Posts Tagged ‘Culture’

May
10
2013

Loving Someone With Whom You Disagree

Today in my Friday Five interview for Leadership Journal, I had the privilege of interviewing Dr. Russell Moore, the newly elected head of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention. I’ve long admired Dr. Moore for his clear, biblical teaching and his winsome perspective on the Scripture and politics. One of the questions I asked him was about his relationship with the President. You might not expect a friendship between a liberal Democrat and a conservative evangelical, but this is what Dr. Moore said. I think his response gives Christians a good model for how to disagree agreeably:

I have disagreements with President Obama on some crucially important things, such as matters of life, marriage, and religious liberty. I have respect for him as a leader and as our president, and I like him as a person. When you pray for someone every day, it is hard not to love that person, even when he disappoints you in some area or another.

He and his Administration have always treated me with kindness and respect, and I have friends I love in the Administration. We don’t have to agree on everything to work together sometimes, and to seek to understand one another when we don’t agree.

I hope to honor and to pray for the President, as the Bible commands us to do, even when we disagree, and to work with his Administration when we have points of mutual concern for the common good.

I have learned a lot by watching the example of Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) in his friendship with the President. In a profile of Sen. Coburn in TIME Magazine, written by President Obama himself, of all people, the senator is quoted as saying, “What better way to influence someone than to love them?” I recognize the Spirit of Christ in that statement, and I hope to live up to it.

Read the entire interview here:

Nov
20
2012

Shouldn’t Gratitude Should Be Our First Language?

Yeah, yeah, of course we’re supposed to be thankful on Thanksgiving. But it occurs to me that we’re not very good at this. By we, I don’t mean the editorial “we” by which I’m pointing the finger at the rest of Americans for being ungrateful while I ignore my own ingratitude. By we I don’t mean the “Church” by which I think the problem is the rest of those ungrateful brothers and sisters in the Lord while I silently pretend I’m not full of unhealthy entitlement.

No, I’m talking about me and my own ingratitude. And of all people, shouldn’t it be me that’s the most thankful? Whose first language is one of thanksgiving? After all, it’s me who was sovereignly chosen to salvation, who was brought from death to life by the mercy of God at the cross. It’s me who is the recipient of God’s resurrection power, giving me new life, endowing me with the Holy Spirit, gifting me to serve God, and securing a beautiful eternal city where I’ll dwell with God forever.

It occurs to me that, of all who should be grateful, Christians are at the front of the line. And yet it is us–it is me–who are the least grateful. We belly ache about the state of our country, posting our beefs on Facebook and Twitter, muttering them at the coffee shop and the water cooler. We complain about our jobs, our marriages, our children, our in-laws. We rail against the faults of the Church worldwide, the church local, and that cranky old neighbor next door. When we’ve exhausted these complaints, we moan about the weather.

But our lips should resound with praise. Of all people, we who have been touched by the gospel, should know the depths from which we were rescued. We, of all people should recognize the simple gifts of beauty from a gracious God. Sunlight, oxygen, green grass, rows of harvested corn, breath, blood, life, and community. We, of all people, should enjoy the fruits of American prosperity: political stability, food, order, money, iPhones, clean shirts, education, books, coffee, and a warm coat.

God’s people should speak first the language of gratitude. We should treasure, rather than bemoan, our closest relationships. We should overlook rather than highlight the flaws of those we love. We should embrace, rather than run away from, hard work and accomplishment and purpose.

I wonder the effect on our culture if Christians first simply expressed the unadulterated joy of a man in prison: The Apostle Paul. Where others would complain, he said, “Rejoice.” Where others would give up hope, he said, “I’m content.” Where others would rail at God, he said, “To live is Christ, to die is gain.”

Imagine the impact if this attitude prevailed among God’s people. Imagine the impact if it simply prevailed in me.

The careless soul receives the Father’s gifts as if it were a way things had of dropping into his hand yet is he ever complaining, as if someone were accountable for the checks which meet him at every turn. For the good that comes to him, he gives no thanks—who is there to thank? At the disappointments that befall him he grumbles—there must be someone to blame!- George MacDonald


Oct
02
2012

3 Reasons Your Pastor Probably Doesn’t Preach Politics

I’ve written on this issue before, but it’s probably worth revisiting in an election season. And new research has been released by Lifeway that affirms what I’ve always believed: generally Bible-believing pastors shy away from overt political endorsements and preaching politics in the pulpit.

