Kingdom Harbor

In part 1, I introduced the socio-economic philosophy of Neo-Tribalism. Wikapedia further adds that

Data has pointed to a general breakdown in the social structure of modern civilization due to more frequent moves for economic reasons, longer commutes and a lack of emphasis in the media narrative on the desirability of strong friendships and community bonds….The French Sociologist Michel Maffesoli was perhaps the first to use the term neo-Tribalism in a scholarly context. Maffesoli predicted that as the culture and institutions of modernism declined, societies would look to the organizational principles of the distant past for guidance, and that therefore the post-modern era would be the era of Neo-Tribalism. 

Let me interact with the Neo-Tribalist’s ideal by looking to “the distant past” and unfolding the ancient tribal story as told by another nomadic tribe of the Ancient Near East — the Hebrew people who brought us the story of Genesis.   You will see that at almost every turn the Hebrew story speaks to, often affirms and also firmly critiques the Ne0-Tribalist’s narrative.  

1. The God of the Bible created human beings in community and for community – to share a beautiful, intimate and fragile interdependence with God, fellow human beings and nature. Paradise paints a picture of humans enjoying a perfect fellowship, with each person standing naked before the other, with nothing to hide and nothing to fear. (INTIMATE, TRIBAL COMMUNITY)

2. God entrusted the entire created order, the natural environment to his human image bearers, and they were to be wise, gentle stewards of the land. They also shared a relationship with the land that was friendly and favorable. (ENVIRONMENTAL HARMONY)

3. Things go bad. A rebellion occurs. It results in the breakdown of human relationships (the blame game), tribal warfare (Cain & Abel, Gen. 4), hostile environmental conditions (“thorns and thistles”), human pride and drive for self-preservation (Tower of Babel, Gen. 11), and a broken relationship with the Creator God. (DEHUMANIZING CIVILIZATION)

4. The Bible describes and celebrates the same idyllic primal beginnings that the neo-Tribalist longs to return to. The Hebrew tradition deeply honors and teaches strong, community [Photo]bonds for the wellbeing of the human race. The Bible tells the long, bumpy story of how the Creator sets about restoring the earth and reconciling human beings to one another. Yet, the Bible differs sharply on one foundational point that the neo-Tribalist is not likely to admit: the unpopular idea of HUMAN SIN. (COSMIC RENEWAL PLAN)

5. The perfect harmony initially shared between God, humanity and the created order is disturbed, broken, marred and disordered by a cataclysmic moment in the history when human beings freely chose to live outside the bounds of the established Creator-creation relationship. God gave his precious children, created in his very image, one condition that might be summed up like this: “I am God, and you are not. I have given you charge to exercise dominion and wise stewardship over all creation – birds, fish, animals and the ground (that’s what it means to be God’s image-bearers on earth), but you must not become prideful and long to replace me as God (idolatry). If you do, you will find yourselves living outside the beautiful, magnificent, divinely crafted order of things and everything will fall out of whack.” (INNER REBELLION)

6. Cosmic harmony, environmental rhythms, perfect relationships, and ultimate pleasure and happiness (the goal of neo-Tribalism and Christianity alike – with some variations), according to the Hebrew and Christian Scriptures, are found in a proper relationship with the Creator himself. When that relationship gets out of whack, the rest of the created order crumbles as well. (REVOLUTION OF THE SOUL)

So, we can see in this general sketch of the biblical narrative that both God and neo-tribalists desire that human beings have intimate community, experience harmony with creation and others, and fight against the dehumanizing powers of unhealthy human civilization.   

But where do these two worldviews drastically diverge?  That’s next time.