Jesus Creed Politics

I’ve been sporadically blogging for over a year now, and I’ve offered very few thoughts on politics. That’s partially because I don’t have a lot of thoughts on politics, and partially because I think Christians have prostituted the Kingdom and the Gospel to political action. As I said in my sermon where I mentioned this, it happens for conservatives and liberals. We hand the responsibility, as God’s people, over to secular government to bring what we think is God’s will on earth. And while it’s not the responsibility of the government to ensure that the work of God is done, it’s also painfully true–as my cyber-friend Nate recently pointed out to me–that the party lines have created a false dichotomy between what is “biblical” or “godly” in the first place. And so, because of these things, and the increasing ungodliness of most politicians, I really have little place in my heart and mind for politics of any variety.

That being said, the unfortunate part is that we can’t really get away from it. Sticking our head in the sand is worthless and cowardly–even if it is really tempting. So I’ve still been trying to process all my thoughts on politics. For better or for worse, this may result in a few more politically oriented posts, as my blog is the place for me to get my thoughts out of my head (for sanity’s sake). But, the fortunate thing is that I don’t have to think about these things alone.

For those who may not read Scot McKnight–his blog or any one of a number of his books–I would encourage you to do so. He is an Anabaptist (I think, if I’m wrong, please correct me), which is great, but can be as ambiguous as calling yourself Protestant. He is certainly less Calvinistic, though I doubt he would call himself Arminian either. He is at least sympathetic with the Emerging Church, but again, I don’t know if he would place himself fully in that classification. But most importantly, his theology flows from what he calls the “Jesus Creed”–the statement of Jesus that says the greatest commandment is loving God and the second is loving others. Most of us like to say or think that our theology flows from this directive as well. I would recommend Scot’s The Jesus Creed to see what a theology and life revolving around those words of Jesus would look like.

Anyway, these two disparate ideas come together as McKnight has decided to talk through politics on his blog. So far, there is a letter posted that provided the impetus for the series. The other posts are a general introduction, where he says some of the same things I said in my first paragraph, and the first post, which happens to look at McCain’s politics and the Kingdom of God. Scot promises to deal with Obama next.

I really just happen to see his thoughts as interesting, and very close to where I am at the present time. I plan to try to update my this post with his future posts on this topic. I recommend McKnight in general, but it looks as if he will have some good thoughts on politics, and Scot is always positive about people, even if he is being negative–which would be a fresh breath in itself.

Voting for President 1 (here), 2 (here), 3 (here), 4 (here).

Avoiding the Avoidance Ethic

I’ve been reading John Piper’s Don’t Waste Your Life for a class this semester. It is a short book, and is not entirely different than Piper’s normal teaching. In fact, having read Desiring God and Let the Nations be Glad!, I would say there is very little that I’ve seen which cannot be found in one of those two books.

But, there is one part that caught my eye, and I think it is worth repeating. Allow me to quote a bit from it:

If we are going to pay the price and take the risks it will cost to make people glad in God, we move beyond the avoidance ethic. This way of life is utterly inadequate to awaken people to the beauty of Christ. Avoiding fearful trouble and forbidden pleasures impresses almost no one. The avoidance ethic by itself is not Christ-commending or God-glorifying. There are many disciplined unbelievers who avoid the same behaviors Christians do. Jesus calls us to something more radical than that.

People who are content with the avoidance ethic generally ask the wrong questions about behavior. They ask, What’s wrong with it? What’s wrong with this movie? Or this music? Or this game? Or these companions? Or this way of relaxing? Or this investment? Or this restaurant? Or shopping at this store? What’s wrong with going to the cabin every weekend? Or having a cabin? This kind of question will rarely yield a lifestyle that commends Christ as all satisfying and makes people glad in God. It simply results in a list of don’ts. It feeds the avoidance ethic.

The better questions to ask about possible behaviors is: How will this help me treasure Christ more? How will it help me show that I do treasure Christ? How will it help me know Christ or display Christ? The Bible says, “Whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God” (1 Corinthians 10:31). So the question is mainly positive, not negative. How can I portray God as glorious in this action? How can I enjoy making much of him in this behavior?

In a sense, this is nothing new. Though I’ve never read Dallas Willard’s book, I’ve heard enough about “sin management” that I think I understand it. And, if I do understand, this is similar in content. It also reminds me of Scot McKnight’s definition of sin in his book The Jesus Creed. To summarize, he says that the Jesus Creed is to love God and love others–taken from Jesus’ response to the teachers of the law about the greatest command. Since this is the greatest command, McKnight sees sin as anything that fails to love God and love people. For McKnight, the standard definition of sin as “breaking God’s law” is insufficient, as it fails to go far enough. Therefore, complacency, apathy, and other similar things are sin, as they fail to actively love God or people.

God never calls us to simply avoid the world, but to pursue Him. If, in pursuing Him, you have failed to avoid the world, then something is probably wrong. The amazing thing about these understandings of Christianity is that they have actually expanded the comprehensiveness of sin. In the avoidance scheme, watching a dirty movie might fall under the sin category, after we have decided on the specific movie rating that Jesus would have us stay under. Under the glorifying God/Jesus Creed scheme, watching a “clean” movie could be sin, if it fails to actively seek to glorify God, love God or love others. Yet, the latter scheme actually gives me more of a desire to faithfully live out the Christian life.