When people say the US should be a "Christian nation," they never mean that we should feed the poor, clothe the naked or, God forbid, turn the other cheek.
What people usually mean by the term "Christian nation" is that their own primitive ideas of creation should be imposed upon science classes and that their almost perfect ignorance of human biology should become law. Unlike Peter, many Christians only lay down the sword so they can take up the gun.
If by "Christian" people meant "followers of Jesus" they might be surprised to find that we would not have to shape others into our own image. We could work with them as they are to make this a better world. A follower of Jesus, and of Buddha and of Darwin would each bring something to the one task that Jesus called us to- calling the world to love.
Rules, beliefs and rituals are never the heart of true religion. A religion what does not dissolve into love is like food that has not properly digested. What calls itself "Christianity" is, often as not, a bad case of spiritual indigestion.
JIm, I have read many of your articles over the past year or so, and though I’m sure you strongly believe what you write, and seem to have a decent following, your articles promote division among Christians, not unity. As a Christian, I get the impression that you would detest me, think I’m “primitive” for some of my beliefs and can feel your hostility in what you write. I read an article by Dr. Tony Evans recently that said this (the sentences I especially want you to read start with “My concern…” and “The proof…”:
Interviewer: “In your book, you say Christians should be like NFL referees when it comes to politics in that they should represent a kingdom perspective rather than identifying primarily with a political party. How can we really know what God’s will is on issues like health care or immigration law?
Dr. Tony Evan’s answer: “I believe that there are biblical positions on every issue, but no party fully represents all God’s views consistently on all God’s issues. Christians are going to vote differently because they will prioritize issues differently. My concern is that we’ve so aligned ourselves with the parties of this world that we’re missing the kingdom of God. The proof of that is that we’ve let political parties divide the kingdom of God. My illustration regarding referees is simply to say that while they sometimes vote for one team and sometimes vote for another team, they’re obligated ultimately to neither team, because they belong to another kingdom called the NFL. So, we should never let the party divisions interfere with the unity of the church, causing the church to lose its influence in the culture.
Now, I know… I KNOW, that you’re going to have problems with Tony Evans because he is conservative and you’re not, and I know that I’m not going to change your mind and who you are ONE bit, but you should think about what I said. Are you unifying the Kingdom of God, or are you dividing people? Because I know someone who has gone to your church and seen how they’ve become more hostile, I can attest to the fact that it is the latter. The hostility and the bias and the almost hatred that has started to transform this person is tragic.
Anne,
If you let other people have a different opinion from yours, then we don’t have a problem. If you don’t try to use religion to judge and interfere in other people’s lives, then we are on the same page. But if you believe Christians should be privileged over other people in the community, and should be able to deprive others from having the same rights we do, then I’m not the one who is being hostile.
Jim
Would unity in doing evil be better that promoting good and thereby creating division. If Jim is right, isn’t that division a necessity? Why would unity be more important than goodness?
Christine, I think you make a good point. The tendency in all groups is to organize around some kind of rejected other. It’s very difficult to organize a group to serve the common good, and to live by principles that (in theory anyway) would be fair for everyone. Religious people who come together to criticize and attack other groups are not an example of unity but of a mutual aggression pact. No one truly loves their group who allows it to act unjustly. A universalist is the least popular of human beings because she or he is hated by partisans of very stripe.
I guess we just have fundamentally different views. Unfortunately, I guess you would both put me in the “evil” category because there are some things that I think the Bible is clear about that you think it is not, or you think it is clear in a totally different way. For example: My best friend in high school was gay. I loved him then and I love him now. Do I think that he should be able to be married in the Christian church? No. Do I think he should be able to be married legally outside the church? Yes. I don’t have the right to deny him that right of marrying someone he loves. He’s not a Christian, so I’m not going to expect him to act like one. However, I believe that the Bible speaks out against the actual act of homosexuality (NOT being homosexual) and therefore, homosexual marriage would not be ok in God’s eyes. Christians absolutely should love anyone, regardless of their sins. And in no way should they ridicule, say hateful things (like the evil Westboro Baptist church) or not love people. There is nothing worse about acting on homosexual tendencies than my personal sins that I deal with. But God does call us to fight against our sinful nature. We are called to be the salt of the earth- to be different. That’s partly why the Christian faith is so difficult. Because we are having to fight against the things of this world. If we are no different from the world, and it’s views of morality or religion, how are we any different? What is the point of being salt if we “taste” like everyone else? Why would anyone be attracted to the church if it’s not any different from the rest of the world? What would knowing Jesus bring us freedom from?
Anne,
We have never met. I never put you in any category and I certainly don’t assume you are evil. If you are in favor of full civil rights for GLBT then we are on the same page. We may disagree on what the Bible says, but I don’t question your motives. I just want to protect my GLBT neighbors from discrimination and violence. Since you share that concern I have no argument with you about your personal interpretation. My problem is when people bring their faith into the public sphere to deny others civil rights and then, when some of us stand up for our GLBT neighbors, they pretend that they are the ones being attacked. I appreciate your writing in to give your sincerely held view points. I respect the gentle tone of your comments, and hope you know I respect you. You are welcome to comment here any time.
Jim
Anne – I am gay, and I in no way think you are evil. I do think you are completely wrong, and I do think that your belief on this issue is evil – the way racism and misogyny is evil – for the real harm it does to real people, and for the way I feel it betrays the Gospel. But I do also believe that good, lovely, wonderful and well-meaning people with the best of intentions can still propagate evil views. It is the nature of being human, that we all make mistakes and have limits in our understanding. I fight your view on this one particular issue, but I do not fight you. Nor, because you stand for equal rights, do I feel you making yourself to be my enemy – though I could still strive to love and understand you even if you did.
I *do* believe that it is also important for the Church to accept such marriages and ordain people in those marriages – but from a decision made within, not imposed from without. I feel strongly in this regard because I am Christian and I wish my orientation and my marriage – central, inseparable parts of myself and my life – to be recognized and accepted just as every straight person does. I wish for the people with whom I share a faith and the Church of which I am a part to not attempt to divide me in a way others are not divided and to burden me in a way others are not burdened. I seek a recognition of what in my life is fact: that my loving, committed relationship makes me no less human and no less demonstrably Christian.
Indeed, I was legally married (I’m Canadian) in the Church – by two pastors in a conservative, evangelical demonination no less. They took a stand for the full inclusion within the Church of myself, my partner, and all those who are LBGTQIA, just in the way the Gentilles came to be included in the faith. This is something the church will come to face and resolve internally, as it should be.
Christine,
Thank you so much for sharing a part of your story here. It is much easier for people to understand what is at stake in these issues when individuals have the courage to share who they are and what this prejudice means in their lives. It can’t be easy, but I am grateful for your courage.
Jim
I meant to say not BEING homosexual. I bolded the wrong word
Your article makes me think about expulsion of Muslims and Jews from Spain in 1492. Some Spanish people (on the extremist right-wing side) justify this by saying that Christians had the right to take back what was stolen from them back in 711 (when Muslims first set foot in Spain). The way that people were kicked out was particularly disturbing (with hatred and xenophobia). It is very sad episode in history, where Christian Church instead of spreading love, spread hatred with inquisition, divided people into us and them. This was wrong act. By 1492, the Muslims and Christians along with Jews were all deeply integrated in the society. They were one people. Muslims have been in Spain for over 800 years. After 800 years of living in a land you cannot be called conqueror anymore. Spain kicked it’s own people, and these people lost their homes, land, dignity. It is said that Jews were so attached to their homeland (Spain; They lived since the time of Roma Empire, over 1400 years), that they chose to convert to Christianity, and even that did not satisfy the Church Inquisition, for hey were hated by simply being Jews most of the time. Really, Really sad!
Today there are many Islamophobobes who in the name of supposedly protecting “Chrisendom”, rant about how Muslims have continuously waged jihad against Spain and “Christian Europe”, and there are videos on youtube of extremists scaring people, screaming at the top of their lungs “Muslims are retaking Spain, we’re doomed”. Whining that Muslims are threat to European civilization. This makes me shake my head, and feel ashamed. Often these types of people overlook the crimes of European nations, during colonial period. Spain is case in point! Immediately after expelling Muslims and Jews, Spain embarked on the conquest of the South America, one of the most brutal genocidal land thefts in history, if not the most brutal! Incredible is isn’t, that Spain did exactly the same thing to native peoples of South America that Spain accused of Muslims doing to Spaniards, namely invading the Christian lands in 711.
Well Muslims were certaintly no saints, and they did their share of bad things, however even at their worst and most oppressive, they generally treated subjects under their rule better than Europeans treated their own and various other people, when Europe ruled over them. As a European and Christian, I’m deeply sad, ashamed, and angry. For centuries, European minds have been poisoned against other peoples of the world by our “leaders and clergy”. Always hard at work finding enemies for us! We, Europeans have betrayed much for what we claim to stand for. If Jesus and Apostles were alive today, they would weep bitter tears if they read history of Western Christianity! I feel lost sometimes to tell you the truth. What can I do to change the bleak situation we are in?
Keep up amazing work, Mr. Rigby!
Yours truly,
Oleksiy
Oleksiy,
Thank you so much for taking the time to write. And especially for all this historical background. I hope people take the time to read it. I’m curious about your name. It’s a great name, but I’ve never seen it before. Do you mind me asking what its roots are?
Jim
Dear Jim,
I did write on your post before, and I remember sending you an article”Welcoming Muslims for the love of Christ” under the name AntoninusPius, which I often use as my nickname, when I write on blogosphere. My name is quite common in Eastern European Slavic countries (Ukraine, Russia, Belarus). I’m from Ukraine, which was part of former USSR, when I was born. Now I live in Canada. As for it’s roots, I think it’s Greek, since I’m Greek Orthodox Christian. I hope it answers your question.
Oleksiy
” I never put you in any category and I certainly don’t assume you are evil.”
No, Jim, you didn’t. You simply impugned an entire group of people that may have _included_ Anne and then hid behind the “I didn’t say that about _YOU_” defense. It’s pretty shameful and cowardly (not to mention obvious). If you’re going to have the false-courage to call an entire group names at least have the intellectual honesty to claim it when you’re called on the carpet.
Example: if I wrote, say (emphasis mine), “When people say the US should be a “Christian nation,” they _never_ mean that we should feed the poor, clothe the naked or, God forbid, turn the other cheek. What people usually mean by the term “Christian nation” is that their own _primitive ideas_ of creation should be _imposed_ upon science classes and that their almost perfect _ignorance_ of human biology should become law. Unlike Peter, many Christians only lay down the sword so they can take up the gun.” I would be intellectually dishonest if I then claimed that a specific member of that group did not have “primitive ideas”, was “ignorant”, or “imposed” their ideas upon other people, as you have quite clearly done. Or don’t you get that?
Words, Jim. Words have meaning. You cannot use them to tear down a group and then claim “oh! I didn’t mean it about YOU, stranger” when someone raises an objection. That kind of sloppy thinking is very indicative of the sort of common intellectual dishonesty that wants to have their opinion without any repercussions.
Either stand up for what you say or don’t say it. Coward.
My post yesterday saying that this is not a Christian nation yesterday triggered some interesting responses. Anne wrote very politely saying she felt my article was divisive. She said many of my blogs divide Christians, instead of calling them together. She said that while she personally believed the Bible condemns homosexuality, that she also believes in full civil rights for GLBT citizens. I wrote back that while we disagreed on scripture, that my article was not meant to criticize Christians who didn’t impose their religion on others.
Craig said that I was being a coward. He quoted my response to Anne:
“I never put you in any category and I certainly don’t assume you are evil.”
And then he responded:
“No, Jim, you didn’t. You simply impugned an entire group of people that may have _included_ Anne and then hid behind the “I didn’t say that about _YOU_” defense. It’s pretty shameful and cowardly (not to mention obvious). If you’re going to have the false-courage to call an entire group names at least have the intellectual honesty to claim it when you’re called on the carpet.”
He then quoted from my post: “Example: if I wrote, say (emphasis mine), “When people say the US should be a “Christian nation,” they _never_ mean that we should feed the poor, clothe the naked or, God forbid, turn the other cheek. What people usually mean by the term “Christian nation” is that their own _primitive ideas_ of creation should be _imposed_ upon science classes and that their almost perfect _ignorance_ of human biology should become law. Unlike Peter, many Christians only lay down the sword so they can take up the gun.”
Then he continued with his comment: “I would be intellectually dishonest if I then claimed that a specific member of that group did not have “primitive ideas”, was “ignorant”, or “imposed” their ideas upon other people, as you have quite clearly done. Or don’t you get that?
Words, Jim. Words have meaning. You cannot use them to tear down a group and then claim “oh! I didn’t mean it about YOU, stranger” when someone raises an objection. That kind of sloppy thinking is very indicative of the sort of common intellectual dishonesty that wants to have their opinion without any repercussions.
Either stand up for what you say or don’t say it. Coward.”
Here is my response to Craig:
“Craig,
When you say that criticizing a group necessarily includes every single member of that group, you miss the fact that I consider myself a Christian, too. The group I was criticizing was not Christians in general, but only Christians who bully. Groups can be do bad things without all of the members of that group participating.
If you can find an example of any place in any of my writings where I have actually called someone a name please point it out to me and I will apologize. But what I actually did was describe a type of bullying behavior and you took it personally. I will say what I said to Anne, as long as a you aren’t trying to impose your religion my neighbors, we don’t have a problem. If you are not cramming your version of Christianity down other people’s throats I wasn’t talking about you. But if you are, I need to stand in defense of the people you are attacking using the name of Christ.
You illustrated the difference in criticizing and name calling in your comment. When you said my actions were “cowardly” that was not name calling. When you called me a “coward” that was name calling.
I agree that words are important, but so are people. This is a nation of Jews, Muslims, and atheists as well as Christians. Lots and lots of Americans are not Christian. This is their country too. When anyone says this should be a Christian nation they are saying that non-Christians are second class citizens.
And calling this a “Christian nation” is a dangerous lie for another reason. If God gave this land to anyone, it was the indigenous people. The “Christian” founders of this nation robbed that land and committed genocide on the inhabitants. When the “Christian” founders built this nation, they did it with people kidnapped from Africa and enslaved for that purpose. What does it mean when we call these things “Christian?” To say God gave us this land and leave out these atrocities muffles the voices of our victims and masks one of the most heinous crimes in history.
If we ever meet in person I will be happy to take you to coffee and have a Christian to Christian fellowship. But if you attack my GLBT or my non-Christian neighbors, you will find out that “coward” isn’t a very good description of me.”
Anyone with a rudimentary understanding of our history as a nation knows the United States was not founded to be a Christian nation. Quite the contrary, it was founded to allow freedom of religion and freedom from religious persecution. I think part of the troubles Jim speaks of begin with the Christian
admonition to evangelize and spread the faith. I believe a Christian is someone who lives according to Jesus’ teachings, not those who try to bully others into believing exactly as they do.
Matthew 7:1-5
John 13:34-35
Brad,
Well said, thank you.
Jim