Customer Reviews

Jesus for President: Politics for Ordinary Radicals

5 star:		(42)
4 star:		(14)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(6)
1 star:		(6)

 

 

I'm a writer. Yet, I'm at a loss for words to describe Shane Claiborne and Chris Haw's new book Jesus for President. Let me break this review down into two sections: (1) Design, and (2) Content.

DESIGN

Put simply, Jesus for President is a wonder to behold. I've never seen a book designed with as much attention to detail and visual impact -- not on the outside, mind you; on the INSIDE. The only thing comparable is House of Leaves, the debut novel by American author Mark Z. Danielewski...and Sandman graphic novels designed by the incomparable British artist Dave McKean. Sure, Jesus for President contains regular text just as you'd expect to find in a book. But, in addition, this groundbreaking new book also sports hand-written margin notes, little doodles and drawings, photos with typewritten descriptions, pieces of fabric, pressed flowers, varying type-faces and -sizes, arrows drawn in ink pointing to important passages, circled words, underlines, pages that look as though somehow took a pink highlighter to them, and a bibliography so clever that it, alone, is worth the price of admission.

In other words, everything about this book screams "I HAVE BEEN CRAFTED WITH LOVE." You can pick up this book, turn to a page at random and simply enjoy what your eyes behold. If Jesus for President doesn't win an award for its design, attention to detail (recycled paper, printed in America), and its ability to grab -- and hold -- one's attention from the very first page, there is no God.

CONTENT

Studies show that Americans today are changing their religious faiths almost as quickly as they change their underwear. They jump from church to church, from religion to religion, and hover -- at any given moment -- somewhere between a creeping agnosticism and a growing, bitter, atheism. And I haven't even mentioned the rampant pessimism that's coloring everyone's outlook, especially in the area of politics.

Once-committed Christians are not immune to this modern-day spiritual malady. In fact, many of them lead the exodus away from churches. Or, they remain in church out of a sense of duty to parents, spouses, or friends (or simply out of fear of reprisal from God), and become burned out and depressed, growing ever more frustrated that their Christian faith doesn't seem to mean anything, do anything, or change anything.

Like Neo in The Matrix, Christians everywhere have begun to ask questions about the nature of reality. They want answers because what they're getting now -- from the media, from Hollywood, even from their own churches -- doesn't ring true.

In that now-famous scene in The Matrix, Morpheus offers Neo two pills: one red and one blue. "You take the red pill, you stay in Wonderland. And I show you how deep the rabbit hole goes." As Neo reaches for the red pill, Morpheus suddenly says, "Remember. All I'm offering is the truth. Nothing more."

Jesus for President is like taking the red pill.

And, like Morpheus, all Shane and Chris offer is the truth. Nothing more.

And, baby, that rabbit hole goes pretty deep.

At the heart of Jesus for President is the answer to the question, "Why does the Bible seem so dynamic, yet my church seems so bland, spineless, and ineffectual?" Or, to put it another way, "Why does America -- one of the most heavily-churched countries in the world -- seem to continue going down the drain...economically, politically, morally, and spiritually?"

The answer is found in the first few pages of Jesus for President:

"Too often the patriotic values of pride and strength triumph over the spiritual values of humility, gentleness, and sacrificial love."

"We in the church are schizophrenic: we want to be good Christians, but deep down we trust that only the power of the state and its militaries and markets can really make a difference in the world."

"Rather than placing our hope in a transitional church that embodies God's kingdom, we assume America is God's hope for the world, even when it doesn't look like Christ."

Jesus for President is nothing less than reality-shaking, butt-kicking, rock-solid TRUTH. It presents a Jesus -- and a Christianity -- wholly foreign to today's pew-warmers. It presents a Jesus who is strong in his humility, bold in his compassion, and more concerned with feeding the poor among us than taking up arms to fight those on the other side of the world.

Yes, Jesus for President is heavily critical of American politics. Yes, Jesus for President is a slap in the fat face of mega-church dilettantes who cruise to Sunday school in their Hummers...and leave without dirtying their Manolo Blahnik shoes, scuffing their Hermes handbags, or smudging their Armani suits.

Jesus for President is for those who are sick to death of political lies, bloated lifestyles, and a Christian faith so far removed from the one found in the Bible that they teeter on the brink between pitching it all and...pitching it all. This is a get-off-your-butt-and-roll-up-your-sleeves Christianity. If you don't want to get down and dirty with the world, forget about Jesus for President.

But...

If you're tired of living an anemic version of the faith Jesus espoused in the Bible, you're ready to take the red pill.

