Jan, the promises to Israel are always conditional on their faithfulness. Nor does it say unbroken possession, remember Egypt and the Exile. You need to balance your text against the rest of the Bible.
“Lie” is a strong word. You use it several times, even “blatant lie,” Yet, without any evidence. And to whom is this directed? Apparently, proponents of the Overture, but the primary proponent cannot be accused of lying. By your own account, Martyn did not know the information was mistaken and when he learned it was untrue, he withdrew it and apologized. Lying requires intention to deceive. Where is your evidence Martyn, or anyone, had intention to deceive?
You refer to it as a mistake but you assert it was intentional by placing the word in quotation marks. Again, where is your evidence? In the absence of evidence you attribute motives and make accusations grabbed out of thin air. You might want to apologize and show the graciousness Martyn showed when he was shown to be mistaken.
Recently God gave me a new experience -- a heart attack. It not only drained me of energy but also left me without zest for living, dispirited. That in turn let me to question my faith and relationship to God. Is my depression a sign I do not trust God? I reread Paul Tournier, who wrote: “Christian faith does not involve repressing one’s anxiety in order to appear strong. On the contrary, it means recognizing one’s weakness, accepting the inward truth about oneself, confessing one’s anxiety, and still to believe; that is to say that the Christian puts his trust not in his own strength, but in the grace of God. I believe that there is more peace to be found in the acceptance of human anxiety than in the hope for a life or an old age freed from anxiety.”
All Tournier’s writings contain rich spiritual discernment, but I was particularly helped by his Adventure of Living and his Learning to Grow Old.
In addition, I again deeply benefitted from reading Marilynne Robinson’s triology Gilead, Home and Lila. Her presentation of Christianity is profoundly winsome.
Rom. 13 establishes that all governing authorities are of God, accountable to God and deserving of support in as far as they fulfill their God-given mandate. It does not specify whether a governing authority is local, state, federal or international, whether it is hereditary, a constitutional monarchy, or a republic, nor whether it is appointed, dictatorial, resulting from conquest, or democratically elected. It covers all governing authority but does not speak to size of country or an optimum form of governance.
I am not suggesting Europeans are more God-fearing than people in North America. I am suggesting that the European Union is the most successful treaty of nations in modern times. It has successfully prevented armed conflict among its members for over 50 years, promoted cooperation, eliminated borders, worked towards the common good of all its members, replacing centuries of strive and conflict. I was born in Europe during wwII and well remember what Europe was like before the Union. Christians should celebrate and support the Union’s efforts and oppose all attempts to thicken borders for self-interest and exploitation of others.
You say the church should not bind the conscience of its members. If its members hold political views that are not shaped by Bible truths the church would be negligent to not point that out. I took exception to your view that immigration policies should aim to preserve our home country, which usually means our home country is only for people like us and we will let people in only if there is a net benefit to us. Such thinking, in a world of great inequality, exploitation and injustices, is in my view not supported by Bible teachings, it runs contrary to all Jesus taught.
Thank you for weighing in. There are no easy answers to immigration. I struggle as much as anyone. In the 2015 federal election I voted for Trudeau in part because he promised to bring 50,000 Syrian refugees while his predecessor, Harper, was dragging the puck and painting all Muslims as a threat to us. Trudeau was elected and delivered. I admire Germany’s Merkel for taking in 1 million refugees. Many predicted chaos. Does that mean an open policy? Probably not. One consideration is how quickly new arrivals can be integrated lest chaos does result. I think on balance we can for good reasons discount the extremes. As indicated, my reading of Jesus suggests that a far greater tolerance in both the US and Canada for the plight of the millions displaced is warranted. I do know that holding the line on immigration because we must preserve our own country is not Bible-based. He who wants to save his life will lose it. It is by emptying ourselves that we serve Jesus. In an earlier post you said the US still takes in more than any other nation, perhaps in absolute numbers, but as a percentage of the existing population Canada’s intake is twice to three times that of the US. My own congregation of Ladner CRC has for 12 years taken in on average one refugee family a year. Every Sunday I am surrounded by two Iranian families and sprinkled through the sanctuary are many others. It has been a blessing to them but even more for us. I can respect Christians whose views differ from mine as long at they base their views on Bible teachings. That must at all times be out touchstone. Nor do I think that my understanding of the Bible is the only right and true interpretation. Over the years my understanding of the Bible has shifted, not because the Bible is not reliable but because my understanding is very fallible.
