Over the past week or so I’ve received a bunch of e-mails like the one above. Sorry guys, but I go right for the delete key. My question is; what’s all the commotion about?
This quasi-religious motto has become such an ‘engraved’ part of our national consciousness that it is almost invisible. I seriously doubt if anyone sits and ponders this little prayer before slipping it into the slot machine. (Perhaps each coin and bill are like the little prayer flags of the Tibbetan Buddhists?) But if you are a believer, why would you want to associate God with ‘filthy lucre’ ? Why would you think that God endorses the money of the U.S.A. any more so than that of imperial Rome’s? Perhaps he even finds the implied association with money lenders to be insulting.
And if you are a crusading atheist – get a life. The I.G.W.T. slogan has been appearing on our coins since the mid 1800’s. Who cares if there are some lingering superstitious trappings attached to the design of our money? I don’t hear anyone on either side of this debate outraged at the inclusion of symbols representing elements of the secret-world-dominating-pagan-cult of the Illuminati. How come it’s only the atheists and Christians who are always upset? Why aren’t the New Agers demanding something like “IN GAIA WE TRUST”? I guess they’re just a bit more relaxed about things. Ommmmmmmmmmmm.
Of course, I could be wrong. Just this past summer one of God’s official prophets had a revelation:
While in a trance on the afternoon of July 26, 2008, Bob (Jones) heard the audible voice of God say “America has forgotten Kate Smith’s song……..God Bless America! They are cursing America more than blessing her with their words. Their words have power. I have not forgotten her; I love her. If they don’t begin to bless America, she will go down!
Huh? I guess we should start thinking of her as Saint Kate, patron saint of stadiums. Puts a new twist on the End Times scenario, though – “It ain’t over ’till the fat lady sings. Hit it Kate!“
What do you think? Is this issue important to you one way or another? Is the U.S.A. somehow special in the eyes of God, so special that he would consider us before the French or the Chinese or the Iranians? Or is it that some of us are really worshiping a made in America idol?
So now you’re throwing our motto down the toilet? What’s next?
By: logiopath on August 22, 2008
at 9:53 pm
Occassionally, a friend sends me emails like this:
“Here’s your chance to let the media know where the people stand on our
faith in God, as a nation. NBC is taking a poll on “In God We Trust” to
stay on our American currency. Please send this to every Christian you
know so they can vote on this important subject. Please do it right
away, before NBC takes this off the web page.
Poll is still open so you can vote.”
Wouldn’t Jews and Muslims want to affirm “In God We Trust”?
By: logiopath on August 22, 2008
at 10:52 pm
This is hardly worth worrying about given all the much more pressing issues this country faces.
To be blunt, if American citizens were willing to tackle the important issues I’d be willing to consider letting these simple-minded twits continue in their ignorance, that of actually believing that this divisive, pointless and altogether meaningless piece of drivel: ‘In God We Trust’ actually belongs on our money and which has been foisted on us as a motto in place of the original, beautiful and much more inclusive motto: E Pluribus Unum
Sore spot with me.
R
By: Robert on August 22, 2008
at 11:48 pm
Really, Rob? Couldn’t tell.
Bruce – what is wrong with you?! Don’t you realize that this country was not founded by Muslims or Jews or Buddhists or Wiccans or other pagans? It was founded by Christians like Tom Jefferson, Ben Franklin and Thomas Paine. Jeesh!
By: Christian Beyer on August 23, 2008
at 11:17 am
You mean men who held ambigous religious views like Unitarians Adams and Jefferson, Agnostic Ben Franklin, Atheist Thomas Paine, Mason George Washington–and drew their ideas from Deists David Hume and John Locke, as well as Atheist Thomas Hobbes.
By: logiopath on August 23, 2008
at 11:24 am
You’re kidding? Next you’ll be saying that Jesus wasn’t Christian.
