« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Epiphany, the Founders, and freedom of religion

From the diaries by Bill S.  Great piece of work, heartlander.

Epiphany actually falls on January 6, twelve days after Christmas (that’s why it’s the “Twelfth Day of Christmas”). However, since that falls on Thursday this year, many American churches celebrate Epiphany today.

The word “epiphany” comes from Greek and means “manifestation” or “appearance.” The feast of Epiphany is when we celebrate the “wise men from the East” coming to adore the child Jesus. These were not Jews; they were gentiles, foreigners.  This, then, was one of the first manifestations of Jesus’ role as the prophesied “light to the gentiles.” (Luke 2:32)

All four Gospel writers describe occasions when non-Jews recognized Jesus for who He was — even as many of his own people did not.  The feast of Epiphany celebrates the remarkable fact that people from a distant, alien culture were among the very first to recognize Jesus’ true identity, the King of Kings.

Adoration of the Magi, by Rembrandt

On Epiphany, as we visualize the wise men adoring Jesus on bended knee, we anticipate the day that will come when every knee shall bend and every tongue shall confess that Jesus is Lord. (Philippians 2:10)

At this point, some people start to get very nervous, because they think that we mean to impose some sort of theocracy, forcing everyone to bow down to Jesus whether they believe in Him or not.

Nothing could be further from the spirit of Christianity, which is not a religion but a freely chosen relationship. You cannot force someone to acknowledge Jesus any more than you can force a person to love another person.

Indeed, the only true theocracies in the world today are Muslim countries, such as Iran and Saudi Arabia. In Islam, religion and government are one and the same thing, and it all hinges on force. Refuse to bend your knee to Allah, and to confess Muhammad as his prophet, and your head will be cut off.

When Christians talk of a day when everyone shall recognize Jesus — a great worldwide Epiphany — we are speaking of a day that only God Himself can bring about. Our job is merely to get out of His way, to not be an obstacle to His revealing Himself to people –  as we are when we fail to be good examples of His charity and joy. (Mea culpa!)

None of that is to say that we sit back and do nothing to transform the culture we live in. As a wise man once said, we can’t make people be good, but we can make the kind of society where it is easier for people to choose to be good. As Christians and Jews, we respect the dignity of the human individual, made in the image and likeness of God, and that includes their God-given free will. We labor to make a social order that respects human dignity by fostering (not forcing) good choices.

Many conservatives often quote the Founding Fathers of the United States on the necessity of religion in public life and indeed, for the very survival of this constitutional republic. That does not make them theocrats.  John Adams was not being a theocrat when he said, “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people.  It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

Patrick Henry — best known for “Give me liberty or give me death!” — was the furthest thing from a theocrat when he observed that a predominantly Christian nation provides the best home for people of every faith and no faith, precisely because individual freedom of choice is at the very core of the Christian view of the human person. Henry wrote:  “It cannot be emphasized too clearly and too often that this nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religion, but on the gospel of Jesus Christ. For this very reason, peoples of other faiths have been afforded asylum, prosperity, and freedom of worship here.” [italics mine]

James Madison, champion of religious liberty

Michael Novak wrote a marvelous article on all of this, “The Faith of the Founding,”in which he pays special attention to the thinking of James Madison.

So high is … God’s valuation of human liberty of conscience that, even though He has launched a divinely commissioned religion in history (in two Covenants, Jewish and Christian), He would not have either of these religions imposed by force on anyone…. Alone among the religions of the world, Judaism and Christianity place so high a valuation upon religious liberty because of their own doctrine that the relation God seeks with humans is friendship.

Cross-posted at West to the West Wing 2012

COMMENTS

  • http://thesandsinstitute.org Vassar Bushmills

    …and it is based on this one thing, so well stated here…that God (Allah) does not wish His children to be driven to Him as cattle and forced to bow down as slaves.

    • David123
      • volunteerstate

        try again to comment ; excellent article. Epiphany is man meeting God. This day is thought to be the day of the second coming by some….the unveiling of God.

      • http://thesandsinstitute.org Vassar Bushmills

        But even in the 12th century (Ramon Llul) this sort of disputation took place…in Moslem Spain. He was so good at it, the Moors beheaded him. It is the one argument they cannot win. (A sura citation would help those who want to look it up.) Llul argued reason and logic from the starting point you just quoted.

        • JSobieski

          “2:106. Whatever a Verse (revelation) do We {Allah} abrogate or cause to be forgotten, We bring a better one or similar to it. Know you not that Allah is able to do all things?”

