Wow! That is all I can safely say to the response to my latest blog posting. I have never received so many responses, assertions, and questions to any of my blogs. I hope to craft my responses to your concerns and questions as carefully as possible. One thing I will say is that I never pretend or assume that I have all the answers. That would be pious and ludicrous on my part.
As I stated when I started my blog through the Facebook group, “I’m on a journey, come with me.” And I do appreciate everyone who reads my blog and comments. The blog is about growing through the ebbs and flows of life, not necessarily asserting my own opinion (but I rest assured that my opinion will always be present, you can never fully separate objectivity from partiality – at least that’s my opinion). Therefore, I hope to share some more of my thoughts regarding the “Not by a Cause” blog, my rational for writing it, and respond to the concerns of my audience.
I wrote “Not by a Cause” because I wanted to be able to remember such a historical night. I meant what I wrote when I looked into the sea of people and saw Martin Luther King, Jr.’s “I Have a Dream” coming to life before my very eyes, with black people and white people and Indian people and Asian people joined together in unison. Though I do not agree with President Obama’s politics, I will not apologize for seeing such a beautiful occurrence in America and remembering it in my own words. To quote Sam Cooke, “Its been a long time coming,” and I am quietly ecstatic that “a change has come.”
One of the comments to my post stated that I need to be more careful parsing the scriptures together that I used. I understand the concern for using scriptures out of context, and I am especially confident given the historical background of the texts used (and as I explicated towards the end of my post) that when Paul and Peter wrote those scriptures, they were speaking of a repressive Roman occupation to their country that was calling for every citizen to acknowledge Caesar as God. When you read such phrases in Phillipians as, “Jesus is Lord” and “Jesus, King of Kings and Lord of Lords”, Paul took those phrases from the modern day vernacular of Rome and Phillipi. Let me explain: The original phrases were “Caesar is Lord” and “Caesar, King of Kings and Lord of Lords.” Paul did not instruct the citizens of Phillipi to revolt. He did not instruct them to raise up an army or militia to take on Rome. Paul basically tells the Body of Christ in Phillipi, “Hang in there, baby. I know it’s gonna get rough.”
Caesar at this time is Nero. Nero is burning Christians at the stake. He eventually beheads the Apostle Peter. And with Peter’s death very immanent, Peter does not tell Christians to revolt. He tells them to honor the king. Peter literally says, “Honor Nero.” And that is tough for us to reconcile in our Western mindset. We don’t like to be told what to do, and we are not accustomed to being oppressed.
Governments, in general, set up laws that usually (except for extremely oppressive countries that we find in continents like Africa and Asia) benefit and protect their people to some greater degree. For example, China oppresses Christians, but China still has laws that protect its citizens. It is still illegal to murder without a cause. No, China is not the most moral nation, but the government has been instituted to protect its citizens.
In conclusion to this response, I was warned to not take the passage so literal.
I take the passage literal. I would encourage the concerned commenter to study the historical setting of those passages. I think it will bring richer meaning. When it says, “For the Lord’s sake” I take it as saying, “because God has asked you to honor the government, then you should honor the government for the Lord’s sake.” I do not take it to mean that when a government is operating on “Behalf of the Lord’s sake,” that is when you should honor them. I don’t see that in that passage and I don’t believe it will be found to be historically relevant to the author’s intent. Call me on it if I’m wrong.
However, I will say, God has always made a way of escape. Jesus instructs his disciples to “flee” (Matthew 10:22-24). If you feel in your heart that the government has become so oppressive of your Christian faith to the point that you need to flee, I commend you to flee. Godspeed. Get outta’ here. The best example would be that of the Pilgrims who were partially fleeing for religious reasons. Currently, I don’t see persecution as a problem with President Obama’s presidency.
I believe that you are right though when you say that Christian’s are reserved a right of resistance. I think the first right of resistance is prayer, though. We don’t struggle against flesh and blood but against spiritual forces. Fortunately, for us, in the US our government affords us the right to freely express our disagreements through peaceful, constructive objection. This is our second right of resistance. However, the first right of resistance, in my opinion, is prayer. We forget that it is prayer that changes things.
To the second post: I disagree that Obama does not have vision or character. I think that he is a good person trying to do good things. He spent his post under-grad years organizing communities to vote and helping destitute communities in the south side of Chicago. In my opinion, that takes character.
The issue with vision is that you and he do not share the same vision. Obama has vision, its just that his vision is different from yours. And that’s okay. I don’t share in some of Obama’s vision myself, but it doesn’t mean I shouldn’t support him or stand by him. Biblically, I believe we have a mandate to do so.
I don’t necessarily have a response to the rest of your post. Although, I will say, let’s pray for him. God changes hearts, not rhetoric or people. It is the Holy Spirit who brings peace, not dissension. Let us all come together in prayer and let God do the rest. It is not by might nor power, but by my Spirit says the Lord (Zechariah 4:6).
I understand your concern for the Constitution and it being slowly dismantled. That’s why I wish we had strict constructionists in the Supreme Court. However, I find the assertion that all Godly men constructed the constitution a tad incredulous. Thomas Jefferson was a Deist who edited his own Bible to take out all the healing references. So, I made that statement to say, we have had a lot of people influence our government. Some good, some bad, but that is life. I choose to look through a brighter lens regarding the future of the U.S.
As far as Ayers and Khalidi and Obama’s association with such individuals, all I can say is that most allegations are unsubstantiated at this time and still at the hear say level. If you want to connect Obama with Khalidi (who do not share the same views regarding Middle Eastern affairs) then I think you also need to take into account the fact the Bush administration undeniably did allow members of the Bin Laden family to leave the U.S. during 9/11 while every other airplane was grounded. That has the makings of a conspiracy theory in and of itself. My goal is not to get into conspiracy theory, but I do believe that we need to call a spade a spade when it comes to matters such as these.
I received the following quote, “Aaron, can you look me in the eye honestly and say Obama is a God-Fearing man who should lead this great country?” I don’t know where Obama is at in his faith. I know where I am at and I am the only one who can answer for myself. I find it curious that no one question’s John McCain’s faith. Perhaps it is because he is a Republican, and the consensus among church goers is that Republican equals God’s Righteousness. McCain is pro-life. But simply because you agree that murdering unborn children is wrong, does not make you a Christian.
Should Obama lead this great country? Let me answer that question with a question: should Thomas Jefferson, a Deist, have led this country? Should Abraham Lincoln, whose wife sought mediums to speak to their dead son, have been allowed to lead this country, if indeed Lincoln is guilty by his association with his wife (Obama and Khalidi)? I say pray for Barack Obama. It is prayer that changes things.
The last posting is super tough and I can only address it honestly through this means: I don’t know. I laughed when I wrote, “I don’t know.” I’m one of those people that will disagree sometimes and not be able to explain why I disagree. It’s just a conviction that I have at the time.
I do know the Apostle’s wrote and said to respect the authorities. I do know Christians were being martyred. I do know that Christians today have a hard time reckoning their spiritual lives with their political view points (I’m not saying they should be separated, I’m simply implying they should be reconsidered). I do believe there are times when God will allow people to break way from their governments due to severe oppression, but I cannot in good conscience state what the criteria for such an uprising should comprise. I seriously consider everything I say and realize the severity of what I write and the implications that could arise due to my assertions.
I knew that when I wrote “Not by a Cause” that there would be objections. In my own mind, I had trouble reconciling those scriptures with the Colonies breaking away from King George III. Honestly, I don’t know if it was right or wrong. Looking back from a historical vantage point, I’m not sure the Colonies broke away for strictly religious reasons or for tax and governance issues, and if a seeming difference should be considered anyway. There might be a difference. There might not be a difference.
To my last poster, no, I don’t think you missed anything. I’m troubled sometimes, too. I can’t explain everything. I would not call the instances you listed as possible sin a sin in my own book, either. You have made great points and it is something that I am still wrestling with myself. I would actually recommend some of Thomas Aquinas’ writings. He addresses the issue of just war and obviously did a much better job with it than I could ever do.
In closing, my intent is really for everyone to heed the scriptures I listed in “Not by a Cause” to the fullest possible. My concern is a spiritual concern, it is a concern to do what is mandated to us by the scriptures. I am afraid that sometimes we pick and choose which scriptures we are going to follow and then explain away the ones we don’t like. I think Christians do a great job of this especially when people are elected into office we don’t agree with completely. I am becoming a broken record and an annoying echo: let’s pray for Obama. If you could pray for Bush, you can pray for Obama.
I think it is interesting that I received more comments and questions regarding this post than any other. In no way am I defensive or licking any wounds. (I will state that despite what comments or concerns I receive from here-on-out, I don’t plan to address them publicly in my blog. I will probably address them via Facebook or through another means. I might change my mind if it is something that maybe I feel that I’ve been inaccurate or led someone astray due to my personal theology. I want to be considerate of my readers.) I wish I got as many responses and concerns over my other postings. If you haven’t got a chance to read my other writings, I encourage you to do so. I would love to receive more feedback on those. But maybe they are not as controversial or as fun as “Not by a Cause”
(C) Aaron Brown, 2008.
5 comments:
Aaron, as you know, I made a last minute decision to vote for Barak Obama. I do not regret my decision because it was a wonderful experience to be a part of that historical night. I know in reality that my vote really didn't make a difference because the electoral votes (NY)would have went to Obama, anyway. I went with my emotions on this one. I voted for Obama because of my son, James and also for my future grandchildren. I wanted to see that wall broken and I wanted to be able to tell them that I was there when it broke...but I have other reasons, too. I voted for OBAMA because I was impressed with the integrity in which he carried himself with his wife Michele and his two daughters, Malia and Sasha. The Bible tells us that our elders should be the husband of one wife and should manage his household well and I believe Barak Obama has shown that he is a loving and caring husband and father who has his household in order. John McCain upon returning home from being a prisoner of war in Vietnam found his first wife to be disfigured and disabled from a car accident. Instead of standing by her in her time of pain and need he divorced her and replaced her with a new and younger version. Granted that he has been married to his second wife, Cindy for over two decades but I still question his integrity and character on this issue. I voted for Obama although I don't totally agree with his politics but at this point in our country's history we need a change in direction. Empowering the wealthy at the expense of the middle class in hopes that the wealth trickles down has only caused greed on Wall Street and has nearly destroyed our economy and if something is not done, our future. John McCain would have continued with Bush's strategies and although I believe that these strategies worked in the past by jump starting the economy during 9/11, it is time for new ideas and a different perspective. I voted for Bush because I thought he was a Christian and because I thought that he would advance us in the fight against abortion. Eight years later, we are no further in our quest and the homosexual agenda has been advanced in astronomical proportions. We have states that have legalized gay marriage and civil unions and gay kissing is common practice on TV and movies. Eight years later, after voting for Bush twice, we are no further in becoming a godly Christian nation and I feel lied to by the Republican party...so I voted for Barak Obama!
~Annie Burgos
You brought out relevant substance such as respecting our elders that I had not considered. I wholeheartedly agree with your sentiments of being lied to regarding the Bush administration; I've been saying that for a long time myself. I'm going to stop writing because I don't want to detract from the power of your comments. Thank you for sharing.
Aaron, I understand the historical context. You explained it well. My point is that the historical context is not the only means of parsing the Scripture.
Let's invoke Hitler, because that's always the easiest. (Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, or the Rwandan genocidalists could be invoked with equal applicability.) Was Hitler an "authority" "established by God" requiring our utmost "submission"?
Do not read the Scriptures you quote in isolation. They must be harmonized. And indeed, it seems Peter is careful to circumscribe his command: "Submit [to authorities] who are sent...to punish...wrong and to commend...right" (my emphasis). Ignoring the subordinate clause ignores half of the passage. Where authorities act contrary to this principle, submission is either no longer necessary or exists in substantially weaker form. And this doesn't even confront what "submit" means. Submit to EVERYTHING commanded by the authorities? What if the authorities demand that you renounce God, or kill your family? Must this be "submitted" to?
In the vein of harmony once again, read Paul's command to the Corinthians with an eye to his command to Timothy. He has a particular end in mind: "that we may live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness." It would stand to reason that where the authorities do not enable this form of living, submission again is circumscribed. Indeed, I would argue that when you vote, you are exercising a form of resistance. ("Democracy is war by other means," perhaps.) When a person votes for Obama, for example, they're resisting the rule of a man and a party they have come to despise these 8 yrs. (Full disclosure: I voted McCain.)
Do you see my point? I don't disagree that yours is a general principle. I am reserving exceptions for exigent circumstances. Christians may one day face the real need to resist. They should have the Scriptural tools to do so.
Browny - long time no see, since ORU, I see you are stirring things up so of course I want to add my thoughts as well.
I voted McCain, but I don't fail to see that significance in the elction of our first African American President either. I wish it was a diffrent African American though.
I think you are right on saying we need to pray for our President and that we do submit to all the authority placed over us unless it violates the written word of God. That is the key to when or if we ever choose not to submit.
I am still getting used to the idea of praying for Obama but that is my hangup. When he becomes President I will be praying that his choices line up with the Bible and what it teaches to be truth.
I wonder if the underlying issue in my own life is fear of what this guy might do, but I refuse to let fear be a controlling factor in my life. I will spare you all the sermon of fear, but if you find fear motivating you instead of Jesus that is a good time to stop and reevaluate.
"I find the assertion that all Godly men constructed the constitution a tad incredulous. Thomas Jefferson was a Deist who edited his own Bible to take out all the healing references." Although it is true that jefferson was a deist he was the exception rather than the rule in this seeing as only one other of the "founding fathers" was considered to be "deist" with the other being Franklin, who although he was one of the men who ratified the constitution he took very little part in the actual writing of the document seeing as he was in the ladder years of his life and suffering from extreme pain from gout. As far as Jefferson goes it is a very common misperception that he was one of the writers of the constitution, but in he fact he took no part part in the actual writing of the document. What very few people realize is that Jefferson was actually serving as a European ambassador at the time of the writing of the constitution and was actually in France and not even at the constitutional convention. It is actually James Madison that should be given credit for writing the bulk of our constituion.
Post a Comment