Mourning Charlie Kirk - for Anabaptists

[Jazman]

... My sense is that this, imo near heresy is more a charismatic or non-denominational thing? But I could be wrong about that too.

Some sections of the charismatics have followed an arc of "we are called to spiritual warfare" to "successful spiritual warfare is mostly political success" to "God has revealed through modern prophets the precise high places in culture and government we are to seize" to "Maga is helping with this project" to "President Trump is God's anointed fulfillment of these prophecies."

Yeah, that's a pretty good succinct synopsis of the trajectory I've seen in some. And like Mast, I struggle with including that in the family that is the Church universal... it feels nearly heretical; so far out there... but I know (intellectually and maybe somewhat heart as well) that it's not my right or role to exile them to non-Christian status...I can discern the parts that I'm fairly confident God doesn't want me to imitate or condone and praise those parts that exhibit the true fruits of the Spirit; many are sincere; they believe they're following Jesus - they Want to, they want to know God/be in relationship with God... just like I'm trying (and often failing)... it's such a muddle...

[JohnH]

I'm not quite sure I can get on board with the idea that evangelical Christians (including ones who happen to be ex-Anabaptists) are somehow not legitimate Christians because they support Trump or have a MAGA political alignment, specifically. Does this condemnation of evangelicals extend to (for example) mainline Protestants who might vote for Democratic candidates? Or is it just uniquely being a Trump supporter that makes one a non-Christian?

[ohio jones]

I'm listening to a podcast with historian Marcus Yoder tonight. This was recorded BC (Before Charlie) but echoes the ideas being developed in this thread. Speaking of the early Anabaptists and relating that to how to view other Christians today,

Sebastian Franck (he was not an Anabaptist) wrote to the emperor and said they had as many different sects as they had leaders. So each congregation had a little different flavor, and I think we need to learn to live with that difference and say they're wanting to follow Jesus. They don't do it like I do, but I love that they're wanting to follow Jesus. And begin to embrace that and say what is at the core, what does it mean to be a follower of Jesus? And if they're trying to follow Jesus, I can honor their journey even if they're not at the same place I am. And bless people, begin to bless people and encourage people rather than put up more fences. Our world needs walls broken down and fences removed rather than more built.

Interviewer: How do we do that while also standing firm and saying that there are certain truths and there are right ways to do things and wrong ways to do things? It's such a hard tension that I've been really curious about recently. What you're saying sounds so beautiful. The idea that there are as many theologies as there are church leaders. I get the appeal to that, but I also want to be able to say, well, there are right things and there are wrong things. So how do we wrestle with that?

Marcus: ...people can believe the core [represented by the Apostles' Creed] and then there are these kind of radiating-out-from-there ways of living Jesus into the world that may look a little differently. And if I can begin to bless those but hold onto the core. I'm in a discussion with a friend right now who has been deeply hurt by Christianity and thinks it's bunk. I actually believe he likes Jesus, but he does not believe in the resurrection. And I'm beginning to understand that at some level I can't share myself with him, yet I love him. So there's that tension....

...and one of the ways that Satan brings destruction, that evil brings destruction in our world today is by creating divisions and silos that we live in. And there is something really freeing in saying at its core I believe that every Christian needs to believe this, but there are some other things and I might be wrong on them. And so, God help me to understand what truth is here and what it means to follow you, and if I'm wrong, help me to change....

In the same way Jesus reached across boundaries, we should be doing that today. And we should resist the urge to get caught up in the identity, religion and politics of our time because that is not the way of Jesus, to paint us into separate camps.... When we reach across boundaries in love we're offering the way of Jesus, but we don't have to abandon truth doing that. We embrace truth and love across boundaries.

[Praxis+Theodicy]

but he also preached a gospel of Jesus that could stand on it's own as truth.

Can you tell me more about this?

You can search for quote about Jesus he's said. Here's the first I found:

I mean, I'm nothing without Jesus. I'm a sinner. I fall incredibly short of the glory of God. We all do. I gave my life to the Lord in fifth grade, and it's the most important decision I've ever made, and everything I do incorporates Jesus Christ

A few days before his death, he tweeted something succinct along the lines of "Jesus died so that I may live."

This kind of message could have been pretty helpful to the world from someone who had his platform. I think it was too often muddied with his political message, which was much more prominent. But he was, it seems, capable of talking about his faith at times without instantly syncretising it with his political ideology.

[Bootstrap]

I'm not quite sure I can get on board with the idea that evangelical Christians (including ones who happen to be ex-Anabaptists) are somehow not legitimate Christians because they support Trump or have a MAGA political alignment, specifically. Does this condemnation of evangelicals extend to (for example) mainline Protestants who might vote for Democratic candidates? Or is it just uniquely being a Trump supporter that makes one a non-Christian?

Look what just happened here. Before we even begin to talk about how we faithfully live out the Gospel, politics comes rushing in—polarization, offense, and assumptions of hypocrisy. That’s how our political identities can so easily overshadow our deeper identity in Christ.

But Jesus’ priorities are very different from those of politicized Christianity. His Kingdom is not of this world, and He continually called people away from earthly power struggles and back toward love of God and neighbor, humility, service, and truth. When political identities take center stage, we risk reducing the Gospel to a partisan test instead of allowing it to be the transforming power of God in our lives.

And one difference we see is that the kind of devotion that many Christians give to Trump is not something we see toward other political leaders, whether Republican or Democrat. Who else could get away with saying "I'm the only one who can save you"? MAGA and QAnon have their own religious elements that seem much more pagan than Christian. They worship power, glory, and greed, not humility, love, and truth. That's not the Christian religion.

