Search This Blog

Thursday, February 29, 2024

Jesus in Christianity

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In Christianity, Jesus is believed to be the Son of God as written in the Bible's New Testament, and in mainstream Christian denominations he is God the Son, a person of the Trinity of God.

Christians believe him to be the messiah, or a saviour, (giving him the title Christ) prophesied in the Bible's Old Testament. Through Jesus's crucifixion and resurrection, Christians believe that God offers humans salvation and eternal life, with Jesus's death atoning for all sin, thus making humanity right with God. The commonly held belief among Christians is the phrase, "Jesus died for your sins," and thus they accept that salvation is only possible through him.

These teachings emphasize that as the Lamb of God, Jesus chose to suffer nailed to the cross at Calvary as a sign of his obedience to the will of God, as an "agent and servant of God". Jesus's choice positions him as a man of obedience, in contrast to Adam's disobedience. According to the New Testament, after God raised him from the dead, Jesus ascended to heaven to sit at the right hand of God, with his followers awaiting his return to Earth and God's subsequent Last Judgment.

According to the canonical gospel accounts, Jesus was born of a virgin, instructed other Jews how to follow God (sometimes using parables), performed miracles and gathered disciples. Christians generally believe that this narrative is historically true.

While there has been theological debate over the nature of Jesus, Trinitarian Christians believe that Jesus is the Logos, God incarnate, God the Son, and "true God and true man"—both fully divine and fully human. Jesus, having become fully human in all respects, suffered the pains and temptations of a mortal man, yet he did not sin.

Core teachings

Although Christian views of Jesus vary, it is possible to summarize the key elements of the beliefs shared by major Christian denominations by analyzing their catechetical or confessional texts. Christian views of Jesus are derived from various biblical sources, particularly from the canonical gospels and New Testament letters such as the Pauline epistles. Christians predominantly hold that these works are historically true.

Those Christian groups or denominations which are committed to what are considered biblically orthodox Christianity nearly all agree that Jesus:

  • was born of a virgin
  • is a human being who is also fully God
  • had never sinned during his existence
  • was crucified and buried in a tomb
  • rose from the dead on the third day
  • eventually ascended back to God the Father
  • will return to earth

Some groups which are considered to be Christian hold beliefs which are considered to be heterodox. For example, believers in monophysitism reject the idea that Christ has two natures, one human and one divine.

The five major milestones in the gospel narrative of the life of Jesus are his baptism, transfiguration, Crucifixion, Resurrection and Ascension. These are usually bracketed by two other episodes: his nativity at the beginning and the sending of the Paraclete (Holy Spirit) at the end. The gospel accounts of the teachings of Jesus are often presented in terms of specific categories involving his "works and words", e.g., his ministry, parables and miracles.  Christians not only attach theological significance to the works of Jesus, but also to his name. Devotions to the name of Jesus go back to the earliest days of Christianity. These exist today both in Eastern and Western Christianity—both Catholic and Protestant.

Christians predominantly profess that through Jesus' life, death, and Resurrection, he restored humanity's communion with God with the blood of the New Covenant. His death on a cross is understood as a redemptive sacrifice: the source of humanity's salvation and the atonement for sin which had entered human history through the sin of Adam.

Christ, Logos and Son of God

First page of Mark, by Sargis Pitsak (14th century): "The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God".

But who do you say that I am? Only Simon Peter answered him: You are the Christ, the Son of the living GodMatthew 16:15-16

Jesus is mediator, but […] the title means more than someone between God and man. He is not just a third party between God and humanity. [...] As true God he brings God to mankind. As true man he brings mankind to God.

Most Christians generally consider Jesus to be the Christ, the long-awaited Messiah, as well as the one and only Son of God. The opening words in the Gospel of Mark (1:1), "The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God", provide Jesus with the two distinct attributions as Christ and as the Son of God. His divinity is again re-affirmed in Mark 1:11. Matthew 1:1 which begins by calling Jesus the Christ and in verse 16 explains it again with the affirmation: "Jesus, who is called Christ".

In the Pauline epistles, the word Christ is so closely associated with Jesus that apparently for the early Christians there was no need to claim that Jesus was Christ, for that was considered widely accepted among them. Hence Paul could use the term Christos with no confusion about who it referred to, and as in 1 Corinthians 4:15 and Romans 12:5 he could use expressions such as "in Christ" to refer to the followers of Jesus.

In the New Testament, the title "Son of God" is applied to Jesus on many occasions, from the Annunciation up to the Crucifixion. The declaration that Jesus is the Son of God is made by many individuals in the New Testament, and on two occasions by God the Father as a voice from Heaven, and is asserted by Jesus himself.

In Christology, the concept that Christ is the Logos (i.e., "The Word") has been important in establishing the doctrine of the divinity of Christ and his position as God the Son in the Trinity as set forth in the Chalcedonian Creed. This derives from the opening of the Gospel of John, commonly translated into English as: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." λόγος in the original Koine Greek is translated as Word and in theological discourse, this is often left in its English transliterated form, Logos. The easiest way to understand this is the teaching that Jesus (The Word of God) came from the bosom of God the Father and became a living being who then translated into a foetus in the womb of (Virgin Mary) through a supernatural means, as professed by believers in Christ.

The pre-existence of Christ refers to the existence of Christ before his incarnation as Jesus. One of the relevant New Testament passages is John 1:1-18 where, in the Trinitarian view, Christ is identified with a pre-existent divine hypostasis called the Logos or Word. This doctrine is reiterated in John 17:5 when Jesus refers to the glory which he had with the Father "before the world was" during the Farewell Discourse. John 17:24 also refers to the Father loving Jesus "before the foundation of the world". Nontrinitarian views about the pre-existence of Christ vary, with some rejecting it and others accepting it.

