The Church, Abortion and “Law and Order”
Oct 28
I don’t watch television much. Usually because I like movies. Most movies have closure after watching it for 1.5 to 2 hours, and often they don’t have make a bunch of sequels. In regular television it can take months for characters to develop (depending on the audiences reception) and many shows have themes that run for years. For instance if you watch “Lost” you best watch the first season before the second. Or I was a “Heroes” fan the first season but missed about half of the second season and I am so far lost now, that none of the characters seem to be the same at all.
However I do watch Law and Order and even though there some character development the plot of each episode is usually separate from the episode before, it makes it easier to follow and even when new Assistant D.A’s or cops come, it does leave you with such a whopping hole that you have to rent the previous seasons to follow it. So if you watched it in 05 you can watch it in 09 and not feel lost. However, this is not about which shows to watch per se.
In the last Law and Order (the original not the spinoffs) they tackled the issue of abortion. An abortion doctor was murdered by a “fanatic” (you can read the plot here) and now a lawyer is using the “protection of a life” defense to get him off. I don’t want to spoil it or not but let me tell you it was a very passionate episode, even though I know it was acting it really stirred something up in me. I began to ask am I thinking about this issue in a way that reflects the mind of Christ.
What is the mind of Christ on this issue? I don’t know. What would Jesus do, comes into play here like never before. As a Christian this little human is a life. I believe in life at conception, conceptually, theologically and even practically. None of those are my issues. My issue is how to respond to a government that allows abortion on demand.
I put the picture above for a reason. Many people make the argument that slavery and abortion are one in the same. Both have grossly misinterpreted what human life is and what right to life means. I am pretty convinced that this is true. Much like Africans who were considered subhuman by the government to give other humans the green light to perpetrate and perpetuate some of the most grievous atrocities the unborn have now been attached to this label to allow the same mistreatment. The tenure of the mistreatment is irrelevant (slavery for 100 years or murder in 30 minutes) the mistreatment is still the same.
So that moves me into my current dilemma. Since I have been given freedoms in this country, how should I respond? I know one way definitely is to support clinics who give their sweat, blood and tears to prevent these deaths, through ultrasounds, literature, adoption assistance and prenatal care. That is a no-brainier. But there is another freedom and option and that is the right to vote and help candidates that share my conviction and that is where I get tripped up. Do I support a candidate like Obama and other men who support pro-choice but who have convictions that I might share? Do I support a Bush who shares convictions I have on issues of pro-life but are way off on other issues? Am I obligated to support local, region and state politicians who are pro-life? Or should I stay away from this at all and pursue the kingdom.
The choice is hard because the scriptures don’t give me answer. I know I am not to depend upon this worlds systems to fix the world ills; however, what about slavery and the abolition of it? Men and women risked their lives to get the government to overturn its position on Africans and life and I am very grateful to them for their sacrifice, should I now take the freedoms they died for and squander them because I don’t want to get involved in politics?
Do I owe it to the unborn to fight on my knees, with my dollars and with my ballot? And I ain’t bringing in the issue of the health and safety of the mother or the welfare of the child (this is tough, would a child never want to be born if they had the mental faculties to make that decision, is it even their right to make that choice as they are owned by God). I am praying for direction on this very issue, its a tough one, many Christians believe it is our duty to protest outside of clinics, to vote for politicians who are “anti-abortion” (pro-life for me includes our enemies and criminal) and to storm Capital Hill every year to end Roe vs. Wade. Whats your thoughts?
Where do you get this clip art? Powerful.
Hutch,
Thats what takes me the longest. Writing comes easy finding pictures is difficult. Don’t know where I got this from, I just search online everywhere.
Lionel,
I don’t think it’s really anything wrong with getting involved in politics at certain levels, for it could prove helpful in living this life more comfortably. I think the problem and sin comes in when people put their confidence in politics rather than in the Lord. Some things may or may not change based on our physical actions, but we do have confidence in the Lord that His will will be done regardless of our actions and politics.
I believe it is impossible to be unhypocritical in politics. I realize that is a strong position and others will not share it. That’s ok. Let me give an example. Here’s how the “Christian Politics” argument goes:
You must vote for Candidate A for President so that he can appoint a pro-life (anti-abortion is more accurate) judge to the Supreme Court if he/she gets the chance. If you vote for pro-choice (pro-abortion seems more accurate) Candidate B, then you are responsible for all the abortions that take place under his/her presidency and you will answer to God for it.
Now let’s look at it logically. In 1988 that meant voting for George H.W. Bush. He was the “Pro-life” candidate. President Bush appointed Judge David Souter to the Supreme Court. However, when Roe v. Wade came up for review, Judge Souter voted to uphold it. Now, are all the Christians who voted for President Bush because he was the “Pro-life” candidate and could appoint a “Pro-life” judge like Souter was supposed to be, responsible for all the abortions that took place the 4 years President Bush was in office? They would say no. But they would say that if you voted for Clinton or Obama that you are. That is hypocrisy.
And what about the “morning after pill” approved by supposedly “Pro-life” candidate/president George W. Bush? He’s another one that the James Dobson’s, Albert Mohler’s and Matt Slick’s of the “Christian Politics/Culture Warriors” told us that we had to support so that he could appoint “Pro-life” judges (which he apparently did, to his credit). But the “morning after pill” produces, in the case where the woman has conceived, an abortion. So again, are all the Christians responsible for those “morning after pill” abortions as they would hold you responsible for voting for a “Pro-choice” candidate? They would say no. Again, that’s hypocrisy!
Looking to politics to “work out our salvation” has never, ever succeeded. It starts with great intentions but usually disolves into being more about the issues (homosexual marriage, abortion, gays in the military, Creationism in school) themselves than the spread of the gospel, which is our main objective.
So what can we do? Preach the word, in season and out of season. We proclaim Christ, the Holy Spirit changes hearts and those changed hearts seek to please God and don’t need a written law to do so. The reality is that “evil men and seducers will wax worse and worse.” And without God restraining sin in men, laws themselves are virtually ineffective. Laws only provide consequences for evil, they don’t stop evil.
Lastly, this is a personal conscience issue. I contend with no one who involves themselves in politics so long as it doesn’t mar the gospel message, it doesn’t become their “hope” and it is unhypocritical.
LD,
Wow.
None of the political parties is ever going to tackle this issue. BLD is right. Bush used and then sold the religious right down the river. He had an opportunity to go to the mat to get the right Supreme Court judged on the bench and he caved-BTW: I hope everyone knows that if we ever do get RVW overturned that will not outlaw abortions, it will simply send it back to the states to decide like it was before RVW. Prior to RVW, the states voted on the issue, some states allowed abortion and some did not. This is obviously a better situation than having RVW in place, but it does not guarantee that abortion will stop being legal in America. I may show up and vote or most likely I will not, but without a doubt my days of carrying water for any politician or putting any emotional energy into politics is over. I’m a drop out.
BLD-
Well said.
The only thing that gives me pause about completely dropping out of the political arena is the Civil Right Movement with Martin Luther King Jr and the eventual changing of the law. I don’t know. Vote and act out your conscience.
Thats where I am Hutch. I had a lot of people fight for that right and I think squandering it causes wasted blood, but I am still wrestling through that now.
Lionel,
Very thoughtful article. DLB as well! Loud applause for both.
Whom do we find trustworthy? That’s where the answer lies.
Thanks Mr. Aussie J! I could only tip my hat to BLD!
Lionel-
Yeah, it was/is a long struggle. Although the largest amount of bloody violence was not meeted out against white emancipationists, plenty of white people were a part of that struggle as owners of safe houses on the railroad, some paid with their lives and some had their property burned down, even in MLK’s day that black and white college student were killed together in Alabama. Yes, I know the struggle was and is primarily a black struggle and the body count was a black body count but a lot of people put a lot of energy into making the changes that we see today. BTW, we would ahve less progess than we have if the struggle was just a political struggle. Civil Disobedience, boycots, marches and strikes ahd to take place as well for us to be where we are today. Maybe the same is true with the abortion issue.
Does that make sense? I’m not trying to portray that white emancipationist suffered like slaves.
POWERFUL THREAD!!!!!!
Working in the Human Services field and seeing this as one of the BIGGEST issues believers fight over in the church, many thanks to you Lionel (as well as BLD, Hutch and many others) for sharing your thoughts…and trying to keep it real on the deal.