          The older Mecca verses tend to be peaceful, the relatively more recent Medina verses tend to be less so.

          2:256. There is no compulsion in religion. Verily, the Right Path has become distinct from the wrong path. Whoever disbelieves in Taghut and believes in Allah, then he has grasped the most trustworthy handhold that will never break. And Allah is All-Hearer, All-Knower.

          8:39. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and polytheism: i.e. worshipping others besides Allah) and the religion (worship) will all be for Allah Alone [in the whole of the world]. But if they cease (worshipping others besides Allah), then certainly, Allah is All-Seer of what they do.

          • aesthete

            that all of the orthodox schools of Islam have developed doctrines for religious war (jihad). While I am certainly no advocate of punishing people for what they believe (rather than how they act), obviating key doctrines in favor of selective interpretation isn’t a good way to go about interpreting the Koran.

          • Jack_Savage

            One’s belief will certainly inform how one acts, and a layperson can be forgiven for judging Islam by the way it is practiced, particularly in its homeland. This knowledge also has to inform the way that non-believers in Islam relate to those who are believers. To do otherwise may be tolerant, but it is also stupid.

          • Scope

            particularly those that follow the last Muslim prophet Muhammed.

          • Jack_Savage

            The extension of grace without the corresponding strength, requirements and worship of Christ has put us in a vulnerable position as a people.

          • aesthete

            have a problem with anyone judging Islam as a packet of beliefs: I don’t have an enormously high opinion of the religion myself, tbh (though admittedly, I don’t know as much about it as I would like to). I simply don’t think that beliefs without intent should be criminalized.

          • Jack_Savage

            “I simply don

      • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

        http://www.americanthinker.com/2005/08/islam_without_camouflage.html

        Just Like Today (from, ch.2, ‘The Qur’an: Book of War’, p.27): ‘The doctrine of abrogation [cancelling Qur'anic verses] is not the province of long

    • Jack_Savage

      Exactly. Bravo. And bravo to the diarist in spades as well.

    • http://pocketchangeproductions.net/ anotherindyfilmguy

      But there are so many other citations about killing, enslaving and humiliating “unbelievers” that the stuff about playing well with others tends to get overlooked by the desires of those with evil in their hearts…

  • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

    I struggled with responding to this diary, because I was pretty sure it wouldn’t be well received, but with the comments I decided I’d go ahead.

    Freedom from government coercion in religious expression is quite different from our freedom in Christ. They should actually head in completely different directions.

    Freedom of religious expression is best represented by limited government that leads to individual choice and self-determination. Freedom in Christ is best represented by a denying of self and a reliance on God’s Work for everything. I believe Michael Card said it best:

    The way of understanding lies
    In not how much you know
    Where the pathway is a person
    That you’ve come to love and so
    You can stop pretending that it all depends on you
    For it’s not how much you love
    As much as how much He loves you

    • aesthete

      While both are important (and freedom from coercion is one of the few things that NT Christians are told to pray about concerning government), our freedom in Christ is distinct from freedom from coercion.

      • CincoSolas_del_Bronx

        our freedom in Christ is distinct from freedom from coercion

        Perfectly stated, and too easily forgotten in a culture that is not as biblically-informed as at other times.

    • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine
  • http://www.onejerusalem.org Ashbrook

    Excellent essay.

  • bobmontgomery

    formerly a champion of separation of church………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..and state, is now calling for the teaching of Islam in the public school. See, the kids have just got to learn this stuff so they can………apreciate……….it. And wouldn’t you know? Why, it’s suddenly okay to teach about Christianity in the school, too, because these things don’t mean anybody is advocating or forcing somebody to do anything.WHY IT’S NOT LIKE CONGRESS PASSED A LAW RESPECTING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF RELIGION OR ANYTHING! So who has a problem with Islam being taught in the public school, huh?
    Barack Hussein Obama, former Muslim, on-again, off-again Christian, now struggling with the conflictions of his convictions; Joe Biden, devout Catholic, now claiming this whole man-woman marriage thing was bound to fail anyway,
    See, everything is all relative, and all religions, like all people, and all political systems, and all economic systems, are meritorious, so when we start the Wiccan Studies program in the fifth grade, the kids will have another choice to pick from, and so by the time they’re nineteen, they can choose a religion to try. Because America is all about choice, isn’t it? Teaching the kids to not judge and to try different things like, oh Marxism, for example. Imagine! Imagine there’s no country! And no religion, too! Imagine all the people……

  • runner12

    Well written heartlander.

  • chamberD

    Blimey.

