We have done foolish things in Christian History, and still do.

Church and State

Church and State, what a lovely concept of having a nation so deeply rooted in faith that it is directly tied together with the government. Imagine the possibilities of such a union. Full support from the government for missions and evangelism; prayer and scripture involved in every facet of government; what could be better? There was a shout of joy at the conversion of Constantine; a rejoice as Christianity was made the religion of the nation. Finally after years of persecution the government has seen the light! Finally the sufferings endured by centuries of brothers and sisters paid off. If ever there was a perfect time for spreading the good news, it is now. The weight of the pagan gods has been thrown off and the truth has been brought to the head of the government. Imagine the days to come. As the gospel spreads across the country like wild fire surely now the gospel will be taken to the uttermost ends of the earth. As every nation, tribe and tongue is reached we will surely see the coming of Christ and the glories of Heaven unfold. Oh what a glorious day indeed! Or so it may have seemed.

It could not have helped but seem an answer to prayer and a God ordained union to some. I cannot answer for sure how I would have felt about the subject had I lived in that time; in reality I wanted this to work. I was happy as I played out the image in my mind of having my faith so closely tied in with state. The thought of having an integrated faith and government should not be considered foreign or all wrong to us. In the perfection of Heaven we will see this take place as we see every knee bow down to our God and Father of our faith. But as is was for me it surely must have been for others. I failed to bring into account the one element that keeps us contained in this world, sin. If man before the fall could not keep complete check on himself in the Garden of Eden then he was surely destine to fail to keep check over the faith of others in his fallen state. While this may be an achievable goal, it will not be accomplished by man.

As the years unfolded on the pages of history the progressing nightmare was told. How did the Church go from Justin Martyr to the Dominican Order? From a people that endured torture for the name of Christ to a people that inflicted torture in the name of Christ, the Church was radically changed. I seem to have the feelings of a father trying to comprehend the addiction found in his daughter. How could this have happened? She was so innocent, such a beautiful light to others. What made her make these choices? Why couldn’t she see what was happening to her and how she was hurting herself and others?

So what is the answer? Do we abandon completely the idea of faith playing a role in government? Should the Church be completely divorced from the state? Should Christians isolate themselves from government and state offices? One possible answer: The presence of the Church should only be felt in government through the beliefs and moral convictions of those believers holding office in government and in no way should the leaders of the Church be directly tied to the state outside of being the spiritual leaders of the congregations in which the government officials reside. As in any situation and in a government chosen by the people the Church’s focus should be on the Great Commission. The change brought about by a relationship with Christ brings about a moral and spiritual cleansing. Through ongoing discipleship in the individual believer and an intentional approach to evangelism all with the guidance of the Holy Spirit the Church will grow. This change brought about on the population will in effect change the culture we live in. This change will be felt in all aspects including government. You cannot change the government to change people, you must change people to change the government. Are the problems we have today anything to do with a lack of the Church being involved in the state, or is it more likely a problem with the faith in the Church?

Christian Jihad

Christian Jihad is a very eye opening book. Having little study into the Crusades my perception of them was greatly weighed on by Hollywood. Take for example Robin Hood. As the story goes the Honorable King Richard was absent fulfilling his duty to England and God. In Indiana Jones and The Last Crusade the knight portrayed is one of most heroic and outstanding character having not abandoned his post for hundreds of years. To see what the view of the early Church was and then to see how warped the Church became in later years is really frightening. The view given of the Donatists and the Anabaptists and how they were treated by the organized Church is scary to say the least. How could a people who actually read the Bible be so far off as to think that torture and murder were bringing people to God? Where did Christ nail the Pharisees to a cross? What example or teaching was used?
Another part of the book I deeply enjoyed was learning the depth of the Just War criteria. While Augustine is not able to come to a fully complete acceptance of war I feel a sense of relation in that I am not always able to completely put all my eggs in one basket. Overall I feel confident that Christian Jihad will serve as an excellent challenge to traditional and cultural thinking and serve to open up the mind to a clearer view of our world and history.

Quote

I am not sure where I heard this but I believe it speaks volumes on the importance of the decisions we make.

“You make your choices and then your choices make you.”

Resource

As a resource I am recommending that if you don’t already have one that you get a Thompson Chain Reference Bible. Since we are attempting to look at the world from a Biblical view our first point of reference should be the Bible and having a Thompson Chain Reference has been very helpful to me.

“Among the varied influences that have determined both the course of history and the development of historiography religion has ever been one of the most potent. And of all the great religions that have entered into the life of the race Christianity has most profoundly affected the historic process itself and our conceptions of its nature and meaning.