Sincerly, I have a lot of conflicting emotions on the issue as well..as I have had to do work/debate with people differing on the issues all the time. And for me, I cannot help but wonder how one scripturally deals with the examples of believers in similar situations—from Daniel in Daniel 1:1-17 to Esther 4:1-14 when it came to the political intrigue involved in her having to save her people from being destroyed, to Joseph in Genesis 41:41-57/Genesis 45:3-14 having the support of unbelieving pharoah to politically impact the lives of millions (God’s People most importantly), Nehemiah 1:1-18 with Nehemiah recieving governmental help for rebuilding the walls. There’s also Obadiah in 1 Kings 18:3-5 1 Kings 18 , working in the palace of a king/using his position to aid the people of God…and of course, others examples of people in the OT who were never even saved—-yet when it came to the purposes of God’s Kingdom being expanded, they were called upon for service….such as how Isaiah noted, with Cyrus. .as it was with King Cyrus, who came after the Babylonians were captured…and who was not saved and yet was known as God’s Servant for the Jews in some of his actions concerning aiding the Jews in their return after the Exile, as said by Isaiah (Isaiah 44:28-45:9, for God clearly moved on his heart/changed the man’s perspectives in accordance with His Divine Decree for what was to happen..moving the man into His Direction …and using a man politically for the benefit of God’s People.
The Lord used Joseph to influence the pagan king, Pharaoh of Egypt …Daniel to influence the pagan King Nebuchadnezzar Babylon. … God used these men of God to influence those nations after the king was in power…all for the glory of God. To say politics was seperate from that seems odd.
The NT is full of examples as well that one must wrestle with too, such as the Roman Centurion who had faith in Jesus but still had to work in the Roman Army, which at times did/believed many things contrary to what a Christaisn should act like…Matthew 8:5-13. Luke 7:1-10 shows that he had the elders sent forth by him….and that is significant, as Jews hated Romans. But this paticular Roman had been one who had used his position for the benefit of God’s people. Same with others like Cornelius in Acts 10:1-6. Apart from them, there was also one whom aided Paul Himself..and he was known to be the CITY’s PUBLIC of HEALTH essentially,….as seen when Paul said “Erastus, who is the city’s director of public works, and our brother Quartus send you their greetings.” in Romans 16:22-24
Many other examples besides this…but if we’re truly believing that it is our job to expand/proclaim the Kingdom of God by actively involved on all levels, as in was in scripture, I’d have a hard time seeing how politics are to be counter to Biblical Faith expressing itself.
On the issue of abortion/slavery….
To add more fuel to the fire, I remeber an article on the issue that really struck me long ago….entitled Outlawing the Symptom: Our Broken Abortion Strategy on the God’s Politics blog. Here’s a quote that deserves attention:
The question is, will evangelicals expand their understanding of social influences and actually work towards healing the causes, or just wait around to outlaw the symptom? And on that note, I must say that I agree 100%. That’s mostly due to the side of the camp I lean toward when it comes to issues of Social Justice—as I very much enjoy the ministry of “Sojourners” and Jim Wallace…and their thoughts on Abortion have been reasonable to a good degree in the times we live in—especially for those tired of the Bi-Partisan Politics. For more info, one can go to A New Conversation on Abortion
Or they can also investigate “Democrats For Life”…
Others have felt the same way as well…..and for other examples, one can go to media teleconference hosted with Catholics In Alliance, Father Thomas Reese, and Rev. Samuel Rodriguez the week prior to the election…and the same with others who used to be with the side of saying “MAKE LAWS AGAINST ABORTION”…but now they’ve switched to saying that people need to simply find ways to reduce it.
What people have already said of them:
Others on the camp that folks like “Focus on the Family”/Dobson are on have reacted strongly to people choosing to do such…..as is often the case for those who are CONSERVATIVE Evangelicals reacting toward Progressive Ones ( People For the American Way: Prop 8′s Call to Extremism )—-though people like Focus on the Family/Most of the Religious Right have made it out as if anything counter to their views is automatically “of the devil” or “sign of God’s Judgement”. There are enough issues by Dobson that have been bothersome, one of which is something he did with his ministry what slander on the President–as seen in James Dobson’s ‘Letter From 2012 in Obama’s America’. & Back to the Future with Focus on the Family.
and the side Dobson’s reacting to is the side I happen to currently be on. It’s
Perhaps it’s just me, but even being against abortion, that bothered me greatly to see other Pro-Life believers label people disagreeing on METHODS as “traitors to the cause”. For Abortion reduction should not be seen as traitorous or counter to ending abortion, IMHO….
The main reason why many seem to avoid battling the issue is due to feeling as if with Politics nothing can ever get done—nor has it EVER Been done. But as Brother Hutch mentioned earlier, that kind of mentality would have been the reason that most of the blacks here would still be seeing no development during the Civil Rights era….and the same thing with Slavery. But even then, people may forget that there were battles as to how to go about dealing with the issues. Some got involved in Politics—like Martin Luther King and Thurgood Marshall…..w and others fought for change by means of aggression such as Malcom X. Others never even wanted to get involved at all. But all played a role in the shaping of where we are TODAY. And the same thing with Abortion—as it often seems all sides are so busy decrying one another than many forget the same dynamics occurred previously. To be clear, when it comes to the issue of abortion, it has always amazed me seeing the ways in which many go about seeking to deal with it.
People often say those not seeking to address abortion are the same as those who supported slavery by doing nothing. But even then, when it comes to things such as the issue of slavery being abolished, there were a MYRIAD Of ways people went about dealing with it. As another individual well stated:
Even with slavery, there were some things that were a matter of SMALL VICTORIES that led into greater ones over time. It was never a matter of a complete overhaul in all respects—so for those saying the same must occur with abortion today, it’s error (IMHO). Some things change in increments…and regardless of who is in charge, change can occur. And some things can be best seen in Hindsight only….
Perhaps I’m the only one here thinking such, but I truly believe that the key to ending abortion isn’t in making a ban against it—as I’ve seen otherwise in differing countries. The key, IMHO, is when the church will rise up not only in denouncing the issue but raising the issue of AIDING THOSE WHO ARE FATHERLESS, PROMOTING ADOPTION POLICY CHANGES MORE AGGRESSIVELY and SUPPORT FOR THOSE WOMEN WHO OFTEN FEEL TRAPPED IN THINKING THAT ABORTION IS THEIR ONLY OPTION EVEN WHEN THEY’RE DOING ALL THEY CAN TO TAKE CARE OF THE CHILD BUT SIMPLY CANNOT MAKE ENOUGH….
No longer can folks afford to divide over issues that are a matter of cause/effect (i.e. focusing on the end results of abortion–which is an issue indeed–and yet ignoring the qualities of lives many of those women who used to be abandoned little girls once grew up in and that often served as significant factors leading to choosing abortion, such as lack of support for single mothers, extreme impoverishment, lack of hope even working as hard as they can but not being able to raise enough to take care of the children, etc).
To be clear, I support grassroots organizations such as “The CALL“ ( thecall.com/ ), “Bound4Life“ , JHOP, and others seeking to combat the sin of abortion among others through national protest/prayer and government action, as the CHURCH SHOULD BE THE PRIMARY ONE who seeks to deal with the issue, primarily through promoting/advocating for ADOPTION—as that seems to be one of the greatest issues many in the church do not wish to deal with, as I’ve often see others decry abortion clinics/those who’re pro-choice—-and yet, when it comes those in the church willing to take care of the children, many are silent…and that’s just as bad ,
The reality’s that fighting for the concept of “right to life” and ignoring the other issue of a “quality of life” is like dividing over cause and effect—acknowledging/treating the symptoms while ignoring the bulk of the disease….as well as the reality of what many in the Church and the U.S.A will not admit to: ignoring the plight of the widows and the ORPHANS–and that’s directly connected with the cause of ending abortion:
Cool to see I wasn’t the only one who knew of that paticular picture—as I’ve referenced it before in other discussions elsewhere…and it’s one of the most powerful descriptions on the issue of what abortion is today. Though the same thing goes for gigs such as Human Trafficking–which is probably GREATER than slavery ever was since that one is more underground…and accepted by most at ALL levels of government/life ….and many don’t know about it. There’s actually a movement I found out about last year/LOVED known as “Exodus Cry: The Prayer Movement To End Slavery” ( http://www.exoduscry.com/ )
Hutch,
I agree completely brother. Many of the white skinned (there is no such thing as white people, just people with white skin, nor black people or brown people, they are all people with different pigmentation, I call them light-skinned brothers and sisters) especially amongst the United Methodist walked hand and foot with MLK and others. They don’t get the proper recognition and maybe I can write something about that during black history month. Many did suffer like blacks, they lost their jobs, were alienated from their families, many were beat harder and killed for the simple fact of being a “nigger lover”. So I agree with what you are saying completely.
I agree. You know my position:
I do not believe that there are different races of people, but rather that there is one race of people, the human race made up of different ethnic groups.
Teh idea of different races is the product of Darwinian racist teachings and genocidal population controlers.
That picture is shockingly appropriate for such a time as this.
I’ve always maintained that we cannot legislate morality (especially in a country where morality is highly subjective). I agree with BLD when he said it’s “a personal conscience issue.”
Vetta,
For arguement sake, what if Christians used this logic on the issue of slavery? That is what the picture was coveying. Slavery was a legal issue (heart also) they couldn’t change the heart to they changed the law. Can we do the same for abortion? If not, why did it happen for slavery?
