Sermon Video: The same attitude toward each other as Jesus had -Romans 15:1-6

Why should Christians of "strong" faith bear with those whose faith is "weak"?  The answer certainly isn't to bolster our own ego (as if the faith we have were our own doing rather than a gift of grace), instead the Apostle Paul tells us that we are obligated to act toward our fellow Christians with the same attitude that Jesus Christ had.  Now, let's be honest, that's far beyond our capability.  Thankfully, God has also committed to empowering his people to imitate Jesus (through the Holy Spirit that indwells God's people).

How Franklin moves forward, together: the Law of Love, Romans 13:10

Franklin PA from above, the 13th St. bridge to the right, and the 8th St. to the left.

It was a tumultuous week here in Franklin, things got real nuts online on Tuesday, it rose to a crescendo on Wednesday and then started to calm down, thankfully with things being peaceful on Saturday.  For those of you who missed it, a social media post by St. Patrick Parish regarding yesterday's downtown business fundraiser, the "Witch Walk", set off a furor of liking/hating, sharing, and increasingly nasty comments online.  That was Tuesday.  On Wednesday afternoon I posted this: What the furor over the Witch Walk in Franklin can teach us about Christian cultural engagement, it was well received (thank you all for the civility and kind words), and I followed it up on Friday with this: An observation about social media comment sections in light of the Witch Walk furor, and this: Light vs Darkness and the reason why Christians should be perpetual optimists.

This morning, Sunday, I just finished doing what I always do which is review my sermon one last time and make any necessary corrections or changes (typically they involve fixing my horrible penmanship so at least I can read my scratches).  I thought I'd share with you what I wrote about Romans 13:10, words that feel providentially appropriate to our community moving forward (for those who prefer the video version, the whole sermon on Romans 13:8b-10 will be available on this blog and YouTube on Tuesday):

10 Love does no harm to a neighbor.  Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law.

Here is where the Apostle Paul gives a glimpse, "behind the curtain" if you will, at the principle upon which God built the Law of Moses and all prior and subsequent expressions of his will to mankind, such as this letter from Paul.  That principle is of course love.  Love for God, love for family, neighbors, and as Jesus expanded the idea, even love for our enemies, is the beating heart of the commands we've received from God.

This tells us a few things, among them: (1) God's commands are not arbitrary, purposeless, or pointless.  They have a rhyme and a reason, and it is love.

(2) Therefore, when God's commands are portrayed by his people in ways that are not love-based, or carried out by his people in ways that are not love-infused, we do a grave dis-service to God.

(3) When we come to an issue or topic about which God has made no law, or where our information from God seems to be difficult to apply to the present circumstances, our path forward is to say, "What does love have to say on the subject?"

(4) Which is why some efforts of God's people, individually or collectively, are doomed to fail because they're not built upon love.  Whatever the other motivations and methods used might be, they won't connect to the heart of God if they are not build upon love, and they, of course, will actively oppose the will of God if those motives and methods consist of hate.

Now, some will say, "That's fine on paper, but this is the real world, we need to fight fire with fire!"  No, no, no, a thousand times no.  As cool as Batman may be, we don't need a Dark Knight to advance the cause of Christ.  While it is absolutely true that methods that utilize anger, greed, lust, or pride may make a bigger splash, get more clicks, have higher ratings, draw bigger crowds, or achieve more sales, they will never have lasting impact for good because they cannot.  Why?  Because they go against the nature of God himself!  God is love, the only way to truly advance the Kingdom of God is through love.  It is far better to "lose" in this life through love, than to "win" in this life through anything else.

What the furor over the Witch Walk in Franklin can teach us about Christian cultural engagement

Downtown Franklin during last year's Witch Walk

As many of you in the Franklin area will have noticed, a post on the St. Patrick Parish Facebook page yesterday has gone viral (800+ shares and 3k plus comments on the original post in the first 24 hours, that's a whole lot for our small town). Here is the yourerie.com news story about the drama that has been unfolding.

While I have no desire to engage in the argumentation about the post's topic (their opposition to the upcoming Franklin Retail & Business Association's sponsored Halloween themed shopping event called the Witch Walk), and will gladly delete those who comment in that direction, this is absolutely a teachable moment with respect to Christian discipleship and engagement in the world.

Today's Wednesday AM Bible Study had come to 1 Corinthians 5:12-13: 12 What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? 13 God will judge those outside. “Expel the wicked person from among you.”

Bible Study video, 1 Corinthians 5:12-13 {We talked about this topic during the first 30 minutes of Bible Study, if you want to engage more deeply on the topic, watching it is a good place to start.}

This text leads us to an important question: When should Christians, in a free society like ours (we are indeed blessed with Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Religion), engage in the culture at-large by either supporting or opposing what is happening around them?  In other words, when is what happens outside of the Church our business?

Some important context: 

(1) The mandate to protect the innocent from violence/exploitation/oppression supersedes this.  If/when that is what is happening, it is not a question of choice but an obligation, Christians must intervene, to the best of their ability, to protect those in need.  This then explains why Christians ought to speak out and fight against racism, injustice, homelessness, sexual abuse, violence, fraudulent practices, cults, and the like.  Real people are being hurt and even if that action is taking place outside of the Church (God forbid it is happening inside the Church, in that case our mandate is even stronger), we ought to act.  {Example: The Abolitionist and Civil Rights Movements, Dietrich Bonhoeffer and the Confessing Church, etc.}

(2) When the topic is illegality, it isn't an option for the Church to handle it "in house."  This was one of the great sins of the clergy sex abuse scandal, to think that such illegal and evil acts could be dealt with through counseling and church discipline while at the same time hiding the truth from the proper legal authorities.  As Paul makes clear in Romans 13, we have human governments for a reason, when behavior is criminal (assuming the law itself is not immoral) the justice system is the primary remedy.

(3) Our house will always be made at least partly of glass.  The obvious and expected response to any negative cultural engagement on the part of the Church (officially through leadership or on the individual member level) is to point out the hypocrisy of all of the ways in which the Church, past and present, has failed to live up to the high standard of Christ-likeness.  That this objection is valid, those sins truly do stain the Bride of Christ, means that this will always be an impediment if/when the Church decides to take a side in a cultural issue.  If the response is to downplay or deny the evil that has been done by those who claim the name of Christian, it will only make matters worse.

(4) Hyperbole doesn't help matters.  I've often seen Christians take an issue that has some objectionable content in it and make it out to be something that Satan himself created.  The sky isn't falling, the Devil doesn't lurk behind every corner, and not everything is wholly evil that we take issue with.  Before we start yelling, "Burn the witches!" we'd better know if there are actual witches involved, actual pagan worship, and not just play acting.  By the way, even if there are real-life witches involved, the answer is never "burn them!", it is always pray for them and love them, for only Good can overcome Evil, utilizing different kinds of evil as a weapon is always counter-productive.

