[donaldscrankshaw] Donald: Theology and Politics

[Email subscription to blog articles]

Posted by Donald:
Theology and Politics
http://www.donaldscrankshaw.com/posts/1197147767.shtml


   Jonah Goldberg's [1]recent column cites this eschatological
   interpretation:

     For example, many Christian conservatives support Israel and look
     kindly on Jews because they believe they have a holy duty to do so.
     The Messiah will not return, according to the book of Revelation,
     until the Jews restore the Kingdom of Israel.
     Evangelical Christians believe that when the Messiah returns,
     things wonât go too well for the Jews â two thirds die, one third
     convert. Gershom Gorenberg, author of The End of Days, once
     complained to 60 Minutes, âAs a Jew, I canât feel very comfortable
     with the affections of somebody who looks forward to that
     scenario.â
     Well, boohoo. In the horrible annals of Jewish problems, the fact
     that a whole bunch of Christians love Jews for the âwrongâ reasons
     has got to rank pretty low. Besides, since presumably Jews donât
     believe in Christian prophecy, whatâs the problem? If itâs not
     true, then no harm, no foul. If it is true, well, who are we to
     argue with God? My guess is Godâs response to the morally decent
     Jew who gets really worked up about this would be something akin to
     âDonât worry, Iâve got you covered.â

   To be honest, I've never heard this particular interpretation of
   Revelation before. That's not too surprising, as there are so many
   interpretations of Revelation that I doubt anyone's heard all of them.
   Although the actual numbers are new to me, the hope for the salvation
   of the Jews is not, and is quite apparent, although less in Revelation
   than, say, Paul's letter to the Romans. In any case, that's hardly the
   central point of Jonah's column, which is instead about the role of
   theology in American politics, leading to the bottom line:

     Irving Kristol has cited the fight over Utahâs statehood as a
     quintessential expression of how America practices theological
     pluralism while insisting on moral conformity. It is the American
     way to care about what people do, not about what they think. Every
     religionâs theology has some wacky stuff in it, not only from the
     atheistâs perspective but from the perspective of pretty much every
     other religion. Itâs impossible to know how much this or that
     theological tenet guides a personâs actions. All we can judge is
     the personâs actions.

   This came about on account of Romney's Mormonism, of course, and it's
   a legitimate question how someone's religion may or may not influence
   their governing. But it's also true that it's better to judge people
   by their actions than their politics.
   So what do I think? Well, I consider Mormonism a heresy, in the
   literal sense: a belief at odds with orthodox Christianity. That
   doesn't mean that I consider Mormons evil. People can believe wrong
   things without being evil. I'm reluctant even to say that Mormons
   aren't Christians--they believe themselves to be followers of Christ.
   It's not for me to say that their incorrect doctrine excludes them
   entirely from his call. That said, I still see heresies as dangerous,
   and it is important to correct those who have fallen into them. In
   this context, that correction doesn't look that much different from
   evangelizing.
   All that doesn't answer the question of what to do with Romney. Here,
   I'm reluctant to give advice to other Christians, but I'm willing to
   vote for him. As Jonah said, it's what he does that matters, and if
   given a choice between Romney and Clinton, I'd rather choose him.

References

   1. http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NjIxNmMyMDQwNTg5OTUwMTNiYWYwZGZhZmFmNjA0MzA=