So Joshua was leading the Israelites into their promised destiny after forty years of wanderings in the desert. Here's what happens from Joshua 4:
Now when Joshua was near Jericho, he looked up and saw a man standing in front of him with a drawn sword in his hand. Joshua went up to him and asked, "Are you for us or for our enemies?" "Neither," he replied, "but as commander of the army of the LORD I have now come."
This passage came to mind as I was thinking more about the Jerry Falwell effect and my post from this past Friday. If ever any government or people-group had an officially God-sanctioned mandate to do something, it was Joshua with the Israelites. Yet even here, even as God's People, the Israelites, are about to take the land promised to them by Yahweh, the angel of the Lord refuses to take sides other than His own.
God is not a Republican. He is not a Democrat. He is not for America. He is not for Israel. He is ultimately not on any side other than his own. God is passionate for His own kingdom, His own glory. We dislike people who are like this, but God is a little bit different.
For a human to worship anything other than God is idolatory. If God were to exalt anything over Himself, even and especially humans, he, too, would be an idolator. So thankfully He doesn't. He is always and ultimately for Himself...which blesses us immensely.
And this is why I'm so squirrely about the evangelical = Republican sub-culture monstrosity that Falwell helped to create, even though I tend to be conservative. Christians are not to be in anyone's back pocket, because God refuses to be. We are to follow Him, politically as well as in our private morality.
This will be crucial for evangelical Christians in the coming months as the volume slowly gets turned up on what's sure to be a heated presidential election and many folks court our vote.
4 comments:
Sometime I would love to hear more about your politics, Alex, b/c you always say you lean conservative, and I obviously consider myself liberal...
But I feel like I agree with you on so many things (God's heart for justice, M-E, etc.) that are a huge part of why I became liberal.
And I know you know stuff about politics, too, since you, also, were a poli major.
All in all-- quite fascinated, curious, etc. :o)
Good call, Alex. Mix faith and politics - that'll get some discussion going!
It seems difficult to be squirrely about the evangelical-Republican political sub-culture when it appears to be a category that you might fit into . . .
What do you mean when you say conservative? Because you end your second to last paragraph saying, "We are to follow Him, politically as well as in our private morality." That doesn't exactly line up with a traditional view of political conservatism which tends to see morality as a public affair. Perhaps you mean more conservative theologically, in which case I believe I might even consider myself conservative . . . (but, ugh! I hate using the terms conservative and liberal - they're so charged and come with so many presuppositions about what they mean).
Ultimately how do we reconcile the fact that God doesn't take sides with the fact that we must, at least by outward appearances, choose a side to vote for in elections? And not only that, but it seems to be perpetually unsatisfying as a Christian to vote for any individuals and parties that have a very narrow view of what is important (no less politicians who claim to be Christians but lack a very broad view of God's Kingdom and purposes).
The gospel is a very political message against the powers of the world that seek to rule and subjugate in the name of man. So how do we as Christians remain engaged politically and not feel as though we are constantly sacrificing certain aspects of faith that God calls us to walk in (knowing that neither side of the political spectrum has it all together)?
great stuff, j and a! thanks for posting.
ashley, i'll duck taking your question head-on for now. maybe i'll post more about that later.
j, i wanted to clarify my point about "private morality." what i meant to do was draw a contrast: Christians are often slow to engage in politics (including myself sometimes) and have historically emphasized personal piety (don't drink, don't smoke, don't play cards, and don't hang out with those who do). so i was saying that we need to be as intentional and thoughtful about public issues as we are about those "private issues" that we've traditionally been so focused on.
i think that basically you're asking the right questions: to remain engaged without thinking that any one side of the political spectrum holds it all together. what that means for me is that if we're going to wade into questions of politics, we need to do so very thoughtfully.
Voting straight-ticket Republican without really knowing what's up with candidates and positions on things (admittedly it can be overwhelming to know everyone's position on everything) just doesn't seem to me to fit the bill. But this felt like the consistent message from the Religious Right camp.
I must say, I agree with this post.
Post a Comment