    I wasn’t trashing Madison; I was pointing out his failure to properly state — in that one instance we’re referencing — the relationship of man to his Creator and for believers, their Father in heaven.

    As for C.S.Lewis. Hmmm. The Abolition of Man is a great read; and Mere Christianity is a fine primer for unbelievers and new Christians. But a friendly act? Well, God’s creating man was not an unfriendly act, but I’m sure you’re not suggesting that Lewis reduced God’s motive for creating us to a need for friendship, or are you?

  • chamberD

    From creepingsharia.wordpress.com:

    Minnesota:
    Santa banned from Head Start classes to avoid offending Muslims.
    NJ:
    Muslim girl gets non-muslim boy suspended for saying “taliban.”

    CBS bans ad opposing Ground Zero mosque (video)
    NBC joins CBS in refusing to air ad opposing Ground Zero mosque
    NY State Regents exam shills for Islam, slams Christianity

    Obama admin halts prosecution of USS Cole bomber

    US to help Yemen upgrade judicial system, ie, sharia
    Islamists recruit screenwriters to spread Islam in Hollywood
    Pastor arrested for sharing gospel with Muslims

  • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine
  • bobmontgomery

    ….recognizing what a good thing we have, reminds us that, as much as America is ours, we have a responsibility to keep it also for others. We have never forced Christianity on others and we have never forced America on others. There is a British MP who speaks a lot about “what is wrong with you people? You have a great thing; don’t throw it away.”

  • http://thesandsinstitute.org Vassar Bushmills

    the Christian church bombing in Egypt, that Christians are martyred the old-fashioned way, innocently dying for and because of their religion, not killing others for it.

  • chamberD

    This is clear when he writes: . . . “that the relation God seeks with humans is friendship.” James Madison reportedly made this statement.

    Well, while we may admire, even revere, Madison for his political insights, his theology leaves much to be desired.

    God does not seek friendship with His creation. Show me one place in Scripture where believers are described as friends; and please, no references to “What a friend we have in Jesus,” that familiar old Baptist hymn.

    No. God sees us as his children, his heirs; He seeks that we rightly acknowledge him as our Father; He is our counselor, our guide, OUR REDEEMER. But friend, not so much. We are to worship Him, and Him alone. One does not worship ones friends.

    As for Islam: it is not, I repeat NOT, a religion. Rather, it is an ideology that employs religious trappings, the language of religion, to dupe people and to control them; it is little different from Nazism, and just as dangerous to our American way of life. All Muslim immigration to this country must be stopped — IMMEDIATELY.

  • aesthete

    The Founders were great students of political philosophy. Theology, not so much.

    OTOH, Islam is quite clearly a religion: it is definitionally a religion and the Founders recognized it as one many, many times in their writings (Thomas Jefferson even wrote a letter where he explicitly mentions “Mohammedans” as entitled to the protections of Virginia’s constitutionally recognized freedom of religion, which was the inspiration for our own First Amendment. It may not be a religion that we like or agree with, but Islam is clearly a religion protected by the Fisrt Amendment, if that’s what you’re leading up to.

  • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine
  • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

    We are going thru a study of Mere Christianity by CS Lewis here on RS (see recommended list), and I do think one could use the term friendship broadly to describe God’s decision to create us and make us his children as a friendly act. So without knowing more about Madison’s beliefs, I wouldn’t want to take that one sentence and trash him, especially given the gross mischaracterizations of God’s purposes by those hostile to his Lordship.

  • http://westforwestwing2012.com heartlander

    That statement was Michael Novak’s paraphrase or summary of Madison’s thinking. I recommend reading the whole First Things article. It really gave me a better understanding of Madison.

  • http://westforwestwing2012.com heartlander

    …in the “last discourse,” the deep, intimate conversation Jesus had with the Twelve the night before He died, Jesus repeatedly calls them His friends. Re-read John 15.

    This is not to mention all the times recorded in the Gospel accounts where Jesus addressed someone as “friend,” e.g., Luke 5:20; Lk. 12:14.

    And the special closeness Jesus had with the little family at Bethany — Mary, Martha and Lazarus — was clearly friendship. (but if you insist on a proof text with the specific word “friend,” there’s John 11:11.)

    One of the great paradoxes of Christian faith — and no other religion has it — is that the One who is our Maker and Lord and God Almighty of the whole universe is at the same time…. our most intimate friend.

  • chamberD

    In fact, in this post-civil war era, many, if not most people, would heartily condemn his practice of owning slaves.