To sum up: I know well-meaning and God honoring Christians who are worried and want to do something about a whole range of issues, including the Witch Walk, and I know well-meaning and God honoring Christians who look at those same issues, including the Witch Walk, and come to a different conclusion.  Where one sees evil, the other seems harmless fun, where one sees a cause to champion, the other says, "Live and let live."  Because I believe so strongly in the breadth and depth of the Church in our world, I both expect and celebrate this diversity of viewpoint.  God has called so many people out of the darkness and into the light, from so many different backgrounds and experiences, that it would be folly to expect us all to look out at the complex world we live in and see it in exactly the same ways.  We are indeed one body, but designed to be many parts, and that's a good thing.

In the end, what we need is compassion, dialogue, patience, hope, and the willingness to agree to disagree.  These aren't the qualities that make good "click bait", but they are the ones that help us develop the Fruit of the Spirit and make a true positive impact upon the world that we live in.

* Note * This is not a pagan religious event, those wanting to share opinions about freedom of religion or the separation of Church and State are barking up the wrong tree, it is a business venture, and attempt to encourage shopping in the downtown district.

* Final note * In a deep irony that was expected, the local Torah Club leaders have praised the efforts of St. Patrick's social media account to "combat evil" and "stand for the Gospel", even going so far as to praise the Catholic Church (For context on why that is unusual, First Fruits of Zion, their parent organization, is strongly Anti-Catholic to its core).  This support from the Torah Clubs is deeply ironic for two reasons: (1) the Gospel itself is not at stake in this question, the Witch Walk is not an event where a version of the Gospel is being proclaimed in any way shape or form, thus whether or not a pastor or church supports, opposes, or says nothing about it, it is not matter of "standing for the Gospel."  (2) The Torah Clubs are 100% committed to overturning and replacing the Gospel as it has been preached for the past 2,000 years (replacing it with Torah observance as the true measure of devotion to Jesus), and the Franklin Christian Ministerium has spent the last year fighting against their malign influence and proselytizing of church members. 

Update 9/19/23: explorevenango.com, a website that publishes local news, wrote a story about the original post, how it targeted the Chamber unfairly, the uproar, and subsequent events.  I found it to be accurate and even-handed: Controversy Brewing Over Franklin Witch Walk - By Gavin Fish, October 18, 2023

Update 9/20/23: The News-Herald/Derrick, our joint Franklin-Oil City newspaper, wrote about all this in Friday's paper, below are photos of the story for those who don't live in the area.

Update 9/20/23: Erie News Now was in town yesterday, doing interviews about the story.  Their reporting doesn't add much except it is in the video format: Erie News Now story on the Witch Walk controversy

Update 9/22/23: Things went off without any controversy or contention yesterday, both at St. Patrick's and downtown.  My thanks to all who worked to make sure that was the case, if you dissuaded someone from doing something fueled by fear or anger you did the work of the Lord whether or not you knew it at the time.

Sermon Video: Rejecting Evil and Revenge by Embracing Kindness and Peace - Romans 12:17-21

How should the followers of Jesus respond to evil?  The answer can never be with our own evil attitudes and actions.  Where does that leave us?  We must turn instead to kindness and peace, embracing them no matter what happens, knowing that God may use our kindness to open the door to his own mercy upon those who are evil, for only God knows how each person's story ends, as objects of God's wrath or love.

Sermon Video: One Body with many different gifts - Romans 12:4-8

The Church was designed and created by God to be unity with diversity.  The Gospel has always appealed, purposefully, to many different people.  As a church then, whether we're talking about our local congregation or a grouping of congregation in a community or denomination, we have only one body made up of many different parts.  These parts have been given gifts by God's grace of talents and abilities designed to make individuals usual in the life of the church and the completion of its mission.

Here's the key thing: Everyone in every church has a gift from God that they can share with the other members of the church.  We all can contribute to the common cause, we all can make a difference.

Illustrating the types of cultural response available to Christians with the Barbie movie as the example

 

Full disclosure: I haven't seen the Barbie movie.  If my 8 year old daughter hadn't been out of town with my wife Nicole since it came out, no doubt we would have taken her to see it (although with respect to Oppenheimer, I'm on my own).

When it comes to the culture that we live in, whatever nation or era that might be, Christians have four primary options when it comes to how they will interact with it: Promotion, Animosity, Withdrawal, and Engagement.  Let me illustrate what these might look like with respect to the summer blockbuster that is The Barbie Movie.

1. Promotion

"The Barbie movie illustrates what God intended gender roles to be."  Admittedly, I haven't seen anything like this in the many online commentaries and comments swirling around.  Aside from a TV show like The Chosen, you don't often see commentary written from a Christian perspective that explicitly endorses cultural artistic expressions, but on the somewhat rare occasion that a particular song, play, show, movie, etc. does indeed reflect the Judeo-Christian worldview, it would be appropriate to point that out.  {FYI, just because the content in question is produced by a "Christian" studio/writer/director, etc. doesn't mean it will properly reflect a Biblical mindset, such creations ought to still be held up to God's Word for evaluation on their own merits.}

2. Animosity

"Demonic plot of Barbie movie revealed!" "Liberals are trying to indoctrinate your kids through the Barbie Movie!" "Feminist Crap!"  I have actually seen each of those headlines in recent weeks, in all cases the message is clear, "Don't watch this movie because it is liberal/feminist/demonic."  An entire cottage industry has evolved, and is making a lot of money, creating just this sort of antagonistic response to most everything produced by the entertainment industry today.

A brief note on the problem with the "all animosity all the time" approach: (1) It has the tendency to convince both fellow Christians and non-believers that we have nothing to offer each other, that in fact we are enemies and should treat each other as such. (2) It quickly becomes a "boy who cried wolf" phenomenon.  When everything produced by Disney, for example, is labeled as demonic by online pundits and cable news talking heads, whatever values such warnings may have ever had becomes diluted (and non-believers look even more skeptically at Christianity wondering what on earth we're thinking). (3) The end result of this type of response is that it becomes an exercise in preaching to the choir, those who shout "amen" are with you, but everyone else decides to keep their distance.

3. Withdrawal

"Haven't seen it, don't really care."  Now, the Barbie movie is the example, and that won't be on everyone's must-see list no matter how much money it makes (after two weeks the answer is a whole lot of money), and certainly not every Christian thinker needs to weigh in on every cultural moment of import.  The withdrawal impulse is reflected in the "moat mentality," as I like to call it.  By that I mean the tendency of many Christians to view their neighbors and country as a lost cause and respond by digging a proverbial moat around themselves and ceasing to engage altogether. 

