Funny how our politics can shape our theology. I wish the opposite were true all of the time, but I can’t help but think that our biblical interpretation often gets molded around our civic ideology.
The other day, someone passed on a writing supposedly by David Barton. In this piece, the author says that he feels that the Bible teaches us to respect the office of the President, but not the President himself.
I disagree. I haven’t fully agreed with any president since I was old enough to realize how the world works. If you’ve read this blog much, you probably realize that I’m neither a political activist nor a believer in the theory that America is God’s new chosen people. But I believe that the principle of respect toward rulers is taught in the Bible. Yes, I know that Jesus called Herod a fox and the Old Testament prophets could be pretty hard on the kings they spoke with. But there are some pretty clear New Testament passages that talk about honoring the king and respecting authorities.
Some brothers in Cuba were angered when prayers were offered for Fidel Castro at a national preachers conference. I wasn’t present, but I agree with the principle. We are to pray for leaders, pray that there be peace so that we may go about the task of proclaiming the kingdom of God.
I don’t think we can say, “I don’t like what this man is doing, so I’m free to not respect him.” When Paul and Peter taught the need to honor the authorities, they were talking about the pagan Roman rulers, men like Nero.
The article that I read offered no textual evidence as to why Christians should feel free to disregard the command to honor those in power. Political reasons were offered, of course. But it’s a dangerous thing to start down the road of ignoring what the Bible says just because we don’t like it.
“Funny how our politics can shape our theology.” Tim I disagree I believe the understanding, or misunderstanding of the bible shapes our politics” For those of us who believe in the bible anyway. I am a democrat, totally because of what Jesus taught.
I believe we are all given the freedom to choose, I believe we should sacrifice for the poor, I believe we should treat others as we expect to be treated, I believe to those of us who are intrusted with more, more is expected. The modern republican party does not believe in what I just named, not so much.
Well come to think of it, it works both ways. I don’t disagree with you as much as i first thought, I am not a very good example of what motivated most people, just what motivates me.
Since when did the Scriptures teach that believers are allowed to disrespect anyone? The commands to honor the king aren’t there because the king is especially worthy of honor, but rather because of JUST this temptation – the temptation to let our dislike of a public figure affect our actions.
“That whole ‘Love thy neighbor’ thing? I meant that.” -God
“That whole ‘Love thy neighbor’ thing? I meant that.” -God
Nick , can I still call you nick? I see you have been given a promotion, I wondered why you quit speaking to the common man (through your blog) now I know. you have been to busy practicing for your new “gig” :)
Tim, I know my first comment sounded a little “self righteous” but look what you have done now ! you have done and riled “the god Nick” that can’t be good. :)
Tim, I agree completely, and that disturbs me. In fact, I think you held back a little – we have become a nation of idolaters, and the idol we serve is political power. If “we” can just gain enough seats in congress all will be well. Never mind that the “we” changes every 2, 4, or 6 years.
Jesus said, “My kingdom is not of this world.” Paul said, “Our citizenship is in heaven.” The Hebrew preacher said, “Here we have no lasting city, but we seek the city that is to come.”
The trajectory of our views to equating “church” with “America” is fascinating. With your experience in foreign countries I’m sure you are far more familiar with other nations thinking we are bizarre for the way we wrap our faith in the American flag. My question is, can we break the cycle? Can we unlearn what we have spent the last 100 years chiseling into granite? And, if you optimistically answer yes, how do we begin?
Sorry for the rant, but I think I stuck my sore thumb under the hammer you were swinging today.
Blessings,
Paul
Just a few observations about 1 Peter 2:15. The honor due the king is the same honor to be given to all. Peter has already mentioned submission to the king and governors (2:1-2). The purpose of this is not participation in government or being partaker of their evil deeds (Ephesians 5:3-7; 2 John 1:10-11). Our king is Jesus (Acts 2:36), and our citizenship is in heaven (Philippians 3:20; ASV). Because we are his soldiers we do not involve ourselves in the affairs of this world 92 Timothy 2:3-4) . We are followers of our king Jesus subject to his law which liberates us from the laws of sin and darkness of this world (James 2:12; Ephesians 6:10-12). The important thing is that we pray for all in authority that “that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty” and that they “be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.” (1 Timothy 2:1-4). The opposite of honoring the king is using our “liberty for a cloke of maliciousness” (1 Peter 2:16). When we preach and teach against the evils of abortion, same sex marriage, war, or anything else; we must not use this as means of malicious verbal attacks against anyone in particular, even rulers.
Wes
Just as we cannot serve two masters, so also we cannot live out two or more stories. The American story is a different story than that which is told in scripture. Christians are those who have born into a new life with a new King and that is to belong to a new story which is alternative to anything this world has to offer. So long as Christians – and specifically in this case, those living in America – continue to live out the American story (a vision which has proved to be VERY seductive) they will continue to force the Bible to fit their understanding (i.e., left or right, Democrat or Republican) of that story.
In truth, that is idolatry but this is a form of idolatry that is very difficult to discern from the inside because it retains just enough “Christian/biblical” elements to appear faithful. However, it is beyond stretch to imagine any early Christian singing “God Bless Rome” as Rome proudly displays its conquest. Yet many Christians in America have found a way to justify the exact opposite…and we wonder why people now scoff at the confession of Jesus’ Lordship, that he is “the way, the truth, and the life.”
