Should Christianity, politics mix?
by Tristan EmmanuelWe are engaged in a war that is not only defining our times, it is determining our destiny. I'm not talking about the wars in Iraq or Afghanistan, or even the broader war on terror – those are offshoots of the real war. I'm talking about the culture war. The culture war is a struggle between secular socialism and free market traditionalism, and the outcome of this struggle will ultimately determine whether or not the jihadists will pick up the pieces to convert America and Canada into a North American caliphate. Given what is at stake, I must say the traditionalist side has me worried. Part of the problem is that some traditionalists are so consumed with "end times" theorizing, they've virtually given up on politics. The sentiment is that "it is only going to get worse – so why bother." Of course, that doesn't stop them from investing into their retirement funds. However, there is a far more fatal reason for the failure of traditionalists to exercise cultural leadership today and win the culture war, and it has to do with the "emergent church". It seems some pastors, in that church movement, are fed up with Christians engaging the political arena as though it were their divine right. These pastors claim it is "un-Christian to be political." It may be a "civil right", they say, but since when did Jesus care about "civil rights"? Rev. Greg Boyd, a pastor in Minnesota, told CNN's Christiane Amanpour in the recent miniseries "God's Warriors" that equating the kingdom of heaven with "the politics of the world" is like trying to create an "Islamic state." He's not the only pastor with serious reservations about Christians in politics. Rev. Mel White, the former ghostwriter of the late Jerry Falwell's autobiography and now an ex-Evangelical, is also deeply troubled by Christians in the public square. Speaking to RollingStone Magazine, White said: When most people hear… talk about a "Christian nation" they think, "Well, that sounds like a good, moral thing." What they don't know… is that "Christian nation" means something else entirely to these dominionist leaders.White doesn't reveal what the nature of the dominionist conspiracy is, so I had to do a little investigation of my own. The critics say these people want to turn America and Canada into a radicalized version of Old Testament Israel. According to the website religioustolerance.org, that would mean: A system of just restitution for victims would replace the tax payer funded prison system The death penalty would be practiced for serious capital crimes "Legal" abortions would be banished Income taxes would be eliminated Governments would have balanced budgetsThere were also references to other "nefarious" practices such as: Daily Bible reading Daily prayer for America and Canada Teaching children that morality is absoluteReligioustolerance.org drew its obligatory conclusion from all of this zealotry: If radical Christians control civil government, American and Canadian streets will literally be running with blood – just like in Islamic theocracies.Ah yes, the dreaded T-word. Theocracy. It's the catchphrase secularists (and now some "emergent church pastors") love to use to beat back Christian involvement in politics. After all, who wants to live in a "theocracy"? That's just for those crazy Iranians and Afghans! But in a Judeo-Christian context, the term means something completely different, as evidenced by North America's political foundations. Theocracy simply means: "God's rule." The concept clearly appears in the preamble to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and it is an integral part of virtually all of early American constitutional literature. That's not to say either country was ever a "theocracy." But both countries remain good examples of how a Judeo-Christian ethic could and should be applied to the underpinnings of society. Concepts such as justice, liberty and equality under the law were established in North America precisely because there were predominantly Christian communities. Only an imbecile or a blatant secularist – or both – would purposefully choose to ignore the political impact Christians have had on the creation of America and Canada. Neither Boyd nor White elaborated on their misgivings about Christian involvement in politics, but Boyd did insist that he wouldn't want anyone to have the false impression that Christians actually "want to run a Christian society and enforce Christian law." Heavens no. Far better to let atheists, agnostics, humanists, socialists, or Marxists rule the West, like they did in the old Soviet Union. Remember the Soviet Union? It lasted what, 70 years? And when it collapsed under the weight of its anti-religious, nihilist, man-centered worldview, it gave way to a situation where some of its tiny satellite states were ripe for Islamists to take control. That's why I don't hold out much hope for a victory in the culture war if the current leadership remains in place. When so-called "Christian leaders" are ready to abandon their responsibility, there's not much hope that North America can withstand the tenacity and conviction of the jihadists waiting on the sidelines – witness what's happening in Europe. Besides, if the "end times" are here anyway, why not just pick Hillary for president? That should really speed things up. Then again, there are those retirement funds to consider.
read more | digg story
