A Biblical View Is The Best View

Should only Black lives matter or should all lives matter? That is the question. And the answer is it depends. It depends on what we are referring to when discussing what matters. Are we referring to the movement or the opinion when saying 'Black Lives Matter'? The same applies to saying 'All Lives Matter.'

In his article on the Biblical view of Black Lives Matter (click here for the article), Jeremy Williams (click here for a very short bio) responds to the opinion with a resounding 'YES!' But it wouldn't be wrong if he was responded to the movement in the same way either. Why? Because the movement is there to address the disproportionate number of Blacks who are the victims of police shootings and abuse, mass incarceration, and youth unemployment. We could also throw in here the stagnant, if not worsening, disparity in wealth between Blacks and Whites. So saying 'All Lives Matter,' though being what we should say and believe, undercuts the attention society needs to pay to the plight of Blacks and other minoirities in our society.

Williams' article here is both simple and important. While focusing on the opinion that Black lives matter, he notes the obstacles that that are put in the way of those in the Black community: the mass incarceration, the overwhelming presence of drugs, the closing of schools, the presence of businesses that financially exploit people, and the placing of liquor stores, there is a sense that the Black community is being targeted. And here is the problem for those of us who are not Black, none of the above seems to pose a threat to those of us who are moral and law abiding. Thus, some of us tend to believe that Blacks are bringing problems on themselves by not exercising self-discipline. And because we can deduce such a conclusion, we feel no urgency to experience in person or ask for first hand accounts of what it is like to live in Black neighborhoods. 

This reminds me reminds me of my visit to the 4th birthday celebration of Occupy Wall Street. As I was talking to some Blacks who live in New York City, I was trying to tell them that many of my suburban friends find their experiences with the police as being as incredulous as they find our experience to be as I was discussing how many of the suburban police I've seen treat protesters, even the ones they are arresting, with respect. The issue is that us Whites who live in safe neighborhoods must take an investigative journalist approach to learning about life in Black communities rather than using our own neighborhoods to assume what life there is like.

Williams then gives an all too brief account of how the plight of immigrants is not all that easier from the plight of many Blacks.

Williams then proceeds to answer the question whether Jesus would say 'all lives matter' or 'black lives matter.' Here, Williams answers with the latter. Why? Because Jesus cared for those who needed to be cared for. He sided with the marginalized and those who had no leader. This is also why Jesus would reach out to welcome and help the immigrants if He were here today. On what does Williams base his opinions? He bases them on Jesus' earthly ministry. He bases his answers on how Jesus talked to the Samaritan women by the well or on when He told His disciples that He pursues His lost sheep. We could throw in Jesus' parable of the sheep and the goats.

Finally, Williams notes how the Evangelical Church does not follow Jesus' example in how they treat the vulnerable. While Jesus would look to minister to them, many of today's evangelicals are 'annoyed' with Black Lives Matter and afraid of what immigrants are doing to our nation.  Thus, those evangelicals who are also part of the marginalized sometimes feel like they have to "sell out" in order to fit in.

In one sense, based on how Williams described Jesus, Jesus would fit in in the May Day celebrations because it is the vulnerable whom those who organize such celebrations focus on. Only, instead of relying on ideology to save those in need, He would offer Himself. And indeed, He both already has in His first coming and he continues to through the preaching of the Gospel and the sending of the Spirit. While those who have the biggest ideological hangups might just be those whose ideology has trumped their understanding of God so that they do not respond to the vulnerable as Jesus did.

ONIM For April 20, 2015

Christian News

• Conservative Anglicans Poised For 'Leap Forward,' Deny Schism -- Christian Today (UK)
• Pakistan: Gunmen Open Fire At Catholic School In Lahore -- Christian Today (UK)
• Bishop Of London Warns Of Global 'Peril' Caused By Environment, Poverty And Conflict -- Christian Today (UK)
• Not The Christian Zionism You're Thinking Of -- Christianity Today
• Finding My Place In The Gospel Coalition -- Christianity Today
• One Last Thing: The Christian Porn Secret -- Christianity Today
• 'Like A Good Neighbor' Jesus Is There -- The Christian Post
• A Millenial's March For Marriage -- The Christian Post
• No. Carolina House Approves Bill To Put Billy Graham Statue In US Capitol -- The Christian Post
• What Is Freedom Of Religion -- Veterans For Peace
• New Episcopal Church Calls For Divestment From Israeli Occupation -- Mondoweiss

