Gay Marriage & Christian Faith

August 31st, 2010 No comments »

In my last post on this topic, I made two observations regarding this debate.

  1. First, the issue of gay marriage and Christian Faith will not go away and it will continue to shape the public debate.
  2. Second, every church in America will at some point be forced to take a stand on this issue one way or the other.

I have spent a lot of time contemplating this post.  The issue is a lot more clear in my head, so what follows is my best attempt to put my Faith into writing.

First, My Faith is Not Political

This, to me, is the most fundamental point to the issue of gay marriage.  I have written a lot on about the politics of Faith over the past years, so I will leave it to you, the reader, to do some research so you can understand this point (a good starting point is the articles linked at the bottom of this post or use the Category “Politics” to refine your search).  Christianity, in its truest form, is quite dissimilar from the other major world religions when it comes to politics.  The little chart below shows the fundamental difference.

 

Faith Comparison of Major Religions

Most important to notice is that Christianity is the only major religion that is NOT political.  In contrast, Judaism IS a political religion, but NOT evangelistic and Islam is BOTH Political and Evangelistic.

Israel, for example, is the political expression of Judaic faith, but they make no attempt to convert the Muslim or Christian citizens of Israel to their faith.  Nor do they force their citizens to observe Jewish Torah.

Islam is BOTH Political and Evangelistic.  Pick any Muslim country in the world (Turkey being the most moderate example) and you will see a legitimate interpretation of Islamic faith in action.  Mohammad is the first and best example.  He established the first Islamic State, Medina, in the middle 7th Century.  Islam is both concerned with Political power and converting non-belivers to follow Allah.

Christianity, as defined by Jesus, the Apostle Paul, and the New Testament, is NOT Political, but only concerned with taking the Good News (Gospel) of Jesus to those who do not have it.  Jesus refused to establish himself as a political leader and his first Apostles followed his example.  Christianity is decidedly apolitical in its nature. Our goal is Evangelistic (which means to spread to the good news), but not to convert people to a political view.

I will pick up on this point in another time, but suffice to say, this is why I think Conservative Evangelicalism in America has bastardized what it means to be a Disciple of the Messiah Jesus. Conservative Evangelicalism in its current incarnation has conflated politics, and Democracy, with the true evangelistic mission of Christian Faith.

Second, My Faith is Not Legal

This is another area where so many Christians get confused because of poor teaching over the past decades.  Too many confuse the Old Testament, which tells the history of the Jews, with the politics of America.  Simply put, The Old Testament theocracy and Torah (Law) was meant to bring Israel to the realization that no Law can make the heart of Man righteous.  The Law of the Old Covenant between God and Israel illustrated that no legal system can make people good.  Each person needs to be remade in the Image of God, not subjected to a form of government.  Thus, all the Law pointed to Jesus as the Savior and hope of mankind.

Judaism, as it is lived out today, does not see a need for Jesus as Messiah and so they live out their faith through either the politics of Israel, or through obedience to a set of Laws they find consistent with the Torah.

Islam, because it is both Political and Evangelistic, lives out their law and enforces it on others.  That is why we find Homosexuals hanged or killed in Muslim countries for their “sin” of homosexuality.  It is why Islamic countries have laws that force women to wear head coverings and stone women to death for sex outside of marriage.

Faith in Jesus, in contrast, recognizes that no matter how good our laws our, they are not enough to change the heart of people.  It is the great irony of American Evangelicalism that so many people think that if they pass a law to prohibit gay marriage, they will somehow keep the country “pure.”  But even God with his perfect Law (Torah) could not purify Israel.  This is why so much of the Evangelical furvor against homsexual marriage makes no sense.  It is an attempt to live out a Legalistic faith instead of an Evangelistic one.

Finally, Where I Stand

So given this understanding of my Faith, here is where I stand.

1. Christianity is not political, yet we live in a democracy.  Out of respect to the political powers in authority over me, I do feel obligated to vote my conscience.  However, there are two caveats to this point.

First, I do not find any foundation in the teachings of Jesus or in the teachings of the New Testament that would allow me to persuade others to share my political conscience.  In other words, it does not fit with my personal faith to endorse or create any “Christian” Political Action Committees to oppose gay marriage.  I do not think it is of any value to donate money to candidates who share my faith.  I do no support any advertisement campaign to “raise public awareness,” engage the “culture war” or persuade people to vote against gay marriage.  These are the methods of politicians, not Christians.