By: Christian Beyer on August 23, 2008
at 12:29 pm
jesus was jewish my friend
By: robbie on June 30, 2009
at 5:08 am
Hey, Robbie. You probably don’t know me well enough to see that I was being sarcastic here. I was pointing up the fact that many if not most Christians tend to forget that Jesus was a Jew, living among Jews, practicing a Jewish faith and that Christianity was originally a subset of Judaism.
Thanks.
By: Christian Beyer on June 30, 2009
at 8:59 am
Ahh. I almost was pidgeon holed in an argument like this. A dramatization and fact-changed example of a real conversation.
My dad, who is Jewish, asked the question, “You mean Abraham wasn’t Jewish.” I had to answer of course Abe was a Jew–but . . .
Abraham was a Semite. He was a Hebrew in the sense that he was descended from Heber–and we see the reference to Hebrews in Genesis, in reference to the Joseph refusing to eat with his brothers because they were Hebrews.
As far as being Jews? Abraham’s grandson Judah had yet to be born, so how can we say Abraham was a Jew?
So, by the same token, Jesus was a Jew who was saying a new way would come–what we now call Christians. Historically, He is seen as the founder of Christianity. However, it is more correct to say that distinction goes to Paul. Even more technically speaking, it isn’t until the Council of Nicea that a definition and “creed” is even formed.
Logioannoyancepath
By: logiopath on August 23, 2008
at 3:05 pm
Yep, we forget who Abram really was and the kind of culture he hailed from as well as helped to found. It had little resemblance to what was going on in the 1st century BCE.
“However, it is more correct to say that distinction goes to Paul. Even more technically speaking, it isn’t until the Council of Nicea that a definition and “creed” is even formed.”
Yep. But the even bigger point is Jesus was a Jew which tends to make some people become apoplectic. The argument goes something along the lines that he was ‘born’ into Judaism but came to refute it and replace it with Christianity. But history shows that this early ‘cult’ of Jesus was (at least initially) in all other aspects thoroughly Jewish. Of course once they embraced Jesus as messiah they became apostates (there’s that word again) but he wouldn’t be the last Jew purported to be as such nor would the Xians be the last group of Jewish apostates.
When we ignore the Jewish framework for the Gospels we begin to make all kinds of crazy Christian pronouncements. I don’t think Jesus came to kill off the Hebrew faith but to restore it to righteousness. It was only later the Church expunged the Jewish nature of the faith (although kept that “Old Testament” around as a refutation of its antisemitism.)
By: Christian Beyer on August 23, 2008
at 4:17 pm
apoplectic. Hey Mr. Webster, what does this mean (consulting Webster . . .
let’s see . . . “relating to or causing apoplexy . . . affected with . . . showing symptoms of apoplexy . . .” Apoplexy, “sudden dimunition or loss of consciousness . . .” Wow. So you’re saying modern Christians are apoplexic about the historic situation in the early church.
Actually, having read some of C. H. Dodd’s book “The Fourth Gospel” I argue the context of that book is as Greek as Zorba and Onassis. The book starts out with “The Logos” instead of a recall of Jewish history (as with Matt and Luke) or a purely Jewish teleos, like Matthew and Mark.
In fact, it is plausible to say that with the exception of the first part of Acts, the bulk of the NT is from a Greek context, not Jewish. Look, for example, at Romans chapter 7. Paul’s dilemma is weighing his ethical standards against his behavior–like a Platonic dialectic–he is acting out all of the parts. One can also see the Aristotilian ethic of “The Golden Mean” by Paul’s declaring “let all men know your moderation” and “all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any.”
Even Hebrews, with its declaring Christ to be “the express image” of God
has a Greek tone until getting into the pictures of the heavenly tabernacle and the references to Jesus as High Priest (of course, the Jews had been heavily Helenized, thanks to Ptolemy and his boss Alexander of Macedon).