World News

• Ted Cruz  Launches Senate Fight To Auction Off America's Public Lands -- Climate Progress
• Investors Chip In As Renewables Rise Toward Record Level -- Truthdig
• United States Forest Service Investigates Expired Nestle Water Permit -- ABC7 News
• First Florida, Now Wisconsin, Ban The Words 'Climate Change' -- BuzzFlash
• Scientists Have Found A 10 Million Gallon 'Bath Mat' Of Oil On The Floor Of The Gulf Of Mexico -- Business Insider
• Police Investigating 'Homicide' Of 10-Year-Old Minnesota Boy -- Yahoo News
• Correction: Killings By Police--Oklahoma Story -- Yahoo News
• A Nation's Shame: Trillions In New Wealth, Millions Of Children In Poverty -- BuzzFlash
• Nearly 50 Aid Agencies Charge International Community Failing People Of Gaza -- Common Dreams
• Judge Permits Uranium Mining Near Grand Canyon -- Mining Awareness Plus
• What Sanctions? The Russian Economy Is Growing Again -- Newsweek
• Video: Arizona Officer Rams Police Cruiser Into Suspect -- Yahoo News
• Obama Pleads With Jewish Groups To Back Iran Deal -- The Hill
• Assembly Republicans Reject Anti-Discrimination Resolution -- WKOW
• Student Groups Clash Over Politics Of Israel And Palestine -- The Wesleyan Argus
• You Are Paying Billions Because McDonald's And Walmart Won't -- Gawker.com
• Ben Carson To Launch Presidential Bid On May 4 -- MSNBC
• Iraq: ISIS Escapes  Describe Systematic Rape -- Human Rights Watch
• Report Shows US Invasion, Occupation Of Iraq Left 1 Million Dead -- Truthout
• Former Philadelphia Police Officer: 'I Planted Drugs Too Many Times To Count' -- Daily Kos
• Former Prosecutor Says Cops Planting Guns On People They Shoot Is 'Standard Operating Procedure' -- Counter Current News
• 'Thousands' Of Israeli Arab Homes Threatened With Demolition -- Yahoo News
• Frequently Asked Questions About Upcoming Marriage Equality Case At The U.S. Supreme Court -- Human Rights Campaign
• Warren Blasts Government For Ignoring 'Blatant Criminal Activity' On Wall Street -- Common Dreams
• Police Report Sharp Increase In Religious And Race Crimes In London -- Christian Today (UK)

Pick(s) Of The Litter

• Goldman Sachs CEO: Entitlements Must Be Contained -- CBS Evening News
• Noam Chomsky: America Hates Its Poor -- Salon
• In Landmark Case, Dutch Citizens Sue Their Government Over Failure To Act On Climate Change -- Climate Progress
• 27,000 Oil And Gas Wells Abandoned In Gulf Of Mexico Ignored By Government, Industry -- The Times Picayune
• After Walmart And Fast Food, Labor Activists Target Big Banks -- Aljazeera
• Railroading Racism: Warren Buffet Vs Northwest Indians -- Intercontinental Cry
• Ethiopians 'Tortured, Oppressed And Silenced' Into Surrendering Land To Foreign Investors -- Truthdig 

Paralyzed Parables From The Gospel Of Individual Liberty

There is a new emphasis on or definition of individual liberty roaming around today. The emphasis or definition being promoted by some conservatives goes like this: the only liberty is individual liberty. Thus, anyone who is tries to either prevent one from doing what they want or force them to do something they don't want is infringing on the other person's liberty and is thus using coercion. We should note two things here. First, this view of individual liberty is especially applied to business elites. Second, infringing on the individual liberty of people is, to some conservatives, the root of all evil.

This new view of individual liberty makes it absolute with some exceptions. No individual has the right to treat others unjustly as defined by the Ten Commandments or to infringe on the liberties of others. But no such exception is provided for democratically made decisions. That is, individual liberty, especially when exercised by business elites, trumps democracy. We should note here that democracies are exercises in corporate or social liberty. That is democracies are how groups of people decide how they wish to live with and relate to one another. So according to the new emphasis on or definition of individual liberty, no democracy has the right to infringe on anyone's individual liberties by giving them limits on or regulating how they are to treat others except for what has been previously mentioned.

Because of this new view of individual liberty, democracy is seen as a threat by conservatives. That is because binding decisions that are democratically determined can easily threaten individual liberty. Thus, the only alternative to democracy which these conservatives approve of is to support elite-rule, that is tyranny, provided that those in charge are the right elites--the one who protect individual liberties especially of the business elites.

But the conflict between the above definition of individual liberty vs democracy is not the main issue here. The issue is how does this new version of individual liberty mesh with the Bible especially when it comes to what the Bible says about helping others? To illustrate how this new definition might fit in I rewrote a couple of parables to accommodate the new view of liberty.