I think the bigger issue that harms others is when all people from multiple sides say “slavery is akin to abortion in evil”…and yet assume the side they’re on is the one that made a difference in slavery.
There were people in the slave days who were abolitionists/fighting fully against it…..while there were others who felt that it made no sense to end slavery immediately if there was nothing the slaves could go to—with many going right back into slavery/selling themselves out for jobs as sharecroppers or going back to their masters since the Economic systems were not controlled in their favor……and so for some people, ending slavery was not the most primary concern. And there were others who felt that slavery should at best be restricted.
All those factors collided into the ending of slavery as we know it…..with various aspects/perspectives of law brought–and the same with abortion today. Some feel laws will make the difference…and others feel the CHURCH/GRASS-Roots organizations will do the job…and others feel both, with prayer, is what will do the trick. Does it need to be the case that others feel like they’re not truly “figfhting” against a problem if they’re fighting in differing ways?
Gab,
No that doesn’t need to be the case at all. That is what I am trying to present here; however, the question is should we use our access to democracy to curb abortion? But I was asking Javetta for discussion sake.
When Slavery was ended, anyone recall the debates between Booker-T Washington and W.E.B Debois?
After slavery, there were plenty of times blacks fought for higher education in the Arts—as they felt that the way to KEEP SLAVERY dead was to have access to the things whites did so they could control the system. But the times weren’t right for it during the Civil War. Then, at key times in history when enough awareness was raised/people became open to studying the issues, those who did their homework had a platform to work from and bring about change.
Even then, though, battles occured. For Booker T.Washington & W.E.B Debois had excellent ideas, but the seasons for them being applied made a difference in what to do/how successful they were. Though Booker T’s thoughts on gaining economic/agricultural success were good for making whites “respect” them economically, many blacks had already long sought to do that—-simply band together/get by——but continuing to do that would’ve left blacks forever trying to maintain things as they were. After the Reconstruction Era, Blacks would have possibly gone back to slavery.
Had Debois come out at any other time with his ideas/concepts and the drive to get education, nothing would’ve happened. Fortunately, the timing was right—and from there, doors opened for the Harlem Renaissance, the Civil Rights Movement, etc.
Same thing here when it comes to the issues when it comes to the issues of abortion….as it seems that many times people are more focused on what is right or wrong rather than what season they’re in. Both men had wonderful ideas—but on some things, perhaps one of their ideas would not have worked. With abortion, perhaps a better question would be “Is it the case that we’re in season/time where making laws would be the most effective way of dealing with abortion?”….as it may have been “Yes” 20 years ago…..but times change.
Shalom, L…
To be clear, the comment I made wasn’t in response to the question were asking Javetta for discussion sake…as I do agree with you on the issue of using our access to democracy to curb abortion. I do think, though, that we have to be realistic on it—as a vote can only go so far….and many times, it was more than just that. People look at the Civil Rights era & think it was all a political issue of voting/using democracy..but there were a host of issues going down that took DECADES of work to bear fruit….and with WORLD WAR II and VIETNAM taking place, those external factors actually served (IMHO) to make using democracy for change a more realistic way of change. Same here with abortion, IMHO, as I don’t think abortion would have ended if people choose not to suppport Obama and other factors were left out of the picture.
Gabriel,
The season for civil rights was a 200 year season. It didn’t begin with Debois or Washignton. The season to do all it takes to end abortion began with its inception I don’t buy the seasonality and I am sure most slaves don’t buy a sesonality for freedom either. For them if it took running, responding with violence, law or war, they wanted it done. I wonder how the unborn feels about which season abortion abolition is in, when they are getting scapels ran across the base of their tiny necks. The “season” isn’t important to me, what is important is should Christians use the system that they benefit so much from (we love laws that protect us and our property and our children) to protect the helpless, while working simultaneously to encourage outside of the system.
I agree with your Obama comment. I don’t think a president has the power to make a decision either way. I acutally don’t know if legally it would change anything either. For example before abortion became legal, abortions were performed at the cost of the lives of those who chose to make those decisions. I don’t know if the Christian response should be “oh well they sinned”. But on the other hand should we have the response of “oh well they sinned”?
I’m probably going to be misread but I feel must make an attempt to address some of GG’s comments.
Gabe has mentioned before that political involvement saturates the OT story. I agree. It can’t be denied. Here’s the problem: Christians are not National Israel! America is not the new National Israel! Christians in America DO NOT have a political covenant with God whereby they must imitate or recreate a Theocracy as that that existed in National Israel. We are a part of an unseen kingdom. (i.e. Jesus to Pilate, “My kingdom is NOT of this world. If it were, then my servants would fight….) This is what happens when we divorce context (historical and otherwise) from our application of scripture. (something else Gabe and I radically disagree on).
We look at Joseph fulfilling prophecy by ascending in authority in Egypt, eventually bringing his entire family there and fulfilling the prophecy of the enslavement of Israel in Egypt. Question: Where is the prophecy concerning Christians in America? Where is the prophecy that is fulfilled based on the political actions of Christians in America?
The same argument can be made for all the others mentioned (Daniel, Esther, Nehemiah, Obadiah, Isaiah, etc.). God was working out His(tory) through the lives of these people, fulfilling prophecy and culminating in the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ. (Hebrews 1:1-2)
In the NT, political involvement, in my not-so-humble opinion, can be reduced to those imprisoned (Peter, John, Paul, etc.) who were afforded opportunities TO PROCLAIM THE GOSPEL to those in wordly positions of authority. Again, to try and equate that with voting, picketing, sit-ins, etc. is gross equivication. Is it a sin to vote, picket, sit-in, etc.? I don’t believe so. But it has no parallel in scripture.
We have to be careful (as Lionel said in a previous post) that we don’t make up our minds first and then go to scripture to find evidence that is not there in order to promote what we feel deeply about.
LD,
Do you think Gabe was doing this in one of his post or is this a culmination of previous comments.
By the way, I also have a question concerning our/my debt to the Civil Rights Movement in regards to my right to vote:
Does the fact that people died to attain a certain thing in a cause that I may believe was right, equate to that thing (voting in this case) being a sanctioned activity for a Christian to involve themselves in? Please pay close attention to the question as I was careful in wording it.
LD,
Do you think since we are affored the opportunity we should take it and use it to do justice? Speaking of democracy here, or do you think it is better to not blur the lines? And what would you have said 44 years ago if you had the same opportunity? I am enjoying this discussion and these are the comments I was looking for.
Brother Lionel,
I’m refering to the citing of OT political involvement as a parallel to what a Christian in America could or should be doing now. So yes and yes.
LD,
My question is of that of a descendent of those who these atrocities were perpetrated against. And also my bigger question is that since we are called to do justice and we are afforded the opportunity to do it, shouldn’t we use that opportunity to do justice for the good of the world (not for our particular Christian values but for the good of common man). This may open up a new can of worms.
It can’t be yes and yes. If you say yes to number one that means we should use the rights afforded to us, but if you say yes to the second that usage may blur the lines and thus cause Christian to move towards a Theocratic view.
Though I’ll respond more in depth later, here’s the bottom line (for me, at least). Should Christians be involved in politics? And for the sake of definition, “politics” can be described as using positions of governmental authority/leadership for the cause of advancing the kingdom of God/love for one’s neighbors.
For at the end of the day, if you disagree with at, then there’s no need to at any point complain about any laws made…….or references to any benefits thereof where people prior to use USED law/examples in scripture (including OT ones) to make the environment wer’re in and other issues. There can be no working/noting of why believers are not dealing with Humanatartian AID in Dafur, Helping the Inner City, or any referencing people like King since we use their work but decry the methods which they used…even though we still benefit
Gabe,
Explain a little more.
Brother Lionel,
This is not a diversion but I’m truly not sure how I would have felt 44 years ago. Selfishly, I could say no. But I also could say yes, if the real ME or the current ME were transported back to that time. As I have discussed with others, the Civil Rights Movement came with some cost. It wasn’t a total victory! Case in point:
There was a time when the color of your skin prohibited you from shopping in certain stores. (Woolworth’s for example). Laws were changed. So now you can shop anywhere, but you also can be followed, eye-balled, screened, profiled, etc.) I’d rather they just didn’t let me in the store.
Now that’s a small and maybe silly example but it goes to the point. What did those laws change? What did they provide access to? Because laws were changed and not hearts, we still have Black this anad Black that. White this and White that. Ok, I’m rambling.
Bro. Lionel,
I was saying yes and yes to the question about Gabe not political involvement. We have to slow down the discussion is getting muddled.
BLD,
I understand, many dark-skinned folks feel the same way, with desegration came the decline of black business (banks, dealerships even sports teams), black education (HBCU), strong communities (black flight) and other such diversifying issues, it seems that as soon as blacks were given the right they ran to the country clubs, stores and communities that were forced to embrace them. Remember when Dee Brown had a cross burning in his yard when he was drafted by the Celtics, that was in like 87 or something. I would have asked for a trade
).
