Legacies of Christian Racism in America

Protestant clergyman Josiah Strong

Josiah Strong, from Our Country (1885)

http://www-personal.umd.umich.edu/~ppennock/doc-JStrong.htm

A century and a half ago no writer did more to popularize the idea of Anglo-Saxon supremacy than the Protestant clergyman Josiah Strong. His book, Our Country: Its Possible Future and Its Present Crisis, was written for a limited purpose: to promote missionary activity by Protestant churches. But it argued for foreign missions with ideas that captured a much wider audience than the limited one Strong had in mind. The book quickly sold almost 200,000 copies, and became something of a bible for those who were ready to be convinced that it was the destiny of the Anglo-Saxon race to dominate - even to eliminate - the savage races of the world.

"It seems to me that God, with infinite wisdom and skill, is training the Anglo-Saxon race for an hour sure to come in the world's future. Heretofore there has always been in the history of the world a comparatively unoccupied land westward, into which the crowded countries of the East have poured their surplus populations. But the widening waves of migration, which millenniums ago rolled east and west from the valley of the Euphrates, meet to-day on our Pacific coast. There are no more new worlds. The unoccupied arable lands of the earth are limited, and will soon be taken. The time is coming when the pressure of population on the means of subsistence will be felt here as it is now felt in Europe and Asia. Then will the world enter upon a new stage of its history - the final competition of races, for which the Anglo-Saxon is being schooled. Long before the thousand millions are here, the mighty centrifugal tendency, inherent in this stock and strengthened in the United States, will assert itself. Then this race of unequaled energy, with all the majesty of numbers and the might of wealth behind it - the representative, let us hope, of the largest liberty, the purest Christianity, the highest civilization-having developed peculiarly aggressive traits calculated to impress its institutions upon mankind, will spread itself over the earth. If I read not amiss, this powerful race will move down upon Mexico, down upon Central and South America, out upon the islands of the sea, over upon Africa and beyond. And can any one doubt that the result of this competition of races will be the "survival of the fittest?" - Josiah Strong

* * * * * * * * *

Legacies of

Christian Racism in America

by R.E. Slater

From time to time, as I come across Christian racism of the past or present, I will place an article or two of both the good and the bad of that individual, institution, organization, church, denomination, or movement's mixed beliefs and attitudes.

In this first article, for all the wonderful Christian zeal Josiah Strong had for Jesus he also displayed the belief that whiteness is superior to non-whiteness. Josiah wished to missionize the non-white to improve their social and economic position not for the good of races but for the considerable good of America.

The racism we see present today was the same racism on display 160 years ago. If we went further back before the Civil War to the Colonial days of America we would find the same thing between upper white classes towards poorer white classes. The church during the early days of American colonialism had a chance to treat one-and-all with the same dignity and respect as the other. But in Europe this wasn't happening and it wouldn't happen in America either in it's "new lands of freedom" where John Winthrope spoke enthusiastically of America being a light in darkness or as a "City on a Hill".

It is why today, in the post-racist Trump era, the declining evangelical church continues to woo white supremacists and supremacist attitudes into their church and school structures preferring the alabaster world of the "white-Jesus" while exhibiting a Josiah Strong-like attitude of granting uplift - but not equality - to women, non-whites, trans- people, and so forth. Even as recently as last week Fox News mentioned that the only Afghans they wished to airlift out were Christian Afghanies and none other.

The lesson learned here is that to speak out against systematic racism will be to speak out against white America and any white Christian institutions unwilling to re-educate their congregations and school districts away from exhibited racism and racist attitudes these Christian organizations are condoning and overlooking (the religious right's strident 2021 arguments against Critical Race Theory comes to mind).

Racism won't end until the Christian church and American democratic society decides to end it. Until then we live with its unhealthy outcomes across many of America's social structures where we must continue to decrying it's harmfulness while attempting to personally rectify what others won't wherever we are.

