Definitions and Clarifications

In my last post I responded to a request by a friend to read a blog and give her my opinion of it. It was an entry entitled, “God is in Control, Pt. 2” by Craige Lewis. In my response I said that the writing as it was presented to me was a heresy. I want to make sure that we have the same definition for some words related to error in Christian doctrine. Therefore I am offering some definitions and clarification of terms:

1. 
   doctrine: a doctrine is a teaching of Holy Scripture or a revelation from God about a particular line of thought in Scripture concerning essential truths, i.e. the nature and character of God, the nature and ministry of his Son, Jesus Christ, the nature, function and ministry of the Holy Spirit, how we can be saved, etc. Doctrine is always based on God’s revelation from the whole body of revealed truth known as Holy Scripture. Doctrine is always about essential truths, it is always revealed by God to the Church, and it is never private, personal, or secret (2 Pet. 1:20-21). If a person prays for a car and then has a dream about buying a car at a certain place, then goes to that place and is able to buy a car, he cannot therefore come forward and postulate a doctrine of dreams and cars. This is not a doctrine. This is a private revelation. He can, however, proclaim the doctrine of answered prayer.
   
2. error: In Christian doctrine, error is the proclamation of a misinterpretation of Holy Scripture, or a making of doctrine out of one text without the support of the whole body of revealed truth, or constructing a doctrine by emphasizing smaller matters while leaving the more weighty matters untouched. This last one is what incensed Jesus (Matt. 23: 23). Many churches and denominations go into error by choosing an area of emphasis that is unrelated to eternal salvation or pleasing God on earth. Churches that emphasize clothes and physical appearance, strict obedience to church hierarchy, choosing dates for the rapture are usually in error.
   
3. heresy: a false teaching or misinterpretation of Scripture or a misrepresentation of the revelation that God has given the Church concerning a Scripture or a line of thinking about essential truths in Scripture, and not turning from it to orthodoxy once having been shown the error in it. If an error is preached or taught as being true, it is only an error until it is confronted, and corrected by Holy Scripture and divine revelation. If the person teaching this error refuses to be corrected, then his/her error becomes a heresy.
   
4. Apostasy: an open, confirmed and continuous contradiction of the revealed truth of God’s Word. The word “apostasy” means “to turn away,” as in turning away from what is true.
   
5. Separation of Church and State: a political doctrine based on the first amendment of the Constitution of the United States, stating that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion...." Together with the Free Exercise Clause, ("...or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"), these two clauses make up what are commonly known as the "religion clauses" of the First Amendment” (Wikipedia). This is important because church doctrine is not the same as the law of the land. According to the Constitution of the United States individual Americans are free to have any religion they choose or no religion at all. An individual American can be orthodox, in error, heretical, or apostate in his religious beliefs and not be in violation of any law.
   
   This last point is important because the Conservative Right has wrapped itself in the flag and the Bible, and proclaimed that it alone represents real Christianity. It beats people over the head with its mantra of hot button issues: abortion, sexual abstinence, homosexuality, prayer in public schools, evolution vs. science, etc. The problem with all these issues is that these people are trying to legislate both morality and faith. This is wrong for two reasons:

It is wrong first because Jesus said it’s wrong. The entire 23rd chapter of Matthew is dedicated to Jesus’ judgment against hypocrites who “do not practice what they preach” (Mat. 23:1, NIV). Jesus goes on to say that these hypocrites “tie heavy loads and put them on men’s shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to lift one finger to move them” (23:4).

Jesus then says these are people who “travel over land and sea to win a single convert, and when he becomes one, you make him twice as much a son of hell as you are” (v. 15). But his greatest indictment against these hypocrites is in verse 23 where he says: “You give a tent of your spices—mint, dill and cummin. But you have neglected the more important matters of the law—justice, mercy and faithfulness. You should have practiced the latter, without neglecting the former.”

Jesus said the more important matters of the law are justice, mercy, and faithfulness. Isaiah said that God calls on us to “…undo the heavy burden, and let the oppressed go free” (Isa. 58: 6). The Conservative Right neither believes nor practices these things. Oppression is what they do.

Secondly, attempting to legislate morality and faith is wrong because it violates the Constitution. According to the Constitution there can be no religious test for elective office. The Conservative Right appears to want to establish both a State religion and a religious test for public office. It is wrong in a democratic republic for one religious group to force their religious values on the rest of us. If we do this then we become no better than the Islamic Republics, which I believe are nothing but fronts for dictatorship under the guise of religion.

The present national election campaign is for president of this democratic republic called the United States of America, once known as the "land of the free and the home of the slave." Jesus is not runing for president. His name is not on the ballot. America is not the Kingdom of God. This is a nation that was founded on slavery and exploitation, and hence has been flawed from it's inception. So if you have been crooked from the start, why is it you have to have a perfect leader now?

Any nation and any party that has put up with the bumbling idiot who has lived at 1600 Pennsylvannia Avenue for the last eight years can tolerate someone with a few flaws.

This writer is a Christian who opposes abortion, premarital sex, and homosexuality. But if we make each of these things a crime punishable by law, then we put the government in places where it should not be; in people’s bedrooms. These matters ought to be choices made by the individual and God.

The aim of a democratic republic is to allow its citizens the widest possible latitude in their personal freedoms without allowing them to encroach on the liberties of others. This means that we must give people the room to live their lives and express themselves as they see fit, so long as their lifestyles and behavior doesn’t adversely affect the freedom and expression of others. Real morality can never be legislated.

I would like to see abstinence taught in public schools and be the goal of every high school student. I would like to see prayer in public schools. I would like to see creationism taught along side evolution. But I cannot accept that these things should be coerced on others.

There is a way for our society to deal with the rising pre-marital sex problem, and the vast number of pre-marital pregnancies and abortions; but the churches, pastors, and politicians are too busy playing the blame game to help launch programs that would reduce the rate of first time pre-marital sexual encounters, cut unwanted pregnancies in half, and reduce abortions to almost none.

The first step is to jail the pastors, church men, and politicians who are impregnating the teenagers. I will write about the other nine steps in another post on this blog.

"Of Christ and Culture"

I guess you’ve noticed by now that I am a Christian. I am not a Christian of the “Let’s get a rope and lynch ‘em,” “I am better than you are,” “I know better than you do,” “They are bound for hell and I am not,” “Not in my back yard” variety. I am more of the “Love your enemies, pray for them that despitefully use you,” “humble is the way,” “forgive your enemies,” “Bless them that persecute you, bless and curse not,” “Don’t seek revenge,” If your enemy hunger feed him” variety of Christianity.

I know, I know, you haven’t heard much of my kind of Christianity. My brand of Christianity is not popular among the “mainline denominations” or the up and coming Pentecostals and Charismatics. It’s certainly not popular with politicians and preachers who want America to have a “whop ‘em up side the head” attitude towards everybody else on the planet. No, in America being Christian means that you are the winner at the other guy’s expense.

For centuries Christianity has been identified with the European thirst for conquest and domination. The first European power to employ the name of Christ for this purpose was the Roman Emperor Constantine who had the Greek letters for Christ emblazoned over a cross and placed on his shield and banner and on the shields of his soldiers. The next day he won the battle of the Milvian Bridge, thus making himself sole ruler of the empire. This was in 312, A.D.

Every since that day Europeans have been invoking the name of Christ in every battle, crusade, war, pogrom, lynching, and pillage in which they have engaged. The Nazis believed themselves to be Christian. The Klan called themselves “the Christian White Knights of the Ku Klux Klan.” Whenever Europeans seek to dominate people, promote their own culture and destroy others, Christ is their protector and leader. What a fine general this Christ is.

This country was founded with the same ideology: Conquest in the Name of Christ. This thinking was not that Christ would guide them to the new land, and prosper them in settling it, and give them favor with the Indigenous Peoples, and make them a part of the development and prosperity of the country. No! This ideology said, “Our warrior Christ will help us annihilate the savages, subdue them, and rule the land: in other words, “Manifest Destiny.” (Any civilization that is not like Europeans is savage).

Not quite a century after the founding of the country a Civil War erupted in the nation over the ideas of conquest and domination. The war between the abolitionist and the slave traders was largely a church fight. It pitied the “slaves obey your master” Christians against the “Let the oppressed go free” Christians. The Southern Baptist Convention, presently the nation’s largest Christian church, split from its main body, The American Baptist Churches, not over doctrine, but over dominance.

“The SBC became a separate denomination in 1845 in Augusta, Georgia, following a regional split with northern Baptists over the issue of slavery in the US South….The increasing tensions and discontent of Baptists from the South regarding national criticism of slavery led to their withdrawal from the national Baptist organizations.” (Southern Baptist Convention, Wikipedia) Fifteen years after the upheaval that formed the Southern Baptist Convention, the Civil War erupted at Fort Sumter, and “the best blood of the nation was spilled on its own battlefields.”

There has been no major fight in the nation since then that did not include these factions: those who believe that God has ordained them to subjugate, dominate, and control others, and those who feel that God has called them to set people free spiritually, economically, and socially.

“The John Birch Society,” “The Moral Majority,” “The Evangelical Christian Right,” “The White Citizens Councils” are all names for the group that believes that God through Christ has granted them the right of conquest and domination. The main thread of the ideology has not changed since 312, A.D.: “God is with me. He is not with you. I am ordained to win and you are not. God has called me to subjugate, dominate and rule you, and he has called you to be my servant and slave.”

I watched the debate between Senator Barack Obama and John McCain on Friday night. I saw the classic dichotomy once again; two Christians from opposing perspectives. Every time I heard John McCain say, “Senator Obama doesn’t understand,” I saw the old paradigm: “Boy, God has sent me to be your master and to tell you what to do in order to be safe. You are too much of a child to known what government ought to do. Let me worry about government, because God has left me in charge.”

The language used by McCain when addressing Senator Obama appeared to be aimed at belittling and humiliating him. This attitude resembled the thinking of those people who challenged Lincoln in the abolition of slavery, but more importantly it puts him with the thinking of those who challenged Jesus over the woman caught in adultery. People who think like this are always ready to take lives, belittle destinies, and kill dreams for the sake of proving themselves to be right.

What is real Christianity? Is it a paradigm for cultural conquest? Is Christianity a method of social conquest that will give Nazis the upper hand over Jews, and once again make German bankers the deciding power in the life of German citizens? Is Christianity the organizing force that puts plantations and their inhabitants in right relationship so that “master and slave” have proper balance? Is Christianity that ideology that causes the “have nots” to be content with what they don’t have, so that they will not challenge the “haves?”

I do not believe that Jesus is either Democrat or Republican, but the nature of the Gospel is liberating. The person of Jesus sets one free. The Sacrifice of Jesus makes us free. The teaching of Jesus makes people free. The preaching of Jesus makes people free. The ministry of Jesus makes people free. What Jesus says and does at once makes us free and draws us to him. Bondage, control, slavery, and domination, are as antithetical to his person as witchcraft is foreign to his nature.

I am certain that the Christ of the Gospels and the Christ of Conquest and Domination are not the same person. The one is an invention of those in charge to give them-selves license for racial and cultural superiority; the other is a Person who enables us to live victoriously even in the face of adversity. The real Christ is a liberator, even when the one whom he is setting free is Pilate, Judas, or Thomas; and he would have set them free had they only asked him.

The appeal of “The John Birch Society,” “The Moral Majority,” “The Evangelical Christian Right,” “The White Citizens Councils,” is that they seek to reach “John Q Citizen” in his most visceral area! What is that? Dominance and security! He only feels secure and successful when he/she has dominated and subjugated some one else, even if the other person is another Anglo-Saxon White Protestant. In their mind Success is equal to being over others. This ideology is inescapable when you learn it in your home, at your school, and in your church.

What if Constantine had an authentic vision of Jesus, and what if Jesus actually did intervene on Constantine’s behalf, causing him to win the battle of the Milvian Bridge? And what if our Lord intended that event to be a relief for his Church and not a charter for future generations to effectuate conquest upon other peoples in his name? Jesus has NOT sent us forth to conquer and subjugate political kingdoms, cultures, and people groups in his Name. Political domination is as foreign to the Christ of the Gospel as is murder.

“The Christian Right,” “the Conservative Right,” “The Moral Majority,” “Focus on the Family” brings all of these issues back into focus. These people are basically saying, “God has ordained us to tell you how to think, feel, and act. Your responsibility is to obey; ours is to lead. This is not my idea of Christ or Christian leadership. I reject this thinking. I hope that you will reject it also.

Falling Into Your Own Pit

“God did not deliver on Republican Prayers: In a good Christian Manner, James Dobson’s Republican Organization, Focus on the Family sent out a notice 2 weeks ago requesting that all Republican Christians pray for rain in Denver to disrupt Obama's acceptance speech at the outdoor Invesco Field."

The above is an e-mail that I received from a friend last night telling me that James Dobson and his right wing followers were summoning people to pray that Denver would be inundated by a storm, thus disrupting the Democratic National Convention, and most importantly Senator Barack Obama’s acceptance speech on last Thursday night.

It seems that God did not hear their prayers, but instead turned their prayers against them. Senator Obama did make his acceptance speech on Thursday night to a capacity crowd of almost ninety thousand people at Invesco Field, while millions watched (and cried as I did) around the world. But since the right-wingers sought injury to others through a storm, now they have had to cancel portions of their convention and revelry because of a storm. “Whoso diggeth a pit shall fall therein…” (Prov. 26:27, KJV).

The questions in my mind are: “When will powerfully placed preachers realize that God is not a Republican or a Democrat?” And “when will fundamentalist believers of any ilk, (Christian, Muslim, LDS, etc.) cease to invoke the name of God to support their personal agendas?” When celebrity preachers lead already narrow minded people to believe that God is as narrow minded and as petty as they are the outcome is an embarrassment for them and an insult to the Gospel of Jesus Christ. When unbelievers see people who are supposed to be followers of Christ pleading with God to ruin the events and purposes of their opponents it makes a mockery of the teachings of Jesus.

I also wonder if the fundamentalists think that it is wrong for me or other believers to disagree with them? I am sure that many of the people gathered to hear Senator Obama speak considered themselves to be Christian. So was God supposed to punish the believers at Invesco Field for supporting Senator Obama, and pass over George W. Bush and John McCain for engaging in an ungodly and unjust war? No body died at Invesco Field, while Gorge Bush’s policies, supported by John McCain, have caused countless numbers of lives.

If Dobson’s actions in this matter are a reflection of the character of his god, it seems to me that his god is more like a bad dog than the God of the Bible. You can sic a dog on your opponent, but you can’t sic God on your political opponents. Maybe Dobson’s Bible doesn’t contain this verse “If your enemy hungry, feed him…” (Rom. 12:20).

We must remember that rabid, irrational Christian fundamentalism is never about Jesus any more than the fundamentalism of the Pharisees was about God or the Law. Fundamentalism is about fear and power; fear of the larger world outside and beyond the control of the fundamentalist; and using that fear and any other fear to control others. Fundamentalists once taught that God created African peoples to be slaves, that women should never be educated or given the right to vote, that Jews are habitually filthy and manipulative, that Chinese people were law breakers, that Native Americans were alcoholics by nature, and on and on the list goes.

Now the question is, “What is the difference between a fundamentalist in Jerusalem or Baghdad who straps on an explosive belt and walks into a crowded market and ignites it and one who sits at home in America praying for rain on Invesco Field?” They both mean to cause harm. The difference is only in degrees. Today he calls for them to pray for rain because someone opposes his politics; tomorrow he will call them to spill blood for the same reason.

Lynching used to be a Christian exercise.