steal, bully, use violence, accept gross immorality when it comes from 'our team', embrace what-about-isms and hypocrisy, and on and on?
If you are, you're a fool.
Satan is more than happy to trade your usefulness for the Kingdom of God {which any Christian gives up when they embrace immoral behavior, for whatever reason} for such a comparatively worthless prize.
Mark 2:15-16 New International Version
15 While Jesus was having dinner at Levi’s house, many tax collectors and sinners were eating with him and his disciples, for there were many who followed him. 16 When the teachers of the law who were Pharisees saw him eating with the sinners and tax collectors, they asked his disciples: “Why does he eat with tax collectors and sinners?”
Any day at the office that starts with me thinking of a way to use a Star Wars analogy to make a theological point is a good day...
In Star Wars Episode IV, A New Hope, the young naïve farm boy Luke follows the world weary Obi-Wan Kenobi into a bar in the town of Mos Eisley, as Kenobi called it, "a wretched hive of scum and villainy." One would think that just about anyone would be welcome in a dive bar in such a town, but when they enter the bartender angrily yells, "We don't serve their kind here!" while pointing at Luke's droids, R2-D2 and C-3PO. They evidently have a problem with droids, the reasoning for which the movie makes no attempt to explain.
It isn't a mystery, however, why the Pharisees of Jesus' day didn't like 'tax collectors and sinners' (in other passages prostitutes are thrown into the same list of 'off-limits' people). The Pharisees saw such people as a stain upon society, a visible manifestation of the ways in which the Jewish people were not sufficiently committed to the Mosaic Law. One one level they were right, those who break the Law of Moses are indeed sinners and that Law takes such things very seriously. A response is necessary.
And what was their response to those who didn't live up to God's standard? Treat them as outcasts, revile and denigrate them, make sure everyone knows you are better than they are.
And how does Jesus respond to these lost souls? He ate with them. He treated them like real human beings, like people who, although they had made poor choices in life thus far, still mattered to God, still had worth. Jesus responded to the sinfulness of others with a kindness and compassion designed not to push them into a corner, but to offer them the hope of repentance.
Which brings us to 'Christian' Nationalism. Recall the rhetoric of leading 'Christian' Nationalist voices. How do they describe those they view as a threat to a 'Christian America'? Certainly as an enemy, often with pejoratives, insults, and venom. The anger is real, the hostility is palpable, and so is the fear.
Where is the outreach to the Lost? Where is the compassion for those living in darkness? Where is the confidence that God can save even the vilest offender? These have been tossed aside as a weakness we can't afford to indulge {See: The folly of the "Sin of Empathy" - A self-inflicted wound to Christian Fundamentalism}. The goal of 'Christian' Nationalism is to crush the enemies of God's people, not to convert them, not to love them, not to treat them like Jesus did.
Let me end with one more Star Wars quote, this time from Empire Strikes Back: "That is why you fail."
Having established that our sins have been forgiven, and the wrath of God averted, by the shed blood of Jesus Christ, Paul now looks toward what our life in Christ should look like now and where we are ultimately heading. He begins that process by reminding us that it is not simply the death of Jesus that saves us, for Jesus did not remain in the grave but rose to new life. Given that Jesus now sits in glory at the Father's right hand, how much more has God planned for those he has redeemed?
In this 3 part series, Pastor Powell seeks to highlight some of the most important ideas, people, and movements within the universal Church during its two-thousand year history.
In part 1, the Early Church, the Early heresies regarding the person of Jesus, the Ecumenical Councils, and St. Augustine are the focus.What is the value of one human life? What would you be willing to risk, or lose, to save it? God answers this question definitively from his point of view in that Jesus Christ was willing to die on behalf of the ungodly. That is, Jesus came to die, not for family or friends, not for the good or the righteous, but for those who were powerless to change their own hopelessly sinful state, a group that happens to include all of humanity.
What did God prove by putting forth and accomplishing this plan of redemption? How powerful, how effective, and just how amazing his love is, no wonder John would later write that "God is love". Stand in awe of God's love for lost sinners.
Suffering is an oft misunderstood topic. Many religions and philosophies, including people within Christianity, get it wrong. Suffering isn't necessary, for evil will ultimately be vanquished, and it can be opposed and lessened, nor does God cause it in the hopes of bending it to his will. Suffering is, however, a reality in this present life, but so is hope. Hope is not only possible but guaranteed if we trust in God, live righteously no matter what, and persevere by faith.
 |
| The Vision of the Cross, 1520-24 by Raphael and his assistants |
Matthew 26:52 New International Version
“Put your sword back in its place,” Jesus said to him, “for all who draw the sword will die by the sword."