This is, in the end, a self-defeating option, retreating to the modern equivalent of monasteries is not a viable option.  No need to have an informed opinion on everything, but walking away entirely is not going to help anyone.

4. Engagement

"Our culture is struggling with questions about power, gender, purpose, and death. Barbie raises these questions brilliantly, but believers can point to the One who ultimately answers them: the Triune God who created all humans with purpose and for partnership."  You probably noticed that the engagement option wasn't very headline worthy, that's part of the point.  Rather than click-bait, true engagement seeks to look at something produced by human beings, flawed as we all are, and evaluate it through the lens of the Judeo-Christian worldview.  In doing so, we hope to highlight that which is in keeping with the Word of God, point out that which is contradictory to it, and offer insight that illustrates how the Gospel would fill in the gaps or correct the shortcomings of the what is being evaluated. 

The above quote was taken from the review of the Barbie movie by Professor Amy Peeler, professor of New Testament studies at Wheaton College.  Having already written a book entitled, Women and the Gender of God, she was well positioned to offer insight into the issues about gender roles raised in the movie.

Neither Barbie Nor Ken - A Barbie Movie Review - by Professor Amy Peeler

Note: I have seen numerous people respond with animosity toward the director of the Barbie movie, and/or the movie itself, by attacking Professor Peeler as if writing a review of a movie (or book, song, show, etc.) automatically means that you somehow endorse everything in it.  That is nonsense and immoral, but far too commonplace in the social media realm.  For example, I mentioned the death of Jon Snow from Game of Thrones in my sermon on Sunday as an example of how characters with a moral code suffer when those around them live by a survival of the fittest mentality.  It would be unfair to then smear me (so please don't) by pointing out non-Christian ideas that exist in Game of Thrones (of which there are plenty to choose from) simply because I used that as an example.  To engage with the culture thoughtfully does not make you responsible for the entirety of that cultural expression.

That's the danger of participating in engagement.  When one puts commentary out there, slings and arrows are often the primary response you see, often times from both the right and left of what you've written/spoken, no matter how far to the right or left your position actually may be {online there is always someone more to the margins willing to shoot at you}.  Nevertheless, engagement is what true Christian apologetics consists of, it sometimes will be a positive review and interaction with the material created by others, sometimes it will be a negative review, the important connector will be honest and thoughtful responses.  

Be honest, you'd rather see more kind dialogue than the endless stream of click-bait anger, wouldn't you?  

Call me an optimist, I have to hope you're as sick of the endless invective as I am.

Listen to the Word of God: 62 Scripture passages that refute 'Christian' Nationalism - #14: Matthew 18:3-4

 

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. 

Listen to the Word of God: 62 Scripture passages that refute 'Christian' Nationalism - #8: Matthew 5:13

 

Matthew 5:13     New International Version

“You are the salt of the earth. But if the salt loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled underfoot.

How cozy with the Kingdoms of this World (human governments) can the Church be before it loses its saltiness?  In other words, if the Church wields dominion in this age, determining military policy, tax provisions, environmental regulations, food and drug safety, and the whole host of decisions over peoples lives that a modern government must make {choosing not to regulate an area is of course a decision too}, will such a Church retain any of its required saltiness?

The context leading up to verse 13 of the Sermon on the Mount is the Beatitudes.  Just prior to telling his followers to be salt, an element essential for life in the Ancient World, Jesus proclaims that the Kingdom of God is counter-intuitive by declaring those whom society normally looks upon as 'losers' to be "blessed".  You see, the Kingdom of God is not business as usual, it isn't a slightly better version of this world's cultures and governments, it isn't a tweak of the old; the Kingdom of God is a radical change of human behavior and interactions on a fundamental level from top to bottom.

For far too much of Church History the Church has been content to nibble at the margins, to strive for a better world without putting the Word of God to the test by living in accordance with ALL that it teaches.  The Church has lived by faith, but only so far.  And yet, 'Christian' Nationalism would ask us to lean into this hesitancy, to go all-in on ruling here and now by using the very methods and tactics that this world has devised to grasp and maintain power.  "Be Christ-like and trust God with the results?  You naïve fool, we'd lose if we did that!", there actions (and at times words) proclaim. 

Can you honestly say, when listening to politicians, that any of them (save perhaps some on the local level) are acting in their role as public leaders according to the vision of the Sermon on the Mount?  Are any of them striving to establish the Kingdom of God?  So, why are they, politicians and pundits, being treated as leaders of Christianity?  What training, calling, and experience do they have in Christian discipleship, in leading with a servant's heart?

On of the great tragedies here is that God has called his people to far more.  To a more abundant and purposeful life here and now through radical self-denial and service.  Take back the country for God, the culture?  Why would God want them, he's already spelled out his plans for a far greater prize.

Sermon Video: "circumcision of the heart"? - Romans 2:25-29

Surface level participation in religion isn't good enough.  Paul demonstrates this by discussion the circumcision of Judaism, but it equally applies to the baptism of Christianity.  Religious ceremony can be negated by immoral behavior (or lack of moral behavior), it is important but limited.  In the end, hearts and minds need to be changed, obedience to God's commands needs to occur, anything less is insufficient.

The Bible doesn't mandate that Christians support Democracy, BUT preventing the Evil that Autocracy would unleash in America does

 

The Bible doesn't support Democracy.  Then again, the Bible doesn't denounce it either.  In fact, the Bible mentions Democracy not at all.  Most people familiar with the Bible and world history would assume this already, but there are numerous modern topics that were not part of the conversation in the Ancient World.  The Bible doesn't address any of these topics directly.  How could it?  What language would it use, and how could the original audience possibly understand it if it did and thus be edified by it?  Remember, the portions of scripture that collectively make up the Bible were first given to specific people on specific occasions, for specific purposes.  Because it is God's Word it has meaning and application beyond those initial considerations as part of its enduring quality, but not without them.  In other words, "It cannot mean for us what it never meant for them."  