Grace and Peace,
Rex
Although I can understand certain political cartoonists and their poking fun at the Commander in Chief…I believe it is disrespectful when people offer ugly, biting criticism on a personal or even a professional level. When I see such e-mails, I immediately delete them. As Christians, we should treat all people with love and respect…and just because a person (president, politican, CEO, elder, preacher) is in a position of leadership and/or authority should not mean that people…particularly believers in Christ…have the right to be mean.
Wes: Thank you for accurately interpreting 1 Tim 2:1-4 with it having to do with rulers and those in authority. It is clear that in context, “all” in that text means “all men without distinction” and does not “all people without exception”. Good on ya.
I am tired of either “side” using Jesus for political ideology, but can we really escape it? This may strike some as a bit harsh, but as much as Sarah Palin might do it on one side, I see the same thing from those a little less assuming, like Scot McKnight on the other (I expect his new King Jesus Gospel book to be filled with it). Both try and frame the debate using Jesus, and oh look, it just so happens Jesus agrees with their political position. Go figure!
But again, can we escape it? One side says nuclear weapons are anti-God; another side says infanticide (abortion) is anti-God; another side says our trade policy is anti-God; and on and on and on. Are all correct? Are all wrong? We will bring our thinking of the Scriptures into our political thought. I don’t think we can escape that. What burns me the most is when preachers, ministers, or author/speakers draw the line at politics (or those who represent a “side”) before they even get to Jesus and the Gospel. What we need is a greater understanding and living out of the Two Kingdoms. We are, in the end, a part of the unshakeable Kingdom.
I agree we need to pray for our leaders and respect and honor them as people and not just as position; from the Bushes to the Obamas to the Castros. It is interesting to observe the outcry today with critics of Obama, when the same thing was done to Bush before (who can forget the Bush=Hitler parades?). But as Paul writes, all are instituted by God for His purposes. We need to always have this in mind, even as a mystery.
Biblically speaking, it is interesting to see the difference between Paul’s attitude in Romans (written prior to Nero’s insanity, though Jewish Christians were kicked out of Rome and returned just prior) and John’s attitude in Revelation (written during harsh persecution). Even the take on governing authorities is situational in the New Testament. We can have it all though! We can (and should, I believe) pray for our leaders (as we are instructed by Paul and others), but at the same time, for those who are in nations today where they are suffering persecution for claiming Christ, we can also (in the tone of John) realize that it is Satan that is behind those rulers and that Him and all His cronies will be tossed into the lake of fire one day. “Vengeance is mine, says the LORD.”
Let us pray and give respect and honor, and let us then let God do His thing.
Grace be with you –
Jr
Jr.,
I’ve not read “The King Jesus Gospel” by Scot McKnight yet since it has yet to be published but I have heard him present some lectures based on some of the material from the book. Maybe you should reserve judgment on his book until it’s read.
Grace and Peace,
Rex
Rex: You are right, and I could be wrong. I’m just going off the track record from previous publications and talks/interviews I’ve heard him give. If the book doesn’t have any politics, I will be pleased and admit error.
Grace be with you –
Jr
Jr.,
Can anyone really discuss the Gospel Jesus proclaimed and avoid politics? I’m not saying Jesus is either a Democrat or Republican but simply to say that Jesus is a King, Messiah, and Lord was to make a political statement and if that doesn’t then have implications for the contemporary political landscape, we seem to have failed at allowing the Gospel to bear on our own circumstances. Of course, since I not only appreciate the work of McKnight but also the contributions of people like Yoder, Hays, Hauerwas, and Wright, I acknowledge a certain bias.
Grace and Peace,
Rex
Rex & Jr.,
We’ve discussed a bit in the past the definition of “politics” here on this blog. In this case, would “partisanship” better express Jr’s concern?
Grace and peace,
Tim Archer
Rex: Indeed, I agree with you and I asked the same question above in paragraphs two and three. (btw, my wife tells me I need to be more short-winded in my comments so I will make an effort to do so). The question I asked was, “can we escape it”? The rhetorical answer being, “I don’t think so.”
But I think what Tim responded with does better define the concern: partisanship. This is because the politics of it can get really subjective, as I stated in paragraph three with the few examples. Again, this is why WWJD is such a silly question in my opinion. What would he do? Does anybody really know? The truth is, nobody knows what Jesus would do (just read the Gospels and count how many times you say “what the…?”); which is why the central question for Gospel proclamation is instead, WHJD (What Has Jesus Done?). To assume anything otherwise confuses the two kingdoms and turns Jesus into a tool for partisanship. This is the concern I have.
Grace be with you –
Jr
Tim & Jr.,
I think Tim is right in pointing out the difference between “politics” and “partisanship”. The former is certainly impacted by the claims of the Gospel while forcing Jesus to fit into the mold of the later is subjecting the Gospel to another agenda. And I agree with you Jr., that a better question to ask is “What has Jesus done?” rather than “What would Jesus do?”.
Grace and Peace,
Rex
P.S. This dialogue here is a great example of the way a blog discussion such as this should work. Thanks for the dialogue!
I know this is chasing a rabbit that was flushed by this post, rather than the point of the blog itself… but asking “What Has Jesus Done?” doesn’t help us incarnate Christ in our own cultural settings. In order to enact the lift of the kingdom publicly, we can’t merely ask ourselves, “What did Jesus do” in the context of his first-century Jewish culture. We have to ask both questions, because what He *would* do (which we can only answer by examining what He DID do and IS doing) is what we *ought* to do.
“Imitate me, even as I imitate Christ.” – Paul
…enact the *LIFE* of the kingdom…
/headdesk