Faithful Christianity keeps Jesus at the center, above every political figure, every party, and every faction.

[GaryK]

I'm not quite sure I can get on board with the idea that evangelical Christians (including ones who happen to be ex-Anabaptists) are somehow not legitimate Christians because they support Trump or have a MAGA political alignment, specifically. Does this condemnation of evangelicals extend to (for example) mainline Protestants who might vote for Democratic candidates? Or is it just uniquely being a Trump supporter that makes one a non-Christian?

Look what just happened here. In a post calling out the politics above rushing into the conversation, the politics below comes rushing in...

And one difference we see is that the kind of devotion that many Christians give to Trump is not something we see toward other political leaders, whether Republican or Democrat. Who else could get away with saying "I'm the only one who can save you"? MAGA and QAnon have their own religious elements that seem much more pagan than Christian. They worship power, glory, and greed, not humility, love, and truth. That's not the Christian religion.

The part below was good and would have gotten to the heart of the matter but was, IMO, undermined by the political statement included in the response.

Look what just happened here. Before we even begin to talk about how we faithfully live out the Gospel, politics comes rushing in—polarization, offense, and assumptions of hypocrisy. That’s how our political identities can so easily overshadow our deeper identity in Christ.

But Jesus’ priorities are very different from those of politicized Christianity. His Kingdom is not of this world, and He continually called people away from earthly power struggles and back toward love of God and neighbor, humility, service, and truth. When political identities take center stage, we risk reducing the Gospel to a partisan test instead of allowing it to be the transforming power of God in our lives.

Faithful Christianity keeps Jesus at the center, above every political figure, every party, and every faction.

[Wesleyb]

I'm not quite sure I can get on board with the idea that evangelical Christians (including ones who happen to be ex-Anabaptists) are somehow not legitimate Christians because they support Trump or have a MAGA political alignment, specifically. Does this condemnation of evangelicals extend to (for example) mainline Protestants who might vote for Democratic candidates? Or is it just uniquely being a Trump supporter that makes one a non-Christian?

You are the first in this thread to use the term "legitimate Christian." Does that mean the same to you as "brother in Christ" referenced in the article in the OP or something different?

[JohnH]

I'm not quite sure I can get on board with the idea that evangelical Christians (including ones who happen to be ex-Anabaptists) are somehow not legitimate Christians because they support Trump or have a MAGA political alignment, specifically. Does this condemnation of evangelicals extend to (for example) mainline Protestants who might vote for Democratic candidates? Or is it just uniquely being a Trump supporter that makes one a non-Christian?

You are the first in this thread to use the term "legitimate Christian." Does that mean the same to you as "brother in Christ" referenced in the article in the OP or something different?

In my specific church, we use the terms "a brother in the faith" to mean someone who holds identical doctrines to ourselves (such as nonresistance), and "a brother in Christ" to refer to someone who is clearly filled with the Holy Ghost and following Jesus, but isn't in our church and possibly has different doctrines.

I am simply challenging the idea that someone isn't a Christian at all because they align with a particular political party or political leader. I think Christians shouldn't do that at all, but I am going to challenge the idea that everyone has to have identical doctrines to my church (or to my own personal list of doctrines I believe in) to be a follower of Jesus. There are some followers of Jesus who also think Trump is a good President and voted for him. There are some who thought Harris would be a good President, and voted for her.

[barnhart]

... My sense is that this, imo near heresy is more a charismatic or non-denominational thing? But I could be wrong about that too.

Some sections of the charismatics have followed an arc of "we are called to spiritual warfare" to "successful spiritual warfare is mostly political success" to "God has revealed through modern prophets the precise high places in culture and government we are to seize" to "Maga is helping with this project" to "President Trump is God's anointed fulfillment of these prophecies."

...I can discern the parts that I'm fairly confident God doesn't want me to imitate or condone and praise those parts that exhibit the true fruits of the Spirit; many are sincere; they believe they're following Jesus - they Want to, they want to know God/be in relationship with God... just like I'm trying (and often failing)... it's such a muddle...

This is presumably a thread to express an Anabaptist response to a tragedy manufactured into a culture war event. It's not surprising those two worldviews clash.

I have been meditating on Jesus' sermon in Luke 12 given to the disciples in response to coordinated plotting to turn the people, the local authorities and the empire against Jesus and his followers.

"Fear not, little flock; for it is your Father's good pleasure to give you the kingdom. Sell that ye have, and give alms; provide yourselves bags which wax not old, a treasure in the heavens that faileth not, where no thief approacheth, neither moth corrupteth. For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also."

The first violation is to fall into fear. This produces nothing Jesus desires. The second is failure to recognize the true position of strength and power, reigning with Jesus. Once we loose sight of this we will certainly fall into error of grasping for swords like Peter and swinging at people who are not really enemies. Third, we must recognize the kingdom of Jesus advances by the power of God, not our power or ability, and it arrives as a gift. Fourth, the proper response to kingdom is embracing the certainty and security of the kingdom by adopting the radical generosity of one who has no concerns for self preservation. Struggle over self preservation is evidence of living for a different kingdom . And fifth, if we fail to embrace Jesus' kingdom the price will be our deepest selves.

[JohnH]

“Tragedy manufactured into a culture war event”

Barnhart, this was an assassination of a public figure that was apparently motivated by disagreement with his public views / opinions. That’s not a “manufactured culture war event.” The assassination actually happened.