Unsettled ChristianityOne blog to rule them all, One blog to find them, One blog to bring them all and in the darkness bind them.
“Where you see areas in which you can take the current political event and turn the discussion to one of ultimate Truth and the Gospel, do so! Rather than view politics as an icky, yucky thing to be avoided, consider that perhaps Christ has given his followers in America in 2012 this political environment so that we can have a better, greater opportunity to proclaim the Gospel.”
Um what? Another Dominionist, Calvinist blogger [see here] confusing proclaiming the Good News with politics. Where do the Gospels say to allow the political atmosphere to determine how we are to present the Gospel? That sounds like conservative cultural Christianity to me, and it is, it’s Dominionism.
And of course, I offer a quick rebuttal:
I feel the winds of change a-brewing. People are choosing good scholarship and truth over racism and propaganda. Glory in the highest!:
Dang Islamists… won’t let us be Christianists.
David Barton, the supreme authority on all that is The Founding Fathers and their “Christian religion” is willing to go around Right Wing Circles to spread his message, but at a neutral site?
Do I smell fried chicken in the kitchen?
Of course, when you white wash history, someone’s bound to call you out!
First, I am a United Methodist Christian with a firm believe that the Gospel is not just doctrine, theology, and being ‘saved’ but that it involves works as well. So, I am attracted to the message of Jim Winkler and others who are firm on the social aspects of the Gospel. But, Dr. Bevere has caused me to pause and consider the laws needed for such an enforcement. Maybe Winkler and others are indeed theocrats, much like Robertson, Wagner and others who wish to see whatever view of Christianity imposed upon others. After all, like the Dominionist Right, the Left wants to use the power of the Government to enforce biblical passages out of context and are, thus, themselves, fundamentalists in a sense that they aren’t looking for the historical method of interpretation but only what the text says to them at this moment. As the Reformed Pastor points out, this causes some concern when reading Isaiah.
By the way, get Dr. Bevere’s book.
I am not against social activism, or asking our government to be moral… but to seek to impose our values upon others while decrying the same thing except that it is being done by people who are at a different political spectrum is somehow wrong. I would agree more with Winkler than I would with others on the Right, but I think that Winkler is wanting a theocracy too… albeit, one better than Wagner and his side.
Peter and I are having a conversation lately that I think quite frankly think needs to be had. Who here has heard of Christian contemporary music? Anyone? Anyone? Why does CCM exist? So that evangelicals can have a “counter-culture” to respond to the un-godly music industry, right? Or who hear has heard the arguments against public education? That only home-schooled and Christian-private schooled children are worth having, while the public schools are hopeless and in need of Corporation Driven Education reform, at least here in the USA.
Now, 2 comments from Peter’s posts are very telling about what offends Peter about my approach to Christian politics. Just the idea that Christians are free to “withdraw” is a non-starter for Peter’s political theology.
First this comment from Peter,
“Rod clarifies his objection to this teaching of Wallnau by denying that Satan has “the power of election, to choose who is in control of the world”. But he accepts that Satan has “the ability to lie”, and this is the only power that the evil one needs to put his chosen people on the mountain tops – if his followers are in the majority, or even if they are a minority but the others keep out of politics or retreat into monasteries.”
Notice how Peter brings up monasteries, when I didn’t even do so in my post. Oh why oh why? Well, I will tell you why! It’s because Christians obtaining political and cultural leadership positions are more important to Peter and dominionists, whether they be liberal or conservative, than discernment (as if that’s a guarantee anyhow of a righteous society in the first place!).
Second comment from Peter,
“But we can’t do this by hiding in holes in fear. Instead, like Jonathan and his armour bearer in 1 Samuel 14:1-23, we need to boldly climb the mountain, confront the enemy, and take back the world for God.”
