American
Christianity's Adultery With Secular Culture by Michael D. Lemay addresses the
American Church's desire to be relevant to the society around her. I saw the
title and some of the contents of this book online, and was pretty intrigued,
looking forward to reading it. But, after going through it, I have mixed
feelings. Let me try to explain.
First, let me
explain some of what this book is about:
In this book, Lemay goes through and points out many of the
philosophical poisons the church voluntarily drinking and diluting the gospel
with. Thinking they're improving it, the
modern church is actually making it deadly. The author lists several popular
teachers and preachers of our day and points out specific heresies of their
teachings.
The author attacks
the notion that we need to make God and the gospel more palatable to the
unbeliever, and laments that so many Christians are content to not spiritually
grow. He also attacks the heresy that
repentance from sin is not a part of God's gift of salvation, and that we are
free to do whatever we want in Christ. "Jesus died to free us from sin, not from
obedience." I especially
liked his pointing out that church meetings are primarily for believers, not
focused on unbelievers. I'll quote my
favorite part here: "The early church was a family, not a social
club. Christians came to learn more about the Word of God. They shared meals and possessions when
necessary, and they challenged one another and together raised the corporate
level of Christian spirituality. They
were committed Christians, not curious strangers. They didn't send out fliers announcing
cleverly disguised outreach events that are just ploys to attract new
members. If you weren't serious about
the gospel, you stayed away. The Word
was not reduced to the lowest level of common understanding, allowing the
spiritually weak to drag down those who wanted to pursue holiness and
righteousness." I thought
that was pretty interesting. We all are
committed to helping each other grow and understand the message, it's not the
preacher's job to teach the elementary truths of the Gospel every single
Sunday, he is focused on discipling his congregation and having many of them at
the level of eating spiritual 'meat' and his congregation will help him teach
the elementary truths to new believers.
Now, as I said, I
really liked some parts of the book, but there were others that really bothered
me.
For instance, at
least at the beginning of the book, the author is very much focused on the
American church's relation to the country as a whole. He apparently thinks that, in their
separating from England and setting up a new republic, the founding fathers
were inspired by the Holy Spirit. That
kind of shocked me.
He says things like, "a free republic and a strong church need each other. Secularists and extreme left-wing progressives realize this, and their attacks
to implement 'hope and change' are a coordinated assault on both the American
republic and Christianity in America."
"..American Christianity was entrusted by our
founding fathers to be the moral guardian of this nation….We, the professed
body of Christ in America, have failed this nation and its citizens."
"The church was
to be the guardian of this nation, providing righteous, moral boundaries
to keep this nation 'under God. But the church started to remain silent at a
time when our nation needed it the most."'
"our democratic republic is, I believe, the one
form of human government that comes closest to getting it right with God."
"We need to become willing partners with God to
reclaim the culture from the Enemy."
I'm sorry…but I
don't see how one could claim that our Republic is the best form of government
before God. Do I prefer it? Yes. Am I against it, absolutely not! And I am so
grateful to live in this country and have the privileges that I do. And I think
that it is a gift of God allowing us to (for the moment), as Christians, to
live "quiet and peaceable lives" (1 Thess 4:11). But biblically, I
don’t see where, in the Bible, this type of government is promoted by God. God didn't propose a republic to Israel (No,
the absence of a King did not make it a republic, and the times of the Judges
were not times of democratic republicanism).
And, remember the statue in Daniel? Which government was the Gold Head?
A Monarchy, Nebuchadnezzar's government.
After that, things degrade, and by the time we get to what might be
symbolizing the time of our government, we're a mix of clay and iron. Hardly as valuable as gold and I'm not sure
how sturdy that is either.
Of course, someone
might point out that the best government is a Theocracy. Yes, but that is not what America is or ever
was. That will only come in the Millennial Kingdom. America might have claimed
to be "under God" but she was not ruled by God. Remember what John said, "We know that we are from God and that the whole
world lies under the control of the evil one." (1 Jn 5:19) I don't think that has changed. In the past,
America might have been more strict about keeping some Christian morals and
being mono-theistic, but, as in any premillennial age, her people were still
ruled by the god of their age (2 Cor 4:4), even if that "age" looked
morally better than ours. For all we
know, America was populated by a bunch of self-righteous mono-theists who
attempt to keep the ten commandments. Satan would be okay with that. And that might be what we get back to by
"reclaiming the culture from the Enemy". We won't be able to do that anyway, and it never
will be claimed by Christ, until He comes again. The church is here to make
disciples of individuals, not of the culture.
Because of this and
some other things that the author said and pushed that I did not think were
biblical, I didn't like it well enough
to give it a high rating.
Thanks to the folks at Aneko Press for sending me a
free review copy of this book. My review did not have to be favorable.
My rating: 1 out of 5 Stars
This book may be found at Christianbook.com and Amazon.com
No comments:
Post a Comment