Peace,

R.E. Slater

September 2, 2021

* * * * * * * * *

Josiah Strong

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to navigationJump to search

Josiah Strong, from Book News, 1893

Josiah Strong (April 14, 1847 – June 26, 1916) was an American Protestant clergyman, organizer, editor and author. He was a leader of the Social Gospel movement, calling for social justice and combating social evils. He supported missionary work so that all races could be improved and uplifted and thereby brought to Christ. He is controversial, however, due to his beliefs about race and methods of converting people to Christianity. In his 1885 book Our Country, Strong argued that Anglo-Saxons are a superior race who must "Christianize and civilize" the "savage" races, which he argued would be good for the American economy and the "lesser races".^[1]

Overview

Josiah Strong was one of the founders of the Social Gospel movement that sought to apply Protestant religious principles to solve the social ills brought on by industrialization, urbanization and immigration. He served as General Secretary (1886–1898) of the Evangelical Alliance for the United States, a coalition of Protestant missionary groups. After being forced out he set up his own group, the League for Social Service (1898–1916), and edited its magazine The Gospel of the Kingdom. The League was later expanded to become the American Institute of Social Service, based on the concept of the Musée social.^[2][3]

Strong, like most other leaders of the Social Gospel movement, added strong evangelical roots, including a belief in sin and redemption. Strong, like Walter Rauschenbusch and George D. Herron had an intense conversion experience and believed that regeneration was necessary to bring social justice by combating social sin. Though they were often critical of evangelicalism, they thought of their mission as an expansion of it. Their primitivist desire for noninstitutional Christianity was influenced by liberal, postmillennial idealism, and their attitudes influenced neo-orthodox theologian Reinhold Niebuhr.^[4]

His best-known and most influential work was Our Country: Its Possible Future and Its Present Crisis (1885), intended to promote domestic missionary activity in the American West. When the work appeared, Protestants had long been accustomed to meeting the sorts of perils that Strong saw threatening the country's survival, Christianization, and world greatness. His work flowed from a tradition habituated to perceive threats to "our country". It was a tradition that helped ensure the end of slavery in defense of the Union during the Civil War, while also predisposing many northern Protestants to look past, if not entirely forget, the ex-slaves following the war.^[5] Historians also suggest it may have encouraged support for imperialistic United States policy among American Protestants. He pleaded as well for more missionary work in the nation's cities, and for reconciliation to end racial conflict. He was one of the first to warn that Protestants (most of whom lived in rural areas or small towns) were ignoring the problems of the cities and the working classes^[6]

Strong believed that all races could be improved and uplifted and thereby brought to Christ. In the "Possible Future" portion of Our Country, Strong focused on the "Anglo-Saxon race"—that is the English language speakers. He said in 1890: "In 1700 this race numbered less than 6,000,000 souls. In 1800, Anglo-Saxons (I use the term somewhat broadly to include all English-speaking peoples) had increased to about 20,500,000, and now, in 1890, they number more than 120,000,000."^[7]) had a responsibility to "civilize and Christianize" the world, sharing their technology and knowledge of Christianity. The "Crisis" portion of the text described the seven "perils" facing the nation: Catholicism, Mormonism, Socialism, Intemperance, Wealth, Urbanization, and Immigration. Conservative Protestants, by contrast, argued that missionaries should spend their time preaching the Gospel; they allowed for charitable activity, but argued that it did not actually save souls.

In 1891 a revised edition was issued based on the census of 1890. The large increase in immigration during this period led him to conclude that the perils he outlined in the first edition had only grown.^[6]

The term Anglo-Saxon before 1900 was often used as a synonym for people of English descent throughout the world.^[8] Strong said in 1890: "In 1700 this race numbered less than 6,000,000 souls. In 1800, Anglo-Saxons (I use the term somewhat broadly to include all English-speaking peoples) had increased to about 20,500,000, and now, in 1890, they number more than 120,000,000".^[7] In 1893 Strong suggested, "This race is destined to dispossess many weaker ones, assimilated others, and mold of the remainder until ... it has Anglo-Saxonized mankind."^[9]

Strong argued that, "The Anglo-Saxon is the representative of two great ideas, which are closely related. One of them is that of civil liberty. Nearly all of the civil liberty of the world is enjoyed by Anglo-Saxons: the English, the British colonists, and the people of the United States. ... The other great idea of which the Anglo-Saxon is the exponent is that of a pure spiritual Christianity." He went on, "It follows, then, that the Anglo-Saxon, as the great representative of these two ideas, the depositary of these two greatest blessings, sustains peculiar relations to the world's future, is divinely commissioned to be, in a peculiar sense, his brother's keeper."^[10]