But you didn’t answer my other question about justice and democracy.
LDW-
Well, I don’t think the law changed the pro-slavery camp’s heart. No law can change anyone’s heart; only the Holy Spirit can. I know some Christians today who would disagree with us that slavery was atrocious. They believe it was a necessary evil of that time to build the nation up :-/ (This is the view of one of my former history professors who taught a class called “American Slavery.” This view is held by him and his circle of friends)
I think that the physical existential nature of the human creates an unfortunate dichotomy. Because the slave exists on its own, non-dependant on another human for life, his atrocity is greatly realized and therefore can be legislated/banned/outlawed. An unborn child is at the mercy of his mother, so it is impossible to force the mother to keep the child. If we ban abortion by the law, she’ll just get a “back alley” abortion, thereby making the law ineffective.
I agree with you totally on “life at conception.” But again, we live in a society where morality is subjective. We can debate all day whether or not there is life at conception, but no one can debate the existence of a born human being. And I think for that reason the immorality of slavery is able to be legislated but the immorality of abortion is not…
Vetta,
Good answer tank-head 8). Jeff shol’ got him a smart one
Brother Lionel,
Ok. I will attempt an answer. Again, these are my personal views so far as my scripturally informed conscience. (If you can post the scriptures that you are refering to then perhaps I can interact with them.)
As the active Body of Christ on earth, we do not need any particular political system in order to obey the command to do justice. As a matter of fact, democracy itself may be just as big of a crutch to Christians as a prolific bible teacher in a pulpit or his study bible. For example, as long as I can vote for a Pro-Life candidate, I don’t have to consider opening my home to a single mother or poor family and sacrifice my comforts to help them get back on their feet. I also don’t have to consider adopting unwanted children. I can vote and clear my conscience.
As long as I vote against gay-marriage, I don’t have to love my homosexual neighbors who are struggling or losing their homes. They’re in sin and are receiving justice from God.
What about welfare? Government feeding programs? ETC.? Can we escape our responsibilities to the less fortunate/unprotected by appealing to government? And really let’s be honest, is it because we are being taxed? (Taxes are really only for military defense and infrastructure.)
Lionel,
Nowhere did I say the Civil Rights era began with Debos or Booker T–but their actions set the stage for very large degree of effecting change in it for later. You would never have had folks like Thurgood Marshall—who helped to shape the laws that allowed the Civil Rights Act Movement to thrive–had it not been for the setting of the stage with Debois. Had things not been done when they were done, opportunities would have been missed.
On seasonality, if necessary, I will go back and find most of the slave narratives I know of where many slaves for AGES made clear that though they hated slavery, there were some things they did in the hopes that their descendants would have platforms to do greater. Many were not trying to end slavery at THAT time–as they understood it was never that simple of a matter. For many, they understood that at the time they were in it was best to do things such as instill hope/pass down legacy for future generations…and as time progressed, others fled to parts where slavery was outlawed/did advocacy work.
If people are wondering how the unborn feel, then they should have been asking that in the 60′s/80′s at a time when there was still time to actually change things before they were too far gone/decayed for there to be turning back completely. Like it or not, it’s most likely the case that abortion is not going anywhere anytime soon—-espeically when seeing that we’ve too long invested in a culture of entertainment/pleasure that feeds into babies being aborted..such as the fact that sexual immorality is exalted in media/music and t.v and pornagraphy feeding sexual irresponsibiliy continues. Factor in the issues of FATHERLESS homes and dysfunctional familes and how many people DON’T care to deal with those issues….but still want to focus upon using the laws, it’s a destructive cycle….much like a man who is in need of emergency health care because of his high blood pressure/heart attack…but he never got around to doing PREVENTATIVE health care in taking care of his body 20 years ago when there was actually a chance to do something. Using emergency surgery can only do so much…..and the same with focusing upon using the law to enact change for the unborn when there are too many factors no one wants to deal with that connect with the problem.
I have made clear from the jump that I think we should be fighting for laws to affect abortion and that Christians use the system that they benefit so much from…just as it’d be for any other ill, from Human Trafficking to to protect the helpless, while working simultaneously to encourage outside of the system.
For me, its the entire issue of which war are we really fighting…and whether or not we’re even fighting the in the right war. For more information ( http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5555324196046364882&ei=wc_pSvzQJ5OorQKosai-Cw&q=Gregory+Boyd%2FRick+Warren&hl=en# )
BLD,
Sometimes I think you may really be saved, no need to keep your pledge card you can shred it now
Gabe,
Understood.
Brother Lionel,
When listening to this subject being discussed by the “Christian Culture Warriors” as it pertains to voting, protesting, writing my Congressman,etc., it dawned on me to ask the question: How many Christians are willing to open their homes to those in need? Forget about them. Am I willing to open my home to those in need.
Right now, I have a desire to purchase a home for my family. My wife and I are coming up on our 10 year anniversary tomorrow. We have wanted a home of our own for all these years and have never been able to afford one for one reason or another. It consumes most of my thoughts concerning finances. But when I read Matthew 6, Luke 6, Luke 12, Colossians 3 and other texts, it is apparent to me that my mind and thoughts should be focused elsewhere, ON HEAVENLY THINGS! So the indictment, as it were, is not on others. It is on myself. I don’t have the “sell all you have and give it to those in need” attitude that I see. I don’t live as Abraham who, “looked for a city whose maker was God” and was therefore willing to dwell in tents. (so that he could constantly move when God said to move). But I should have that attitude.
So how does that relate to this subject? It says to me that were there not such an easy way out of that attitude, that is by absolving myself of the personal responsibility through government, I may have learned by now to have that attitude. As you said in another post, it appears to have been a Spirit wrought attitude as a result of the Gospel of the Kingdom. If I have a “better inheritence”, ” a reward reserved in the heavens”, “an eternal reward”, etc. then how can I be so focused on these earthly matters. Except that the “married man focuses on earthly things, how he may please his wife and the married woman focuses on earthly things how she may please her husband.”
Pray that God would instill in me the proper attitude.
Shalom…
Before going any further, I’d like to take the time to give out a couple of references…in the event that anything I’m seeking to convey does not come out the proper way when it comes to my views on politics. For on some things, there’s no need trying to “re-invent the wheel” when someone else said it best. Some sources to consider when it comes to Christian & politics (parallels):
Partnership with Unbelievers
Why the Cross Can Do What Politics Can’t
Proverbs and Politics
The Christian and Politics
The Politics of Esther and Mordecai: Courage or Compromise?
For Such a Time As This
The Indigenous Pilgrim Principle: A Theological Consideration of the Christian, the Church, and Politics
You’re fine, Bruh…and I appreciate the taking of time to share thoughts on the subject.
Perhaps it’s just me…..but the argument on National Israel does not really seem to be one that’s stable if saying that political involvement in the Bible is not basis for political basis today for the believer. For starters, people quote “My Kingdom is Not Of This World”—and have debated the issue for ages. Rick Warren–well known for his advocacy when it comes to Humanatarian Aid/Government support (including during the Presidential debates where he was one of the few that actually dared to ask questions of the cannidates)—and Gregory Boyd of “The Myth of a Christian Nation” debated the issue intensely back in the day when it came to differing views on that specific scripture…
With the scripture in John 18:35-37, it’s already intriguing to see how Jesus’s description of the nature of His kingdom echoes similar passages in Daniel such as Daniel 2:44 , Daniel 7:14-27,…..John 6:15. But the way many treat it comes off as if they were for things akin to simply being “spiritual”—such as saying we can never lock arms with those who are either MUSLIMS, Atheists or others involved in politics due to how we can have nothing to do with them when it comes to God’s Work of “feeding the poor” (even though we go to work with them ALL the time in the marketplaces/work with them the way the kingdoms of the world do work).