Following the Apostolic Age, from the 2nd century forward, several controversies developed about how the human and divine are related within the person of Jesus. Eventually in 451, the concept of a hypostatic union was stated at the Council of Chalcedon, namely that Jesus is both fully divine and fully human. However, differences among Christian denominations continued thereafter, with some rejecting the hypostatic union in favor of monophysitism.

Incarnation, Nativity and Second Adam

Nativity at Night, by Geertgen tot Sint Jans, c. 1490

He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible. — Colossians 1:15-16

The above verse from Colossians regards the birth of Jesus as the model for all creation.

Paul the Apostle viewed the birth of Jesus as an event of cosmic significance which brought forth a "new man" who undid the damage caused by the fall of the first man, Adam. Just as the Johannine view of Jesus as the incarnate Logos proclaims the universal relevance of his birth, the Pauline perspective emphasizes the birth of a new man and a new world in the birth of Jesus. Paul's eschatological view of Jesus counter-positions him as a new man of morality and obedience, in contrast to Adam. Unlike Adam, the new man born in Jesus obeys God and ushers in a world of morality and salvation.

In the Pauline view, Adam is positioned as the first man and Jesus as the second: Adam, having corrupted himself by his disobedience, also infected humanity and left it with a curse as its inheritance. The birth of Jesus counterbalanced the fall of Adam, bringing forth redemption and repairing the damage done by Adam.

In the 2nd century Church Father Irenaeus writes:

"When He became incarnate and was made man, He commenced afresh the long line of human beings, and furnished us, in a brief, comprehensive manner, with salvation; so that what we had lost in Adam—namely to be according to the image and likeness of God- that we might recover in Christ Jesus."

In patristic theology, Paul's contrasting of Jesus as the new man versus Adam provided a framework for discussing the uniqueness of the birth of Jesus and the ensuing events of his life. The nativity of Jesus thus began to serve as the starting point for "cosmic Christology" in which the birth, life and Resurrection of Jesus have universal implications. The concept of Jesus as the "new man" repeats in the cycle of birth and rebirth of Jesus from his nativity to his Resurrection: following his birth, through his morality and obedience to the Father, Jesus began a "new harmony" in the relationship between God the Father and man. The nativity and Resurrection of Jesus thus created the author and exemplar of a new humanity. In this view, the birth, death and Resurrection of Jesus brought about salvation, undoing the damage of Adam.

As the biological son of David, Jesus would be of the Jewish race, ethnicity, nation, and culture. One argument against this would be a contradiction in Jesus' genealogies: Matthew saying he is the son of Solomon and Luke saying he is the son of Nathan—Solomon and Nathan being brothers. John of Damascus taught that there is no contradiction, for Nathan wed Solomon's wife after Solomon died in accordance with scripture, namely, yibbum (the mitzvah that a man must marry his brother's childless widow).

Jesus grew up in Galilee and much of his ministry took place there. The languages spoken in Galilee and Judea during the 1st century AD include Jewish Palestinian Aramaic, Hebrew, and Greek, with Aramaic being predominant. There is substantial consensus that Jesus gave most of his teachings in Aramaic in the Galilean dialect.

The canonical gospels describe Jesus wearing tzitzit – the tassels on a tallit – in Matthew 14:36 and Luke 8:43–44. Besides this, the New Testament includes no descriptions of Jesus' appearance before his death and the gospel narratives are generally indifferent to people's racial appearance or features.

Ministry

The Communion of the Apostles, by Luca Signorelli, 1512

The thief comes only in order to steal and kill and destroy. I came that they may have and enjoy life, and have it in abundance (to the full, till it overflows).—John 10:10 (Ampl)

Jesus seemed to have two basic concerns with reference to people and the material: (1) that they be freed from the tyranny of things and (2) that they be actively concerned for the needs of others.

In the canonical gospels, the Ministry of Jesus begins with his baptism in the countryside of Judea, near the River Jordan and ends in Jerusalem, following the Last Supper. The Gospel of Luke (3:23) states that Jesus was "about 30 years of age" at the start of his ministry. The date of the start of his ministry has been estimated at around AD 27 to 29 and the end in the range AD 30 to 36.

Jesus' early Galilean ministry begins when after his baptism, he goes back to Galilee from his time in the Judean desert. In this early period he preaches around Galilee and recruits his first disciples who begin to travel with him and eventually form the core of the early Church. The major Galilean ministry which begins in Matthew 8 includes the commissioning of the Twelve Apostles, and covers most of the ministry of Jesus in Galilee. The final Galilean ministry begins after the death of John the Baptist as Jesus prepares to go to Jerusalem

In the later Judean ministry Jesus starts his final journey to Jerusalem through Judea. As Jesus travels towards Jerusalem, in the later Perean ministry, about one third the way down from the Sea of Galilee along the River Jordan, he returns to the area where he was baptized.

The final ministry in Jerusalem is sometimes called the Passion Week and begins with the Jesus' triumphal entry into Jerusalem. The gospels provide more details about the final ministry than the other periods, devoting about one third of their text to the last week of the life of Jesus in Jerusalem.

Teachings, parables and miracles

A Gospel of John, 1056

The words that I say unto you I speak not from myself: but the Father who dwells in me does his works.John 14:10

In the New Testament the teachings of Jesus are presented in terms of his "words and works". The words of Jesus include several sermons, in addition to parables that appear throughout the narrative of the Synoptic Gospels (the gospel of John includes no parables). The works include the miracles and other acts performed during his ministry.

Although the Canonical Gospels are the major source of the teachings of Jesus, the Pauline epistles, which were likely written decades before the gospels, provide some of the earliest written accounts of the teachings of Jesus.