The History of the Church contains amazing highs of love, mercy, and justice, and horrific lows of hate, greed, and injustice. As a rule of thumb, the more temporal power the Church has wielded, the worse it has behaved. When the Church has had the power to put people to death, it has tortured and murdered in Christ's name.
Prior to the famous vision of Constantine preceding his victory at the Battle of the Milvian Bridge in 312, the Church was a persecuted minority. One generation later it began to wield the power of the Roman Empire, a change for the worse if ever there was one. Now, nobody in their right mind would rather be a member of a persecuted minority instead of a member of the ruling elite, but those aren't the only two choices that were, and are, available to the Church.
In America today, 'Christian' Nationalism promises to give Christians the cudgel with which to beat down their enemies, enabling the Church to dominate society through the force of law whether its teachings are accepted by the citizens of the nation or not. This proposed bargain has tremendous appeal to those who are scared about the future of the Church in America, promising to erase decades of change that they don't like.
But the promise is a hollow one, and also something that Jesus warned Peter against believing. Having the whip-hand won't fill our churches again, it won't undo the sexual revolution, and it won't force God to bless America simply because prayer in school is once again mandatory.
What it will do, instead, is make evangelism a more daunting task, drive yet more young people from a Church that in their eyes cares more about controlling than loving people, and offer up to Christians all the temptations associated with the love of power (its cousins in crime: lust and greed).
The sword? It won't help you.
Matthew 25:34-40 New International Version
34 “Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’
37 “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’
40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’
The 1984 movie, Red Dawn, starring Patrick Swayze, C. Thomas Howell, Charlie Sheen, Lea Thompson, and Jennifer Grey came out when I was 10. Although I didn't see it in the theater (it was PG-13), at some point I watched it on VHS tape (young people, ask your parents what those were), and it blew me away. It became one of my favorite movies, watched over and over against despite the annoying use of "Wolverines!" as the rebel battle cry {being a Spartan fan, you can see how that rankles}. As a kid, I loved the gutsy chest thumping bravado of its message, it fit nicely with the tough guy message that came to me through the movies of Stallone, Schwarzenegger, Van Damme, and the rest.
The thing is, 'Christian' Nationalism tends to treat the mission and methods of the Church like combat. In war, the rules are often bent, if not ignored, victory is the only thing that matters, and the only real concern about the enemy is how to defeat them more quickly. {See for example: the use of torture post 9/11 by American operatives} I can't count how many times those leading this movement have described what they are doing as a 'war' {For which they should apologize to every combat veteran and those whose nation has been invaded; real war is hell}. In fact, we call it a Culture War, and those who fight it on both sides Culture Warriors. And while whatever is happening in America is far short of warfare, thank God, this no-holds barred, anything goes, mentality is not only growing in how many claim it to be necessary, but even in how many champion such methodology is a good in their own right, all in the name of defending God, His Church, and/or Western Civilization.
When we listen to Jesus, however, it becomes clear that they have things upside-down. Far from being called into combat to smash and destroy God's enemies, the Church is called to serve in ways both diverse and humble. The Church is commanded, this is no suggestion, and warned accordingly, that the true measure of its success will be how it responds to, "the least of these."
How about a real-world example involving one of the most contentious political issues of our day (yikes).
What do you see when the news shows a picture of would-be immigrants wading across the Rio Grande? An invading army? An infestation? A threat? Or do you see men, women, and children made in the image of God, desperate and in need, an opportunity to show the love of Christ (most of those coming here are indeed fellow Christians, an additional question of obligation)?
'Christian' Nationalism is telling you to see things on this issue, and many others, through the lens of warfare, Jesus Christ is ordering you to see them with grace and compassion. Choose you this day whom you will serve.
Matthew 22:37-40 New International Version
37 Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ 40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”
In the 1984 movie, The Karate Kid, Mr. Miyagi (played by Pat Morita) tells his student Daniel (played by Ralph Macchio) who still has much to learn about karate, "Daniel-san, must talk. Walk on road, hm? Walk left side, safe. Walk right side, safe. Walk middle, sooner or later, [makes squish gesture] get squish just like grape. Here, karate, same thing. Either you karate do 'yes', or karate do 'no'. You karate do 'guess so', [makes squish gesture] just like grape. Understand?"
