That Ted Cruz, with some of the most obviously Antichrist of policies was able to gull enough evangelical voters in Iowa to support him shows that there is something massively wrong with a large part of that movement. That is if the actual teachings of Jesus are important to them. That a hate-spouting, war-mongering son of a preacher man can be passed off to such voters as the Christian in the race shows as much about the sad state of Christianity in the United States as it does anything.
American Christians have been as seduced by Mammon as non-religious Americans have. The idolatry of money, of power, the exclusiveness of racism, and other kinds of bigotry, the oppressive misogynistic form of masculinity that is as much of it as anything is all about as opposed to the Gospel of Jesus as could be, yet that is what is identified as Christianity by the media and by large numbers of people who falsely claim allegiance to that Gospel.
Perhaps some of the problem has been the passive non-resistance to that "christianity" by those who take the radical economic justice of the Gospels and the Jewish prophetic tradition the most seriously. That the person in the Iowa race who is closest to that is Bernie Sanders isn't really any great mystery. Hillary Clinton comes in a second on that count. That Sanders is often presented as a "secular Jew" - which many people interpret as "atheist" - is interesting, though in decades of Sanders watching I don't remember him ever declaring his religious belief.
If the often touted "evangelical vote" were really influenced by their reading of the words of Jesus, they would have stood up for Sanders yesterday, or perhaps Hillary Clinton. And, you know, I would bet that more than a few Christian evangelicals DID support either of those candidates, not that you're going to hear about them. That so many of them stood up for the Antichristian candidates, most of all Ted Cruz makes me think of the predictions that Jesus made of those who would find his Gospel too hard, to much of a personal sacrifice.
The tests of authenticity in those who claim to be followers of Jesus are laid out in the Gospel, those who follow the teachings of Jesus and his exposition of the Jewish Law are the rock bottom foundation of it. He said that doing to others what you would have them do to you was "The Law and the prophets". He also said that what we do to the least among us we do to God. He also said that those who serve Mammon cannot serve God. There is no way to intuit those requirements from the politics of Ted Cruz or Donald Trump or any of the Republican candidates, in every single case their policies are the direct opposite of the Gospel of Jesus, it is anti-Jesus, their "christianity" is, in fact, Antichristianity.
We need a real religious fight in this country, against the Antichrist that flourishes among us. At the very least those who take the Gospel seriously, who think that it is the truth have to loudly and constantly call out those who promote the opposite of that, lying about its identity.
I'm not real interested in basing my Christianity on how loudly I can shout. I leave that to the Falwells and Robertsons of the world.
ReplyDeleteAs I've said before, the Christians who are interested in Ted Cruz or Donald Trump or even Marco Rubio are interested in power, not in Christianity. I can preach the power of powerlessness, which is I think at the heart of the gospel (along with charity and hospitality), but I can't preach it by declaring it a greater power than all the powers of the world.
That's an irony too far.
The only way to preach Christianity, ultimately, is to live Christianity; and you can't do that by challenging the powers of the world to an arm-wrestling match. I agree with you about what is "Anti-Christian," but what the media wants is a fight, a boxing match, preferably a mud-wrestling match. If I'm not going to be Ted Cruz, I can't fight like Ted Cruz.
I am disgusted with a media that declares Mammon the only measure of Godliness. Falwell and Robertson were only attended to insofar as they claimed enough of a segment of public attention (with money the measure) that they resembled a Wall Street banker. Even the Pope gets attention because of his "Pope-mobile" and his position of power (so many Catholics!) and his entourage (how many Protestant leaders live in their own castle and common such a bureaucracy?). I don't mean to demean the Papacy to point that out, but it's the glittering facade that draws the American media's attention, not the humility of spirit expressed by Francis I.
I will "fight" the "Antichristians" with the humility of the Gospel, not the arrogance of Ted Cruz. It seems a one-sided effort, as measured by the world. I prefer to measure by the power of God's powerlessness. If I cannot represent the Gospel, I cannot preach the Gospel, and I lose whatever standing I have to oppose the abuse and misuse of the Gospel.