We know there is a bias in media today against those who follow Christ. I have no problem with that, we were told that this would happen by our Lord. However, I think the nature of the criticism provides for us a plan of response within the nature of the slander itself. How? Christians are looked at as ignorant, back-woods people who fall-in-line with the sentiments of a small circle of prominent leaders. The rational goes like this: since so many people vote so consistently on subject matters they must disengage their brains along the way. Don’t believe me?
HBO’s “Real Time” host, Bill Maher, told Joe Scarbourough on MSNBC’s Scarborough Country, that: “I think religion is a neurological disorder.”
60 Minutes’ Andy Rooney — a self professed atheist, told a group of students and faculty at Tufts University that he thought religion is
“all nonsense” after the 2004 election. According to The Tufts Daily newspaper, he added that he thought Christian fundamentalism was the result of “a lack of education. They haven’t been exposed to what the world has to offer.”
Consider the consistent slamming leveled at Christians from the Washington Post and New York Times. For example, in an article entitled “What’s Going On?”, the Times’ Paul Krugman wrote about “the threat posed by those whose beliefs include contempt for democracy itself.” Guess who that is? As opposed to Islamic extremists who exist as a minority in nations like the Netherlands, Krugman said the U.S. is a nation “where dangerous extremists belong to the majority religion and the majority ethnic group, and wield great political influence.” Krugman’s ends with this warning: “America isn’t yet a place where liberal politicians, and even conservatives who aren’t sufficiently hard-line, fear assassination. But unless moderates take a stand against the growing power of domestic extremists, it can happen here.”
Washington Post columnist Colbert I. King said, regarding the “Religious Right” that they “are not now and never will be the final arbiters of Christian beliefs and values. They warrant as much deference as religious leaders, as do members of the Ku Klux Klan, who also marched under the cross.”
I think within these vitriolic comments is one key to engaging those around us. Be a person who thinks! Be a person who takes Biblical values and applies them to issues of the day with those we encounter. We will not turn the tide of all criticism, nor should that be our goal, but we can represent the Gospel through not disconnecting our brains from issues and ideas.
Ques. How can this be done practically in our lives without drowning in a sea of social ills.
I’ll launch the first discussion flare:
Don’t disagree with people simple because they are not Christians! There are well-intended Christians that propose that a person who is not a follower of Christ cannot lead a nation if they are not a Christian. Do we need to connect being a better nation with whether or not we have a “Christian” president?
Ques. Would you rather have a well-trained pagan president over a incompetant “Christian” president? Why or Why not?
Based on the July 28 article by Ed Vitagliano in AgapePress – a monthly publication of the American Family Association.
How ironic that Christians must answer charges of unthinking doltishness leveled by detractors evidencing such gross privation of critical thought in the charges themselves.
To the second question first: a competent pagan, or a Christian dunce.
Let’s bring it closer to home. Who should manage your retirement account: a swearing, smoking, drinking, adulterous financial prodigy, or your Bible study leader (who just filed for bankruptcy protection)?
Another one: you get clipped by a hit-and-run driver, and your femoral artery ruptures. Two people stop to help you: your pastor, and an abortionist. Whom would you rather have working on you?
What I hope to demonstrate is that the question betrays a form of Christian superstition. “Oh, he’s a Christian? That’s all I need to know.” Phooey. God expects more of our decisions. Besides, a little dose of reality (your retirement account, your femoral artery) shows where your faith really resides.
Now to the first question: how can we bear witness to the Gospel as thoughtful followers of Christ without drowning in the mess of ideas that’s out there?
The simplest thing I know of is to listen more, and be slower to speak. “Whoever restrains his words has knowledge, and he who has a cool spirit is a man of understanding. Even a fool who keeps silent is considered wise; when he closes his lips, he is deemed intelligent.” (Proverbs 17:27-28, ESV)
When we give in to the pressure we feel to go out there and preach the Gospel, make disciples, save sinners, and Hit A Home Run For Jesus™, we often fall into the terrible position of betraying a lack of careful thought about the issue. When we do that, we signal that the Gospel isn’t really important… and neither are the lost souls we’re preaching at.
No, we should listen, not preach. We should ask good, thoughtful questions. We should insist that when people slip in some “preaching” of their own, they have to explain what they mean and back it up with some good reasoning. In so doing, they will show themselves the consequences of their ideas (cf. the redirection on “would you rather have a Christian president,” above), and then you can see if they still like their positions.
Truth is on our side. We must learn how to use it.
Great post Hugh! I love those examples you gave to illustrate where our “faith” really is when the rubber meets the road.
Your post made me remember an old episode of “All in the Family” when the “openly racist” Archie Bunker was unconscious and needed a blood transfusion to save his life. When he awoke he was so thankful that someone gave blood to save his life that we wanted to personally thank that individual. To his shock it was a Black nurse who provided the matching blood to save him. He started to panic and the nurse told him in the most sarcastic way possible “You will be just fine, but you will sometimes get the strangest craving for watermelon!” Classic!
Do you think if he had to make the choice while awake he would have done the same thing knowing that he would die without it? I think he would have chosen life over his racism. Just as we would choose life from a person that does not believe like me or is not a Christian at all.
Just like I would rather take the chance on an abortion doctor saving my life by stopping the bleeding than a pastor. Though I might need to make sure he did not accidentally “abort” anything else in the process! 🙂
How about the guy on the roof of the house in a flood that refused the help of a helicopter and a boat and told those people that God would rescue him? When he drowned he got to heaven he asked God why He did not save him. God told him “You big dummy! I sent you a boat and a helicopter!”