I wrote a piece for Relevant not long ago on this subject in which I said this:

[To preach] is a humble and holy task because the people who attend churches arrive with the assumption that what is said comes from the Bible. To cut and paste partisan talking-points or to substitute consistent exegesis with sample “election season” sermons is spiritual malpractice.

I want to expand on this with three important points on why pastors don’t and probably shouldn’t preach politics in the pulpit:

 

1) Our Text Must be the Word of God

This sounds like a cliche, but it bears saying: faithful Bible preachers use the text of the Word of God as their source of preaching. Anything less is simply a speech, which may be inspirational, moral, or even Christian-themed. But if our basis is not the text, we’re not preaching.

Sometimes a given text will make political or moral statements. For instance, if you’re preaching through Psalm 139, you cannot escape the references to the sanctity of life. Or if you are preaching through Proverbs you will encounter many economic truths that shape capitalism. Or if you are preaching through parts of James or Timothy, you will find it inescapable to avoid the harsh condemnations of greed.

But as a rule pastors, especially those who preach in an expository (taking a book at a time, chapter at a time, verse at a time) approach, will be guided by the text. To parachute political talking points into the text is spiritual malpractice.

One caveat is this: perhaps a pastor will do a topical series on key issues of the day and how Christians should think through them biblically. I’ve done this as a Sunday Night series. This can be helpful, however, a pastor must be faithful to let the text speak to the issue and not wedge your particular political opinion into the text.

2) The Bible cuts both ways

I find it fascinating that certain groups on the Right want pastors to “speak up.” What they mean by this, of course, is to more overtly endorse their preferred candidates and/or moral issues. But what they don’t understand is that pastors are speaking up, it’s just that what pastors are speaking up about may not be the taking points of the current season.And, the Bible cuts against both parties, against all political persuasions. Yes, there is much in the Scripture affirming the prolife (Psalm 139; Genesis 2-3) and traditional marriage (Mark 19:5) positions. You can also make a good argument that the Bible affirms the idea of limited government (1 Timothy 2:2; Mark 12:17) and some of the root ideas of capitalism. So some would say the Bible is very conservative.

And yet that would be incomplete, because you will also find in Scripture many texts on justice, the plight of the poor, treatment of the immigrant. And who were Jesus’ chief antagonists were in the gospels? The Pharisees, the Religious Right of their day.

Should pastors speak about in the pulpit about contemporary issues? Yes, but only when the texts of Scripture clearly articulate it. They shouldn’t bow to any party’s talking points. They shouldn’t slant their sermons to fit a political profile. They shouldn’t become wannabee pundits in the pulpit. They should preach the Word and let it do it’s work in the hearts of the people, who will then go influence their communities.

3) We must never dilute the message of the gospel. 

The Church should be counter-cultural and should engage the issues of the day. But this engagement should be an outgrowth of the gospel’s sanctifying work in each believer. In other words, the political issues shouldn’t be the main thing that characterizes a church. The gospel should be the main thing. The Scriptures should be the main thing. Christ should be the main thing. This is why pastors often shy away from endorsements or public pulpit activism. It sends the wrong message that the main purpose for gathering on Sunday is to stir up the troops and get “our guy” elected. But what of the brother or sister of the other party or the soul seeking God who only hears partisan talking points? If this happens, we’ve failed in our mission.

To be clear, pastors are citizens, too. And so in other venues, such as op-eds, blogs, books and other places of influence the pastor may speak his mind. Even so, he must jealously guard that influence and always speak winsomely. Again, as a minister of the gospel, he must not make politics more important than his pastoral duties.

Pastors should also coach their members to winsomely engage the culture. We need gospel preachers at all levels of society and in all spheres, politics included. Pastors should equip, encourage, and support those who enter public service.

Summary: In conversations I’ve had and in my own experience, it is mission that keeps pastors from overtly preaching politics in the pulpit and not the IRS.

 

Aug
28
2012

5 Attitudes Toward Someone With Whom You Disagree

We live in a generally uncivil world (because we are fallen creatures) and we are in the midst of an uncivil season (Campaign 2012). I don’t buy the idea that this is the “most negative campaign we’ve ever had.” One only needs to read biographies of the American founders (unless written by David Barton) to realize the human capacity to savage one another was alive and well in the golden years of America’s founding. Still, technologies, the proliferation of campaign spending, and the insidious, but effective tool of dishonest 30-second TV ads all add to a very uncivil culture.

