Eldon
New Member
Posts: 11
|
Post by Eldon on Apr 16, 2009 21:54:09 GMT -8
I'm upset by the political direction our country is going. Is any one else upset? How much time as a Christian should I be spending on politics?
|
|
|
|
Post by robin on Apr 17, 2009 7:58:20 GMT -8
I spend much of my time studying politics, and perhaps too much time. I too share your concern about the direction that we are moving. I believe that as Christians we cannot Isolate ourselves from the world and pretend that societal shifts don't effect the church. We should be willing to stand for Justice and righteousness in all things, including politics.
However, even as society changes, for better or worse, we must not allow those changes to distract us from our mission as a church.
Matthew 28:18-20
18 And Jesus came and said to them, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Go therefore 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 that I have commanded you. And remember, I am with you always, to the end of the age."
Robin
|
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Apr 18, 2009 8:26:29 GMT -8
Eldon, I'm curious what upsets you. Depending on what issues you're talking about, you might find a wide variety of responses here  My take on "how much time" is something like this: it's important to be informed and involved, but never at the cost of blurring the lines between the kingdoms of this world and the kingdom of heaven. When those lines start getting blurred, so does the outworking of our faith. Of course, different folks define what those "lines" look like differently, but still I think it's an important question to be asking. |
|
|
|
Post by moritz on Apr 20, 2009 2:27:46 GMT -8
I'm upset by the political direction our country is going. Is any one else upset? How much time as a Christian should I be spending on politics? The amount of worry you put into politics is a litmus test for the degree of secularity (read: worldliness) of your faith. The more fundamentalist you are, the more you will reject worldly spheres. Classic sociologists of religion like Max Weber point out five wordly spheres which stand in direct conflict with salvation religions like Christianity: the political sphere and the economic sphere are the first two. The passage you alluded to (“Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” Mt 22:21 e.g.) is just one instance in which Jesus distiguishes between worldly and otherworldy spheres. Especially the Sermon on the Mount is instructive here: Mt 6:19 f.f. Lay Up Treasures in Heaven
19 “Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy and where thieves break in and steal; 20 but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroys and where thieves do not break in and steal. 21 For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.
...
24 “No one can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or else he will be loyal to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon.
Do Not Worry
25 “Therefore I say to you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or what you will drink; nor about your body, what you will put on. Is not life more than food and the body more than clothing? 26 Look at the birds of the air, for they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not of more value than they? 27 Which of you by worrying can add one cubit to his stature?
28 “So why do you worry about clothing? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow: they neither toil nor spin; 29 and yet I say to you that even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these. 30 Now if God so clothes the grass of the field, which today is, and tomorrow is thrown into the oven, will He not much more clothe you, O you of little faith?
31 “Therefore do not worry, saying, ‘What shall we eat?’ or ‘What shall we drink?’ or ‘What shall we wear?’ 32 For after all these things the Gentiles seek. For your heavenly Father knows that you need all these things. 33 But seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, and all these things shall be added to you. 34 Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about its own things. Sufficient for the day is its own trouble. This excerpt is a great example for the general otherworldliness of strict Christianity. Politics isn't directly included here, but politics and economy are the worldliest of all businesses. Politic organizes this world and doesn't give a fig about the other world. You being upset (and this includes concerned) about politics shows that you are a fairly secular believer. As a matter of fact, from what I observed on this board, the entire Aletheia community (read: the people this community consists of) is rather secular (as can be seen in concerns about the economy and politics, questioning essential Christian doctrines like hell, having regular jobs, playing Nintendo wii, watching movies and TV shows, etc. etc.)*. From my perspective, secular faith is far away from what Jesus preached and wanted things to be like. That doesn't mean it isn't sincere though. After all I prefer a secular Christian any time over a fundamentalist. Fundamentalists who consistently reject worldy spheres are dangerous because they reject basic principles and rules of cohabiting in a pluralistic society. This is why fundamentalists usually live in high tension to the rest of society and why the term "fundamentalist" has undergone a change in meaning (sort of from "a person who's faith builds the fundament of his life" to "a religious fanatic"). Your original question was: "How much time as a Christian should I be spending on politics?" My reply would be: None! But as a citizen of the USA you should spend a lot of time on politics. It's just that I assume you will put your citizenship in the land of the Lord first, hm? Either way, "No one can serve two masters". *no worries, you guys are still waaaaaaaaaay more otherworldly than average Europeans. |
|
|
|
Post by robin on Apr 20, 2009 7:24:52 GMT -8
Why do you relate "questioning essential Christian doctrines like hell", with being secular? Why do you believe that any particular understanding of hell is essential to Christianity. Are you unaware that the current popular view of hell was not the majority view in the early church?
Perhaps the last two questions belong on another thread.