Notes

1. ^ Josiah Strong, Our Country: Its Possible Future and Its Present Crisis (New York: The American Home Missionary Society, 1885
2. ^ Information Beyond Borders: International Cultural and Intellectual Exchange in the Belle Époque
3. ^ The Encyclopedia Americana
4. ^ Matthew Bowman, "Sin, Spirituality, and Primitivism: The Theologies of the American Social Gospel, 1885-1917," Religion and American Culture, Winter 2007, Vol. 17#1 pp 95-126
5. ^ Grant R. Brodrecht, "Our Country: Northern Evangelicals and the Union during the Civil War and Reconstruction" (PhD diss., University of Notre Dame, 2008), p.8.
6. ^ Jump up to:^a b Muller (1959)
7. ^ Jump up to:^a b Josiah Strong, Our Country (1890) p. 208
8. ^ Irving Lewis Allen, "WASP—From Sociological Concept to Epithet," Ethnicity, 1975 154+
9. ^ Strong, New Era (1893) page 80
10. ^ Josiah Strong, Our Country (1890) pp. 208–210

Further reading

Works by Strong

• Josiah Strong on Anglo-Saxon Predominance, 1891, excerpt

Wikisource has original works written by or about: Josiah Strong

• Josiah Strong (1893). The New Era or The Coming Kingdom. The Baker & Taylor co. Josiah strong. complete text from Books.Google.com
• Address of Rev. Dr. Josiah Strong: The American missionary. Dec 1895 Volume 49, Issue 12 pp. 423-424
• Josiah Strong (1898), The Twentieth Century City, New York: Baker and Taylor
• Josiah Strong, Expansion Under the New World-Conditions. New York: Baker & Taylor, 1900.
• Josiah Strong, Religious Movements for Social Betterment. New York: Baker & Taylor, 1900.
• Josiah Strong, The Times and Young Men. New York: Baker & Taylor, 1901.
• Josiah Strong, The Next Great Awakening. New York: Baker & Taylor, 1902.
• Josiah Strong, The Challenge of the City. New York: Baker & Taylor, 1907.
• Josiah Strong, My Religion in Everyday Life. New York: Baker & Taylor, 1910.
• Josiah Strong, Our World: The New World Life. New York: Doubleday, Page & Co., 1913-14.
• Josiah Strong, Our World: The New World-Religion. New York: Doubleday, Page & Co., 1915.
• Our Country text^{[dead link]}
• Excerpt from Our Country
• Excerpt from Our Country
• Excerpt from Our Country

Secondary scholarly sources

• Berge, William H. "Voices for Imperialism: Josiah Strong and the Protestant Clergy," Border States: Journal of the Kentucky-Tennessee American Studies Association, No. 1 (1973) online
• Bowman, Matthew. "Sin, Spirituality, and Primitivism: The Theologies of the American Social Gospel, 1885-1917," Religion and American Culture, Winter 2007, Vol. 17#1 pp 95–126
• Deichmann, Wendy. "Women and Social Betterment in the Social Gospel Work of Josiah Strong," in Wendy J. Deichmann and Carolyn DeSwarte Gifford, eds., Gender and the Social Gospel (Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 2003).
• Deichmann, Wendy. "Forging an Ideology for American Missions: Josiah Strong and Manifest Destiny," in Wilbert R. Shenk,ed., North American Foreign Mission, 1810-1914: Theology, Theory, and Policy (Wm B. Eerdmans Co. & Curzon Press, 2004).
• Deichmann, Wendy. "Manifest Destiny, the Social Gospel and the Coming Kingdom: Josiah Strong's Program of Global Reform, 1885-1916," chap. 5 in Perspectives on the Social Gospel: Papers from the Inaugural Social Gospel Conference at Colgate Rochester Divinity School, "Texts and Studies in the Social Gospel" series, Edwin Mellen Press (Lewiston, NY: 1992).
• Herbst, Jurgen. "Introduction," in Josiah Strong Our Country (Belknap Press 1963 edition)
• Luker, Ralph E. The Social Gospel in Black and White: American Racial Reform, 1885-1912 (1998).
• Muller, Dorothea R. "Josiah Strong and American Nationalism: A Reevaluation," The Journal of American History 53 (Dec. 1966), 487-503, online at JSTOR at most academic libraries.
• Muller, Dorothea R. "The Social Philosophy of Josiah Strong: Social Christianity and American Progressivism," Church History 1959 v 28 #2 pp. 183–201] online at JSTOR

Pluralism Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow - Why Its Important to Know and Accept

Imagining a Brotherhood of Man

by R.E. Slater

January 31, 2020

Contemporary societies either move forward accepting multiethnic, multicultural compositions or endlessly fight for pure blood societies of their imaginations which can never return to the "good old days" of "one race, one religion, one meaning." Not now, not then, not in "biblical times." The race of men will always hold wide and varied beliefs. It will never be otherwise. The plea for accepting pluralism requires seeing another as equal and important. The latter observation of one religion, or one race above all others, diminishes both being and outcome.