I've never tried to learn karate, nor to compete in a tournament against others like Daniel was planning on doing. I have finished five 50k trail races, with another one coming up very soon, and anyone who has done ultra-running can see the point Miyagi is trying to make: some things in life can't be attempted with half measures. I can't imagine trying to run 31 miles without training, without the right gear and fuel along the way, "squish just like grape" sounds about right though.
Christianity requires an even more single-minded, all-in, nothing-held-back, level of commitment than anything else you or I may attempt to accomplish in life. There is no room for split allegiances, no allowances for putting other goals and priorities above our devotion to God.
The second commandment, as listed by Jesus, puts our devotion to God in its full context. When we give God our whole heart, soul, and mind, it doesn't eliminate or even diminish our obligations to other people, it actually enables them. God requires that we treat everyone with love because God is the maker of us all and the redeemer of humanity. We are not allowed to put labels on individuals or groups of people and thus exempt ourselves from loving them (see the Parable of the Good Samaritan for a powerful rebuke of those who think 'neighbor' is limited).
Which brings us to 'Christian' Nationalism which runs afoul of both the greatest and the second greatest commandments. {It isn't the only 'ism' guilty of this flaw} The greatest by diluting our devotion to God, the Gospel, and his Kingdom by putting the interests of a particular country on par with them {If you think 'Christian' Nationalism isn't elevating love of country to this level, you haven't interacted with it in its full form either historically or in America today}, and the second greatest by invariably treating our country's citizens as more worthy of love than 'them'. "America First!", whatever else it may be, cannot be a Christian slogan, nor one which God would approve, as it inherently treats people who don't posses American citizenship as lesser than those who do.
Go ahead and love your country, if you think it is the best country to live in your faith won't have any problem with that opinion. But don't, if you wish to obey the commands of Jesus, act as if Jesus mentioned devotion to country when he spelled out the greatest commandment, and don't commit the sin of treating 'them', whoever you may put in that category, as anything less than your neighbor.
Having established both the forgiveness of our sins, removing God's wrath, and our justification, making Christ's righteousness our own, both through faith in Jesus Christ, now Paul turns to the implications of these profound changes of status by highlighting one of the most important: we have peace with God.
Gaining peace with God is far more valuable than we understand, in part because most of humanity does not recognize that it is currently at war with God, a hopeless path. Also, peace with God is a cause worthy of profound celebration as it will create positive change throughout our lives, both present and future.
Matthew 22:20-21 New International Version
20 and he asked them, “Whose image is this? And whose inscription?”
21 “Caesar’s,” they replied.
Then he said to them, “So give back to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s.”
It has been a long time since I was a math nerd. The A that I earned in Calculus in high school was the last math class that I ever needed, or wanted, to take. But I still enjoy a well laid out Venn Diagram's ability to explain the relationship between things that otherwise are confusing to people. In my World Religions seminar I created a three circle Veen Diagram to illustrate the overlap and differences between the terms: Jew, Judaism, and Israelite because people can belong to one, two, or all three of those categories.
When the Pharisees tried to trap Jesus between the power of the Roman Empire and man's higher obligation to God, Jesus could have given an answer that would have resoundingly supported both Jewish Nationalism in the 1st Century, and Christian Nationalism in the last two thousand years. But he didn't. Not at all, not a bit. Instead of ranking the obligations that we owe to God and earthly powers, Jesus differentiated between them.
The Pharisees were expecting Jesus to argue that "B is proper subset of A" (the circle within the circle in the chart above), either that God's rule is supreme, or Rome's, but they're all one circle. In a sense, that's true, God is indeed supreme over all, the entirety of the created universe belongs in a circle contained within the all-encompassing circle of God. But, and this is key, that's an ontological answer (i.e. the nature of reality), not a functional one. God chose to allow humanity a degree of freedom and autonomy, to let the governments of humanity exist without being theocracies directly under his immediate rule {Israel prior to their requests for a king come closest to that model}.
In the end, 'Christian' Nationalists want the two circles of human government and God's rule to perfectly overlap, to make them one in the same (i.e. one circle, not two). Jesus rejected this idea, he wasn't interested in conquering human governments, his Kingdom would be founded on different principles and pursue different goals. The Church of Jesus Christ must follow his lead. We are not called to triumph over Caesar, or even to be Caesar, but to continue to give to God what is God's.