If the scripture on having a “Kingdom Not of This World” was something that meant we’re to not have ANY believers working in high-level positions, then there are too many scriptures within the Bible one must deal with when it comes to believers involved in differing positions IN THE KINGDOM of this world on behalf of the KINGDOM of God . Of course, the Kingdom of God was meant to be something that could not be stopped and expanded regardless, as seen in Luke 13:10-21 and Matthew 13:31-35 & Mark 4:26-40. When reading/studying many of the Great Awakenings that occurred in the history of the U.S., it was the case that believers many times were simply living life/seeking to do what they could on their block….and when it got enough attention/significant impact, people from the Government chose to step in to make a difference…
Gregory Boyd noted it best in his book “The Myth of a Christian Nation” (which I Bought/enjoyed), as he said here:
That I more than agree with….as it does seem others so focus upon the Kingdom of God as if there’s a bit of escapsim occuring….never wishing to do anything on a large-scale level when it comes to things such as the environment, human trafficking, abortion, world hunger and too many other issues to note. On the issue, it’s interesting to see the issue since many holding to the view of “The Kingdom” involving political action are those believers holding to a “Kingdom Now!!” view..believing that the church will not be raptured…but will be given more authority as the times continue, with prayer/fasting globally by the saints leading to the Kingdom of God advancing till the Earth is prepared for Christ to come back. Because of this, they’re actively engaged in society trying to change social ills and do humantarian work. This is often discussed in groups connected with IHOP (International House of Prayer).
when saying one is seeking to recreate a theocracy, it seems a bit skewed since many of the example in the scriptures of believers in politics were in situations that were NOT seeking a theocracy….but rather believers in political realms using their faith to impact others. Consider the example of Daniel, who worked virtually the entirety of his adult life in the Babylonian court. The man was required alongside others to study witchcraft, among other things such as astronomy/history/science and magic…seen in Daniel 1:3-7 and Daniel 1:17-21. The man was was an agent of the governmen that had enslaved his people, destroyed the temple in Jerusalem, and exploited what remained of his homeland…..and the text of scripture makes clear that Daniel’s example was ANYTHING but one on creating THEOCRACY in the land. Any Christian who seeks to do so is in error, IMHO…..as the atmosphere in Babylon was much more similar to what happens in the U.S when it comes to corruption than one where all were “under God”, for they little regard for the living God there ..and were indifferent to either the interests of the Jews or those of other subject peoples.
If there was a comparison for Daniel today, it could be akin to what it would have been for an American captured & then made to work in the Soviet government during the Cold War…..or, for that matter, finding oneself a POW in Communist China. It was not a matter of a theocracy when Joseph was aiding Pharoah in Egypt—as he was simply there/set in place by the Lord for advancing the cause of his people. The same thing goes for others such Esther/Nehemiah, as all of them had their beliefs in the Lord—–yet they all lived in cultures that were very much pluralistic in thought/allowed for worship of differing beings. The laws made in those cultures were never made for the sake of GLORIFYING GOD alone—though when it came to policies that’d directly affect the people of the Lord, they spoke up. This is very much similar to what occurs today when it comes to policies affecting the SAVED and UNSAVED alike in ways where both are allowed opportunities to do their thang.
This is consistent with the CALL of Christ to do that which would line up with walking in love, for “He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous.” Matthew 5:39-48/ Matthew 5:44-46/ Matthew 5
And when it came to the Parable of the Good Samaritan, the one who loved was the one who found out how he could use wherever it was that he was at in life to aid his neighbor in need (Luke 10:25-37). Others may disagree….but I’d think that politics would also be included in that call as well.
If one’s going to discuss historical context, it must be shown that the texts of those paticular situations were ever just a matter of applying to national Israel–with no other applications/principles & lessons. IMHO, As of yet, all that has occurred is assertion–when most circles (if not all), from Jewish Culture to Scholars today—have consistently pointed out those stories were not just for the sake of describing Israel. If one chooses to say otherwise, then by the logic one must go the entire way when it comes to referencing OT examples for encouragement/example of God’s Working. One surely cannot say that anything God said he hated in the OT—and that was remphasized in the NT (i.e. MURDER, Adultery, Stealing, etc)—is valid for today since those things were spoken mainly to the Jewish people.
One cannot quote Abraham—the father of our faith—because many of the dynamics going on were specifically discussed within a Jewish context….even though the man was referenced in NUMEROUS examples for application to our lives TODAY …(Romans 4:11-13 / James 2:22-24 /1 Peter 3:5-7 / Hebrews 11:10-12 /Galatians 3:28-29 /Galatians 3:13-15 , etc)…and the promises made on His behalf for Israel apply to us since those having faith in Abraham are also considered to be APART of TRUE Israel (Ephesians 3:1-17). One certainly has no business learning from the examples of those in the Hall of Faith because those were apparently all examples of ISRAEL/God working through that only—despite the common reality that they were there for the encouragement of the audience in Hebrews 11:3-40 (as well as us today, when it comes to walking in FAITH and differing ways it was expressed/seeing the way God was sovereign). We cannot really, by that logic, encouragement from places such as Hebrews 11:31-39 when it comes to the cloud of Witnesses before us expressing faith in God when it came to the battles they had to fight…..from those quenched in fire (like Shadrach/Meshack and Abednego in Daniel 3:19-30) or those escaping the edge of sword–like Elisha (II Kings 6:15-19), Elijah (I Kings 19:1-3) and David ( I Samuel 18:4-11) and many others. One cannot even have a simple quiet time in reading their stories and the wonderful ways the Lord operated in their lives/seeing how much it can relate to issues others go through today.
By that form of logic, one must make it out as if Paul Himself was in error when it was clear from text that he felt the OT had principles to learn from it in the multiple times he referenced it—-whether in 1 Corinthians 10:1-13 in citing the examples of the failures of the Israelites with sexual immorality/grumbling and saying they happened as OUR EXAMPLES/WARNINGS for us today….or in his citing of Deuteronomy 25:3-5 when it came to Church Planters in 1 Corinthians 9:8-10/ 1 Corinthians 9 (and also, 1 Timothy 5:17-19 ) concerning supporting. The same goes for Paul in his referencing/citing Exodus 16:17-19 in regards to gathering when he spoke on being a generous giver in 2 Corinthians 8:14-16. Add to that 2 Corinthians 4:12-14 when he referenced Psalm 116:10. There’s also the reality of James being referenced when it came to his PRAYER life having effect—as noted that he was a man just like us and yet his righteous prayers were answered in James 5:16-18 James 5 when it came to his praying for rain in 1 Kings 18:35-45. Dozens of other examples besides this, as well as plenty of scholary books/references on the issue of how those within the first 3 centuries of the Church actually referenced the examples of the saints for Church Practice/Encouragement. If one would so desire, I will go back and gladly bring them up in order…
On the issue, to be clear, I see that what we, in the New Covenant, can take out of the old is the principles of God wherein they still exist in the new. We do not take specifics unless they exist in the new — confirmation that this principle was carried forward. The OC is obsolete; a NC has been put in place. . I an not a New Testament Only person. But the OT is a picture for the NT. It contains the principles in a physical picture of the principles we live by in the true spiritual nature of the New Covenant. If you want the OT to be literal, then you must live by Leviticus as well as any other book. We are under the New Covenant, under Jesus Blood. We look to the Old Testament to see the principles that the New Covenant was built upon — because God never changes — and from that we can draw our conclusions.
I’ve yet to see anyone saying politics in the Bible equates to the the prophecy of the Jews being protected applying to America. Of course the text of Scripture makes clear that God in his Sovereignty set up Joseph to be able to not only save His people…but in the call of God to love our neighbors—the fufillment of all of his laws—in a position so that all others in the land could be aided from perishing in the famine. It also dealt with the central issue of how God was sovereign over the nations themselves for accomplishing his purposes on behalf of HIS PEOPLE/REVEALING himself to the World. On this issue, one must deal with the central question of who Israel is….as well as what the KINGDOM OF God is all about—specifically, whether or not it is something that was meant to affect the saved and the unsaved. Also in the Old Testament we see men like Joseph and Daniel, both of whom served pagan kings and lived in lands far from being centered on God. In neither instance (Egypt or Babylon) is the king a godly man, nor is the nation anything close to a democracy. …with the people being enslaved, and often dealt with cruelly. With Daniel, he actually served under several differing terms/kings …but as it relates to one’s FAITH being expressed before the Lord right where they’re at, Daniel did this daily in the Market places. And his faith made a significant impact on them in many ways—–just as it is for believers working at the Post Office under corrupt employers…or believers working in the Medical Field, Law, Corporate America and any other environment for the sake of building the Kingdom.
This of course goes with the issue of whether or not Israel was in any way a TYPE/Symbolization of the Church today….as in Him redeeming them with the intention of bringing them together with the Gentiles to make up His Bride. But apart from that, what matters most is that we keep in mind how we are strangers /pilgrims in this world (Hebrews 11:13; 1 Peter 2:11)–with our “great” commission being to be witnesses of Christ (Acts 1:8) and to make disciples (Matthew 28:18-20). The way we’re to do that is to be in the world, even though we are not of it….& politics is but one avenue of involvement among MANY others. Caution must be exercised at all times, of course….. but as it is, there is a great deal of darkness in the political arena, and thus the need for “light.”/”Salt” in there as well ( Matthew 5:13-17/ Mark 9:49-50 /Luke 14:33-35 / 1 Peter 2:11-13)
Too often is it the case people complain (IMHO) about how much our nation is decaying—& yet when it comes to believers in political areas who wish to be like “salt” and aid in slowing down the decay—-whether by how they conduct themselves in the policies/views they have or in finding ways to combat evils they see in their communities— many act as if they’re not allowed to….and seem akin to placing the salt back in the cabinet and looking for something else (lol).
