“Having explored Phil 2:6-11 [Paul's 'master story'] in some depth, … we may now paraphrase Ernst Käsemann, who said that the cross was the signature of the Risen One, and assert that the cross is the signature of the Eternal One. Any other understandings of God are henceforth rendered either incomplete or obsolete or idolatrous.
“…. God is not a god of power and weakness but the God of power in weakness… Thus if the cross is theophanic, God must be understood as essentially cruciform….
“In the light of this first theological conclusion, we must affirm that the ‘normal’ ‘civil’ god of power and might is an idol, and it must be named as such. This god is not the Lord God revealed in Jesus Christ and narrated in the theopolitics of Phil 2:6-11. The ‘normal’ god of civil religion combines patriotism and power; this is the god of many American leaders and of many Americans generally. (This god has, of course, had many other incarnations in human history.) Most especially idolatrous … is the image of God (and/or Christ) as military power incarnate, whether in the crusades or in Iraq or at Armageddon. As the Spanish historian-theologian Jaume Botley Vallès said about the political theology that underwrote the U.S. response to 9/11, including the invasion and occupation of Iraq, the god of George W. Bush (and, we might add, of many other presidents, prime ministers, and kings) is a god of military might. That simply is not the God revealed by Jesus, Vallès rightly says. Neither is it the cruciform God of Paul. In other words, military power is not the power of the cross, and such misconstrued notions of divine power have nothing to do with the majesty or holiness of the triune God known in the weakness of the cross. The ‘civil’ god, though perfectly ‘normal,’ is not only unholy; it is an idol.”
Michael J. Gorman, Inhabiting the Crucifrom God: Kenosis, Justification, and Theosis in Paul’s Narrative Soteriology (Grand Rapids, Michigan / Cambridge, U.K.: William B. Eerdmans, 2009), pp. 32-35.
{ 5 comments… read them below or add one }
DH 05.22.09 at 4:38 pm
Kim, when God told the Israelities to destroy the pagan Amorities, if we understand that Christ has always been in existence, then wouldn’t that be the “God of Power and Might” that is the Bible and in fact NOT (not yelling) the “idol” that is so quickly projected?
I don’t believe that there was a “God of military might” in the response to 9/11. I do believe God used the US to eliminate a terrible regime but I’m not concluding like you are that there was a “theology” behind going into Iraq.
Like the worship song says “Holy Holy Holy Lord. God of power and might. Heaven and earth are filled with your Glory.”
It seems to me that this understanding of God goes against Scripture. Jesus was and is made perfect in weakness but we must not forget that Jesus has always been and is God. He was around being God during the time the Father told the ites to destroy the Amorites. With Jesus being God we can conclude that He also said this to the Israelities. Also, Jesus has always been consistent and never changing. So to project that Jesus was “overly weak” like the author says is “idolatry” as well.
I agree that one can, not to the extent KIm or the author say, place America as an idol but we mustn’t go in the other extreme and present Jesus as being overly weak when in fact being God He is powerful like Scripture says “Lion of Judah on the throne.” (aka sitteth on the right hand of the Father) as well as being “the Lamb of God who taketh away the sins of the world.”
BruceA 05.23.09 at 4:16 am
DH -
Have you seen these documents? There most certainly was a theology behind going to war in Iraq.
Kim 05.23.09 at 8:03 am
What you don’t get, DH - and it is this theological tin ear of yours that accounts for the window-shattering cacophony of the same old Bible-bashing pseudo-psalms that you are always singing here at Connexions - is that, theologically and existentially, Jesus deconstructus and redefines the very nature of the God of Israel whom he calls Abba. Your god, unlike the God of Jesus, is not cruciform, he’s just a big kick-ass bully whose power is worldly, coercive, ultimately violent power infinitely multiplied. Your god is not only an idol, he is, in fact, the very devil. What a pity.
DH 06.02.09 at 5:29 pm
My God is not an idol or of the devil. The fact remains Jesus has always been during the time of the OT and God the Father was around during the the time of the NT. I have never said or presented God as being “kick-a”, etc., etc. Just because at times God will punish people whose heart is hard toward God to the point of never turning to Him doesn’t mean He doesn’t care about us and truly love us. “Whom He loves He chastens.” God is the perfect balance between Lamb of God and Lion of Judah. Yuo presnet my position as being solely as a “Lion” when in fact that is an extreme overgeneralization that is totally incorrect understanding of my view or God’s view.
DH 06.02.09 at 5:36 pm
Bruce, just because a military leader uses Scripture in a presentation doesn’t mean that they are using a “theological basis” for going to war. The fact remains that the Saddam regime was a terrible regime that no Iraqi should have ever been under and that regime deserved to be eliminated. The people of Iraq deserved to be supported to help them not be under this evil regime. Just because a military leader shows the military praying and uses a Scripture in the presentation does it make a “theology behind the war”. For me I would hope that the American military WOULD pray and that our leaders WOULD look to God for guidance. Better than not doing anything at all. That isn’t “theology”.