Listen to the Word of God: 62 Scripture passages that refute 'Christian' Nationalism - #26: Luke 18:9-14

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. 

Sermon Video: "comfort my people, says your God", Isaiah 40:1-5

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.

Sermon Video: The Messiah and his Kingdom - Isaiah 11:1-10

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.

Sermon Video: The Gospel in a nutshell - Romans 6:23

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.

Listen to the Word of God: 62 Scripture passages that refute 'Christian' Nationalism - #25: Luke 16:13

 

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)