God’s politics.

Why is it when we discuss God’s politics, we’re still talking about fitting Him into our system? He has His own system.

This month the synchrobloggers decided to work on “The Politics of God,” which lends itself to two interpretations: (1) What God thinks, or (2) The direction politically active Christians want us to go. And since #2 tends to annoy and depress me—and since my “Four views” piece sorta covered that already—I figured I’d dip a little bit into what God thinks.

Politics is the art of using social manipulation to get things done. How it works depends on the system of government.

• In an absolute monarchy, dictatorship, or feudal lordship, you have to convince society that you’re in charge. You do this by killing anyone who opposes you, and maybe their relatives for good measure. Or you can convince the public that you’re a god—or, now that monotheism has caught on, that God appointed you, and He’s your homeboy—and that their immortal souls are in danger if they do oppose you. (And if they still do, kill them and their relatives.) Then you tell them what to do, tax them into funding your lavish lifestyle, and enjoy life until you annoy an American President and he decides to invade your ass.
• In an oligarchy, you convince your fellow oligarchs that it’s in their best interests to do what you want—either through common desires, or blackmail. Otherwise it’s much the same as an absolute monarchy, but you have the option of whether to go the oppose-me-and-die route, or here’s-a-lower-house-now-we’re-a-democracy route. The trouble with the fake democracy scam is that, though it worked for the Romans, in the case of the British it actually became a democracy. You wanna be careful there.
• In a democracy, you convince your fellow citizens to elect you so that you’ll do what they want. This can either coincide with what you want; but if you really don’t care one way or another and just want the power, you can commission polls and find out what they want, and do that. The longer you stay in power, the more influential you’ll appear to be, so make sure you stay re-elected. You do this by arguing the issues, and proving point by point that your views are based on solid, common-sense thinking, just like that of the people. In the meanwhile, behind the scenes, your operatives will convince the public that your opponent will utterly tear their world apart, and that voting for you is the only way they can stop the madness.
• Or, if you’d rather not hold elective office, you gather up like-minded citizens in your cause, and convince the politicians that you’re a voting bloc to be listened to, or feared. Money helps, ’cause funding a re-election is insanely expensive these days.

Any of those methods sound like the way Jesus described the Kingdom of God? Where you give up all your power, become the servant of everyone else, and in so doing become the greatest in the Kingdom? Where you follow Jesus’s example of doing exactly that? And, in so doing, become worthy of having everyone in the universe bow before you?

No. But those are God’s politics. Not the American conservative, libertarian, or progressive movements. Not the Republican, Democratic, or Green parties. Not the Christian lobbies, whether the Religious Right or the Jim Wallis bloc or the pro-lifers or the pro-Israel-anti-UN apocalyptists. Nothing that seizes power, or tries to manipulate power away from another person, fits into God’s politics. God’s Kingdom is not impatient to get things done. It won’t behave unkindly. It won’t act with strong emotion. It won’t go on and on about what it’ll do. It won’t exaggerate, be rude, look out for itself, easily turn to hate, plot evil, or delight in wickedness. The politics of God involve putting up with everything, putting trust in everything, putting hope in everything, and always standing firm. Does this sound familiar? Not if you’re looking for it in human politics.

God’s politics do not use government, or social structures, to manipulate society. It uses love. It involves people acting in the love of God to redeem society. It involves a permanent system—the Kingdom—rather than temporal systems and political figures. It has nothing to do with what I want, but everything to do with what God wants, whether I like or want that, or not.

God intends to change the world by it, and my interference, or disinterest, will not hinder this plan. It will only hinder me. I will not gain if I oppose it and try to accomplish it by my own means. I will only become smaller, pettier, more shrill, less loving, less forgiving, angrier, and take to wearing T-shirts that loudly define me and ask, “Any questions?”

God’s politics involve the leaders of the world coming to me for my advice, not my going to them to ram through my cause. It involves my trying to please Him, not them. It involves redeeming my community, not “fixing” it. It involves lifting up the poor, not funding them till we feel better about ourselves. It involves rehabilitating the evildoer, not jailing him for life. It involves sending my kids (and myself) to evangelize the schools, not pulling them out and demanding vouchers so I can fund their cloister. It involves sharing Jesus, not writing His commands into law.

The trouble comes when we take an issue that we’re fond of, find some scriptures to justify our position to ourselves, attempt to navigate the existing political system, and drop God’s name in the mistaken belief that someone—who cares what He thinks, or at least who naïvely believes that His followers are a unified voting bloc—might listen. That is the scenario people immediately think of when we discuss God’s politics. But in reality, it is just another special interest group using God’s name for their cause—something God actually prohibits when He tells us not to “misuse the name of Yahweh your God for vanity.” The reason religious political groups get mocked is because the pagans recognize, deep down, that this is what’s going on—and the reason the mockers succeed is not because the devil backs them, but because God backs them. God has His own system, and wants us to stop wasting His time trying to blend Him into the other one.

The July ’08 Synchroblog.

Like I said, this is the topic the synchrobloggers decided on. So below is a pull-down menu of what they wrote.

You might notice some of them say the same things I did. That’s ’cause I didn’t read their blogs before I wrote my rant. I want any synchroblogs I write to be about my conclusions, not my conclusions after being influenced or repelled by other people’s conclusions. If any of them lead me to rethink things, I’ll rethink ’em on my own schedule and rant about it later. Anyway, I’ve read them now (I do that every time I put the pull-down menu together) and I recommend most of them as awesome—and not just the ones who said the same things I did.

On some of the other sites, you’ll see a bigger list of bloggers than I have here. That’s ’cause I haven’t listed anyone who actually doesn’t have a synchroblog entry posted yet. They might have them written, and might even have listed a web page for it, but when you go there you get a “404: File Not Found.” So, rather than annoy my faithful readers—all five of you—I’ll risk annoying the synchrobloggers. Half of them don’t read my blog anyway; they’re more interested in being part of a group than seeing what the rest of the group thinks. Yes, I said it.

Browse the list, then click “Let’s read that” to read it.

Sonja Andrews: “Won’t get fooled again.” Jonathan Brink: “The political fray.” Julie Clawson: “Singing the songs of Zion in Babylon.” Sally Coleman: “God’s politics.” Adam Gonnerman: “Living Christ’s present reign.” Steve Hayes: “God’s politics.” Steve Hollinghurst: “Are we ‘a Christian country’?” Alan Knox: “Is God red, blue, or purple?” K.W. Leslie: “God’s politics.” Beth Patterson: “Learners inheriting the earth.” Lainie Petersen: “Questioning the citizen deity.” Dan Stone: “The rivers shall open for the righteous.” Erin Word: “Hanging chad theology.” Phil Wyman: “The talking points of presumption.”