The New Testament does not present the teachings of Jesus as merely his own teachings, but equates the words of Jesus with divine revelation, with John the Baptist stating in John 3:34: "For the one whom God has sent speaks the words of God, for God gives the Spirit without limit." and Jesus stating in John 7:16: "My teaching is not my own. It comes from the one who sent me". In Matthew 11:27 Jesus claims divine knowledge, stating: "No one knows the Son except the Father and no one knows the Father except the Son", asserting the mutual knowledge he has with the Father.

One of the most important of Jesus' teachings is his second coming in Matthew 24 and Luke 21. There Jesus explained the signs of the last days, popularly known as the end-time. These are the days that precedes the second coming of Jesus Christ, there he spoke of the signs of the end of days and what will happen to the believers in Christ, the persecution and the troubles that will come upon the world. The second coming of Jesus is mainly divided into two, namely; the Rapture and the Second Coming. The rapture being the time Jesus comes in the air to take up his saints to Heaven for a period of seven years and the second coming, being a time he comes with the saints to rule the earth for a thousand years. It is also referred to as the millennial reign.

Discourses

Jesus' Farewell Discourse to his eleven remaining disciples after the Last Supper, from the Maestà by Duccio

The gospels include several discourses by Jesus on specific occasions, such as the Farewell discourse delivered after the Last Supper, the night before his Crucifixion. Although some of the teachings of Jesus are reported as taking place within the formal atmosphere of a synagogue (e.g., in Matthew 4:23) many of the discourses are more like conversations than formal lectures.

The Gospel of Matthew has a structured set of sermons, often grouped as the Five Discourses of Matthew which present many of the key teachings of Jesus. Each of the five discourses has some parallel passages in the Gospel of Mark or the Gospel of Luke. The five discourses in Matthew begin with the Sermon on the Mount, which encapsulates many of the moral teaching of Jesus and which is one of the best known and most quoted elements of the New Testament. The Sermon on the Mount includes the Beatitudes which describe the character of the people of the Kingdom of God, expressed as "blessings". The Beatitudes focus on love and humility rather than force and exaction and echo the key ideals of Jesus' teachings on spirituality and compassion. The other discourses in Matthew include the Missionary Discourse in Matthew 10 and the Discourse on the Church in Matthew 18, providing instructions to the disciples and laying the foundation of the codes of conduct for the anticipated community of followers.

Parables

The Good Samaritan is a painting by James Tissot. The Parable of the Good Samaritan is one of the parables of Jesus.

The parables of Jesus represent a major component of his teachings in the gospels, the approximately thirty parables forming about one third of his recorded teachings. The parables may appear within longer sermons, as well as other places within the narrative. Jesus' parables are seemingly simple and memorable stories, often with imagery, and each conveys a teaching which usually relates the physical world to the spiritual world.

In the 19th century, Lisco and Fairbairn stated that in the parables of Jesus, "the image borrowed from the visible world is accompanied by a truth from the invisible (spiritual) world" and that the parables of Jesus are not "mere similitudes which serve the purpose of illustration, but are internal analogies where nature becomes a witness for the spiritual world". Similarly, in the 20th century, calling a parable "an earthly story with a heavenly meaning", William Barclay states that the parables of Jesus use familiar examples to lead others' minds towards heavenly concepts. He suggests that Jesus did not form his parables merely as analogies but based on an "inward affinity between the natural and the spiritual order."

One of the major reasons why Jesus spoke in parables to the Jews was explained to the disciples of Jesus by Jesus himself. It is found in Matthew 13:13-14; there Jesus explains why he used much of parables to the people of Israel. Jesus explained that it was so for the fulfillment of the prophecy of Isaiah the prophet, and this is found in Isaiah 6:9-10. This was for the people of Israel not to understand and realize who Jesus is and accept him, he purposely did this to make provision for Gentiles to be part of the children of God.

Miracles of Jesus

Believe the miracles, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me, and I in the Father. —John 10:38

In Christian teachings, the miracles of Jesus were as much a vehicle for his message as were his words. Many of the miracles emphasize the importance of faith, for instance in cleansing ten lepers, Jesus did not say: "My power has saved you" but says "Rise and go; your faith has saved you. Similarly, in the Walking on Water miracle, Apostle Peter learns an important lesson about faith in that as his faith wavers, he begins to sink.

Jesus healing the paralytic in The Pool by Palma il Giovane, 1592

One characteristic shared among all miracles of Jesus in the Gospel accounts is that he delivered benefits freely and never requested or accepted any form of payment for his healing miracles, unlike some high priests of his time who charged those who were healed. In Matthew 10:8 he advised his disciples to heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse those who have leprosy, and drive out demons without payment and stated: "Freely you have received; freely give".

Christians in general believe that Jesus' miracles were actual historical events and that his miraculous works were an important part of his life, attesting to his divinity and the Hypostatic union, i.e., the dual natures of Christ's humanity and divinity in one hypostasis. Christians believe that while Jesus' experiences of hunger, weariness, and death were evidences of his humanity, the miracles were evidences of his deity.

Christian authors also view the miracles of Jesus not merely as acts of power and omnipotence, but as works of love and mercy: they were performed to show compassion for sinful and suffering humanity. Authors Ken and Jim Stocker state that "every single miracle Jesus performed was an act of love". And each miracle involves specific teachings.

Since according to the Gospel of John it was impossible to narrate all the miracles performed by Jesus, the Catholic Encyclopedia states that the miracles presented in the Gospels were selected for a twofold reason: first for the manifestation of God's glory, and then for their evidential value. Jesus referred to his "works" as evidences of his mission and his divinity, and in John 5:36 he declared that his miracles have greater evidential value than the testimony of John the Baptist.

