Intersection of Faith and Politics: A Christian Response to the Gun Control Debate?

The Sandy Hook Elementary tragedy has caused a not unusual response.  Everyone has once again been given a disturbing reason to make their positions clearer. That this latest school shooting involved young children has made it even more emotionally-driven. My heart still aches for all the parents forced to endure the Christmas Season without their babies. Every time I think about it tears well up. I’ve posted a number of comments on Facebook about his tragedy to express my own thoughts but want here to write more extensively about this issue and weigh in with what I hope is a Christian response. You can let me know by posting a comment if I achieved by goal.

Pro-gun advocates are arming for the battle with guns sales soaring while anti-gun advocates are calling for disarmament and Hollywood hypocrites make a video saying “it’s time” while continuing to earn millions through violent films. Personally, I’m not as much a proponent of gun rights as I am a opponent of logical fallacies, a misconception resulting from incorrect reasoning. The opposing camps both need to understand that neither side has it completely right since much of what we believe is based on our imperfect perception of the world. Maybe Hollywood has at least one thing right that it’s time to at least give serious thought to this 2^nd Amendment issue, and maybe in a way few are talking about. 

In my opinion, the facts tend to support the pro-gun side of the argument. The fact is there are about 11,000 murders committed annually by those who use guns in the course of committing their crimes. It is simply a logical fallacy to say that guns commit murders, since such is an impossibility for an inanimate object.  A 2011 Gallup poll estimates that 47 percent of US households own a gun, for an approximately 50 million American household. If we consider each of the gun related murders a household we arrive at the fact that 99.98% of Americans households who own guns are responsible law abiding citizens in any given year. It is simply emotionally unreasonable of the anti-gun side to look past the fact that the overwhelmingly majority of Americans, almost 100%, who own guns do so responsibly. There really is no rational basis to penalize the many for the crimes of the few. Such emotional response of gun control proponents is not the way to make good public policy.

However it would also be a logical fallacy to say that access to guns doesn't make it easier to commit crimes like Sandy Hook, especially since the expired assault weapon ban in 2004. Easy access to weapons such as ARs and AKs, coupled with lax or non-existent background checks, compounded by improper care and storage of household weapons (which was the case in Sandy Hook Elementary), does allow those who would commit such horrible crimes to get their hands on these weapons. Since 1982, there have been at least 62 mass shootings across the country and in 49 of those cases the gunmen obtained the weapons legally. Therefore it is another logical fallacy that our protocols for legal gun ownership are not at least part of the problem.  Another logical fallacy, known as a genetic fallacy, is to link efforts at gun legislation today with history of gun confiscation under communist or fascist governments of the past. Such speculation based on history is also an emotional fear-based response. 

Now what? How do we proceed with all the emotionally based arguments? How do we have a reasonable debate, about such an important issue, with all the emoting going on? Knee jerk responses will never produce well-reasoned public-policy. It is worth the effort to have a rational debate for the common good of our nation. Some compromise is needed from both sides but the discussion must be broadened to other important issues that create a culture where such tragedies as Sandy Hook have become all too common. Ronald Reagan thought so which is why he supported Bill Clinton's assault weapon ban in 1994. But our problems go well beyond gun rights or gun control, both arguments simply miss the point. There are mental health issues and spiritual issues that must be addressed in this national conversation.

It is estimated today that more than 40 million American are on some form of anti-depressant drug, Adam Lanza among those. There are many factors that drive this epidemic and no easy answers on how to solve it, especially without a spiritual component. The mental health of our nation is perilous and a few are driven to commit such atrocities as mass shooting. Postmodernism and secularization, which I believe to be the root of our national emergency, has disaffected many from any basis of truth or a purpose for living beyond themselves. Value for life is lower today than even a decade ago,  if our national suicide rate, especially among young adults is any indication. What Sandy Hook and our depression epidemic should clearly show us is that we need something real beyond ourselves to hope in.  It should also demonstrate the emptiness of the world’s values that infect our 21^st Century culture, that may contribute to the lack of mental health in country.

A recent Huffington Post article cites Frank Newport, author of "God is alive and well in America," as saying:

"the correlation between religion and well-being has been established by Gallup and many other organizations. The question is causality: Maybe healthier people choose to be more religious. But it's clear that religious (people) are less of a drain on our mental and physical health systems. So, a company may want to give discounts for employees who attend church four or five times a month, just as many give discounts for employees who go to the gym. If America were to become more religious, and this is controversial, it would become healthier."

