And then Again\u2026Clarifications about \u201cChristian Reconstructionism\u201d and the \u201cProsperity Gospel\u201d<\/p>\n
This is a footnote or addendum to yesterday\u2019s post entitled \u201cA Call for American Evangelical Leaders to Confront Evangelicalism\u2019s Lunatic Fringe\u201d (December 3, 2015).<\/p>\n
Whenever I mention a movement or type critically someone responds\u2014either by direct, personal e-mail or here, in a posted comment,\u2014accusing me of being \u201cuncharitable.\u201d Often they mean\u2014to them or their organization. Sometimes they just think being critical is uncharitable.<\/p>\n
Yesterday, after that critical call for evangelical leaders to denounce religious extremists who call themselves \u201cevangelicals,\u201d I received an e-mail from the director of an organization. He accused me of having my facts wrong and of being uncharitable. So I asked him (by return e-mail) why he thought I was talking about him or his organization. I didn\u2019t mention any by name. So I examined his organization\u2019s web site. I found nothing there about either Christian Reconstructionism or the Prosperity Gospel. He did not say in his e-mail what specific facts I had wrong or in what way I was being uncharitable\u2014to the ideologies I specifically described.<\/p>\n
My suspicion is that there are people \u201cout there\u201d (among the nearly 300 million Americans) who, for whatever reason, identify themselves with \u201cChristian Reconstructionism\u201d who do not fit the profile I described<\/em>. I made quite clear in that post what I mean<\/em> by \u201cChristian Reconstructionism\u201d\u2014the goal of establishing \u201cbiblical law\u201d as the law of the United States, the goal of using political muscle, power, to establish a kind of Christian theocracy in America. Are there individuals and groups that consider themselves \u201cChristian Reconstructionists\u201d who do not have those goals<\/em>? Perhaps. But that\u2019s why I made very clear who I was talking about<\/em> without naming names\u2014not<\/em> everyone who thinks they are \u201cChristian Reconstructionists\u201d but those who fit the profile I outlined and described.<\/p>\n The same happens when I criticize almost any ideology or theology. For example, if I declare \u201cThe Gospel of Health and Wealth\u201d heresy and even describe what I mean by that\u2014belief and teaching that financial prosperity and perfect physical health are God\u2019s will for everyone and that \u201cpositive faith\u201d practiced \u201cthe right way\u201d (viz., \u201cclaiming them\u201d) causes God to bestow those \u201cblessings\u201d in a kind of mechanical way (\u201cmagic\u201d as opposed to true prayer)\u2014inevitably someone who thinks they adhere to a \u201cgospel of health and wealth\u201d accuses me of being uncharitable and having my facts wrong. No, the problem is that they<\/em> only think<\/em> they adhere to \u201cThe Gospel of Health and Wealth,\u201d so-called \u201cWord-Faith Theology.\u201d For whatever reason they\u2019ve attached themselves to those labels (or attached those labels to themselves) when, in fact, they do not<\/em> believe or teach what I described.<\/p>\n Given the fact that these ideologies, theologies, movements, have no headquarters or popes, there is some inevitable diversity among people who subscribe to them (or think they do). That\u2019s why I specifically said in yesterday\u2019s post that \u201cChristian Reconstructionism,\u201d like the \u201cProsperity Gospel,\u201d comes in degrees<\/em>. I was clearly talking about the most fanatical advocates of \u201ctaking America back for God\u201d\u2014those who wish, for example, to see homosexuals executed just for being homosexual<\/em>\u2014a clear indication of wanting to establish the harshest aspects of Old Testament law, meant for ancient Israel, as American law.<\/p>\n Now, if<\/em> there are people who call themselves \u201cChristian Reconstructionists\u201d who have no such vision for America, but only want to influence<\/em> American culture through persuasion<\/em> toward a greater voluntary acceptance of the gospel of Jesus Christ and truly Christian (New Testament-based) ethics without criminalizing distinctively Christian norms and mores<\/em>, I don\u2019t call that \u201cChristian Reconstructionism\u201d even if they do. Also, if<\/em> there are people who call their theology \u201cProsperity Gospel,\u201d and\/or \u201cGospel of Health and Wealth,\u201d but only believe God wants everyone to have sufficient shelter, food and clothes to live decent human lives and that God wants to heal people of physical illnesses in response to prayer (not \u201cclaiming\u201d those things expecting that God must bestow them if they are \u201cclaimed\u201d without strong enough faith<\/em>), I don\u2019t call that \u201cProsperity Gospel\u201d or \u201cGospel of Health and Wealth.