Second, if push comes to shove, I would gladly give up my right to vote at all if it caused anyone to stumble and think my faith in Jesus was in any way political or legal.  Voting my conscience is NOT my primary obligation.  My first obligation is to be an Ambassador to Jesus, not an emissary of the political Right (or Left) of America.

2. Christianity is not legalistic, so while I trust the biblical teaching that homosexuality is a sin, passing a law against homosexuality or against homosexual marriage is not my mission.  My mission is the Gospel of Jesus Christ.  My only obligation is to share the Good News of Jeuss and then I must allow the Holy Spirit to convict others of both their sin and the path of righteousness. This is hard for legalistic-Evangelicals, because they would rather be in control and force others to follow their rules even if they do not share their heart.  But the message of Christ, and Him Crucified, is that our Heavenly Father wants to restore our hearts and then lead us into right action—not the other way around.

In short, it does not matter if gay marriage is legal or illegal in America.  The legality of this State sanctioned contract does not change my mission; it only shows how big my mission is.

  • Share/Bookmark

Weekly Tweets for 2010-08-22

August 22nd, 2010 No comments »
  • Excited to spend the morning at the DMV! #
  • The good news, the DMV was so much fun, I get to come back again!!!! #
  • RT @ArtieDavis A good leader knows that sometimes others will receive the credit for some of his or her greatest http://tl.gd/37i05h #
  • My day.. happy b-day Nathan… fun time at SeaWorld… Zachary broke his nose… may need fixed… no insurance… praying for healing… #
  • Zachary may have a concussion as well… #
  • Share/Bookmark

Weekly Tweets for 2010-08-15

August 15th, 2010 No comments »
  • RT @b_moss RT @JohnMurphy8: Anyone in mood to spar? Really need to let some agression go in violent way. Promise http://tl.gd/301qks #
  • Looking at photos on my trip reminds me how much I love my family! #
  • Fun family day @ Balboa Park #
  • RT @b_moss Some modern worship music is as artistic and lyrically deep as Dora's song about the map // sadly true! #
  • Super Bowl XL: Mike Pereira Says Leavy Didn't Err http://tinyurl.com/39933p6 // Now can Seattle Seahawks fans stop whining? #
  • A long day ahead of me! #
  • RT @watters Droid [fill in the blank]: the phone you get when you want an iPhone but can't/won't leave Verizon for AT&T. // I feel ya' #
  • Diversity is not the mission of the church, but it is a consequence of the Gospel! #
  • Yummy Sushi for lunch #
  • Share/Bookmark

The Myth of Institutional Church

August 12th, 2010 2 comments »

One of my pet peeves over the years has been the abuse of language.  Or to be more precise, the use of language that distorts the meaning of words.

For example, “Christian Music”.  Is there really such a thing?  No.  The word “Christian” is a noun that defines an individual’s relationship as a disciple of jesus Christ.  The term “Christian” Music turns the word into an adjective that modifies the noun music.  Can music be a disciple of Jesus? How silly.  The term “Christian” as it relates to music creates an easy way to market a product to a targeted demographic, but it is terrible abuse of its true meaning.  There is music that is sung by Christians.  There is music that is written to worship YHWH.  But there is no such thing as music that has accepted Jesus as Savior and therefore no such thing as “Christian music.”

I think the same thing applies to the term”Institutional Church”.  The term exposes a gross misunderstanding of the word “Church.”  There is simply no such thing as “Institutional Church” or “Organic Church.” or any other culturally-conditioned man-centered noun modifier people want to put in front of Church.

There is only one Church defined as the men and women who are collectively saved by the shed blood of Jesus.  There are some churches that live out their faith in a more structured way and others in a far less structured way, but they are all still THE Church.

My biggest gripe about the myth of Institutional Church, is that the term is used to create a divide between followers of Jesus.  If a Church is deemed “Institutional” by some group then somehow, magically, it is no longer considered a valid gathering of saints.  “Institutional” becomes a pejorative, created by one group of Christians, to marginalize another group of Christians.  It is used to create an artificial divide between what some consider the “real” church from the “false” church… Does this sound familiar? “whew.. I am glad I am no longer part of that Institutional Church and that my faith is real.”

Words have purpose and their use has consequence.  In this case, the purpose of  calling some gatherings”Institutional” has the consequence of dividing the one Church into social denominations.

Let me be clear… are there some practices carried out in some Churches that depersonalize our faith?  Yes. Can we do better at living out the nature of Church in America?  Yes.  But using pop-culture market-driven phrases designed to sell books and that have no biblical foundation only creates friction and will keep the one Church from going where we need to go.

So can we all agree to reject the myths of man-centered faith and be the Church together?

  • Share/Bookmark