I've been reading Christian books for 20 years. Not just books published within the last two decades; rather, books published within the past 150 years or more. I've never seen anything like Jesus for President. I can honestly say, without hyperbole, that Jesus for President is the most important Christian book published in the last half century. Follow it, and you WILL see a change in your life. You will also see a change in your community, and in your country.

"Jesus For President: Politics for Ordinary Radicals" by Shane Claiborne and Chris Haw is an accessible yet slightly-revisionist history/review of the Hebrew Scriptures, the world at the time of Christ, and the rest of Christian history. The fourth section of the book consists of jumping-off points and testimonies of people, groups, and situations where the kind of politic and economy described throughout the rest of the book is "fleshed out".

Claiborne is radical. To some, 'radical' is bad, to others, refreshing. But there is no denying that his ideas and his lifestyle are counter-cultural and challenge the status quo. I do not believe this is always a bad thing (more on this later). We can all agree that something is wrong with politics in America today, especially Christians in politics today.

My biggest take-away was the "Third Way" idea he espouses throughout the book, the "prophetic imagination" that should be our primary posture in responding to the needs and challenges of our world today. I think a lot of people my age (18-24), especially Christians, feel torn between blind nationalism ("God bless America") and the angst-ridden anti-establishment attitude we see in the picket lines at anti-war demonstrations. There *has* to be another choice, right? Thankfully Claiborne lays this out pretty clearly, yet with enough room for imagination and creativity.

A note on design: this is one of the most beautiful and interesting books to read. Every page is unique and striking. Some of the text material would honestly be rather dull without all the artwork. This book gets 10 stars out of 5 for creativity in design.

Back to radicalism. I see Claiborne as a modern-day prophet: someone with the eyes to see what's really going on and the balls to do something about it. Prophets in the Hebrew Scriptures (a term I adopted from him in place of 'Old Testament') were hated, persecuted, and even killed, or at least misunderstood. They shook up the establishment. I don't believe he is a "rebel" just for the sake of rebellion. I believe he and his community (and the hundreds of communities like the Simple Way) truly live and breathe the creative nonviolence they preach, much like the Amish (I loved his recommendation of putting the Amish in charge of the Department of Homeland Security).

The reason I gave this book four stars instead of five is because I personally think it could have been 3/4 as long. At times, it seems like he is going in circles, making the same points in different ways. The artwork distracts from this fact: as a standard book it would be much more noticeable.

Another reason it recieved only 4 stars is because I got the impression that there is little or no middle-ground between becoming an "extraordinary radical" - making your own clothes, dumpster-diving for scrap food and parts, killing your TV, living communally, etc. - and incorporating elements of this way of life into a more mainstream lifestyle. For example, in response to the valid question, "What do you do about taxes if you are so concerned about how they are used?" One solution of theirs was to write a letter to the IRS with the amount they were liable for minus 37% (the amount spent on the military) and a note stating they donated that 37% to a nonprofit organization dedicated to promoting peace, and that they could not in good conscience finance war. Or else, they make sure to earn so little that their tax liability is zero.

So many things pop into my head: what about health insurance? Retirement? What if God's miraculous provision for your health and welfare are in fact a good job with benefits and a 401(k)? Are those things any less holy than earning nothing and living on "faith"? Can you earn $80,000 a year and drive a nice used car and enjoy vacations (and give generously to your church and community) and not be considered an "ordinary radical"? There has to be some kind of middle ground, and I don't think the authors recognized or acknowledged this, nor did they expressly recognize those "ordinary" middle-class families that fund missionaries and their community foundations and love their neighbors while still enjoying some of the comforts of the "empire". Is it really one or the other? I digress.

Overall - an important read for every Christian, especially in these politically-heated times. Great artwork and design and (as one reviewer pointed out), the most creative and innovative bibliography you will ever see. Read it with a grain of salt (no human author is infallible), let it challenge you (I'm still churning inside) but most importantly - ACT on your convictions. If your heart is stirred by reading this book, don't stifle it - let it work its way through and change your life, however that looks.

A friend of mine recently pointed out the importance of discernment when choosing what books to read. Most of us will not complete more than a dozen or so books in a year, and with all the fantastic books out there, we need to be careful not to waste our time on dribble. Unfortunately, Jesus for President, by Shane Claiborne and Chris Haw, is not a fantastic book. It is a stunning example of what happens when Christians allow our political ideology and biases to affect how we approach the Bible. Billed as a "book to provoke the Christian political imagination," the reader is left with more provocation than actual thought. Showing no understanding of the differing roles of the Church and the state, the authors conflate the two in a misguided attempt to shape Christians approach to politics. The end result is a work that only the most radical of the Christian left will find intriguing, while the rest of us are left wondering if it is Jesus they are following or the god of Liberalism. The book is replete with error, all of which fit into one or more of four different categories.

