8/15/2019 Toward A Christian Worldview

1/6

Toward a Christian Worldview

Confusion in the American Christian community today causes many to take partisanstands which are unbiblical and unreasonable. This confusion is the result ofmisunderstandings of Scripture and of the proper role that Christians are to playin a democratic society.

Lets view some popular distortions and misconceptions using a biblical and

historical lens to gain a proper perspective.

The first and predominant view mistakenly taught by some Christian leaders is thatthe United States was founded as a Christian nation. While it is true that thedominant religion in the United States is and has been Christianity we should notconfuse this fact with the notion that the United States is a Christian nation inany Biblical sense.

The fact that we have a system of government based on majority rule does notequate to a national structure based on Christ. Our government is based on theU.S. Constitution. Most of our laws are based on English common law and representan accumulation of legal thought throughout the centuries. Our laws are the resultof the compromise of divergent interests that negotiated their positions under the

notion of the consent of the governed.

Indeed, the Declaration of Independence states: Governments are instituted amongMen, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. Notice that nomention of God or the Bible is made. The validity of a government is based on theconsent of those directly affected by a governments decisions. The overridingconcern is the extent to which the government affects the citizens safety andhappiness, rather than its ability to encourage the sanctification of itspopulace.

Corresponding viewpoints to the Christian nation theory include the belief thatour nation was born as an act of divine will according to Scripture. There is anotion that the founding fathers were on a mission of God in demanding their

independence. We must be careful to distinguish between the permissive will of Godand his active authoritative will that for example was exercised when Moses ledthe Israelites out of Egypt. George Washington experienced no burning bush andKing George was no pharaoh keeping the American colonists in slavery.

According to the Declaration: When in the Course of human events, it becomesnecessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected themwith another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equalstation to which the Laws of Nature and of Natures God entitle them, a decentrespect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causeswhich impel them to the separation.

The document claims that God has entitled them to exalt themselves to the equal of

England. No Scripture is referred to that would support such a claim because noneexists.

Romans 13:1-7 makes it clear that complaints such as no taxation withoutrepresentation and other concerns about British control over the colonies did notjustify rebellion against the God-ordained government. God is unchanging. Soeither Paul was wrong or God had no active role in Americas struggle forindependence.

First Peter 2 instructs, Submit yourselves for the Lord's sake to every authorityinstituted among men: whether to the king, as the supreme authority, or to

8/15/2019 Toward A Christian Worldview

2/6

governors, who are sent by him to punish those who do wrong and to commend thosewho do right (2:13-14).

Nowhere in Scripture are we told to insist on a democratic form of government.Christians are given no right to rebel if the government is not to their liking.These verses apply to every Christian in every nation no matter what form ofgovernment they live under. Fortunately for Americans we live in a representativedemocracy. This form of government grants us certain privileges and

responsibilities. Understanding how to meet these demands as Christians isimperative if we are to live up to our calling to be salt and light (Matthew 5:13-16).

This is not to say that God is incapable of using events as a blessing to theworld. But it does show that those who see the rebels as Gods emissaries involvedin a holy mission can make their claim only in opposition to Scripture and notbecause of it.

In the same sense it should be noted that the founding fathers were not actingunder divine inspiration either. Upon the signing of the Declaration, forinstance, John Adams said of the 4th of July: I believe that it will becelebrated by succeeding generations as the great anniversary festival, he wrote

his wife, Abigail. It ought to be celebrated by pomp and parade, with shows,games, sports, guns, bells, bonfires, and illuminations from one end of thiscontinent to the other... He takes a totally secular view as well he should.Someone working directly for God would have been more inclined to call for hymnsof joy, sermons of praise and prayers of thanksgiving to a benevolent God forrescuing America from the evil clutches of mad King George.

Another popular, but bogus notion commonly taught is that all of the foundingfathers were Christians. The founding fathers were among the most gifted group ofmen that one era has ever seen assembled in the history of the world.Collectively, their talents are awe inspiring. Based on their writings we mayconclude that as a group they certainly believed in God. But their beliefs couldhardly be described as Christianity in any Biblical sense of the word. A

smattering of the record they left us:

George Washington wrote, Religious controversies are always productive of moreacrimony and irreconcilable hatreds than those which spring from any other cause.I had hoped that liberal and enlightened thought would have reconciled theChristians so that their [not our?] religious fights would not endanger the peaceof Society. (Letter to Sir Edward Newenham, June 22, 1792).