Matthew 25:31-46 gives us the parable of the sheep and the goats. In that parable, the final judgment divides all people into two groups: the sheep and the goats. Those who helped the least of Christ's brethren in this life ministered to Jesus by doing so and were judged as being righteous and were thus welcomed into heaven. Those who did not help the least of His brethren were condemned to eternal punishment. What is below is the rewrite of the parable assuming that Jesus subscribed to making individual liberty absolute.

At the end, there was a great judgment and all of the people were divided into two groups: the sheep and the goats. Jesus said to the sheep on His right, "Welcome to my kingdom prepared for you because despite the suffering of those in poverty, jail, or illness, you gave me the freedom to respond in the way I saw fit."  And the sheep replied, "When did we ever give you such liberty?" Jesus said, "Whenever you refused to make me feel guilty for ignoring other while trying to be more successful, or when you opposed those who would either make me pay my employees higher wages and benefits or require me to spend more to care for the environment, or when you voted to both reduce my taxes and cut government programs for social uplift you gave me that liberty."

 Then Jesus turned and scowled at the goats on His left and said, "Leave and go to the eternal punishment prepared for you and the devil. For when those in need cried out for help, you tried to take away my liberty to be a success by either making me be fair to others or help those in need." And the goats on His left asked him, "When did we ever take away your liberty?" And Jesus said, "Whenever you made me feel guilty for not helping those in need, or whenever you stood up for exploited workers, or whenever you voted for government programs for social uplift  you were attacking my liberty."

In Luke 10:25-37 a man asked Jesus how he could have eternal life. Jesus responded by telling him to follow God's law. Jesus went on to describe God's law as loving God with one's whole being and loving one's neighbor as oneself. Below is a rewrite of the parable showing how Jesus might have answered using the absolute definition of individual liberty:

"You are to love God with your whole being and to love yourself before you love your neighbor. For you cannot love others unless you first love yourself."

The man then asked Jesus, "How can I love myself?" Jesus replied, "You love yourself in the same way that you love others, you love yourself by setting yourself free to see where you will go and what you will do."

So the man asked, "How can I set myself free." Jesus then told the man a parable. "A man was walking along a road from Jerusalem to Jericho when he was attacked by thieves. The thieves beat and robbed him and left him to die. A priest came upon the man and crossed to the other side of the road and continued his journey. A Levite did the same. But Samaritan who saw the man stopped, applied first-aid, and took him to an inn where the man could recover. The Samaritan paid the innkeeper in advance and told him that he would return in case there were more expenses." 

Jesus then asked the man which person loved himself by setting himself free. The man replied, "Both the priest and the Levite because they were not compelled to help the man who was attacked." Jesus said, "Yes but the Samaritan was free too. Just because he helped the man who was beaten doesn't mean that he wasn't free. Thus all three loved themselves by allowing themselves the freedom to determine how they would react to what they saw. So go and do likewise knowing that whether or not you stop to help is not the issue, the issue is that you freely choose how you want to interact with those who are in need."

To be clear, this post is not against individual liberty per se. Such liberty is extremely important. This post is questioning making individual liberty absolute so that it always overrules democracy. And we need to remember that since power follows wealth, this absolute version of individual liberty will be awarded to business elites more than to those from any other group. So here, we need to maintain a balance between recognizing individual liberty with practicing democracy or we will lose our democracy. 

But more importantly, we need to see how destructive the absolute definition individual liberty can be to a Christian's faith. Here, one only needs to compare this version of individual liberty with the teachings of the Bible such as with the real parables referred to above. For what we will find is that adhering to this absolute definition of individual liberty will prevent us from using the Bible to know good from evil.

The Circles Of Love

There is a troubling tendency among some preachers whether they be liberals and conservatives. The problem is there is a growing tendency to using single passages from the Bible as the basis for a topical sermon. The clear implication made by those who do this is that the single passage being cited contains everything that the Bible has to say on a given topic. This is a great technique for those who favor bully pulpit to push favorite causes, but it also traps trusting parishioners unawares.

The not ready for topical sermon passage I am thinking of today is John 13:35 where Jesus tells his disciples that they will know them by how they love one another. When used as the basis for a topical sermon, the implication is that we are to proclaim God's love to the world primarily by how we love fellow believers. This would give us permission, if not encourage us, to live as much like the Amish as possible while trying to fulfill the Great Commission. We would then be reaching out to the world by asking them to be voyeurs as we perform in a soundproof glass room where we fellowship with and serve people who most resemble us. However, if we read through the rest of the Bible, we see that there additional ways to show that we belong to Jesus

This passage in John brings us to the subject of whom should we love. As life would have it, there is  more than one group to love; there are four, as illustrated in the above "circles." We are commanded to love 3 of them while love for self is assumed (see Matthew 22:39).