The Bible was written in a world that knew only variations of one-man rule (occasionally one-woman rule).  Emperors, Kings, Chieftains and the like, some kind and benevolent, some vain and cruel.  It did not know Communism, Republics, Constitutional Monarchy or Democracy {The short-lived experiment in 'pure' Democracy in Athens being, if anything, a cautionary tale thanks to its demise, and by the time Rome became a part of the story in the New Testament it had long since ceased to be a Republic}.  As such, the Bible neither supports nor condemns modern concepts related to other ways to govern a nation.  This gives Christians freedom of conscience when considering what type of governmental system they prefer.  Instead of commands in this area, the Bible gives Christians principles to seek to apply such as the Golden Rule, "Do to others as you would have them do to you." (Luke 6:31) or "He has shown you, O mortal, what is good.  And what does the Lord require of you?  To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God." (Micah 6:8)

That being said, there is a growing trend in the West (Hungary is already there, but also Poland, France, and America) of Christians (a mix no doubt of self-professed cultural 'Christian' and genuine disciples of Christ) supporting Autocratic tendencies in government.  In response to societal pressures and fears, a growing number of Christians are beginning to prefer a 'strong man' type leadership to the leadership derived from fair elections.  In other words, they would rather have their team win without democracy than risk losing with it.  There are increasingly supporting having the policies they champion imposed by any means necessary, regardless the legality of the methods or the rights of others.  The most common rationale is to view modern politics as a war, one in which it doesn't matter how you play the game, only whether or not you win or lose.  In this view, democratic norms and morality are naïve, only power matters because the stakes are too high {There is much Christian Apocalypse related imagery and reasoning here as well.}

I have written often about the dangers of choosing power over principles, might over right, but what about the danger of choosing Autocracy over Democracy?  Are Christians obligated as a matter of morality to support, even defend, the modern concept of liberal democracy?

The answer is yes, and the reason doesn't have to involve a philosophical discussion regarding governance.  One need only ask this question, "If democracy falls, what will replace it?"  History has shown, repeatedly, that the answer is: something less just, less fair, and more prone to evil.  It would be the height of folly to believe that this time it will be different.  That we can hand power over to one man, one family, or one cabal, without watching our society descend into persecution of those who oppose the regime.  Until the invasion of Ukraine, it was fashionable in some Christian Nationalist circles to view Vladimir Putin as a 'savior' of Christianity against the forces of Islam and Liberalism.  As the mass graves in Ukraine, the rape of a country previously at peace attest, autocrats are no friend to Christian morality.  There is NO scenario where the American system of elections, of sharing power based upon their results, is replaced by one in which 'our team' has permanent rule that does not involve a massive increase in Evil.

Perhaps some Christians are thinking, "this time it will be different, you'll see."  They're wrong; both history and human nature make trusting the leadership of a nation to an autocrat to be a folly, but let's move to a 2nd line of reasoning: Do Unto Others.  Would you want to be on the losing side of an Autocratic regime?  Would you want your rights taken away by 'them', your role in choosing your nation's future reduced to nothing?  The answer is no, it would be tyranny and you would hate it.  HOW then can any Christian support the notion that Autocracy is just fine when my team wins if they would violently oppose it if the shoe was on the other foot?  If Christian Nationalists are not willing to live with permanent rule of the Democratic Party, how can they cheer on the notion of permanent rule by the Republican Party?  To do so, those trending toward autocratic methodology must consider the people on the other side to be less than us: they are less than those of us who are the 'real Americans'.  An ethic that follows the teachings of Jesus Christ, that views every person as your neighbor that you must 'love as yourself' cannot tolerate this dissonance.  In fact, to embrace us over them, even to see the world as divided into these competing camps, is to begin to walk down the road that negates the truth that every person is made in the image of God. {Yes, the world is divided into Redeemed and Lost, Sheep and Goats, but those are not the lines being drawn here, this is political not spiritual warfare}

Can a Christian, in good conscience, turn against Democracy in favor of Autocracy?  Not if he/she loves their neighbor whom such a system would harm, as Jesus commanded us to do.

Sermon Video: The Way of the Righteous - Psalm 1

The psalm chosen to begin the collection of music brought together as the book of Psalms highlights two stark and divergent paths.  The righteous path delights in God's Law (his Word), studying it and living by it, and is rewarded with a steadfast and fruitful life (prosperity using God's definition).  In contrast, the wicked lack this anchor and nourishment and are ultimately unable to stand in the face of God's judgment.

As Robert Frost wrote, there is a choice of paths, but it isn't a question of which is more or less traveled by, the true question is: which path leads to God?

Sermon Video: Swords and clubs to arrest the Prince of Peace - Mark 14:43-52

 

They came with swords and clubs to arrest Jesus because they expected him to fight back, they couldn't imagine that Jesus would not resist, that he would willingly face their 'justice'.  Jesus' non-violent self-sacrifice has inspired many through the years, like the Civil Rights protestors who were brutalized on Bloody Sunday, March 7th, 1965.  But his example has been ignored by many others, both Christians and those claiming to be.  From the Inquisition to Crusader armies, Christians have often 'fought fire with fire', choosing power (and/or wealth) in this world over service and sacrifice for the next.  A recent example illustrates the point: On December 19th 2021, Donald Trump Jr. declared at a conference that turning the other cheek has "gotten us nothing" and thus must be abandoned.  Following Jesus doesn't help us 'win' so we can't do it.  Christians know better, imitating Jesus isn't designed to help us 'win' in this world, it is the path of righteousness, the method by which we glorify the Gospel's declaration of victory over sin and death through self-sacrifice.  The calling of the Church is clear: imitate Jesus.

The irrefutable rejection of Christian Nationalism by the New Testament

One of many crosses brought to the political rally that became an insurrection on 1/6/21

 na·tion·al·ism

Learn to pronounce

noun

1. identification with one's own nation and support for its interests, especially to the exclusion or detriment of the interests of other nations.

Why irrefutable?  Because Christians are required to respect the authority of the Word of God.  When the Scriptures repeatedly make clear a particular issue of belief or practice it is not optional for those who would claim to be disciples of Jesus Christ, if in fact they are indeed true disciples, to follow that divine guidance.  Can Christians improperly interpret or apply Scriptural dictates?  Certainly, it happens regularly, even from learned Church leadership which ought to know better.  Can Christians reject Scriptural teaching because of pride, self-interest, or a rebellious attitude?  Yes, that also happens, such cases are examples of disobedience, certainly not what we as a Church should tolerate let alone celebrate.  There is no case FOR nationalism in the New Testament, and the case AGAINST nationalism is both multi-faceted and broadly stated in numerous passages.