Robin
|
|
|
|
Post by christopher on Apr 20, 2009 21:27:41 GMT -8
You pose an interesting dichotomy here, but one that I think is inaccurate and should not go unchallenged. It might be worth noting that many Christians in the bible are noted to have regular jobs and were even instructed to do so. Paul himself was a tent maker and on occasion reminded his readers to be productive and agreeable members of society: 1 Thess 4:10-12But we urge you, brethren, that you increase more and more; 11 that you also aspire to lead a quiet life, to mind your own business, and to work with your own hands, as we commanded you, 12 that you may walk properly toward those who are outside, and that you may lack nothing.
NKJV
followed up later to the same church.... 2 Thess 3:10-13
10 For even when we were with you, we commanded you this: If anyone will not work, neither shall he eat. 11 For we hear that there are some who walk among you in a disorderly manner, not working at all, but are busybodies. 12 Now those who are such we command and exhort through our Lord Jesus Christ that they work in quietness and eat their own bread.
NKJV It's also worth noting that Jesus spent most of His life learning and practicing the vocation of His father (carpentry). It was only the last 10% of His life that was committed completely to ministry. He was also known to have a little worldly fun and even criticized for doing so by the religious fundies (see Matt 11). I would also like to point out that a great number of Christians (especially postmillenialists) believe that part of God's plan is to reclaim this world, politics, economics and all. This view does not at all depart from Jesus teachings, it's just another interpretation of them. It's not at all the case that the Christian world view is strictly interested with what happens in the afterlife or "other world". Jesus' message was that the Kingdom of God was imminent and present. The Christian is interested in how we live out kingdom values in the midst of a broken and hurting world that needs Jesus here and now. It is also the case that, as King of Kings and Lord of Lords, there is no dominion that Jesus doesn't lay claim to, including the things that you might call "secular". |
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Apr 21, 2009 15:05:35 GMT -8
Well said, Chris. Well, said.
|
|
|
|
Post by robin on Apr 22, 2009 12:19:06 GMT -8
Very nice Chris! You said much of what I was thinking. I was just too lazy to post my thoughts. I'm glad you spoke up.
Robin
|
|
|
|
Post by moritz on Apr 23, 2009 12:56:09 GMT -8
Why do you relate "questioning essential Christian doctrines like hell", with being secular? Why do you believe that any particular understanding of hell is essential to Christianity. Robin, I haven’t said anything about particular understandings of hell. For the point I was making, it doesn’t matter whether one sees hell as a place of eternal torment or merely as a spiritual washing-bay in the process of reconciliation or even a nonexistent place. Hell is essential for Christianity because hell is the consequence of disobedience. It is the antithesis to the heavenly reward. Why should anybody fear God if there is no way God is going to harm you? Whatever hell is, Jesus refers to it as the (unpleasant) consequence of sin: Mt 5:29-30 29 If your right eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and cast it from you; for it is more profitable for you that one of your members perish, than for your whole body to be cast into hell. 30 And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and cast it from you; for it is more profitable for you that one of your members perish, than for your whole body to be cast into hell. I have read the discussion of universal reconciliation on this board with interest. I’m not interested in going into it though. Just in case you are itching to discuss the passage I just quoted in a different light  . Back to the question at hand: What has declining belief in hell to do with secularization? It is being argued by sociologists of religion that a particular faith can only survive if it manages to reproduce its rituals, teachings and contents on a broad daily basis. I guess this is self evident. Hell comes into play as an instrument of disciplinary action. It is the law enforcement of the Lord, so to say. Imagine we would abolish mundane law enforcement. It wouldn’t mean that everybody would become a criminal, but criminality would increase drastically. Equally, hell is not the sine qua non of Christianity: One may well reject belief in hell and still be a disciplined follower of Jesus. However, this would require an exceptional amount of dedication and studying – an amount not matched by the vast majority of non-academically inclined believers. If hell is merely “a place locked from the inside” – as Steve Kunselmann argued (I think referring to C.S. Lewis), it loses its horror and disciplinary potential and this ultimately undermines God’s authority. Why fear him? Why play by the rules? Think of Pascal’s Wager! It is hypothetical, but I think one can logically argue, that Christianity wouldn’t have expanded and succeeded the way it did without the tool “fear of hell”. The Rational Choice Theory is instructive in this regard. That’s why belief in hell is an essential Christian doctrine: Where the strict discipline of believers fades, the reproduction of a religion stalls, and where the reproduction stalls, religion erodes. This process too, is called secularization (secularization has many meanings. That’s not really helpful when it comes to discussing it). In context of the definition I used earlier in this thread (secular = worldly), the process I now described (secularization = the erosion of established religion and thereby the loss of social significance of religion) presents the implication of increasing worldliness: Due to an unique sequence of historical events, the worldly societies of Western Europe and the USA have increasingly grown more pluralistic, individualistic and egalitarian. Each of these factors are catalysts of secularization. A detailed explanation of this already filled more than one book. If you’re interested, I recommend the following one (it also goes deeper into the relation of decreasing belief in hell and secularization): Bruce, Steve. 2002. God is Dead – Secularization in the West. Oxford: Blackwell. (Never mind the provocative title). For a second and different opinion on secularization in general, read: Stark, Rodney and Finke, Roger. 2000. Acts of Faith: Explaining the Human Side of Religion. Berkeley: Univ. of California Press. I’m not sure I was able to express myself well. I hope this substantiation helped you understand the point I was making and answered your questions. EDIT: Oh and Chris, you'll get a reply too. |
|
|
|
Post by Josh on May 2, 2009 13:26:59 GMT -8
Hmmm, I am curious to what degree it has actually been a motivator to sincere Christians throughout history.