For Christians, it can be difficult to know how to engage in an uncivil culture and in an uncivil season. On the one hand we want to stand boldly for truth, speaking prophetically to our culture and wisely steward our rare gift of shaping our government. On the other, we’re commanded by Scripture to comport ourselves differently. So how do we do this? Here are five principles from the Scripture that helps us adopt grace-filled attitudes toward those with whom we vehemently disagree:

1) Love Your Neighbor As Yourself (Mark 12:31). At the very least your political opponent, whether it’s the President, someone in the other party, your opinionated relative, or the blogger who has it all wrong–that person is your neighbor. And we are to love our neighbors, not with a sort of grudging foot-dragging love, but “as yourself.” In other words, you are to treat them with the same respect you would want to be treated. How does this play out in the public square? Well I think it means we argue principles without making it personal. It means we give them the benefit of the doubt. 1 Corinthians 13 says that one of the definitions of love is that it “believes all things and hopes all things.” In other words, we can oppose someone politically without thinking they are part of some evil, Machiavellian scheme to make our lives miserable.

2) Love Your Enemies (Matthew 5:43-48). I think viewing a political opponent as an “enemy” might be too strong, but let’s just assume that for a moment, on the issues about which you care, he or she is your enemy. For instance, I think it could be honestly said that most liberals are adversaries of the pro-life position that I hold. So how does Jesus’ words to love them apply? Well, I’m suppose to love them with the fullest definition of love. I can oppose what they stand for without ridiculing the person or mocking them or their families. I love my political adversaries by speaking only what I know to be true about them. I means I see any good and redeeming values in them and pray for them.

3) Honor the King (1 Peter 2:17). Peter wrote these words to a church about to endure four decades of brutal persecution at the hands of Roman oppressors. And yet Peter writes, “Show proper respect to everyone, Fear God, Honor the King.” If this seems difficult to do under leaders who might oppose biblical values, imagine how difficult it was for Christian citizens of Rome. But it’s made easier with the middle words of that phrase, “Fear God.” Romans 13 reminds us that nobody is in power except those God anoints and puts in power. So, you can show proper respect to a political adversary because you acknowledge the sovereignty of God and you affirm that even your enemy was created in God’s image. And therefore you can honor a political leader because in doing so you’re honoring the God who put him or her there. I think the words, “respect” and “honor” give us a good grid for how we should make political arguments. We can forcefully oppose unjust, unwise, or unbiblical policies without resorting to name-calling, mockery, and slander. In doing this, I think Christians set themselves apart. Think of men like Nehemiah, Daniel, and Joseph who served wicked monarchs and still always showed proper respect to the office.

4) Pray for Your Leaders (1 Timothy 2:2). There are not many specifics in the New Testament about Christian political activism. I might point to Jesus’s words in Matthew 5:13-16, Jesus prayer in John 17 and Paul’s appeal in Romans 10 for the necessity of Christians to shape culture at all levels (including political and governmental). But the one very specific instruction regarding Christians and their leaders is the command to pray for them. We Christians (myself the most guilty) seem to have it backward. We treat activism as a necessity and prayer for our leaders as an option. We should do both. We should pray and watch, pray and build, pray and act. But we must never diminish prayer. We must pray for our President, our Congress, our Governors, our statehouses, our mayors, our local leaders. Public service is a difficult calling. I like what Max Lucado is doing this year to gather Christians to pray during this election season.

5) Speak with Grace (Colossians 4:6). Paul writes to the church at Colosse, “Let your conversation be always full of grace.” This verse really convicts me, because I now that my speech is not always marked by grace. Especially in election season. Especially when I’m all wound up with an opinion or idea about someone with whom I disagree. But followers of Jesus should be marked by grace. This means that what we post, what we say, what we discuss should run through the prism of grace. How is graceful speech different than ordinary speech? It flows from a heart humbled by God’s forgiveness. It considers the human behind the argument. It tries not to divide, but to unite. It grounds every argument in the gospel story. Graceful speech doesn’t post angry, half-truth, slanderous opinions on Facebook. Graceful speech doesn’t support distorted 30 second TV ads. Graceful speech is open to new arguments, admits wrongs, and doesn’t assume that it’s right all the time.