Why only the New Testament?  The issue of patriotism/nationalism is fairly unique in that the perspective changes when talking about Jews and Israel in the Hebrew Scriptures vs. Christians and Nationalism in the New.  The Christian Bible is divided into two sections separated by about 400 years between the prophet Malachi and the earliest Christian writings.  These two sections were written and received by two different audiences in two different sets of circumstances.  The Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament) were written about and to the descendants of Abraham, the Jews.  That they are to be studied and remain authoritative to Christians is made clear by the abundant quotations of them by Jesus, Paul, and the Early Church Fathers.  That being said, the Church is not Israel.  America is not Israel.  The promises made to Abraham remain for his literal descendants, his spiritual descendants have been given new promises (in the New Testament).  The covenant of Abraham that God further developed in the Hebrew Scriptures through Moses and David contain blessings and curses, as well as promises of a Messianic Kingdom, these belong to the Jews.  It is inappropriate, and a facet of antisemitism, to seek to appropriate these promises for the Church or any particular nation, America included.  

The New Testament, by contrast, is written to the newly formed Church, an organization not tied to one ethnicity, not connected to one geographic location.  Instead, the Church is bound together above and beyond these tribal distinctions by the connection of all of its legitimate members to Jesus Christ through the indwelling power of the Holy Spirit. 

* The definition of Nationalism above is the one in use, not the secondary use of the term, "advocacy of or support for the political independence of a particular nation or people" which is a different topic, biblically speaking, and practically as well.

So, how does the New Testament convincingly reject Nationalism on the part of the Church?

The case could be made, and has been, in book length form (see: The Myth of a Christian Nation - by Gregory Boyd: a summary and response), but in brief among the numerous incompatibilities are:

1. The Modern Nation-State is a concept foreign to the New Testament

 The world we live in today is one of Nation-States, both those states that are governed democratically and autocratically have developed beyond the previous era of personal kingdoms or multi-ethnic empires, concepts that died in the revolutions and wars of the 19th and 20th centuries.  From those ashes arose the modern nation-state, and while many have inherited the territory of the kingdoms from which they sprang with minor variations, the legitimacy of modern governments in the eyes of their people, and the responsibilities of modern governments to their citizens, has changed dramatically from the models familiar to the ancient world.

Along those lines, the term translated in the New Testament as 'nation' is the Greek word: ethnos, which we recognize from the continued use of one aspect of the word transliterated into English as ethnic or ethnicity.  The most common usage of the term is actually to refer to the Gentile peoples (in contrast with the Jews), which it does 93 times as compared with nation/nations 67.  Thus any argument based upon a reading of what the New Testament says about our 'nation' or the 'nations' that is using the term to refer to a modern nation-state like America or China is already on thin ice before it begins because the geopolitical conceptions of the New Testament authors most certainly did not include the idea of a nation-state, as their entire frame of reference consisted of tribes, kingdoms, and empires.  In addition, the actual N.T. references that speak of nations (again, in the ancient not modern sense) have ZERO to do with identification with a nation by its people, support for the interests of that nation by its people, or the placing of those interests above that of other nations.  The New Testament is simply not talking about nations in any way connected to modern nationalism.

Examples: Matthew 24:9 "You will be hated by all nations because of me"

Matthew 28:19 "Therefore go and make disciples of all nations"

Mark 11:17 "my house shall be called a house of prayer for all nations"

Romans 4:17 "I have made you a father of many nations" (referring to Abraham)

Galatians 3:8 "All nations will be blessed through you" (again, Abraham is the you)

James 1:1 "To the twelve tribes scattered among the nations"

2. The focus of Jesus is entirely upon building up the Kingdom of God NOT any kingdom of this world.

Matthew 6:33  But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well.

Matthew 22:36-40  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.

John 18:36  Jesus said, “My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jewish leaders. But now my kingdom is from another place.”

Throughout the Gospels Jesus makes it clear that he rejected the role of a political revolutionary and military commander that his people longed for him to be.  The purpose of Jesus was higher than their limited hopes in this world, the goal of Jesus was far broader and lasting than establishing a new kingdom of Israel.

3.  Christians already have a citizenship to which they owe their primary allegiance: Heaven

Ephesians 2:17-19 He came and preached peace to you who were far away and peace to those who were near. 18 For through him we both have access to the Father by one Spirit. 19 Consequently, you are no longer foreigners and strangers, but fellow citizens with God’s people and also members of his household, 

Philippians 3:30 But our citizenship is in heaven. And we eagerly await a Savior from there, the Lord Jesus Christ,

See also: Hebrews 11:8-10 and 1 Peter 2:11, ‘foreigners and exiles'

One of enduring facets of nationalism is its increasing demand for allegiance from the people.  What begins as patriotism grows over time and the pressure of rivalries with other nations to become full blown nationalism.  Nationalism eventually arrives at the equivalent of, "America, love it or leave it".  Christians have are already citizens of heaven, they cannot make such a commitment to their country. 

4. The obligations of Christians cannot be minimized or superseded by ethnic rivalries or national boundaries.

Matthew 28:19-20  Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.”

John 17:20-23 (1 John 4:8-9)“My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, 21 that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. 22 I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one— 23 I in them and you in me—so that they may be brought to complete unity. Then the world will know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me.

In America today "America First" is associated with the Republican Party of Donald Trump, but the truth is that both parties have taken turns proclaiming that they will put our nation ahead of others and consider the needs and wants of our people above and beyond those of the rest of the people of this world.  Both parties appeal to the nationalism, pride, and greed of Americans, both parties (to varying extent) proclaim by word and deed that the lives of American citizens are worth more to them than the lives of other people in this world.  The Church, with its doctrine of Imago Dei {Latin for 'image of God'} which proclaims that every human being is created in God's image, cannot agree (although it has many times in its past and present, to its shame) with treating the lives of one nation's people as more valuable than another.

Matthew 25:31-46 where Jesus inquires what those who claim to be his followers did for 'the least of these' is incompatible with nationalistic rivalries which dehumanize ('other') people who happen to come from a different geopolitical entity than our own.  'America First' may be great politics in America, but it is a horrendous ethic for followers of Jesus.  {Yes, tens of millions of those claiming to be Christians in America today enthusiastically support either the Red or Blue version of 'America First', this is one example of how unhealthy the modern Church in America has become.}

5. The allegiance of Christians cannot be shared, God demands a total commitment.

Luke 16:13 “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.”

The principle that applies to money also applies to fame, power, politics, patriotism, and many others.  Whatever obligations and commitments we make in this world must be subservient to our commitment to Christ, even that to our spouse and children.

6. The methods demanded by nationalistic rivalries and 'realpolitik' are anathema to Christianity.

Acts 10:34 (2 Chronicles 19:7) Now let the fear of the Lord be on you. Judge carefully, for with the Lord our God there is no injustice or partiality or bribery.”

Romans 12:17-21  Do not repay anyone evil for evil. Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everyone. 18 If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone. 19 Do not take revenge, my dear friends, but leave room for God’s wrath, for it is written: “It is mine to avenge; I will repay,” says the Lord. 20 On the contrary: “If your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink. In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head.” 21 Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.

