No, Western Christians Are Not In Exile

“Occupation has many advantages over exile as an organizing metaphor for ministry, but I will enumerate only two.” - C.Today

Discussion

They’re kind of buried in the piece, but the author has a solid point or two.

I’ve been struggling for a name for the mindset I keep encountering in my circles—a mindset at odds with my own—one that speaks of our times as dire and catastrophic and speaks of government locally or nationally (whenever the left is perceived to be dominant) as something wholly sinister, secretive, and hostile to Christianity.

There’s definitely a ‘we’re in exile’ component to it, and I definitely don’t see the role of Christians and the church in the world that way.

So I appreciate this:

Peter’s advice to believers living as “foreigners and exiles” was addressed to a church under occupation. He was not content for them to simply settle down and plant gardens (Jer. 29:4-7) or “sing the songs of Zion” (Ps. 137:3-4) until Cyrus’s liberating decree—much like those waiting on a sweet chariot to carry them home to heaven. Rather we are called to be on mission and “live such good lives among the pagans that … they may see your good deeds and glorify God on the day he visits us” (1 Pet. 2:11-25).

We should stop mourning what we’ve lost, accept the reality of where we are as a culture now, and ask how to be faithful as Christians and as the church going forward. “Occupation” mindset is better than “exile” mindset, as far as it goes.

Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.

[Aaron Blumer]…I appreciate this:

Peter’s advice to believers living as “foreigners and exiles” was addressed to a church under occupation. …

This shows that it’s just quibbling over words. Peter used the term “exile” and even there, Jacob seems to be telling Peter that the proper term was “occupation.”

Fine, whatever. I’m inclined to agree, though. Daniel was in exile. He had no option but to be educated by the Babylonians. We’re not there…yet. We have Christian schools and Christian colleges.

Our secular colleges, however, are squarely anti-Christian. Will there come a day when anti-Christian teaching is mandated and schools that refuse to tell boys they are girls get shut down?

This article, by arguing for “occupation” over “exile,” is part pointless quibbling and part representing something significant as insignificant or less significant.

Is is profitable for us to be looking at the liberal changes around us and saying, “Things aren’t so bad - don’t use THAT word.”?

I see socialism and woke-ism in general as anti-Christian. It is right and good for Christian teachers to attempt to wake people up to the changes that are happening and to motivate Christians to do their duty as citizens to work against those changes.

That’s how this article struck me. Maybe we shouldn’t say “at war.” But overall that sort of thing seems to minimize the dangers that we face and the way we should be active against these evils.

I see an awful lot of ‘active in the wrong ways.’ For God’s people, the struggle—regardless of geography or culture or political structure—has always occurred mainly within: how well do we understand the Scriptures? How well do we understand our times and how to live the Scriptures in them? What are the dangers to our own beliefs, values, and will?

The piece I struggle with a lot these days is hard to capture in concise language. “Exile” vs. “occupation” helps some. I get the feeling that many Christians do not see themselves as humans first and those around them as fellow humans, and then see themselves as ‘humans who are born again’ second. Though we have a completely different relationship with God and a very different nature, we’re still more like unbelievers than not, by virtue of being human—and not a one of us fully sanctified.

So I see expressions of the problem in “the only way to help anyone at all or help society at all is to get people saved” language, as an example—as though a human can’t help a human thrive in ordinary human ways. Extrapolate that out to whole societies. I believe in common grace and natural theology. They are both limited, obviously, but we haven’t done ourselves a favor neglecting them so much for so long.

Ironically, many of the same people who say social decline can only be helped by more conversions are the same ones who think we have to get anti-abortion policy done, and at any ethical cost. So only revival can make any difference but we better pass laws that force … a difference. I guess I wish if we’re going to be self-contradictory in this part of our worldview, we’d weight persuasion over coercion. But if only conversions help, there’s no point in doing anything else but preaching. Forget voting, forget better judges, forget better laws.

On the other hand, if we’re going to concede that society can be improved by means other than evangelism, the next question is, well what’s most helpful then? Do we believe that only behavior can be changed in the unbelieving population? Then why post billboards with pro-life messages on them or demonstrate at clinics?

I think we know deep down that the unregenerate masses can be more or less possessed of truth, can change their minds about things—some of them really important things—and can experience changes in values, priorities, and commitments. Because deep down we know they’re human like us.

But we have a lot of rhetoric that denies this. I’d love to see us get actions, messaging, and beliefs all in sync. In other words, lets close the gaps in our worldview.

Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.

They’ll never repent, Joeb. They need the culture war to maintain their positions of power and influence on American Evangelicalism. There is only judgment to come - on believers first and then the nation.

As to Occupied / Exile = we can quibble semantics but this world is not our home, and the sooner we get that through our heads and start living as pilgrims/sojourners here (as Aaron alluded to as well as Peter and the writer of Hebrews), the better off we will all be. The NT is clear on this.

BTW, there is a great book on this subject if anyone is interested: “The Church in Exile” by Lee Beach. I highly recommend it.

"Our task today is to tell people — who no longer know what sin is...no longer see themselves as sinners, and no longer have room for these categories — that Christ died for sins of which they do not think they’re guilty." - David Wells

[Jay]

They’ll never repent, Joeb. They need the culture war to maintain their positions of power and influence on American Evangelicalism. There is only judgment to come - on believers first and then the nation.

I’m not sure who “they” is here. Lots of culture warriors are sincere people with passionate convictions about what helps people (this is true at every point on the political/social spectrum from far left to far right, thoug I think it gets very thin the further you go from the middle).

Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.