Topic: Social and Cultural Issues
Subversion and Religious Pluralism What’s wrong with the idea that everyone should be free to practice and promote his own religious views?by Lou Poumakis
(libertarian)
Sunday, August 24, 2008
Faith and culture are irrevocably interdependent. They are essential complements that cannot continue to exist in conflict with each other. Faith informs the culture and the culture informs faith. The idea that Christianity can continue to thrive for several generations in a heathen cultural environment is very wrong. It must either govern the culture or be subdued by it. Religious Pluralism is never permanent. It is characteristic of a culture in transition from one faith to another. This is the condition in America and most of the western world today. Sadly, Christians in this nation and around the world do not appreciate this fact. They have bought into the idea that their faith is something between themselves and God. It is a private matter, they say, and hence there is no problem with other people having whatever faith they desire. "Their faith does not affect me or mine." This is both wrong and foolish. We can see from God's repeated injunctions to the nation of Israel to separate themselves from the surrounding nations, how debilitating contact with heathen cultures can be. Even Israelites that promulgated false religions were subject to the death penalty (Deuteronomy 13: 6-9). Without entering into a discussion as to the differences between their society and ours, we can plainly see the importance that God places on the environment His people live in. He knows our frame, that we are but dust and highly susceptible to the evil influences of false religions.
In a stable, steady-state condition, the faith held by a population is supported by the culture. Families can teach their faith to their children and expect them to grow up sharing the same values they themselves were taught a generation earlier. This is so because everyone (or almost everyone) they come into contact with supports the faith inculcated in the youth by their parents. They re-enforce rather than oppose and conflict with each other. Young people grow up, not ignorant of alternative faiths, but understanding them in a proper light with an appreciation of their many deficiencies.
In the early church and wherever Christianity is suppressed and forced underground, it forms a culture around itself that is thoroughly Christian. It is then able to survive and even grow in size, strength and influence. The pockets of Christianity formed by Paul and the other apostles grew and eventually coalesced into a force that took over the whole of the European continent. For over a thousand years, Europe was known as "Christendom;" the vast majority of the population recognized Christ as the ultimate ruler whose word was the final authority, above that of whoever might be on the throne at the time. Kings were forced, by the will of the majority, if not of their own conviction, to acknowledge Christ as their master and submit to His will. This is not to say there were no exceptions or that obedience was total. It certainly was not. Sin was present then as it is today and corruption became so prevalent that the upheaval of the Reformation became unavoidable. It does show, however, the strength inherent in the Christian faith and its ability to conquer and maintain dominion over cultures at the national and continental levels.
In the pluralistic society that we see around us today, families that wish to pass their faith to their children are compromised by their inability to isolate them from the irreligious ideas of others they come into contact with. Many mature, doctrinally orthodox Christian parents are sorrowing over wayward children and grandchildren. They feel they have done a reasonably good job of raising them and don't understand why they have left the faith. They can do an excellent job and yet have it be compromised by a schoolteacher or friend or anyone the child comes into contact with that impresses him or her favorably. Sports figures, TV personalities, books, movies, etc. have a cumulative effect on the mind of the growing, learning child or youth. To think that the cultural impact on the faith is negligible, or easily compensated for, is extremely foolish. It is highly charged propaganda that drives home the message that there is no God. Perhaps the most insidious form this takes is simply the omission of any reference to God throughout the book or movie or during the whole day at school. The silence is effectively a loud declaration of the non-existence of God. To think that our faith or that of our children is so strong as to remain unaffected by a repeated barrage of this kind of material is to play the ostrich and hide one's head in the sand. The Pilgrims had this problem in Holland where, although they were welcome and well treated, they saw the effect the ungodly environment was having on their youth and felt they needed to leave, even at the terrible cost they knew would be involved. Their understanding of the seriousness of this issue was far better than we see among Christians in our day that have virtually abandoned the culture. Many Christians claim to hold to a world and life faith but in practice they limit it to self, family and church. The outside world does not feel any serious challenge from most Christians. God's name is rarely brought into the public square. Even in the arguments brought against abortion for example, instead of "thus saith the Lord," we hear about the danger to the mother, the psychological trauma, etc. usually accompanied by insipid pleas for some sort of compromise position. This, of course, is a logical consequence of assuming that God's law is for believers only and not applicable to the culture.