Ephesians 5:5-7  For of this you can be sure: No immoral, impure or greedy person—such a person is an idolater—has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God. 6 Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of such things God’s wrath comes on those who are disobedient. 7 Therefore do not be partners with them.

The classic example of this from the 20th century is the fire-bombing of the cities of Germany and Japan by the Allies.  It was justified, at the time, as a necessity of war, and was not seriously objected to by the Church in Allied countries, but it perspective has shown this to have been both militarily ineffective, and morally repugnant.  Had it not been 'unpatriotic' to object to the methods of one's own team/tribe, perhaps the generals and politicians would have sought a method of prosecuting the war that didn't kill hundreds of thousands of civilians.  The Church has been guilty of such compromise too many times in its history to count, the Crusades being but one of the better known examples.

7. The goals and purpose of Christians in this world cannot be lowered to those of  nationalistic us vs. them rivalries.

Ephesians 1:4-5  For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love 5 he predestined us for adoption to sonship through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will.

Ephesians 6:12  For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.

We, as Christians, are here for a purpose.  It isn't to make a lot of money, it isn't to maximize our own pleasure, and it isn't to help our country 'win'.  

8. The triumph of the Gospel of Jesus Christ will not be limited to one ethnic group, nation, or ideology.

Revelation 7:9  After this I looked, and there before me was a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, tribe, people and language, standing before the throne and before the Lamb. They were wearing white robes and were holding palm branches in their hands.

Galatians 3:26-29  So in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith, 27 for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. 28 There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. 29 If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.

With respect to a hilarious moment in the sitcom Cheers between Woody and Kelly, Heaven will not have chain link fences and barking dogs to keep people apart based upon the categories this world places upon people.  There will be one people in Heaven, just as there is one Lord, one faith, one birth.  There will be no Americans in Heaven, no Russians, no Italians, Egyptians, or Indonesians, there will only be those people called out of darkness and redeemed by the blood of the Lamb.

9. 'Victory' in this world's rivalries, economically, geopolitically, or otherwise, are ephemeral to the Christian.

Mark 8:36  What good is it for someone to gain the whole world, yet forfeit their soul?

2 Peter 3:7  By the same word the present heavens and earth are reserved for fire, being kept for the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly.

1 John 5:19 We know that we are children of God, and that the whole world is under the control of the evil one.

Today's economic champion is tomorrow's has-been, and today's superpower is tomorrow's used-to-be.  That is the way of this world's geopolitical rivalries.  At one point in time, Spain was the world's most powerful kingdom (technically the Hapsburg family whose holdings extended far beyond Spain), but that hasn't been true in a few hundred years.  So what was accomplished by those who killed for, and will killed fighting for, the supremacy of that particular nation over its rivals?  Power in this world is temporary, domination is a rickety throne, and yet Nationalism calls upon us to being willing to kill our fellow man (created in God's image) or to sacrifice our own lives, to achieve it.  How much evil has been sanctioned by the Church in the name of nationalistic pride and rivalries?  The Church on all sides supported WWI with pastors thundering against 'them' from the pulpit and Christians cheering on their side.  The carnage that followed is directly responsible for empty churches in Europe to this day.  That millions of 'Christian' Americans (some genuine, many not) have deeply embraced nationalism will inevitably lead to the same result: empty churches.  {Why? Because it testifies to our lack of faith in the Gospel, our lack of true hope in the next world is exposed by our obsession with wealth and power in this one.  Christian hypocrites are not effective witnesses to the Gospel.}

 

10. Submitting to governmental authorities is a far cry from calling upon Christians to champion that authority against other nations.

1 Peter 2:13-14 Submit yourselves for the Lord’s sake to every human authority: whether to the emperor, as the supreme authority, 14 or to governors, who are sent by him to punish those who do wrong and to commend those who do right.

Nationalism is not patriotism.  Appreciation for, and love of, one's own country (if and when it deserves it) is both fitting and proper.  Nationalism is a different beast, it elevates my country above other countries, it justifies rivalries, it excuses immoral behavior with an ends justify the means mentality, and it treats people made in God's image who happen to live somewhere else (especially if that somewhere is a rival) as an 'other' to be guarded against not a neighbor to be loved.

My further writings on this topic:

Ronald Reagan was wrong, America is not a "city on a hill", it never could be.

The blasphemous "One Nation Under God" painting by Jon McNaughton

Rejecting Idolatry: No, Mike Pence, we will not, "Fix our eyes on Old Glory"

White Nationalism and White Supremacy are an abomination to the Church

Why our favoritism (politics) is an affront to God - Romans 2:11, Colossians 3:25

In Flanders field the poppies blow...Nationalism and the lessons of WWI

The downward spiral of Bonhoeffer biographer Eric Metaxas

The danger of defining 'real' Americans vs. the necessity of categorizing 'real' Christians

We ignore "repay evil with blessing" at our peril: the Culture War, politics, and 9/11

The danger of defining 'real' Americans vs. the necessity of categorizing 'real' Christians

It has become increasingly popular for politicians and pundits to tell their hard core followers that they represent the 'real America', and that those who have opposing viewpoints are conversely not 'real Americans'.  That this attitude is inherently dangerous, divisive, and ultimately a precursor to violence toward the group of people now labeled as un-American, even anti-American, history has attempted to teach us.  Once a group of people, defined by whatever parameter, have been deemed to be the 'other', it is a short road to convincing those who have drunk the Kool-Aid that 'they' should be incarcerated, expelled, or eliminated.

On the other hand, I have often referred to some people as 'self-professed Christians' or even 'so-called Christians'.  That such labels have been used in the past (on the wrong basis), for example during the Thirty Years War, to foment persecution and violence, is horrifyingly true, yet the need to have a proper definition of what a genuine follower of Jesus Christ looks/acts like, and call out those who fail to live up to it, remains.  Why?  

1. An earthly human kingdom vs. a divinely created spiritual kingdom

The United States of America is a human construct.  Like all governments it derives its legitimacy from God's delegated sovereignty (Romans 13:1-2), but it is no more divinely created than the hundreds of other nations that exist in our world today, or the nations or kingdoms that existed in years past.  As such, notions of citizenship in this nation have changed (mostly for the better) over the years, and are subject to changing laws and even constitutional amendments such as the 13th-15th Amendments that sought to remedy the original Constitution's flawed acceptance of the notion that Blacks were not citizens, or the 19th Amendment which gave women the right to vote.  Citizenship in America has always been a work in progress, it has always had ways in which our government and our people failed to live up to our ideals.  

