The part of the preamble that you quote is the part that I think is an hysterical reaction to an hysterical reaction over 9/11. It reads rather melodramatically, in my opinion. If they have a point, I think the overblown language kind of overwhelms it. I don't think it is entirely accurate anyway, even if I try to overlook the language. I don't believe that all the US's notions of democracy and justice are 'twisted' at all. The US was not the inventor of democracy. Nor do I know what 'the historical misconceptions of its "Christian heritage" mean in this context since it wasn't intended to be a theocracy and it isn't clear to me what the writers expect the US to be.
I think they are referring to the hyper patriots who believe that America and Christianity are synonyms but for me it is hard to tell in these Theses, what the writers think America should be. But the hyperbolic language and the use of "Yahweh" for "God" is a turn-off for me.
Why say "Yahweh" when the way common people express it is as "God?" Even the Jews do that, although they might spell G-d. I'm not disputing that Yahweh/Jehovah is used in the Bible but calling him "God" is also not wrong. We're not calling him "George" for instance. But in using "Yahweh" it is as though they want to make a distinction where none exists, hair-splitting. It is as though they are looking to seem educated but they seem as dumb in that unnecessary distinction as those people who think that Muslims worship Mohammad/that "Mohammad" is the name of the Muslim God. Or "Allah." "Allah" means "God" in Arabic. It's not some new and unknown god. It's no different than if I pray in German, mein Gott.
But I think that there is some Biblical justification for repentance and praying for a nation even when we do not share the ideas that we are repenting from. When you say "And with the separation of church and state, how do we decide which actions to repent?" this would be my thinking.
That Christians are never part of the state. God does not see separation of church and state. It is something that He allows. But I see no indication that He sees that as a good thing anywhere in the Bible, the live and let live attitude. Since I am a citizen of the Kingdom of God and not of the state, I have no problem praying for the state, and maranatha, Lord Jesus, even so, come quickly.
What you are talking about when you talk about the dilemma of how to choose what to pray for in a secular state, is oddly enough, exactly what my objection is to Christians not realising that they are citizens of one country only - the Kingdom of Heaven. Which has not yet, but which will, absorb all states, when God Himself will walk once again among us and wipe our tears. What you describe are torn loyalties, and we must serve either one or the other. We can't serve two masters. We can't separate ourselves into multiple personalities and say this is the law for the state and I support it because I see no other option, and then hold a different view in terms of our religion.
So I must pray for all the things that my understanding (which is limited) tells me a Christian ought to pray for. I can pray for leaders, that they will be just. I can pray that the death penalty, or abortion or whatever else I might consider a sin is something that doesn't happen in the state. What I think is wrong though, and where I do think that America has gone wrong - is in thinking that it is possible to serve both masters - to do what the state requires, and which that old idol of personal freedom requires, even if I personally believe it is wrong.
I only mention America as having gone wrong there because the Theses is so geared towards America specifically, and also because Americans, even in politics are so vocal about their faith and there are those who believe that what is right in the Bible should be imposed on the state. Other nations are just as wrong - only I can't think of any but Islamic republics that are as vocal politically on that as Americans.
I don't know - I just don't see a problem with my praying, "Lord, have mercy on Canada. I hope you give us good leaders and good laws. And I am so sorry for the sins we as a nation have committed. Forgive us - we know not what we do."
That is the kind of repentance I think that the writers of the Theses are referring to, although it is hard to tell from the convoluted language. There is that general repentance and the repentance of one's personal sins. I think we need to do both.
We are told that I will bless them that bless you and curse them that curse you regarding Israel and the Jews. But I don't think I agree that there is a measurable correlation in US history with regards to Israel. I would like to see the site you mention. Neither Canada nor the US nor any other country wanted the Jews at all, and even turned them back during WW2. Canada and the US have both been great supporters of Israel since its inception, along with many other countries.
But we are also told that God causes the rain to fall on the just and unjust alike. Therefore I think that we need to be careful before we say there is a cause and effect thing going on here rather than a just and unjust thing going on here.
I also don't think that the verse means that we are not to be critical of Israeli policies. It is like being a friend - sometimes a good friend is the one who has the nerve to tell you what you don't want to hear but need to hear. Israel as an earthly land is as subject to corruption and injustice as any of us. You can be a friend and be critical of Israeli policies and still absolutely want Israel to exist and believe that Israel is a holy people, set apart by God, the gravitational centre of the world, the thing to which all other things turn, whether they know it or not.
But the US will not save Israel from its neighbours that do not wish them well. The Lord Himself shall do that. He will do that so that no one can rationalize away just Whom it was who is Israel's help and shield. He will not, I think, save them by proxy, through another nation, US or otherwise.
Judaism holds that there are 7 Noahic Laws which God gave the nations at the time of Noah and his sons, and those 7 laws are what all nations are required by God to obey. They are 1) not to worship idols; (2) not to blaspheme the name of God; (3) to establish courts of justice; (4) not to kill; (5) not to commit adultery; and (6) not to rob (7) not to eat flesh that had been cut from a living animal (Taken from the Jewish Encyclopedia http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/)
In the great debate between Peter and Paul, we are told that the apostles also agreed that for Gentile Christians, while there was no need for circumcision or keeping kosher, Gentile Christians were obliged to follow some rules, those being (Acts 15:19) Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God: But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood.
See now, this is very interesting to me what you had to say about the pursuit of freedom and Americans hiding in bunkers and relating that to helping people during the Rapture. I don't believe in any of that. I don't think that is theologically defensible. The last days won't be a souped up version of WW2 in which a hero or heroine smuggles food to hiding Jews, or in this case, new Christians.
Revelations 6:15: And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every free man, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains; And said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb: For the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?
I don't believe that anyone will escape those days - not the rich man, nor the free man (your pursuit-of-liberty man). I think that you are also basing this idea on thinking that a lot of people who are left behind, will come to their senses, so to speak, and therefore hide. I don't think that in those last days, any country is excluded, and I think you underestimate just how vile and perverse man can be.
I don't think there will be any helping of their fellow man. Evil doesn't always come in obvious forms. I think that the evil that will come is already among us and survives by disguising itself as goodness. I don't think there will be compounds full of gun-wielding Americans outwitting the anti-Christ and helping Christians. We are told that those who don't follow the anti-Christ will be killed and are given as an example the two witnesses,which traditional theology holds to be Elijah and Enoch. When they are killed, people celebrate - they send each other gifts in a perverted Christmas-like celebration.
Maybe I misunderstood what you are saying about that? I just reread that part of your post and I'm not sure anymore that I understood you correctly.
Ah, well, it's late and I'm not thinking very clearly.
Layla
No comments:
Post a Comment