Crucifixion and atonement

Johannine "agency christology" combines the concept that Jesus is the Son of his Father with the idea that he has come into the world as his Father's agent, commissioned and sent by the Father to represent the Father and to accomplish his Father's work. Implied in each Synoptic portrayal of Jesus is the doctrine that the salvation Jesus gives is inseparable from Jesus himself and his divine identity. Sonship and agency come together in the Synoptic gospels only in the Parable of the Vineyard (Matthew 21:37; Mark 12:6; Luke 20:13). The submission of Jesus to crucifixion is a sacrifice made as an agent of God or servant of God, for the sake of eventual victory. This builds upon the salvific theme of the Gospel of John which begins in John 1:36 with John the Baptist's proclamation: "The Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world". Further reinforcement of the concept is provided in Revelation 21:14 where the "lamb slain but standing" is the only one worthy of handling the scroll (i.e., the book) containing the names of those who are to be saved.

A central element in the Christology presented in the Acts of the Apostles is the affirmation of the belief that the death of Jesus by crucifixion happened "with the foreknowledge of God, according to a definite plan". In this view, as in Acts 2:23, the cross is not viewed as a scandal, for the Crucifixion of Jesus "at the hands of the lawless" is viewed as the fulfilment of the plan of God.

Paul's Christology has a specific focus on the death and Resurrection of Jesus. For Paul, the Crucifixion of Jesus is directly related to his Resurrection and the term "the cross of Christ" used in Galatians 6:12 may be viewed as his abbreviation of the message of the gospels. For Paul, the Crucifixion of Jesus was not an isolated event in history, but a cosmic event with significant eschatological consequences, as in 1 Corinthians 2:8. In the Pauline view, Jesus, obedient to the point of death (Philippians 2:8) died "at the right time" (Romans 4:25) based on the plan of God. For Paul the "power of the cross" is not separable from the Resurrection of Jesus.

John Calvin supported the "agent of God" Christology and argued that in his trial in Pilate's Court Jesus could have successfully argued for his innocence, but instead submitted to crucifixion in obedience to the Father. This Christological theme continued into the 20th century, both in the Eastern and Western Churches. In the Eastern Church Sergei Bulgakov argued that the Crucifixion of Jesus was "pre-eternally" determined by the Father before the creation of the world, to redeem humanity from the disgrace caused by the fall of Adam. In the Western Church, Karl Rahner elaborated on the analogy that the blood of the Lamb of God (and the water from the side of Jesus) shed at the Crucifixion had a cleansing nature, similar to baptismal water.

Mormons believe that the Crucifixion was the culmination of Christ's atonement, which began in the Garden of Gethsemane.

Resurrection, Ascension, and Second Coming

Depictions of the Resurrection of Jesus are central to Christian art (Resurrection of Christ by Raphael, 1499–1502).

The New Testament teaches that the Resurrection of Jesus is a foundation of the Christian faith. Christians, through faith in the working of God are spiritually resurrected with Jesus, and are redeemed so that they may walk in a new way of life.

In the teachings of the apostolic Church, the Resurrection was seen as heralding a new era. Forming a theology of the Resurrection fell to Apostle Paul. It was not enough for Paul to simply repeat elementary teachings, but as Hebrews 6:1 states, "go beyond the initial teachings about Christ and advance to maturity". Fundamental to Pauline theology is the connection between Christ's Resurrection and redemption. Paul explained the importance of the Resurrection of Jesus as the cause and basis of the hope of Christians to share a similar experience in 1 Cor 15:20–22:

But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.

If the cross stands at the center of Paul's theology, so does the Resurrection: unless the one died the death of all, the all would have little to celebrate in the Resurrection of the one. Paul taught that, just as Christians share in Jesus' death in baptism, so they will share in his Resurrection for Jesus was designated the Son of God by his Resurrection. Paul's views went against the thoughts of the Greek philosophers to whom a bodily resurrection meant a new imprisonment in a corporeal body, which was what they wanted to avoid, given that for them the corporeal and the material fettered the spirit. At the same time, Paul believed that the newly resurrected body would be a spiritual body—immortal, glorified and powerful, in contrast to an earthly body which is mortal, dishonored and weak.

The Apostolic Fathers, discussed the death and Resurrection of Jesus, including Ignatius (50−115), Polycarp (69−155), and Justin Martyr (100−165). Following the conversion of Constantine and the liberating Edict of Milan in 313, the ecumenical councils of the 4th, 5th and 6th centuries, that focused on Christology helped shape the Christian understanding of the redemptive nature of Resurrection, and influenced both the development of its iconography, and its use within liturgy.

Nontrinitarian perspectives

The doctrine of the Trinity, including the belief that Jesus is a Person of the Trinity, is not universally accepted among Christians. Nontrinitarian Christian groups include the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Unitarians and Jehovah's Witnesses. Though modern nontrinitarian groups all reject the doctrine of the Trinity, their views still differ widely on the nature of Jesus. Some do not believe that Jesus is God, instead believing that he was a messenger from God, or prophet, or the perfect created human. This is the view espoused by ancient sects such as the Ebionites, and modern-day Unitarians.

Wednesday, February 28, 2024

Dominion theology

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominion_theology

Dominion theology, also known as dominionism, is a group of Christian political ideologies that seek to institute a nation governed by Christians and based on their understandings of biblical law. Extents of rule and ways of acquiring governing authority are varied. For example, dominion theology can include theonomy but does not necessarily involve advocacy of adherence to the Mosaic Law as the basis of government. The label is primarily applied to groups of Christians in the United States.

