Review of "The Myth of a Christian Nation" by Greg Boyd

Recently on vacation, I picked up Greg Boyd's "The Myth of a Christian Nation." This title sparked my interest, because I, as a evangelical Christian, have often struggled with the relationship between church and state in America.

I have become firmly convinced from historical records that the founding fathers approved of the Christian faith in many ways, though many of them where more deistic than theistic. America also started as a Christian nation in the sense that most of her people have claimed some form of Christianity. Additionally, two major Christian revivals deeply influenced national thought for the more than hundred years as America grew from colony to one of the most powerful nations on earth.

The question Boyd asks of all this is "What is the difference between the nationally recognized form of Christianity throughout American history and Jesus' kingdom--the kingdom of God?" Here Boyd drives a stake between widespread national faith and the faith of Christ. He basically says there is no relationship...zero...and bases his claim on the fact that the kingdoms of this world, whether America or any other have advanced by coercive, self-interested power, whereas the kingdom of God in Christ advances by other-interested, sacrificial love. He says:

"Following the example of Christ, and in stark contrast to the modus operandi of the world, we are to do "nothing from selfish ambition or conceit, but in humility regard others as better than ourselves." (pp. 31)

This is his key point, and it is forceful. He uses various evidence from American history to make this point stick, from the Indian Wars to slavery, in order to show that America is much different than the kingdom of God and is really just another kingdom of the world.

I nodded along as I read much of his argument on these points, probably for a couple of reasons. First, during college, it is just these negative points of American history that many of my professors used as arguments against evangelicalism. For some reason, they couldn't help but lump Christ together with the national history of people who have not followed all of His teachings (of course their arguments included the Crusades and Europe's bloody, post-Reformation religious wars, as well, among others). The second reason, I nodded along was because of his many quotations of Christ's teachings on how His followers are to regard others. Jesus did tell us to do good to our enemies rather than forcing them to our position or attacking them. Boyd's practical application of these ideas is that we are not called to force America to abide by Judeo-Christian morality, and consequently, certain moral issues should not be so important to evangelicals as they are (gay marriage, war, or patriotism for instance). As all these arguments stirred my mind, I couldn't help but remember watching Gary Cooper in "Sgt. York," a film where "give to Caesar what is Caesar's" includes military service and killing other human beings (which is antithetical to the statement "do good to them that hate you").

However, I did find some difficulty with Boyd's argument.

First, my biggest question was "Are Christians not to work for a society more in accord with God's moral law, particularly in regard to God's commands for human behavior, if it is within our power?" If we where to go to hell, we would see there many people from Sodom and Gomorrah. Is it not possible that some of these would regret that their society's wickedness was not controlled somehow, allowing them a greater chance to repent back then, instead of the sudden destruction that overtook them? Certain persons might say, those folks would not have repented, so they don't care and they hate God even now, but I think the picture of the rich man in hell in the story Jesus told of he and Lazarus speaks otherwise. I believe that being salt is being a witness to God's Law, His justice, and His wrath, as well as showing Calvary-quality love. To Boyd, what society does does not matter to Christians, so pacificism and love are the only witnesses available to Christians. This is a difficult point to take at face value and needs more complexity from Boyd to be convincing.

Second, beyond the control of the standard of society's laws, there is the doctrine of repentance within the Gospel appeal. This is a deeper issue than influencing legislation, and goes to the heart of what the Gospel is. Predictably, Boyd denies any preaching of judgment to unbelievers. Boyd says, "...when we assume the role of moral guardians of the culture, we invariably position ourselves as judges over others. Not only is there no precedent for this in the life of Jesus, but Scripture explicitly and repeatedly forbids us to judge others....Jesus contrasts love and judgment as antithetical activities...Our fundamental job is to love like God loves, not to pretend we know what only God knows." (pp. 132-133). Boyd goes on to say that we are to preach none of this "judgment" to unbelievers and this is why evangelicals are hated. Excuse me? When is calling something God calls sin wrong? When is preaching against such sin wrong? When is seeking to limit such sin in the lives of others wrong? When is it wrong to call on the consciences of people to do what God commands--no matter how close they are to Christianity? None of these things is wrong, yet Boyd denounces them all. He urges that we build relationships and present the love of Christ only. And it is that "only" that completely overlooks Jesus', the New Testament writers, and the Old Testament writers position on the sin of man and the necessity of repentance. Jonah even preached repentance to Ninevah in the Old Testament for crying out loud. Boyd may want to love people as God loves, but God is in the business of calling all people to repentance (Acts 17).

