non-metaphysical stephen

Back in August I wrote some observations and concerns about Ezra’s decree that the people of Israel put away their foreign wives.

Today, while working on a book review, I read an article about that same passage and how it relates to modern African-American readers. The article, “Reflections in an Interethnic/racial Era on Interethnic/racial Marriage in Ezra” by Cheryl B. Anderson, outlines the ways in which the text claims to be about religious purity but in fact promotes cultural divisions along racial, class and gender lines.

Anderson states that Ezra’s emphasis on genealogical purity is actually more severe than earlier Hebrew restrictions on group membership, since earlier texts focused on ritual and/or moral purity, both of which are more amenable than Ezra’s position towards the inclusion of non-Hebrews. Anderson also argues that the decree exacerbated class differences, many of which come to a crisis during the time of Nehemiah. Similarly, she notes the asymmetry of the divorce ban–it affects wives more than husbands; Anderson connects this problem with a more widespread use of “women as Other” throughout the scriptures.

It’s nice to see that I wasn’t off track in my concerns about the implications of the text.

At the same time, Anderson demonstrates the parallels between Ezra’s decree and the anti-miscegenation laws in the United States, many of which were defended by theological arguments that deflected attention from the racial, class and gender problems that accompanied them. Thus, she claims, black readers have good reason to identify more with the divorced wives than with Ezra and his followers. If this is so, then modern readings of the texts need to pay attention to these issues lest they reinscribe the problems we have tried so hard to overcome.

…I found Christ and left the GOP: because they lack charity.

And if we have not charity….

Promises, Promises | Christianity Today

I’ve known about The Political Illusion but didn’t know much about what he says in it until it showed up in my Google Search results a few days back. Tonight I found this discussion of the book from Christianity Today, a magazine I generally have very little in common with other than being a Christian and living “today.” (The article is by Chuck Colson, with whom I also have very little in common. The fact that he wrote this piece almost makes me suspicious of how he’s using Ellul, who had some harsh things to say about conservative Christians.)

From the article, it seems that Ellul focuses on the problem of relying on government for everything. Although I’m critical of all the accusations of socialism (mostly because I feel that the free market is screwing people over and that something needs to change), I recognize that we can’t simply turn everything over to the government. This idea is one I’ve believed for a while, but I must admit that I’ve been reluctant to give any credence to the paranoiacs on the right.

I’m trying to keep my critical distance with all the policy debates going on, and hearing this idea from someone I trust intellectually (Ellul) helps. The church needs to take a stand for human rights, needs to stand up for the people who are getting squeezed by the capitalist system. But how to do this without simply leaving everything up to the government.

I’m convinced that an unregulated free market will continue to be a bad thing. But I don’t want the theocrats getting into office either. So what’s the option for the church to follow that can set an example of how to fix the system without relying more and more on the government?

Here’s the message I wish I could get across to all the conservative folks who try to use Christianity to explain their political policies:

1. Do you follow the Constitution or the Bible?
2. Do you trust in the Founding Fathers or in Jesus?
3. Do you serve the USA or the Realm of God?
4. Are you a citizen or a priest?

You can’t serve two masters. It’s time to pick one.

That’d be my billboard. What’d be on yours?

And I say, Right on, Brother Frank!

Far-Right Evangelicals And The Campaign Against Obama

Above all, ordinary Americans—and especially religious people who seek faith rather than power—need to understand that the evangelical right is basically unpatriotic and anti-American.

As I have said before, the Religious Right has turned the nation into an idol and now worships the scriptures of The Constitution and The Wealth of Nations. So I’d say they’re also un-Christian….

May God deliver us from all who advocate nationalism in place of the humility and charity of Christ. Amen!

Are you effing kidding me????

The American Patriot’s Bible

Here’s the publisher’s description:

THE ONE BIBLE THAT SHOWS HOW ‘A LIGHT FROM ABOVE’ SHAPED OUR NATION. Never has a version of the Bible targeted the spiritual needs of those who love our country more than The American Patriot’s Bible. This extremely unique Bible shows how the history of the United States connects the people and events of the Bible to our lives in a modern world. The story of the United States is wonderfully woven into the teachings of the Bible and includes a beautiful full-color family record section, memorable images from our nation’s history and hundreds of enlightening articles which complement the New King James Version Bible text.

Quelle horreur!!!!!

I’m glad I didn’t know about this before July 4th. I had to give the opening prayer at church the following day and this information would have really set me off!