As a Christian, God loves all without preference. The church must then obey and do the same. The days of assimilating western practises and beliefs into the Christian faith are gone. Post-colonialism says those days are done and over and must never be returned to. Pluralistic cultures do not colonize. They find ways to elevate common ground in appreciative respect.

Populism, or nationalized Christian faith, refuses these acts in power moves to restrict, curtail, deny, and barricade the rights of minorities and diversely different religions. Yet statistically those same minorities and religions will continue to grow and expand thus creating greater conflict with old guard traditionalists refusing foreign thoughts and beliefs beyond their own rationalized structures. Missions accept the difference and work within cultures of difference.

Societies which successfully navigate these waters must therefore deconstruct their beliefs before they can positively reconstruct their faith on a pluralistic basis. One could say this is occurring now in America but one could also say it is failing as ideological Christian borders rise higher and broader across the hearts of white Christians wishing to force their sectarian ideas of westernism above all other beliefs thereby refusing pluralistic attitudes and behavior in the Christan faith which might otherwise thrive openly with embraced welcome by churches, schools, and religious bodies of convention.

One last... if God is God then we shouldn't worry if pluralism will drown out God's voice. He is, and because He is - in a different non-colonizing way - it is the old attitudes, beliefs and theologies of Christianity which must change. Which must release God from bondage by freeing Him to be who He is apart from our restricting cultural ideas of who God should be.

Christianity has always acted and taught that God is trans-national, trans-geographical, and trans-temporal. This means that God is the God of all nations, across all places on the earth, and across all eras. So let us now double down on practicing these ancient acknowledgements even as the Hebrew Christians had relaxed their Jewish rituals; as Paul did when preaching to Greek and Roman alike; as Philip and Mark had when bearing Christ's message to Egypt and Africa; and, as the Apostle Thomas did bearing the gospel into India.

There should never be any fear in discovering God in new ways through the lenses of other cultures. It is enough to appreciate how God can be seen through the eyes of fellow Christians across the world beginning first with our Catholic Hispanic neighbors and all Muslim Christians who have come to America for sanctuary. I find it even more interesting that some immigrants have come to "Christian" America to missionize us as lost ones to the gospel of Christ. It seems both ironic and paradoxical but I am so very grateful to our foreign brother's hearts in passionate witness for Jesus. Even as many of God's remnant residing in here in America are similarly burdened, working out of positions of pluralism and welcome to all segments of society, including the gay and trans populations of America.

by R.E. Slater

January 31, 2020

Amazon Link

An Introduction to Christian Worldview:

Pursuing God's Perspective in a Pluralistic World

by Tawa J. Anderson, W. Michael Clark, David K. Naugle

Publ October 10, 2017

Description

Everyone has a worldview. A worldview is the lens through which we interpret the cosmos and our lives in it. A worldview answers the big questions of life: What is our nature? What is our world? What is our problem? What is our end? As Anderson, Clark, and Naugle point out, our worldview cannot simply be reduced to a series of rational beliefs. We are creatures of story, and the kinds of stories we tell reveal important things about our worldview. Part of being a thoughtful Christian means being able to understand and express the Christian worldview as well as developing an awareness of the variety of worldviews. An Introduction to Christian Worldview takes you further into answering questions such as the following:

• Why do worldviews matter?
• What characterizes a Christian worldview?
• How can we analyze and describe a worldview?
• What are the most common secular and religious worldviews?

Well organized, clearly written, and featuring aids for learning, An Introduction to Christian Worldview is the essential text for either the classroom or for self-study.

Website Link

A Focused Session from our

2010 Ecclesia National Gathering

There is no question that we are living in the midst of a pluralistic society. For much of the western world, this is new territory that is becoming increasingly complex to grabble with and help those in our congregations understand. Inadequately dealing with the issues that a pluralistic society creates also hampers the confidence of those in our congregations towards mission and evangelism. In this session, Willard will address the issue of how the Christian gospel interacts with the pluralism of western society and offer a reason approached to re-establish confidence in the uniqueness of the gospel of Jesus.