Christians have been hamstrung by this virtually universally accepted idea of religious pluralism. They cannot fight to make God's word the basis of civil law because they either don't realize it should be or just want to be "considerate" of other religious views. The opponents of Christianity (today primarily the religion of secular humanism) don't play fair. They take every opportunity to eliminate God and especially God's law from every aspect of public life. They have been very successful in subverting our once widespread Christian culture, in large part due to having sold the idea of religious pluralism to American Christians.
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 1 thumb so far
The views expressed in this
article are those of Lou Poumakis only and do not represent
the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates. Lou Poumakis is
solely responsible for the contents of this article and is not an
employee or otherwise affiliated with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
It's called tolerance. Jesus said to go into your closet to pray religion is between you and your God. Read something about other religions and you'll realize there is nothing enormously special about Christianity.Jefferson said he didn't care how many gods people worshipped or if they worshipped none that it did nothing to harm him. You have every right to your faith, but no right to impede on the practices of others!
My guidebook is the Bible, which is the basis for the Christian faith. In it we can clearly see that the God of Christianity does not tolerate other religions. The first commandment is, "thou shalt have no other gods before me." Foreigners that did not subscribe to the national faith could worship their gods so long as they did it privately and didn't attempt to subvert that faith.
You can hold to and practice any religion you wish but my point is that multiple religions cannot be maintained within a single law system. Eventually only one can remain standing. In this country it once was Christianity but Christians, failing to heed God's warnings, allowed the faith of our culture to be subverted by Humanism. We now have both religions competing with each other and that can't last. Eventually one or the other will become the accepted faith and our laws will be shaped to fit the precepts of that faith. The current turmoil over abortion and homosexual marriage are aspects of the struggle for religious supremacy.
As the christian god is a jealous god and also commands the faithful to put all non-believers to the sword, are you advocating using violence to force your beliefs upon others? BTW, advocating to have the government gang do your bloody work is still violence.
No, violence is not part of the Christian formula. The cultural changes are to be effected through regeneration and conversion, not the force of government. Those that say otherwise do not understand the Bible.
As an ex catholic myself it was the historical and current actions of christianity that prompted me to remove myself from that envirionment. I think it is safe to say the forefathers knowing chistian history included the 1st amendment so the US would not become yet another victim of christian history and organized religion in general.
You may want to revisit your christian history as it is painted in blood. Just one of the reasons the founding fathers were adamate on keeping religion out of the state.
Here's an except from a letter to F. A. Vanderkemp from John Adams dated 27 December 1816:
"Christianity, you will say, was a fresh revelation. I will not deny this. As I understand the Christian religion, it was, and is, a revelation. But how has it happened that millions of fables, tales, legends, have been blended with both Jewish and Christian revelation that have made them the most bloody religion that ever existed? How has it happened that all the fine arts, architecture, painting, sculpture, statuary, music, poetry, and oratory, have been prostituted from the creation of the world, to the sordid and detestable purposes of superstition and fraud?"
Now we could examine history in detail to count the blood and violence that ARE part of the christian formula. Or we could just examine "modern" (smorgasbord variety) chrisitianity's violence starting with the child abuse of indoctrination into the "faith", all the way thru intolerance of others' beliefs, including the current call for genocide against muslims.
As non-violence is a cornerstone of libertarianism, I'm troubled that anyone would even concider christianity as anything but a psychosis that needs to be excised from humanity.
I am not a religious man but I do like Jefferson\'s stance:
"An Act for Establishing Religious Freedom
This bill, drafted by Thomas Jefferson in 1777, first appeared in the form of a broadside, printed in Williamsburg in 1779. The only known copy of the original broadside belongs to the Boston Public Library.