What belongs to Caesar and what belongs to God? That's an important question, and one God-honoring men and women in the Church might not always agree upon, but one thing is certain, there is a distinction between them.
Matthew 21:31 New International Version
“Which of the two did what his father wanted?”
“The first,” they answered.
Jesus said to them, “Truly I tell you, the tax collectors and the prostitutes are entering the kingdom of God ahead of you.
When asked in episode 3 of the new Disney + series Andor how he acquired a highly secret piece of Imperial hardware, the show's title character Casssian Andor (played by Diego Luna) responds with scorn that because the Empire is so full of itself the only thing you need to do is put on a uniform and walk in like you belong there.
An age old question for both Judaism and Christianity has been how to differentiate between those who properly belong to the religion and those who do not. The question is complicated by the realization that our methods or criteria for inclusion or exclusion may not properly align with God's such that we may be welcoming those whom God has not, and scorning those whom God has chosen. Jesus himself makes much of this dissonance, repeatedly rejecting self-righteous Pharisees and others with power and authority within 1st century Judaism, while welcoming fishermen, women, tax collectors, prostitutes, lepers, and various others that had been labeled by society as outcast 'sinners', but who were willing to come to him in faith.
The Church, for its part, has struggled throughout its history to require genuine discipleship from all its adherents, while at the same time keeping its doors wide open to anyone and everyone whom God may call to repentance. The more power and influence the Church has wielded in society, the more it has been likely to welcome the rich and well connected with no questions asked and turn up its nose at the poor and forgotten despite Jesus' example to the contrary. Jesus called us to be better than that.
'Christian' Nationalism is especially vulnerable because of its pursuit of worldly power to the charge of accepting false devotion (i.e. that which is based upon selfish motives and not grounded in repentance and faith) among those who can help it achieve its goals {Including the related topic of ignoring heretical beliefs, even clear apostasy when coming from a political leader or ally}, while at the same time rejecting as unworthy those who demonstrate faith and righteous living, but happen to not share the same politics/ethnicity/nationality. In other words, 'Christian' Nationalism is defining 'us' and 'them' by superficial criteria that mock Jesus' willingness to speak hard truths to the powerful and hold out hope to the weak.
Why? Because 'Christian' Nationalism is trying to 'win' in this world, the consequences to the next are secondary at best. The true Church is willing to lose everything in this world for the sake of the Kingdom of God.
Matthew 18:3-4 New International Version
3 And he said: “Truly I tell you, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. 4 Therefore, whoever takes the lowly position of this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven.
One of the things that made George Lucas' fictional Force interesting as a story plot device was how counter-intuitive it was for most of the characters. Luke's first interaction with the Force is a training exercise where Obi-Wan Kenobi asks him to try to defend himself against a drone with the 'blast shield' on the helmet lowered, i.e. to fight blind. After initially failing, he eventually starts to get the hang of it. At the end of the movie, Luke demonstrates that he learned something about the Force in the brief interim by destroying the Death Star by 'using the Force' to aim his proton torpedoes rather than his targeting computer. The Force, in Lucas' imagining, is not like anything we know from our own experience here on Earth.
As Jesus explains the Kingdom of God to his disciples, he time and time emphasizes that the methods and goals of the kingdom he is founding are not those of this world. It won't operate according to this world's rules, and it won't chase after what this world covets. The Kingdom of God will be different.
The Church, therefore, must follow this series of commands and teachings by Jesus when considering how we are to fulfill our obligations as encapsulated in the Great Commission. If we attempt to achieve the correct goals, but do so using the methodology and tactics of this world, we will fail. If we attempt to achieve goals other than the ones that Jesus told us to pursue, we will fail. It is that simple.
Unfortunately, Church History is full of examples of men and women, some of whom were acting in sincere faith and devotion, others not so much, who either abandoned Jesus' methodology, or eschewed his goals. The results were, entirely predictably, disastrous.