Prominent adherents of those ideologies include Calvinist Christian reconstructionism, Charismatic and Pentecostal Kingdom Now theology, and the New Apostolic Reformation. Most of the contemporary movements that are labeled dominion theology arose in the 1970s from religious movements asserting aspects of Christian nationalism. Roman Catholic integralism is also sometimes considered to fall under the dominionist umbrella, but the Catholic integralist movement is much older and theologically markedly different from Protestant dominionism since it is tied to the doctrine that the Catholic Church is the only true church.

Etymology

Dominion theology is a reference to the King James Bible's rendering of Genesis 1:28 in which God grants humanity "dominion" over the Earth.

And God blessed them, and God said unto them, "Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth."

In the late 1980s, several prominent Evangelical authors used the phrase dominion theology and other terms such as dominionism to label a loose grouping of theological movements that made direct appeals to the passage in Genesis. Christians typically interpret the passage as meaning that God gave mankind responsibility over the Earth, but one of the most distinctive aspects of dominion theology is that it is interpreted as a mandate for Christian stewardship in civil affairs, no less than in other human matters.

Types

Protestant Christian reconstructionism

An example of dominionism in Reformed theology is Christian reconstructionism, which originated in the teachings of R. J. Rushdoony in the 1960s and the 1970s. His theology focuses on theonomy, the rule of the Law of God, and his belief that all of society should be ordered according to the laws that governed the Israelites in the Old Testament. His ideas on biblical law in civil government are laid out most comprehensively in The Institutes of Biblical Law, but he wrote many other books dealing with the subject. Rushdoony's proposed system is strongly Calvinistic by emphasizing the sovereignty of God over human freedom and action, and denying the operation of charismatic gifts in the present day (cessationism). Both of those aspects are in direct opposition to Kingdom Now theology (see below).

Full adherents to reconstructionism are few and marginalized among most Christians. Dave Hunt, Albert James Dager, Hal Lindsey, and Thomas Ice specifically criticize Christian reconstructionism from a Christian viewpoint and disagree on theological grounds with its theocratic elements as well as its Calvinism and postmillennialism. J. Ligon Duncan, Sherman Isbell, Vern Poythress, Robert Godfrey, and Sinclair Ferguson analyze reconstructionism as conservative Calvinists, primarily giving a theological critique of its theocratic elements. Michael J. McVicar has noted that many leading Christian reconstructionists are also leading writers in paleolibertarian circles.

Some social scientists have used the word dominionism to refer to adherence to Christian reconstructionism.

Catholic integralism

Catholic integralism has been characterized as a form of dominionist theology, but in reality, it is much older and theologically distinct from the dominionism that is espoused by Protestants. Antonio Spadaro and Marcelo Figueroa have said that Catholic integralists have entered into a nontraditional ecumenical alliance with Protestant reconstructionists who share "the same desire for religious influence in the political sphere." Likewise, in the National Catholic Reporter, Joshua J. McElwee wrote that Catholic integralists, along with their Protestant counterparts, wish to establish a "theocratic type of state." But ultimately, the goals of Protestant dominionists and Catholic integralists are divergent, as Catholic integralists adhere to the doctrine that the Catholic Church is the "only true church" and that every form of Protestantism is "heretical." That has not prevented cooperation between them, however, when it has been mutually beneficial.

Catholic integralism has a much longer history than the Protestant dominionism that arose in the U.S. in the 1970s and in fact has its root in traditional Catholic doctrine on church-state relations that developed when the governments of Europe were nearly all Catholic confessional states and had Catholicism as their official religion. Such a political conception was referred to as "Christendom" with the summit of political authority held by the Holy Roman Emperor and the summit of spiritual authority held by the Supreme Pontiff (Pope). After the movement toward liberal secularism and disestablishmentarianism, several modern states eventually reacted with a revived integralism, often in a fascistic or proto-fascistic form, such as in Spain under the leadership of Francisco Franco, Portugal under Antonio Salazar, and Austria under Engelbert Dollfuß and his Fatherland Front. Today, only a handful of states remain with Catholicism as the official established religion of state, but there are still movements in other nations and among some in the Catholic hierarchy who support a revival of integralism in states that have become secular.

Fatherland Front rally, 1936

In recent years, a "revived Catholic integralism" has been noted among the younger generation of Catholics writing for websites such as The Josias. Integralism could be said to merely be the modern continuation of the traditional Catholic conception of church–state relations elucidated by Pope Gelasius I and expounded upon throughout the centuries until the Syllabus of Errors, which condemned the idea that the separation of church and state is a moral good. For example, some Catholics have praised the actions of Pius IX in the 1858 Mortara case in which he ordered the abduction of a six-year-old Jewish boy who had been baptized without his parents' consent. A systematic account of Catholic integralism as a coherent political philosophy has been written by the Catholic theologians Thomas Crean and Alan Fimister: Integralism: a manual of political philosophy.

Allegory of the Concordat of 1801, by Pierre Joseph Célestin François

Today, the Catholic Church's political treaties with various countries, known as concordats, are criticized by some liberal and democratic human rights groups for advancing Catholic integralism. More than 200 concordats are in force. Some of them explicitly guarantee that Catholicism is recognized as the official religion of state in several countries and others grant historical recognition of the Catholic faith and grant certain rights and privileges to the Church.

Pentecostal Kingdom Now theology

Kingdom Now theology is a branch of dominion theology that has a following within Pentecostalism and attracted attention in the late 1980s.

Kingdom Now theology states that although Satan has been in control of the world since the Fall of Man, God is looking for people who will help him take back dominion. Those who yield themselves to the authority of God's apostles and prophets will take control of the kingdoms of this world, being defined as all social institutions, the "kingdom" of education, the "kingdom" of science, the "kingdom" of the arts, etc. C. Peter Wagner, the founder of the New Apostolic Reformation, writes: "The practical theology that best builds a foundation under social transformation is dominion theology, sometimes called 'Kingdom Now'. Its history can be traced back through R. J. Rushdoony and Abraham Kuyper to John Calvin."

