A House For All People

Introduction: Nationalism and the Christian Identity

As we enter our study of today’s topic, I cannot but help to warn you of the extensive background I will share before engaging in the passage we have just read. The responsibility of building a bridge between the ancient audience and ourselves is a tremendous task, which has not always been treated fairly when discussing this passage. Though there is an obvious parallel between the ancient world and our own, there is a very subtle suggestion of theological and eschatological importance, which is unseen due to the blinders we all wear.

Today, I want to talk about God’s desire to be with us and the things in our society that prevents us from experience divine communion with God.

The challenge of being a Christian in a diverse and patriotic society is great. Many are not able to discern the difference between patriotism, ethnic pride, and nationalism. The unction to bask in our own identity often trumps the responsibility to represent Christ.

The problem we often discover with the supercharged focus in ethnic/racial pride and patriotism prevents one’s opportunity of being conformed into the image of God, which immediately gives way to some form of nationalism. (Romans 8:29). The excessive emphasis on our own identity negates the reality that Jesus is the expression of what all men should be, which does not, by the way, include any attention to his skin color, ethnicity, dialect, tone of voice, style of music, or political affiliation. To look at Jesus and designate any of these distinctions or any other similar component, would be to misunderstand what Jesus expressed.

Though many have desired to place Jesus in some ethnic box; religious box; national box; patriotic box, Jesus claimed none of these. He actually did something no one, at the time, would have wanted him to do. He created a box and welcomed all others, not to leave their box, but bring their box with them. This is where things get quite difficult to manage.

We all have assumed that being a Christian is about abandoning our cultural, ethnic, and national identities to pick up some other—whether one deeply rooted in Jesus or some relevant identity of the time. Yet, the Christian story is about how God invites people from all backgrounds, individuals from diverse experiences, to take their rightful place in the family of God.

Some will say, “Well, what about the values that are attached to certain cultures and ethnicities.” To this I would caution one from implying that some races, nations, and cultures are exempt from sin on the basis of their race, nation, and culture. If any positive distinction in cultural, ethnic, and racial values exists, it is on the basis of the work of Christ and not the nation, culture, and race itself (1 Cor 6:11, Romans 1).

Our task, then, becomes recognizing that there’s some good in all people, nations, and races, because we are ALL made in the image of God. And what might be found in an ethnic, racial, or national group that is pessimistic is not divinely inherited, but rather naturally obtained by those who have not learned Christ (Ephesians 4:17-32).

The challenge, then, for the believer is not to present a redefined Christ, but to present Christ as He expressed himself.

There are two nationalist groups in America that prevents Christ’s expression of Himself: 1) Black or “African-American” nationalism and 2) American nationalism.

Two Nationalist Groups in America

Before we engage in this observation of two groups, we must say that there is a difference between American patriotism and American nationalism; black pride and black nationalism. The major difference between these groups is the will to be separate—so separate that we are unreconcilable. Each group poses a different threat to the Christian idea of kingdom and universal harmony. A thorough reading of the Bible will reveal that it is possible to abide as a holy, righteous, and diverse community under God.

American Nationalism

American nationalism is unlike other forms of nationalism, because the basis of this nationalism exists to combat other nations, rather than other ethnicities or people groups. Thus, this form of nationalism is all-encompassing, including religion, ethnicity, race, and social status.

Matthew McCullough explains that Christian nationalism is an understanding of American identity and significance held by Christians wherein the nation is a central actor in the world-historical purpose of the Christian God. It is the belief that God has divinely appointed America to play a significant role, that is not appointed to any other, in the overall plan of God.

Thomas Kidd explains, the justification of this idea is found in the previous conflict between America and the Soviet Union that established the idea that other societies are motivated by evil forces and ideologies, which must be stopped by American efforts, because of the God-given responsibility obtained. Therefore, America becomes the new Israel, in a sense—fighting for justice and godliness among an abundance of nations that have no consciousness of its Creator.

The problem here is one of theological aptitude and historical accuracy. Theologically speaking, nothing implies that God is concerned with using America as a new Israel. In fact, the biblical narrative condemns such a view. Historically, American nationalism was birthed out of conflict with France and Spain and in its more modern form, adopted from the times of the Cold War.

You see, nationalism exploits a very good thing. Nationalism is very selfish, self-centered and self-serving.

African-American/ Black Nationalism

Indeed, this expression of nationalism should be second, because it is, in many respects, a response to the previously mentioned form of nationalism.

It is important that I state, I am not against black pride. I think the color black is the most distinguished and eloquent colors of all. It bears a statement of many expressions—one of sadness and grief; power and authority; grace and eloquence.

However, many of the ideas within the Christian black nationalist group contradicts the principles of the gospel and biblical message. The circumstances of this current time has made these sort of discrepancies permissible since the hostility against African-Americans is indeed hard to bear; the injustices unprecedented. Many resort to a less biblically-sound solution, supposing that no other model exists. True Bible students cannot agree with this sort of nationalism even with the intent of bringing freedom to those who are oppressed and targeted. There is a better and more biblical model, which grants godly liberation. Sadly, many Christians have accepted a separatist ideology that has no basis in biblical examples or sound theology, but rather in black nationalist movements of more recent history.

We’ve all heard of Dr. Martin Luther King. However, perhaps, we have not recognized his very obvious conflict with black nationalist groups that promoted separation over reconciliation. Dr. King recognized this tension, describing it as the “hatred and despair of the black nationalist.”

