Patheos

BuddhistCatholicContemplativeEvangelicalGeneral ChristianHinduJewishLatter-day SaintMuslimNew VisionsProgressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Patheos

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos Patheos on Facebook Patheos on YouTube

On Scripture - The Bible

Mark 1:4 – 11: Does Baptism Make for Better Presidents?

Last updated on: May 15, 2012 at 8:00 pm   by Odyssey Networks

Mark 1:4 – 11: Does Baptism Make for Better Presidents? 2012-05-15T20:00:17+00:00 Odyssey Networks

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

By Andy Watts

Christians seem to have a genetic disposition for describing people and events through a biblical lens. It makes sense. We are story-formed people, and the Bible shapes our political, moral and social imaginations.

It follows, then, that our judgments about Presidents and presidential candidates will also arise from our Bible-shaped imaginations.

For example, at the 2008 Republican National Convention, former Washington Redskins coach Joe Gibbs spoke of John McCain and Sarah Palin as if they were a modern-day Amos and Hosea. Some Christians have likened George Bush to the “man of God” of Chronicles and Kings. Others have heralded John Ashcroft as “Daniel of the Year.” Barack Obama has been declared both the “antichrist” and the “Messiah.” And Christians have compared Newt Gingrich to King David for his marital problems as well as his extraordinary gifts.

Like it or not, faith is a vibrant tableau against which we evaluate our candidates. Some of them have been comfortable with this fact, others not so much. John Kerry’s reticence to discuss faith until the eleventh hour in 2004, and McCain’s insufficient attention to faith values in the eyes of many evangelicals in 2008, were in part blamed for their defeats. Yet Barack Obama was able to confidently answer Rick Warren in 2008 with the statement, “I can maybe carry out in some small way what [God] intends.”

Evangelical Christianity, in particular, has in the past decades embraced the once forbidden relationship between faith and politics. Some Christians dislike the situation. Others welcome it.

A recent CNN article written before the Iowa Caucus addressed this issue in light of the 2012 election. It gave math as one of the reasons candidates are speaking so publicly about the importance of faith values in their campaigns. Conservative Christians form the majority of caucus-goers in Iowa and have been the most consistent voter block in recent elections. Candidates cannot ignore their concerns.

Yet, the public articulation of faith beliefs by candidates is not simply political posturing, the article suggests. Candidates framed their presidential aspirations using religious language in Iowa for deeper reasons.

The DesMoines Register asked the Republican candidates before the caucus, “How would your faith inform your decision-making as president?” Their answers indicated, across the board (except for Ron Paul), that they connected faithfulness to governance. Rick Santorum explained the connection philosophically. “If your faith is true and your reason is right — the ultimate decision will be explainable and good for the nation.”

Santorum’s confident view of the faith’s role in governance is similar to those voiced by past and present Christian politicians, most notably, Jimmy Carter. In his 1976 campaign he said, “I try to use my religious beliefs as a constant guide in making my decisions as a private or public citizen.” Bill Clinton put this view to practice when explaining his support for a V-Chip in televisions in the 1996 campaign. Using scriptural reasoning, he said, “There are hundreds of admonitions in the Bible to take care of the children…if that was true for Jesus, surely that must be true of America.” Yet, coupling right reason and true faith outside the reach of democratic deliberation may be politically unsatisfactory to many non-Christians and Christians alike.

Many Christian traditions view the possession of faith as a sign of rebirth, the kind of change that represents new life. This is orthodox doctrine received from the Apostle Paul himself, who describes the new creation of the believer through a water-and-spirit baptism. He says it washes away sins and in doing so imparts righteousness (I Cor. 6.11).

Following generations of Christians would easily equate their baptisms with the knowledge of God’s will. While this is not an erroneous belief, it does have its limits. And in situations like presidential nominations, the claims of faith must sit with the overall needs of public service.

The story of the baptism of Jesus found in Mark 1 is usually read by the church before Christmas or Epiphany. It asks us to prepare ourselves for the Lord’s coming. In this story, baptism functions neither as a cleansing of sin nor as the acquisition of knowledge of divine things. If it were, then Jesus would have no need of it. The gospel of Matthew recognizes this problem and recounts Jesus’ explanation to John about the meaning of his baptism.

The New Interpreters Bible commentary describes John’s baptism in water as a preparation for the one to come. It is an invitation to be God’s people once again, to follow Jesus into that perfect relationship with God in the eschaton. Rather than imparting right reason, it gives us the trust to find reason in the right place.

Why, then, was Jesus baptized?

In Mark the answer appears to be that he too was to be prepared for the coming forgiveness. In the water, however, he learned that he was that forgiveness, the Beloved. That day he learned it as he emerged from a crowd, and he continued to learn it as he ministered to the crowds. Although he might not have seen himself as divine, as Marcus Borg says, he began to see it as his task to embody the kingdom of God, as N.T. Wright says.

I find it comforting that candidates describe their political aspirations in the language of faith. They reveal a sense of call, one discovered through a deep faith in God, and the Creator. This view of vocation resonates with many Christian traditions and teachings.

However, we encounter story after story in the New Testament that describes the knowledge of God’s reign as a communal thing. It is acquired in humility and through relationships. It is acquired in practices of reconciliation, justice and peace.

Should we—and much less our political leaders—really claim to be aligned with God’s will when not even the faith of baptism guarantees such a knowledge?


Learn more about the ON Scripture Editorial Board Click here

Learn more about ON Scripture Click here

Like ON Scripture Click here

Follow ON Scripture Click here

ON Scripture is possible by a generous grant from the Lilly Endowment

On Scripture

Andy Watts

Baptism

Gospel of Matthew

Jesus

John the Baptizer

Political Campaign in 2012

Politics

President Obama

Previous Post



January 3, 2012

Luke 2:22-40 - How Are We Caring for Our Children Today?

Next Post



January 12, 2012 1 Samuel 3:1-20: Prayerful Listening, Prophetic Proclaiming


Browse Our Archives

Select a Category On Scripture Uncategorized

Select a Month April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011




TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

What did God tell Isaiah to do for three years as a sign against Egypt and Cush?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Drink only water Eat bread only Walk barefoot and naked Sleep outside

Related posts from On Scripture - The Bible

Progressive Christian

Wounded Resurrection: The Body of Christ for the...

On Scripture - The Bible

Progressive Christian

Only women should speak on Easter Sundays! (John...

On Scripture - The Bible

Progressive Christian

Christianity’s First Hate Crime (Isaiah 50:4-9, Philippians 2:5-11...

On Scripture - The Bible

Progressive Christian

When Trauma Victims Teach Us About Hope (John...

On Scripture - The Bible

TRENDING AT PATHEOS Progressive Christian

Prayer for the Earth, to the Earth

What if we asked the Earth to pray for us? This lyrical...

An Insightful Look at Age-Gap Relationships in Scripture

If you've paid any attention to social media over the past 20...

Was God Silent for 400 Years, or Just...

God’s Global Footprints Across the Ages: How the Creator Has Always Been on...

Brandy Anderson, Team Weird, and Transcending Church

I met author Brandy Anderson on Heretic Happy Hour, when podcaster Keith...

Why Christians Have a Sacred Duty to Vote:...

The Bible offers strong support for the sacred duty to vote. Here...

What Being a Modern-Day Apostle Means to Me

In my last column, I discussed the ins and outs of modern-day...

view all Progressive Christian blogs

Patheos on Facebook Patheos on YouTube

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Copyright 2008-2026, Patheos. All rights reserved.

Subscription Support Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In

Follow Patheos Patheos on Facebook Patheos on YouTube