1. Bad Hermeneutics (Biblical Interpretation)
The most egregious and prevalent of all their errors, the authors blatantly rape Scripture in order to bend it to their ideology. For example, even though 1 Chronicles makes it quite clear that David was not to build the Temple because he had shed much blood, Claiborne and Haw argue that God didn't want a temple because He likes sleeping in tents with poor people (pg. 35). Of course this doesn't explain why God seems to have been pleased to dwell in the temple Solomon built. In another instance the authors state that the Israelites had laws for dealing with illegal immigrants (pg. 58). By choosing the phrase "illegal immigrants," instead of what the text actually says "aliens," the authors are trying to make a passage that has little relevance to our current immigration debate fit their own ideological purpose. At one point Claiborne and Haw state that Jesus was from a family of "peasants" (pg. 116), when we now know that the fact that he was a carpenter most likely put him in what we would know as the middle-class. In another instance, the authors say that the people were hungry for revolution, and thus chose for Barrabas to be freed instead of Jesus (pg. 76), when the Gospel account makes it clear that it was the prompting of the Pharisees that led to this decision. Finally, they state that the book of Revelation was written in code so the empire wouldn't know what John was really saying (pg. 148), when it is commonly recognized that the genre of Revelation is apocalyptic and is thus written in such a mysterious manner.

2. Bad Theology
Despite the fact that Chris Haw is said to be working on a graduate degree in theology, the authors make some incredibly basic errors in theological understanding. In many cases they footnote their arguments by thanking some scholar for giving them "new eyes to see" on a particular issue, but due to the obscure nature of their argument, we are left feeling that they simply choose which eyes they like best. In one disturbing instance, they state that violence kills the image of God within a person (pg. 205). The doctrine of Imago Dei is one of the most foundational beliefs for Christian thinking, and no where does the Bible indicate that a person can have more or less of the image of God within them. The image of God is what gives each person their value, and, if the authors' assertion were true, we would be left with some people that are intrinsically more valuable than others, hardly the traditional Christian understanding. Another instance where the authors show their ignorance is their understanding of the Trinity. In a poor attempt at humor, the authors tell a joke in which Jesus is letting people into Heaven whose names are not written in the Book of Life (pg. 290). This type of naiveté is easily repudiated when one recognizes that the Trinity cannot be divided, and thus would certainly know who is allowed into Heaven. Of course, this issue is further complicated by the authors seeming to indicate that they might not believe that Hell exists anyway. In another instance, Claiborne and Haw state that it is difficult to know whether or not Jesus would pay taxes if he lived in the U.S. (pg. 257), of course the simple phrase "render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's" seems to answer that quandary. In still another case, the authors revel in the act of lying when it fits their political cause (pg. 297).

3. Bad Political Philosophy and Logic
In many places Claiborne and Haw show utter inconsistency in their logic, coupled with a radically naïve approach to politics. For instance, they state that capitalism is a yoke that we need to be freed from (pg. 113). And while they admit that writing a book participates in capitalism, they don't seem to grasp the fact that without capitalism their book would not be able to be printed or distributed. In a truly confusing paragraph, the authors argue that the industrial revolution wasn't really an advancement, an assertion so absurd it is difficult to even respond to (I'll let the fact that you are reading this be my rebuttal). And in perhaps the most stunning example of the sheer absurdity of their logic, Claiborne states that, if faced with genocide, he would simply take his clothes off and squawk like a chicken (pg. 273). Such a simplistic assertion fails to grasp the fallen world we currently inhabit, and instead makes a joke of over a million deaths on one continent alone.

4. Bad Use of Historical Argument
Still another way that Claiborne and Haw mislead their readers is by a deceptive use of history. They state that the more the early Church lived out the Gospel, the more they collided with the Roman Empire (pg. 141), when even a cursory understanding of early Church history shows that persecution was sporadic and wholly contingent on who was running the empire, not the degree to which Christians lived the Gospel. In an attempt to show the futility of violence, the authors state that an attempted assassination plot against Hitler only galvanized his resolve and made any efforts towards peace impossible (pg. 203). What they fail to mention is that this happened mere months from the end of WWII, and there was no indication that Hitler was going to surrender under any circumstances.