Summary: This is not a complete or exhaustive list, just a few ideas about living out the gospel during political season and beyond. Christians can be both civil and engaged, full of grace and yet firm in support of truth.

Aug
15
2012

Max Lucado on the Presidential Election

I so enjoyed Max Lucado’s recent message on the election. To sum it up: don’t freak out, God is in charge. This is a biblical challenge to all of us. Take time to view it:

Aug
10
2012

Friday Five: Charles Drew

Charles D. Drew, M.Div. has pastored for thirty years in Virginia, Long Island, and New York, all in university settings. He presently serves as the senior minister of Emmanuel Presbyterian Church, which he founded in 2000 near Columbia University. He speaks frequently to university and churches and is the author of An Ancient Love Song and A Journey Worth Taking. He and his wife Jean have two married children and two grandchildren.
It is his most recent book, however, that arrested my attention. Body Broken discusses the impact of political partisanship on the Church. Charles was kind enough to stop by today, for The Friday Five:
 How can Christians be actively involved in shaping the culture (especially their representative government) without falling prey to the hyper-partisanship that shapes our discourse? 

A number of things help here.  The first is to define ‘public life’ more broadly than ‘political life.’ As long as we think that the only way to be a public Christian is to do battle in the political sphere, we will for the most part be frustrated and angry—for few of us ever acquire much political power, and, what is more, power politics is much less powerful than we think.  But the moment we broaden our definition, the anger and hyper-partisanship drop a notch or two, for we begin to discover that there is always something that we can do to make the world a better place.  It might be through political praying, through journalism, through the arts, through making public virtue attractive by our own example.  The list goes on.

The second thing that helps is to make some distinctions, namely, (1) between theocracy and influence, (2) between moral principle and political strategy, and (3) between the calling of the individual and the calling of the church.

Take the first distinction, a distincti0n that hyper-partisanship often blurs.  Theocracies identify a particular political group (a nation, a party) with the will of God and seek to advance God’s will by force.  Ancient Israel was a theocracy in this sense.  But theocracy in this sense is behind us, for Jesus reigns over all nations and groups.  What is more, he aims to rule the heart, calling for a level of voluntary allegiance that a theocracy in the older sense could never pull off.  Sadly, Christians still often tend to think about America theocratically—and this is a mistake.  It feeds hyper-partisanship—the tendencies to demonize those who oppose us and to use underhanded or ungracious means to put things right (since, after all, we are fighting for God).  Christians should, rather, think in terms of influence, not theocracy.  Influence is harder to identify, and it calls for patience not only with ‘the opposition’ but with each other.  Influence does not necessarily pay obvious dividends.   But that is OK, since Christians do not enter public life to win (Christ is in charge of winning).  They enter public life to serve, come what may.  We can live with ambiguity and small returns since Christ and Christ alone will make all things right in the end.

Take now the second distinction—between moral principle and political strategy.  Hyper partisans tend to blur this distinction as well, giving a political strategy the same value as a moral principle.  Moral principles are grand behavioral truths that the church must teach and model.  The Ten Commandments give us a great summary: We may not, for example, kill, or bear false witness, or steal, or covet, or take God’s name in vain.  These all have bearing upon public behavior and they must be proclaimed as such. But the moment the church moves from saying, “Do not kill (unborn children)” and “do not steal” to advocating particular strategies for reducing/ending abortions and particular strategies for reducing theft, the church enters the area of fallible human solutions involving human consciences.  Hyper-partisanship elevates such human solutions to the level of divine law—and this must not happen in the church, for such an elevation binds consciences where the Bible does not bind them.  To put the matter another way, the church has a dual obligation in these important matters: (1) to declare God’s law and (2) to guard the consciences of all its members so that no member feels like a second class citizen because he chooses to advance God’s moral law in one way but not in another.

The third distinction is between the calling of the Christian and the calling of the church.  Hyper-partisans often confuse these two callings—assuming that their burden is God’s burden (which is why they become ‘hyper’) and therefore rightly the burden of the church.  But God makes a distinction here.  He calls individual Christians to many types of public involvement depending on training, gifts, and opportunity.  But he calls the church more narrowly—namely to pray for his kingdom to come and to make disciples of the nations (which includes caring for the weak in the name of Jesus).   When a hyper-partisan spirit invades the church, it not only divides her, but it also distracts her from the business God has given her to do.  There is a great irony here.  Hyper partisans get hyper because they deeply want to change things for the better.  But when they draw the church away from prayer and disciple-making (things that the church alone is equipped to do), they deprive the world of the two things that change it most profoundly

 It seems many conflate civility with compromise. But they’re not the same, are they? 