Here is where 'Christian' Nationalism comes in. As a movement, it is BOTH utilizing strategies and tactics that are in direct contradiction to Jesus' example of servanthood and righteousness by placing morality as a lower priority than winning, AND doing so in the service of the pursuit of worldly power (and the wealth and fame that go with it) that Jesus never, not once, told his disciples to pursue. Knowing that either immoral methodology, or faulty goals, will doom any human endeavor that is supposedly undertaken on God's behalf, it is certain that 'Christian' Nationalism will fail, as it has always done throughout Church History, no matter how much power it manages to scrape together in this world. Make sure you understand this: Even if 'Christian' Nationalists "take back America for God" they will fail. Even if they control the entire government, in perpetuity, wielding all of its power in pursuit of their politics, they will fail. It may not look like it from the heights of world power, but it will most assuredly be true when looking at the effect upon the Kingdom of God.
Failure is inevitable because the Kingdom of God doesn't work this way, and the Kingdom of God isn't interested in what Nationalists so badly want.
Matthew 16:25 New International Version
For whoever wants to save their life will lose it, but whoever loses their life for me will find it.
In 1519, Spanish Conquistador Hernan Cortes, facing attempts by some from his expedition to abandon their mission and sail back to Cuba, ordered his entire fleet to be scuttled {The popular story is that the ships were burned, but given how costly they were, Cortes would have only put holes in the ships, making sailing them impossible in the short-term so they could be salvaged at least for the wood later on}. Having eliminated the possibility of retreat, Cortes then led his men onward in the Spanish conquest of Mexico.
An illustration from a conquest carried out, at least on paper, in the name of Christ is not something one would normally use when writing against 'Christian' Nationalism since that's the attitude we need to avoid, but the well known actions of Cortes, in an unjust cause, still serve as a reminder of how differently people act when they have passed the Point of No Return.
Every single legitimate follower of Jesus Christ throughout history was past the Point of No Return from the moment he/she became committed to Jesus until death. What does this mean? This world is not our home, this life is not ours to do with as we please. We are here on a mission from God, called to serve a purpose, we cannot do that and try to live for wealth, power, or fame in this world too.
'Christian' Nationalists certainly have a sense of purpose and mission, that's not the problem, the problem is that they've turned the focus of our calling as Christians toward this world and not the next, toward the physical and not the spiritual. Toward power and control here and now, not the service and sacrifice that Jesus demands of us. In the end, they're still trying to save their lives (and/or country) here rather than give them over to the Gospel.
As the Steven Curtis Chapman song, Burn the Ships, inspired by Cortes' bold move says,
"Burn the ships we're here to stay
There's no way we could go back
Now that we've come this far by faith
Burn the ships we've passed the point of no return
Our life is here so let the ships burn and burn"
My beautiful
wife Nicole and I have been married for 21 years and counting. Early on in our married life she began a
habit of asking, “tell me a story” at the end of our day. Aside from an occasional foray into fiction,
my go-to response was to tell her about how we had met, about our first kiss,
reminding her that she asked me to kiss her, and how we had subsequently fallen
in love.
Along with
these origin stories about how our union came to be, which she enjoyed even
though they lacked any radioactive spider bites or experiments with gamma
radiation, I recounted to her the tales of road trips we had taken together to
Texas, Virginia, Glacier National Park and Yellowstone, Rocky Mountain National
Park, and once more to Glacier National Park, and the various adventures, and
misadventures that accompanied them.
For example,
“Do you remember the time we pulled a pop-up camper to RMNP, only to discover while
we tried to set it up in the dark at the end of the first day that we’d left
two of the poles behind, necessitating making new ones from some pipe purchased
at a Lowe’s the next day, have the stove be unusable because the gas line was
clogged with a wasp nest, discover the hard way that misquotes had multiple
ways inside that we needed to plug, have a flat on the car in Colorado and on
the trailer in MN, and finally have the lift mechanism stuck in the up position
while I beat on it with a rubber hammer at Tahquamenon Falls State Park in MI’s
U.P.? Ah, fun times.” FYI, that was the only trip we took with that
trailer, sold it the next summer.
For
Christmas 2007, I created a journal of memories to give to Nicole that covered
our relationship from 1999 when we first met until then. It was a leather-bound journal with the
written version of the stories from my point of view that I had been telling
her at night, in my dubious handwriting, but also with stickers representing
the various events in our lives together and places we had visited in it that I
had purchased at a craft store to give it some flare.
In 2014,
when Nicole and I returned to Glacier National Park, hiking to some of the same
places as we had in 2004 like Avalanche Lake, but adding a 13.6-mile round trip
trail with 3,526 feet of elevation gain to Sperry Chalet, the last mile or so
on top of the still six or seven feet deep snow that remained in mid-June. It was a climb that seemed endless to Nicole,
especially since you can’t see the goal to know if you’re getting close or not until
you’re almost to it. After that trip,
Nicole took it upon herself to one-up my effort of commemoration by making this
professional looking book on the computer and printing it on Shutterfly.
