welcome to multiple strands

a place to converse, virtually, on a variety of topics, bringing together multiple strands to encourage, question, challenge, ponder, and edify. A cord of three strands is not quickly torn apart. (Eccl. 4.12)

Wednesday, January 23, 2013

Statism, the dominant religion?

In God We Trust, or so the inscription states on currency in America.  But exactly which "god" is that?  I have increasing wondering on this point.  As I am very, very late to the party, I simply need to reference works for others.

A recent news article prompted these thoughts.  An article simply titled Statism from some time ago, written by R. C. Sproul (what an amazing mind that man has!), formally introduced me to the topic.  He wrote
Statism is the natural and ultimate enemy to Christianity because it involves a usurpation of the reign of God. ... the church and the nation face a serious crisis in our day. In the final analysis, if statism prevails in America, it will mean not only the death of our religious freedom, but also the death of the state itself. We face perilous times where Christians and all people need to be vigilant about the rapidly encroaching elevation of the state to supremacy.
I am aware that others have spoken and written about this issues, including Russell Moore on First Things and The World and Everything In It (good stuff!) and First Things, and even Ayn Rand (again, to my shame, I have not read her works yet, so I cannot comment on her views).

Why do I write this post now?  This article, posted on CNN, is a prime example of what Sproul and Moore spoke.  In one of the most viewed CNN iReport articles, the author concluded 
I do not want religion to go away. I only want religion to be kept at home or in church where it belongs. It’s a personal effect, like a toothbrush or a pair of shoes. It’s not something to be used or worn by strangers. I want my children to be free not to believe and to know that our schools and our government will make decisions based on what is logical, just and fair—not on what they believe an imaginary God wants.
Do you see it?  I have no qualm with the author writing this phrase (though I completely disagree).  I would ask, respectfully:  Do I want my children to know that our schools and government make decisions based on what is logical, just and fair?  On what basis could our schools and government possible base decisions of justice and fairness, outside of either democratic voting (might makes right), or dictatorship (because I said so)?

Again, I am no political theorist, and I acknowledge my understanding of this topic is very limited.  Yet I see the raising of the "state" as a pseudo-religion, ultimately becoming a "god" (without using the term).  Am I wrong?

Sunday, January 13, 2013

emphasis: bloody cross or empty tomb?

A thought for the new year:

As we seek to live in light of the gospel - good news - of Jesus Christ, I am noticing a significant focus on the cross upon which Jesus was brutally executed.  It was this pivotal event in history that secured justification and salvation of those who confess and believe.
But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it—the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction: for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God's righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins. It was to show his righteousness at the present time, so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.  (Romans 3:21-26 ESV)

and

if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved. (Romans 10:9-10 ESV)

Paul presses home this historical fact, this reality, time after time after time...
For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. (1 Corinthians 15:2-5 ESV)
My observation is one of emphasis, not one of omission.  It is this:
Do we focus so much on the cross that we inadvertently neglect the empty tomb?

Yes, that the incarnate God-Man died in my place ("justifier") on the cross is pivotal in history.  And that the Father counted Him worthy ("just") to pay the penalty of sin on my behalf, and so much more broadly, on behalf of all mankind, and even creation (Romans 8.20-25) is our only hope ... and oh, what a hope (assurance) it is!
Now if Christ is proclaimed as raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? But if there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain. We are even found to be misrepresenting God, because we testified about God that he raised Christ, whom he did not raise if it is true that the dead are not raised. For if the dead are not raised, not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. If in Christ we have hope in this life only, we are of all people most to be pitied.
But in fact Christ has been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. For as by a man came death, by a man has come also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive. (1 Corinthians 15:12-22 ESV)
Rejoice in the hope, for we follow a risen Saviour, and there is an empty tomb!