Dan, thank you for your response. I do not find your summary accurate.
One The modern nation-state is a European invention of the last 400 years. I find nothing in the Bible that commands us to maintain the nation-state. I do find in the Bible we are our brother’s keeper and that in Christ borders breakdown. While we await the new earth the nation-state can be an instrument of good for promoting and administering justice, for instance, but it can also be used for self-centered purposes, and that Christians must resist. God created the earth to held in common by all, by what right then do we put up borders for the purpose to keep others out?
Two, Yes, even Overture #14 allows for political advocacy.
Three, I want the denomination to advocate for public policies that are shaped by and based on Bible teachings.
Four, I oppose #13 and #14 because they deal with symptoms, not the cause. The cause is differences in how we understand the Bible.
I must express my discomfort with describing those who hold positions within the denomination as employees. Such language is demeaning and reduces the Church to a business organization. Those who occupy Church positions have a calling, a vocation, an office governed by their mandate but more importantly they are accountable to God.
You are keeping me very busy. This is turning into a full time job. I appreciate you drawing attention to the need to differentiate between the various tasks of God-instituted social structures. The command to love your neighbour takes on different forms depending on whether the neighbour is your employer, the plumber, or your spouse. The particular form that love takes is determined by the tasks of each social structure. The task of the business enterprise differs from that of government and that of marriage is different again. That flows out of Kuyper’s sphere sovereignty. I get that and it remains a helpful tool to shape the actions of Christians. As you note, the task of government is to promote and administer justice. That is not merely for its own citizens but for all citizens of the world. That is the basis for foreign aid and humanitarian relief efforts. Today, 60 million people world-wide are displaced, looking for a safe place. That deserves government action as much as an earthquake in Haiti. During our life time the role of government has enlarged beyond recognition. It is possible to use sphere sovereignty to argue for limited government to the point where all acts of charity and compassion including health care and all social services are left to individuals. We have to recognize history, that is, the increasing complexity and inter-relatedness of life which requires a larger role for government. We cannot go back to simpler days because the job of caring for those in need, if left to individuals would not get done at all. In his day Kuyper was criticized for being a Socialist because he recognized the need for government regulation and intervention, as was Teddy Roosenvelt when he busted business monopolies at exactly the same time. How can we love those 60 million displaced persons today without government initiatives? How can we provide health care to our own citizens except through a single-payer system? It will not happen. The job will not get done. Many who argue for limited government, whether supported by sphere sovereignty or otherwise, at the same time endorse massive subsidies for business and not only in the US. In my part of the world the Fraser Valley dairy farmers grow rich because of “supply management” while preaching free enterprise for everyone except themselves. In short, to me, the call to love our neighbour must shape government initiatives and public policies as much as my personal actions. Kyper's Sphere Sovereignty was balanced by his Sphere Universality, holding to the one without the other allows people to claim that religion has no bearing on politics. That is to turn Kuyper on his head, As for Calvin, I have never heard anyone accuse Calvin of a Two Kingdom view. I do remember reading Calvin to say government was given for our good and as neccessary as bread and water. Calvin was not a Libertarian. He also served on City Council and had the Church build hospitals and sewer lines.