On the one hand, the Gospel of Christ, with its characteristic teachings concerning the spiritual life and the Kingdom of Heaven, literally fashioned a new world for man to live in. It enlarged the resources of human nature; it stimulated and heightened
intellectual pursuits; it chastened the affections; it not only restrained evil but purified the very fountains of morality; it gave dignity and worth to the humblest task and brought fresh sanctities to the joys and sorrows of everyday life. It redeemed men from sin and made them in turn grateful messengers of hope to their fellows. It showed that the life of highest spirituality might prove to be also the life of widest social beneficence, and that religious interests, in any true view of history, are far more important than the merely economic, social, or political factors. Above all, it created the Christian Church, quite the most remarkable of all historic organizations,—that institution which by the sheer value of its contribution to human welfare, temporal as well as spiritual, speedily won a place first of co-ordinate and then of superior influence, beside the state; which in nearly every epoch of its career has continued to accomplish more than any other agency for the promotion of the common good; and which, whatever be our judgment concerning any of its particular achievements or failures, must be regarded as having vastly enlarged and enriched the domain of history.

And on the other hand, Christianity inevitably gave birth to new conceptions of the meaning of history. ‘The rise of ecclesiastical history was more to historiography than was the discovery of America to geography.’ The reasons are not far to seek. They are latent in those views of the world of nature and of human life which are set forth in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments with a clearness and impressiveness matched only by their originality and creative power. It is no accident that the first worthy attempt at a philosophy of history was made under Christian auspices and that it appeared early enough to be credited to the Ancient Church.”

How fascinating it is that from ancient history mankind has continued to define what is acceptable by one’s might! Did either leader in the instance above provide better leadership than the other? Did either man inflict fewer atrocities on humanity than the other? To answer would be difficult. What gave one man the “authority” to impose his will over another? It is nothing more than the “stick” with which he backs up his position. Remember the common saying, “he who has the biggest stick wins.” Just as in the case of the early government of the expanding United States versus the Native American Indians who had been living in the land for years, the US was “allowed” to relocate them. They were not relocated because the US had certain God-given rights to the land, but because the US government had the bigger “stick.” Interestingly, perception plays a greater role in what is right than reality does.

“History is the witness that testifies to the passing of time; it illumines reality, vitalizes memory, provides guidance in daily life and brings us tidings of antiquity.”

Cicero (106BC – 43BC), Pro Publio Sestio

Cicero, a respected Roman orator, author, and politician, shared this view of history at the beginning of his speech, Pro Publio Sestio (On behalf of Sestius). Considered to be one of the most versatile minds of the Roman world, Cicero gave this judicial speech in 56BC as a defense of Publius Sestius against an accusation of public violence. Many historians and philosophers argue that Pro Sestio is Cicero’s most important speech as it serves to account relevant history and introduces many political values and philosophical ethics.

Cicero’s words create a foundation for the importance of studying history. As a student, one can easily see the relevance in such words. The historical/philosophical world would be wise to pay close attention to this statement in order to testify the passing of time, illumine reality, vitalize memory, find guidance in daily life and bring tidings of antiquity.

This quote may be common to some, and new to others.
Regardless, this shows Luther’s understanding of the weight that the Cross carried in redemption but also expresses the love he feels within his relationship with Christ Jesus. The thoughts that are invoked are ones of losing someone that means a lot; someone that has had a vital impact on our life. The reality that Luther felt so close to Christ, he felt as if he had lost his best friend just yesterday, is quite the challenge to complacent or non-active Christians. In a constant pursuit of Christ-likeness, we draw closer to Him whom which we desire to be, thus enhancing a relationship to one that is personal. Conclusion: The quote is not only to show Luther’s immense love for Christ, but to serve as a challenge to love Christ in such a fashion, we truly understand that “…we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin. Let us then with confidence draw near to the throne of grace, that we may receive mercy and find grace to help in time of need.” (Heb 4:14-16)

“God himself will lead them, for they will be doing His work. There will be absolution and remission of sins for all who die in the service of Christ. Here they are poor and miserable sinners; there they will be rich and happy. Let none hesitate; they must march next summer. God wills it!”

I wonder how many tragic events of human history have come to be under the assumption that whoever is committing the act is following God’s will to receive eternal glory. This assumption is not limited of course to Christianity. We see this same mindset in actions of Islamic extremist, in the kamikaze pilots of the Japanese air force in World War II, and in lives of many others in history. We can see the error in this mindset, of course, but I still wonder what kind of ignorance leads the populace to belief in such a mandate.

This quote evokes many unpleasant memories for me. I can think of countless times throughout high school and through some of my jobs in the past where I could sense that God wanted me to share the Truth with someone and I either refused or hesitated to do so. It really does hurt badly to reflect back on all the people that I had at least some sort of relationship with and neglected to share the message of Christ with. Your next breath is not promised and this life is too fleeting; make the most of right now.

-Stephen Charnock

It is better to be an Atheist and deny God’s existence than a “Christian” who denies His holiness or any of His attributes as the Gnostics of the Early Church did.