There are many other examples of all these types of errors I could list, all with equally simple rebuttals. The point is that Claiborne and Haw do not contribute anything new to the discussion of how our faith should influence policy. Rather, they simply carry the water for the far left, attempting to argue that Jesus agrees with them. Personally I am tired of people trying to prove that Jesus agrees with their ideologies, instead, I believe, we should be trying to agree with Jesus. Admittedly this is incredibly difficult for any of us to do, especially since Christ didn't have much to say about the role of the state (contra Claiborne and Haw). What He did address, however, is how we as Christians should act, and I think if we put those things into practice the politics will come naturally.

-Kolburt Schultz
[...]

I recommend this book to anyone who is dissatisfied with current versions of Christianity. The authors return us to the biblical texts and present a reasonable and text-based interpretation of the Jesus who died as a political prisoner. The centrality of the politics of Jesus allows the authors to challenge the current mainstream Christian community to re-commit itself to a way of living that challenges most, if not all, of the political and economic power structures of our day. it is an invigorating and provocative read; I hope that many people take the time to reflect on it, if not, indeed, to pray with it!

I borrowed this book from a friend of mine and because of the subject matter I spent a great deal of time working my way through it in an attempt to evaluate it as honestly as I could. Some of the authors' ideas and positions (a more community based Christian Church and non-violence) have merit and are worth further exploration. If you like these ideas, I recommend you read an essay by Theodore Koontz titled "Christian Nonviolence: An Interpretation." I really do think these are points that are worthy of consideration.

That said the logic, scholarship, facts, reasoning, and rhetoric in Jesus for President is awful. If this book were written as a persuasive essay, any good professor would fail the authors. Two logical fallacies that the authors make are circular reasoning and the straw man fallacy. On pages 67-69, the authors argue that because within the gospels Christ uses words that have political connotations within the Roman/Greek world there is an inherently political nature in Christ's teaching. These are terms like "evangelion," "Savior," "Lord," and "Emmanuel." The problem is that Christ would have spoken in Aramaic and Christ himself did not write the gospels. His disciples and followers wrote the gospels down somewhere between 30-80 years after his death and resurrection. When the gospels were written they were intended for a mostly Greek/Roman world audience so the authors translated Christ's words into the language and terms that the Greek/Roman world understood and identified with. This is very similar to modern publishing. There are British and American versions of the Harry Potter books. The reason is that there are terms and idioms within the British version that the American audience will not understand, so the publisher translates the novel from British English to a more American English. The writers of the gospels did the same thing. They used terms and idioms that their target audience would understand. Therefore, this means that the authors' argument that Christ used political language is based on a translation and writing technique that only leads around in circles. It is possible that Christ did use political language, perhaps even some of the terms the authors credit to him, but we cannot determine so from this argument. While they don't always commit this particular fallacy in reference to Biblical passages the authors do often impose a modern understanding of politics and life on Biblical passages rather than evaluating them in the original context.

The straw man logical fallacy is where you misrepresent the other side's position so it will be easier to argue against it. The authors commit this error numerous times. One good example is on page 106. Here they assume what all people mean in a specific statement. "In regard to Christian politics, some might say, "Sure my citizenship is ultimately in heaven, but I have to live in the `real' world now." In other words acting heavenly on earth is too risky; or, Jesus was the Son of God, but he was not realistic; or, following the Sermon on the Mount will not work on earth, so it will have to suffice in heaven. This interpretation basically comes to mean that my citizenship in heaven means nothing in the real world." The reason this is a misrepresentation is that people could and do mean several different things by "live in the `real' world." Couldn't they simply mean the earth is not heaven? Couldn't they mean that what Christ says is an ideal that does not exist on earth? I sometimes use this phrase and I have never meant it this way. I have always understood it to mean something like that in this `real' world (which includes many more places than luxury loaded America) there are people who are in horrific situations where they will have to choose between two evils. This is far from an ideal thing and is certainly not good; but problems and questions like this really do exist and need resolution. I find it irresponsible and arrogant for those of us in peaceful, free countries (America and the western world especially) to assume our definition of the `real' world is something that applies everywhere else.

The authors also commit internal factorial inconstancies on pages 281 and 331. On page 281 the authors cite a specific source and claim that as of 2006 there have been 654,965 civilian deaths in Iraq since the US invasion. While this figure sounded a bit inflated to me, knowing the exact number of war related deaths in Iraq is a near impossibility, so I was willing to accept it may be right. However, on page 331 the authors explicitly state, "And publicly remember the Iraqis (around one million) who have died since the US invasion of 2003." So somehow in fifty pages another 350,000 people died? Which figure is right and why does this discrepancy exist?