On a side note, I wonder what it is that we’re to do with other examples in the NT of those in political involvement that utilized their positions to aid others. One individual coming to mind is found here:
Some things worth noting are that Erastus is the same person mentioned in Acts 19:21-22 and 2 Timothy 4:20, a committed follower of Christ and Paul’s helpful assistent. However, politcally, he was also Corinth’s director of public works….a job that involved making policies to affect the saved/unsaved alike, very similar to one who is a “chamberlain” or “treasurer”…very similar to one in the position of being the mayor of a town. And for anyone familar with Corinth, it was ANYTHING but a theocracy. But nonetheless, there were believers there using the positions/roles God had given them for the sake of impacting others in the Kingdom of God. For historical research one can find on their own, there is actually a large latin inscription in the limestone pavement near the Corinthian theater that reads “Erastus in return for his aedileship laid (the pavenment) at his own expense.” An aedile was a man elected to oversee aspect of a city’s finances. Often prominent elected officials would fufill campaign pledges by providing some public structure to the city. And as it is, I think that’s fascinating how Paul had a fellow church man who was also involved in practical ways benefiting the people of his community—yet he also was able to simultaneously benefit the saints.
For other examples of people in politics, Some of the others were men who were in the armies themselves—as seen in the soldiers in Luke 3:13-15. These soldiers were the Roman troops sent to keep peace in this distant province. Many of them oppressed the poor and used their power to take advantage of all the people….and John called them to repent/change their ways. However, John never said that working for the Roman government or serving politically as a soldier is in itself morally wrong…but in principles, right conduct was a must. And for them, their positions were to be used for the sake of justice. There is also the examples of the Centurion in Acts 10:1-8 to the one in Luke 7:1-10. With the latter example, it’s interesting (IMHO) since centurions were Roman army officers in charge of 100 men…..a high ranking man in government/military. However, he was a man noted to have faith in the Lord (Matthew 8:5-13) and who was so in favor with the Jewish people that they were willing to aid him—as Jews and Romans hated each other. This man, however, aided in bridging the gap however he could…& the man was one who used his resources as a soldier devoted to the ROMAN Government to aid God’s people (politics) when it came to the work of GOD’s Kingdom. It’s no different than when you or I work a job/we give a good witness to others in our field of work for the sake of aiding others who can possibly serve as helps for our cause of spreading the Gospel. When it comes to recieving aid for things such as food distribution, I’m glad for organizations (saved or not) that are willing to give aid—as I nowhere see in the scriptures, anyhow, that those who are saved are the only ones to be worked with in the Kingdom.
One may say it’s error to use scriptures due to having no parallel for today. But on the same token, the same logic used is often used when others say that Church Practice in Acts must be applied EXACTLY the same way due to how what occurred there has to happen today—as in people having to meet in homes because believers did so….or wearing togas/sandals due to them as well, alongside other issues of ecclessiology. Of course it is the fact that description does not equal prescription–as the Church is like an organism that evolves as much as it is alive. And because methods were differing back in the day, does that equate to there being out of place because we have differing means—such as Civil disobedience/actively refusing to obey certain laws, demands and commands of a government or of an occupying power without resorting to physical violence….or things such as protesting? One must also keep in mind that the OT/NT had many situations that in NO way were happening as they are today.
Was Domestic Violence happening in the homes of those in Scripture? Most likely not…but there are some who’d say that Divorce from an abusive husband was not allowable due to how they saw no “parrallels” and had what seemed akin to a “static” view of the scriptures…as if they were exhaustive on all subjects. Some forget that scripture was silent on many issues like the printing press for publishing books, the internet, computers, cars for transportation, MOVIES/MEDIA, CD’s, MP3′s etc, BLOGS, Group Homes/Food pantries, job/career, and a host of other things that may not have been exactly replicated in in the early church. Yet we understand that the Word has given plenty of principles on the issues when there were similar circumstances happening back in the day.
That said, is the Government of TODAY in differing countries the same as it was in Roman times? Of course not…but on the principles of Church Practice/How to operate regardless of the form, the scripture has given us instruction on how to handle it…especially when it comes to the reality of God being Sovereign enough to place others in positions of influence for the protection of his people.
On a side note, some of the things that often go on when discussing politics/scripture can be a bit intriguing. For when it came to those in SLAVERY and being beaten/chained—or others who were forced by the governments (whether in Islamic nations in the Middle East or in European ones), what was it that they were often quoting as encouragement for them to get through? It was the examples of the slaves in Exodus and Moses setting them free. And of course, though that was dealing with Israel being set free, of course those in African-American slavery referred back to them as encouragement/examples to go by because they saw the clear principles within that GOD HATED SLAVERY—-and that His desire was to set people free.
I cannot help but be reminded of Phillis Wheatley, who was a child when taken to Boston to be raised in slavery–as the OT offered her hope of release from the chains of bondage…just as was the case for many other slaves when it came to the examples of God’s people being protected and seen as parallels for those having faith in Him. For more info on this, some resources one can investigate:
Exodus and Emancipation: Essays & Reflections on the Bible and …
Exodus and Emancipation: Biblical and African-American Slavery …
The ones by Rabbi Dr. Kenneth Chelst have been some of the best ones around on the issue of Jewish Culture in connection with parallels in our times, in regards to how as a Jewish believer and how he started to see and develop parallels and contrasts between Israelite and African-American slavery…..
For other possible sources to investigate.
Exodus as Travelling Theory: Excavating the Promised Land in the …
Slave narrative
A Slave’s Subtle War: Phillis Wheatley’s Use of Biblical Myth and …
SLAVERY – North American Slave Narratives – Civil War era and post …
“As if I had entered a paradise”: fugitive slave narratives and …
For the Biblical Account of the Exodus—with the Israelites journey from slavery to freedom—is what also gave the metaphorical framework for understanding the attrocities of their day, from the Middle Passage to Slavery..and of course, their quest for Emacipation. The same thing goes for others who looked to folks like Daniel/Shadrack, Messach, and “A Bad Negro” because of how in times of intense persecution/demanding denial of God, they saw others who were in the same position & chose to STAND OUT. Same goes for Esther, as her people were marked for destruction…yet she chose to not remain silent—-and for those who were abolitionists of slavery (or various other social ills, from child sweat factories to the need for Prison Reform–as done by John Wesley, etc), they remembered the examples of those who had positions of authority to aid God’s people in times of dire straight…and seeing how it only took one person to make a difference, those people took courage in the work they set out to do.
Again, it’s interesting to see how much of the benefits we see in our days are due to others remembering the examples of others in the OT when it came to politics. Of course, the other side of the issue is that the Gospel must always take stage. Many of the great reformers in our times more than understood that—as others like William Wilberforce and other abolitionists were committed to not only seeking social change…but praying (I Timothy 2:1-4) , as Paul commanded, for all those in authority/institutions …and their main thing was not just affecting government, but prayer for social change
Shalom…..
GG,
Unless we agree on a way in which scripture should be handled, then going back and forth would probably just descend into insults. So I’ll just agree to disagree.
GG,
However, not with everything you said.
Brother Lionel…
If I may share,
I think it’s interesting when studying history in seeing the realities on how the world was changed when it came to believers getting involved in the meat of the world as salt and doing their part to make a difference. John Wesley said it best when it came to a rulee he had for all of his life—-as he stated “Do all the good you can…by all the means you can…in all the ways you can…in all the places you can…at all the times you can…to all the people you can….as long as ever you can.” Truly, the man was dedicated to what the Scriptures command when it comes to being eager to do good however possible, Titus 2:14 / Titus 2:11-15 and Galatians 6:9-11 & Titus 3:1-8….alongside his remembering on how the Lord felt when it came to nations neglecting the rights of others who are poor (Deuteronomy 10:17-19, Deuteronomy 24:17, Psalm 10:18, Psalm 68:5, Isaiah 1:17, Isaiah 1:23, Isaiah 58 Jeremiah 5:27-29, James 1:27, etc ). Seeing the work that the man did for things such as the abolitionist movement for ending slavery for the SAVED/UNSAVED alike astounds me….for under Wesley’s direction, people became leaders in many social justice issues of the day including prison reform…and abolitionism movements that involved individuals such as Fredrick Douglass—alongside others who were involved in abolishing like William Wilberforce ( 24 August 1759 – 29 July 1833 ), born a year after Edwards died and yet supported by Wesely STRONGLY. Wesley’s character/adherence to that scriptural reality of doing good for all however one can helped to shape much of the Groundwork laid for future victories…… despite his living in a time when contemporaries were justifying slavery/saying it was all good (as Jonathan Edwards did)—that’s significant, IMHO. Of course, the issue got discussed more in-depth over at your older blog in the article entitled What’s A Couple of Slaves When You Have Good Theology?
But on the issue, other examples of how believers in history sought to make a difference right where they were at.