Such a novel idea who's time may have come again as an answer to our gun control debate. But are American Christians ready to respond with real answers for the hope that we say we have? I don’t think many when we have so much syncretic political belief mixed with our faith. Many American Christians are gun owners who place a premium on their rights to bear arms. Where does the idea come from that American Evangelicals in particular stand on 2^nd Amendment rights, but from our cultural heritage? We need to take caution that we don’t mix our faith with too much Americana. Other Christians approach the subject from a pacifistic position. They believe that Jesus was opposed to any form of violence and therefore they are for gun control. They need to be take caution that they understand the inalienable right to self-defense even Jesus agreed with (see Luke 22:36). But who is right?  How can we communicate to our culture a united message as Christians? 

Some Christians who are for gun control will look to Matthew 26:54 for support. There Jesus says, “for all who draw the sword will die by the sword.” But pro-gun Christians might look to the same verse that begins with Jesus saying, “Put your sword back in its place," and note that the Lord didn’t tell Peter he was wrong for possessing a sword, he simply warned about the consequence of living by the sword. Sometimes looking to the Bible doesn’t provide clear direction for such issues. Other times it can tell us clearly the direction we need to go.

Certainly Jesus calls us to be peace-makers (Matthew 5:9) but he obviously also understood the sin laden dangerous world he had entered. The fact is Jesus allowed Peter to keep a sword in his presence. The Lord didn’t come to disarm the world but to save it from itself. Jesus asks Peter, “Do you think I cannot call on my Father, and he will at once put at my disposal more than twelve legions of angels?” But Jesus didn’t call upon Heaven’s armed forces because he understood what he had come to do. The reason he told Peter to put away his sword was because Jesus understood his time had come (John 13:1). Nothing would keep him from completing his mission. 

How then do we communicate a united message as Christians on this issue? I would like to offer these 4 ideas for starters. First, by showing proper respect for others who have a different opinion on the subject (1 Peter 2:17). We must not allow our witness for Christ to be tarnished by how we respond to others we disagree with. Second, by not allowing truth to be outweighed by our emotions or politics (Philippians 4:8). Honest debate is a good thing because no one has all the answers, as much as we think we do. Third, by focusing on the Gospel message which is something every Christian should agree on (1 Corinthians 1:10). Jesus did come to bring justice and establish righteousness (Matthew 12:18) and the darkness of our nation will not be overcome except by the Gospel. Finally, with much prayer for God’s will to be done and his purposes to prevail. Anything short of at these four, at least, is not a Christian response. 

We cannot expect that our secular government will understand or agree with any of these ideas but that should not really be our concern as Christ followers. Neither should our concern be with unrestrained gun ownership, even if our founders understood that no government should disarm its citizenry. Rather our concern should be with the spiritual health of our nation, which requires the advance of the Gospel, and peace of our society (Psalm 34:14), even Newport points to. And, our primary concern should always in all things by all means be that Jesus is made known. 

The Apostle Paul who also lived in troubled times, actually more troubled than our own since Christians were being brutally persecuted for their faith, instructed Timothy with these words:

“I urge, then, first of all, that petitions, prayers, intercession and thanksgiving be made for all people— for kings and all those in authority, that we may live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness. This is good, and pleases God our Savior, who wants all people to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth.” (1 Timothy 2:1-4)

Perhaps maybe when we make prayer and proclaiming Christ our primary focus all our politic issues will work themselves out for the glory of God in our nation. Regardless of what happens in this national debate we are called to do both anyway. Can I get an Amen!?

The Mission of God's People - Chapter 3 - Part 3.3

Happy New Year! I'm looking forward to what the Lord will do with 2013! I recently wrote a 20 day prayer guide entitled "Live It! People who live His Story." to begin the New Year for my home church, Christ Fellowship, you can download here. 

So we’re to live as fully alive humans but how do we do that (see Part 3.2)? The fruit of the Spirit is a good starting place of what it might look like to be fully human but how do we live  that outs as our own? I don’t know about you but I still struggle with every one of the fruits regularly.