Kingdom Now theology is influenced by the Latter Rain movement, and critics have connected it to the New Apostolic Reformation, "Spiritual Warfare Christianity," and Fivefold ministry thinking.

Seven Mountains Dominionism, also known as the Seven Mountains Mandate or 7MM, has become a more prevalent manifestation of Kingdom Now theology since the early 2010s. Bill Bright, Loren Cunningham, and Francis Schaeffer are often credited as having been given the same divine vision that revealed the Seven Mountain Mandate in 1975. The mandate proposes that there are seven "mountains" that Christians must control to establish a global Christian theocracy and prepare the world for Jesus' return: government, education, media, arts and entertainment, religion, family, and business. The mandate is based on two Biblical passages: Isaiah 2:2-3, which says, "In the last days the mountain of the Lord’s temple will be established as the highest of the mountains," and Revelation 17:1–18, which describes "a scarlet beast... [with] had seven heads and ten horns." Prominent Christian leaders who support Seven Mountains Dominionism include David Barton, James Dobson, John Hagee, Bill Johnson, Lance Wallnau, and Paula White. Notable politicians who have embraced it include Michele Bachmann, Sam Brownback, Ted Cruz, Newt Gingrich, Mike Huckabee, Charlie Kirk, Sarah Palin, and Rick Perry.

Kingdom Now theology should not be confused with Kingdom theology, which is related to inaugurated eschatology.

Christian right

In the late 1980s, the sociologist Sara Diamond started to write about the intersection of dominion theology with the political activism of the Christian right. Diamond argued that "the primary importance of the [Christian reconstructionist] ideology is its role as a catalyst for what is loosely called 'dominion theology.'" According to Diamond, "Largely through the impact of Rushdoony's and North's writings, the concept that Christians are Biblically mandated to 'occupy' all secular institutions has become the central unifying ideology for the Christian Right" (emphasis in original) in the United States.

While acknowledging the small number of actual adherents, authors such as Diamond and Frederick Clarkson have argued that postmillennial Christian reconstructionism played a major role in pushing the primarily premillennial Christian right to adopt a more aggressive dominionist stance.

Misztal and Shupe concur with Sara Diamond and Frederick Clarkson by arguing, "Reconstructionists have many more sympathizers who fall somewhere within the dominionist framework, but who are not card-carrying members." According to Diamond, "Reconstructionism is the most intellectually grounded, though esoteric, brand of dominion theology."

The journalist Frederick Clarkson defined dominionism as a movement that includes dominion theology and reconstructionism as subsets but is much broader in scope and extends to much of the Christian right in the United States.

In his 1992 study of dominion theology and its influence on the Christian right, Bruce Barron wrote:

In the context of American evangelical efforts to penetrate and transform public life, the distinguishing mark of a dominionist is a commitment to defining and carrying out an approach to building society that is self-consciously defined as exclusively Christian, and dependent specifically on the work of Christians, rather than based on a broader consensus.

In 1995, Diamond called the influence of dominion theology "prevalent on the Christian Right."

The journalist Chip Berlet added in 1998 that although they represent different theological and political ideas, dominionists assert a Christian duty to take "control of a sinful secular society."

In 2005, Clarkson enumerated the following characteristics shared by all forms of dominionism:

  1. Dominionists celebrate Christian nationalism, in that they believe that the United States once was, and should once again be, a Christian nation. In this way, they deny the Enlightenment roots of American democracy.
  2. Dominionists promote religious supremacy, insofar as they generally do not respect the equality of other religions, or even other versions of Christianity.
  3. Dominionists endorse theocratic visions, insofar as they believe that the Ten Commandments, or "biblical law," should be the foundation of American law, and that the U.S. Constitution should be seen as a vehicle for implementing Biblical principles.

The essayist Katherine Yurica began using the term dominionism in her articles in 2004, beginning with "The Despoiling of America" (February 11, 2004). Authors who also use the term dominionism in the broader sense include the journalist Chris Hedges, Marion Maddox, James Rudin, Michelle Goldberg, Kevin Phillips, Sam Harris, Ryan Lizza, Frank Schaeffer, and the group TheocracyWatch. Some authors have applied the term to a broader spectrum of people than have Diamond, Clarkson, and Berlet.

Sarah Posner in Salon argues that there are various "iterations of dominionism that call on Christians to enter... government, law, media and so forth... so that they are controlled by Christians." According to Posner, "Christian right figures promoted dominionism... and the GOP courted... religious leaders for the votes of their followers." She added: "If people really understood dominionism, they’d worry about it between election cycles."

Michelle Goldberg notes that George Grant wrote in his 1987 book The Changing of the Guard: Biblical Principles for Political Action:

Christians have an obligation, a mandate, a commission, a holy responsibility to reclaim the land for Jesus Christ—to have dominion in civil structures, just as in every other aspect of life and godliness.... But it is dominion we are after. Not just a voice.... Christian politics has as its primary intent the conquest of the land—of men, families, institutions, bureaucracies, courts, and governments for the Kingdom of Christ.

Spectrum of dominionism

Writers including Chip Berlet and Frederick Clarkson distinguish between what they term "hard" and "soft" dominionism. Such commentators define "soft" dominionism as the belief that "America is a Christian nation" and opposition to separation of church and state, but "hard" dominionism refers to dominion theology and Christian reconstructionism.

