Alright.
I just got through watching the Larry King Live special on Religion and Politics, counted to 10, and took several deep breaths. As usual, Dr. Mohler was the lone, conservative evangelical voice in the five-person panel, the closest to him being Jim Wallis. Most frustrating, however, was that every time Dr. Mohler spoke on an issue, Barry Lynn cut him off and immediately rebutted him. It must be nice to be so reactionary and bankrupt of ideas where the best one can do on an hour long discussion forum is play tit for tat. Anyway.
One of the arguments Jim Wallis and others were making was the belief that abortion and homosexuality are no longer the front-burner ethical issues among evangelicals. They argue that, for instance, the environment and poverty, are rising to the place of prominence among the evangelical corporate conscience to eclipse the central issues of marriage, family, and the sanctity of human life. Ideally, I think most evangelicals would say it is not an either-or but a both-and matter, but Dr. Mohler was right to assert that every has an hierarchy of needs and convictions. Consequently, I am curious to know more about just what everyone is thinking on such matters today.
The reason I am writing this post to ask you a couple of questions to get your thoughts on such certain issues. Let me put the caveat out there that God is neither Republican or Democrat, and I am not siding with either party. I am specifically asking about issues that matter most to evangelicals. So let me know what you think.
Here are five questions that came to my mind after the show tonight:
_____________________________________________________________
1. What do you believe to be the single most important socio-political issue today?
2. Do you believe that there is an shift to the left in evangelicalism as a result of the emphasis on poverty and global crises?
3. Are you personally involved in or committed to helping the poor, overcoming oppression, and fighting injustice? (I am not asking if you believe in that, but are you doing something about it currently)
4. Would you support or vote for a presidential candidate who is pro-choice?
5. Do you consider global warming to be a scientifically legitimate issue? Should it be a priority to evangelicals?
_____________________________________________________________
As many of you already know, I did extensive study this past semester on Carl F. H. Henry on such front-burner issues. I will begin assessing and providing excerpts from him soon. In the meantime, please, if you have time, let me know what you think. Thanks.
1. Life. This is so tied to so many important aspects of the gospel – humans as image-bearers, sexual behavior and even creation. If I understand NT teachings on the role of government properly, then the authorities have been established for two main purposes: punish those who do evil and to praise those who do good. There is no greater evil in our country than the slaughter of millions of pre-born children.
2. It’s really hard for me to comment on all of evangelicalism, so I’ll speak from my experience as a college minister. I’ve witnessed a lot of collegiate evangelicals who are leaning left politically and the gateway drug seems to be poverty issues and global crises. However, I think that for many, it’s less about biblical conviction and more about trying to make the faith look attractive. The logic seems to be, “Maybe those pagans will warm up to Jesus if I seem to care about kids in Darfur,” instead of, “Christ was about justice, so I want to be about justice.”
3. Sad to admit it, but not much outside of financial donations to various groups.
4. I cannot based on my current understanding of scripture.
5. I think the research findings on both sides of the battle have proven global warming to be a legitiimate issue. Care of God’s creation should be a priority for evangelicals and any discussion about global warming should begin with that affirmation.
1. Most serious in America – abortion. Globally – terrorism and nukes.
2. I don’t see a shift in Evangelicalism – rather what is labeled as the Evangelical right is growing in % of unregenerate.
3. Personally involved in helping the poor – no. We do very small things through church but nothing personally.
4. I would not vote for pro-choice candidate for president with the current Supreme Court situation.
5. Global climate variations are somewhat normal historically. It all seems a little too Hollywood for me.
Chase,
You said, “I think that for many, it’s less about biblical conviction and more about trying to make the faith look attractive.”
While I don’t want to judge motives, it does seem like social justice is the cool thing to do. American Idol is doing it. Hollywood is doing it. So why shouldn’t we? (or so it goes). I would also argue that it is a badge of protest as much as it is a badge of honor for what we find in the elder generation of evangelicals (and moreso fundamentalists) is a failure to pick of the bibical mandate to care for the poor and fight injustice.
Thanks for sharing man.
Tony,
As always, I appreciate your feedback.
So you would vote for a pro-choice candidate under a different state of affairs? In other words, is your conviction circumstantial or absolute?
If our legal system had was not morally insane – aka Roe vrs Wade – then it might not be an issue we even talked about. I’m not sure about other “what ifs.
To my knowledge I have never voted for a Anti-Life candidate. But on state offices I just vote the party.
1. I think the issues of life (abortion, euthanasia, genocide, etc.) are the most vital issues of the day, and will remian to be. I find it strangely ironic that we have people consumed with saving the lives of people thousands of miles away, and stopping genocides across the world, when we neglect the fact that millions of children are being brutally murdered right under our noses.
Any sort of outcry for mercy and justice that denies the fact that abortion is both unmerciful and unjust, and that ignoring it is neither merciful or just, just rings hollow to me. (Do you hear that Jim Wallis?)