Amazon Link

Authenticity and Religion in the Pluralistic Age:

A Simmelian Study of Christian Evangelicals

and New Monastics

by Francesca E.S. Montemaggi

Publ March 19, 2019

Description

This book provides an original concept of authenticity to illuminate the transformation of Christian consciousness in the increasingly more secular and pluralistic culture of Western societies. The present work is unique in offering an in-depth study of Simmel’s sociology and philosophy in dialogue with an ethnographic account of contemporary Christians. It develops original concepts drawing on Simmel’s writings on individuality and religion and connecting them with classical and contemporary scholarship in sociology and philosophy. The theoretical framework is illustrated through an analysis of the narratives and practices of Christians in an evangelical church in the UK and several New Monastic communities in the UK, US, and Canada. The book proposes an understanding of belief as relational and experiential and a concept of authenticity, as self-transcendence articulated in dialogue with religious tradition and the Other. Religious tradition is developed through an on-going process of interpretation and sacralization of what is considered within and without the tradition’s boundaries. The book also proposes an innovative approach to the study of morality by distinguishing between a people-centered ethic (ethic of compassion) and a norm-centered ethic (ethic of purity) to account for the the different ways in which Christians engage with the Other. This allows an exploration of the relationship between ethics and the making and breaking of boundaries in a given community. The case studies in this book show that committed Christians attempt to reconcile commitment to their tradition with the value of inclusiveness and to affirm their moral and religious identity as a distinctive moral lifestyle, not superior, but of equal worth to those of non-Christians.

David Congdon - No, The American Church is Not in Exile

No, The American Church is Not in Exile

https://sojo.net/articles/no-american-church-isn-t-exile

By David Congdon

April 19, 2017

In the wake of the Obergefell v. Hodges decision legalizing same-sex marriage, conservative Christian leaders sounded a dire word: Christians are no longer at home in the United States.

Rod Dreher, a senior editor at The American Conservative, wrote an article for TIME following the decision with the headline, “Orthodox Christians Must Now Learn To Live as Exiles in Our Own Country.” In his long-anticipated book, The Benedict Option, Dreher tells Christians to “embrace exile.” He alludes to the oft-used Jeremiah 29:7 in his conclusion when he says that “though in exile, we work for the peace of the city.” In a response to Jacob Lupfer, who penned an essay saying Dreher suffers from a “delusional persecution complex,” Dreher claims that Christians are “called by God to be faithfully present here in Babylon ... like Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego.”

In a similar vein, Russell Moore, the president of the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention, published a response to the Supreme Court decision in the Washington Post that concluded by calling Christians to “joyfully march to Zion” as “strangers and exiles in American culture.”

Moore is drawing here on the language of Hebrews 11, which describes believers as “strangers and exiles on the earth” (Heb 11:13, ESV). The idea of the follower of God as an exile has deep roots in the faith, originating in Israel’s history of exile in Assyria and Babylon.

But instead of “exiles on the earth,” Moore writes “exiles in American culture.” And Dreher speaks of being “exiles in our own country.” Everything hangs on this change.

Christians today who adopt an exilic identity have

abandoned this dimension of Christianity.

Why Exile?

The idea of the church in exile is once again popular in American Christian circles. Missiologist Michael Frost wrote Exiles: Living Missionally in a Post-Christian Culture in 2006. In 2008, before his own exile from the evangelical community, Rob Bell coauthored Jesus Wants to Save Christians: A Manifesto for the Church in Exile. New Testament professor James Thompson wrote The Church in Exile: God’s Counterculture in a Non-Christian World in 2011. And in 2015, Lee Beach of McMaster Divinity College published The Church in Exile: Living in Hope After Christendom.

Why the attraction to exile? For many of those in the missional church movement, exile language offers an alternative to the “culture war” rhetoric of the religious right. Instead of a church at war with surrounding culture, a church in exile presents a vision of God’s people living peacefully within foreign territory.

Seeking the welfare of a foreign city (Jeremiah 29:7) is certainly an improvement over waging constant battle against it. But what does the idea of exile imply about the church? And is it consistent with Christian faith?

Exile means that one is barred from one’s native land. The people of Israel, for instance, were prevented from living in the land promised to them by God. Followers of Jesus, however, have no native land. The Great Commission at the end of Matthew finds Jesus telling his followers to “make disciples of all nations” (Matt 28:19). In the Acts of the Apostles, Jesus tells them “you will be my witnesses ... to the ends of the earth” (Acts 1:8).

READ: Where Do You Find Church?

If the message of Christian faith is for all peoples and nations, then how can the New Testament writers speak of believers as exiles? The answer is that, for Christianity, the whole earth is a foreign land.

In the Gospel of John, Jesus prays: “I have given them your word, and the world has hated them because they do not belong to the world, just as I do not belong to the world” (John 17:14). If the world is a foreign land, then the church is by definition in exile. But so the adage: If everything is exile, nothing is exile. Because the whole world is alien territory, no culture has a privileged position in relationship to God. Every culture is equally close and equally distant from the new creation. For those who follow Jesus, every person is a neighbor and every place is a home.