Enough
By: logiopath on August 23, 2008
at 10:31 pm
Whoops, I should say with the exception of Matt, Mark, Luke, and the first part of Acts, the NT is mostly in a Greek-thinking context.
By: logiopath on August 23, 2008
at 10:32 pm
I agree. But the Greek influences upon the early church doesn’t change the Jewishness of Jesus, his Apostles, the people of the region nor their faith and history. My understanding is that the early church fathers felt it necessary to incorporate some Greek metaphysics into their understanding of scriptures in order to avoid making a false idol out of God. Something that we have not successfully done in the 19th and 20th centuries.
By: Christian Beyer on August 23, 2008
at 11:09 pm
Wow. You are so profound.
By: logiopath on August 23, 2008
at 11:20 pm
Thanks. I once was prolost, now I’m profound.
By: Christian Beyer on August 23, 2008
at 11:24 pm
You should quit the food thing and take up stand-up comedy. What a sensation. Sort of the next (hmm. think of a short comic) Paul Williams?
No. How about Don Adams. No, no–Billy Barty. Hmm.
By: logiopath on August 24, 2008
at 1:45 am
You’re usually amusing yourself, although Paul Williams was a cheesy singer/songwriter, not a comic. I can’t think of anyone that is very funny that resembles you physically, unless I can count Mr. Ed. Or Francis the Talking Mule.
Oh I know….Horton!
By: Christian Beyer on August 24, 2008
at 7:57 am
Hardy, Har-Har. I’ve heard ‘em all, from Fred Flintstone (AKA John Goodman–I always tell them I wish I had his money–Yabba, Dabba, Doo) to Peter Griffin, to Uncle Ted on “Bobby’s World” (when Howie Mandel had hair).
By: logiopath on August 24, 2008
at 10:36 am
Don’t know Uncle Ted. I still think Ludo from the movie Labyrinth is the closest, although you are cuter.
By: Christian Beyer on August 24, 2008
at 10:43 am
Okaaay.
By: logiopath on August 24, 2008
at 2:18 pm
Off the topic of the original post I suppose, but Christian said: “I agree. But the Greek influences upon the early church doesn’t change the Jewishness of Jesus, his Apostles, the people of the region nor their faith and history. My understanding is that the early church fathers felt it necessary to incorporate some Greek metaphysics into their understanding of scriptures in order to avoid making a false idol out of God. Something that we have not successfully done in the 19th and 20th centuries.”
I have been reading through “Getting to Know the Church Fathers: An Evangelical Introduction” by Bryan Litfin — interesting book if you like that kind of stuff — and you see that there were two main “schools” of thought: one based in Alexandria with heavy Greek (Platonic) influence and another in Antioch (where Christians were first called Christians and so forth) with Jewish influence. The Alexandrians tended to focus their exegesis on finding the “Christ” or “divine” in all the scripture and far less concern over the “human” history, while the Antiochians(?) focused primarily on the historical context to the exclusion of the divine.
What emerges around the fifth or sixth century as “orthodox” theology (the Council of Chalcedon) is a doctrine that is a compromise between these two competing views. For example, the Christology that accepts God as fully human and fully divine (fairly standard Christian belief today) comes from bringing together these two opposing views. Cyril of Alexandria is the guy given credit for helping to bring that about.
It actually strikes me that we need something similar today between moderns and post-moderns — an ability to articulate a theology that finds a “middle ground”. Really, that has happened all throughout church history, hasn’t it, with varying degrees of success?
By: Alan on August 25, 2008
at 4:12 pm
Thanks Alan. I’m going to stop by Cokesbury today and see if they have it. Good points.
By: Chris Beyer on August 25, 2008
at 5:19 pm
If not, try Amazon.com. I looked it up there to remember the author’s name.
I find the history interesting and worth getting to know. Their story is our story… the good, the bad, the ugly… and all in between.
I did an article that Precipice magazine published that touched on these ideas.
By: Alan on August 27, 2008
at 10:16 am