The Flag and the Cross

Last night I was watching ABC News with Charlie Gibson. They were interviewing a soldier in who had known Major Hassan in the Army and worked with him in the past.

In his interview, the soldier said something that rubbed me the wrong way. "I always had a problem with him. He always said he was a Muslim first and an American second. But I didn't think that was right. If you took an oath to defend your country and the Constitution, that should come first. Anything else is simply wrong."

In our nation, where radical faith of any kind is looked down on or questioned, it seems like his statements make sense. He wants to attack radical Islam and make sure that it cannot rear its ugly head again.

But here is my problem. I have always considered myself a Christian first and an American second. My allegiance is to the Kingdom of God, and always will be so. I have no problem with patriotism and loving one's country, and even dying for one's country in order to defend rights and freedoms. But as a Christian, regardless of how much I love my country, I simply cannot drink all of its Kool-Aid.

As a Christian I cannot just ignore some of the legal things that I think are unethical. I must always view my political leanings as an outlet of my faith. Now, this says nothing about being a Democrat or a Republican. Both are fine places to sit, and neither is a Christian position. Rather, I approach every issue in life in light of my faith. My belief in God MUST color my thoughts about abortion, capital punishment, unjust war, taxes, health care, etc. As Paul tells me "'Everything is permissible,' but not everything is beneficial..."

I am a Christian first and an American second. It simply isn't going to change, regardless of what the government or the military tells me. My allegiance to the flag does not trump my allegiance to the cross; when one stands in stark contrast to the other, I must take notice.

Does this make sense? What are your thoughts?

Truth and truth

I want to continue a thought I began a couple of weeks ago. Sorry it has taken so long to get back to it, but things have been HECTIC with all the various things that have come up.

I think we are happy settling for little-t truth these days. As we are constantly bombarded and reminded by our culture, all truth is relative. Your truth may not be my truth, and vice versa. Yet a problem seems to exist within these mantras: universal truth does seem to exist.

For example:
1. Every culture in the world believes that murder is wrong. Now, the interpretation of murder is different in each culture, but every culture agrees that murder is wrong. In some states in the United States, we execute a person for the vicious murder of another person. We call this justifiable execution. War against enemy combatants is called "the elimination of a target or threat." In many African tribes, murder is reserved for people of one's own tribe. If you kill someone outside of the tribe that isn't murder, because that individual isn't a real person.

2. Child rape is wrong. Every culture in the world values their children and wants no harm to come to them. Each culture has a moral rule against child rape. Some cultures tend to ignore their own rules (tribes of the Trobriand islands, some Afghan tribes, etc.) But most people believe that taking the innocence of a child is wrong.

Morality isn't subjective or totally culturally driven. There are universal standards that exist. Thus, not all truth can be relative; some things are universal.

Some would point to the inconsistencies between the two aforementioned rules as proof that morality is relative. Each culture calls things differently and has their own inherent rules... Thus, isn't it all relative to their experience.

I would argue that they are making a little-t truth out of a Big-T Truth. God said, "Do not murder." Yet it seems to be the second sin committed by mankind. Cain tried to justify his actions, just as cultures try to justify their own thinking. The Truth gets ignored for the truth. (Yes, the words and capitalization are intentional...) Just because we distort Truth doesn't mean that that Truth doesn't exist.

Truth is universal, applying across time and space. Yet there is a place for interpretation within our own cultural contexts. "Do not commit adultery" can now apply to internet pornography. Jesus' appeal to turn the other cheek can apply to nuclear proliferation or economic recessions. These Truths are universal, and yet we are called to apply them in our own circumstances.

Little-t truth should be the application of Big-T Truth; yet so often we allow it instead to replace it.

Patriotism (Part 2)

Can one be a good Christian ad also be a patriot? Can one belong to both the Kingdom of God and the kingdoms of this world? Is this possible?

I recently tackled these questions in a paper for Christian ethics. I argued that it is possible to be a good Christian and a good "patriot," if the word were nuanced.

My view of patriotism is the love of one's culture, background, and country of origin.
The term "patriotism" is derived from the Latin patria, "belonging to one's father." Thus, to be a patriot is to adhere to the culture, practices, and even country of one's father.

God himself works through cultures and peoples. God created man with the ability to create cultures. God called Abraham and told him he would make him "a great nation" and bless "all peoples" through him. God called the people of Israel to be a "kingdom of priests" and a "holy nation." God choose Israel to be his called nation in order to bless the world through them.

In the NT, Jesus tells his disciples that there is a difference between the Kingdom and the kingdoms of this world. Yet Jesus never tells them to not associate with the kingdoms of this world; rather, Jesus reminds them to "give to Caesar what is Caesar's..." Thus, we are called to be good citizens of our country.

Yet when the ethics of this world stand in sharp contrast to the ethics of the Kingdom, we must decide: which kingdom do we ultimately adhere to? Put another way, am I an American Christian or a Christian American? The ethics of the Kingdom of God must always trump out the ethics of the kingdom of the world...

What do you guys think?

(I am trying to publish this paper, so any feedback you can give me on my arguments would be greatly appreciated.)

Patriotism (Part 1)

Someone help me understand the dichotomy between these two thoughts:

Noah Webster: “Whatever makes (human beings) good Christians makes them good citizens.”

Adolph Hitler: “One is either a good German or a good Christian. It is impossible to be both at the same time.”

Aren't they mutually exclusive?