Christian citizenship is different in many ways.  It was instituted by Jesus himself (Matthew 16:18

NIV  And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it.), populated not with any group of people, or based in on any geographic boundaries, but with individuals called out from amongst all peoples (Revelation 7:9 NIV  After this I looked, and there before me was a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, tribe, people and language, standing before the throne and before the Lamb. They were wearing white robes and were holding palm branches in their hands.), and also defined by a standard that does not change and cannot be amended (John 14:6 NIV  Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.)

Given those differences, the United States of America can, will, and should change in an effort to "form a more perfect Union", and it can be torn asunder by division.  The Church, which is the body that comprises the individuals who have been called by the Holy Spirit to follow Jesus, must maintain its original calling and purpose, uphold its given mission and parameters, and is incapable of effective division (Ephesians 4:5-6 NIV  one Lord, one faith, one baptism; 6 one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.) even if it has been split in two for a thousand years, and in three for the past five hundred.  What those who claim to follow Jesus, whether they be genuine or not, cannot do is split his Church.  America, however, has no such guarantees.  We survived one Civil War, and the tumult of the 60's, but have no promise that if we continue to sow division we will survive the next conflagration. 

2. E pluribus unum vs. the Mind of Christ

The people who comprise human kingdoms and nations are never of one mind.  Attempts to force uniformity have resulted in some of history's most horrific abuses and genocides: the Spanish Inquisition, Indian Education Program in 19th century America, Mao's Cultural Revolution from 1966-76 which cost the lives of untold millions, or the ongoing Uighur genocide in China today.  In fact, differing viewpoints are a strength of human institutions, preventing them from becoming stale or blind to reality.  The generation of the Founding Fathers famously disagreed on the direction that the new nation should take on a host of issues (ask Alexander Hamilton), with some preferring the vision of Madison and others that of Jefferson.  If those who disagree, about any particular issue, are not 'real Americans', the ability of our democracy to continue to function decreases.

The Church is likewise made up of people with differing viewpoints, often contentiously, but with one key distinction that separates it from America: We are all heading in the same direction, learning from the tutor, and seeking to emulate the same hero (John 14:26 NIV  But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.    Philippians 2:2 NIV  then make my joy complete by being like-minded, having the same love, being one in spirit and of one mind.).  Thus while those within the Church can, healthily, disagree on the secondary issues, we are united, for more strongly than any nation, on the foundational ones.

3. Law abiding citizens vs. the Law of Love

Once a person becomes an American citizen, either by birth or naturalization, that person remains a citizen for the rest of his/her days (short of committing actual acts of treason, or renouncing one's citizenship).  Each citizen is as much a 'real American' as the next.  Given that we enjoy the protections of the Bill of Rights in America, as long as people don't break the law (or aren't unjustly convicted of breaking the law), there is no legal grounds to value the beliefs and hopes of one citizen over that of another {providing that they aren't advocating for anarchy or gross immorality}.  Our representative republic helps transfer that mass of opinions and beliefs into something approximating a functioning government, but those who hold minority opinions are not less American than those who happen to currently be in the majority.  In addition, what was once majority opinion can find itself in the span of a generation, or less, to be a minority view.  That being said, you can love America, and be a fully patriotic citizen of this nation, and still hold any number of political/economic/cultural viewpoints.  I know that many partisans, especially those sold on the Culture Wars, would strongly disagree here, but if we are to have a United future, ever increasing venom against the 'enemies of the people' cannot prevail.

It is not the same in the Church.  In order to be a real/genuine Christian, there must be concrete evidence of the presence of the Holy Spirit in the form of what is known as the Fruit of the Spirit.  This term is derived from Galatians 5:22-23 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23 gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law.  If these qualities are not present, whatever the person in question might claim to believe, he/she cannot be a true follower of Jesus.  This is not in any way a partisan viewpoint, it isn't a liberal or conservative one, but a Truth derived from the very nature of the Church itself and everything we know and understand about what it means to be washed clean by the Blood of the Lamb.

Matthew 7:22-23 NIV  Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’ 23 Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’

1 Corinthians 13:1-3 NIV  If I speak in the tongues of men or of angels, but do not have love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. 2 If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. 3 If I give all I possess to the poor and give over my body to hardship that I may boast, but do not have love, I gain nothing.

James 2:14-19 NIV  What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if someone claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save them? 15 Suppose a brother or a sister is without clothes and daily food. 16 If one of you says to them, “Go in peace; keep warm and well fed,” but does nothing about their physical needs, what good is it? 17 In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.

18 But someone will say, “You have faith; I have deeds.”

Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by my deeds. 19 You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that—and shudder.

1 John 2:6 NIV  Whoever claims to live in him must live as Jesus did.

1 John 3:16-18 NIV  This is how we know what love is: Jesus Christ laid down his life for us. And we ought to lay down our lives for our brothers and sisters. 17 If anyone has material possessions and sees a brother or sister in need but has no pity on them, how can the love of God be in that person? 18 Dear children, let us not love with words or speech but with actions and in truth.

The verses above but scratch the surface on how many times the New Testament addresses this topic, each time affirming the absolute need for heart conversion, not just head knowledge or mouth proclamations.  This then is why we must distinguish between 'so-called' or 'self-professed' Christians and the genuine article.  God chose to make it abundantly clear in his Word that checking a box on a survey, voting a certain way, or wearing a cross on a necklace isn't good enough.  Outward appearances and empty words are not good enough.  Unless true life changing Fruit of the Spirit is present, on an ongoing basis, there is no reason to belief that such a person is a Christian.  Conversely, if evil is present, tolerated and habitual, there is also ample reason to doubt the sincerity of any profession of faith.

This is actually not a change from the Old Covenant to the New.  The prophets of old wrestled with a people who believed that having Abraham as an ancestor was good enough, that it would guarantee their position before God, regardless of their conduct.  That lack of genuine faith led inexorably to the destruction of the Temple and the Exile in Babylon.  Unfortunately, Jesus found that same shallow attitude present in his own day, and reacted very strongly against it: Matthew 3:8-10 NIV  Produce fruit in keeping with repentance. 9 And do not think you can say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our father.’ I tell you that out of these stones God can raise up children for Abraham. 10 The ax is already at the root of the trees, and every tree that does not produce good fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire.

It is far easier to be a good citizen of the United States than it is to be a genuine Christian.  At the same time, the United States is a far more fragile vessel than the Church of Jesus Christ, and while divisions sown in either will bear harmful fruit, we know that the Church will endure, America has no such promise.

So, the next time you hear a politician, pundit, or regular person spouting off on social media about how 'we' are the REAL Americans and 'they' are not, don't be fooled, that road leads to self-destruction.  Likewise, the next time you hear someone proclaiming their bona fides as a Christian while still embracing hate, lust, greed or the like, and/or while not exhibiting love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, gentleness, and self-control, don't believe it, fruit-less Christians don't exist.