Talking about the church in exile is redundant, unless there is a change in the definition.

Exile and Christendom

Notice the book titles mentioned above. They describe the church in exile within “a post-Christian culture,” “a non-Christian world,” and a society “after Christendom.”

To be sure, many of these authors would view the experience of exile as a good thing. They do not necessarily think “Christendom” was a golden age to which we ought to return — and yet the decision to define the church as exilic allows Christendom to set the terms for the conversation.

Speaking of the church in exile within American culture suggests there is some ideal culture — according to Dreher, “the Judeo-Christian culture of the West” — in which the church would not be in exile. Once we make that move, we have abandoned the early church’s insight that the church is exiled from every culture.

We end up pining for the Christendom of earlier history, when in fact the only true Christian world exists beyond the end of history.

But the problem goes deeper. Thinking of the church as exiled from a particular culture further implies the church has its own. Dreher compares the evangelical church to the monastic communities of St. Benedict, while Moore views the church as a new Israel marching to Zion. This idea of church as a specific culture has implications for mission. Moore makes this explicit when he calls American culture “our mission field."

Imperialism or Separatism — or Something Else?

There are only two options at this point: Either the church spreads its culture to others or it assimilates its own into distinct community. The former is the way of imperialism, while the latter is the way of separatism.

Israel’s mission is of the separatist variety, as defined especially by the book of Deuteronomy, whose message can be summarized as a warning to Israel to remain distinct from the other nations. The prophetic tradition interprets the Babylonian exile as God’s judgment on Israel’s failure to remain separate from other cultures.

Yet the overall message of the New Testament, especially the book of Acts, is that the church is not a separate community with its own culture. The power of Christianity is found in what scholars of mission call its capacity for contextualization, which means that the message of Christ can be translated into different languages, cultures, and contexts.

READ: Religious Freedom or Culture War? 

According to Lamin Sanneh, the Gambian missiologist and professor at Yale Divinity School, the Gospel comes “without a revealed language or a founding original culture,” and therefore “all cultural forms ... are in principle worthy of bearing the truth of Christianity.”

Christians today who adopt an exilic identity have abandoned this dimension of Christianity. They are giving up on the contextualization principle. For them, contemporary American culture is enemy territory, and the only recourse is to retreat into a separate cultural community.

Talking about the church in exile is redundant,

unless there is a change in the definition.

This does not mean, of course, that a church contextualized within the United States would uncritically affirm the culture. But it does mean we need to consider more thoughtfully what exactly constitutes the truth of Christianity and how this truth might relate to its given context.

Returning Home After Exile

The Barna Group’s “Faith That Lasts” project, conducted over five years between 2007 and 2011, revealed that nearly a quarter of 18- to 29-year-olds (23 percent) said that “Christians demonize everything outside of the church” was a statement that “completely” or “mostly” described their experience.

Christians have largely left behind the days when their faith was defined by prohibitions against drinking, dancing, and movies. But the exile mentality remains: Today, Christian culture may be more ideological than moral, the us-versus-them logic more pervasive and more subtle.

The church communicates an exilic message when it speaks about the need to evangelize “the West” as if this need is greater now than in the past, when it associates “the world” specifically with American culture, or when it waxes longingly about how much better things were “back then” or are “over there.”

READ: Christ, Not America, First

The church needs to abandon talk of exile, and reclaim the possibility of being at home. Home is the cultural context within which the church already exists. Reclaiming home does not mean uncritically adopting whatever seems fashionable at the time. It means approaching cultural changes and developments with an attitude of openness and hospitality, with a readiness to embrace rather than exclude. Reclaiming home means obeying the biblical injunction to live wholly without fear or anxiety.

Many Christians have already put down their weapons to fight the culture. It is time now to put down the walls of defense that keep them separated from the culture. Perhaps a future generation will yet say that “Christians love everything outside of the church.”

---

David Congdon

David Congdon has a PhD in theology from Princeton Theological Seminary. He is the author of three books, including most recently The God Who Saves: A Dogmatic Sketch.

