Brad,
Thanks for the interesting post. Unfortunately, my immediate image while reading it was of an angry group of picketers righteously "proclaiming the truth" with scathing words of condemnation painted on their signs and red-faced angry shouting directed at the news cameras. Having listened to and read a lot of your teaching, I feel safe saying that this is not what you have in mind with your comments.
It seems that when we speak the truth, we need to accept the fact that we will offend and alienate some people just like Jesus did, and we will appear as fools, like Paul did, etc. But Paul tells us in Col 4:5,6 to "Conduct yourselves with wisdom toward outsiders, making the most of the opportunity. Let your speech always be with grace, as though seasoned with salt, so that you will know how you should respond to each person." Also, and in 2 Tim 2:24-26 that "The Lord's bond-servant must not be quarrelsome, but be kind to all, able to teach, patient when wronged, with gentleness correcting those who are in opposition, if perhaps God may grant them repentance leading to the knowledge of the truth, and they may come to their senses and escape from the snare of the devil, having been held captive by him to do his will."
Taken in the context of an individual truly following Jesus' teaching in Sermon on the Mount, your article makes lots of sense. But in the context of American Christian political activism, it could be interpreted quite differently.
Could you expand on how to go about proclaiming the truth in these days where disagreeing can be construed as 'being unkind'? Could you give some situational examples of where we may have been conditioned to falter when we should instead stand firm? Are your comments mostly focused on our evangelism efforts, or obedience to Jesus' teachings in general?
Thanks for your sharing your insight!
Oh no...I am not talking about evangelism or any thing outside the decision making in the church and on what priorities we make them.
A point would be how we spend money in the church..are we using our money as the bible teaches us namely to show compassion or are we prettying up the building. The preacher needs to preach the value of generosity whether or not it makes people feel comfortable or not.
Or what if we preach that conscious contact with God is to be a regular experience in life and this makes grandpa feel like he is missing something in his faith and it make grandpa feel anxious about his relaitonship with God. Should the preacher avoid this. What if we preach one on one discipleship and this requires a change of lifestyle...blah blah blah...
brad
Excellent, Brad. You've hit the nail on the head here about the fundamental conflict between political and spiritual power. Peace.
Thanks for the clarification, Brad, that you were talking about internal church politics and not public policy politics or evangelism. Great examples.
I would encourage you to read "The Myth of a Christian Nation" by Greg Boyd. Subtitle is "How the Quest for Political Power is Destroying the Church." Thought provoking book to say the least. Should be read by all evangelicals who believe that the American Church should get involved in politics -- whether it is on the right wing or the left wing of the political spectrum.
Certainly an interesting post. I fundamentally agree with your main point that Jesus was at odds with the "political establishment." We should trace this inherent tension not only to Pilate's questioning of Jesus, but to the very essence of Jesus.
I think you go a little far in impugning politics and contraposing it against happiness. Politics is simply a framework to understand the nature of the world itself, a perishing temporal order whose final aim is opposed to God's kingdom.
You also seem to give the prophets a bit too much credit. Most of the prophets, at one time or another, lived in complete fear. Jeremiah, Elijah, Isaiah and Peter lived in constant fear and convicted of their unbelief by God. Peter is the best example of a man who was after God's heat but completely paralyzed by his own human nature and limitations. The triumph of the prophets says nothing of man, but exemplifies the glory of God to use fallen man.
It is also a bit misleading to say "Fear and politics is the enemy." Fear is a natural consequence of unbelief, which is in turn caused by many factors. Politics, in itself, is also not the enemy. If I were to say that the "government is the enemy" that would be equally false. The only enemy we all face is sin and sin is a consequence of our being. Because we are creatures with free will, we must confess that we have seen the enemy and we are it. Only the Christ is this nature changed.
Finally, I take issue with your phrase "We have dummied-down and watered down the gospel for the sake of the middle-class." First of all. I dont know who "we" is but that should be some and not all Christians. Second, we know from Jeremiah that false teachings spring from people's heart and its because they want to form a fake idol to worship. Thus, if the gospel is watered down, it's because people in the church wanted it that way regardless of class or race. This is heresy at poor, middle and upper class churches. That heresy of a "watered-down" gospel has nothing to do with class, but everything to do with every man's sinful nature.
Commenting by HaloScan
