I found much of your original posting to reflect the anti-American, anti-"whiteness" attitude of many of those who have experienced the advantages of having grown up here and now for some reason are turning against. while I share your enthusiasm for not mixing the Cross and the flag, the fact is many of the advantages or blessings that we have experienced in the past and are experiencing now, are the result of the impact of both personal and corporate expressions of Christian faith on American soil. Yes there are problems. Yes, there are people who no longer are faithful to the God that enabled these things to come about, but it doesn't change the fact that the advanced position that Europe and the United States have in the world is a function of them being Christian cultures. What is the alternative? Neo-Marxism? No, of all the bad ways of governing, capitalism and democracy turn out to be the least offensive and promote the highest level of individual respect and liberty.
Why are there only two options? The Milton Friedman unregulated capitalism bucket or the Lenin communism bucket. Sometimes framing our options as a simple binary is an excuse for working to improve the democratic, capitalist system we have. There's all sort of gradations on the political and economic spectrums. For me, I advocate a capitalism that is more regulated by the government to protect vulnerable people. And a democracy that has more safeguards to prevent rich and powerful people and entities from disempowering people without as much power. And more separation between church and state - mostly to keep the church from compromising its Christian witness as badly.
This is a place where we try to have substantive discussions and avoid this kind of nonsense that we can get on FB. Care to explain what you didn't like or what about this you think is just "Blah, blah, blah..."?
Well, I suppose I am compelled to speak here, as one of the nameless people you quoted as being sincere but wrong, “wrong in the way in which Peter was when he asked Jesus to deny the cross… wrong in the way the Satanic is often clothed in religious decency and self-defense.”
This is very powerful rhetoric and a very strong claim, particularly given the demonstrative lack of love present in using a comment as a buttressing point for your argument without ever engaging the person who made it to understand what they meant by it.
For the record, mine was the “Nah… no more than the biggest obstacle for the early Christians was Rome.”
This is not a comment rooted in American moral individualism, in my mind, such a thing is antithetical to the gospel.
I appreciate your continual reference to the apocalyptic imagery in the book of Revelation, to Rome as Babylon the Fallen, and by extension every human empire that elevates itself against the knowledge of God and woos followers of Christ away from true discipleship either by force or comfort. I have no problem seeing America as you expound it in that vein.
And yet, in the epistolary opening to the letter of the book, the seven churches embedded within the Roman Empire were all addressed by Jesus in varying ways- affirmation, calls to remain steadfast and not capitulate to cultural pressures, calls to repentance, and with promises of reward for those that were faithful to the end.
These concrete gatherings of followers were assailed by cultural forces that were quite powerful and compelling in a variety of ways, obviously at times eclipsing their view of the gospel, and so John is given an apocalyptic reframe… essentially Jesus saying, “I know your situation, but let me show you what is really going on.”
What was revealed was a vision of the throne room of God, where the Lamb slain before the foundation of the world was being venerated alongside God the Father, above the powers and principalities, above every Empire, with the power to execute judgment over all.
The tyranny and urgency of the worship demanded by the empire- both literal and metaphorical- was revealed to be hollow in light of the eternal worship proceeding around the throne. Earthly empires are finite, the One who stands above them all is eternal, when they all crumble to dust or we do, He is the One who alone has the words of life or death.
When I said that America is not the biggest impediment to the gospel any more than Rome or Babylon the Fallen, it is rooted is the narrative tapestry of the book of Revelation.
I think that is rather that we are so overwhelmed or seduced by our circumstances- both macro and micro- that we begin to be controlled by them rather than a vision of who God is.
Lack of vision or perspective, of the crucified One, who you so eloquently elevate (thank you) and lack of eschatological vision informing our day to day living, both individually and communally, is the biggest impediment to the gospel, in my opinion. I think that Jesus recognized that for the churches in the book of Revelation this was the force tugging them away from fidelity to the gospel in their daily living, which is why the revelations to John came in the manner they did and were shared with the churches. He was providing that vision to inform countercultural, subversive, and cruciform lives, even unto death. It wasn’t an invitation to shake the fist at the powers and principalities, but to walk the way of the cross after the manner of Christ himself, recognizing that the ultimate power of the enemy, death itself, has been vitiated of its power through the resurrection.
To be fair, both Rome and America, and every empire in between and yet to come, are vehicles through which our vision can be distorted and skewed. I resonate with that. And yet, the people of God from the beginning of Scripture to the end, and throughout history have always been prone to embrace and erect idols that are concrete and forget who God is.
What is the answer? Prophetic revelation in word and deed through those consumed with a vision of the Lamb upon the throne and the One to whom judgment of all men… and empires has been given.
I apologize for the lengthy comment. I felt compelled to respond since I had been quoted and labeled in the post without being invited into conversation.
I appreciate the dialogue the two of you foster and wanted to offer my thoughts on the discussion.
David, my sincere apologies. I said on that thread that I wasn't going to discuss it there but instead write a Substack post about it, but I meant to put a link to the Substack in the comments on that thread but forgot. Greg and I are just trying to move as many of these discussions away from FB as possible for a few reasons. One is that I couldn't engage a thoughtful comment like this without others jumping in with distractions and bad faith arguments, so I intend to respond later today once I've had some time to think about all you've written. I am thankful for your engagement, and again, I really do apologize because I meant to link this in that thread to invite anyone who commented there to engage here if they choose. Looking forward to considering what you've written and responding once I have considered it for a bit.
