Do Christians need to be patriotic in order to be godly?

[BlindSeeker]

I know you getting annoyed at us for not commenting on every word you have laboriously typed here, but I am presently limited in my time and therefore will address the parts that I feel necessary. On a forum, I will often post for the sake of the readers (non-posters) so as to provide another perspective for prayerful consideration . . . I

[thechild]

christianity is not god.

acts 5

29Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men.

30The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree.

31Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins.

32And we are his witnesses of these things; and so is also the Holy Ghost, whom God hath given to them that obey him.

33When they heard that, they were cut to the heart, and took counsel to slay them.

34Then stood there up one in the council, a Pharisee, named Gamaliel, a doctor of the law, had in reputation among all the people, and commanded to put the apostles forth a little space;

35And said unto them, Ye men of Israel, take heed to yourselves what ye intend to do as touching these men.

36For before these days rose up Theudas, boasting himself to be somebody; to whom a number of men, about four hundred, joined themselves: who was slain; and all, as many as obeyed him, were scattered, and brought to nought.

37After this man rose up Judas of Galilee in the days of the taxing, and drew away much people after him: he also perished; and all, even as many as obeyed him, were dispersed.

38And now I say unto you, Refrain from these men, and let them alone: for if this counsel or this work be of men, it will come to nought:

39But if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it; lest haply ye be found even to fight against God.

[apothanein kerdos]

That may be your opinion, but it is not the criteria for posting on Worthy Boards.

It is for a civil debate though. It is a good criteria as well. Like I said, it is considered rude, at least where I come from, to ignore the complete message of what someone says and only hit on one or two sentences. It underminds the effort put forth by the person. I am merely saying that for civilities sake, I would appreciate it if you would respond to the main points of what I have been saying instead of taking one or two sentences out of context to try and formulate your point.

Actually, I am surprise with you question considering the lengthy volume of your post. I am for quality, be assured.

Then why did you ask if I had any scripture to validate my point when I had already supplied scripture?

[Smalcald]

Apo,

I will try to respond to some of your points as I remember them.

First, I am not holding the Amish up as a total model for all Christians. If I was then I myself would be a hypocrite for not living like them. However, they do reach our culture with some important points, they set an example of how we can live with less material things, and work with our own hands, they show that Christianity is not simply about the junk that is on TBN, that it is not just about sex scandals, divorce and fleecing people. If you think of the massive damage those kinds of things do, indeed we should be trying to be everything those scandals are not. Paul indeed says we are to live in peace as much as possible with those around us, that we are to work with our own hands, and to be blameless and harmless. The Amish have done some of that. As far as being the butt of jokes, of course they are, because they are counter-cultural they make people uncomfortable, they always have done that, I wish I were the butt of secular jokes, as they stand as a witness against the rank materialism that is the God of our culture. Christ said count this as a very good thing when we are mocked for His sake.

I disagree with worrying about what academics think about the Christian faith. Yes I would like to see more CS Lewis style college academics that can give the academic world a run for their money. But it may be that God has offered them the Gospel and they have chosen to reject it, these people know the Word of God and still work to mock it, we should not seek their approval. Christians ARE on campuses however, Campus Crusade for Christ does great work on college campuses to name only one group.

Now as far as engaging culture. I don't disagree with you we all should be involved but I think we should be working to CHANGE culture not just engage it. I disagree with you I think about how to do that and also your judging people who do that in unique ways. I frankly found it terribly disturbing that you judge the faith of anyone else who you do not know, who also claim faith in Christ, that is not a Christian attitude at all. Everything that we do is a witness, our entire life, not just in politics or academics, or handing out tracts, or preaching, our entire life and lifestyle is a witness and part of evangelization.

Look at the staying power of a group if you want to see who is influencing culture and who is not. Who will be here as a group 500 or 1000 years from now? The order of St. Benedict has been worshipping as a group and in the same way for a 1000 years, they have indeed influenced hundreds of different cultures, through their work of Christian scholarship, through their continual life of prayer. You seem to have a very narrow and self defined definition of what it means to influence culture. If you want to go debate on college campuses I think that would be great and greatly needed, if you want to be in politics to give a Christian view, great again, but we are all called differently. I am not called to do those things; I am called to live for Christ in a different way. Sure I vote, I take part in our civil life and I think Christians should.

But consider what is the biggest problem for self-professing Christians in the US today? Is it that we are too separate too different from modern culture, or is it that we are far far too much like the trash culture that we live in. I for one think the second problem is the bigger problem. We are certainly NOT disengaged from culture in the US. Our president is a born again Christian, a good portion of the Senate and House are self professing Christians, we are dominant in politics. So how has that influenced culture? Are things more Christian or less Christian than forty or fifty years ago?

