The Myth of a Christian Nation - Ken

This blog is supposed to have two bloggers, myself and Dave. But Dave’s too busy wrestling deer down to the dusty ground of the Texas hill country. So like a deft hunter, I need to draw him out. And what better bait to use than a book that rejects and harangues against the Christian support of American militarism.

One of the books I received for a holiday gift (and purchased it with my employee discount while I still have it!) is Gregory Boyd’s The Myth of a Christian Nation. Boyd lays out two types of kingdoms: the kingdom of heaven and the kingdom of the world. Because the kingdom of the world never looks like Jesus, as it uses the power of the sword - the ‘power over’ people to inflict either justice or harm - it can never be equated or coupled with the kingdom of heaven. The kingdom of heaven, on the other hand, follows the teachings and employs the ethics of Jesus, which teach us to love enemies, forgive, and turn the other cheek. Such a kingdom spreads its territory and influence through this self-sacrificing ‘power under’, the power of the cross.

Boyd charges that, since the age of Constantine, rulers have employed the support of the church to justify destroying their enemies and using the power of the sword over others. The same has happened in our time with Bush and the religious rightthat movement’s eager endorsement of the invasion of Iraq. Boyd argues that identifying the kingdom of heaven with an earthly kingdom harms the church in its mission and its reception around the world.

An initial strength of Boyd’s thesis is his use of Scripture: the church on earth follows Jesus’ teachings, and his teachings promote forgiveness and non-violence (i.e. the Sermon on the Mount). Boyd agrees that God can and does use governments to maintain order and justice, but such structures will always be kingdoms of the world and not of the cross.

Even though Boyd - who was raised Roman Catholic - appears Anabaptist in his theology and congregational/independent in his ecclesiology (as far as I can tell), his separating the church, its mission, and its function from the culture raises up the body of the church in this world. Such elevation pushes evangelicals of both denominational and independent persuasion to better understand and protect the holiness of the church and its eternal character, as opposed to identifying with the temporal kingdoms of this world.

So, Dave, is Boyd correct? When Christians support the invasion of Iraq and the continuing conflict there, are we mistaken? Are we harming the message of Christ? How do we deal with the teachings of Jesus, the central figure of all Scripture and God incarnate, before jumping to Augustine’s just war theory? Help me, Dave.