Thank you for interacting. I am Canadian and not sufficiently informed about OSJ activities to make a valid assessment. But I am not much interested in that discussion. As my letter goes on to state the denomination has more important fish to fry than quibbling over who the messenger should be, the denomination or its members. Many of our members think president Trump is a man of God, to many others he is the Devil incarnate. That is not merely a political disagreement, our political disagreements have turned so intense and all-encompassing they are spiritual disagreements. That our members can no longer speak to each other about political issues as Christians informed by the Bible and in way that is respectful has spiritual origins. We read the Bible differently, we have different understandings of what constitutes modern-day idol worship. Increasingly, I hear voices, including Calvin’s James Bratt, questioning how much Evangelicalism has in common with Christianity. In that reality, discussing who does what in addressing government is treating symptoms. The denomination needs to address the underlying cause. Overture #12 aims to do that. It asks the denomination to find ways whereby the members in their local churches struggle to understand the central Bible teachings that relate to government, its task and how we are to serve God as citizens of our respective countries. We need to find greater agreement on what the Bible teaches. That, it seems to me, is where the denomination should focus its efforts. Overture #13 and #14 miss the mark. Neither overture will result in greater unity among out members. They will only lay bare hidden fissures. The church does not need that at this time.
How wonderful to have a fellow Canadian join the discussion and we are just down the road from each other.
Harry, I do not doubt our church members can make judgments about political matters. The concern of Overture #12 is that often we fail to do so as Christians. We make political judgments that are not informed by the Bible. For example, I often hear Christians defend restrictive immigration policies because ‘we are about to be over-run.’ Is that a biblical argument? I have never seen or heard a defense of restricted immigration that quoted Jesus, or the prophets, or the Apostolic letters or the confessions. Do we lack a Christian mind when it comes to politics?
You say the church need not instruct its members in political discipleship because the members do not lack in biblical understanding. I think we do, at least when it comes to politics. Another example, Overture #12 is grounded in the Bible. You disagree with the Overture, but on what grounds? You don’t say. Are your views about the task of the church derived from the Bible? I know what Jesus’ instructions are, “Teach them to observe all I commanded you!” What did Jesus command that might relate to immigration? Perhaps something about loving others!
All Jesus commanded. Think of that. For starters, Jesus spoke more about money than any other topic, he also spoke a lot about idols, false gods. If the church cannot equip the saints for ministry what do you take the task of the church to be?
You say the church should preach and teach the Catechism. Here I agree, totally, because the catechism covers the 10 Commandments. The Ten Commandments show us how to live in righteousness on earth. When you and I were a bit younger, the Catechism and the Law played a huge role, they grounded us to think and live life Christianly. In contrast, today most messages from the pulpit are designed to take us away from this life. Overture #12 asks that the church through all its preaching and teaching equip its members for political discipleship so we might glorify God in how we talk and act as citizens, so God's will be done on earth.
PS Harry, the quote you attribute to Jason Ellis are my words and I agree with them. I am particularly pleased that you think Jason Ellis said it best.
Eric, thank you for engaging. You suggest we need immigration laws to protect the nation-state. Does Jesus, does the Bible command us to protect the nation-state? On the face of it, not at all! The OT says protect the stranger among you because you were a stranger and God delivered you .... 36 times it is repeated. Jesus is about inclusion, breaking down walls. Do you think there will be nation-sates on the new earth? Historically, the nation-state is weakening, if not disappearing. That is moving in the direction of the Kingdom. In the meantime we must recognize the nation-state can be a force for good but also for great evil. Let us use the nation-state for good while working toward a better order. Do you not think that the European Union represents a model more worthy of Christian support than calls for isolationism?
I greatly admire John Calvin, in his commentary on the Lord's Prayer he asks who is included in the 'our', just the disciples, just the Jews, just Christians? No, every member of the human race. He also discusses how difficult it is to love our neighbour because some of them are disgusting, immoral and ready to take advantage of us. Calvin says it is possible only when we see all humans as image bearers, made in God's likeness. If Christians advocated for those values to be reflected in immigration laws we would testify to the coming of the Kingdom and hounour King Jesus. Too often we merely parrot the values of the world which in our culture is money.
Posted in: ‘Palestine’ and Overture 6: Ten Questions to Consider
Jan, the promises to Israel are always conditional on their faithfulness. Nor does it say unbroken possession, remember Egypt and the Exile. You need to balance your text against the rest of the Bible.
