When did Christianity shift into its current political form?

[blugbox]

This is my first thread, so I'm sorry if it is jumbled and unorganized. It just popped into my head recently and I'd like to hear other's thoughts on it.

As Americans, we live by certain base principles and laws, and we are given certain basic rights as humans and American citizens. If you choose to become a Chirstian, you are agreeing to follow additional rules and laws. Chirstianity has its own defined set of principles and laws in addition to the laws and principles of America. Living the life of a good Christian is supposed to be a sacrifice and a personal rejection of the "overly lax" laws we currently have. That's all fine and dandy.

Many Chistians look at secular America and say "Hey! that's not fair! They get to do such and such but I can't!" This is also part of the sacrifice of living a Christian life. This issue that is arising now and is very concerning to me, is that we have Christians in positions of political power who think "If I can't do this or that, nobody can." They are unwilling to live with their additional laws and principles, yet seek to make everyone follow these more stringent guidelines, because they still have to make it so God is never wrong or not the supreme being...When did they get so concerned with the way everyone else lives? Why does it even matter to them? Does it affect their own personal salvation for some inexplicable reason? Why do they even concern themselves with anybody else's personal journey? Why must they feel they need to push their personal beleifs onto the entire counrty? Why must they force everyone else to play by their additional rules?

I know I have not articulated this in the way my mind sees it, but hopefully my point has come across nonetheless. Thanks for your time everyone!

[H2O Man]

1. Oh, hundreds of years ago.

The self-righteous, aggressive branch raises its head in cycles. This is merely the latest.

[Effete Snob]

2. 381 CE

Christianity is a lot older than democracy.

[rurallib]

9. I'd say from day1, but 381 is also a good marking point

That's when church & state became one as I recall.

[Celerity]

10. not is it is not, democracy is older

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy#Origins

The term democracy first appeared in ancient Greek political and philosophical thought in the city-state of Athens during classical antiquity. The word comes from dêmos '(common) people' and krátos 'force/might'. Under Cleisthenes, what is generally held as the first example of a type of democracy in 508–507 BC was established in Athens. Cleisthenes is referred to as "the father of Athenian democracy". The first attested use of the word democracy is found in prose works of the 430s BC, such as Herodotus' Histories, but its usage was older by several decades, as two Athenians born in the 470s were named Democrates, a new political name—likely in support of democracy—given at a time of debates over constitutional issues in Athens. Aeschylus also strongly alludes to the word in his play The Suppliants, staged in c.463 BC, where he mentions "the demos’s ruling hand" [demou kratousa cheir]. Before that time, the word used to define the new political system of Cleisthenes was probably isonomia, meaning political equality.

Athenian democracy took the form of a direct democracy, and it had two distinguishing features: the random selection of ordinary citizens to fill the few existing government administrative and judicial offices, and a legislative assembly consisting of all Athenian citizens. All eligible citizens were allowed to speak and vote in the assembly, which set the laws of the city state. However, Athenian citizenship excluded women, slaves, foreigners (?έ?????? / métoikoi), and youths below the age of military service. Effectively, only 1 in 4 residents in Athens qualified as citizens. Owning land was not a requirement for citizenship. The exclusion of large parts of the population from the citizen body is closely related to the ancient understanding of citizenship. In most of antiquity the benefit of citizenship was tied to the obligation to fight war campaigns.

Athenian democracy was not only direct in the sense that decisions were made by the assembled people, but also the most direct in the sense that the people through the assembly, boule and courts of law controlled the entire political process and a large proportion of citizens were involved constantly in the public business. Even though the rights of the individual were not secured by the Athenian constitution in the modern sense (the ancient Greeks had no word for "rights" ), those who were citizens of Athens enjoyed their liberties not in opposition to the government but by living in a city that was not subject to another power and by not being subjects themselves to the rule of another person.

Range voting appeared in Sparta as early as 700 BC. The Spartan ecclesia was an assembly of the people, held once a month, in which every male citizen of at least 20 years of age could participate. In the assembly, Spartans elected leaders and cast votes by range voting and shouting (the vote is then decided on how loudly the crowd shouts). Aristotle called this "childish", as compared with the stone voting ballots used by the Athenian citizenry. Sparta adopted it because of its simplicity, and to prevent any biased voting, buying, or cheating that was predominant in the early democratic elections.

snip

[Sibelius Fan]

12. This

[Effete Snob]

13. You know what "BC" means?

Christians were not present in any of those states.

Democracy was foreign to any Christian experience for most of its existence.

If you have an example of a democracy in which Christianity was a significant presence between the death of Christ and the formation of the US - ie most of Christian history, name it.

Christianity has spent most of its history propping up authoritarian regimes.

Christianity does not require democracy, and the First Amendment is not compatible with the First Commandment.

[Celerity]

16. Non sequitur. You claimed:

Christianity is a lot older than democracy.

That claim is false, EOS, as I just showed.

The rest of your positings do nothing to correct and/or support that false claim.

You know what "BC" means?

Condescend much?

[Effete Snob]

18. The subject of this thread is:

“ When did Christianity shift into its current political form?”