It’s hard for me to take people seriously who call us to save children in Africa when those same people ignore the millions killed hear…or rather endorse it.
2. I think poverty and global issues have become the talking points of many younger evangelicals. I, too, wonder if they are the talking points because they are of real concern or just because it is “cool” to seem concernec about these issues.
But I do think all the discussion has led to the distrust of those on the right, especially the evangelical right, who have been successfully portrayed as ignorant sheep following the GOP wherever they lead.
Sadly, that is mostly true. Unfortunately, it is an unfair characterization that has tainted the good that the “Right” does.
I hope that people can remain conservative, yet still care about poverty and global crises…I do. I think the lie many of our generation have bought is that you must support welfare and universal healthcare if you really are concerned about poverty. Again, cries for helping the poor (or attacks on “the rich GOP”) by rich Democrats sitting in their fancy mansions trying to decide what to do with OUR money just rings hollow to me.
3. We’re (my church) trying to build mercy ministries in our church to do the work we should have been doing all along. Currently we have a work with orphans and single mothers (also involved with Crisis Pregnancy). But we’re trying to build support for homeless ministry, widow ministry (which we kind of have now) and a few other areas.
I believe the church should be the starting place for mercy ministries, we should not farm it out to the government…so we’re working toward that end.
4. No, I would not vote for a pro-choice candidate. But that fact does NOT make me a one issue voter as is often the charge. I don’t vote for people based on one stand they take, but I will refuse to vote for someone because of it. We all do that.
I think it is still the crucial issue…but not the only important issue.
5. I think the jury is still out on the global-warming deal. I’ve read the research, and the rebuttals, and I am just not convinced. I think it can be seen that there have been changes in the environment…but does that mean that global warming is the cause? No. Can we trust scientific data (or scientific guesswork) from a century ago? Not sure.
Even if we were able to definitively nail down that GW is true (which I find unlikely)…how do we know that the things that we have been told to do will actually stop or even slow it down? How do we know it isn’t the next evolutionary cycle? (If they are going to believe evolution and promote it, why would they try and stop it?) There are just WAAAAY too many unknowns…so I find it hard to follow Al Gore down this road (or any road).
Now, that being said, I do think we should take measures to protect the environment. God gave us the earth to subdue it and rule it well. We should do the best we can to protect it.
But God gave the earth to mankind…not the other way around. Man is not a parasite that has taken over where we were not wanted, as many GW proponents seem to believe.
1. I do not know.
2. I would not say there is a shift, if what you mean by shift is that issues like abortion, sanctity of marriage are becoming less important. However, I would say yes to the question if what you mean by shift is that many more Christians are being awakened to and are beginning to have a stronger desire to help out on the issues of poverty, AIDS, and environmentalism.
3. There are many poor people where I pastor, and occasionally my family helps. I do not go banging on doors, but if I become aware of a need, then we will try to help to meet the need. For example, recently there was a wife who could not bury her husband because she had no money so we helped her.
4. Ideally not, but if there were only two to three serious contenders and all were in some way pro-choice, I do not think I would sit the election out. I would still try to pick the best candidate for the office.
5. Part 1. I am not sure. Part 2. I do know, however that if I heed the directives given to Adam and Eve then it should not be an issue as I would already be living out my life responsibly in this area (the answer is yes).
Gray,
Thanks for your generous response!
You said, “I believe the church should be the starting place for mercy ministries, we should not farm it out to the government…so we’re working toward that end.”
Exactly. That is what Carl Henry stressed in his writings. Protestant liberalism wanted social justice through changing social structures and big government (entitlement mentality). This was a view that government’s responsbility was not only justice but benevolence as well, and hence the welfare state was pushed. This, however, was nothing but Marxism pure and simple (from each according to his ability to each according to his need), and it was destructive to the Gospel, to the Church, and to love in general. It should be the church’s responsbility to carry out mercy ministries or acts of benevolence to society, but unfortunately many in the conservative ranks don’t see it that way. Perhaps our generation will change that.
I would not be surprised to find a parallel between young people refusing to go to traditional evangelical churches because they find them disingenous and egocentric with their empires they are building. In their search for authenticity and fidelity to Jesus’ message, they are looking elsewhere than the church growth movement and the nominal Christianity it has spawned.
I wonder, if church dollars could speak, what would they say?
We value the poor?
We care about the lost?
We want to reach those who have never heard the gospel?
We defened the widow and orphan and cared for them?
Jason,
Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
You said that there are many poor people where you pastor. This is a point I want to bring out. I think many churches today are reaching middle white Americans in the suburbs, having been located in “safe” places and morally refined. Poor people are just not on the radar screen because they are not in our zip code? I was in a church where the pastor’s closest friends were the richest men in the church. I wonder why this was the case? Could it be that when he needed the money for a building project, radio ministry, or something else, he had friends in high places?
The priest and levite walked on the other side of the street? Us? We move two or three blocks away.