Lessons from the Book of Joel

Lessons from the Book of Joel

by R.E. Slater

June 30, 2016

Introduction

Over the past month or more I have been introducing myself and my readers to the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha through external abstracts and Phillip Long's commentaries. Throughout the entirety of Long's review of 1 Enoch has come the realization of how closely (but not without exaggeration) this book follows the apocalyptic literature within the Old Testament (sic, Genesis, Isaiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, perhaps Joel, etc). So if the supposition is true that the writer of 1 Enoch wrote after the establishment of the OT apocalyptic literature (sometime during, or after, the Maccabbean war in the Intertestamental period) than it may also be true that there is a remarkable similarity between 1 Enoch's summary writings (of creation, of mankind's (and the angel's) spiritual history, and of the end times to come) to the apocalyptic books later to be written and included by the church into the NT (parts of the Synoptics, Paul, Peter, Revelation, for example). As such, the storytelling author of 1 Enoch borrowed liberally from the OT literature even as the NT writers borrowed liberally both from the OT literature and outside sources such as the book of 1 Enoch.

But why?

Because not only was 1 Enoch a very popular book during the pre-NT era but its imagery was vivid enough to be encapsulated and moved forward by the perceptive NT writers who were part of a growing new movement known as the first century church. More simply, popular cultural ideas were synthesized and then utilized to explain the Jesus-event within a time of turbulent societal evolution. In essence, though 1 Enoch was not a canonized OT book it related the main presumptions of the Jewish people so very well in its mythologized and very creative storytelling as to provide fertile imagery for Jesus and His apostles to tell of God's salvation to man and the coming judgment upon all those who would refuse obedience and submission to the rule of God.

Now I have been spending not a little bit of time over the past several years in examining the kind of judgment God will execute upon a sinful world. Some of this has been mentioned before when dealing with the several topics of hell, salvation, or God's character. Nevertheless, the bible itself, along with much of the literature written by mankind since time immemorial has dealt with the consequences of living in sin, the retribution that comes with causing willful oppression upon others, or ignoring the wisdoms and moralities of common life observances by a society. As such, the burden of public opinion leans in the direction that if there is a judgment for sin it will always be executed - if not in this life than in the life to come. For myself, I would prefer this judgment to be as a result of living in sin and ignoring the commands of God to live a godly, righteous life. This, as opposed to accusing God of purposely casting sinners into a tortuous hell to pay restitution for an innumerable eternity. It seems more natural to place the burden upon the willfully sinful person than upon a holy, righteous God who warns us out of love that He is incapable to spare us from sin's experience/power/seal/death should we ignore His solution of salvation through His Son and the fellowship of His holy community found in His people.

Again, this is a personal opinion. I am not denying a judgment-to-come but what I am refusing to accept is placing the cause of this judgment solely upon God alone. Yes, in some sense God is seen as Judge and Ruler of this world and His creation. We have investigated what these subjects might mean under the topics of divine sovereignty: whether God's sovereignty is beneficial (vs. harming); partnering (vs. controlling); at all times loving and good (vs. a wrathful love and duplicious goodness); and so forth. These topics would fall under the headings of Arminianism vs. Calvinism which I'll mention in my next article in a short review of Roger Olson's book, Against Calvinism.

Now back to our conversation. What does this all mean? Why this long introduction to the book of Joel? Well, let's continue on....

The Book of Joel as Apocalyptic Literature of a Future Eschaton

How then do we interpret the Book of Joel? Does it predict a divine future full of wrath and judgement? Or does it depict a Jewish congregation's (if not the suffering world's) hope for divine retribution? If it is prophetic, than the work of God in this world has lost - all God's efforts have failed to redeem, to bring shalom into His creation, except by divine force. If prescriptive (sic, dogmatic/creedal), than Israel (or Judah, or its remaining exilic remnants) had given up in witnessing to their neighbors of their glorious God and are found waiting for the coming judgment of the "Day of the Lord" to consume mankind in a great flood of apocalyptic revenge. This position would likewise make of God's divine rule one that was ineffectual, incompetent, or both, so that again, God has lost His battle with evil and must end its reign by force rather than by the Cross. And if not by the Cross, then in essence, the Cross is made weak and loses too.

How then are these two approaches to the book of Joel any different in today's churches which wait for divine judgment while praying for its imminence? When Jesus and the Apostles used the book of Joel they likewise spoke of an end time apocalyptic as remarkable for its fearful warnings as for its pleas to repent. More significantly, in their pleas for repentance each servant of the Lord - whether Jesus or the apostles - became consumed with a missional fire which unleashed God's Holy Spirit power of redemption upon a sin-torn world. They were not found sitting around commiserating on the woes of the world and praying for God's imminent return. No. They were busy praying for God's mighty work of salvation to be declared amongst the habitations of mankind and that He would delay His return just long enough until every last sinner had escaped into the ark of atonement which Jesus had provided through His death and resurrection.