Thankfully, a lot of people are seeing this in the same way I do–as idolatry. (more…)

David’s relationship to Saul’s reign has always fascinated me. On the one hand, David refuses to kill Saul, on the grounds that Saul is still God’s anointed and therefore it is up to God to remove Saul from the throne. On the other hand, David spends a significant amount of time with Saul’s enemies, the Philistines. David is even willing to go to war with them against Saul; the only reason he doesn’t is because the Philistines do not trust him and send him away.

Still, if we think about what David’s actions must have looked like to those loyal to Saul (i.e., loyal to the government), he gave every appearance of being a traitor. I have to wonder how David’s actions would look to us today in the States–would David ever be accepted as a legitimate ruler given that he almost went to war against his own nation? Can you imagine anyone becoming President–a great President at that–after having joined up with our military enemies?

Interesting stuff. But today, as I read 1 Chronicles 12, I noticed something else. David was not alone! (more…)

Another interesting column from the same paper as the previous post, this one by Bob Gourley. He notes how the “battle for the Bible” has been tossed aside in favor of issues that have no connection to biblical teachings:

Associated Baptist Press - Opinion: Losing the Bible.

Today, the agenda of the Religious Right, including many prominent fundamentalist Baptists, lies outside the Bible. That their politically conservative but extra-biblical agenda is a construct of modernist thinking seems to be of no concern: they proudly pledge overarching loyalty to the human construct of inerrancy  and fidelity to unrestrained capitalism.

And later,

Rising hand-in-hand, Baptist fundamentalism and small-government Republicanism are adrift together, struggling to stay above water. Unable to reverse the demographics, Republicans hope to “increase their share of the minority vote“ (including Southern Baptists), while one fundamentalist Baptist response to denominational decline focuses on making more Baptist babies and Liberty University recently banished Democrats from campus. For some Baptists, procreation and political correctness offer hope where an inerrant theology has failed.

So true, and not just for Baptists….

Nice to see this kind of editorial in a Baptist paper — but look how predictable the comments are….

Associated Baptist Press - Opinion: Truly supporting our troops.

We Christians should be against all forms of deception, and yet, in an attempt to impose mandatory heterosexuality, we force many of our men and women in uniform to deceive their fellow soldiers. Besides the immorality of forcing our troops to lie, the present policy is placing them and our nation in greater peril. Since the policy was enacted in 1993, almost 800 specialists with critical skills needed for the defense of the homeland have been fired, of whom 323 are linguists — 55 of them Arabic experts. Think of the backlog of thousands of documents that cannot be translated — documents that, conceivably, could save American lives — because we are more concerned with whom a soldier loves than we are with his or her ability to do their job.

(Though I have to admit that I think the first commenter has a point about Christians and militarism. I don’t know if defensive campaigns are compatible with Christianity, but I do know that the early church kicked out people who joined the military. And even if defensive campaigns are okay (I think of the Israelites re-building the city wall with a sword in their free hands), I do not believe for one second that our actions in Iraq were justified in God’s eyes.)

The Center for American Progress has published an article by Lester Feder–”Is the Religious Right Losing Its Grip?”–that resonates with me regarding the reasons I left the conservative Republican/Christian movement. And it suggests that the leaders of the evangelical right (Feder mentions Dobson, Perkins and Bauer by name) simply are not paying attention to what’s going on around them.

I should explain that one of the reasons I grew disenchanted with the Republican-Christian movement is that, through reading the Hebrew prophets, I realized that many of the values and goals of the Religious Right were the very things that the prophets warned AGAINST. That is, the Religious Right was being unbiblical. As I learned more about the scriptures (that is, reading something other than Paul and Deuteronomy), I realized that the Bible is very clear about the need to protect the poor, the weak, the oppressed, and the foreigner, and that the Bible strongly condemns nationalist arrogance, reliance on military, economic and/or military might, and the luxuries that come from greed, gluttony, power and wealth. And by and large, the latter have been more important to conservatives than the former.

So as I read Feder’s article, I saw that many of the reasons I had left the movement are still in place, in spite of many defections to a growing, more progressive evangelicalism that embraces the call of the prophets on such issues as social justice, poverty, environmentalism, imperialism, etc. (more…)

Today’s Hebrew reading in my daily devotional includes 2 Kings 3, which tells the account of the Moabite rebellion against King Jehoram of Israel. Like all the kings in the history of ancient history, Jehoram is displeasing to God, although he is not as bad as his father, Ahab–the scripture says that Jehoram pulled down the pillar his father had erected to Baal.

So it is not surprising that when the Moabites rebel (and we’re not told if this is a military attack or simply a refusal to continue paying the tribute of sheep and wool), Jehoram rushes off to battle without consulting God. And it is no surprise either that when things get rough, Jehoram quickly assumes that God is against them.

Which, in a way, God is. (more…)