These two problems were the most prominent to me in this book. I have not provided exhaustive answers to them, but only enough to show that the issues are far more complicated than Boyd would have them. A book may arise that will give Christians a correct sense of their social role in regard to America's civil Christian mores--what to do, and what not...but this book is not it. Though there is something to be said for reading this book, for I wrestled with its implications.

Ruth Colyer: A Faithful Woman

Ruth Colyer, my mother-in-law, died July 20th, Sunday morning, 2008. Many of you, my readers, have prayed for her and kept watch over her, here and on my other web pages as to her progress during her illness. We are saddened deeply by losing her, but she has gone on to be with the Lord Jesus to His place He has prepared for her. Thank you all for your prayers, your concern, and your faith in our God who decided to bring her home. I wanted to offer a few words of encouragement in light of her death.

1. Ruth came to saving faith in the Lord Jesus Christ as a young girl. I sat with her several years ago as she told me her testimony. She told of how as she sat in church one day, she was convicted of her sin and the truth that Jesus died to pay for her sin. She told me about trusting Him that day, and how that she had never changed her mind about what He did for her. She said she had been following Him since that time, and her life showed it: her love for Him, His church, and His kingdom. She lived a life in which she blessed others for God, not least of them, myself. I was a wandering soul when I began to date her daughter, but Ruth influenced me, by strong example, to follow the path of discipleship that leads to Christian hope. I will thank her for that always, until the day I again see her face.

2. Ruth fulfilled her calling as a Christian mother. She always urged her daughter and husband to follow the way of God. She did the most important thing as a parent, which is to have a Christian home. As an extension of her natural family, she helped raise many other children as a caretaker, helping them to grow physically, mentally, and spiritually. She was a mother to many children, not just Teya, and will be missed by all of them.

3. Ruth endured trial with faith, even when she was shaken. Cancer was a horror for Ruth, and it took away most of her health in this world before she died. She desired to be healed, but was willing to accept that she might not be healed. I prayed with her not long ago, that God might heal her, but if not, He might have mercy on her as her health declined, and that he might help her to endure the great trial that death is. As I prayed, she quietly whispered "amen" to either path God might lead her on.

Like my great-grandmother, I had a mother-in-law that I would say lived "A beautiful life" for her LORD. She, like all people, struggled from time to time, but she focused, at her end, and on the fact that there will be "no tears in heaven" (her words in her last days). My prayer for all of us, is that we would emulate her good qualities, and prepare for the day when we must all meet Christ, and having prepared fully to meet Him, meet Ruth also.

Life is a struggle. Not only in the broad sense between good and evil, just and unjust, predator and prey, but also in the little things. It is a struggle to do my job right now. It seems things just keep coming up that hinder my plans. I have been nervous, agitated at times, and finally just break into laughter to blow off the steam of how ridiculously complicated life can be. You try to build something (not just buildings-- think your character, your family, your track record of success), and things come along that just blow it all apart, and these blowups can happen frequently.

Now a confession, I have a streak of lazy despair in me. When I struggle, or fail and try to re-route to success in my life, I find that that re-routing is only for a time. Seems like Achebe's title to his piece "Things Fall Apart" fits here, and when things keep falling apart, I want to throw in the towel. I want to be lazy, or fall into some depressed funk. Yet, I know that my life is more important than the mistakes I make along the way, what matters a heap load is what kind of person I become in this process. Do I become that cynical, apathetic soul? Or do I gather my courage and man-up? Do I allow the struggle to shape me into Christ-likeness or do I take the easy way and fall apart too? I know what I got to do, because God doesn't allow us to live in a problematic world for no reason. I know He lets us live in this kind of world because how we respond to it is proof of what He can do when things dismantle before our eyes--that is He is the Rock in this stormy sea. When we cling to Him his grace shines. It's not that we can conquer all our problems, but that through Him I can have faith that ultimately, problems will not make us fall entirely, rather we fall into His arms, and everybody will see what holds us up when nothing else does.

soli deo gloria

Michael Horton on Charles Finney

Michael Horton is a distinguished professor at Westminster Seminary. He wrote a short article I read recently on Charles Finney, American evangelist of the 19th century. I will come back to Finney's effects on American Christianity later, but suffice to say, he has deeply influenced all of Protestantism in America since before and after the Civil War, through his writings and teachings about such topics as Christian conversion and revival.

Horton quotes the following from Charles Grandison Finney (Systematic Theology, pg. 46):

"But for sinners to be forensically pronounced just, is impossible and absurd... As we shall see, there are many conditions, while there is but one ground, of the justification of sinners ... As has already been said, there can be no justification in a legal or forensic sense, but upon the ground of universal, perfect, and uninterrupted obedience to law. This is of course denied by those who hold that gospel justification, or the justification of penitent sinners, is of the nature of a forensic or judicial justification. They hold to the legal maxim that what a man does by another he does by himself, and therefore the law regards Christ’s obedience as ours, on the ground that he obeyed for us."

Let me put this in layman's terms:

The idea that people who break God's law can be legally declared "not-guilty" (by God), is impossible and foolish...I will show you that there are many conditions for a person to be declared righteous by God, but all these are based upon one root condition...As I have already said, law-breakers cannot be said to be "not-guilty" (as by a jury, judge, or God)...there is no such law-breaker freeing verdict given by anyone, rather, the one condition for being declared "not-guilty" is whole-hearted, completely fulfilled, and constant (for all of life) obedience to the moral law of God. This idea, of course, is denied by those who say that Gospel declaration of repenting law-breakers means that God calls such repenting law-breakers "not-guilty," (often called judicial justification). They hold to the legal idea that a person may have another person do something to take his or her legal obligation (his obedience or punishment for example), and therefore that Christ's obedience may be said to be ours, because he obeyed God for us.

This paragraph, which I have tried to paraphrase rightly, reveals that Finney could not abide the idea of one person fulfilling another person's moral obligations to God's law--even if it was Jesus Christ! Never mind that the moral law flows from God's character and that God has shown in both OT and NT scripture that He allows one person to take another person's moral obligations!

Romans 3:21-26 does not show God calling a person "not-guilty" on the basis of their moral behavior...no way! This whole section says that a person's "faith" or trust in Christ's death for himself/herself is the way a person is declared "not-guilty." In other words, God gave Christ as a gracious substitute for law-breakers and law-breakers embrace Him as their substitute in order to be declared "not-guilty" of their deeds.

Paul even goes on and says: "Where then is boasting? It is excluded. By what kind of law? By one of works? No, the contrary, by a law of faith." (Rom. 3:27 HCSB).

Still with me? Does it sound like Finney was in line with the Bible? That's right! He taught error instead of the truth concerning the most important doctrines...how guilty law-breakers are to be relieved of the guilt of their wrongdoings. This is a very serious error...in fact, it is the most serious error...it is the error of the Pharisees of Jesus day: Trying to get right with God by good behavior!

As I said before, Finney is revered among many evangelicals, Horton says:..."Jerry Falwell calls him "one of my heroes and a hero to many evangelicals, including Billy Graham." I can add to this testimony, as I was listening to Dr. James Dobson one night on the radio and he commended Finney on his radio program by reporting a positive testimony of someone converted under Finney's ministry. If you ever read "Hell's Best Kept Secret" or "The Way of the Master" materials (by Ray Comfort), you will find he deeply respects Finney too.

Despite what I have shared with you here about Finney's understanding of salvation, many evangelicals blindly see him as a great man...and in the human sense, he probably provoked many to better behavior. Yet, tragically, he did not give people what they needed, the Word of God on salvation that would save their souls...he left them hoping to reach heaven by works--utter folly.

Finney is worth investigating also because of his lasting impact on the church. Ever heard of a church altar call? That's Finney's baby. Ever wonder when the sinner's prayer began to be highly popularized in America? Finney again. Ever wonder where modern revivals that focus on getting people to "get right with God" (in behavior) and which focus on people's emotions to get them to respond to God come from? Finney a third time. He didn't invent these things by himself, except the alter call, but all are children of his view of sinners getting right with God by behavior.

I would say finally, that all these things were well intentioned...but woefully off base in their origin. The Gospel itself is a command to repent and have faith in Christ alone for salvation; Finney put the focus on the quality of the individual's repentance, in fact, all the load for salvation is based on the individual's behavior. Therefore, Finney's system leads to both pride (for the morally strong) and despair (for the morally weaker sort), and both pride and despair have wreaked havoc on the preaching of the Gospel in America.

Many called Christians and churches have based salvation on the strength of the moral impulse. In other words, particular conformity to a Christian group's scruples becomes a substitute in salvation for the brokeness, humility, and love toward God that ought to characterize true salvation. It's not that Christ didn't give commands for us to carry out, but many in the American church (because of Finney) have added to them and required near behavioral perfection in the Christian life or adaption to a particular group's commands as the basis of whether a person is Christian or not. No wonder that we have pride in the American church. No wonder that we don't reach out with the true Gospel as we ought. Many of us are confused. Charles Finney has lent us part of our Christian legacy in America, and that legacy is tainted with dangerous error.

Here is the link to Horton's article: http://www.mtio.com/articles/aissar81.htm

A poem inspired by Dylan Thomas

Do Not Go Lonely Into That Coming Night

Do not go lonely into that coming night,
A soul should seek company at close of day;
The way alone is the darkest of ways.

Though worldly wise then know that way is right,
Yet, their homegrown wisdom has no sight, they'll say:
The way alone is the darkest of ways.

Good folks, their deeds in scales bouncing, ever slight
Flawed deeds hold little weight on that day, they'll say:
The way alone is the darkest of ways.

Wild ones, who merry made in sunny day light,
They learn, alas, they wasted life in delay, they'll say:
The way alone is the darkest of ways.

Grave souls, near death, who see with blinded sight
Blind eyes, missed the Blaze, Torch of Days, they'll say:
The way alone is the darkest of ways.

And you, my belov'd, there in dark vale's gate,
Call, bless me now with your broken tears, I pray.
Do not go lonely into the coming night.
The way alone is the darkest of ways.


(This poem was inspired by Dylan Thomas. Thomas was a hard-drinking writer, and his intent was to express his desire that his father not regret death. My view of the world is quite different than Thomas' and consequently, my fears for those who die depart from his, though my poem's form is the same)

Thank God

I want to say thank you to God. He is so good to me--"Thank you Lord." I can't say enough about Him: he chose me in Him (Jesus Christ) before the world was made, he called me from death to life, he made me right with him through the gifts of repentance and faith in Jesus Christ...He gave me my physical being and my soul...He has given me my wonderful family, my friends, my church family. He is caring for our physical needs through the job He has provided, and has protected us from harm. He is walking with us through our trials.

Lord, thank you for being in my life..I love you.

Greg

When I Get Where I'm Goin

Lately, certain songs have touched my heart deeply. This is one of those songs...my heart literally aches with joy and sadness when I hear this song. Christians ought to be happy to be "going somewhere," which happens to be the abode of God--the Son, Jesus Christ, His Father, and of the Holy Ghost, not only that, but there is the hope of seeing those gone on there, and that place is devoid of the many things that make us hurt here. The key (or door to use His words) is our Lord Jesus Christ--no man comes to the Father or that place without the Son. He demands our lives, but promises a greater life in return--life with Him forever.