I found much of your original posting to reflect the anti-American, anti-"whiteness" attitude of many of those who have experienced the advantages of having grown up here and now for some reason are turning against. while I share your enthusiasm for not mixing the Cross and the flag, the fact is many of the advantages or blessings that we have experienced in the past and are experiencing now, are the result of the impact of both personal and corporate expressions of Christian faith on American soil. Yes there are problems. Yes, there are people who no longer are faithful to the God that enabled these things to come about, but it doesn't change the fact that the advanced position that Europe and the United States have in the world is a function of them being Christian cultures. What is the alternative? Neo-Marxism? No, of all the bad ways of governing, capitalism and democracy turn out to be the least offensive and promote the highest level of individual respect and liberty.
Why are there only two options? The Milton Friedman unregulated capitalism bucket or the Lenin communism bucket. Sometimes framing our options as a simple binary is an excuse for working to improve the democratic, capitalist system we have. There's all sort of gradations on the political and economic spectrums. For me, I advocate a capitalism that is more regulated by the government to protect vulnerable people. And a democracy that has more safeguards to prevent rich and powerful people and entities from disempowering people without as much power. And more separation between church and state - mostly to keep the church from compromising its Christian witness as badly.
Blah, blah, blah...
This is a place where we try to have substantive discussions and avoid this kind of nonsense that we can get on FB. Care to explain what you didn't like or what about this you think is just "Blah, blah, blah..."?
Well, I suppose I am compelled to speak here, as one of the nameless people you quoted as being sincere but wrong, “wrong in the way in which Peter was when he asked Jesus to deny the cross… wrong in the way the Satanic is often clothed in religious decency and self-defense.”
This is very powerful rhetoric and a very strong claim, particularly given the demonstrative lack of love present in using a comment as a buttressing point for your argument without ever engaging the person who made it to understand what they meant by it.
For the record, mine was the “Nah… no more than the biggest obstacle for the early Christians was Rome.”
This is not a comment rooted in American moral individualism, in my mind, such a thing is antithetical to the gospel.
I appreciate your continual reference to the apocalyptic imagery in the book of Revelation, to Rome as Babylon the Fallen, and by extension every human empire that elevates itself against the knowledge of God and woos followers of Christ away from true discipleship either by force or comfort. I have no problem seeing America as you expound it in that vein.
And yet, in the epistolary opening to the letter of the book, the seven churches embedded within the Roman Empire were all addressed by Jesus in varying ways- affirmation, calls to remain steadfast and not capitulate to cultural pressures, calls to repentance, and with promises of reward for those that were faithful to the end.
These concrete gatherings of followers were assailed by cultural forces that were quite powerful and compelling in a variety of ways, obviously at times eclipsing their view of the gospel, and so John is given an apocalyptic reframe… essentially Jesus saying, “I know your situation, but let me show you what is really going on.”
What was revealed was a vision of the throne room of God, where the Lamb slain before the foundation of the world was being venerated alongside God the Father, above the powers and principalities, above every Empire, with the power to execute judgment over all.
The tyranny and urgency of the worship demanded by the empire- both literal and metaphorical- was revealed to be hollow in light of the eternal worship proceeding around the throne. Earthly empires are finite, the One who stands above them all is eternal, when they all crumble to dust or we do, He is the One who alone has the words of life or death.
When I said that America is not the biggest impediment to the gospel any more than Rome or Babylon the Fallen, it is rooted is the narrative tapestry of the book of Revelation.
I think that is rather that we are so overwhelmed or seduced by our circumstances- both macro and micro- that we begin to be controlled by them rather than a vision of who God is.
Lack of vision or perspective, of the crucified One, who you so eloquently elevate (thank you) and lack of eschatological vision informing our day to day living, both individually and communally, is the biggest impediment to the gospel, in my opinion. I think that Jesus recognized that for the churches in the book of Revelation this was the force tugging them away from fidelity to the gospel in their daily living, which is why the revelations to John came in the manner they did and were shared with the churches. He was providing that vision to inform countercultural, subversive, and cruciform lives, even unto death. It wasn’t an invitation to shake the fist at the powers and principalities, but to walk the way of the cross after the manner of Christ himself, recognizing that the ultimate power of the enemy, death itself, has been vitiated of its power through the resurrection.
To be fair, both Rome and America, and every empire in between and yet to come, are vehicles through which our vision can be distorted and skewed. I resonate with that. And yet, the people of God from the beginning of Scripture to the end, and throughout history have always been prone to embrace and erect idols that are concrete and forget who God is.
What is the answer? Prophetic revelation in word and deed through those consumed with a vision of the Lamb upon the throne and the One to whom judgment of all men… and empires has been given.
I apologize for the lengthy comment. I felt compelled to respond since I had been quoted and labeled in the post without being invited into conversation.
I appreciate the dialogue the two of you foster and wanted to offer my thoughts on the discussion.
David, my sincere apologies. I said on that thread that I wasn't going to discuss it there but instead write a Substack post about it, but I meant to put a link to the Substack in the comments on that thread but forgot. Greg and I are just trying to move as many of these discussions away from FB as possible for a few reasons. One is that I couldn't engage a thoughtful comment like this without others jumping in with distractions and bad faith arguments, so I intend to respond later today once I've had some time to think about all you've written. I am thankful for your engagement, and again, I really do apologize because I meant to link this in that thread to invite anyone who commented there to engage here if they choose. Looking forward to considering what you've written and responding once I have considered it for a bit.