An additional example of this book's factorial inconstancies occurs on pages 184 and 256. On page 184 the authors state that 36% of the US government's budget ($0.36 of every dollar of tax paid) goes to the Department of Defense or Military. Then on page 256 they claim that nearly half of every tax dollar goes the Department of Defense. So which percentage is it? Is it 36% or something close to 50%?

Both of these inconstancies could have any number of explanations that are not malicious, and I am not accusing the authors of deliberately misrepresenting the facts. They (the facts) could be a hazard of having dual authorship, a lazy editor, or the use of multiple, conflicting sources for the same information. The reason I am pointing out these inconstancies is that they suggest the authors did not do their homework, take the material seriously, or did not know very much about the subject they were discussing.

In addition, several 'facts' in the book are just wrong. Calling AK-47s US made weapons (they're Russian, you can look it up on Wikipida), claims made about Biblical passages and history that scholars and historians will heavily dispute, and a statement on page 178 that the US has the greatest stockpile of nuclear weapons in the world (once again it's Russia) all weaken the authors' arguments. Anyone of these errors in facts or logic could be forgiven individually, but taken collectively they are quite condemning. Is it really reasonable to take the arguments of anyone seriously if he cannot get simple facts right and disagrees with himself?

These errors do not mean the authors' main points are invalid. But it does seem they did not do the basic research needed for a high school essay, much less a published book. For this reason alone, I will not recommend this book to anyone. Read the essay I mentioned above as it supports many of the same positions and commits none of the fallacies these authors do. I really do wish these authors had written a better book as arguing poorly for these points helps no one and brings us no where.

Set aside its creative, engaging format. Set aside the fact that it is a page turner. Jesus For President is an important book. Claiborne and Haw speak with a challenging, even prophetic voice. Some will unfortunately dismiss the pair as ultra-liberal, but this is an easy and irrelevant mistake. Their interpretations are important. Their arguments sound. For those of us who love America and the political system of our forefathers, this book is essential reading. At its most surface level, the book rightly reminds us that sometimes such love is misplaced--even idolatrous.

And idolatry never leads to life.

I had very high hopes for this book! And in so many ways, it did not disappoint. The readers attention is very often rewarded with a beautiful insight into the Christian walk, or just a clever turn of phrase. If I could snip out the bits in between, the book would be half as long and twice as good. The purported topic of this book _needs_ earnest, honest, and humble minds in its service; this book, and these minds, aren't them.

As often as these rewarding bits appear, the reader is punished with nonsense and spurious assertions -- many of which could have (should have) been caught well before publication, like the silly assertion that AK-47s are produced in the US, that Chris Shays is "Chairman of Congress" (whatever that is), and that any author of the Bible had sex and climaxing in mind when writing Scripture (this is particularly fatuous and offensive and really a disturbing insight into the authors place in life's cycle). These are just data points, true, but these examples are symptomatic of the lack of intellectual rigor and discipline that pervades the book.

These are two very intelligent, earnest authors whose hearts are right with God. I applaud that! But, they are far too inexperienced to be writing tomes on things beyond their grasp. They rely on folks like Noam Chompsky for their views on US international relations -- but anyone with an ounce of shoe-leather spent off-shore (or in a library) knows that the path trodden by Noam is for intellectually lazy, conspiracy prone, knee-jerk anti-Americans.

In short, while there is ample data to support a thesis of radical Christ-centeredness manifested not in the national political sphere, but at the community and family level, while there is ample scope for a lengthy work on how Christ would react and want us, his followers, to react and act, this book has a political point of view that simply smothers Christ's. It's a shame and I know these boys can and will do better.

Jesus for President messed with my theology.

I re-read at least 57 sentences because they were so good.

This book questions assumptions, tells real stories, and gives alternatives to live in rebellion to the empires of this world.

If you believe that Jesus is American and votes Republican, then this book may be difficult to swallow. Of course it is written precisely for you. For your summer reading, read this along with Ragamuffin Gospel by Brennan Manning and CrazyLove by Francis Chan. You will be challenged, confused, and perhaps willing to be intellectually honest with yourself and realize there is A LOT more to Christianity than having opinions on Political issues and participating in religious rituals.

This review isn't about the "book" itself but rather the Kindle format of the book. A lot of the book's text is included in the book's pictures. The resolution of the pictures is too small to even be able to read when open full screen on a device such as Kindle/ iPhone/ iPad.