Pseudo-Christian Religion is NOT Biblical Christianity
The rhetoric coming out of the Evangelical political right is increasingly including attempts to find obscure passages from the Bible, specifically from the Old Testament references to ancient, theocratic Israel, to justify threats of political violence in the event of a Democratic party victory, especially in the Presidential election, and to push the agenda toward full-on Dominion theology, should Trump be elected and a Republican majority be seated in Congress. The head of the Heritage Foundation, the group responsible for writing the draconian Project 2025, threatened violence if there was resistance to their efforts to start a "second American revolution."
Those within American Evangelicalism who consistently repeat these kinds of threats, and continue to push dominion theology and Christian nationalism, by violence if they deem it necessary, are not Christian. I use the term "pseudo-Christian," because they belong to groups that appear and act like Christian churches, but which preach a very different gospel than the one recorded as being preached and taught by Jesus. They will point to obscure passages of scripture which they take completely out of their historical and cultural context and mis-apply to current circumstances as justification and proof for what they want to do.
In the case of the Wisconsin pastor cited in the linked article above, dragging out a 16th century Protestant doctrine, the Doctrine of the Lesser Magistrate, an "out," primarily to get past biblical prohibitions against resisting the authority of the civil government in order to "protect true religious practice." What that meant was that "lesser magistrates," for example, Frederick III, Elector of Saxony, could protect someone like Martin Luther, from the Emperor, Charles V, who would have enforced the Catholic Church's verdict against Luther's protest.
It's not a biblically justifiable doctrine. In fact, it defies the principles laid out by the Apostle Paul in Romans 13:1-7 and the Apostle Peter in I Peter 2:13-17. Those passages were put into practice by the church during the great persecution it experienced at the hands of the Roman emperors from the mid-first century until the reign of Constantine in the early 300's. It also goes completely against every value and virtue taught by Jesus in the Christian gospel. It's a justification for the use of political power to advance the mission and purpose of the Christian church, and from my perspective, an admission of their inability to recognize, or even acknowledge the presence of any spiritual power within the church.
Jesus condemned the use of violence. He gives the blessing of being a peacemaker the high honor of being called "Sons of God," and gives further blessing to those who are persecuted for their righteousness. He did not resist his own arrest and rebuked Peter for using a sword to attempt to defend him. He notes that his kingdom transcends the temporal world, and is spiritual in nature.
There is No Tyranny in the United States Against any Branch of the Christian Church
Claims by right wing Evangelical leaders that the church is subject to tyranny, specifically because of Democratic Presidential administrations, which started during the days of Jerry Falwell and his Moral Majority, and Pat Robertson and his Christian Coalition, are among some of the more ridiculous claims made by these pseudo-Christians. The fact of the matter is that virtually every branch of the Christian church in the United States, regardless of denomination or theological perspective, is privileged way beyond what should be expected in a country where the first amendment guarantees religious liberty and where there is no formal relationship between the church and state.
State controlled churches, or church-controlled states, throughout the history of the Christian church and Western Civilization, were the most egregious examples of religious tyranny humanity has ever perpetuated on itself. The overwhelming influence of Protestantism in the United States, following the Second Great Awakening, led to Protestant churches being the recipients of all kinds of government favors, cutting around the wall of separation defined by Thomas Jefferson as a constitutional principle.
There has never been even an inkling of any kind of tyranny at all, forcing or bending the will of the church to that of the state. The removal of things like mandated public prayer and Bible reading from public schools is not tyranny, nor persecution. That's simply an example of how the pervasive influence of Protestantism managed to get past the wall of separation.
Nor is the extension of personal freedom, guaranteed by the constitution, to people who are not Christians, who practice no religion, who live their life doing things that Christians consider "sinful" any kind of tyranny. The Bible does teach that human beings are created in the image of God, and are given a free will enabling them to make choices, including the choice of whether to worship God, believe in his existence, or not. The presence of people who have made a personal choice to worship God and follow the Christian faith has nothing to do with what happens to the country in which they live. In Christian theology and practice, there is no covenant offered to any country or nation by God.
And while there is religious persecution of people in many places in this world, Christians being among those who are persecuted for their religious beliefs, Christians in this country are still privileged, not persecuted. Railing from the pulpit about the evil in the world, about things Christians consider sinful, like sexual relations outside marriage, or abortion, is not an indication that there is any persecution or tyranny directed at the churches. Far from it, white Christians, and the churches in which they worship and denominations into which they gather, are still among the most privileged American citizens.
Attempts to Use Political Power to Achieve a Mission and Purpose Are An Admission of Failure to be Spiritually Connected
Removing prayer and Bible reading from public schools is not tyrannical. Public schools are institutions belonging to the state, and the constitution makes separation of church and state quite clear, even though Christian influence, for over 150 years, pushed past that to have their way imposed on the schools.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion," says the Constitution, "or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."
If someone reading this can point to an example where the free exercise of religion has been prohibited in this country, I'd appreciate hearing about it, because I do not believe there is an instance where the circumstances would permit such an action being defined as tyranny. On the other hand, I can point to multiple examples where there has been respecting the establishment of religion done by government, because of the influence of church leadership within the government.
And yet, we have people on the far right determined to enforce their will by turning the country on its ear and handing it over to its enemies by starting a civil war, claiming religious persecution that does not exist, justifying violence with a religion that isn't Christian, but is more a form of idolatry. How do we deal with this, before it happens, without violating our Constitution?
I learned, from required semester hours in biblical studies at the small, Southern Baptist college I attended and graduated from, that the Bible can be twisted, taken out of context, and used to justify just about any evil someone wants to do. The contrast between much of what I had been taught in the small Southern Baptist church I grew up in, by laypeople who were uneducated in both academics and the Bible, and which involved mostly verse memorization to prove presuppositions and a heavy dose of religious mysticism and superstition, and the systematic theology based on the historical, cultural and linguistic context in which the Bible was written, was so sharp, that it was difficult to tell they came from the same denominational origins. It became impossible to discuss the Bible, and Christian faith, with my former Sunday school teachers, and pastor, because they considered everything I was learning at college as a "liberal distortion" of true Christianity.
It is difficult to use reason, facts and evidence to counter pseudo-Christian religious superstition. That's where we are here, now. It's dangerous when someone thinks they are fighting on God's behalf and he's holding their coat-tails and cheering them on. They think their mission is justified, and they are "taking the country back," though it never was where they want to go.
"For certain intruders have stolen in among you," warned the Apostle Jude, likely the younger half-brother of Jesus, "people who long ago were designated for this condemnation as ungodly, who pervert the grace of out God into licentiousness and deny our only master and Lord, Jesus Christ."
He was certainly prophetic.
I certainly agree with everything you've written here. You ask the question: "How do we deal with this, before it happens, without violating our Constitution?" Do you have any suggestions? Especially when one party to this is NOT Christian... but with an extensive Christian (Evangelical - Church of God) background. I'm old now. I never thought what I went through in my late teens and early 20's would be having to be re-fought when I'm 70. But here we are. And I AM open to suggestions, because I'm very worried.
ReplyDeleteThis has to be called out, for one thing. How do we enforce church-state separation, which is in the constitution, without violating the religious freedom of the extremists and the frauds and phonies who have used this constitutional protection as cover for insurrection, rebellion and treason? We, in the church, have to hold our leaders accountable.
Delete