Civility could be a mask for compromise.  But this is not at all necessarily so.

 Properly motivated civility is an expression of a number of things that the Bible teaches and values.  (1) First, there is Jesus’ command to treat others as we would want to be treated—with respect.  Jesus disagreed profoundly with the Pharisees, but when Nicodemus came to see him (John 3), Jesus received him with courtesy.  (2) Civility expresses humility—an acknowledgement that I might not be right, or completely right, about whatever is at issue.  And who among us can ever be sure that he is completely right?  We all ‘see through a glass darkly’, we all have ‘logs in our own eyes.’  The people who agree with us politically are likely to share our blindness and so we are less likely to learn from them than we are to learn from those who come at things from a different angle.   But we will not learn from those who think differently if we are rude and refuse to listen courteously to what they have to say.

Theologians teach “common grace”—the notion that truth ‘pops up’ in unexpected places.  They also teach ‘total depravity’—which means that sin and lies ‘pop up’ everywhere as well—even among the ‘good guys’ (the group we like to see ourselves belonging to).   We would all do well to learn from James 3:13-18

13 Who is wise and understanding among you? By his good conduct let him show his works in the meekness of wisdom. 14 But if you have bitter jealousy and selfish ambition in your hearts, do not boast and be false to the truth. 15 This is not the wisdom that comes down from above, but is earthly, unspiritual, demonic. 16 For where jealousy and selfish ambition exist, there will be disorder and every vile practice. 17 But the wisdom from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, open to reason, full of mercy and good fruits, impartial and sincere. 18 And a harvest of righteousness is sown in peace by those who make peace.

 Some believe pastors need to “stand up” more, but don’t they mean to simply echo partisan talking points? 

 Of course pastors need to ‘stand up’ for the truth.  They are ordained to preach the Word and if they do not do this they should leave the ministry.  But what, more precisely, is the word that they are to preach?  It is the gospel of Christ, the great fact that God has fulfilled every promise and every command in his Son, that he has given his Son in substitutionary atonement so that we may be reconciled to him and to one another and, by the power of his Spirit, set on a new trajectory by which the law is fulfilled in us by faith.  Any “standing up” that obscures this message by ordering the life of the church around partisan issues is a failure of NT pastoral calling.  As Paul put it, “Woe is me if I preach not the gospel.”

 This does not mean that a pastor may not speak out on the pressing moral issues of our time—marriage, abortion, violence, greed, war, to name a few.  But it does mean that he   must take care not to speak out on them in such a way as to mandate a particular strategy for nudging the culture into greater conformity to the standards of God in those areas.  When, for example, he mandates for his flock one particular strategy for improving the state of marriage in America, he endorses not God’s law on marriage but man’s law.  And man’s laws are always imperfect.

The pastor as individual citizen can think and act in whatever ways his conscience dictates.  But the pastor as preacher—as prophet speaking from the pulpit—has the dual obligation of (1) declaring God’s law (as fulfilled in Christ) and (2) protecting his people from their consciences being made prisoner to human laws.

 How does a Christian model Christ-like temperament in a world of talk radio, cable news, social networking, blogs? 

Christians will hold firmly but with humility to their convictions, knowing that they may be wrong, and thankful that they themselves do not have to win for good to triumph.

They will listen carefully, they will be unafraid and therefore patient, and they will moderate their language, refusing to pigeonhole people or positions, refusing to demonize the opposition, admitting with humility that the truth pops up everywhere.  They will be on the lookout for common ground, seeing themselves as servants of the common good not only with regard to the issue at hand but with respect to the relationships between the people who disagree.  They will position themselves as servants, not winners.

Back of all this behavior will be faith, hope, and love:  (1) faith that God loves them and will take care of them no matter what happens to them or to America, (2) hope that God will one day vindicate the rule of Jesus and along with that, all that is good and beautiful and true (we represent Christ, but we do not have accomplish what he alone will one day accomplish), and (3) the love that chooses, like Christ, to serve and care without strings attached, and without the need ourselves to win or be vindicated.