I. Whereas Almighty God hath created the mind free; that all attempts to influence it by temporal punishments or burthens, or by civil incapacitations, tend only to beget habits of hypocrisy and meanness, and are a departure from the plan of the Holy author of our religion, who being Lord both of body and mind, yet chose not to propagate it by coercions on either, as was in his almighty power to do; that the impious presumption of legislators and rulers, civil as well as ecclesiastical, who being themselves but fallible and uninspired men, have assumed dominion over the faith of others, setting up their own opinions and modes of thinking as the only true and infallible, and as such endeavouring to impose them on others, hath established and maintained false religions over the greatest part of the world, and through all time; that to compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves, is sinful and tyrannical; that even the forcing him to support this or that teacher of his own religious persuasion, is depriving him of the comfortable liberty of giving his contributions to the particular pastor, whose morals he would make his pattern, and whose powers he feels most persuasive to righteousness, and is withdrawing from the ministry those temporary rewards, which proceeding from an approbation of their personal conduct, are an additional incitement to earnest and unremitting labours for the instruction of mankind; that our civil rights have no dependence on our religious opinions, any more than our opinions in physics or geometry; that therefore the proscribing any citizen as unworthy the public confidence by laying upon him an incapacity of being called to offices of trust and emolument, unless he profess or renounce this or that religious opinion, is depriving him injuriously of those privileges and advantages to which in common with his fellow-citizens he has a natural right; that it tends only to corrupt the principles of that religion it is meant to encourage, by bribing with a monopoly of worldly honours and emoluments, those who will externally profess and conform to it; that though indeed these are criminal who do not withstand such temptation, yet neither are those innocent who lay the bait in their way; that to suffer the civil magistrate to intrude his powers into the field of opinion, and to restrain the profession or propagation of principles on supposition of their ill tendency, is a dangerous fallacy, which at once destroys all religious liberty, because he being of course judge of the tendency will make his opinions the rule of judgment; and approve or condemn the sentiments of others only as they shall square with or differ from his own; that it is time enough for the rightful purposes of civil government, for its officers to interfere when principles break out into overt acts against peace and good order; and finally, that truth is great and will prevail if left to herself, that she is the proper and sufficient antagonist to error and has nothing to fear from the conflict, unless by human interposition disarmed of her natural weapons, free argument and debate, errors ceasing to be dangerous when it is permitted freely to contradict them.
II. Be it enacted by the General assembly, that no man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, not shall otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief; but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinion in matters of religion, that that the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge, or affect their civil capacities.
III. And though we well know that this assembly elected by the people for the ordinary purposes of legislation only, have no power to restrain the acts of succeeding assemblies, constituted with powers equal to our own, and that therefore to declare this act to be irrevocable would be of no effect in law; yet we are free to declare, and do declare, that the rights hereby asserted are of the natural rights of mankind, and that if any act shall be hereafter passed to repeal the present, or to narrow its operation, such act will be an infringement of natural right."
The bloodiest century in history was the 20th century. The blood was let by Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, to name just a few of the non-Christian and anti-Christian regimes responsible. Christianity is based on the Bible, which teaches us to love our neighbor as we love ourselves, to share what we have with those in need, to not take vengeance against those that have harmed us, to turn the other cheek when struck, etc., etc., etc. It is most decidedly non-violent!
The violence you cite in Christian history is a consequence of disobedience to these injunctions. It was the failure of sinful men to obey God and the Bible that shed the blood you speak of.
When and where the Bible was truly obeyed and not just held up as an excuse for criminal action, suffering was alleviated and people were free and prospered as never before. Western civilization, which provided more freedom and prosperity than the world has ever known, is a product of the Christian religion. It is in decline today because it has lost its anchor, it no longer believes in God and the Bible is no longer the rule of life for most of us. Our only chance to recover what we had is to return to the faith of our fathers.
Jefferson had some good ideas but, while he speaks here of Almighty God, he doesn't really follow God's word, the Bible. He at one point wrote his own greatly distorted version of the Bible. I think we need to take and use what's good in Jefferson but be very careful with the rest.
Like many Christians, you have a strong faith. Unfortunately what you don't see, or want to see, is simple.
If you raise your Children up in Christ and they go astray -- there is nothing you can do. GOD does not work the way you wish him to, GOD works in the way that works. Don't you realize that after the persecution of the Church by the Roman Empire the faith was still exposed to the licentous behavior, idolatry and sinfulness of that day and age? Mithraism and other faiths were constant temptations.
To suggest that Christians be able to worship freely without being made to feel wrong for doing so is one thing, and admirable. But you are implying that this is a Christian culture, that no others belong, that the law should be drawn up on Christian lines -- but it wouldn't be CHRIST defining the laws, but man.
You claim to follow the Bible. Tell me, then -- do the portions of the Old Testament that apply to the Jews apply to us? Some Christians say yes, others no. What about the part where you're say that "Foreigners that did not subscribe to the national faith could worship their gods so long as they did it privately and didn't attempt to subvert that faith. " Who draws the lines of what is private? Can you have a church? Define "subverting the faith"? What if I'm Jewish and want a menorah, is that subverting the faith?