We have been subsumed by this culture, we have lost our flavor, and we are no longer salt and not much good for anything. That is the biggest problem we face, being too separate from culture, that is the LEAST of our worries.

[BlindSeeker]

That may be your opinion, but it is not the criteria for posting on Worthy Boards.

It is for a civil debate though. It is a good criteria as well. Like I said, it is considered rude, at least where I come from, to ignore the complete message of what someone says and only hit on one or two sentences. It underminds the effort put forth by the person. I am merely saying that for civilities sake, I would appreciate it if you would respond to the main points of what I have been saying instead of taking one or two sentences out of context to try and formulate your point.

Perhaps it is merely the leaven that needs defining . . .

"out of context?" . . . next time I'll try and remember to post your whole post and just bold type the part in reference (even though there is that little arrow tab next to your name that links directly back to the original post . . . )

Actually, I am surprise with you question considering the lengthy volume of your post. I am for quality, be assured.

Then why did you ask if I had any scripture to validate my point when I had already supplied scripture?

Because you had no scripture directly attached to your broad statements.

Edited June 4, 2006 by BlindSeeker

[apothanein kerdos]

First, I am not holding the Amish up as a total model for all Christians. If I was then I myself would be a hypocrite for not living like them. However, they do reach our culture with some important points, they set an example of how we can live with less material things, and work with our own hands, they show that Christianity is not simply about the junk that is on TBN, that it is not just about sex scandals, divorce and fleecing people. If you think of the massive damage those kinds of things do, indeed we should be trying to be everything those scandals are not. Paul indeed says we are to live in peace as much as possible with those around us, that we are to work with our own hands, and to be blameless and harmless. The Amish have done some of that. As far as being the butt of jokes, of course they are, because they are counter-cultural they make people uncomfortable, they always have done that, I wish I were the butt of secular jokes, as they stand as a witness against the rank materialism that is the God of our culture. Christ said count this as a very good thing when we are mocked for His sake.

I think you would agree with me that the best way to counter a false belief is not with another false belief. For instance, assume you and I attend a church where they begin to teach all material items, unless spiritual (like a Bible, a hymnal, etc), are inherently evil and should not be used by Christians. This would be close to the Gnostic movement, or my famous over used line, misplaced metaphysical dualism . Well you and I encounter this, realize that it is wrong, that God can use any material item, and therefore to counter it we become materialist/hedonist. We begin getting items simply for the sake of having items. Now, the belief we encountered was absolutely false, but the way we counter it is likewise false.

It is the same with the Amish. Yes, they do not succumb to materialism, but they do succumb to dualism. They do not lead simple lives for the sake of living simple lives, they do these things because they believe these other things are inherently evil. In other words, because the electricity you use comes from "the world," according to Amish beliefs you are sinning. Since the car you drive was built by the lost, you are becomming "unequally yoked" and therefore are sinning. Yes, we should avoid materialism, however, I do not think the Amish are a good example in anything they do because in ridding themselves of a materialistic culture, they have only accomplished going to the other extreme and avoiding culture.

I disagree with worrying about what academics think about the Christian faith. Yes I would like to see more CS Lewis style college academics that can give the academic world a run for their money. But it may be that God has offered them the Gospel and they have chosen to reject it, these people know the Word of God and still work to mock it, we should not seek their approval. Christians ARE on campuses however, Campus Crusade for Christ does great work on college campuses to name only one group.

I think you are quickly forgetting that we do not become intellectual and academic in order to impress or seek the approval of those in acadameia, we do so in order to reach them at their level. These people bring up valid reasons why not to accept Christ and unless we are intellectually prepared, we will never be able to plant a seed. A seed is not merely a spiritual thing where you tell someone about Jesus. A seed is something planted within both the heart and mind, that fosters in both conviction and forcing thoughts to occur which break down intellectual barriers. However, if Christians are seperated from the world and are unwilling to learn the processes of this world, then how do we reach out to these people? The simple answer is we cannot.

As a side note, all Christians should hold some form of education (whether self-taught of proper bible education) beacuse we are called to love God with our minds as well.

Now as far as engaging culture. I don't disagree with you we all should be involved but I think we should be working to CHANGE culture not just engage it. I disagree with you I think about how to do that and also your judging people who do that in unique ways. I frankly found it terribly disturbing that you judge the faith of anyone else who you do not know, who also claim faith in Christ, that is not a Christian attitude at all. Everything that we do is a witness, our entire life, not just in politics or academics, or handing out tracts, or preaching, our entire life and lifestyle is a witness and part of evangelization.