I certainly wouldn’t say I’m fruitless. I would sure hope not after 16 years as a Christ follower but that’s only by God’s grace. I do take solace in Paul’s confession of being bruised fruit (Romans 7:21-25) But I want to be fruitier and maybe that’s really it. Our desire for being a more fully alive human coupled with the knowledge of what that might look like as the image bearers of God multiplied by the power of the Spirit at work in us is the only way that will lead us to a fruit-filled life. Not that we ever become perfect fruit bearers but we can attain a more consistent fruitfulness as we understand more about who we are in Christ and what our Lord expects from us. To get there we need to understand who we are as humans and what we have been tasked to do.

Wright has taken us back to the beginning, back to Genesis 1, to understand something of our human responsibility, our original God given mandate:   

“So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them;male and female he created them. God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground.” (Genesis 1:27-28) 

It is necessary to understand our unique role in creation to live as fully human, especially as we have a propensity to turn away from those assignments, even as Christians. While God allowed us the free will to choose otherwise, he had a plan on how it was supposed to be. Wright tells us that there our two fundamental things about us that are clearly connected as being part of our fundamental nature as humans. First, that God made us in his image, and, second, God intended us to exercise dominion over creation. But as Wright points out: 

"It is not having dominion that is what constitutes the image of God, but rather that exercising dominion is what being made in God’s image enables and entitles us to do. We humans have a mission on earth because God had a purpose in putting us on it.”

There are three directives in the Genesis mandate we need to embrace. The Lord gives his newly created humans orders to “multiply and fill the earth,” to “subdue” it and to “rule” over it. Wright doesn’t deal with the first in this chapter but we need to understand the “multiply” in terms of God’s mission. Multiplication is not only for the propagation of the species but more importantly the advancing of the knowledge of God’s glory. It has always been God’s intention to fill the earth with the knowledge of who he is. God is motivated by his global glory so it would only make sense that he had it in mind at creation. Living that truth out well then takes expression in our mandate to “subdue” and “rule.” We could say it is our “prime directive”  (that is if we are a Star Trek fan). 

Wright does elaborate on the meaning of “subdue” and “rule.” He states here that these “are strong words, with a sense of imposing of will upon another. However, they are not terms that necessarily imply violence or abuse (though some critics of Christianity lay the blame for ecological disaster at the door of these two words and the freedom they allegedly give us to rape the environment – a charge that has been well refuted.)” But as Wright rightly points out… 

“human dominion over the rest of creation is to be an exercise of kingship that reflects God’s own Kingship. The image of God is not a license for arrogant abuse, but a pattern that commits us to humble reflection of the character of God. “ 

Is it safe to say that too often American Christians haven’t really thought about this subject, at best, or at worse contributed to the charge of the critics? Have we arrogantly assumed we didn’t need a well thought out position on creation care as part of our faithl? While, I don't find a compelling reason to buy into today's all too prevalent climate alarm-ism (although Wright seems to on this point - we can agree to disagree on minor points), we do need to treat God’s world well in the safekeeping we have been tasked with. It is a requirement of the mission of God’s people that we are to live the whole Gospel, as it is a part of the mandate God gave humans  - or “the rocks will cry out” (Luke 19:40). 

How would it reflect to our culture if Christians actually led in important ways in caring for the world God has gifted us with? Not as the most important part of our mission, there are priorities, but in a way that reflects what the prophet Micah understood when he said, “He has shown you, O mortal, what is good.  And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God.” That’s not just a spiritual call, or a call to a social Gospel, but as well a call to a holistic worldview that treats all of God’s glorious creation as God desires. 

This may be best captured in the ancient Hebrew concept of “shalom” (more on this in future posts) that treats all things as sacred - from God - and they are, right (Psalm 24:1, 1 Cor 10:26)?. Space here today won’t allow me to elaborate but I believe a “shalom” based theology, anthropology and missiology may well be the answer to being a fully alive human. Living a shalom lifestyle would help us to recalibrate our lives around “beholding” God in all things he has made, and that includes humankind (2 Cor 5:16). King David, a man after God’s own heart, understood that “The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands.“ 

It’s easy to stand on a mountaintop beholding the beauty of God's creation, with the ruined places of our world out of view, and “declare our God reigns. It’s easy to live with cultural blinders and not see the broken places of our world, except perhaps through our TV screen. It’s even easy to contribute, if even unaware, to the structural imbalances and injustices that mankind perpetuates against creation and the image of God. But if the glory of God is man fully alive how do we respond to our polluted global cities, urban blight, or overcrowded slums? How should we be moved by famine ravaged regions, the inequalities of healthcare access, the lack of clean drinking water? To name but a few areas of our "ruined streets." 