Some quotes from others in Church History, as it relates to how Christians conquered Rome through Acts of Love:
Very challenging to consider—especially seeing that to a good degree, it was the believers working among themselves to accomplish the goals…and many times, today, believers find themselves unable to do the same, “were there not such an easy way out of that attitude, that is by absolving myself of the personal responsibility through government” (as Brother L.D said best earlier). ..even though in the early church believers were instructed to recognize how not all government issues were to be a problem and they were to work with/submit to it as far as possible with scripture, 1 Peter 2:9-25
The battle that is of most struggle is finding out how government can be used to aid in the call to love others. Wrote about it more in-depth on my Facebook profile, as seen in A Response to One Dear Brother in CHrist—on God, Government & Politics….
Others may disagree with me (and that’s cool–as these are simply some of my own personal convictions)–but there are some things in which I think we should have NO problem at all seeking assistence from the government…especially when it comes to other issues we already use the law/authorities for on our behalf—from crimes/criminal activity to provision in protection & other venues. Of course we cannot legislate morality—as that can never change a human heart. But I do believe that there are circumstances where you really can’t rely on folks hearts changing in order for them to be compelled to do good. I’m not going to wait for men to be converted, before I advocate for tougher laws concerning rape and child molestation, in example…..as law can be a restraint on man’s fallen nature—even though not all aspects of our fallen nature can be addressed by a law. This is why I said earlier that I do not believe having a law against abortion will ever end abortion—as they were occurring even before it was legal. And even if they had laws made, how would they be enacted? What would one do with the women who already had an abortion after the law was made? Would they get arrested?
On the issue, I do believe that God is neither a Democrat nor a Republican..Conservative or Liberal…..& that His politics are beyond both sides. And to make either party “The God Party” is idolatry…and one of the reasons the church is failing, as it’s dominated more so by the Culture War/Politics rather than fighting against sin.
But that, however, does not mean that Christians should abandon political activism. ..and I think it makes sense for Christians to be involved in both political parties, striving to be the “leaven” that permeates both parties with biblically-based judgments and values derived from Christian beliefs…ones that will benefit all of the common man. Culture wars do not always have to occurr when people get involved in political issues. As Jim Wallis said best:
For as Edmund Burke said, ‘The only thing necessary for the triumph [of evil] is for good men to do nothing.’ ….and as once said best by Bodie Thoen, “Apathy is the glove into which evil slips its hand”—-and that’s something we’ve seen too much in our nation as it is…with so much mess occuring due to what happened in the 60′s–much like one group being “The Party Generation” where they simply got buck-wild/made a mess out of everything (sexual revolution being the biggest thing)…& then generations after that were like those having to do the “After-Party Clean Up” and dealing with the consequences of people who did not care ( Proverbs 18:9 / Psalm 11:2-4 )
With political activism, especially as it relates to the cause of the Unborn/Their Bondage, I can see no where where there’s biblical reason for Christian organizations to not receive support from the state/political backing if it comes to helping them out….and I there’s a positive biblical precedent for God’s people receiving funds from governmental sources. More than 60 percent of all abortions are economically driven anyhow—as the reality is that without provisions for hospital coverage, pre- and post-natal care, maternity leave so that a woman giving birth will not lose her job and nursing assistance to help single mothers transition into parenthood, millions of women who want to carry their pregnancies to term will not do so. And of course comes the issues of things like fatherless homes, lack of stability for men needing jobs to take care of their children, people being uneducated as to sexual responsible practices and a host of other issues….namely culture. For many have been well-informed on sexual consequences….and had ability to carry a baby. But in our culture, what I have observed, is that there is a culture of “no big deal” if I get pregnant…for many times, abortion is on demand/people don’t want the consequences of the pleasure they can get. There is a “I can handle a baby” attitude in many young women…and I know of some who even WANT to get pregnant. Others do not even want to have a father figure in their lives—and as a result for socio-psychological reason too in depth to get into here.
We have our work WELL-Cut out for us.
But If / when the state’s willing to fund the Kingdom of God & aid in that which will benefit ALL , PRAISE GOD. And thankfully, it in no way has to be done in a manner that will lead to having a Theocracy……….as there are some things , whether saved or not, that are generally a problem. Murder will also corrupt a nation….just as it was with Slavery and a host of other issues. Laws against them does not mean one has to go as others do in trying to have a “nation under god” or a “Christian Nation”–as we’ve NEVER been such in the U.S.
Some may say “We need to not leave our jobs to the government!!!” —and that I agree with. But one must realize (IMHO) the reality that the church has rarely, if ever, been the main one giving aid to those who’re impoverished. Research the Great Awakenings (As there were 3 of them, if not 4). In each of them, many things got developed, such as prison reform and Protection for Children in Sweat Factories with child labor laws, the creation of Hospitals. The same goes for women such as Jane Addams and her “Hull Houses”—which involved the rich voluntarily going into POOR communities/buying property to create homes that the poor could live in. It was an experimental model of reform — trying solutions to see what would work — and committed to full- and part-time residents to keep in touch with the neighborhood’s real needs, Jane Addams built Hull-House into an institution. For more info, Jane Addams biography & Jane Addams College of Social Work & Jane Addams Hull House Association
There are other examples today of organizations/churches having the same kind of impact….as it’s one of the reasons why faith-based initiatives have been receiving funding from the government in the work they do—-as well as para-church ministries and non-profit organizations when it comes to things such as domestic abuse shelters, food pantries, medical-clinics in the inner-city and many other things. In example, Dave Wilkerson wrote a book not too long ago known as “Cross and Switchblade”–detailing his work in the Inner City with those who were destitute…and how the Lord worked mightily to aid them powerfully. From there, he was able to make “Teen Challenge” ( ) , which is an evangelical Christian recovery program and a network of Christian social / evangelizing work centers aiding those who’re drug addicts, alcoholics, gang members, prostitutes and people with life-controlling problems. The organization was a grass-roots organization—yet during its existence, President Bush sought to try backing it heavily with government because of the success it was having. And in public policy debates, President Bush brought up “Teen Challenge” as an example of why such programs merit the federal funding of faith-based organizations, as its documented success rates played a significant role in the establishment of the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives in 2001. ( President Bush sought to try backing it heavily with government because of the success it was having ( http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d06616.pdf ) ( http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d06616.pdf ). There’s another one that was backed by President Bush in n 1991, known as “Urban Concern”—-by a mnistry known as “Xenos”, a Christian inner-city charity recognized by President George H. Bush in his “Thousand Points of Lights” awards. The ministry of “Xenos” is a non-denominational/cell-church based (home church) fellowship which has done extensive work for those in the inner city—-and together with Columbus city government and business leaders, Xenos has been continually expanding their work with the inner city in amazing ways. In 2007, Xenos constructed a Christian school and community center in the inner city…and now also provides two free clinics for the underprivileged in the Columbus area. For more info, go to Xenos Annual Reports & Xenos Free Clinics
If one studies history, they will notice that the same dynamics occurred during the very course of the Civil Rights Movement with Martin Luther King. Nearly all great movements began at the Grass-Roots level—with the Church/Individual doing what they can…..but at some point, government backing was necessary to keep things going. He was simply a Baptist preacher teaching on how things were…and later, he got the attention of people higher up. That’s why it was significant for President Kennedy to back the Civil Rights Movement when he did———-before he got assassinated for it. One would literally have to reinvent history in order to say that government was not an instrument of God in aiding those movements in the work they did for God when it came to making the government adapt to/aid the causes that God said were important. And it took God using His Church—-Both those of it in the local assembly and those who were officials/in positions of authority—to make a difference….just as it has been the case quite often in the Scriptures when God had His Church Diversified on a Myriad of fields rather than stuck within “four walls of a building” to do something…
The Church was never seperate from the governement at some point in dealing with the isssues of their time….and I wish it were that simple of a matter as simply having the church take care of it, as the majority are saying such and yet STILL not taking care of it. But thankfully, there are many who are trying to bridge the gap. In example:
—”XENOS: Ministry to the Social and Physical Needs of Our Society” ( http://www.xenos.org/classes/um2-10.htm ) & history of Urban Concern.
Homeboy Industries ( http://www.homeboy-industries.org ), which is a Christian-Based ministry that assists at-risk and former gang involved youth to become contributing members of our community through a variety of services in response to their multiple needs…giving free programs — including counseling, education, tattoo removal, job training and job placement — enabling young people to redirect their lives and provide them with hope for their futures.