Nick
Posted in: ‘Palestine’ and Overture 6: Ten Questions to Consider
Jennifer:
“Lie” is a strong word. You use it several times, even “blatant lie,” Yet, without any evidence. And to whom is this directed? Apparently, proponents of the Overture, but the primary proponent cannot be accused of lying. By your own account, Martyn did not know the information was mistaken and when he learned it was untrue, he withdrew it and apologized. Lying requires intention to deceive. Where is your evidence Martyn, or anyone, had intention to deceive?
You refer to it as a mistake but you assert it was intentional by placing the word in quotation marks. Again, where is your evidence? In the absence of evidence you attribute motives and make accusations grabbed out of thin air. You might want to apologize and show the graciousness Martyn showed when he was shown to be mistaken.
Posted in: What Books Are You Reading in 2019?
Recently God gave me a new experience -- a heart attack. It not only drained me of energy but also left me without zest for living, dispirited. That in turn let me to question my faith and relationship to God. Is my depression a sign I do not trust God? I reread Paul Tournier, who wrote: “Christian faith does not involve repressing one’s anxiety in order to appear strong. On the contrary, it means recognizing one’s weakness, accepting the inward truth about oneself, confessing one’s anxiety, and still to believe; that is to say that the Christian puts his trust not in his own strength, but in the grace of God. I believe that there is more peace to be found in the acceptance of human anxiety than in the hope for a life or an old age freed from anxiety.”
All Tournier’s writings contain rich spiritual discernment, but I was particularly helped by his Adventure of Living and his Learning to Grow Old.
In addition, I again deeply benefitted from reading Marilynne Robinson’s triology Gilead, Home and Lila. Her presentation of Christianity is profoundly winsome.
Posted in: Does Social Justice Contribute to Church Decline?
This is a wonderful story, little known and very timely.
Posted in: Social Justice Overtures #12; #13; #14
Hi Eric:
Rom. 13 establishes that all governing authorities are of God, accountable to God and deserving of support in as far as they fulfill their God-given mandate. It does not specify whether a governing authority is local, state, federal or international, whether it is hereditary, a constitutional monarchy, or a republic, nor whether it is appointed, dictatorial, resulting from conquest, or democratically elected. It covers all governing authority but does not speak to size of country or an optimum form of governance.
I am not suggesting Europeans are more God-fearing than people in North America. I am suggesting that the European Union is the most successful treaty of nations in modern times. It has successfully prevented armed conflict among its members for over 50 years, promoted cooperation, eliminated borders, worked towards the common good of all its members, replacing centuries of strive and conflict. I was born in Europe during wwII and well remember what Europe was like before the Union. Christians should celebrate and support the Union’s efforts and oppose all attempts to thicken borders for self-interest and exploitation of others.
You say the church should not bind the conscience of its members. If its members hold political views that are not shaped by Bible truths the church would be negligent to not point that out. I took exception to your view that immigration policies should aim to preserve our home country, which usually means our home country is only for people like us and we will let people in only if there is a net benefit to us. Such thinking, in a world of great inequality, exploitation and injustices, is in my view not supported by Bible teachings, it runs contrary to all Jesus taught.
Posted in: Social Justice Overtures #12; #13; #14
Hi Doug:
Thank you for weighing in. There are no easy answers to immigration. I struggle as much as anyone. In the 2015 federal election I voted for Trudeau in part because he promised to bring 50,000 Syrian refugees while his predecessor, Harper, was dragging the puck and painting all Muslims as a threat to us. Trudeau was elected and delivered. I admire Germany’s Merkel for taking in 1 million refugees. Many predicted chaos. Does that mean an open policy? Probably not. One consideration is how quickly new arrivals can be integrated lest chaos does result. I think on balance we can for good reasons discount the extremes. As indicated, my reading of Jesus suggests that a far greater tolerance in both the US and Canada for the plight of the millions displaced is warranted. I do know that holding the line on immigration because we must preserve our own country is not Bible-based. He who wants to save his life will lose it. It is by emptying ourselves that we serve Jesus. In an earlier post you said the US still takes in more than any other nation, perhaps in absolute numbers, but as a percentage of the existing population Canada’s intake is twice to three times that of the US. My own congregation of Ladner CRC has for 12 years taken in on average one refugee family a year. Every Sunday I am surrounded by two Iranian families and sprinkled through the sanctuary are many others. It has been a blessing to them but even more for us. I can respect Christians whose views differ from mine as long at they base their views on Bible teachings. That must at all times be out touchstone. Nor do I think that my understanding of the Bible is the only right and true interpretation. Over the years my understanding of the Bible has shifted, not because the Bible is not reliable but because my understanding is very fallible.