Can we declare “our God reigns” and then not seek the restoration of those broken places for his glory? Should we not bring humble kingship over those “ruined” places seeking to subdue and rule in accordance with God’s “very good” plan? Why is it that so few Christians actually live in accordance with our mandate? Could it be we have some wrong ideas we need to rethink? 

Closer to home, what excesses do we need to address in our own lives that contribute to the neglect and contamination of our world? Do we even give such ideas room for thought in how we live our lives? It wasn't that many weeks ago that so many were decrying the end of the Twinkie. That should tell us something about what we think is important, no? I confess I have only recently started to think more healthy and make efforts to live that out. 

When Jesus tells us to go and make disciples of all nation, baptizing them, and teaching them to obey everything he had commanded, I don’t think he meant for us to pick and choose what parts he wanted us to obey. The Great Commission is great because it is “all” encompassing. We should not separate care for the “all things created” in him and for him (Colossians 1:16) from our mission as God’s people. If we are concerned with the whole Gospel, with being fruitful Christ followers, I have become convinced this too is part of living sent today. 

Other links to consider:

http://creationcare.org/

http://eerdword.wordpress.com/2012/11/29/creation-care-is-christian-formation-by-steven-m-studebaker/

http://www.apologeticalliance.com/blog/2012/10/08/environmentalism-creation-care-christianity/

Q – How might subduing and ruling take practical expression in your life?

The Mission of God's People - Chapter 3 Part 3.2

Here's a profound thought to start with today: we are human. Have you stopped to think about that lately? You are human. Wright says and I think he's right, "It may be easy to forget but we were human beings before we became Christian and we don't stop being human beings when we do become Christian (though some Christians make you wonder...) And God will hold us accountable for our humanity as much as for our Christianity."

We know as Christians our sins are forgiven, we have been "washed in the blood," redeemed from the curse, and born again into new life in Christ. We should also know that's not the end of the story but rather just the beginning. The cross is not only for our redemption but for our reclamation and restoration to what it means to be human. Our fallen state is not an excuse not be human (Romans 1:20) but our inhuman behavior contributes to the mess we make of our world - war, genocide, injustice, systemic poverty, human trafficking, sexual abuse, drug cartels, the slaughter of innocent school children and all manner of evil we do (Romans 1:28-31, 1 Cor 6:9-10). Is it any wonder we often have such a low opinion of "mankind?"

That's not God's design however nor is it what we were created for. The Westminster Confession says that "Man's chief end is to glorify God and enjoy him however." That idea must be at the core of the whole Gospel and inform our thinking for living sent today. It does call us to a duty as humans to live the way we are designed. In fact, now that we are "in Christ" we have a great responsibility to be human. Wright informs us that, "being God's people and therefore already among the new redeemed humanity surely reinforces and intensifies our obligation to live by his original mandate to the human race." And in the beginning God said it was "very good."

I cannot think of any change in our mandate or subjugation of our responsibility to be human we are entitled as Christian, can you? No where in Scripture does it tells us that since we are now born-again our concern in only for the spiritual and we can allow the world to waste away, as long as we make a few converts. Living sent doesn't mean we stand gazing at the sky focused on Jesus return (Acts 1:10-11) but rather to be actively engaged in God's human reclamation project. Jesus calls us to be "salt" and "light" in the world, not only to get people saved, but so that we become fully alive to who we are created to be (2 Timothy 2:21). Salt preserves the imago Dei, the image of God, in which we are made, and Light illuminates the knowledge of God's glory in which we are to live, and move and have our being (Acts 17:28). 

We cannot live sent today without at least working on our humanity.  Jesus came to us as the perfect man to show us how to live as human. Being Christian doesn't dismiss our duties as humans, nor as we will see our God ordained duties for all humankind. Rather our position in Christ makes it possible to live out those duties as fully human. But first we need to realize, appreciate and apprehend our humanity and what that actually means. Wright quotes Michael Wittmer here:

"To be human is to be in proper relationship with God, other people, and the world. Sin has marred and well-nigh destroyed these relatioship, but in Christ, the perfect person, these are restored...Each of these three relationships is restored as we increasingly grow into the image of Christ. Because Christ is the perfect human, the one person who completely fills out the image of God, the more we become like him, the more human we become...The Christian life, far from transforming us into super-spiritual, quasi-angelic beings, is actually a quest to recover our humanity."