I am a Minister of the Gospel: called, ordained, and entrusted to shepherd the sheep

I may not look the part yet, but perhaps someday

In recent conversations, primarily online, a number of people have 'warned' me against speaking out about the reality of systemic racism and/or the deadly nature of COVID-19 and the efficacy of the vaccine.  Some of these conversations have included predictions that doing so will damage my ministry, my Gospel witness, and call into question my integrity.  Some have suggested that wanting to be right (i.e. know and share facts and truth) is a character flaw, or at least a waste of time when such issues are only matters of opinion.  I would be sugarcoating it if I said these responses didn't bother me; some of them, given my relationship with the source, have been deeply disappointing and emotionally painful.

What then is my response, how do I evaluate this advice in light of my own call to ministry?  The following is an attempt to respond, if you are one of the people referred to in the paragraph above, please read this in the spirit and heart in which I write it, as much as I value our relationship, these issue demand more of me.  If what you wrote/said was coming from a place of genuine concern, I value that.

Therefore, as a minister of the Gospel:

1. I will NOT disregard, dismiss, or 'other' those in need

When we first began working on getting a homeless shelter operating in Venango County {now called: Emmaus Haven of Venango County a wonderful organization my church and I are committing to supporting} there were a number of local people who shared a variation of this idea: "There are no homeless in Venango County, what are you going to do, bus them up here from Pittsburgh?"  This was factually inaccurate, those who work to help solve housing issues in our area were well aware that there are in fact a significant number of homeless individuals (and families) on any given day in our county.  Many of them are temporarily homeless, as opposed to chronically, but they certainly needed shelter.  Additionally, are we as Christians supposed to care less about those who are homeless in the Pittsburgh area?  Are they not our neighbors too?

Thankfully, the local churches of our county, together with our partners in the county government, were able to continue to move forward and eventually open Emmaus Haven.  Whether we see them or not, whether we know them or not, those in need in our community are human being created in the image of God, they are not an 'other', not a 'them' to be ignored.

I will not consider less worthy of compassion, help, and prayer:

A. Immigrants, refugees, and other non-citizens

B. Those who are homeless, downtrodden, and desperate

C. The who suffering with physical or mental handicaps

D. Those living in poverty

E. Those battling addictions

F. The unvaccinated or those otherwise lacking healthcare

G. Those who don't look, act, or think like me.

The list could be longer, or more specific, but you get the point.  As a minister of the Gospel, called to live by the Law of Love, setting up barriers to that obligation is a direct violation of my oath before God.  I cannot allow them in my own heart or mind, and am called to confront them when the people of God wrongly exhibit them.

Psalm 82:3     New International Version

Defend the weak and the fatherless; uphold the cause of the poor and the oppressed.

2. I will NOT excuse, utilize, or encourage lies and falsehoods in the name of the 'greater good', in a misguided attempt to bolster my ministry, or protect my country.

This is the part that frightens me about the health of much of the Church in America today.  I see 'Christian' websites willingly spreading falsehoods because they bolster the Culture War narrative of the moment, 'Christian' leaders embracing easily disprovable ideas for financial or political gain, and much of it without significant pushback.  We seem to care more about 'winning' than the Truth, and that guarantees that the last thing we will be doing with respect to the Kingdom is winning.

A. Truth matters, honesty and integrity do too.

B. We all have opinions, we don't all have facts to back them up.  Opinions are not created equally, authority, experience, and expertise have weight.

C. A disregard for the Truth is a cancer within the Church, WE must always want to be, strive to be, and pray to God that we will be, walking in the light of truth and not the darkness of error/lies.

Titus 1:2  New International Version

in the hope of eternal life, which God, who does not lie, promised before the beginning of time,

Hebrews 6:18  New International Version

God did this so that, by two unchangeable things in which it is impossible for God to lie, we who have fled to take hold of the hope set before us may be greatly encouraged.

The cause of the Gospel of Jesus Christ is NOT advanced through lies, end of story. 

3. While matters pertaining to God, the Church, the Bible, and Christianity are my area of special concern, training, experience, and relative expertise, that does not mean I will MYOB or 'stay in my lane' regarding the issues that confront me, my family, community, country, or the world.

A. A prophetic voice is a calling from God.  My particular calling, as evidenced by my passion, the testimony of other Christians who know me, and my ability is to be a Teacher.  I will not ignore it or muzzle it.

B. When a minister of the Gospel grounds his/her opinion in a biblical, orthodox, and historic understanding of the Church, the burden shifts to the people of God to evaluate, weigh, and respond to it.

C. If you disagree with my conclusions without offering a biblically, orthodox, and historically Christian alternative, you haven't responded to the prophetic voice God has laid upon me {and tens of thousands of others, I am but one of God's servants}.

Putting B and C together, this is what frustrates me about much of the online, in particular, 'debate'    between Christians.  I see little evidence of attempts to ground opinions in biblical interpretation or the teaching of the Church.  I see ample political argumentation, far too much actually, and plenty of economic or philosophical viewpoints, but very little of it grounded in a Christian worldview, expressing a desire to evidence the Fruit of the Spirit.  It is not the secularists on the outside who are a significant threat to the Church in America, but those who have abandoned a Christian Mind within.

D. There is ample room to disagree within a Christian framework, even strongly disagree.  A healthy Church has diverse opinions within a Christian worldview.

Feel free to disagree with me, if you do so within a Christian framework at least we're having a healthy discussion, an 'iron sharpens iron' type thing, even if we cannot agree.

E. Opinions which are contrary to biblical, orthodox, and historic Christianity are NOT healthy for individual Christian or the Church and should be challenged by every minister of the Gospel.

Such opinions included, but are not limited to, those based in

    (1) Individualism

    (2) Consumerism/Materialism

    (3) Nationalism

    (4) Racism

    (5) Sexism

Philippians 2:1-5  New International Version

2 Therefore if you have any encouragement from being united with Christ, if any comfort from his love, if any common sharing in the Spirit, if any tenderness and compassion, 2 then make my joy complete by being like-minded, having the same love, being one in spirit and of one mind. 3 Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit. Rather, in humility value others above yourselves, 4 not looking to your own interests but each of you to the interests of the others.

5 In your relationships with one another, have the same mindset as Christ Jesus:

I will continue striving to fulfill my calling, hopefully speaking the Truth, and hopefully doing so in love.  As Luther was purported to have said, "here I stand, I can do no other."  May God enlighten us all through his Spirit at work within us.