    But back to the question at hand. Merely because Jefferson included “Mohamedans” in a pamphlet you cite — which I have not seen, but it doesn’t matter — does not make it a “religion.” For any ideology that claims a religious mantel but also endorses lying “to infidels” to hide an agenda, an agenda itself that compels forced conversion or dhimmitude, is not an IDEOLOGY that is compatible with the Constitution of the United States.

    Jefferson was wrong.

  • aesthete

    Not sure how citing his owning of slaves is supposed to prove or disprove that belief, though. If you are trying to argue that Muslims don’t have freedom of religion under the 1st Am, you’re going to have a hard time proving it: that is what I was getting at with the Jefferson reference (the guy who wrote the Virginia Declaration of Rights which was a direct antecedent to our BoR, particularly the 1st Am). You’ve got a direct quote showing at least 4 religions, including Islam, to be protected under that Amendment (Jews, Hindus, Muslims, and all Christians), a system of beliefs and morality that shares much in common with what one would traditionally find in a religion, and centuries of its recognition as a religion against your contention that Islam is an ideology. Many Christians at the time said with just as much conviction that Catholicism was a political system, not a religion, and thus not entitled to the protections of the 1st Am. Those claims held about as much water as current cases against Islam as a religion protected by the 1st Am, which is to say, none. It’s an open and shut case as far as the Constitution goes.

  • chamberD

    . . . I stongly recommend you wander on over to gatesofvienna.blogspot.com and scroll down to read a recent article entitled: The Destruction of the Native European Peoples.

    You don’t really seem to get what’s going on.

  • chamberD

    Why don’t we?

    Polygamy. Rape of wives. Murder of apostates. Murder of female children who marry outside of Islam.

    And other ANTI-Constitutional practices.

    You can call it a religion. They can call it a religion. But when a so-called religion runs afoul of the Constitution, then it’s not a “religion” we want to let get a foothold in OUR country. Or don’t you see anything wrong with the religion of peace that forces people like Molly Norris into hiding for such an innocuous act. Or don’t you see anything wrong with a “religion” that has as its goal the subjugation of the entire world to an Islamic caliphate?

    You’re really not so dumb as to think that the First Amendment is a suicide pact?

  • aesthete

    is that, at best, our country’s cultural, technological, and political advances from the Enlightenment Age onwards are under attack by radical Islamists (and that at worst, they are intrinsically incompatible with Islam). That doesn’t have anything to do with the fact that Islam is a religion (and one protected by the 1st Am, at that): or are you going to say that the various crusades and jihads were battles between competing political ideologies? Islam is uniquely tied to government (in a manner similar to, albeit more pronounced than, Catholicism until after the Napoleonic period).

  • chamberD

    From creepingsharia.wordpress.com:

    “Sharia-imposing OIC positioning to take over the Internet?

    Sultan Knish comments further on Lawfare

  • aesthete

    a suicide pact — but then, most of what is decried as “suicide” by those invoking suicide pact nomenclature hardly qualifies as such a thing. The Founders dealt with exactly the same issues related to Islam in even more concentrated form than we do today: the Barbary pirates (and other forms of Muslim piracy) were far more dangerous to 1787 America than Islamic terrorism is for us today, and Islam united under the expansionist Ottoman caliphate was hardly more beneficent or less coordinated than it is today! The fact of the matter is that the Founders saw all of this, and still thought it prudent to include protections for the freedom of religion of Muslims, Hindus, Jews and Christians shows that they clearly saw government infringement on freedom of religion as a greater evil than the evils that arise from the free practice of religion.

    Obviously, one’s religious rights stop where my right to “life, liberty and property” begin. Some (IMO wrongly decided) Supreme Court decisions aside, where my practice of religion hurts no one but myself, I’m free to practice without government restriction. Even if one includes the un-Constitutional Supreme Court rulings, one is still free to belong to the religion of his choice so long as one does so within the framework of laws that apply to all citizens.

  • chamberD

    And I thank you, heartlander, for the references you cite.

    I clearly overstated my objections to Madison’s words (paraphrased, as it appears) because I instinctively recoil at the notion of reducing our Almighty King to mere “friend” status. Your reply is quite correct, however.

    And speaking about that which no other religion has, no other religion has a Savior who himself suffers the punishment for our sins and gives us His righteousness — all without our asking or choosing, but there for us to receive, free-gift that it is, undeserved and unmerited.

  • chamberD

    that is problematic to our continuance as a Constitutional Republic — should Islam be permitted to flourish here. Didn’t Jefferson know that?