Second Century theologian, Irenaeus, one of the earliest Church fathers, famously said,“The glory of God is a human being fully alive; and to be alive consists in beholding God.” When was the last time you heard a sermon on the attributes of being fully alive for the glory of God? Yeah, I can't remember either. What might that even look like? Perhaps a fully alive human, living for the glory of God, looks like the Apostle Paul suggested when he discussed the fruit of the Spirit, a life live in Christ, as exhibiting the following: love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control" (Gal 5:22). Those aren't simply Sunday School lessons for children. Those are qualities we need, I know I need, for living sent today. 

Q - What does it mean to be human? 

The Mission of God's People - People Who Care for Creation - Chapter 3 Part 3.1

When last we left off we had completed Chapter 2 and asked the question: "How do we make the Mission of God’s People our story?" That is a vital question to answer if we are going to live sent today. To begin to answer that question Wright takes us back to the beginning, back to the creation story. 

The title of Chapter 3 - People Who Care For Creation - may leave some perplexed with the direction that Wright is going.  Creation Care is not what the Gospel is about, right? As long as we have Jesus and we recognize him as our Lord and Savior we're good with God. Isn't that tops on the list for us Christians? When we answer "yes" then we can basically live any way we want, right? Of course, we would never say it that way and most Christian do try to live a moral life, but with Christmas just completed we are reminded again of what we American Christians find most important. And once again we can determine that is commericalism and consumerism, buying things for one another we don't need and spending more than must should, all in an attempt to feel good about the Holiday's. Sorry but this year Americans will spend over $500 billion on Christmas Shopping but give less than $300 billion to charity for the year. Is that really the reason for the season?

To the previous two "c's" I'll add cooking. I spent about 15 hours preparing a meal for the family that was consumed in less than 30 minutes. Due to my labors I was too worn out to remember to lead the family in giving thanks for our bountiful feast. We can also add complaining. My teenage daughter upset because she was not getting what she wanted for Christmas, was complaining that her cousin would flaunt all that she received. Is that really what Christmas is all about?  Hey but we're all saved, right? The commercialist, the consumerist, the complainer and the cook all know Jesus so "it's all good."  But is that really how we want to define our Christianity? We can too quickly put other things before our King even as we proclaim he is Lord. Christmas brings this into sharper focus than any other time of year.

Part of the problem we have today, the reason for our misaligned affections, is how we read the Bible. Too often we read the Bible through a "what's in it for me?" lens instead of a "what does God want of me?" honest perspectives. So the Christmas story, and more so our Christian life, becomes a what's in it for me story, about my personal salvation, my personal relationship with Jesus. The mission of God's people then becomes only about "getting people saved" so they can know his salvation and have this relationship too. While that is certainly of paramount Biblical importance, a gateway for living sent, when not properly understood in relation to the whole Gospel, it has tended to create a self-focused, self-absorbed people who miss the whole Bible story.

We end up with a narrowly defined soteriology, with little understanding of God's gift of grace, and may even think it's about the unholy trinity of "me, myself and I." Reemember that Rick Warren began his best selling book the "Purpose Driven life" with these words - "It's not about you." That was quite an assault on American Christianity where we can focus so heavily on the New Testament story, reading it for our personal benefit, that we miss how the Bible begins and ends, missing what God is in fact calling his people to. Wright begins Chapter 3 with the observation that, " Some people have a hard time connecting their understanding of Christian mission to the Old Testament at all, let alone starting in Genesis." But how do we develop a whole Gospel missiology if we don't take the whole Bible into account? Wright notes that, The Bible begins and ends with creation" (Genesis 1:1, Rev 21:1) and tells us that...

"The trouble is some Christians seem to have Bible that begins in Genesis 3 and end at Revelation 20. They know all about sin from the story of the Fall and they know God has solved the sin problem through Christ, and that they will be safe on the great day of Judgment. The story for them is no more than a backdrop for the story of salvation, and the Bible's grand climax speaks to them only of going to heaven when they die (even though the last chapters of the Bible say nothing about us going anywhere, but eagerly anticipate God's coming here."
 