So then, let us ask again, "How are we to interpret the Book of Joel?" If whether prophetically or descriptively of God's people who are scattered across this wicked world as his surviving remnant then two things must stand out:

One, the church must repent of its wickedness and do what its founders did... take up a missional fire which preaches God's word and become active in humanitarian enterprise dispensing grace, hope and healing. And secondly, to not isolate itself from the world so that the church loses its saltiness. But rather, to become deeply involved in the world in ways that will redeem the world and bring to it God's peace and love, care and nurture. The question then is not whether God is coming again, whether He judges of not, or whether sin will have its day upon the rails of God's throne. Nay. The question is whether we as believers and followers of Christ have given up and are simply waiting for God's judgment to fall upon sinful mankind to prove us right and everyone else wrong.

But hadn't this attitude of exasperation and failure been demonstrated before?

If so, then by whom?

Remember the story of Jonah and the whale? Yup, you got it. Jonah was sent by God to the wicked Ninevehites (Assyria) with a message of fearful repentance. Though he was glad to announce God's coming destruction upon their heads he actually first ran away from God's call to duty by shipping in the opposite direction across the Mediterranean Sea. At the last, upon being belched up upon the shore Jonah resigned himself to God's call and attended to his duty which was fearfully received by the Ninevehites when beholding the bleached white oracle of God spitefully pronouncing judgment throughout the plush and luxurious city walls. The people, in response, repented immediately and fell for a time under God's sparing grace. But the story doesn't end there because the last half of Jonah's tale tells of his sulking petulance over having not witnessed God's ruinous judgment fall upon the detested Assyrians. So there he sat upon an unshaded hill for a long time as God ministered to his hard heart even to the point of providing an unwanted plant for shade so angry was Jonah with God's lack of judgment. And I'm afraid today's church is no less kind to this sinful world when despairing of God's rule and falling into a stupor of rage and anger when praying for God's coming wrath.

The point? Let not God's church do this wicked thing. But let His people relent of their posture of doom-and-gloom and disinvolvent in the world but seek to reconcile the world with God in every possible way. But not simply through gospel preaching but also through humanitarian ministries giving shape and meaning to the words of Jesus vouchsafing redemptive reconciliation. Why? Because as any good parent, coach, teacher, or director will tell you - you can preach to the troops all you want but until-and-unless you become personally involved with the lives of those you wish to affect words have very little power. Preach? Yes. But not to the exclusion of working. And if  wishing to preaching then first work. Let your good works preach a better sermon for you than mere words can. And what about our broken hearts yearning for God's rule and reign? Do you not suppose that in working with those we detest, or think of as sinful, or even as our enemy, we will discover how wrong we have been in our judgments? Relational ministries will do a world of good in re-righting the discriminating, or hateful, impulses of our own sinful hearts. The result? If Jesus Christ is in our ministries than the work of God through His Holy Spirit will bespeak release from sin's bondage for both parties; a greater freedom to live pleasingly for Christ; and the tasty fruits of hope, healing, and a new fellowship of community with those the church once considered condemnable. This is the peace of God which surpasses all understanding.

Thus the book of Joel is to be a motivator to Christian action regardless of its prophetic content or its dialectical meaning for a congregation stuck on the perpetual wheel of waiting for divine revenge. An action that cannot come unless God's people become active in this world by sharing God's love which offers hope and healing to all who seek Him. If we believe in the power of God, and in the Cross, and in the power of the Holy Spirit which accompanies God's stunning atonement than let us not weaken it by giving up. Or praying its early end. Or by isolating ourselves by discriminating dogmas and confessions. Or by resorting to heavy-handed force to "make" disbelievers submit. We must be a people who must love and accept and help all whom we might normally not love, accept, or help. Let us not do the work of the devil but learn to do the work of God. This is true revival meted upon judgment, repentance, and restoration.

Peace, 

R.E. Slater

NT Notes to the Book of Joel

The Book of Joel is referred or alluded to numerous times in the New Testament. A few notable (but not exhaustive) examples:

*The Apostle Peter quotes “the prophet Joel” directly in Acts 2:16-21.

*The Lord Jesus refers to Joel 2:10, “the sun and the moon [will] grow dark and the starts lose their brightness” before the Day of the Lord, when He describes the signs of the last days in Matthew 24:29.

*The Apostle Paul cites Joel 2:32, “Whoever will call on the name of the Lord will be saved,” in Romans 10:13.

*The Apostle John alludes to Joel 2:10 when he describes events of the Tribulation in Revelation 8:12

The Apostle John alludes to the Book of Joel and language of the locust invasion in Revelation chapter 9.