—-”Pregnancy Center Leaders Hold Conference to Promote Abortion Alternatives “( http://lifenews.com/nat3043.html )
—”Heart Beat International” ( http://heartbeatinternational.org/about_us.htm )
–”-National Fatherhood Initiative ( http://www.fatherhood.org/research.asp )
—”National Fatherhood: Fatherhood Programs and Curriculum” ( http://www.fatherhood.org/training.asp )
—-”National Fatherhood: Corrections /Fathers in Jail” ( http://www.fatherhood.org/Corrections/ )
– “Promoting Responsible Fatherhood” ( http://fatherhood.hhs.gov/ )
–”Fatherhood Programs” ( http://www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/usermanuals/fatherhood/chaptereight.cfm )
—”Ten Key Findings from Responsible Fatherhood Initiatives” ( http://www.urban.org/publications/411623.html )
——–”The Urban Institute | Poverty and Safety Net” ( http://www.urban.org/welfare/index.cfm )
———”The Urban Institute | Welfare Reform: Ten Years Later” ( http://www.urban.org/toolkit/issues/welfarereform.cfm ) & “Urban Institute: Youth & Children” ( http://www.urban.org/adolescents/index.cfm )
—-” The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996″ ( http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cse/pubs/1996/news/prwora.htm )
—- “Work, Family, Disabilities, & Economic Security” ( http://www.center4research.org/wwf1.html )
On policy making, When it comes to laws made in our nation, I think the church needs to get involved in it—carrying a Biblical Worldview into all that we do. Even apart from that, there are some ways people can go about the issue that are very effective. In example, as another brother said on the issue:
That seemed more than reasonable. Someone who was promoting through law Biblical principles applicable for THE COMMON Man. And it’s something that happens often. As a Human Services Worker, I see much wisdom in utilizing government assistance in practical issues….and I have friends/family who’ve benefited from it first hand. Saw it alot when I did work with Pastor Pendellton Brown at “City of Refuge” ( ) and doing Inner-City Work with the Children’s Ministry . Doesn’t mean that I’m for the many ways government gives indiscrimately—as in funding organizations that’re not being effective in helping others or promoting compassion alongside responsibility. And hence, that’s one of the reasons I think that there needs to be significant improvement in the way government does things if it’s relied upon. I’m not for the notion that government no longer can aid in helping the poor/giving—-but should government be involved, I am for the notion of government learning how to give/help people in SMARTER ways that’d actually last.
If agencies are asking for funding from government, why not have it in the sense of looking for the programs that’re doing the best jobs/making results—as well as recieving aid from others due to their impact—and then choosing to give resources there if in need? That way, those which are not creating would die off and those which would last would make it. It’s much like “Survival of the Fittest”–but it does serve to breed the best and allow for competition among others rather than promoting “entitlement” mentality/lack of incentive. And it’d provide a way that both the community and the church can come together to actually deal with issues….
The means many times did not seem to be as much of an issue as much as the end-goal of “how can we find ways to truly promote love for our neighbor.” And at the end of the day, what matters is practical application. For as Deng Xiaoping said best when it comes to finding solutions for issues, ” “It doesn’t matter whether it’s a black cat or a white cat..for as long as it can catch mice, it’s a good cat.”
Shalom, BLD.
Cool enough, Bruh..
Though I don’t think it’d be a matter of insults being exchanged as much as one of simply not agreeing/finding common ground. No one denies the reality of studying historical/contexual application–which both sides seek to do (I believe) to the best of their ability…..but where they start from makes the difference of course…no more different than how it’d be for teacher within the Reformed/Calvinistic tradition in their interpretations of scripture (as based in the Reformation onward) compared to/interacting with those in an Eastern Orthodox tradition–or, for that matter, one apart of the “Falasha/ Black Jews of Ethiopia ( http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/ejhist.html#authentic ), with one being a Rabbi in a Messianic Jewish tradition. All have a differing frame of reference/historical viewpoint (and with me, having Jewish friends, I tend to lean toward them in some regards). But ultimately, if Psalm 133:1-3 is the goal..
Mentioned it before…but if looking at scripture, it’s always intriguing seeing how even the people Christ chose were among those who came from DIFFERENT Camps—-and had some of the same sort of struggles that occur today…….as it’s already wild enough to see how often the disciples kept arguing amongst themselves about who was the greatest in things Christ taught, Matthew 18:1-3 / Matthew 18 /Luke 9:45-47 / Luke 9 –from faith to prayer and many other things. Even after the incident where they argued on the road in Mark 9/Mark 9:33-41, it was amazing to see how much the disciples DIDN’T GET IT—as James and John got even crazier and became straight BOLD/RUTHLESS about it when they went behind the backs of the other disciples to get “insurance/leverage” with Jesus by trying to make sure they beat the competition and got seats RIGHT next to Jesus in Mark 10:40-42 Mark 10 …as well as in Matthew 20:23-25 / Matthew 20. And it gets even more humorous to see what happened at the Last Supper in Luke 22:14-24….for even on the night Christ said He’d be betrayed, the disciples all swore it’d never be any of them—and then 2 minutes after that, they started suspecting one another and went RIGHT BACK into arguing who’d be the greatest. All of it was carnal, of course…and based on their wrong views of the Kingdom–which Jesus had to often put up with…and I’m amazed at how many times Christ showed incredible patience. It was expected, of course. For when looking at the make-up of Jesus’ team, it’s amazing to see how they had people who had battles on political leanings……..especially when it came to some who were Tax-Collectors and others who were Zealots. I’m always amazed when considering the life/background of Simon the Zealot ( Luke 6:14-16 / Luke 6 / Matthew 10:3-5 / Matthew 10 /Mark 3:17-19 Mark 3 ), who was the “terrorist” of the group (and most likely a problem, especially when dealing with tax-collectors and understanding the History between them and the Zealots..already against government in a myriad of ways ).
And as Levi/Matthew was a Tax-Collector ( Matthew 9:9 / ), one has to wonder how much there were times of starring each other down/him feeling uneasy around someone who was known to support others killing off folks in his line of work—regardless of how successful he was at it Some things to consider…. Simon was called a “Zealot” in his lifestyle before ministry with Jesus, probably a member of the Zealot party, which was a party determined to overthrow Roman Domination in Palestine. Interestingly enough, the “Zealot” term is still used for the man AFTER Christ rose from the Grave Acts 1:13, Acts 1:12-14 Acts 1 . IMHO, it gives room to indicate that even after being in the midst of Jesus, that which he may have been known for was probably with him to one degree or another—such as still possibly wishing for Rome to be overthrown or having sympathies for those against Roman Oppression. When considering how the man died, some say he was martyred—whereas others say that he was involved in a Jewish revolt against the Romans, , which was brutally suppressed in A.D 70. If knowing of the work by Robert Eisenman (Eisenman 1997 pp 33-4), he pointed out the contemporary talmudic references to Zealots as kanna’im “but not really as a group — rather as avenging priests in the Temple.”
All of that said, the point is that people with radically differing leanings had to come together for the sake of serving the Lord and getting the jobs done….and if it happened before, it can happen again.
And yet all of them had to come together if it meant reflecting accurately the camp Christ was for….
Caught that from the jump, Bruh–and I never thought otherwise (lol).
—————————————–
On a side note, You noted earlier the following:
Wrote a response on that earlier alongside the comment I placed up last night—but it got deleted for some reason….and on the issue, I was trying to make clear that I do appreciate your desire not just for accuracy, but for your heart in seeking to ensure that we are the change that we seek to see…..especially when it comes to being willing to give/aid others rather than waiting for the government to save the day. As it is, that’s consistently how it was in Church History when saints would get ready to go in the trenches rather than complain when something came up as a result of negligence…
As Thomas A. Edison said best, “Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work” (lol)
Of course, though I more than agree with you on how much of a problem it has been due to people looking solely to government as the savior (and even as a “crutch”, as if voting was EVER enough to deal with an issue/say you fought for “justice”), I still think it may be incomplete to say government cannot play a healthy role in aiding the church for the work that they’re called to do………and I do pray it changes in time. Government is already noted in scripture in Romans 13:1-12 as a means God uses for righteousness….as it pertains to laws. And I don’t think government is not something that can be used as a tool for the sake of the Kingdom of God. But I do believe that as with any tool, there’re some that’re to be used for special occasions…and with GREAT care. And as it is, most of the time the tools are used out of place with people damaged afterward.
If interested, a ministry I support which you may be interested in known as Matthew 25 Network. Additionally, there was a video entitled Three Degrees of Separation ( http://vimeo.com/952495 )—as it dealt with the generational differences between three Evangelical leaders well known for their work concerning Faith/Politics. It may bless you….
One of the men involved was a man by the name of Chuck Colson, Gregory Boyd and Shane Claiborne.
On Chuck Colson,
On Gregory Boyd
On Shane Claiborne,
I own books from all of the men who were involved in the discussion from “Three Degrees of Seperation”—including Chuck COlson’s book “Born Again” in 1979 describing his transformation/change into a believer and his seeking to glorify God in politics/public life rather than isolating himself from it.
It was intriguing seeing how all 3 men interpret and live out their values in varying ways. The lively conversation revealed a shared theology that guides these three men and it was very good to hear…alongside the interactions of what seemed to be Christian Liberal vs Christian COnservative perspectives—even though all sides have valid points.
But on the issue, all sides are seeking to not only make a change where they’re at—but also to change the things leading up to problems where the changes are required. All of us are called to be Good Samaritans like Luke 10:25-37 describes…but as Martin Luther King said best: