Hello! the Jesus Manifesto is using DISQUS, a powerful comment system, to manage its comments. Learn more.
Community Page
- www.jesusmanifesto.com/ Jump to website »
-
Subscribe -
Community
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
-
Recent Comments
- Yes, I suppose that could describe our experience of it, Jesse. But I'm more interested in the reality of the kingdom that Jesus proclaimed. If it comes slowly to us because we're not...
- I see what you're saying Paul. As another possible perspective, it could be one of those things that just "creep up on you." Like, all the signs are there but you just don't see...
- No interest in this question? Maybe it would help if I was a little more explicit. Here's a piece from a journal entry on this subject, from several years ago, referring to a Methodist belief...
- I do not use twitter...sorry folks
- I think a few quotations from the ol’ Declaration of Independence may be in order: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator...
the Jesus Manifesto
following the way of Jesus in the land of our captivity
…on becoming post-(whatever I was).
After talking about my brief movement in evangelical fundamentalism rather than evangelical liberalism (part 1), and discussion how they really are not that different (part 2), what needs to be rethought now is that we must abandon the movement from private to public altogether, and this abandonment is what I finally [...] ... Continue reading »
After talking about my brief movement in evangelical fundamentalism rather than evangelical liberalism (part 1), and discussion how they really are not that different (part 2), what needs to be rethought now is that we must abandon the movement from private to public altogether, and this abandonment is what I finally [...] ... Continue reading »
10 months ago
I agree that we must reject the Fund/Evan?Lib spectrum. We're off the charts. Again, this language reminds me of the Libertarian diamond diagram.
The common heritage described has a simple name: statism. Call it cultural relevance or what-have-you, but the point of contention remains influence over the public sphere, and what methods are permissible for the Christian.
While the church is to be completely vulerable, as you describe, it is also intensely exclusive. The peculair ethic we adopt is required of Christians only. Altruistic concern for the least of these only makes sense in the context of regeneration. Lifelong marriage covenants only become attractive once we become the bride of Christ. Pacifism is madness apart from the Gospel. Only the believer can adopt this radical lifestyle.
And so I agree that being the church and living the Christian ethic are the political activities of the church.
This clears away the vast majority of policy debates. But there remain those issues where systematic oppression has become a part of the law. In these cases concern for the least of these requires Christian action.
The disciplines of sociology and epistimology have been ethical expolits from the first, primarily funded by those in power to legitimize that power and to determine how to maintain that power.
The needed self-confidence is indeed in Christ. So often when I argue that the Church must assume full responsibility for the least of these I hear the argument that the church does not have sufficient resources. Nonsense. This is OUR Father's world. He is sovereign, and provides our every need. He wants us to work hard and be productive so that we have something to offer him who is in need. Frankenstein of the state indeed. We must not compromise, nor adulturate ourselves in this way. Statism must be called out for what it is - idolatry.
10 months ago
I read similar thoughts over here awhile ago. It has far-reaching implications I'm eager to explore.