James Madison wrote, During almost fifteen centuries, the legal establishment ofChristianity has been on trial. What have been the fruits of this trial? More orless in all places, pride and indolence in the Clergy; ignorance and servility inthe laity; and in both, clergy and laity, superstition, bigotry and persecution(Speech to the General Assembly of Virginia, 1785).

"I have found Christian dogma unintelligible. Early in life I absented myself fromChristian assemblies." (Declared Benjamin Franklin in Toward The Mystery.)

None of these is intended as an indictment of the gentlemen mentioned. It is notour responsibility to determine the faith of others. But these quotations shouldgive us pause when we are tempted to think the founding fathers were saints of thefirst order who live in heaven today and wonder what went wrong with the Christiannation they established.

Another related misconception is that Gods promises to the nation of Israel in

8/15/2019 Toward A Christian Worldview

3/6

the Old Testament apply to the United States today. Gods promise in 2 Chronicles7:14, if my people, who are called by name, will humble themselves and seek myface and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven and willforgive their sin and will heal their land is regularly quoted by Christianleaders in a misguided attempt to motivate American Christians to obedience andprayer as a means to save America from its present day decay and inevitabledestruction if action is not taken.

When read in context (see 2 Chronicles 7:11-22), it is abundantly clear that theverse in question is directed to the Israelites only and not to AmericanChristians. As Christians we may pray for the holy nation, the church, and we maypray for our temporal nation, the United States, but we should not expect specialconsideration based on nationhood rather than church hood. In the Christian erawhen God refers to his people, he means the church and not Americans.

When a Christian thinks of his nation he should think of what Scripture calls aholy nation and not primarily his physical nation. This means that our fellowcitizens are Christians anywhere in the world and not just those people who have aclaim to citizenship in our secular community. There are many nations but only onechurch. Those of us in the church have a dual citizenship but only one ultimateloyalty. When deciding political questions we must use that one loyalty as the

sounding board for all our positions.

According to 1 Peter 2, But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holynation, a people belonging to God. When a Christian thinks of belonging to anation he should see himself as set apart from his fellow (non-Christian)citizens. As Paul points out in Ephesians, Consequently, you are no longerforeigners and aliens, but fellow citizens with God's people and members of God'shousehold (2:19). And to the Philippians in chapter 3, But our citizenship is inheaven (3:20).

We have a dual citizenship: American and Christian. But we are to have only oneultimate loyalty: to Jesus Christ and his church. This ties us to every Christianin every nation. They are our brothers and sistersmembers of the same family.

When we think of family we know that we are to treat its members differently thanwe do non-family. We have a special obligation to support them that is strongerthan any obligation we may feel to others.

In terms of nationhood, we are internationalists functioning in a world ofnational interests. We should be concerned for the welfare of our fellowChristians in other lands. We are one peoplethe church.

This fact has profound implications when a Christian views the nations foreignpolicy. The true welfare of others should be of paramount concern to us even atthe expense of the more narrow national interests of the United States. People wehave never met should count. We love them even though we dont know them and wehave a responsibility to them. By adopting us into his family, God has essentially

obligated us to view foreigners as a part of us and not just as an impersonalthem.

Likewise, Christian leaders also regularly use the idea of restoring the good olddays as a rally cry for the American church and plead for a return to somemagical cultural point in time. When some Christian leaders compare todaysculture with the past they are very troubled with what they perceive to be thedwindling influence of the church in society.

Prayer and Bible reading in public schools are often cited as two elements of thepast that are sorely missed in the present. It is assumed that if only the

8/15/2019 Toward A Christian Worldview

4/6

reinstitution of these and a few other great traditions were made America wouldonce again be a great nation. The desire to turn back the clock, although naturalin times of turmoil, is more a sign of a fear of the future than of a fidelity tothe past. The challenge of each generation of Christians is to determine ways toobey Gods word in whatever circumstances they find themselves. If this means thatwe no longer have a captive audience in schools, then we are to cope.

In fairness it should be noted that the same society that required prayer and

Bible reading in schools was also a society that was racially segregated, deniedequal opportunities to women and dealt unfairly with many of its neediestcitizens. In short, if we do not oversimplify the good old days, but insteadengage in a sober analysis of the entire picture we must conclude that noteverything was better and that we have an opportunity to correct perceivedproblems today.

Even if we could require prayer and Bible reading in our public schools we shouldnot do so. Making everyone abide by the same standard would be a violation oftheir civil rights. No child should be made to conform to activities that violatehis conscience or that of his parents. First Peter 2:17 instructs us to showrespect to everyone. It is hardly a sign of respect to coerce students to engagein even semi-religious behavior.