Dr. King recognized the ideas of Martin Delany and Marcus Garvey, who insisted blacks return back to Africa to settle and assist Africans rebuild the nation, along with the ideas popularized by Farrad Muhammad, Elijah Muhammad, and Malcolm X countered the Judeo-Christian worldview that envisioned all people from various backgrounds coming together in the name of the Christian God to serve each other and the purposes of God.

The problem with these groups is that they have lost their hope in a God to create something new—something fresh and perfect enough to form a more harmonious society in another besides oneself—Jesus Christ. Let us not lose hope in this fight towards creational wholeness. God is able to restore and reconstitute His creation, even matters of racial inequality.

Israel’s Nationalism

Israel existed, in many ways, as a nationalist group. Priding herself on our national identity, while ignoring her divine purpose for national existence. Since every human was created to exist in the image of God and not the image of their nation, Israel violated her covenant responsibility to be a light in dark places.

The story of the cursed fig tree and the cleansing of the temple is not as simple to address the exchange of goods in a holy place alone. Rather, it is a story about how Jesus addresses the inequality and lack of justice within a place that is supposed to be a representation of the heavenly home of God. Instead, it is a place of injustice and oppression.

Understanding Mark 11:12-18

Baerbel Eccardt’s commitment to ministries of reconciliation and peace date from her childhood in Nazi Germany. Her father was a respected judge, although he was not a member of the Nazi party. He decided not to join the Confessing Church movement, as Baerbel and her mother had done, in the hope that he could use his position to provide some measure of protection for people who were at risk under Hitler’s regime. Baerbel’s disabled brother and sister were among many people who lived precariously in a nation committed to producing a pure race.

During the Cold War Baerbel was one of the principle figures in a ministry called the Berlin Fellowship. Based in First Presbyterian Church of Hollywood, the Berlin Fellowship sustained channels of hope and reconciliation between churches in America and churches behind the Iron Curtain. As much as she loved Americans, Baerbel often found it uncomfortable to worship in American churches. Once upon entering a church in southern California she noticed an American flag displayed prominently on the dais, not far from the pulpit. Baerbel stopped for a moment before whispering, “Is this a church for me, too?”

It is interesting that this quote references the Cold War—a time when American nationalism would have been at its highest.

This story explains a lot about the state in which American Christianity existed during the Cold War. Ironically, nationalism heightens during periods of war.

The problem here is that nationalism of any kind prevents others of the justice and equity they need to see Christ.

For Jesus, this was not a fight over land or material goods. This was a fight over the fact that the temple, as it stood, prevented people from coming into the family of God while it was supposed to exist as a light.

A closer examination of Mark 11:12-18 will show us that there are two Old Testament passages in Jesus’s mind and he expresses his dissatisfaction through the cursing of a fig tree.

The Fig Tree (Mark 11:12-14)

This parable is given to reveal a more relevant message. The message is concerning the temple of Jerusalem. It is deeply rooted in prophecies given by Jeremiah.

Mark’s gospel seems to give little information. However, this is the case, because the hearers of this parable would have been aware of the stories that Jesus borrowed from.

In this parable, Jesus looks at a fig tree, which was a very common tree during this time, and sees that it is full of leaves. However, after recognizing that there were no figs, he cursed it.

The interesting thing is that vs. 13 states that there were no fruit, because it was not the season for bearing fruit. The question is, if it was not the season for bearing fruit, why would Jesus curse the tree.

Jesus is telling a story about a tree that is able to produce leafs, but not able to produce fruit. (Ref. Jeremiah 8:13, 24) The idea is that if the tree can produce leafs out of season, it should be able to produce fruit. Furthermore, Jesus is providing a picture of what the temple looks like. It is like a tree that produces leafs, but not fruit.

Clearing the Temple

Again, Jesus, the Master Teacher, gives us a loaded lesson. The untrained eye cannot see what Jesus is communicating. To perceive the weight of His teaching requires knowledge of the Old Testament Scriptures, which are used to build upon and produce a valuable lesson about the purpose of the temple. This time, Jesus uses the words of two prophets: Isaiah and Jeremiah.

After seeing how individuals used the temple for buying and selling, Jesus began overturning tables while running the violators out of the temple. He says two unique things. First, quoting Isaiah 56:7, “My house will be called a house of prayer for all nations...”

If we read Isaiah 56, we find that Isaiah’s prophecy is concerning a matter of justice. There are two groups that are deprived and withheld from engaging in the liberties of the people of God—the eunuchs and the foreigner. These individuals were hopeless and God promises to bring them in, because they love and obey God. God promises to bring them, because the temple was made for the purpose of receiving prayer from all nations.

The other reference is to Jeremiah 7:11, which references the house of God being turned into “a den of thieves.” In this prophecy, Jeremiah pronounces the judgment of destruction, leaving Jesus’s audience to understand that the destruction of the temple of Jerusalem is at hand.

What do we learn from these verses? God measures the people of God by their production and not their leafs. The fruit that we produce will create a house for all people, executing justice and equality for the disregarded and ignored.

What Kind of House Are We Creating?

As we have committed to planting this church, the question is “What kind of house are we building?” Are we building a house for ourselves or are we building a house for all people. Are we trees with leaves and no fruit, or are we striving to bear fruit that will welcome all into the family of God?

Exhortation: God Made A House For You

God blesses us with His presence and welcomes us in places we were once prohibited from entering.