At heart, Christians will follow in Jesus’ footsteps by heeding Jesus’ command to “deny themselves and take up their cross.”  They will, like Jesus, fully enter the world as its friend, letting go of their need to win, seeking instead to serve.  If they suffer for doing so, then so be it.  If Christ suffered and ‘failed’, then why shouldn’t we?

If you could give one piece of advice to a Christian in this political season, what would it be? 

I have two pieces of advice.

First, identify and repent of political idols in yourself.  An idol is a God substitute—anything that we find it hard to live without.  In political life we easily fall prey to idolatry—whether it is a vision for America of which we have become too fond, or a particular candidate or party or piece of legislation upon which we have become too dependent, or a freedom that has become too precious to us (many of us just want to be left alone—whether it is regarding taxes or gun possession or our sex lives).  Political anger is often evidence of idols being threatened—and we would do well to search our hearts, for God hates idols.

Second, get together for a serious conversation with a Christian who disagrees with you politically.  Talk through your differences in an unhurried setting, aiming as you do so to listen carefully to him and to look for common ground.  As you interact distinguish between moral principles and political strategies in your own mind and help him to make that distinction in his.  If you can find common ground make a plan to take some action together.  In any event end by praying for each other and for the advancement of what is good and right in our country.

Jul
11
2012

5 Reasons to Rejoice in an Election Season

Yes, you read that right. There are actually reasons to rejoice in a presidential campaign season filled with rumor, innuendo, nastiness, and vitriol from both sides. Like you, I’m a bit tired already and the campaign has hardly begun. But, I’ve been thinking that there are many silver linings in an election season. Here are five:

1) You can rejoice because you live in America and not Cuba. Think about it, nations governed by totalitarian regimes don’t feature nasty political campaigns. Nobody in Cuba or North Korea is complaining about dinner-time robo calls, nasty mailers, or grainy, fear-inducing half-true TV ads. There are no elections, real elections. Only strong-armed dictators who rule by the sword. Consider that in our country you can utter the most vitriolic statements about the current politicians in office and not get sent to jail or have your business taken away or have your family threatened with death. I hate the vitriol as much as anyone, but it’s very presence reminds us that we live in a rare time and place where freedom of speech is guaranteed.

2) You can rejoice because this seasons affords you an opportunity to be different. Even though you can utter vitriolic speech about a politician you don’t like, you don’t have to and so you have an opportunity to be different than everyone else. Because you’re a Christian, you can demonstrate what it looks like to hold staunch, truthful positions and still exhibit love and respect for those with whom you disagree. You might be the only one in your office, among your social circle, or among your social network tribe who isn’t routinely disparaging one candidate or the other. Think about that. Your winsomeness during this election season might afford opportunities for further discussion about your relationship with Jesus.

3) You are filled with constant reminders to pray for your leaders. Think about this. You don’t have to write sticky note for your car’s dashboard or your refridgerator, reminding you to pray for the President and his opponent. Why? Because you’re inundated with reminders that they exist! This is a wonderful reminder to fulfill the biblical commands (1 Timothy 2). Just think what would happen if every Christian used every mention of the President or his opponent to stop and pray. Imagine the revival that might take place.

4) You’re reminded of the longings we have for our home in Heaven. What fuels our politics is the innate sense that things can get better in America. They are good, but not as they should be. We instinctively know that there is a better world out there. As Christians we know this longing won’t ever be fulfilled until Jesus comes as reigning King. We know no earthly leader, no political party, no platform, no movement can bring about the utopia we crave. But the craving is good. It reminds us that we’ll forever be unsettled in this fallen, sin-cursed world. Like Abraham, we long for another, better city, whose build and maker is God (Hebrews 11:10). Not only should this longing drive us to deeper intimacy with Christ, our Creator, but it can provoke conversations among the lost about their own desire for utopia and in Whom that longing may be satisfied.

5) We should rejoice in the opportunity to look inward and not outward. Elections get us thinking that the problems we face are outward. If you’re a conservative, all social ills are the fault of the liberals. If you’re liberal, all social ills are the problem of conservatives. So we tag any problem with a face, the face of the politician we oppose. But as Christians, we know that the real problem with America lies in human hearts. Not just the hearts of Hollywood or Wall Street or Occupy or the Tea Party. No, the problem lies within my heart. My heart. Paul, imprisoned by the tyrannical, hedonistic butcher, Nero, nevertheless fingered himself as the “chief of sinners” (1 Timothy 1:15). Elections afford us the opportunity to survey the vast array of social ills and their perpetrators and then turn inward and say, “No, I’m the bigger problem.” Then we can look upward and weep at the grace God affords to us through Christ.