Maybe I was unclear or you missed the point...I'm guessing a bit of both. When I say engage the culture, that means work to change the culture. Likewise, our culture in America and even the world is not singular. When I say "engage culture," that is extremely broad in its context. Some are called to do so through song, others at the workplace, others by helping the poor, others by being teachers, others by being CEO's that reach out to the rich (I pray that God makes this my calling )...I am not saying people have to reach out in a certain way or a certain vocation, I am merely stating that we have to reach the culture in someway. In the end, your last sentence is agreeing with what I have been saying. THe problem is, when we remove ourselves from culture we no longer are able to engage it. See what I am talking about?

Likewise, I find that my assesment of the Amish is accurate according to scripture. Again, notice what both Jesus and James state. Jesus says that anyone who does not reach out, that is, act in faith, does nto have faith, i.e. does nto belong to Him. James echos this by saying religion that is not acted upon is dead, i.e. not really there meaning the person is not a Christian. The Amish have secluded themselves, do not reach out to culture, do not attempt to influence culture, etc. According to the Biblical standards, they are not Christians because their lifestyle is dedicated to seperation.

Look at the staying power of a group if you want to see who is influencing culture and who is not. Who will be here as a group 500 or 1000 years from now? The order of St. Benedict has been worshipping as a group and in the same way for a 1000 years, they have indeed influenced hundreds of different cultures, through their work of Christian scholarship, through their continual life of prayer. You seem to have a very narrow and self defined definition of what it means to influence culture. If you want to go debate on college campuses I think that would be great and greatly needed, if you want to be in politics to give a Christian view, great again, but we are all called differently. I am not called to do those things; I am called to live for Christ in a different way. Sure I vote, I take part in our civil life and I think Christians should.

Again, I am not saying we all have to engage culture in the same way. I am merely saying that we have to engage culture in some manner or form. Monks that hide themeslves into monistaries do not accomplish this and by doing so violate biblical principles.

But consider what is the biggest problem for self-professing Christians in the US today? Is it that we are too separate too different from modern culture, or is it that we are far far too much like the trash culture that we live in. I for one think the second problem is the bigger problem. We are certainly NOT disengaged from culture in the US. Our president is a born again Christian, a good portion of the Senate and House are self professing Christians, we are dominant in politics. So how has that influenced culture? Are things more Christian or less Christian than forty or fifty years ago?

We have been subsumed by this culture, we have lost our flavor, and we are no longer salt and not much good for anything. That is the biggest problem we face, being too separate from culture, that is the LEAST of our worries.

This reflects the problems that have plagued Christianity from the beginning. We evaluate problems, see one as bigger than the other, and subsequently fall into one extreme over the other. For instance, the early church, in response to Gnosticism, began to grow extremely materialistic. It saw Gnosticism as the bigger threat and therefore left open the door for materialism. A few hundred years, this reversed (for the most part). It has been going back and forth, for both Protestants and Catholics, for two thousand years. We cannot go, "Because materialism is a problem, we should not worry about seperation." In fact, because of the corrupt nature of our society and how many Christians have given in, our biggest worry should be seperation from such a culture. The problem is, you are not seperating a few key points when looking at the modern problem.

For one, the modern problem began with seperation. Politics became more corrupt early on because many Christians began to follow a view that faith was autonomous and therefore had no place in the public spectrum. Though not all applied this, and some even promoted false doctrines and sects of Christianity in politics, for the most part this was allowed because Christians refused to engage in the political spectrum. Secondly, our culture has been falling and becomming more corrupt BECAUSE of seperation. Thus, even if the bigger problem is that Christians are becomming corrupt along with the culture, this is not an inditement against being involved in culture; instead, it speaks volumes to the dangerous consequences of seperation from the culture. Notice what Paul says in 1 Corinthians 5:9-10:

I wrote you in my letter not to associate with immoral people; I did not at all mean with the immoral people of this world, or with the covetous and swindlers, or with the idolaters; for then you would have to go out of the world.

This is highly significant. Paul is stating that not only is it okay to associate with the sinful people of this world, it is, as a Christian, impossible not to. We are called to be seperate and different, but this does not include isolation or seperation. What is meant by this is that we are to engage our culture so long as where we are engaging does not compromise our witness for Jesus Christ. Think of it this way:

If I am at work, doing an ethical job, I am associating with non-belivers. I am also attempting to effect culture by being ethical in all that I do and occassionaly talking with co-workers about Christ. None of this violates scripture or is even worrysome. My boss comes to me and notices I have been successful at all that I have done and then puts me in charge of leading the company's celebration for gay pride month. At this point, as a Christian, I must decline the request, even if it costs me my job. I am still among them (unless they kick me out), but I am still seperate. In other words, the seperation is not a physical one but an ethical one. Yes, we have a problem with this in the modern culture, but the response is not to simply turn about and march away from the world. The response is to teach proper ethics within our churches so that Christians do not give in.