\u201d Whenever I have criticized that teaching I have made clear what I mean by clearly describing beliefs and practices<\/em>. Yes, I know there are people who think<\/em> they adhere to a \u201cgospel of health and wealth\u201d and maybe even teach something they consider<\/em> that, but we may be talking about entirely different things.<\/p>\n People need to pay attention not just to labels but to descriptions<\/em>.<\/p>\n My response to people I have not named (and not named someone they follow) who criticize me for my criticisms of certain ideologies, theologies or movements is this: If the shoe fits, wear it; if the shoe doesn\u2019t fit, don\u2019t<\/em>.<\/p>\n I have read enough literature by some<\/em> Christian Reconstructionist leaders, authors, ideological teachers, to know many of them, probably most of them,<\/em> do indeed envision a \u201ctaking back of America for God\u201d by coercion, political power, even criminalizing certain behaviors, if not beliefs only because those behaviors are condemned in the Bible<\/em>.<\/p>\n I have read enough literature by some<\/em> advocates, leaders, authors, teachers of the Gospel of Health and Wealth, the \u201cProsperity Gospel,\u201d to know many of them, probably most of them<\/em>, do indeed believe that God must<\/em> bestow physical health and financial prosperity, even \u201cabundance,\u201d in response to \u201cpositive faith\u201d expressed as \u201cclaiming\u201d them.<\/p>\n Having said all that, which I hope clarifies things, I must go on to say that I think any talk of \u201ctaking America back for God\u201d is pernicious unless it is explained as meaning evangelism and apologetic persuasion without any degree of coercion by means of political power<\/em>. Here\u2019s one reason why (that I think any reasonable person ought to agree with): If we American Christians persecute or even marginalize other Americans just because they aren\u2019t \u201cus,\u201d<\/em> we cannot reasonably object when other religious groups in other countries attempt to do the same to Christians in their countries. If American Christians, for example, think it is wrong for \u201cSharia law\u201d to be imposed on Christians in certain African countries, then it is hypocritical and even dangerous for American Christians to want specifically Christian beliefs about what is sin to be imposed by law on non-Christians in America. None of that rules out discourse about \u201cnatural law\u201d in legal settings<\/em>.<\/p>\n If someone considers himself or herself a \u201cChristian Reconstructionist\u201d but does not believe in \u201ctaking America back for God<\/em>\u201d using any degree of coercion to erase pluralism and religious freedom<\/em> I do not consider him or her a Christian Reconstructionist in my<\/em> sense of the term. But knowing there are people who call themselves \u201cChristian Reconstructionists\u201d who do not fit my definition led me to be very clear and specific about what I mean by it\u2014giving examples. If someone believes in \u201ctaking America back for God\u201d only<\/strong> through persuasion and not at all by coercion, then I do not know why they need any label other than \u201cevangelical.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n<\/body><\/html>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" And then Again\u2026Clarifications about \u201cChristian Reconstructionism\u201d and the \u201cProsperity Gospel\u201d This is a footnote or addendum to yesterday\u2019s post entitled \u201cA Call for American Evangelical Leaders to Confront Evangelicalism\u2019s Lunatic Fringe\u201d (December 3, 2015). Whenever I mention a movement or type critically someone responds\u2014either by direct, personal e-mail or here, in a posted comment,\u2014accusing me […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":58,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3022","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"yoast_head":"\n