In God’s Country
Is the United States a Christian Nation? Are we the new Israel? If one looks at Crosstalk.com, this would be one conclusion you might come to. The entire look and feel is about the American flag and the red, white, and blue. In addition, some of the comments about the Hamtramck, Michigan news story also suggested an paranoid patriotism. The critics think they are not only protecting the Church in America, they are protecting the “manifest destiny” of this country.
It seems that our country actually has some very syncretistic roots. It was a mix of humanism, deism, and Christianity. For example, Thomas Jefferson not only owned slaves, he was also a devout deist. One of his most infamous works was the Jefferson Bible, his version in which he removed the miracles and resurrection because he didn’t believe Jesus was God. Some Unitarian/Universalist churches even use the Jefferson Bible as their pew bible.
Yes, there were Christians who helped found our country. But to claim that we are a special country that God loves more than others is really reaching. And to devout energy to keeping the infidels out seems like a waste of time and unscriptural. God is bringing the harvest to us. Shouldn’t we pray that we are prepared to share His Truth with whomever our new neighbors are?
August 14th, 2007 at 8:43 am
For a while I went to a church here int he UK that was pastored by a Texan. I think my doubts about theplace started when he compared the treatment of Native Americans in the 1800’s to the clearing out of the promised land in the OT - part of the command of God to prepare the promised land. The mopre I think about it (now 15 years later) the more shocking this sounds.
August 14th, 2007 at 8:55 am
Greg Boyd’s The Myth of Christian Nation should be required reading for all American Christians. I think many people have attitudes that are so ingrained, that they don’t even know that they have them.
My dad was a chaplain in the Army, so I do appreciate the sacrifices people have made for the country through the years. I just don’t think God is using the US as His chosen instrument anymore than any other nations have been. I’m not saying there haven’t been great missionary efforts by American Christians, but it’s only because they realize Christ is the hope of the world, not democracy or America.
August 14th, 2007 at 10:04 am
Anytime someone refers to a nation (yes even the nation of Israel) as a instrument of God in the way the OT Israel was misses the whole point of Jesus Christ. What made OT Israel God’s people was the covenant they had made with God. The OT equivalent of Israel is the church. And the same thing that made OT Israel God’s people makes the church God’s people: our covenant with God.
August 14th, 2007 at 10:16 am
I say this as a mixed race person.
People are comfortable with what they know. If they have only been surrounded by like-minded folk, perhaps dare I say even, of a like-minded hue, then inevitably some of them will be anxious about change. This isn’t exclusive to America. These same scenarios are playing out in many parts of England. Communities are becoming more segregated, Islam is becoming more vilified and white flight is occuring at an alarming rate.
North America, for all it’s faults, has always been a country of immigrants and varied cultures. Only now American Muslims or Muslim Americans (depending upon how they see themselves) are beginning to make a contribution to local politics and as a direct consequence the so-called “real” Americans down the street are shutting up shop or placing another flag on their doorstep.
In the Western world Islam has unfortunately become the new whipping boy. There is no longer such thing as a moderate Muslim and God help us if there are a few who border on fundamentalism. I know many of my friends of the Islamic persuasion see America as the most evil of Westernised countries and if you ever watch the Daily Show with your very own (forgot his name, although it might be john Stewart) you will see clear evidence of some of the more idiotic aspects of American patriotism and anti-Islamic sentiment.
August 14th, 2007 at 10:41 am
The Crosstalk page has nothing on the VCYAmerica page when it comes to mixing Christian and American imagery. Seriously, after watching the flash animation on top of that page for a while, you kind of get the idea that they might think that Jesus was American.
August 14th, 2007 at 11:04 am
Phil,
Correction. Jesus was a upper middle class Republican suburbanite fundamentalist American.
August 14th, 2007 at 11:13 am
This piece here, from the VCY site, entitled “It Was Good” pretty much sums up their attitude. It is one thing to be thankful for your heritage or whatever, but I think it’s another to have no optimism for the future.
It would be interesting to hear someone who didn’t come from a white, suburbanite background give us their take on the era that is being glorified in that piece.
August 14th, 2007 at 11:17 am
Your the most powerful nation on the planet. I would presume that some Christians would equate that with God having a certain bias toward your great country. Nowhere does scripture validate such thinking, but it certainly doesn’t stop people believing it to be so.
August 14th, 2007 at 11:26 am
1950’s America was a certainly a challenging time for African-Americans. They still sat at the back of the bus, ate in another part of the local cafe and certainly didn’t have the same lifestyle as that described in the piece you provided. One person’s heaven can very easily be another a person’s hell.
August 14th, 2007 at 11:47 am
Phil,
You touch on an important point. Most of the watchdoggies have so idealized the past that the present and future will always be bitter for them. It doesn’t matter that the past wasn’t as sweet as they like to recall, they’re still bitter.
August 14th, 2007 at 12:49 pm
Phil, you might be interested to know Greg Boyd has already been attacked by some of Ingrid’s friends because of the positive press he’s been getting for Myth of a Christian Nation. You can find an audio file at that site where she writes columns for Brannon. Further, because Boyd has a different view of God’s foreknowledge (open theism), Ingrid and company have lumped him in with “the other emergents,†even though Boyd is as orthodox Baptist as they come and pretty much singlehandedly dismantled the Jesus Seminar.
While I believe in much of what this country stands for in terms of the Constitution limiting government and not the citizenry, free market capitalism, Federal Republic type of representation, I still can’t get behind the notion of unquestioning patriotism, and the assumption that our form of government = God’s form of government. (I still chuckle at a line from a DC comic where one angel says to another, “Yes, democracy is preferred everywhere except in Heaven.â€)
There are some questions that need to be asked of those who want to call this country (the United States) a Christian nation, or hold it up as the template for everybody else:
How can they defend slavery in this country? Slavery in the US is not the same slavery in the Bible.
How could they defend the denial of civil rights to blacks until so recently (1964)?
How could they defend the racial segregation or prohibition of “interracial†marriages, which was law in so many states?
How can they defend so many things this country has done as being in the nature and behavior of Jesus Christ when Satan is called the god of this world in the NT.
And notice, when Satan was tempting Jesus, Jesus did not argue Satan’s claim that all the kingdoms of the world were his to give to whom he would. I would assume that would include kingdoms yet to come on the earth (i.e., the United States). So far, I’ve noticed no one really being able to answer those questions, but only attack whoever challenges their assertions.
August 14th, 2007 at 12:51 pm
Phil,
Of course life wasn’t great for minorities when “it was good,” but don’t think for a moment that the likes of Ingrid will pay attention to them.
Instead they will soak up boilerplate stories of how the African American family used to be a lot stronger before the welfare state and Martin Luther King came around to destroy it.
August 14th, 2007 at 1:12 pm
We do have to be careful to avoid demonizing the past as well. It is possible to say both the past was suckier than now, but certain areas were better then.
August 14th, 2007 at 1:29 pm
All I have to say is Jesus couldn’t have been a fundamentalist! He had Facial hair–something only hippies have!
August 14th, 2007 at 1:43 pm
Tim,
That’s a good point as well. Some of the things mentioned in the VCY were genuinely good. The thing that irritates me about pieces like that is that there seems to be a theme of not just nostalgia, but actually looking back and conveying a sense that the future is hopeless and the best days are behind us. Societies all have things that are good and bad. People have always been sinful, and always will be until Christ returns.
I don’t know if American society now is generally more sinful than it was in the past. Perhaps we’re just more open about our sin now, and we can see everyone else’s sin more easily. Trying to quantify sin isn’t really something that’s too helpful anyway.
August 14th, 2007 at 1:56 pm
In response to Phil’s query, I’m black (not A-A) and was born in the late ’60s in the north. Not old enough to have lived through the lynchings, but I’m related to a lot of people who did.
When VCY brings up how great life was back then, I roll my eyes and say she or Vic never experienced life back then as a black person. Ironically, that is a true Laodicean mindset. “What care I about them? I’m doing okay.”
I believe if all those victims of the lynchings, bombings, burnings, racial bigotry and such were white, something would’ve been done about it a long time ago.
August 14th, 2007 at 2:28 pm
Sandman - great comments. Welcome!
August 14th, 2007 at 2:45 pm
Sandman
When VCY brings up how great life was back then, I roll my eyes and say she or Vic never experienced life back then as a black person. Ironically, that is a true Laodicean mindset. “What care I about them? I’m doing okay.â€
Classic! 5 stars!!!!
August 14th, 2007 at 2:50 pm
Sandman,
Great comments. For some reason your first one didn’t show up until just now. Anyway, I appreciate much of Boyd’s work. I don’t know if how many would call him orthodox Baptist based on his warfare theology and embrace of the “Christus Victor” view of atonement, but “Baptist” is kind of a nebulous term any more. He also pretty much rejects all of the five points of Calvinism. He actually had a response on his blog to John Piper about the Minnesota bridge collapse that I think was very good.
A few years back, the SBC actually tried to pass a resolution that required SBC pastors to outright reject any view that could be called “open theism”. The resolution failed, but I think there are still a lot of people who really make “open theism” out to be something it’s not.
Anyways, I don’t want to turn this into more of a Boyd lovefest than it is. Back to the point, I think it’s so easy for us to ignore the suffering of people who are different then us. It really does get back to loving our neighbor as ourself, no matter what race, religion, etc. our neighbor is.
August 14th, 2007 at 3:11 pm
Whenever there is a domionist agenda I think that is a very scary thing.
I think this is really shown not only on the sites you stated but on Brannon Howse Christian Worldview Network.
Extreme domionism launched world events like the Spanish Inquisitrion, the Salem witch trials and even John Calvin had people put to death (Servetus) who did not share their beliefs.
I find no where in scripture where it allows Christians to kill someone who has different beliefs.
I disagree with much of what Dan Kimball, Rob Bell and others teach but God is their judge not me.
I think it ok to question a persons teachings and be good Bereans but I also believe what the Bible teaches in
2 Timothy 2:23-26 (Ibelieve both sides of the aisle can learn from this verse.
“But avoid foolish and ignorant disputes, knowing that they generate strife.
And a servant of the Lord must not quarrel but be gentle to all, able to teach, patient.
in humility correcting those who are in opposition, if God perhaps will grant them repentance, so that they may know the truth,
and that they may come to their senses and escape the snare of the devil, having been taken captive by him to do his will.
I know I fall short here sometimes. We can all learn from this set of verses though.
Just a FYI Rick Warren is every bit a domionist/ globalist as anyone Ive seen as well.
I do love my country and the freedom that is currently present.
But to think America was a godly country in any area is just a pipe dream.
There are always godly people in every era but you can check history to see that throughout the years it really hasnt been different.
We just didnt have 24 hour news programs and instant information via the internet.
Peace
Tim
Peace
Tim Wirth
August 14th, 2007 at 3:48 pm
Phil,
I was in the moderation holding pen until just then.
To be sure, not every Baptist is a Calvinist. I’m an example of that kind of Baptist, Greg is another (BGC), as are many others. Besides, do we really have to bow at the altar of Calvin or Arminius before we bend a knee to Christ?
I’ve been to a number of Greg’s engagements. He’s big on spiritual warfare, but not dominion theology. His position is that we should show to others the same kind of outrageous love Christ showed us. That is how we begin to tear down the strongholds of the enemy and expand and advance the Kingdom in such a way that invites others in on that love so that God’s will be done on earth as it is in Heaven, and the gates of hell will not stand against it.
Dominion theology, I believe, has to do with Jesus not coming back until the world has been taken over by Christians and restored to such a condition that only then will Jesus return. Pat Robertson has this view, but not Boyd.
Some members of the GBC failed to expel Boyd from the BGC because of some of his views. I liked his response in that none of his views are grounds for expulsion. But others have taken them, distorted them and used them as reasons to create divisions and break fellowship. Not to do a Boyd lovefest either, but is this not what happens at some of the discernment sites?
August 14th, 2007 at 4:11 pm
Sandman,
Of course it’s what happens on those sites. What they call “research” is little more than gossip. It’s sad really.
By the way, just to clarify, I was not implying at all that Boyd was into Dominion theology, by talking about warfare theology. I was simply meaning his emphasis on spiritual warfare, which I think is very good. I’ve also heard him talk of things like the present-day use of the gifts of the Spirit (which I also agree with), which I could see making some Baptists of cessationist persuasion uncomfortable. Again, though, there are many different flavors of Baptists. (Obviously, I got the SBC and GBC mixed up in my previous post, so it shows how much I actually know).
Dominion theology, or different variants of it, seems to be one of the most dangerous errors for Christians to fall into. It really isn’t any different than what the Jews wanted Jesus to do - they were expecting to Him to establish an earthly kingdom - but of course that wasn’t what He came to do.
August 14th, 2007 at 4:33 pm
As one who does not say the pledge of allegience or sing the national anthem or vote, I guess you know what my opinion is.
August 14th, 2007 at 4:50 pm
An open question: Where in the New Testament are believers allowed to arms themselves, kill people, and overthrow the government when they don’t like taxation without representation?
It would seem that God’s method of creating a “Christian” nation is very unchristian, no?
August 14th, 2007 at 6:25 pm
I do believe that South Korea is the country that sends the most missionaries out to the world. The way that the church is growing in China, soon their country will become the dominant force in sending missionaries.
We have freedoms, we have resources, and we have squandered much of the blessings given to us. I submit we need to thank God for the many nations, tribes, and tongues that have been brought to our shores - His plan of reaching all peoples will not be thwarted by our laziness….
August 14th, 2007 at 6:34 pm
Henry (Rick) (which should I call you?)
That put’s you close to the Watchtower Society (Jehovah’s Witnesses). I’m joking, of course. The tribes of Israel had standards (flags); I don’t know if it was more than a recognizable symbol of who they were with regard to tribe, but I’m not going to grieve anyone over that.
August 14th, 2007 at 6:36 pm
Very good, Russ. Allow me to humbly put in different terms, though, which will refelct a non-nationalistic view. South Korea, America, or China have never sent out any missionaries. The body of Christ that happens to live in those countries have sent out missionaries.
That is also why it is unscriptural to say “America needs revival”. America is not a church, it cannot have revival. The church that lives in America needs revival.
August 14th, 2007 at 6:45 pm
Sandman, the JW teaching of governmental separation is far closer to the Bible than the average evangelical “salute the flag in the worship service” practice. The flags you referenced denoted the tribe, we are not of the American tribe.
I also believe that flags as such detract from the Spiritual worship by adding artifacts, even when they are the “Christian” flag which flies BENEATH the American flag on most church campuses. When we look at how we have been influenced by the nation we will see a type of idolatry. How disgusting it is to hear during election years which way we should vote. And the average Christian will spend more time going, waiting, and voting on election day than he will in prayer.
And the idol of the Republican Party to which the church has hitched her wagon has three philanderers as their frontrunners.
Guliani, McCain, Thompson = 3 candidates
Guliani, McCain, Thompson = 7 wives
Yea, God is really behind those candidates. Family values!
August 14th, 2007 at 7:09 pm
Henry (Rick) - yes, I agree. God moving in the body of Christ presently residing within the geopolitical boundaries mentioned is responding to God’s moving and choosing to send missionaries to other areas of the world.
August 14th, 2007 at 7:41 pm
I’ve never been in a church that saluted a flag.
August 14th, 2007 at 7:43 pm
It usually occurs during the Fourth of July “celebration”. I watched as the man in front of me, who never showed any demonstrable emotions during worship, wept as the congregation sang “God Bless America”.
Idololatry.
August 14th, 2007 at 7:59 pm
Well, without knowing the man’s story I’d be reluctant to use his externals, emotions or lack thereof to confirm or establish the internals. It’s too close to the casual dress to church = casual attitude toward God. It doesn’t follow.
August 14th, 2007 at 9:00 pm
Re: Open question:
I don’t know if I can pull direct quotes, Henry, but I’ll take a whack at it. Some general principles from the Bible just come to mind.
Luke 22:35-37 seems to allow Christians to defend themselves.
Turning the other cheek refers to slights, offenses and insults, not subjecting oneself to physical abuse or harm. Even Jesus didn’t stick around when they tried to stone him.
Then, I try to look at what the Bible consistently does not say in conjunction with what it consistently does say. In that regard, Caesar has a right to what is Caesar’s, but no more. Anything more than that is stealing and I have a right to protect myself and my property. Tax collectors were hated for that reason in the first century. And then there was the French Revolution. And now there’s Kim Jong Il living large and building nukes while his people die of starvation.
We are subject to the government (higher powers). If the country is attacked, which it has been, we may be called upon to defend it. I think it’s up to the conscience of the individual to fight or not. You can do the right thing by obeying the gov’t and going to war, but just recognize you may have to do some things that are, while right, not Christian. Now, I’m not calling you a pacifist or anything because you’ve given me no reason to think that, but I believe it’s morally wrong for pacifists and others who just don’t want to get their hands dirty to demand we commit suicide by proxy. Violence gained us our independence from Britain, kept the Union together and ended slavery, and kept Hitler from killing the rest of Europe’s Jews. If not, we’d have to ask ourselves why we let that continue. When dealing with evil (the spirits behind the movements), the moment you compromise with evil, evil wins.
Some will often say Lutherans killed Lutherans in this or that war, but forget they wouldn’t perhaps have the freedoms they enjoy today if Christians didn’t kill other Christians.
Also, since we are more at (or coming up on) a Joel 3:9-11 point in time, and not a Micah 4:2-4 setting, I think it would be unwise to act in a way that would make one more likely to be a victim of one’s own foolhardiness.
I mean, there are people who use the last part of Mark to validate the practice of snake handling. They overlook the line separating that passage and the footnote that say the earliest manuscripts don’t have that passage.
Sorry to the board for being so wordy. Thanks, Henry, for making me think about this.
August 14th, 2007 at 11:39 pm
(Sandman, do you have a blog? I’m finding your comments quite interesting.)
August 15th, 2007 at 2:24 am
I agree. Sandman’s insights are very thought provoking.
August 15th, 2007 at 5:10 am
The OLd Testament is irrelevant in this since our citizenship is not of this earth. You made a slight case fore self defense, but you never showed any teaching that allowed the overthrow of the government. If indeed the New Testament allows for such violence, then we are well within our Scriptural rights to send guns to our Chinese brothers and help them kill people to over throw the government.
In the case of the Revolutionary War, it was supremely over taxes. Even Washington did not desire to pull away from England, but his hand was forced at Lexington and Concord. Nowhere in the New Testament are we even to consider ourselves part of the government. So if America is attacked and they defend themselves, so be it. The church has no Scriptural unction in such a case.
But the Revolutionary War was over taxes not self defense. The main problem is that we so often consider ourselves Americans over being members of Christ’s body. No one can discern God’s will for war, so all the support for wars such as the Iraq war are conjecture at best but the church as a Spiritual body should have no position. Our calling is the gospel exculsively.
Thanks, Sandman, for the discussion.
August 15th, 2007 at 5:13 am
By the way, your “give ceasar what is Ceasar’s” analogy is distorted. Jesus was saying the money was Ceasar’s, not that Ceasar gets only what you decide what he should. It was a teaching about surrender to God, not a teaching about taxes. Your implication that when the government takes too many taxes justifies violence and overthrow is dangerous and incongruous with any Scripture.
August 15th, 2007 at 7:37 am
Not to be too much of a Boyd fanboy again, but I was just listening to his podcast from this past Sunday, and it’s on this very thing. He actually talks about Christians being paranoid about Muslims trying to take over the country, etc. His basic point is that Christians fight by the power of the cross, not the power of the sword.
As far the whole pacifism thing goes, I would say I’m kind leaning more and more toward a view that holds to non-violence. It just seems to me that there is no evidence in the NT of Christians taking up arms against their enemies. The only incident I can think of is in Luke 22 when Peter cuts off the servants ear, and Jesus heals the guy. That’s kind of weird incident, for other things too. Right before that as Jesus and disciples are leaving from the last supper Jesus tells them to sell their cloaks to buy swords. Perhaps this put the thought in the disciples’ minds that they were going to fight back, but Jesus then put the kibosh on that. I’m sure the disciples were befuddled by the whole thing.
I can see that there is some place for self-defense or defending your loved ones in the NT, but there are few wars that really seem to based purely on self-defense or defending others. I guess things like serving in the military and such are issues that each believer needs to really seek God’s will about.
August 15th, 2007 at 8:23 am
Gotta roll, so I’ll be brief. I’ll probably say more later.
Yes, you are right about that Henry; it was Caesar’s image on the coin (we just had a study on that) after all. Hey, I said I was only taking a whack at it.
However, Caesar does not own the people, nor does any other earthly ruler. So again, since evil can’t come from God, and the only thing Satan wants to do is corrupt, accuse and destroy, it seems to me, evil should be resisted. Resist the devil and he will flee. Don’t give the devil a foothold, and so on.
Also, the Bible does not say we should let ourselves be abused to gratify someone’s god complex. Taxing someone to the point they can no longer afford to eat can’t be supported in the NT either.
Whether it be the Canaanites, the French or the British, I’m sure none of them had to see their defeats as perhaps a manifestation of God on the move.
I’m not willing to throw out the OT in this and work only with the NT. It is, after all the prophetic beginning, and I’d have to ignore how God interacted with us prior to Christ. And there would be no verification of the identity of Christ without all those OT prophecies being mentioned in the NT. And there are OT prophecies yet to be fulfilled, and may not be in this present age.
Again, my point is that doing the right thing may not always be the Christian thing. We need to be careful not to get too indignant about people’s past deeds, given we’re not willing to give up what was gained. In like manner, we should avoid over romanticizing the “good ol’ days” because they probably weren’t good for everyone.
And lastly, if the Bible were black & white on everything, we would not be having this discussion. Since it is gray and silent on a number things, we all need to take care to not exceed what is written.
Have a good one!
August 15th, 2007 at 8:37 am
Good dialogue, Sandman. Until ten years ago I just embraced the company line concerning these issues. Then I began to question nationalism and violence in light of the New Testament and I found some startling conclusions. I look forward to more exchanges.
August 15th, 2007 at 12:57 pm
You got it, man!