If prayer in school is required, then the questions of the content and therecipient of the prayers need serious attention. Prayer to the god of the lowestcommon denominator should offend real Christians. Just as prayer to God the Fatherin the name of His Son Christ Jesus offends atheists and proponents of a myriad ofother religions as well, repeating a watered down prayer to an amorphous being ina public setting is not spiritually uplifting nor is it satisfying to a realbeliever. Playing at worship is not designed to please God, which should be ourgoal. There is no reason to assume that such prayers would have an upliftingaffect on the students or any tangible benefit such as improved school disciplineor improved test scores.

Finally, it needs to be pointed out that students are free to pray or read their

Bibles in school now. Institutionalizing these acts would carry no real benefitsand would cause a host of problems.

God expects us to be a positive influence on our society by setting an example forothers. Our American citizenship should be seen as a blessing that not allChristians enjoy. By granting us citizenship in a free society, God has placed aburden on our shoulders that not all Christians share.

For instance, we have an obligation to vote. And voting is counterproductive if wedo not choose wisely among the candidates. This does not mean that we are to votefor the most Christian candidate. Such a strategy would be impossible to implementanyhow since we cannot accurately judge.

Jesus told us in Matthew 10:16, I am sending you out like sheep among wolves.Therefore be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves. Part of being shrewdis determining which candidate is most likely to accomplish the most rather thanwhich one seems to be the best Christian.

Regardless of who is in office, it is possible that some demands of government runcounter to the word of God. Should this occur we must take a stand similar toPeters when he declared, We must obey God rather than men (Acts 5:29)! While itis not likely that our government would require something that runs counter toGods instructions in the Bible we must be willing to reject such a measure if itwere ever made.

8/15/2019 Toward A Christian Worldview

5/6

On some issues there is no Christian position. But all Christians are obligated tosearch Scripture to inform their decisions. We must recognize that there is adifference between principle and policy. We look to the Bible as our guide to theprinciples upon which we base our policy positions.

Some Christians feel that the best way to be salt and light to the society is tomobilize and vote to require all Americans to abide by what they see as Christian

principles of conduct, but there is no Biblical mandate to do so. In fact, doingso violates our instructions given in 1 Peter 2:17, Show proper respect toeveryone: Love the brotherhood of believers, fear God, and honor the king.

For example, consider a modified pledge of allegiance: There being no god Ipledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republicfor which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

This is not the pledge being sought by those who wish to remove the phrase underGod from the Pledge of Allegiance; but what the separation of church and statecrowd is after, however, is neutrality in the pledge on the question of Godsrelationship to the nation. Before disregarding these dissenters, we should try tounderstand the issue without relying on our prejudices to shape our opinion.

First, consider the atheist. Making a pledge to a fictitious god is a violation ofhis personal beliefs. Opting out of saying the pledge degrades him also. He is noless a citizen or an American because he is so fundamentally wrong about God. As afull partner in our nation, he is entitled to the respect to which Peter referred.

Second, consider the non-Christian person of faith. Whether Muslim, Hindu orBuddhist, he is not referring to God the Father when reciting the pledge. If thepledge is to be something held in common to serve to bind us together asAmericans, how can we all have a different deity in mind as we speak?

Third, imagine the howls of protest that we would hear if under God weresuddenly replaced with under Allah. We cannot pretend that the words do not

matter or that it is only the thought that counts. When Christians say under Godwe mean under the rule of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To think otherwisedemeans the very act of pledging.

Being in the majority does not give us the right to disrespect our fellowcitizens. They are partners with us in the nationnot in Christs church. The bestway to show respect for our fellow citizens, love for our fellow believers,respect for God, and honor for our government is to delete under God from thepledge. To insist on its retention is nothing less than an attempt to Christianizea secular exercise under the guise of doing Gods will.

Gods will for us is the same as it has always been: to make faithful believers ofall people regardless of their national identity. We should not become sidetracked

by fighting meaningless battles over the nations facade of faith.

With a worldview based on the preceding concepts American Christians are not justordinary citizens. Our outlook should be different than non-Christians and becauseof those differences, not all Christians will be popular. Jesus said in John15:20, No servant is greater than his master. If they persecuted me, they willpersecute you also. We are not called to seek the approval of men. We must takeour stand as God would have us stand: on Biblical principles that we hold toregardless of the views of our fellow citizens or the inconvenience of holdingthem. Our guiding principle as American Christians is not the narrow self-interestof regular citizens but the instruction of our Lord Jesus Christ. We should want

8/15/2019 Toward A Christian Worldview

6/6

no other.