Suffering in Christianity Part 2: the Living God and his Church for the suffering

In Part 1 of this short series, I discussed the backward nature of the sort of Christianity which must convince people that they are suffering in order to sell them the cure thereafter. Terrible as that sort of culture may be, one may wonder how in the world it came to be. The answer, however, is crystal clear if we just take a look at our history.

When Christianity began, it began among the legitimately oppressed and suffering. It championed those thrown down by the Roman empire, by Jewish religious authorities, and by society in general. It was a movement of radical acceptance and love for the poor, the weak, and the despised. It stood in stark contrast to the Jewish Zealots, who sought a military Messiah to overthrow the Roman government.

Christianity spread rapidly through the Roman empire, but their non-participation in the Roman state cult made them an easy political target: burn a few Christians at your parties to make it look like you, the emperor, are actually accomplishing something. Several Roman emperors persecuted Christians severely, most notably Nero (who, as an aside, is in many ways the subject of many of the prophecies in Revelation).

A curious thing happened under the rule of Emperor Constantine in the 4th century: the story goes that he saw the Christian symbol “chi-rho” (the first two letters of “Christos,” or “Christ,” in Greek) in the sky prior to a battle which he won. He started painting it on shields and armor and so forth. There is much more to the story, and it is suspect whether he was truly Christian or a political opportunist, but to make a long story short, Christianity — once oppressed and downtrodden — suddenly became the official state religion of the Roman empire.

It didn’t take long for the persecution to reverse. For example, after the switch from paganism to Christianity, a group of Christians destroyed a Jewish synagogue. Emperor Theodosius, seeing this injustice, wanted to repair the vandalized facility with state funds. St. Ambrose, a notable figure in church history, opposed Theodosius and managed to convince him that Jews, who did not accept the godhood of Christ, were heretics; thus, we should not support them. This set off a wave of Jewish persecution across Europe.

As history would have it, Christianity has maintained almost exclusive political control of western society ever since, with only the Moors making some headway into Spain for a time. So where were the suffering and the oppressed during this time? Usually stuck under the bootheel of the politicized church. The church bore — and frankly continues to bear — little resemblance to that oddly-peaceful resistance movement that taught us unconditional love for all people, even our enemies.

The supposed suffering of the church in the Western world since the time of Constantine has been in large part a total fabrication. We inherited relics of a culture which suffered legitimately — their letters which we now call Scripture — and then tried to force them into a context from which they could not be more alien. The Church in the West cannot identify with its own savior — or can it?

Pay close attention as I ask this next question: what about the people who are still suffering?

This is the critical question which the Western church consistently fails to ask in the appropriate way. We ask it, but only incidentally, as though solidarity with those who have suffered injustice is secondary to unity with Christ. We pretend as though the pursuit of justice were something that happens after you become a Christian, not the very definition of what it means to be Christian at all. Yet, if you strip Christianity of its message of justice, you have Nietzsche’s madman now asking, “What after all are these churches now if they are not the tombs and sepulchers of God?”

If you pursue justice, you follow Christ. If you seek right living, you are God’s child. Since Constantine, the church has largely abandoned this project, seeking instead to maintain its identity through enforcement of specific practices, becoming the source of injustice rather than the instrument of God. But yet, if no one will praise God, even the rocks shall cry out, and so they have! Those thought to have been dead to God — the secular progressives, for example — have cried out for justice. Those who profess none of Christianity’s tenants have become some of Christ’s greatest disciples.

What would it look like for Christians to come alongside Muslims in the US and fight for their right to practice their religion? What would it look like for churches to come alongside the homeless, the prostitutes, the oppressed minorities who cannot rise above the problems presented by their living conditions? What if these weren’t just “ministries” of the church but its primary function? That would be a different sort of Christianity, and then perhaps we could identify with our suffering Savior. Until then, we continually slander His name.


About Chris Attaway

Raised in the digital wilderness of the pre-Internet 2.0 era, Chris Attaway is a true gamer and Internet citizen. After a stint studying computer science, his life got flipped turned upside down, and he ended up studying philosophy to help him sort out his life. Now the black sheep in a family of engineers, he has set out to get his footing in the world of freelance journalism. With interests ranging from gaming and technology to LGBT rights, race and politics, Chris is a diverse and skilled writer who always tries to give a fair shake to his subjects.
This entry was posted in Christian Culture Issues. Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to Suffering in Christianity Part 2: the Living God and his Church for the suffering

  1. Islam states there are only three options given to Muslims as to how to treat infidels (non-Muslims) – convert them, enslave them or murder them (preferably via beheading).

    When you ask, “What would it look like for Christians to come alongside Muslims in the US and fight for their right to practice their religion?”, I must ask you why would any Christian do that knowing the truths of Islam?


    • You should take anything you have learned about Islam from Christians with an enormous grain of salt. There are many, many peaceful Muslims. There are many violent Christians. You should all people with dignity and respect.

      • Do you honestly believe they will do the same?
        Do you honestly believe a white, male, American, professing Christian could walk in safety, being given dignity and respect in Cairo, Benghazi or Damascus today?
        When that becomes more the reality, I believe we could begin to discuss this beautiful “COEXIST” life you imagine is possible.


      • In certain countries, the Muslim authorities take on the role of the oppressor, in which case Christians should stand in opposition to what they do. In America, the opposite is often true, in that the Muslims are frequently the oppressed people.

      • Thank you for this conversational exchange. Sadly, you have given no defense of your position at all. You continue to obfuscate which leads nowhere. If you have objective, factual data, please allow the readers of this blog to be good Bereans and examine it with you in light of Scripture. We would all appreciate your efforts and, perhaps, be enlightened and edified by them.


      • I have as much factual data as you have presented, so I don’t know what the issue is. But since you seem intent on supposing that Muslims are all bad, I wonder what you would make of this article:,-servi.aspx

    • 17Sevens says:

      What then do you propose we should do? Convert them? Then why would any Muslim do that knowing the “truths” of Christianity?

  2. Ken Nichols says:

    What you propose is a “social” gospel, and it is certainly a noble ideal. I’m just not sure it’s a “saving” gospel, as well. What oppressed people REALLY need is the same thing we ALL need –Christ in our lives. Standing with/helping the oppressed is a wonderful, humanitarian, loving thing to do, but it we aren’t showing people the difference that a life with Christ makes, then it’s really for naught. We can’t forget the more important eternal component to our love. It’s a love with a greater purpose than just the here and now.

    BTW, I completely agree with part 1 of this series. We have turned Christ’s gospel of love and inclusion into a gospel of fear and loathing, both for ourselves and for others.

    • The thing is that a life with Christ, as you say, was originally a life described by seeking to uplift those who had suffered injustice. You couldn’t separate that element from the rest. Sure, there were church services and liturgies, but the church understood its purpose beyond just that. Once we had the political power, we forgot the true meaning of suffering, and we abandoned those whom Christ came to save.

      • braudcj says:

        Quite right. 1 Cor. 12:26- “If one member suffers, all suffer together; if one member is honored, all rejoice together.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s