Glocal Christianity

Violence in the Old Testament

Some forgotten teachings on violence from the Old Testament.

Genesis 6:11
Now the earth was corrupt in God's sight and was full of violence.

Job 16:17
yet my hands have been free of violence and my prayer is pure.

Psalm 11:5
The LORD examines the righteous, but the wicked and those who love violence his soul hates.

Proverbs 10:11
The mouth of the righteous is a fountain of life, but violence overwhelms the mouth of the wicked.

Isaiah 53:9
He was assigned a grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death, though he had done no violence, nor was any deceit in his mouth.

Jeremiah 22:3
This is what the LORD says: Do what is just and right. Rescue from the hand of his oppressor the one who has been robbed. Do no wrong or violence to the alien, the fatherless or the widow, and do not shed innocent blood in this place.

Ezekiel 7:23
Prepare chains, because the land is full of bloodshed and the city is full of violence.

Jonah 3:8
But let man and beast be covered with sackcloth. Let everyone call urgently on God. Let them give up their evil ways and their violence.

Habakkuk 1:3
Why do you make me look at injustice? Why do you tolerate wrong? Destruction and violence are before me; there is strife, and conflict abounds.

Zephaniah 1:9
On that day I will punish all who avoid stepping on the threshold, who fill the temple of their gods with violence and deceit.

Malachi 2:16
I hate a man's covering himself with violence as well as with his garment.

Again, this is just a small sample from the Old Testament. But even from this small sample we can see that the living God associates the violence of humanity with corruption, impurity, wickedness, deceit, wrongness, evil, injustice ... things which are condemned by God.

Is White Supremacy Anti-Christian?

Is White Supremacy Anti-Christian? I am sure some of you will say, sure, that's obvious! In fact, I hope so. But if that is the case, if white supremacy is so anti-Christian, why is so-called Christian white supremacy teaching never condemned as heresy? Why is it that, even when church authorities distance themselves from white supremacy, is it rarely called sin?

White supremacy is the belief that "Whites" are better than "Blacks" and "Jews" and others. It's an ethno-centric ideology that has sometimes been linked with Christianity and justified by distorted readings of the Bible. That's a situation that I find very odd given the multi-ethnic history of Christianity. That's a situation I find odder still when we consider that Jesus was a Jew, and that one of the earliest Christian converts was an Ethiopian, a black.

When we are called to conversion, when we are called to renounce sin and embrace grace, should not white supremacy be one of the sins seekers are called to renounce? Should conversion be considered valid if it is not renounced? Can there be conversion without repentance? After all, if the good news is about reconciliation, how is this reconciling? This is a serious question. And here is a more serious one, what would you say to Christians who refused to renounce white supremacist views? And what do you say to white supremacists claiming Christian faith? How core an issue is reconciliation? What witness do you leave the world?

Song: God of Justice

This song, God of justice, is more my style of worship music. Something that goes beyond self indulgence and actually says something about who God is and what he saves us for.

Ethical Relativism

Once upon a time I was an ethical relativist. But then I encountered Jesus and that changed everything. My old reasoning no longer seemed so convincing. Here is a Jesuit critique that highlights a number of pertinant issues:

Most ethicists reject the theory of ethical relativism. Some claim that while the moral practices of societies may differ, the fundamental moral principles underlying these practices do not. For example, in some societies, killing one's parents after they reached a certain age was common practice, stemming from the belief that people were better off in the afterlife if they entered it while still physically active and vigorous. While such a practice would be condemned in our society, we would agree with these societies on the underlying moral principle -- the duty to care for parents. Societies, then, may differ in their application of fundamental moral principles but agree on the principles.

Also, it is argued, it may be the case that some moral beliefs are culturally relative whereas others are not. Certain practices, such as customs regarding dress and decency, may depend on local custom whereas other practices, such as slavery, torture, or political repression, may be governed by universal moral standards and judged wrong despite the many other differences that exist among cultures. Simply because some practices are relative does not mean that all practices are relative.

Other philosophers criticize ethical relativism because of its implications for individual moral beliefs. These philosophers assert that if the rightness or wrongness of an action depends on a society's norms, then it follows that one must obey the norms of one's society and to diverge from those norms is to act immorally. This means that if I am a member of a society that believes that racial or sexist practices are morally permissible, then I must accept those practices as morally right. But such a view promotes social conformity and leaves no room for moral reform or improvement in a society. Furthermore, members of the same society may hold different views on practices. In the United States, for example, a variety of moral opinions exists on matters ranging from animal experimentation to abortion. What constitutes right action when social consensus is lacking?

Perhaps the strongest argument against ethical relativism comes from those who assert that universal moral standards can exist even if some moral practices and beliefs vary among cultures. In other words, we can acknowledge cultural differences in moral practices and beliefs and still hold that some of these practices and beliefs are morally wrong. The practice of slavery in pre-Civil war U.S. society or the practice of apartheid in South Africa is wrong despite the beliefs of those societies. The treatment of the Jews in Nazi society is morally reprehensible regardless of the moral beliefs of Nazi society.

You'll find the rest of the article here.

What's your thoughts on ethical relativism?

• Do all religions teach a similar ethic?
• Is good and evil just a matter of perspective?
• What way do you see good and evil?

The Anabaptist Tradition and the Politics of Jesus

I have mentioned my Anabaptist influences on a number of occasions but now realise, having been asked to explain what the Anabaptist tradition is by one of you, that I really haven't explained what that means much before now, that I have presumed too much.

In summary then, the Anabaptist movement of the sixteenth century was the radical wing of the Protestant Reformation. Going much further in their protest than the Lutherans and Calvinists, the Anabaptists rejected the Christendom alliance of church and state outright, affirming voluntary baptism and pacifist commitment as outworkings of that.

When I embraced the way of Jesus in my mid twenties I quickly gravitated towards this tradition, and one book in particular had a major impact on me. That book was The Politics of Jesus by Mennonite theologian John H Yoder. Prior to reading Yoder I struggled to reconcile the Father of the New Testament with YHWH of the Old Testament. I was very Gnostic in some ways. In particular, I struggled intensely with the book of Joshua, with the wars of God. Yoder opened up the Old Testament for me, allowing me to see it in a new way, allowing me to see the wars in a new way. In the process I also came to understand the political implications of the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus, and indeed, his call to the crucified life.

This goes some way towards explaining why I shifted from the Sydney Anglicans towards the Sydney Baptists within a few years of becoming a Christian. The Sydney Anglicans, well the hierachy at least, are deeply Calvinist. And though Australia has no state religion, it is difficult to get past the fact that within Anglicanism the British monarch is styled the Defender of the Faith. I sought a church that was much less tied to the state.

Now I realise at this point that a few words should be said about how the Mennonites and Baptists relate to the Anabaptist movement. Basically, Mennonites stand alongside the Amish and Hutterites as institutional decendants of the Anabapist movement. The Baptists, Bretheren and some streams of the Emerging Church are more in the way of spiritual decendants. Though these traditions are very different in many ways, what they share is this rejection of the Christendom alliance of church and state as a corrupting influence. Of course there has been drift over time but in recent times some have called Anabaptist influenced Christians like myself neoAnabaptists. I gather what is being implied is that we are related to the older movement similar to how Charismatics are related to Pentecostals. I can live with that.

So, as the missional movement searches for ways of being Christian beyond Christendom, I say learn from those who've trod that road ahead of you, learn from their mistakes and from their wisdom.

Now, in the process of writing this I came across a summary of the Politics of Jesus, called the Politics of Jesus Simplified. Still pretty complex if you ask me but it does give you a bit of a window into the book.

Related Articles

Just War Theology as Constantinian Hangover
Just War: Just what most Christians practice?
The Politics of Resurrection
Abortion, Politics and Christianity
Missional Politics
Church and Politics Quiz
Religious War
Personal Morality vs Social Justice
Evangelism and Social Action
Is Jesus Socially Relevant?

As you can see, there are a few.

Climate of Change

"Climate of Change" is a video on climate change and its effects on the poor by TEAR Australia.

For more see http://www.climateofchange.tv

The World's Most Useful Gift Shop

You can help overcome poverty and marginalisation by creating your own Virtual Gift Shop. TEAR Australia, a Christian NGO which I most highly endorse, has now made it possible for you to set up your online version of their "most useful gifts catelogue". You can give your Virtual Gift Shop a name, add an image and a short description, and link from your Facebook, MySpace, or website. This is the true spirit of Christmas.

Christian Ethics

What makes Christian ethics Christian? There was a very extensive discussion here on Glocal Christianity in October on the ethics of war and abortion. Dispite the differences, all participants were practicing Christians. How do you account for that? Besides that, how do you account for the unChristian behaviour of non-Christians? Is it unethical ... or just reflective of different ethics? Is it reasonable to expect non-Christians to conform with Christian ethics? Interested in your thoughts.

Tollerance and Forgiveness

Tollerance is different from forgiveness, for tollerance says, there is nothing to forgive. Can tollerance truly lead to peace then in the face of injustice??

Seven Ways to Change the World - Jim Wallis in Sydney Next Week

Jim Wallis book launch

If you are in Sydney and would like to catch the launch of Jim Wallis’ new book, Seven Ways to Change the World, then Wesley Mission is the place to be next week. The address for Wesley Mission is 220 Pitt Street, Sydney on Monday, 28 July 2008. The book launch will be at 11:00am. There is no entrance fee.

Jim Wallis breakfast

Or if you would prefer to catch up with Jim Wallis over breakfast instead, you can do so at the Waterview Convention Centre, Bicentennial Park, Shirley Strickland Avenue, Sydney Olympic Park, where he will be joined by World Vision's CEO Tim Costell for a talk on "Reviving faith and politics: How people of faith can make a difference to the social and global challenges of our time" . The breakfast is 7am to 9am. The cost for the breakfast is $30. RSVP here.

For those unfamiliar with Jim Wallis, he is the President and Executive Director, Sojourners. Previous books include, "God's Politics: Why the Right Gets It Wrong and the Left Doesn't Get It".

So, what's your view on faith and politics?

• Should faith and politics be separated?
• Was Jesus political?
• If so, in what sense?
• Was Jesus left or right?

Can God Murder?

Yesterday I was on an Atheist blog where it was being suggested that because God murdered more people in the Bible than Satan he must be less loving. Now, I though about this and, you know, I don’t think any of the judgements of God can be defined as murder within a Christian reference frame. Capital punnishment, yes, but murder no. You see murder implies an illegality. But for Christians there is no law above God - God is the law – so it is quite illogical to speak of God acting illegally. It is akin to saying the law is illegal. Buried within the atheist question is an assumption of a higher authority than God. To buy into that question is to buy into that assumption.

Burn in Hell: Falmer condemned in Huxley trial

Ealier today it was reported that Robert Black Farmer has been found guilty of the brutal attack on northmead girl, Lauren Huxley, in which she was beaten, doused in petrol and left for dead in her garage, which Farmer then set alight.

Asked if he had a message for Farmer after the trial, Mr Huxley replied: "Go burn in hell, with petrol, where you belong you bastard.''

Now, over and above my sympathy for this local family and the revulsion I feel at what we humans can do to another, what struck me here was how, in the face of monstorous injustice, people suddenly discover the relevance of hell and divine judgement.

This sudden relevance becomes even more acute where justice in this life proves elusive, where perpetrators go free and escape even secular judgement. Just pause for a moment and recall how often that happens. Imagine a world where there was no consequence for injustice, where all you could say to the father was, "that was just a learning experience Farmer had to go through in his spiritual journey." Does that not pile horror on top of horror? This is not an abstract concept we are talking about. Don't just think, feel.

Hell says there is a court beyond these courts.

Now of course, many of you would challenge this, asking, what about the self perpetuating nature of vengence, the ultimate emptiness of revenge and our call to forgive? This is an importance question, yes. The Kingdom of God cannot come through retribution, I agree. That's why the apostles didn't stop there in their teaching. But the key to understanding is recognizing that forgiveness always comes with a cost, a cost to the forgiver. To forgive means, not to deny injustice was done, but to take the consequences of injustice onto oneself, to sit with it; and for the relationship, in that process, to be transformed.

This is the ultimate why behind the crucifixion. To save us from hell, to save humanity from the consequences of its own injustice, God went through hell himself. We live in the shadow of that.

So, while accepting this father's cry for justice, complete justice, I also pray that one day he can find the peace that comes, not through justice, but through reconciliation. But its a tough call, for I know that involves coming to grips with a very personal hell. What I am suggesting here though is that to deny hell is to deny his hell.

Social Justice Comments

Hmmm, just curious as to the sudden drop off in comments with the social justice and evangelism focus over the last week. I can see people are still reading. Does this mean I'm being too controversial or not controversial enough? Do I take it as agreement, indifference, bamboozlement or overload? 

Evangelical Social Irresponsibility

Last year Rod Benson wrote an article on the Philidelphia Statement entitled "Evangelical Social Irresponsibility" which I found both encouraging and disturbing.

He started positively:

One general strength of the Philadelphia Statement is especially noteworthy. In parallel with many evangelical statements, the present Statement makes strong claims for the integration of word and deed, evangelism and social justice, personal regeneration and social transformation. Taken together, these claims constitute a clarion call to forsake any vestige of the so‐called “Great Reversal” of twentieth‐century evangelicalism, and a passionate plea for holistic mission within a confident evangelical framework. The relevant sections of the Philadelphia Statement are as follows:

(a) “The Lordship of Christ provides the fundamental reason for Christian involvement in social, civic and political affairs. Consequently, both evangelism and social action are essential dimensions of the gospel of Jesus Christ”;

(b) “[The church ought to] bear witness in life, word and action to the power of the gospel to transform lives and societies”;

(c) “The notion of a purely privatized faith in which the gospel only affects individual, personal or family life but has no wider implications for society must be rejected as inadequate”; and

(d) “We must commit ourselves to the common life of faith and action which will lead to a transformation of the world in which we live.”

But then went on to observe:

Yet even this strength has its dark side. I don’t mean that the pursuit of this vision will inevitably (or probably) lead to a diminution of the classic evangelical call to salvation by grace alone, to faith alone, to Scripture alone ... What I mean is best framed as a broad question: Why do peak evangelical gatherings issue so many consensus statements challenging fellow travellers to pursue integral (or holistic) mission?

And one of the suggested answers?

First, there are so many calls for evangelicals to hold word and deed together because evangelical Christians are so very unfaithful to the biblical witness, and to generations of eminent and godly pastors and theologians who have sought to clarify and expound and apply the biblical teaching on this matter.

And this is what I find disturbing, disheartening and disquieting. That no matter what we say, history suggests that the Biblical witness will continue to be ignored by many of our brothers and sisters in Christ. This is where I have to remind myself, obedience to God's call should not be predicated by our chances of short term success.

The Great Awakening on the Right and Left

To balance out my last post on Charles Finney, I would like to draw attention to some comments by Jim Wallis of Sojourners:

As a longtime social activist, I am now convinced that we will not get to social justice without spiritual revival.

In other words, it flows both ways.