Michelle Goldberg uses the terms Christian nationalism and dominionism for the former view. According to Goldberg:

In many ways, Dominionism is more a political phenomenon than a theological one. It cuts across Christian denominations, from stern, austere sects to the signs-and-wonders culture of modern megachurches. Think of it like political Islamism, which shapes the activism of a number of antagonistic fundamentalist movements, from Sunni Wahabis in the Arab world to Shiite fundamentalists in Iran.

Berlet and Clarkson have agreed, "Soft Dominionists are Christian nationalists." Unlike "dominionism", the phrase "Christian nation" occurs commonly in the writings of leaders of the Christian right. Proponents of the idea (such as David Barton and D. James Kennedy) argue that the Founding Fathers of the United States were overwhelmingly Christian, that founding documents such as the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution are based on Christian principles, and that a Christian character is fundamental to American culture. They cite, for example, the U.S. Supreme Court's comment in 1892 that "this [the United States] is a Christian nation" after they cite numerous historical and legal arguments in support of that statement.

Kennedy characterized his perspective on Christian political involvement as more akin to participatory democracy than to dominionism. In an interview with NPR's Terry Gross, Kennedy was asked whether he wanted all public office holders to be Christians. Kennedy answered, "We have people who are secular and humanist and unbelievers who are constantly supporting in every way possible other people who share those views. And I don't object to that. That's their privilege. And I think that Christians should be allowed the same privilege to vote for people whom they believe share their views about life and government. And that's all I'm talking about."

Criticism of usage of term

Those labelled dominionists rarely use the terms dominionist and dominionism for self-description, and some people have attacked the use of such words. The journalist and conservative commentator Stanley Kurtz, writing for the National Review, labeled it "conspiratorial nonsense," "political paranoia," and "guilt by association", and decried Hedges' "vague characterizations" that allow him to "paint a highly questionable picture of a virtually faceless and nameless 'Dominionist' Christian mass". Kurtz also complained about a perceived link between average Christian evangelicals and extremism such as Christian reconstructionism:

The notion that conservative Christians want to reinstitute slavery and rule by genocide is not just crazy, it's downright dangerous. The most disturbing part of the Harper's cover story (the one by Chris Hedges) was the attempt to link Christian conservatives with Hitler and fascism. Once we acknowledge the similarity between conservative Christians and fascists, Hedges appears to suggest, we can confront Christian evil by setting aside 'the old polite rules of democracy.' So wild conspiracy theories and visions of genocide are really excuses for the Left to disregard the rules of democracy and defeat conservative Christians—by any means necessary.

Joe Carter of First Things writes:

[T]here is no "school of thought" known as "dominionism." The term was coined in the 1980s by Diamond and is never used outside liberal blogs and websites. No reputable scholars use the term for it is a meaningless neologism that Diamond concocted for her dissertation.

Diamond denies that she coined the broader sense of the term dominionism, which appears in her dissertation and in Roads to Dominion solely to describe dominion theology. Nevertheless, Diamond originated the idea that dominion theology is the "central unifying ideology for the Christian Right."

Jeremy Pierce of First Things coined the word dominionismist to describe those who promote the idea that there is a dominionist conspiracy and wrote:

It strikes me as irresponsible to lump [Rushdoony] together with Francis Schaeffer and those influenced by him, especially given Schaeffer's many recorded instances of resisting exactly the kinds of views Rushdoony developed. Indeed, it strikes me as an error of the magnitude of some of Rushdoony's own historical nonsense to consider there to be such a view called Dominionism [sic] that Rushdoony, Schaeffer, James Dobson, and all the other people in the list somehow share and that it seeks to get Christians and only Christians into all the influential positions in secular society.

Lisa Miller of Newsweek writes that "'dominionism' is the paranoid mot du jour" and that "certain journalists use 'dominionist' the way some folks on Fox News use the word sharia. Its strangeness scares people. Without history or context, the word creates a siege mentality in which 'we' need to guard against 'them'." Ross Douthat of The New York Times noted that "many of the people that writers like Diamond and others describe as 'dominionists' would disavow the label, many definitions of dominionism conflate several very different Christian political theologies, and there's a lively debate about whether the term is even useful at all."

Other criticism has focused on the proper use of the term. Berlet wrote that "just because some critics of the Christian Right have stretched the term dominionism past its breaking point does not mean we should abandon the term," and argued that rather than label conservatives as extremists, it would be better to "talk to these people" and "engage them." Diamond wrote, "Liberals' writing about the Christian Right's take-over plans has generally taken the form of conspiracy theory" and argued that instead, one should "analyze the subtle ways" that ideas like Dominionism "take hold within movements and why." The authors Robert Gagnon and Edith Humphrey argued strongly against the use of the term in reference to the US presidential candidate Ted Cruz in a 2016 op-ed for Christianity Today.

Tuesday, February 27, 2024

Land defender

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
2016 "Stand with Standing Rock" march. Slogans include "We are here to protect" and "Defend the land."

A land defender, land protector, or environmental defender is an activist who works to protect ecosystems and the human right to a safe, healthy environment. Often, defenders are members of Indigenous communities who are protecting property rights of ancestral lands in the face of expropriation, pollution, depletion, or destruction.

Land and its resources may be considered sacred by Indigenous peoples, and caring for land is considered a duty that honors ancestors, current peoples, and future generations.

Land defenders face severe persecution from powerful political and corporate alliances that profit from resource extraction. which in turn may cause pollution. The United Nations Human Rights Council determined that land defenders are "among the human rights defenders who are most exposed and at risk."

Etymology

Environmental activist and actor Dallas Goldtooth of the Indigenous Environmental Network has criticized the term "protester," stating the word "protester" is negative and implies that Native people are angry, violent, or overprotective of resources.

Instead, members of the movement refer to themselves as "land defenders," a term that emphasizes pacifism and responsibility to care for ancestral lands which may be part of the defender's heritage.