Christianity has been present in “Christian countries” longer than democracy has been present in any of those countries.

Yes, I am certain that there were Stone Age tribes that voted on stuff.

That is completely irrelevant to the topic at hand - I.e. the historical political stance of Christianity.

The presence of Christians in democratic countries is a recent historical development.

Observations about Ancient Greece, Stone Age tribes, or matriarchical tribes in the Pacific, likewise have no bearing on the historical political context of Christianity. The reality is that Christianity has long been the handmaiden of authoritarian systems.

[Celerity]

21. The subject of the thread is not germane to me countering your false claim. You made a simple claim:

You made no limiting or qualifying positings along with it, so I replied to said claim as it stood.

That claim is false, as I showed with documentation backing up my rebuttal.

You are now, ex post facto, trying to add in multiple limiting factors, rationales, and narratives that were not present at all in your initial reply, the reply that I responded to.

[Effete Snob]

22. Wow

Do you have something to contribute to the topic defined by the OP, or are you just going to obsess over a incompletely qualified hasty sentence intended to point out that democracy is not a traditional environment for Christianity?

Perhaps we can make a whole thread about how I wrote an inartful sentence.

Christianity is older than Christians have lived in any democracy.

Happy now?

[Celerity]

29. My happiness (or lack thereof) is of no consequence to an accurate recounting of historical events.

As to the subject of the OP, I find that the 1964 Goldwater implosion was the event out of which came the movements that led to Nixon's Southern Strategy, combined and aided by the rise of modern RW christo-nationalism. These two forces started to see the Republican party as the main (eventually the only viable one) vehicle to achieve their ends. This was cemented after the RW christian leaders coalesced against Carter in the late 1970's. Reaganism forged it all together into its present, destructive, cancerous form.

As an aside:

Long before that, the first example of the American Christian Right that I could find was:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_right#History

In 1863, representatives from eleven Christian denominations in the United States organized the National Reform Association with the goal of adding a Christian amendment to the U.S. Constitution, in order to establish the country as a Christian state. The National Reform Association is seen as one of the first organizations of the Christian right, through which adherents from several Christian denominations worked together to try to enshrine Christianity in American politics.

National Reform Association (chartered 1864)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Reform_Association

The National Reform Association (NRA), formerly known as the National Association to Secure the Religious Amendment of the United States Constitution, is an organization that seeks to introduce a Christian amendment to the U.S. Constitution in order to make the United States a Christian state. Founded in 1864, the National Reform Association included representatives from eleven Christian denominations as well as the official support of a number of Churches. It publishes a magazine called The Christian Statesman.

[Voltaire2]

37. Yup.

Well stated and accurate.

[Deep State Witch]

38. A lot earlier than that

Pretty much from Christianity's inception. A good book to read is "God Against The Gods", which details the struggles between monotheism and polytheism.
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/90866.God_Against_the_Gods

[RockRaven]

3. The pushy political aspects of evangelical and fundie Xians arose in response to the

Civil Rights movement of the 50s and 60s, and the Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act. Its roots are in a backlash to desegregation, etc.

*for clarity, there have always been people who push their crap on others. I'm saying today's flavor has these more proximal roots.

[Raven123]

4. When the courts decided separation of church and state meant something different...

..than the founding fathers believed. Funneling money to Christian organizations crossed a big red line.

[Elessar Zappa]

5. It seems to me that it happened

with the rise of Ronald Reagan.

[sl8]

11. I agree. Reagan's religous right. nt

[czarjak]

6. Blacks. Jews. Catholics. The Klan's foundational enemies.

[gay texan]

7. Right around the time of Reagan

He was a master at the dog whistle.

[Gaugamela]

8. Christianity, since the 2nd century, has always been a patriarchal hierarchy,

and as such has always been political. The reason the Romans persecuted the early Christians wasn’t because they were religiously intolerant, it was because they found Christianity a threat to their political order.

Religion seeks to impose itself on the wider population because it benefits the established religious hierarchy. Of course, those within the religion see it as divine truth, and that they are called upon to spread that truth. As the sociologist Gregory Bateson once said, any self-sustaining system looks perfectly reasonable from the inside. Thus capitalism, the fossil fuel regimen, the MIC, and Christianity.

If you’re asking about the current wave of right wing Christian activism, it started in the 70s within the Southern Baptist Convention, which then aligned with right wing political types in DC and various right wing donors. I would recommend a book called The Shadow Network, by Anne Nelson, or look up a talk by her on YouTube. It tells the whole gruesome story, and it’s frightening how determined and organized they are.

[Effete Snob]

19. Bingo

[betsuni]

14. Televangelists became popular in the seventies and grew into a very profitable industry.

Republicans saw a great opportunity for a large gullible base and made religion political.

[Kaleva]

15. Are you talking about Americans who are Christians or Christians worldwide?

And if you are referring to Americans, are you talking about all Christians in this country or just certain denominations?

[LAS14]

25. Thank you. nt

[cally]

17. Highly recommend book Jesus and John Wayne

She is a professor who traces evangelical beliefs. Also, she discusses her findings in a the holy post pod casts.