I'm not denying that a fear of hell isn't a factor, or isn't even a reasonable element of the message of the gospel (though I certainly don't think it should be anywhere near the primary motivation).
If you've been following the universal reconcilation thread, I presume that you notice that all the Christians in that discuss do still agree that there is some kind of place of punishment in the afterlife- and I doubt anyone there would try to diminish the fearful reality of such punishment. The debate, of course, is really about the duration.
Does even the concession that hell might not be eternal seem like "secularization", then?
Also, you didn't respond to the thought that there have been "Christian universalists" from the early days of the Church. How then can CU be seen as a part of the process of secularization when it was latent at the very inception?
|
|
|
|
Post by Josh on May 2, 2009 13:40:50 GMT -8
Just a little trip down memory lane from my journal. I can't say that this is exactly how I feel now, but thought it was worth a chuckle.
May 3, 1999
The Church's primary role in America is not bring about political reform or a return to the (illusary) good ‘ol days, but to show a hurting world grace. I’ve always had a disdain for the political right- for it’s overemphasis of our Christian roots. I remember attending a Peter Marshall speech on “America’s Christian Foundation” of which nearly every point I disagreed from a historian’s point of view. I hate how Christians quote Deists to support the claim that America was founded on Christianity. Of course, I have always felt a sense of patriotism. I know that God did use some sincere believers to help found this nation of showered-on grace and amazing potential, but Christian Foundation is too absurdly simple given all the complexity of what we are and what we were.
It was at that same speech that I and a few others were asked by Peter Marshall to remove our hats. We were guests at an open forum. Graceless.
Such a focus on the external- a focus on religion- another gospel which really is no gospel at all. To hell with whitewashed Christianity and neo- Phariseeism! Let the world see a Christ-like Church and not the mutilators of the flesh.
You see, there was time not that long ago when I was a zealous little punk.
|
|
|
|
Post by marcus on May 3, 2009 0:57:06 GMT -8
Are you claiming to be past your zealous little punk phase?
You have zeal. You are of small stature. You are the definition of punk.
Does anyone else get the feel that Mo is studying us with curiosity from above, like we're a little colony of ants and he's holding a magnifying glass while journaling his observations in a leather-bound notepad?
I like to be the one with the magnifying glass. To be under it is creepy.
But I'm with Eldon on politics. A bunch of people in a society can begin to play a game. They can make rules for the game, divide up teams, set rewards and incentives, enforce penalties, establish a purpose for their game, and claim to be vital to winning the game--but in the end, I don't have to acknowledge their game or pretend to play along.
My feelings about politics are probably comparable to Mo's feelings about religion.
|
|
|
|
Post by moritz on May 3, 2009 14:04:49 GMT -8
Are you claiming to be past your zealous little punk phase? You have zeal. You are of small stature. You are the definition of punk. Does anyone else get the feel that Mo is studying us with curiosity from above, like we're a little colony of ants and he's holding a magnifying glass while journaling his observations in a leather-bound notepad? I like to be the one with the magnifying glass. To be under it is creepy. that's hilarious!  Josh & Chris: I promise I'll reply to both of you but I won't have time till the end of may  |
|
|
|
Post by Josh on May 6, 2009 21:01:17 GMT -8
Marcus wrote:
I'm not sure it was even clear where Eldon stands in his post.
Eldon???
|
|
Eldon
New Member
Posts: 11
|
Post by Eldon on May 12, 2009 22:23:19 GMT -8
I'm still not clear where I stand on this post either, Josh. I haven't had much time to think about politics or read all the posts since I posted the comment. I like being informed but not consumed, a participant but not a proselytizer when it comes to politics. Maybe that is how I can give Caesar what belongs to him. I'm still thinking about it...
|
|
|
|
Post by Josh on May 13, 2009 18:46:59 GMT -8
Nice. Is that an Eldon original?
|
|
|
|
Post by krhagan19 on Aug 24, 2009 17:32:41 GMT -8
I think that Christians should take and extremely active role in politics in this country. We are a democracy and the values of its citizens are the values of the country. That is how elections work. Clearly with the election of President Obama we find that values have slipt a bit to the left (hurray) If you don't like it, I charge you with the task of getting your hands dirty in the political arena like us grass roots activists did, and bring america (back to senses as you would have it) and throw our tree hugging butts out of Congress and the Whitehouse. If you don't want to be involved in Politics, then I would suggest that you not complain about the outcome of political events. This is a participatory Republic.
|
|
. 
