Christian Exodus Project

Actually, when Caesar requires you to actively participate in government, provide your views, and strive for them to be implemented in policy (a pretty good working definition of a constitutional democratic republic) it is a requirement that was not present in Christ's day much as our struggles with cloning are not realistically going to be in the direct text of the Bible or in the life experiences of the Church Fathers. You have to interpret based on new circumstances.

The original "hey, let's all move here" experiment was among liberals moving to Vermont. It worked out so well for them that the Libertarians are moving to New Hampshire and the evangelicals now seem to be moving to S. Carolina.

I simply view it as reinforcing regional differences against the homogenization of national media. I'd like to see a happy middle where we are still one but there's a real difference between Texas and Maine. Variety inside unity is the ticket and as long as we can maintain the unity, this extra bit of variety isn't going to phase me much.

If S. Carolina starts moving up the state rankings, that's the textbook purpose of states as laboratories of innovation. Demonstrating that christian based politics not only gets you to Heaven but are practical for earthly life would not be a retreat from the Great Commission.

TML: If a Christian longs for a more just and loving society -- and who doesn't? -- then the solution is not mass relocation and isolation, but evangelism.

But the Bible doesn't say anything against Christians trying to improve the state of affairs. While I think the Christian Exodus is futile overall, it's not a terribly bad idea.

I see what you're saying about how the Christian Exodus members should stay at home and evangelise and try to change their own neighborhoods before they uproot, but then, aren't they following the same M.O. as missionaries? I assume you aren't against missionaries.

You said:

TML: If a Christian longs for a more just and loving society -- and who doesn't? -- then the solution is not mass relocation and isolation, but evangelism.

Well, missionaries tend to leave home and isolate themselves in a foreign country while evangelising. What's different on an evangelical and theological scale between South Carolina's lost and South Africa's lost?

In the end, the Christian Exodus movement is simply an "outreach" tool to change the state of the government and I would guess that those relocating to SC will be witnessing to non-Christians as well. Therefore, I disagree that the Exodus movement is against the Bible.

When two individuals or groups are in total disagreement, sometimes the only thing you can do is say to each other: "Fine, you think you're right, well so do I. So lets divide. You do things your way and I'll things my way and we'll see who is right in the long run".
This was the mentality of the founding Puritans who built a country on Christian principles in contrast to a corrupted England from which they decided emigration was necessary. I believe that their moral principles and work ethic were intrumental in the resulting greatness of USA. But like England, this country forgot its heritage and Liberals slowly erroded the foundations on which our society was built.

But since Liberals so clearly hate our Christian principles, they should be happy to see Christians moving away.
I think the idea has true potential. My main concern is that it will come across as a revival of the "Pre-Civil War South" and some of its repulsive philosophies. If done in the right spirit though - a genuine attempt to restore the principles of Christ to a corner of a now depraved America - then I hope that this dream will be realised.

DeoDuce: The motiviation of missionaries and members of the Exodus Project are entirely different. Missionaries go to places without Christians and evangelize. The Exodus Project is trying to get all the Christians to bunch up together for political reasons and has nothing to do with evangelism. The only similarity between the two is that both involve Christians changing their location.

FiliusDei: You entirely miss my point; I'm not addressing the political implications of the project at all. I'm saying that the Exodus Project is unbiblical and antithetical to Christian belief.

MW: Doesn't SC have unsaved residents? So then why can't the Exodus members move there to witness to them? And how do you know their exact motives?

I still hold that it's a futile effort by the organization, but I doubt it's *wrong* or *sinful* to do what they're doing. It's simply starting a movement to make a change for the better. Christians are called to "be the salt of the Earth," are they not?

From the website's information page, the Exodus people sound like they are simply "going where needed," not bunching up in one location, as you state.

The Exodus project isn't antithetical in the least, at the very worst, it's a misguided effort at making positive changes in government, and defending core Christian beliefs in a public arena. Is that unbiblical according to your beliefs as well?

I am really sick and tired of the people who say liberals hate Christians and/or Christianity. Whenever anyone says that I know he or she watches too much of FOX-TV's ranting propaganda designed to divide and conquer Americans.
O'Reilly does not walk on water. Only Jesus and Geo. Bush do that.

Hello Folks ,

I , and others I've been priviledged to know, would well consider relocating to an area where rolling back current Goverment responsibilities to Constitutional levels would be a welcome opportunity. The chance to apply some of the ideas and methods found in the writings of the founding fathers would be met with enthusiasm by many nationally and worldwide.
In the case of one statement that " The Constitution of The United States is for a just and moral people and is wholly unsuited to govern any other. " ( I think that was Adams ? } is too tempting not to try in this generation. Is giving this generation the chance to put this in motion such a threat ? To some , I suppose it would be.
Endless theological arguments that serve only the few and contribute exasperation,confusion,and division to the many should take a back seat to the rallying point that is the Christ . The only one that those of the milk and those of the meat of the Word can exist under together.
Let us pick up these deeper studies in ease after the work of creating the enviorment condusive to that learning is established. May the Exodus begin I say .

Herman

Michael:
You actually illustrate my point. Here we are in disagreement, so a very practical way to see who is right would be for you to do things your way, and I to things my way. There is a principle throughout Christian scripture that those who do what is right will ultimately receive God's visible blessings.
Take for example ancient Israel. God's plan to affect the world was not to send out missionaries, but to create a separate society based on his principles. The idea was that the imminent success of such a Godly nation would cause other nations to perceive a categorical distinction between the way they operated, and the way the people of God acted:
Deut 4:6
"Observe them [the laws] carefully, for this will show your wisdom and understanding to the nations, who will hear about all these decrees and say, "Surely this great nation is a wise and understanding people."
Since we are told to be the salt and light of the earth, in principle, I dont see anything 'anti-Christian' about tacticly combining all our individual lights into one place where, together, they could potentially illuminate the entire country.
I leave with this thought:
Acts 5:38
38"...Therefore, in the present case I advise you: Leave these men alone! Let them go! For if their purpose or activity is of human origin, it will fail. 39But if it is from God, you will not be able to stop these men; you will only find yourselves fighting against God."