Scott Coley Profile picture
Mar 19, 2021 11 tweets 2 min read Read on X
What if America is just like all the other empires? What if America’s power and wealth aren’t a mark of divine favor, but merely a byproduct of empire-building?
And what if, by mistaking the fruits of empire for God’s blessing, Christian nationalists have gotten confused about what sorts of things God favors—confused about the features of our civilization that believers should make an effort to cultivate and amplify into the future?
For example, what if it’s just a very, very bad thing that our government systematically slaughtered and dispossessed indigenous peoples and desecrated their sacred places? What if that’s just all there is to it: no manifest destiny, nothing redeeming about it—just really bad?
And what if it’s just very, very bad that a lot of America’s early wealth issued from labor that was straightforwardly stolen from people who were kidnapped and sold into slavery. What if that’s just evil, full stop?
Read the Exodus account and ask yourself where you fit into the narrative. If you’re a white American evangelical, you’re not among the Israelites—plainly, you’re with the Egyptians. And why think the American empire is any different from that of Egypt, or Babylon, or Rome?
I don’t understand what Christian nationalists are up to, theologically speaking. I just can’t imagine the early Church concerning itself with Rome’s GDP or reputation on the world stage. The greatness of the Roman Empire was perfectly irrelevant to Christ and his followers.
Of course, as an American, I might concern myself with the American economy, national security, etc. But my concern for such things will be tempered by my Christian faith; it certainly won’t be a consequence of my faith.
The notion that Christianity stands in a special relationship to America makes about as much sense as the idea that Jesus took on flesh to make Rome great again—which is to say, it makes no sense at all: it misunderstands what Christianity is about.
So when, as Christians, we see our nation pursue policies that threaten the well-being of orphans and immigrants in our midst, we really don’t have any business asking whether these policies are good for America. That’s not our concern.
Our concern should be for the ones oppressed, regardless of whether that concern is consistent with ephemeral notions of what makes America great.
Christ has no use for the cultural nostalgia of white American churchgoers: Christ simply doesn’t care whether America is great, or ever was or will be.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Scott Coley

Scott Coley Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @scott_m_coley

Mar 28
Within authoritarian ecosystems, men in power often lie about their opponents in a way that desensitizes their audience to some unpalatable truth about themselves. Image
Here Joe implies that David French and Russ Moore hold liberal democratic norms on par with scripture—an obvious falsehood.

True to form, Joe doesn’t state the falsehood explicitly—he merely implies it in a way that any competent language user understands.
(French or Moore might claim that modern liberal democracy is rooted in the Christian intellectual tradition, or that liberal norms can be derived from biblical norms. Not sure exactly what their respective views are here, but:
Read 9 tweets
Feb 4
It’s obvious that “this book isn’t meant to be read” doesn’t imply “I haven’t read this book.”

So obvious that one has to wonder: “How could any literate person draw such an inference?”

I have no idea, so I’ll let you and your friends wrestle with that question.

That said,
The substantive point is not in dispute: you didn’t read the book prior to commenting on it.

Here you speculate about what arguments are likely to be presented in the book (see screenshot—same screenshot from before, with relevant portion circled). Image
So why did I highlight the sentence in which you claim the book isn’t meant to be read?

For the same reason I highlighted the sentence before it (which also doesn’t imply that the author hasn’t read the book): namely, that your unearned confidence is hilarious.
Read 9 tweets
Jan 30
misogyny, white supremacy, and abuse

🧵

Here’s the head of the CBMW promoting an article published in American Reformer. Image
American Reformer is an organization whose leadership has documented financial ties to a notorious white supremacist and pornographer. Image
The article itself asserts that those who advocate against abuse in the church are inappropriately empathic due to the influence of feminism.

(Again, this is the article promoted by the head of the CBMW.) Image
Read 13 tweets
Sep 27, 2023
Hello again, Megan.

I understand they deny that they are white Christian nationalists.

But denying something doesn’t mean it isn’t so.

And then there’s the fact that they go and say stuff like this:
Image
If you say that isn’t white Christian nationalism, the disparity in our understanding of what words mean is most likely such that it’s not worth attempting to converse on this or any subject.
If you concede that it is white Christian nationalism, what am I to believe?

Do I believe Stephen Wolfe when he explicitly, obviously, and undeniably advocates *white* Christian nationalism?

Or do I believe him when he denies that he’s advocating white Christian nationalism?
Read 8 tweets
Sep 26, 2023
What do pro-slavery theologians, creation scientists, and white Christian nationalists have in common?
The hermeneutics of legitimization: an approach to biblical interpretation that consistently produces moral justifications for social practices and institutional arrangements that benefit oneself.
The hermeneutics of legitimization has three defining features:

1. Proof-texting;
2. Motivated literalism;
3. Theological paradigm of authority and submission.
Read 21 tweets
Mar 10, 2023
This is philosophically and theologically illiterate.

Thread:
Either Bathsheba was raped or she committed adultery. There is no gray area. If you say that she wasn’t raped, you are saying that she committed adultery.
It makes no sense to say that she wasn’t raped on the grounds that the text doesn’t explicitly describe a violent rape: that would be tantamount to claiming that she committed adultery, and the text doesn’t say that either.
Read 37 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(