The thing
is, we both knew the stories that we were telling each other, or writing
about, already. It wasn’t new
information the first time we told it to each other, let alone on subsequent retellings,
so why did Nicole want me to share with her those same memories over and over
again?
The reason has to do with the value we place on the stories we choose to tell about the past. There was a reason why she didn’t ask me to, and I didn’t choose to, recount boring everyday stories, things from work, traumas, or sorrows, but rather focused upon those seminal moments, those vivid, comic, and happy memories that we shared together. Our shared stories are instrumental in explaining how we became who we are now, the experiences themselves having molded and shaped us along the way.
It turns
out, God does much the same thing by choosing to share, and reshare, specific
stories about the past in the scriptures.
One moment in time stands out as the example par excellence: The
Exodus.
The first
time God tells Moses that The Exodus is going to be a recurring theme occurs
during the instructions about the Passover,
Exodus
12:14 New International Version
“This is
a day you are to commemorate; for the generations to come you shall celebrate
it as a festival to the Lord—a lasting ordinance.
Even before
it had happened, God told Moses that his people would be required to commemorate
this display of God’s power and covenantal faithfulness with a yearly ceremony
in perpetuity.
It was much
less than one year before the story of The Exodus was brought back up, even
before the Israelites arrived at Mt. Sinai, God needed to remind them of the
plagues that had befallen Egypt, this first time using the story to put a stop
to their grumbling along the way.
In fact,
Moses used the story of The Exodus when talking to God, who certainly
hadn’t forgotten about it, in his plea for mercy upon the Israelites following
the Golden Calf debacle.
Exodus
32:11-12 New International Version
11 But
Moses sought the favor of the Lord his God. “Lord,” he said, “why should your
anger burn against your people, whom you brought out of Egypt with great power
and a mighty hand? 12 Why should the Egyptians say, ‘It was with evil intent
that he brought them out, to kill them in the mountains and to wipe them off
the face of the earth’? Turn from your fierce anger; relent and do not bring
disaster on your people.
Thus begins
a pattern repeated many, many times in the remaining books of the Hebrew
Scriptures as well as in the Gospels and the rest of the New Testament, of God,
the psalmists, the prophets, Jesus, the Apostles, and more making direct
references and easily identifiable allusions to God’s actions in The
Exodus.
The Exodus in
subsequent portions of scripture becomes a catch-all capable of both
admonishing the people when they go astray from the covenant and encouraging
the people during times of oppression.
While pointing to the past, references to The Exodus also become the
basis for promises about what God will do for his people in the future, with
the ultimate culmination being the Messianic fulfillment of Jesus whose life
and ministry is steeped in Exodus imagery highlighted by a Passover meal at the
beginning of his Passion.
The past, for God, is a tool capable of teaching his people what he needs them to know in a variety of settings and circumstances. It is not meant to be forgotten, but remembered and learned from not once, but multiple times.
What then do
we do with what God has done in our lives, individually, our families, as
a local congregation, and as a region of the American Baptist Churches? Commemoration and celebration are certainly
in order, as is storytelling and preservation of that history that allows it to
be shared now and in the future.
Following
the biblical examples of how The Exodus is used, perhaps the most important
things we can do with our knowledge of what God has done for us and through us
in the past, is use it to help us confront, and by God’s grace overcome, the
challenges of the present. Have we
strayed? Remembering how God forgave our
past can guide us to repentance again.
Are we burdened? Recalling how
God provided in our past can comfort us and give us hope. Do we need motivation? Praising God for the
outpouring of his amazing grace in living memory can help us find it.
What stories do you need
to tell of the love of God manifested in your church and your family?
The stories
I can choose to tell to Nicole in the present have a new character in them since
she made “Nicole and Randy’s Big Adventure” in 2014: our precious Clara
Marie. And while we were already aware
of God’s presence in the first 14 years of our journey as husband and wife,
especially the difficult years that led step by step to our decision to move to
PA in 2012, and while we have already given him glory for seeing us through
those days, parenthood is often God’s way of saying, “you ain’t seen nothing
yet.” We have so many stories to tell of
God’s love and faithfulness.