Inuit Labrador land protector Denise Cole has stated, "I am very much a believer when I take my medicines, when I take my drum, what colonial law would call protesting is very much what I consider is ceremony."

History

Deadly land conflicts in Honduras date back to the early 1990s.

The Dakota Access Pipeline protests in 2016.

The occupation of the Atlanta Forest by self-described forest defenders such as Tortuguita, & the broader 'Defend Atlanta Forest' movement to prevent the building of the Atlanta Public Safety Training Center within it. (2022–present)

Role and activism

Land defenders play an active and increasingly visible role in actions intended to protect, honour, and make visible the importance of land. There are strong connections between the water protector movement, land defender movement, and Indigenous environmental activism. Land defenders resist the installation of pipelines, fossil fuel industries, destruction of territory for development such as agriculture or housing, and resource extraction activities such as fracking because these actions can lead to the degradation of land, destruction of forest, and disruption of habitat. Land defenders resist activities that harm land, especially across Indigenous territories and their work is tied to human rights. Yazzie points to the resistance tactics of Diné land defenders and their anti-capitalist and anti-development stance on resource extraction as being highly connected to the longstanding traditions of Diné resistance.

Activism can come in the form of the erection of blockades on reserve lands or traditional territories to block corporations from resource extraction activities. Water and land protectors also erect camps as a way to occupy traditional territories and strengthen cultural ties. Land defenders also work through legal frameworks such as government court systems in effort to keep control of traditional territories. Civil disobedience actions taken by land defenders, are frequently criminalized and some have argued subject to heavier policing and violence.

Women are integral to the success of the movement, as they are often land defenders visible at the front of blockades and in resistance protests.

Dangers facing land defenders

Global Witness reported 1,922 murders of land defenders in 57 countries between 2002 and 2019. 40% of the victims were Indigenous, despite making up 6% of the global population. Documentation of this violence is also incomplete.

In 2020, murders of land defenders hit a record high of 227.

U.N. Special Rapporteur David R. Boyd has asked, "How can we protect the extraordinary diversity of life on Earth if we cannot protect environmental defenders?" He has further stated that as many as one hundred land defenders are intimidated, arrested or otherwise harassed for every one that is killed.

Land defenders often face perilous conditions in opposition to state powers, resource corporations such as gas or mining corporations, others seeking to develop land or extinguish Indigenous land rights. American environmentalist Bill McKibben has stated, "[Defenders are] at risk because they find themselves living on or near something that some corporation is demanding. That demand – the demand for the highest possible profit, the quickest possible timeline, the cheapest possible operation – seems to translate eventually into the understanding, somewhere, that the troublemaker must go."

Middeldorp and Le Billon have pointed to the dangers faced by land defenders, particularly in authoritarian regimes. In their 2018 article on the topic the point to the killings of several land defenders in Honduras. There, paramilitaries in the Aguán valley were sent to infiltrate and murder key lands rights activists to undermine group efforts. One may et al connect the suppression of Indigenous land rights and a history of intimidation, violent tactics and murder against land defenders to economic development and "land grabs" in colonial nation states.

The Canadian national police force, the RCMP, were prepared to use deadly force against land defenders in a 2019 protest in British Columbia.

Dunlop connects acts of violence against land defenders in countries such as Mexico as retaliation for resistance to economic development and resource extraction.

The human rights organization Global Witness reported that 164 land defenders were killed in 2018 in countries such as the Philippines, Brazil, India, and Guatemala. This same report stated a significant number of the people killed, injured, and threatened were Indigenous. Le Billon and Lujala report that at least 1734 environmental and land defenders were killed between 2002 and 2018 and that Indigenous people are most at risk, numbering more than a third of land defenders killed. The UN has reported that many land protectors are labelled as terrorists by state governments in an effort to discredit their claims. Such labelling can create dangerous conditions for those working to protect land rights.

Yale Environment 360 reported that at least 212 environmental campaigners and land defenders were murdered in 2019. Over half of the murders reported in 2019 took place in Colombia and the Philippines.

Amnesty International has called attention to the dangers facing those seeking to protect the earth, water, and communities, calling Latin America the most dangerous location for land defenders. The Environmental Defence Fund has reported that over 1700 defenders have been killed with less than 10% of those responsible brought to justice. The Extinction Rebellion (XR) has worked to bring attention to the situation of land defenders and have honoured those who have been killed and the work of land defenders has been linked to climate justice initiatives such as Climate Strike Canada.

Land defenders who have been killed

  • Berta Isabel Cáceres Flores (4 March 1971 – 2 March 2016) Honduran environmental activist, indigenous leader
  • Paulo Paulino Guajajara, Brazil, killed in 2019 an ambush by illegal loggers the Amazon region.
  • Chico Mendes, Brazil, Environmentalist and activist.
  • Hernán Bedoya, Afro-Colombian land rights activist.
  • Julián Carrillo, indigenous Rarámuri leader, Mexico, killed 24 October 2018.
  • Datu Kaylo Bontolan, Manobo tribal chieftain, member of the National Council of Leaders of Katribu, Northern Mindanao, Philippines, killed 7 April 2019.
  • Omar Guasiruma, Indigenous leader, Colombia, killed March 2020.
  • Ernesto Guasiruma, Indigenous leader, Colombia, killed March 2020.
  • Simón Pedro Pérez, Indigenous leader, killed July 6, 2021, Chiapas, Mexico.
  • Javiera Rojas, Chilean environmentalist and activist, found dead in November 2021.
  • Tortuguita, US environmental activist killed on January 18, 2023 by a Georgia State Patrol trooper in the Atlanta forest.

Politics of Europe

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ...