Disclaimer: Up until now, I've used the terms left and right to refer generally to those sides of the politcal spectrum, as traditionally defined, and as a whole. As I begin to land this plane, I'm turning my focus specifically to Christian politics. So, when I use the terms left and right, there will be an implied "Christian" in front of them, to make that distinct. I suppose I could just right that everywhere, and it would probably take less time than this disclaimer has taken, but that's just not how I roll.
Disclaimer #2: I'm fully aware that there will be some generalizations within the contents of this post.
So, reaching back, I discussed the two kingdom idea - that we as Christians are citizens of God's kingdom, as well as whatever earthly kingdom they happen to dwell in. I also stated that we are supposed to be citizens of God's kingdom first, and of our earthly kingdom second. However, as I also mentioned, since Biblical times, government has developed and evolved to the point where in many countries, everyday, ordinary people (and by extension, everyday, ordinary Christians) have a level of participation and influence in their earthly kingdom in a way that was just not a Biblical reality.
One result of this, at least as I see it, has been what I will dubb "Kingdom Confusion" - that is, a blurring of the lines between God's kingdom and man's kingdom, which comes about as people of faith are given the opportunity to express their ideals and beliefs via their vote. This phenomenon did not exist in Biblical times. God's kingdom and man's kingdom were either clearly one (as with the nation of Israel in much of the Old Testament), or clearly and obviously distinct (as with the Roman Empire in the New Testament).
What kingdom confusion really winds up being at its core is Christians trying to set up their earthly kingdom in the pattern of the heavenly one, or at least their picture of it. (As I've learned recently, one of the somewhat frustrating things about Jesus was that for all that he talked about the kingdom, he never clearly defined it, but that's an aside). That's a noble idea, at least on its face. The problem with it, however, is that, as I said, the kingdom of God isn't exactly well spelled out in Scripture, and as such, as humans, we have a pretty hard time agreeing on what the kingdom should look like. And unfortunately, rather than really examining the Scriptures and carving our own path, we have, for the most part, allowed ourselves to be forced into one of the two traditional sides, left and right, based on our view of Scripture.
The right tends to focus on setting up God's kingdom from a perspective of personal and individual responsibility, its signature issues being more those of personal morality. The left, on the other hand, tends to look at setting up God's kingdom from a perspective of collective responsibility, the signature issues being those of equality and provision for the poor.
I said "the problem" earlier, but there's really at least 2 problems, and the second problem is actually much more significant. The second problem is that, as I see it, trying to legislate God's kingdom to earth via the mechanisms of a secular government is a task that is flawed on its face, and self-defeating, in my opinion. This is an opinion I shall cover in more detail tomorrow (cross your fingers) in what should be my final post (keep them crossed) on this subject.
9 months ago
1 comment:
You know, our pastor just preached on this this past Sunday (the "give to Caesar was is Caesar's; give to God what is God's" passage). It was very good.
Post a Comment