After loving ourselves, we are to love those in our various tribes. For our purposes here, we can think of a tribe as any group to which we belong such as family, church, business, school, political party, nation, and any group that revolves around an activity or an ideology. Outside of self-love, this is the second easiest love to summon from ourselves in part because we are loving those who either resemble us or give us something of value. A very common example that is treasured by some idealists is the love for one's nation. In fact, giving one's life for one's nation is, in America, all too often seen as next to godliness. Of course, some of the even more ardent patriots may not love every citizen of his or her country. Tom Lehrer's satirical song National Brotherhood Week poked fun at both the divisions of people that can exist in a country and superficial efforts to bridge these gaps.

We should note the dangers of tribal love and most of these dangers are because people are content not to extend love to those outside their tribes. One danger is being reluctant to use necessary moral absolutes to judge the behaviors of those from one's own group. This is especially true when hostilities are taking place. Another danger is the belief that as long as one takes care of their own, they can excuse themselves from fulfilling moral obligations to all others. This danger is an ethic of many who embrace a mob or gang mentality but it is also embraced, in varying degrees, by those who revel in patriotism. The thinking here is that as long as I take care of my people, I have fulfilled my obligations and can either neglect others or even abuse others.

However, Jesus calls us to love and serve those from two additional groups who, as the above picture illustrates, are a farther distance from ourselves than those from one from our tribes. In Matthew 22:36-40, Jesus is asked what is the greatest commandment. Jesus, in the spirit of generosity, gave the questioner two and, according to Him, the commandments were close. We are to love God with our whole being (vs 37) and we are to love our neighbor as ourselves (vs 39). The word neighbor may at first sound like a return to tribalism but that is until we read Jesus's explanation in Luke 10:25-37. There, a pharisee asked Jesus who was one's neighbor. In response, Jesus taught the parable of the Good Samaritan. And according to that parable, those who cross our path and are in need are our neighbors. Thus, this parable challenges us to reach farther from ourselves to love. We are to love those who are different from us.

The last group whom Jesus tells us to love are our enemies (Matthew 25:46-47). Now just because we will have different feelings for those who anger and attack us than those who care about us does not mean we cannot love them. Martin Luther King talked about this difference in caring when he was alive. He was a realist and realized that we might not any affection for our enemies. But that does not mean that we are not to return love for hate. Jesus tells us to care and pray for them and this is regardless of how they have treated us. According to King, we are to avoid responding to them with either external or internal violence, which means that that we are avoid hurting or hating them. We are directed to hope and work for their welfare.

At the beginning of this post, we talked about how people will know we are Christ's disciples by how we love our brothers and sisters in Christ. And yet, this is not the only indication that we belong to Christ. When Jesus talked about loving one's enemies, He described it as a way by which we will distinguish ourselves from the world. This is because, as Jesus said, even the godless love their own.

Is there a conflict between John 13:35 and Matthew 5:46-47 here in how we let the world know who we are? There is only when we think in exclusive-or terms. We need to realize that both passages tell us to imitate Him by our love for others. In John 13, Jesus describes how we should love fellow believers and in Matthew 5, we are told whom to love. For Christ came to earth to die for those who, at the time, were His enemies (Romans 5:10).

Love can help bring peace to the earth. But it can only do that when we expand love's borders way beyond our comfort zones. For our love to help foster peace, we must extend it way past the people we hang with. We must love those whose need calls us to be uncomfortable. We must force ourselves, when necessary, to help meet the needs of those strangers who cross our paths. In addition, we must show our enemies that a new relationship is possible. If we meet their hate with the kind of love God shows us in Christ, we have a chance to reduce the hate and violence in the world. If we respond in kind, we show that we belong to the world rather than to Christ.

It is to the Conservative Church's shame that it is restrained from showing Biblical love to strangers and its enemies by the tractor beam of tribal loyalties. The stronger the beam, the less we travel to the outer circles of people to love.  In particular, family, patriotism, loyalty to ideology, and preference for those who share our religion cause us to treat people with preference rather than love Not only is this sin in and of itself (James 2:9), it dishonors Christ especially when non-Christians show this kind of love. This discrepancy causes dissonance and hurts the credibility of the Gospel. And yet, it is a dissonance that is in our faces as some from the Left are not just calling us, but are also laying their own freedoms and even lives on the line for others by challenging those with wealth and power. Unfortunately, this is a spectator's sport to most Conservative Christians who have nested themselves in their cocoons of doctrines and confessions fervently hoping for the rapture to come before time forces them out into the world.

This article was written partially because of my interactions with a fellow blogger and activist, Tom Over. Visit his blog at lovecause.org/