In the end, being seperate from our culture is the biggest worry the church faces right now. We are quickly moving away from hedonism and materialism and going back to isolation. The sad part is, we are starting to refelct both in different demoninations and sects. Seperation will always be a big issue for the Church, and it is never the least of our worries. So long as Christians are more concerned about themselves and how clean they feel more than witnessing to those in desperate need of Christ, it will always be a concern.

Perhaps it is merely the leaven that needs defining . . .

"out of context?" . . . next time I'll try and remember to post your whole post and just bold type the part in reference (even though there is that little arrow tab next to your name that links directly back to the original post . . . )

When I refer to "out of context" I am talking about how it seems you have not read the entire post. Case in point:

Because you had no scripture directly attached to your broad statements.

This is after I supplied you with my post where I not only gave scripture to back up my points, but did an entire analysis over a certai portion of James. This was all before I was accused of not using scripture at all. This is what I am refering to when I say "out of context." You say that I did not use scripture in my statements, yet this is inherently proven wrong when we look at my posts. I used scripture and then based conclusions off of this. In fact, in my post where I rehashed some of my previous statements I underlined the scripture for you and then put in red my interpretation of that scripture and application as well. How this qualifies as "no scripture" is beyond me. This is why you must put things in context, to prove you have read the entire post. As it stands, to me, it seems as if though you have not or at the best you skimmed through it. I think it is honorale and proper that you want to offer an alternative point of view to what I am saying, but if you are going to do so, then you must spend the time and effort to read the entire post before making statements that are proven false simply by looking at a previous post.

[Anika]

While we are on this subject of culture and engaging those around us vs. being seperate. Let me ask about this situation.

My husband's business partner is a Budhist who rejected the Christian religion in which he grew up. The company's financial backer is a homosexual druid who believes he has been renicarted many times over 1500 years. They know my husband and I are Christians. How do we best interact with these wonderful but lost gentlemen?

[apothanein kerdos]

While we are on this subject of culture and engaging those around us vs. being seperate. Let me ask about this situation.

My husband's business partner is a Budhist who rejected the Christian religion in which he grew up. The company's financial backer is a homosexual druid who believes he has been renicarted many times over 1500 years. They know my husband and I are Christians. How do we best interact with these wonderful but lost gentlemen?

In a very Christian way. Obviously, your husband needs to be ethical in all that he does and considerate. He needs to make sure that his business deals are sound, benefit everyone involved, and he gives proper credit when that credit is due. I'm not saying he doesn't do that already, just an affirmation of what is probably already being done.

As for specifics, invite them to dinner, show them love, but also don't support their lifestyle and/or beliefs. Say, for instance, they invite you to a ritual in paganism (for the druid), or to meditate with the buddhist...deny such things. I would say do something so long as it does not dishonor the glory of God...if the action will require to partake in something that the Bible specifically forbids, then I would stay far from it.

[Anika]

Kudos, kerdos Sorry, I couldn't help myself.

That pretty well sums up how we have handled things. I brought this up for two reasons. The obvious reason is it's nice to get confirmation now and then. The other reason is because of this topic. There is alot of debating going on with assumptions and theories, but why don't we take this argument to where we live? We all have to ineract with non-believers, even those who wish for Christians to be more seperate. We can look at our recent history and point out how society as a whole has gone down hill from where we used to be, but what about doing what we can as individuals to show the peace and love of our Lord Jesus to those who don't know him?

[apothanein kerdos]

Kudos, kerdos Sorry, I couldn't help myself.

That pretty well sums up how we have handled things. I brought this up for two reasons. The obvious reason is it's nice to get confirmation now and then. The other reason is because of this topic. There is alot of debating going on with assumptions and theories, but why don't we take this argument to where we live? We all have to ineract with non-believers, even those who wish for Christians to be more seperate. We can look at our recent history and point out how society as a whole has gone down hill from where we used to be, but what about doing what we can as individuals to show the peace and love of our Lord Jesus to those who don't know him?

I think, individually, that is where our gifts come in handy. For instance, I love to study philosophy, history, and then teach what I have learned at all levels. I also like to help people out who cannot be helped. This translates into me teaching in any capacity that i can (hopefully becomming a professor in a few years) but also serving at a homeless shelter when time allows. One of my other friends, however, HATES to teach but loves to write songs and sing. So he puts together music for people and sings it and reaches culture in that way. Others are called to corporations where they simply punch in numbers, yet they are still called in some way to effect culture.

I would highly encourage reading Os Guinness' book, "THe Call: Finding and Fulfilling the Central Purpose in Your Life." It is an excellent book that explains how we are called to vocations and then how we represent Christ within those vocations.