Interesting, how “WE” whoever we is, can go out on our own, with our plans, our methods and strategies, and “take back the world for God.” It’s funny, that King David/Jonathan stories are also Michele Bachmann’s favorite analogies as well (she may or may not be a Dominionist, you know, if Dominionists exist or not). Besides asking exactly who the “WE” in the “WE NEED TO [...] take back the world for God” part of Peter’s statement, who is to say that God needs us to do so in the first place. Again, this is how Christian violence and war-mongering starts: the idea that God needs someone to do HIS dirty work for HIM, as if God was some weakling. But God demonstrated God’s power in the Cross and Resurrection, and it is in that power that the Triune God has defeated evil, not the Church militant. The Church Militant can only claim to be so when it is first and foremost faithful to the warrior God YHWH. The idea from Paul’s Gospel to the Romans, that God will repay the evil doers complements Jesus’ command to love our enemies.
Pushing the idea that Christians must always be first is a privileged idea. It takes God out of the picture, and our dependence on God something as an afterthought in our politics. I want to see more Christian politicians, but let me go on record by saying, they must prioritize the Good News found throughout the Christan Canon first and foremost over nationality, over economic system, over any crack brained ideology. In short, Jesus’ Win must be primary and everything all at once in Christian (over and against our Churchly Ambitions in the name of dominionism), from Jesus -re-introducing humanity to our true selves being made in the image of God and capable of change to Christ’s thrashing of satan, who still has a hold on people, but it is not absolute or necessary (as Dominionism suggests the reverse).
Peter does agree, in principle with my statement, “I am all about participation, but discernment should always come first.” I am just concerned about the kind of discernment involved.” Okay, “so Lance Wallnau – [...], of which each person is encouraged to climb one, and politics and government is only one of the seven,” and I think I get that. What I am saying, whatever the mountain is, culture, politics, whatever, Christians are free to stop and think, to take the time to discern how to partake in that “mountain-climbing” so to speak. I am waiting for Peter to say something positive about monasteries, or people who want to discern. I think the fear of the world falling into chaos is one that is unfounded, and and unnecessary. Some Christians will accept (as today’s politics and culture show) anything thing labelled Christian, and then years later, it may turn out that music artist for example, Creed here in the United States, who said their were not a Christian band in the 90s, only to say they were Christian, only to have some members admit they used Christianity as a front. Of course, the lyrics of many of their songs were quite ambiguous, and you could replace God with a girlfriend anytime, and of course, many Christians loved Creed back in the day, both liberals and conservative. I did like them for a while too, until I started to engage the world through discernment first, and I saw right through their front.
Christians who are seeking “withdrawal” from the world are not doing so to stay withdrawn, but to commune with God in holiness, to seek discernment, and to allow God to lead the way into battle, as God does in the Hebrew Bible. That is the message of Christus Victor, from the Old Testament to the New Testament. God fighting our battles for us, us the community of God trusting this dangerous and forgiving deity, so that God gets all the glory. My confidence is not in the Church’s ability to make society right, but in YHWH’s mighty ability to justify through God’s Son.
With a ht to Robert. From here:
We’ve lost sight of our great heritage as a nation founded on Biblical truth, and the consequences are dire: schools are failing, the divorce rate is climbing, and our society is rife with scandal and corruption. It’s time to reclaim our Biblical heritage and bring God back to the center of American life. Where do we start?
ONE NATION UNDER GOD PREMIERE EVENT ON NOVEMBER 12
On Saturday, November 12, United in Purpose presents One Nation Under God – a national, two-hour premiere event featuring top American thinkers and political leaders who will bring the truth about God and America to people gathered in homes and churches across the nation.
Now, before you start with me, Peter, look at the motivation: “Biblical heritage” of the United States. There is a difference between what they want and what the founders wanted.
Barton is a joke as a historian, and has a stated goal which is counter to that of the Gospel. I could go one, but why?
I have to wonder about the moral voice of authority. Now, my atheist friends may disagree with me, but a society, especially one such as ours, needs a moral voice of authority. When the decline of the Church in the United States, and the upswing of Dominionists, the moral voice of authority has shifted. Now, we nation of individualists seem to believe that corporations, that which denies individuality, individual good, individual innovation, have a moral voice, an authority which needs to be protected.
