RE: [asa] Advice for conversing with YECs (Christian nation?)

The Bible teaches to obey Earthly masters. To rebel is against God's command as revealed in the Bible. The confusion comes when we try to set-up a kingdom on Earth. Jesus said His kingdom is not of this Earth. Someone can kill and fight for independence and personal freedom, but it is against Biblical teaching... just like the Crusades were known to be a Christian movement but was against the Biblical teaching. In the case of the crusades and the inquisition, the outcome was negative, but in the case of USA independence, the outcome was good (as well as a good result for the unbiblical struggles to end slavery and get equal rights for woman). But who knows what would have happened if people followed the Bible instead- maybe things would have been even better?

Would Jesus want you to fight and kill for independence or any social issue at all? I understand fighting in self-defense, but these aren't self-defense issues at all.

I'm half serious, but at the core is the claim of how we are a Christian nation yet don't follow the Bible (especially Jesus' teachings to "love and pray for our enemy"). I think the ultimate repulsion for me are Christian Zionists, causing the turmoil in the Middle East (see wikipedia for "Christian Zionism" for more info if interested). According to them, if you aren't "pro-Israel" you are "anti-semite." I'd like to be "pro-peace," neutral and fair, not taking sides.

...Bernie

________________________________
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On Behalf Of Schwarzwald
Sent: Monday, November 03, 2008 1:00 PM
To: asa@calvin.edu
Subject: Re: [asa] Advice for conversing with YECs (Christian nation?)

Bernie, while I also think that America was not a 'Christian nation' in a simple sense (though the Christian influence and involvement with America's founding is both real and complex), are you really going to ride this particular horse into the ground? Especially when 'give me liberty or give me death' clearly wasn't spoken in a slave context, 'No king but king Jesus' was another cry, the reason for obedience and mercy was vastly more than 'because Jesus is coming back', and so on.
On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 1:47 PM, Dehler, Bernie <bernie.dehler@intel.com<mailto:bernie.dehler@intel.com>> wrote:
If we were ever a "Christian nation" then it must be some kind of "Christian" that is defined differently from the Bible. A rallying cry for independence was "give me liberty or give me death," which is opposite what the Bible teaches.

We are not of this world, and we are to live as "strangers" and "aliens" in it... as "ambassadors for Christ," representing a different kingdom... not a kingdom of the Earth. Also, more specifically:

1 Peter 2:11
Dear friends, I urge you, as aliens and strangers in the world, to abstain from sinful desires, which war against your soul.

2 Corinthians 5:20
We are therefore Christ's ambassadors, as though God were making his appeal through us. We implore you on Christ's behalf: Be reconciled to God.

Even slaves should obey their masters, not revolt for freedom:

Ephesians 6:5
Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ.

Ephesians 6:9
And masters, treat your slaves in the same way. Do not threaten them, since you know that he who is both their Master and yours is in heaven, and there is no favoritism with him.

Colossians 3:22
Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything; and do it, not only when their eye is on you and to win their favor, but with sincerity of heart and reverence for the Lord.

Titus 2:9
Teach slaves to be subject to their masters in everything, to try to please them, not to talk back to them,

1 Peter 2:18
Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh.

The reason we are not to rebel is because the time is short... this world is passing away (very, very soon), and God will make everything new... according to the Bible.

...Bernie
-----Original Message-----
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu<mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu> [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu<mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu>] On Behalf Of Ted Davis
Sent: Monday, November 03, 2008 9:29 AM
To: James Patterson; asa@calvin.edu<mailto:asa@calvin.edu>
Subject: RE: [asa] Advice for conversing with YECs - attn John

I want to reply briefly to James' important concerns about church/state
"separation" and the origins controversy.

I won't repeat (yet again) the details of my own view (searching the ASA
archives will bring out several of my old posts) that the currently received
interpretation of the First Amendment, in terms of a Jeffersonian "wall of
separation between church and state," is not justified. What I will repeat
here, briefly, is my opinion as a scholar of this issue, that the currently
received interpretation substantially shapes this issue, though it does not
drive it. (What drives are theological and biblical objections to
"evolution," and James has already indicated that this is true for him.) I
will also repeat my belief that a fundamental injustice is being done to
parents and families whose values are undercut (in their view) by the
monopolistic nature of public education, on this particular issue. I've
voiced those views in various other venues as well, even in my review of Ken
Miller's "Finding Darwin's God" for the NCSE journal and in my review of
some ID books for Christian Century a decade ago. As long as this situation
continues--which is to say, IMO, as long as I will be alive--the controversy
about origins and public education will not go away.

As for this country being "founded by Christians for Christians," (to
borrow James' words), however, I do not agree. Did the framers intend for
various types of Christianity (such as Catholicism in Maryland or Calvinism
in Massachusetts or Quakers in Pennsylvania) to flourish, without
interference from the federal government? Absolutely, yes. The bottom
line, for them, was religious freedom--but this also definitely included the
freedom not to be religious, or to believe (as Jefferson and Franklin did)
that "reason" made Christianity untenable. We shouldn't forget that Thomas
Paine, whose pamphlets helped incite the revolution, was also a
"freethinker" who said scandalous things about the Bible. The very idea of
disestablishment (which clearly *is* the point of the First Amendment,
whatever one may say about Jefferson's "wall") originated in a severely
persecuted minority--the Anabaptists, who denied the validity of either a
state church (Luther's Germany or Henry's England) or a church state
(Calvin's Geneva) -- and was then secularized by Enlightenment philosophers
in France and Scotland. That minority was not considered to be genuinely
Christian by many of the Lutherans, Catholics, and Calvinists who persecuted
them.

What the founders of the various colonies wanted, James, was freedom to
practice *their particular forms* of Christianity without state
interference. They did not generally want to see other forms of
Christianity (which to them were often not genuinely Christian) flourish.
The framers of the Constitution at least did seem to want that, but they
also ensured that deniers of Christianity (such as deists and unitarians and
even the occasional real atheist) would also be just as free as they were to
freedom of conscience and religious practice (or non-practice).

Nor do I blame Darwin (as James does) for the deterioration of public
education. It's easy to invoke Darwin's name for a multitude of sins, but
I'd much rather see people identify specific problems and talk about
specific solutions. If "naturalism" is the problem, e.g., then you might as
well blame almost every scientist (Christian or not) there is, starting with
all of that atheism going on at places like NASA and NOAA, where I never see
"God" invoked as part of the explanation for next week's weather or next
month's satellite launch.

Ted

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu<mailto:majordomo@calvin.edu> with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu<mailto:majordomo@calvin.edu> with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Mon Nov 3 17:05:07 2008