[milestogo]

20. Karl Rove played a big role in politicizing it to get Christian votes.

Started with Poppy and was in full bloom for Dubya.

[lpbk2713]

23. Billy Graham was one of the first multi-media evangelists.

He started out in the late 1940's. Presidents and lesser politicians all wanted a photo op with Graham.
He paid numerous visits to the White House under several administrations.

[LAS14]

24. Christianity didn't shift. A bunch of people co-opted the term. nt

[honest.abe]

31. +1

[Karadeniz]

26. Christianity should have two levels of understanding according to the gospels and Paul. In Paul's

time, we see how he started at one level for the beginners (infants) and tried to get them to spiritually grow up to digest his meat food and learn the mysteries. But Paul was supervised by James and the Jerusalem group. Unfortunately, James was killed and Jerusalem gutted by the Romans, so management was lost. The remaining congregations were each at different levels of understanding.

Paul doesn't mention much of an earthly life of Jesus, but the Jesus biography must have been at least somewhat developed by then because in many groups, especially in the West, that was basically all they knew. Still, even in those groups, belief in Jesus had to be demonstrated by living Jesus's instructions. Those groups were regarded as kind, honest, generous.

Predictably, groups in the East, having had more influence from Jerusalem from the beginning, were more at the level 2/mystery level. They believed in karma, reincarnation, a god system and the soul's place in it. These are the teachings hidden in the parables whose purpose, Jesus said, was to prevent his pearls of wisdom from being trampled by swine. These were the Gnostics, those with knowledge, as in "You will know the truth..." The Gnostics hung around Jerusalem for centuries. Probably a vestige of them were known as Docets, I think, but Gnostics extended widely over the East.

The different understandings created friction between groups, even violence. Constantine disapproved and desired a set of beliefs that everyone could agree on. Result, the Nicaean Creed, focus on Jesus and obviously not on teachings that were not for public dissemination.

Different emperors contributed to making Christianity more and more social, physical. You had to be a member to hold govt jobs. Tax help.

I would say the nail in the coffin was the empire's move to Rome. The popes became more and more materialistic. Private armies. Political designs. Francis of Assissi being an embarrassing symbol of others' materialism. Keeping the Bible in Latin (that translator, Jerome, became a Gnostic!). The Inquisition... not even pagans were that godawful. Making hatred to and the marginalization of Jews the law.It never got better because Church didn't stand up to unchristian behavior. Slavery. Native American genocide.

You can say that Jesus saves, so faith in that is all one needs to be a Christian. Or one can say that Jesus saves by teaching us how to save ourselves. Following the instructions is all that's needed, but it does help to know the hidden teachings because it's easier to do or be something if you know why.

Welcome to DU!!!!!

[lees1975]

27. A combination of a few things,

The development of the modern "end times" movement, a futurist perspective of the book of Revelation known as Premillenial Dispensationalism, in which the roots of white, Christian nationalism can be found. The development of the religious right used by Reagan to counter Jimmy Carter's genuine Christian faith. Rush Limbaugh and other wannabees with their two-class society and their undermining of democracy.

[Fiendish Thingy]

28. Jerry Falwell, Moral Majority, 1979-80 nt

[msongs]

30. christians have been extremists since the first non believer was killed in Jesus' name nt

[Xolodno]

32. As others said, 381 CE

At the start of this nation, the founding fathers saw how corrupt and dangerous it was to include religion with government. So they purposely kept it separated. And it was affirmed as a wise move when the French Revolution occurred.

But then the Russian Revolution occurred and at first proved church and state should not mix. But then the communists took over and created an atheist nation. The some religions pounced on this along with the Red Scare to give religion more clout in government in the 1920's. After that, faith was considered important for a politician. And then you have television and the rise of mega churches and mega pastors. And the growth of the evangelical movement in the 1970's. And they have been pushing to get religion back in government ever since. Even Michael Flynn has advocated religion back into government, but wants the main stream protestant faiths united. Should that ever occur, its my que to leave the nation, because what will happen next won't be good.

[UTUSN]

33. After the first "catholics" learned, from being persecuted, how to do the persecution.

[GoodRaisin]

34. Seems to me the political christians are the christians that

don’t follow their own guidelines.

[JI7]

35. Christianity has always been Political and many of them have always been horrible people

It's only recently in places like Western Europe where it's less political and that's mostly because people are "cultural christians" and for them separation of church and state is more important . And religious christianity is a private matter mostly where people should not use it to make laws . And for many it's just about holiday parties and decorations .

[Mariana]

36. When you're talking about Christianity or Christians

you really need to be clear about which specific flavors of Christianity you're talking about. There are literally thousands of different denominations of Christianity, plus countless "nondenominational" and "independent" churches, plus who knows how many individual practitioners, each with their own unique interpretations. Their beliefs, practices, principles and values vary wildly.

You may believe that "living the life of a good Christian is supposed to be a sacrifice and a personal rejection of the overly lax laws we currently have" but obviously, millions of Christians disagree with you. The history of Christianity shows us that when Christians have the political power to force their religion on others, they usually do exactly that.