Just as Jesus birth is frequently a only backdrop of our Christmas celebration, missing the real "reason for the season,"  our focus on our sin problem and solving that often misses the grand and glorious story that the Bible is in fact communicating to us. That's why we need to start in Genesis 1 with the idea of caring for what God created. Wright warns, "a Bible stripped of its beginning and ending will produce a concept of mission that is distorted... We will imagine that God's only concern and therefore our too, is to save people from sin and judgment...But it's not the whole story of the Bible, and it should not be the whole story of our mission." Rather...

"the Bible's story is that the God who created the universe, only to see it ravaged by evil and sin, has committed himself to the total redemption and restoration of the whole creation, has accomplished it in advance through the cross and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth, and will bring it to glorious completion in the new creation...it is astonishing, and very sad, that it is such an insignificant, virtually nonexistent place in mission theology and practice of so many Christians who like to claim that they are "biblical" in all things."
 

Thinking about creation sets the stage for where Wright takes us next as he expounds on the mandate that God gave mankind in Genesis 1 and 2. The idea of being people who care for creation may get some push back today, especially given the political debate that typically surrounds issues of planetary climate (for the record I am opposed to most thinking that purports to support anthropogenic global warming as a fact but that's not what we are going to talk about). While Biblical creation care may be foreign to most these ideas weren't foreign to the prophet Isaiah when he declared, "Your people will rebuild the ancient ruins and will raise up the age-old foundations; you will be called Repairer of Broken Walls, Restorer of Streets with Dwellings" (Isaiah 58:12). Then neither should they be for us in living sent today. Shalom.

Q - When you hear the words Creation Care what comes to mind?

The Mission of God's People - Chapter 2 - Part 2.5

Last time we looked at the Old Testament as we begin to understand the whole Bible story for the Mission of God’s People (see Chapter 2 – part 2.4). Today, I want to conclude Chapter 2 – People who know the story they are part of – by looking a little at what Wright starts to unpack about the New Testament and New Creation. Genesis through Malachi points us in one direction – toward Jesus Christ as Lord of all in a New Heaven and New Earth – and it’s important we understand the continuous flow of Scripture form beginning to end. Wright shares that: 

“The New Testament presents to us the answer that the prophets point towards the One who would embody Israel as their Messiah, who would be faithful where they had been rebellious, who would be obedient unto death, and through his death and resurrection would bring about not only the restoration of Israel but also the promised salvation to the ends of the earth.”

Last time we looked at some Scripture that ties the story of the Old Testament and New Testament together through the life of Abraham, the father of the faith. It is important to realize that when the Bible speaks of Israel it is speaking of a people who were called out to make God known. The people of Israel as we know failed to be the “light to the Gentiles” they were “chosen” to be. But we must not think that the New Testament introduces a different storyline to bring course correction to God’s story. And, we certainly must not think the God of the Old Testament, Yahweh, was a different God then the God who so loved the world than he sent his Son into it to die for the sins of all mankind. Any ideas of a dichotomous God between Old and New is a misreading of the whole story of the Bible. God changes not. 

What needs to change is our understanding of our great and awesome God to see his work in history as one continuous plotline for his global glory. That’s where we are heading in the Mission of God’s People for living sent today. 

Q – How have you understood the God of the Old and New Testaments? 

Wright states that:

"In Jesus, the reign of God entered human history in a way not previously experienced –though the expectation of it and the ethical implications of it are thoroughly rooted in the Old Testament. The dynamic action of the Kingdom of God in the words and deeds of Jesus and the mission of his disciples changed lives, values, and priorities, and presented a radical challenge to the fallen structures of power in society."

In the fullness of time, Jesus came – Emmanuel – God with us. Our Lord came in the fullness of deity and the fullness of humanity to set right what was lost and broken. Why then? Why at that particular time in his-story did God chose to fulfill the promises he had made and provide a way for all “nations” to come to the Light? While there is certainly prophetic fulfillment at work there are also some very practical reasons. 

Civilization had progressed to a point where the Gospel, although starting from a remote outpost of the Roman Empire, could begin to spread out along trade routes and over Roman roads like no time before it. The knowledge of God’s glory, in Christ, could now begin to fill the earth from village to village, city to city and region to region due to the social infrastructure that was now in place. That is the story we read in the Book of Acts. 

It is not an overstatement to say Jesus first coming changed everything, as a plan that was in place before the foundations of the world were set in place. Since Jesus’s first coming it is not understatement to say his radical challenge has often been left untried. GK Chesterton once said “Christianity has not been tried and found wanting; it has been found difficult and not tried.” 

Could the reason for this be that we simply don’t believe the story we are part of? Or perhaps we simply don’t know how to live in that story, trying to conform the Bible’s story to our lives, instead of being part of the cosmic story God is writing. Wright quotes Philip Greenslade here: 

"Through believing the story, we are drawn in to the action and find ourselves caught up in the saving movement of God. We learn to “indwell” the story so looking our from within the Biblical world with new eyes onto postmodern lives and world: we stop trying to make the Bible relevant to our lives and instead begin to find ourselves being made relevant to the Bible. We give up the clumsy attempt to wrench the ancient text into our contemporary world and instead bring our world back into collision with, and cleansing by, the strange new world of the Bible. Through believing the story, we allow our minds to be continuously renewed by the normative narrative of God…Jesus calls all his disciples away from a faith which is available to bless their business into a faith in which disciples are available to God to be part of his business."

Q - How do we make the Mission of God’s People our story? 

As Wright closes out Chapter 2 he shares,  “God’s mission is what spans the gap between the curse on the earth and the end of the curse in the new creation of Revelation 22. God’s mission is what brings humanity from being a cacophony of nations divided and scatted in rebellion against God in Genesis 11 to being a choir of nations united and gathered in worship of God in Revelation 7.” (I like to start the mission of God in Genesis 1:28 because it is there that we see the mandate to fill the earth.) But is that how we truly understand the story we are part of? 

Hopefully, as we continue on in Mission of God’s People it will become our story too, if it’s not already. Wright asks, “What impact would better teaching in this area have on our mission awareness and mission commitment?” That is a good question for Living Sent Today. 

Next time, we will start Chapter 3 – People who Care for Creation.

At the Intersection of Faith and Politics 12-03-2012

 Part 2 of 2 (for Part 1 click here)

Last week I started to address the definition of Progressive as it relates to Progressive Conservativism, to bring some connection to what are considered dichotomous ideas. It seems there a quite a number of people who are rethinking what Conservativism means today, post-election 2012, and that is not only good but urgent. At least one group I have come across recently is doing some imaginative political thinking. Without faith however we will get stuck at the intersection and not get very far on things that truly matter. 

It seems to me that Conservativism, as a movement, has been swept up by a radical individualism and infiltrated by Libertarianism, that is both unhelpful and unBiblical. I assume Biblical truth is an important element of your worldview. If not, than you'll find what I have to share here irrelevant at best. A politic that resists any and all government activity, and singularly as it relates to questions of taxation, is not necessarily Conservative. Rather it may simply be reactionary to the forces of humanistic progressive ideology. Being reactionary is no way to be the thought leaders our culture needs today. Conservativism must be more than a pledge of "no new taxes" or it will not be anything at all, which is why I am blogging at the intersection of faith and politics. 

Last week, I shared what I believe keeps us from living our faith progressively with respect to our politics - dualism that compartmentalizes our thought life. When we fail to see all of life as sacred we trend toward a divided inner life that can become all about "me." This gets expressed in both our politics of self-interest, be it Left or Right, and our over emphasis on personal salvation. We then lose important truths of the whole Gospel. To quote AW Tozer, "If we would escape from the toils of the sacred-secular dilemma (dualism) ... [we] must practice living to the glory of God, actually and determinedly….The knowledge that we are all God's, that He has received all and rejected nothing, will unify our inner lives and make everything sacred to us… We can meet this successfully only by the exercise of an aggressive faith.”

Today, maybe more than ever we need an aggressive faith - aggressive in love, mercy, kindness, gentleness, and truth that seeks the progress of the global human condition. The opponents of God are certainly aggressive in what they believe and do. We need an aggressive faith that seeks for the knowledge of the glory of God to fill the earth. Christianity does have the better ideas and arguments, for as Francis Schaeffer said, "Christianity is the greatest intellectual system the mind of man has ever touched." But we need to understand and live our faith through the context of the whole Gospel, which is what the Living Send Today blog is about.  Maintaining the status quo is no way to live, so the option is either progress or surrender. And there is simply no mandate in Scripture to sit idly by awaiting Jesus' return as our culture crumbles about us.

We can either aggressively rethink what "progressive" means from a Biblical worldview perspective or we will continue to witness a distortion of progressive thought from the world's failed systems and empty philosophies.  If we are going to progress, and we must, we must do so “living to the glory of God” and by “the knowledge that we are all God’s.” Today, let's view the definitions of progressive through a Biblical worldview lens. Hopefully, this will help us think well about progress, as Christ followers, because God's story and our place in is meant to be progressive. 

“of, relating to, or characterized by progress”

God is progressive. Not in his nature, God changes not, but in his working in history. God started with nothing, made everything very good, mankind ruined it but God has progressed through history, using a faithful pagan named Abram to start a faith movement, a refugee people as a witness for other nations, incarnated the Son in history, then launched a mission movement to change the world, all toward a New Creation.

“making use of or interested in new ideas, findings, or opportunities”

Our story is progressive. Our story follows in the line of Abraham (see blog post here). Abraham had a level of awareness about what God was asking of him. Next Moses and the Israelites had additional new “ideas” of what Yahweh was asking of them, although they failed to live them out. This was followed by Jesus’ who taught his disciples a new understanding and proceeded by the Church as the the new people of God called to live in new ways not previously thought of. What followed was the world Christian movement over the previous two millennium that greatly shaped history.

“moving forward or onward”

History is progressive. From the Book of Acts on, God’s mission goes forward as God continues to work out his global plan and advance his-story toward the New Creation. In Christ, we are no longer people of Adam, simply human in nature. Rather, in God’s divine plan we are called to now move forward as we live in Christ as new creations, fully human with a new nature that should always be progressing more into the image of Christ.

“favoring or advocating progress, change, improvement, or reform”

The Church is progressive. From a simple band of people of faith emerged a movement that changed the world, advocating social order, developing technologies, advancing science and medicine, developing, changing, improving, and reforming the condition of man. The whole Gospel is a progressive movement that advocates regeneration, advances reconciliation, and activates reformation. The problem is too many Christians have never been changed by an understanding of the whole Bible. Today, conservative Christianity seems to be more about a status quo that is in desperate need of revival and recalibration.

“making progress toward better conditions”

The re-Creation is progressive. The first creation was instant and very good – God spoke and it was so. In the re-Creation God is taking us somewhere and we are invited to be a part of what he is doing. The very essence of God’s desire to fill the earth with the knowledge of his glory must lead us to progress for his global purpose. God gave Isaiah a glimpse of this “progress toward better conditions” allowing Isaiah to understand that…

“If you do away with the yoke of oppression,

with the pointing finger and malicious talk,

and if you spend yourselves in behalf of the hungry

and satisfy the needs of the oppressed,

then your light will rise in the darkness,

and your night will become like the noonday.

The Lord will guide you always;

he will satisfy your needs in a sun-scorched land

and will strengthen your frame.

You will be like a well-watered garden,

like a spring whose waters never fail.

Your people will rebuild the ancient ruins

and will raise up the age-old foundations;

you will be called Repairer of Broken Walls,

Restorer of Streets with Dwellings. (Isaiah 58:9-12)

There is certainly more to it that even Isaiah understood, but he saw a glorious future God promises, as should we, and we have the privilege of partnering with God to work toward that future however God intends for it to unfold. Progressive shouldn’t take us toward a Utopian ideal based on humanism or socialist ideology, which are often void of any Biblical truth. Rather, Progressive must emphasize the importance of Biblical precepts that follow God's story line. To paraphase Irenaeus, an early church father: "The progress of God is man fully alive." 

My purpose here is to look at the intersection of faith and politics, with Progressive Conservativism as a developing politic that bring two previously divergent words together as both have value. My prayer here is that Progressive Conservativism, as a Christ follower, takes us on a journey of discovering more about where the Lord is progressing history toward as we live out the whole Gospel in all domains of life. The point here is that we reclaim the word Progressive for the glory of God.

Next time we’ll look at what is called Progressive Christianity, which is not what I am advocating, especially as many define it today, and compare those ideas with Conservative values, at the intersection of faith and politics.