May
29
2012

Will We Sing or Will We Whine?

What will Christian witness look like in a society that affirms gay marriage? After President Obama’s expression of support, Christian reaction was all over the map, from the usual apocalyptic doomsday stuff to serious and thoughtful biblical opposition to progressive evangelical acceptance. As a committed evangelical committed to the historic Christian teaching of the Scriptures, I am opposed to gay marriage. But I’ve been thinking about what we do next. Despite the success of ballot initiatives in various states, this is clearly a battle we are losing in the culture. It won’t be long before gay marriage is a widely accepted and legal practice. So, to paraphrase the late Chuck Colson (quoting Francis Schaeffer), how now shall we live?

Last week I came across two items that helped shape my thinking on this issue. First, a panel at the Basics Conference hosted by Parkside Church in Cleveland, Ohio. On the panel were Alistair Begg, Mark Dever, and Vodie Baucham. At the end of the segment, the issues of gay marriage was raised. All three pastors were stedfastly opposed, but the conversation delved deeper into the reaction of the Church.

Mark Dever’s words were particularly useful. Dever has first hand experience with this issue as a pastor on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C. The district has legalized gay marriage and Maryland seems poised to. He ministers to many who are in the thick of this cultural fight.

I’m summarizing his words here (I encourage you to listen to the whole panel), but Mark said something along the lines of this: Christians will have to ask themselves this question: Can we preach in a society that affirms something opposed to the Scriptures? Or will we close up shop? And his answer, of course, was, “yes.” We’ve preached in a society that aborts millions of babies every year and embraces much that God opposes. Of course, the question of legal rights is another conversation–one we should fight for.

But must we as Christians have an environment, a government, that affirms our values? Sure, it’s idea, but will we preach even if what we preach is countercultural? Dever said, “Yes.”. We’ll preach if the culture is against the gospel. We’ll preach if they put is in prison. We’ll preach if they threaten our lives.

Dever and Vodie Baucham criticized the Christian Right for it’s sometimes doomsday, apocalyptic tone. That if we don’t this measure passed or defeated or if our guy doesn’t win, then somehow the Church cannot prevail. Alistair Begg even said that what is best for the country may be bad for the church. God may use a period of cultural opposition to purify His Church.

I thought this entire panel was instructive and might inform the way pastors preach. We shouldn’t engage the important cultural issues with a sort of “all-or-nothing, sky-is-falling” tone, as if God is up in Heaven, white-knuckling it over what happens every other November.

Last week I also finished Mark Buchanan’s excellent book, Your Church is Too Safe. In one particular chapter, Buchanan writes about Paul and Silas’ famous jailhouse incident in Philippi (Acts 16:5).

If you know the story, you know these two gospel messengers were beaten to within an inch of their lives, unjustly thrown in prison with the worst of society, and considered a threat to society.

And what was their response? Hatred toward the authorities? Whining about their rights? Threatening to sue? Mocking of the political establishment that put them in jail?

No. Paul and Silas did the unthinkable. They sang. And when it came time to exploit the weakness of the man who put them in jail, to seek revenge, they became instruments of gospel grace, converting the jailer and his family to faith in Christ.

I wonder, if that story took place today, with us, what would our reaction be? Would we sing? Or would we whine?

Better yet, when the culture continues to increase its hostility toward the Biblical gospel, do we sing? Or do we whine? Have we convinced ourselves that we can’t possibly live Christian lives unless our party wins the White House? Have we trained our people to put more faith in chariots (elections) than in the name of the Lord our God (Psalm 20:7)?

When they do come to beat or imprison or chastise us, what will we do? When they come to put us in prison, will we respond as graciously as Paul and Silas? Will those who oppose the gospel hear us singing . . . or whining?

I think of something I heard Focus on the Family President Jim Daly say at a pastor’s retreat a couple of years ago (I’m paraphrasing), “I’ll preach the gospel until they come to kill me for it. And right before they kill me, I’ll ask my executioner, ‘Can I pray with you?’”