1. Liberty. I need to be free to obey my conscience. That means freedom of speech, religion, and economic freedom–the freedom to use the resources God has trusted to me as my conscience dictates, without having them voted out of my pocket and into someone else’s.
2. Yes. I think it is becoming more fashionable all the time to equate Christian charity with socialism.
3. Yes, in fact, I do put my time and money where my mouth is. It has very little to do with politics. God has always replaced what I’ve given away. On the other hand, I’ve come up short many times when I’ve held my money too tightly.
4. That’s a tough one. If I could know that the Supreme Court would do their job and uphold the Constitution, I would have no fear of any President or Congressman’s opinion. I am not a one issue voter. I look at the whole package and how it effects #1 (liberty), because I know the real solution is not in law, but in the Gospel. When hearts are changed, the law will change. I’ve never had to make this choice, though. Most pro-choice candidates are wrong on everything else, too.
5. Global warming is real, but it is certainly no cause for alarm. I believe every honest scientist admits that. I think, 100 years from now when our grandchildren look back on the current hysteria over global warming, the entire planet will resound with laughter at “an inconvenient joke.” Should it be a priority to evangelicals? As in all issues, we should be concerned with the truth, but this is no call for a political movement of the church.
David,
Thanks for the helpful comments and input. I find it interesting that you consider liberty as the greatest socio-political issue today. I presume you find it being threatened, whether freedom of speech, freedom of religion, or economic freedom. I would be interested to know why and how you came to this conviction.
I am afraid that this will be the first presidential election where leading candidates of both parties will be pro-choice. If that happens, I wonder if an independent will come out of the fold to represent the more conservative block of voters.
Timmy,
Yes, I do see our liberty threatened. I don’t think it’s a stretch to say that the left is succeeding in infringing on our liberties more all the time. Ask any Christian public school teacher if they’re free to say what they believe in their classroom. How long before preaching the truth about homosexuality is a “hate crime?” Are you free to give charitably as your conscience directs, or has Uncle Sam already made the bulk of that decision for you? There’s your freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and economic freedom.
Of course, I understand that God is sovereign over all these things, so I don’t worry, but if I’m going to worry, it’s going to be about our ability to spread the Gospel, not something like social justice, which is a by-product of the Gospel, and certainly not the environment.
Actually, I don’t really like the question, “What do you believe to be the single most important socio-political issue today?” It implies that there are political solutions to social problems, and I don’t believe there are. The Gospel is the answer to everything, and politics only matters as it effects that. Again, God is sovereign. I say all this as one who is more than willing to push a political agenda at the right time and place. Speaking of which…
Concerning the coming election, I’m more hopeful than I have been since Reagan. I think Fred Thompson will run, and I believe he can win. His record as a Senator is stellar, and I don’t care what James Dobson says.
David,
Thanks for elaboring on that point. The question I asked was a by-product of the forum on Larry King Live. Concerning religious freedom, I think there needs to be a distinction between religious freedom and religious tolerance. There is a false idea that tolerance connotes that one must agree (albeit implicitly) with other belief systems. This is and has not been the historical understanding of tolerance. So if you disagree with a religious belief or think they are wrong, you are intolerant. That is a false conclusion.
Religious freedom says that one has the right to believe whatever they wish. That is not to say that one must agree or consent to someone else’s beliefs. I think that delineation is important and needs to be made.
At the heart of that freedom you have mentioned is big government and a welfare state derivative of a Marxist agenda. Ironically, some have made the assertion that environmentalist and global warming advocates are pushing such an agenda, telling us how to live, eat, drive, etc. and developing laws that conform to such arbitrary standards.
I would disagree a little where you said that social justice is a by-product of the gospel. I would say that it is a by-product of a biblical view of God, man, and redemption. Justice and righteousness are founded upon the character of God; man is created in the image of God, recipient of common grace and general revelation, etc.; the gospel message bears social implications or imperatives that are fleshed out in both our words and our deeds.
I don’t know much about Fred Thompson, but it seems like he has a large following and is considered a viable presidential candidate (at least that’s what the polls and pundits are saying). I reallly need to look into the candidates more to see where they stand on the issues. Thanks for the link.
I’ve tried to post this comment twice without success. If it fails this time, I’ll assume I’ve been banned (not really).
Timmy,
Thanks for using the word “Marxist.” I was avoiding it, trying to be nice! I agree with your disagreement with me. I guess I was using the word “Gospel” to more broadly than just the message of salvation.
Thanks for your forbearance.
David,
Thanks for the comment brother. I am having problems right now with the comments. Most of mine when they are posted are marked as spam, so I have to go in and de-spam them. I suppose that is what happened to yours. I will check it out.
Timmy
David,
I found them in the spam folder, along with my comments. I don’t know why this is happening (I have had my comments on other Wordpress blogs sent to the spam folder as well). I apologize for the mishap. Maybe I can find a way to fix it.