Anytime you have things of this nature, you don't have GOD in the process, but MAN making decisions, based on greed, money, and pride. You can say whatever you like but the reason this country is in the pits is because people have TWISTED Christianity from telling themselves how to be good , loving people filled with God's knowledge, who spread the faith by their lives and walking the walk, to greedy, intolerant bigots, who cling to the most illogical points in the Bible and never bother to address the points Jesus stressed the most. You have prosperity churches! You have people making money off Christian marketing! you have, of all things, HUNTING CLUBS FOR JESUS.
You , sir, need to please kindly remove the beam from thy own eye, and then you can see clearly to comment about the speck in someone elses. Making this country a theocracy will only destroy it.
In a larger, sadder sense, I know this post is a waste of time. People like you do not engage in "debate" , you do not reason or listen, you simply proclaim and expect people to follow, and if they don't then they aren't Christian. That mindset is why I stopped posting articles here, why church attendance is down, and why when we are all called to Judgement before His Throne, I fear I will not see you there.
Thank you for your well reasoned and well expressed comments. I can appreciate all you say about the failings of Christians and their propensity to take things, particularly the formulation of laws, into their own hands. Christians from ancient times until now have been plagued with idolatry, sinfulness and various heresies.
Regarding who it is that defines the laws, my position is that God in the whole Bible defines all law. Man’s role is not legislative but merely administrative. He may establish procedural regulations but the entire population should understand that God’s law is always above such statutes. This concept was very prevalent in early America and is not quite dead yet. Judges well into the 19th century would typically read a passage from Scripture, one related to the case at hand, prior to passing sentence on a convicted criminal. This reflected the popular notion that God’s law was the higher law that stood above state or local statutes. I recall as a youth in the mid 20th century that many people I knew still held to this notion of a “higher law.” Today it is pretty much gone. The American people have been dumbed down and no longer possess the extensive Biblical understanding their predecessors had.
You ask, “do the portions of the Old Testament that apply to the Jews apply to us?” I say that the Bible is the word of the Creator to all his creatures and it all applies to all of us.
“Who draws the lines of what is private?” Where God’s word does not prescribe a civil penalty, the matter is private. The punishment for many offences is reserved to God’s direct judgment on the individual.
“Define ‘subverting the faith’?” The faith is undermined when anyone attempts to draw people away from God’s truth and into the worship of a false God. It is the equivalent of today’s laws against treason, an attempt to subvert the state. In God’s government the state is a secondary agency, being replaced by the covenant community, a collection of families. Any attempt to alter the faith of that community is an act of treason and hence punishable by death. God prescribed such a law because He knows that we are all sinners and that without a strict regulation the faith would disintegrate and die.
“What if I'm Jewish and want a menorah, is that subverting the faith?” If, the menorah were used as a symbol and a rallying figure to attract covenant members away from the faith, then yes, it would be considered subversion. If it were used privately by a non-covenant member to support his worship of his god, then no, it’s not subversion.
You condemn today’s distortions of Christianity, so do I. How this developed is a long story and can’t be properly addressed here.
I hope that this response demonstrates that I am willing to engage in debate. I have opened both heart and mouth above and hope I will see you at God’s Judgment Throne.
"They cannot fight to make God's word the basis of civil law because they either don't realize it should be or just want to be "considerate" of other religious views."
How on earth is making "God's word" law in any way understood to be Libertarian? Living under the burden of some religious code is not Liberty, it's fascism. I don't care if you wish to belive all that nonsense about God and divine revelations and moral laws, so long as you don't try to force that crap on me!
I understand that you don't believe in God but, whether you do or not, God's law, the law given to ancient Israel, is still the best ever produced by man. Because man is what he is, no law system can provide total freedom. Restrictive measures are unavoidable but God's law provides more freedom than any other form of government ever has. This is so because the Bible replaced the bayonet for many offences. See Ron Paul, Bibles and Bayonets
Want to comment on this
article? Leave your comment here. Your email address is
required to track your comment. However, we will neither
publish your email address nor distribute it to other
organizations or persons. The only reason we might use
it would be if we needed to contact you regarding your
comment. All comments are subject to our
terms of use policy.