Posted in: Social Justice Overtures #12; #13; #14
Dan, thank you for your response. I do not find your summary accurate.
One The modern nation-state is a European invention of the last 400 years. I find nothing in the Bible that commands us to maintain the nation-state. I do find in the Bible we are our brother’s keeper and that in Christ borders breakdown. While we await the new earth the nation-state can be an instrument of good for promoting and administering justice, for instance, but it can also be used for self-centered purposes, and that Christians must resist. God created the earth to held in common by all, by what right then do we put up borders for the purpose to keep others out?
Two, Yes, even Overture #14 allows for political advocacy.
Three, I want the denomination to advocate for public policies that are shaped by and based on Bible teachings.
Four, I oppose #13 and #14 because they deal with symptoms, not the cause. The cause is differences in how we understand the Bible.
I must express my discomfort with describing those who hold positions within the denomination as employees. Such language is demeaning and reduces the Church to a business organization. Those who occupy Church positions have a calling, a vocation, an office governed by their mandate but more importantly they are accountable to God.
Posted in: Social Justice Overtures #12; #13; #14
Good Morning Doug:
You are keeping me very busy. This is turning into a full time job. I appreciate you drawing attention to the need to differentiate between the various tasks of God-instituted social structures. The command to love your neighbour takes on different forms depending on whether the neighbour is your employer, the plumber, or your spouse. The particular form that love takes is determined by the tasks of each social structure. The task of the business enterprise differs from that of government and that of marriage is different again. That flows out of Kuyper’s sphere sovereignty. I get that and it remains a helpful tool to shape the actions of Christians. As you note, the task of government is to promote and administer justice. That is not merely for its own citizens but for all citizens of the world. That is the basis for foreign aid and humanitarian relief efforts. Today, 60 million people world-wide are displaced, looking for a safe place. That deserves government action as much as an earthquake in Haiti. During our life time the role of government has enlarged beyond recognition. It is possible to use sphere sovereignty to argue for limited government to the point where all acts of charity and compassion including health care and all social services are left to individuals. We have to recognize history, that is, the increasing complexity and inter-relatedness of life which requires a larger role for government. We cannot go back to simpler days because the job of caring for those in need, if left to individuals would not get done at all. In his day Kuyper was criticized for being a Socialist because he recognized the need for government regulation and intervention, as was Teddy Roosenvelt when he busted business monopolies at exactly the same time. How can we love those 60 million displaced persons today without government initiatives? How can we provide health care to our own citizens except through a single-payer system? It will not happen. The job will not get done. Many who argue for limited government, whether supported by sphere sovereignty or otherwise, at the same time endorse massive subsidies for business and not only in the US. In my part of the world the Fraser Valley dairy farmers grow rich because of “supply management” while preaching free enterprise for everyone except themselves. In short, to me, the call to love our neighbour must shape government initiatives and public policies as much as my personal actions. Kyper's Sphere Sovereignty was balanced by his Sphere Universality, holding to the one without the other allows people to claim that religion has no bearing on politics. That is to turn Kuyper on his head, As for Calvin, I have never heard anyone accuse Calvin of a Two Kingdom view. I do remember reading Calvin to say government was given for our good and as neccessary as bread and water. Calvin was not a Libertarian. He also served on City Council and had the Church build hospitals and sewer lines.