I am for the Church being the loyal opposition, calling sin sin and standing for the values of Christianity – without getting knee-deep in the political regime. I think that by allowing ourselves to be embroiled in the election cycle, usually on one or two issues, we have lost our moral authority. We are succumbed to the worldly regime and cannot now not be so easily separated. The Church, rightly or wrongly, is not seen as part of the corporate sphere of influence.
How do we separate ourselves from the world regime without going into exile? I believe that the Church needs to speak up against the worldly regime and call out the powers, and not be one.
Not sure if this is a way or not…
Okay, so you know how when cameras get turned on, people tend to clam up if they have been saying stupid stuff? Well, Wagner and the other Dominionists would have us believe that they have no real stake in this election, and wouldn’t dare seek to take over the Government. That, of course, has never been their plan. I mean, we’ve just misunderstood them, that’s all or maybe we are in a conspiracy against them! Except…. the internet has a long memory.
From a letter he wrote in 2007:
Lance’s trademark teaching relates to what he calls the seven “mind molders” or the “seven mountains.” These have now become a permanent fixture in my personal teaching on taking dominion, and I have referenced Wallnau in The Church in the Workplace as well as in my forthcoming book Dominion! In my view it is not possible to get an operational handle on how to initiate corporate action toward social transformation without taking into account the seven mountains or what I like to call “molders of culture.” The seven are religion, family, business, arts & entertainment, government, education, and media.
Our theological bedrock is what has been known as Dominion Theology. This means that our divine mandate is to do whatever is necessary, by the power of the Holy Spirit, to retake the dominion of God’s creation which Adam forfeited to Satan in the Garden of Eden. It is nothing less than seeing God’s kingdom coming and His will being done here on earth as it is in heaven. This includes the need to govern apolitically, as well as to embrace spiritual warfare techniques that neutralize the control of our adversary within the functional and territorial spheres of authority to which we have been assigned. To do this, we know that we must be in communion, we must receive revelation, and we must apostolically and prophetically proclaim that revelation.
Compare that to recent statements:
“In terms of taking dominion, we don’t — we wouldn’t want to – we use the word dominion, but we wouldn’t want to say that we have dominion as if we’re the owners or we’re the rulers of, let’s say, the arts and entertainment mountain. What we strive to do and our goal is to have people in the arts and entertainment mountain who are committed to the kingdom of God so therefore, we use the adjective there — kingdom-minded believers — and our goal is to try to have as many kingdom-minded believers in positions of influence in the arts and entertainment mountain as possible. And the reason for that is, to help bring the blessings of heaven to all those in the arts and entertainment mountain.”
“We believe in working with any – with whatever political system there is. In America, it’s democracy and working with the administrative, judicial and legislative branches of the government, the way they are but to have as many kingdom-minded people in influence in each one of these branches of government as possible so that the blessings of the kingdom will come.”
Now, it seems to me – and correct me if I am wrong – but there is a huge difference between ‘influence’ and “do whatever is necessary.” Seems to me that Wagner is either lying or that he is disorderly retreating…
- Peter Wagner isn’t a “Dominionist” either (gentlewisdom.org.uk)
- Christian Right Fuses with Apostolic Dominionism ” Discerning the World (yumaprogressive.wordpress.com)
- A Christian Plot for Domination? (jhaines6.wordpress.com)
- Dominion Theology, Christian Reconstructionism, and the New Apostolic Reformation (chasdarwin.wordpress.com)
Both Eric Cantor and Michele Bachmann have extreme religious beliefs. In Cantor’s Zionism God expressly desires a piece of land in Middle East be ruled and occupied by Jews. Bachmann’s Dominionism asserts that Christians should play a special role in the American Republic. However, the major news outlets have treated their religous beliefs very differently. While it is open season on Bachmann, Cantor’s Zionism is off limits. In a bizarre marriage of extremism, Zionism and Dominionism are joined at the hip; one never speaking a word against the other. But which one is truly dangerous for America?
Zionism and Dominionism – Yes, too very political and very theological viewpoints, neither of which I believe are ‘biblical.’
When people are elected to Federal Office in the United States, they swear to uphold the Constitution, but many today are taking pledges and running on platforms which promise to protect Israel over and above the United States. Why? Bad theology.