Posted in: Social Justice Overtures #12; #13; #14
Doug and Eric:
Thank you for interacting. I am Canadian and not sufficiently informed about OSJ activities to make a valid assessment. But I am not much interested in that discussion. As my letter goes on to state the denomination has more important fish to fry than quibbling over who the messenger should be, the denomination or its members. Many of our members think president Trump is a man of God, to many others he is the Devil incarnate. That is not merely a political disagreement, our political disagreements have turned so intense and all-encompassing they are spiritual disagreements. That our members can no longer speak to each other about political issues as Christians informed by the Bible and in way that is respectful has spiritual origins. We read the Bible differently, we have different understandings of what constitutes modern-day idol worship. Increasingly, I hear voices, including Calvin’s James Bratt, questioning how much Evangelicalism has in common with Christianity. In that reality, discussing who does what in addressing government is treating symptoms. The denomination needs to address the underlying cause. Overture #12 aims to do that. It asks the denomination to find ways whereby the members in their local churches struggle to understand the central Bible teachings that relate to government, its task and how we are to serve God as citizens of our respective countries. We need to find greater agreement on what the Bible teaches. That, it seems to me, is where the denomination should focus its efforts. Overture #13 and #14 miss the mark. Neither overture will result in greater unity among out members. They will only lay bare hidden fissures. The church does not need that at this time.
Posted in: Social Justice Overtures #12; #13; #14
How wonderful to have a fellow Canadian join the discussion and we are just down the road from each other.
Harry, I do not doubt our church members can make judgments about political matters. The concern of Overture #12 is that often we fail to do so as Christians. We make political judgments that are not informed by the Bible. For example, I often hear Christians defend restrictive immigration policies because ‘we are about to be over-run.’ Is that a biblical argument? I have never seen or heard a defense of restricted immigration that quoted Jesus, or the prophets, or the Apostolic letters or the confessions. Do we lack a Christian mind when it comes to politics?
You say the church need not instruct its members in political discipleship because the members do not lack in biblical understanding. I think we do, at least when it comes to politics. Another example, Overture #12 is grounded in the Bible. You disagree with the Overture, but on what grounds? You don’t say. Are your views about the task of the church derived from the Bible? I know what Jesus’ instructions are, “Teach them to observe all I commanded you!” What did Jesus command that might relate to immigration? Perhaps something about loving others!
All Jesus commanded. Think of that. For starters, Jesus spoke more about money than any other topic, he also spoke a lot about idols, false gods. If the church cannot equip the saints for ministry what do you take the task of the church to be?
You say the church should preach and teach the Catechism. Here I agree, totally, because the catechism covers the 10 Commandments. The Ten Commandments show us how to live in righteousness on earth. When you and I were a bit younger, the Catechism and the Law played a huge role, they grounded us to think and live life Christianly. In contrast, today most messages from the pulpit are designed to take us away from this life. Overture #12 asks that the church through all its preaching and teaching equip its members for political discipleship so we might glorify God in how we talk and act as citizens, so God's will be done on earth.
PS Harry, the quote you attribute to Jason Ellis are my words and I agree with them. I am particularly pleased that you think Jason Ellis said it best.
Posted in: Social Justice Overtures #12; #13; #14
Eric, thank you for engaging. You suggest we need immigration laws to protect the nation-state. Does Jesus, does the Bible command us to protect the nation-state? On the face of it, not at all! The OT says protect the stranger among you because you were a stranger and God delivered you .... 36 times it is repeated. Jesus is about inclusion, breaking down walls. Do you think there will be nation-sates on the new earth? Historically, the nation-state is weakening, if not disappearing. That is moving in the direction of the Kingdom. In the meantime we must recognize the nation-state can be a force for good but also for great evil. Let us use the nation-state for good while working toward a better order. Do you not think that the European Union represents a model more worthy of Christian support than calls for isolationism?
I greatly admire John Calvin, in his commentary on the Lord's Prayer he asks who is included in the 'our', just the disciples, just the Jews, just Christians? No, every member of the human race. He also discusses how difficult it is to love our neighbour because some of them are disgusting, immoral and ready to take advantage of us. Calvin says it is possible only when we see all humans as image bearers, made in God's likeness. If Christians advocated for those values to be reflected in immigration laws we would testify to the coming of the Kingdom and hounour King Jesus. Too often we merely parrot the values of the world which in our culture is money.