Truly there are Christians out there that give the testimony of Christ a bad name with cloudy thinking and even dumber actions, but as Dan said, we should not expect anything less than hate and persecution from the world if we take a stand on solid Biblical grounds. Even if we show that we are not idiots playing follow the leader with out intellectual prowess. If we can encourage some others in their walk and win some to Christ along the journey, that is where the real joy comes from.
I went back and dissected the transcript of the exchange between Joe Scarborough and Bill Maher. I came up with a lot of questions I wish Scarborough had asked…
I am hesitant to align myself with the “religious right”. While there is definitely an anti-God movement going on, I think most of the animosity is caused by the perception that the RR is an institution that is loosing its influence over society and ticked off about it — making it more about a power struggle than wanting to do the right thing.
Beyond the issues of abortion and redefining marriage (notice I didn’t say outlawing homosexuality), I don’t think that the RR would be very responsible towards the constitution — moving from protecting the innocent and a foundational institution towards a theocracy.
I remember when Pat Robertson was running for Pres and people thought he was going to try to start a nuclear war so Jesus would come back sooner. After reading some of his quotes, I wouldn’t put it past him.
Hey David! You and I are too much alike…..very scary. I bet others on this blong find that scary too! 🙂
I know what you mean. I don’t even like calling myself a republican as I don’t want to identify with the ugly politics and wimpy, spineless law makers. I would gladly vote for a democrat if they shared my beliefs and values more than a particular republican.
The “Religious Right should be called in many cases the “Religious We are Right and You are Wrong”. Even that name is a negative label given to people by the left wing media. Not a badge of honor.
We can change some laws and I believe that we should try to when they directly violate clear principles we agree on. It is the methods used and the ugliness and hate toward those that are on the other side that I dislike.
Changing a law and forcing our will will not win any new people to Christ nor will it bring back any Christians on the brink of despair. Got to win the hearts and minds of people with genuine love, compassion, and my new favorite word, transparency.
We will never be accepted or popular in this world on the whole if we speak the truth, even in love. That is what Jesus promised us. Not one of His most encouraging promises, but a truth nonetheless that comes as a natural reaction to the spiritual war in this world.
Did Jesus save us to foam at the mouth and change laws to fit our beliefs or to be the instrument He uses to change lives in this world?
blong=blog A spell checker in here would be nice! 😉
C.A., here’s a tip… Try composing your message in a word processor (like MS Word), then copy and paste into the “Comment Text” box. That’s what I do.
I was just making a little joke about my funny typo.
Being a 20+ year IT engineer I do that every time with my blogs here but paste into Outlook 2003 instead of Word since it is always open. Ctrl+C, spell check then Ctrl+V. 🙂
Spell checking does not always catch grammatical errors. Sorry, must have been thinking about Olympic swimmer “Amanda Blong”.
Soo whut tis de problim dude? Mye pell chker ist jist fyne.
So…. Are we saying that the “pagan” President is preferred over a “Christian” president as long as it relates to skill of leadership? Are there any issues in which you would not make this distinction? When does the benefit of a God-centered individual trump a top-of-the-line, although worldy-centered, leader?
For some it is abortion. For others, it may be the economy. Why or why not should those items matter?
For me it is who I believe is the best person for the job with the balance who most closely matches my beliefs on moral and ethical issues.
There will not be the perfect person that believes just like you do on everything, just like when finding a church for you family. Very similar decision making with both issues.
You must look at the candidate that is the closest to your beliefs and that you believe will be the better president for the country.
Not voting is not a choice for me.
I would have to take a non-Christian that is closer to my moral views than a professing Christian whose views are further from mine on some of the major issues out there. Now if the one that believes closer to what I do does not seem smart enough to lead or has less experience or none at all, that would be a conundrum for me, but I would still do my duty and vote.
Yeah, I’d make a distinction if one of the two was advocating violating God’s law.
Look, what is a Christian? Someone who has repented of sin and lives to follow Christ. What is a president? A man who leads a country… but if the Bible is to be believed, God is sovereign over that president.
So the question you’re asking is, “would you prefer a president who acknowledges or denies that God is sovereign over him?”
I guess it depends on what wisdom tells you the candidate is likely to do while in office.
I will admit that this is not an easy subject. I wish we had some example of a character from Biblical times making such a decision in which we could create some type of decision-making grid for prospective candidates. Daniel in a democratic Babylon would have been nice…
I could never vote for a candidate who promoted abortion as a means for birth control. That is one issue I cannot let go of. Fiscal responsibility, civil authority, defense safety– all issues I need to consider. However, abortion is a hinge issue.
I don’t look for a person to be spiritual in an essentially unspiritual system. How would I really be able to tell anyhow? Referring to “God” in a debate? Seeing a prospective President keep his eyes shut while someone is praying? I am too far away from the person running for office and I am at the mercy of the editor controlling the sound bytes.
I simply discharge my responsibility as a follower of Christ in a democracy that grants me the privilege to belong to the system without promoting the system. I pray for wisdom and seek God’s face along the way.
I’m not sure what you mean by this. Are you saying you choose not to vote or that you let your faith guide you as you vote? Just want to clarify.
P.S. We are a Republic, not a Democracy. :^)
You are correct, I apologize. We are a republic, not a democracy.
I let my faith guide me when I vote while recognizing that the standard of my faith will probably not be met in any specific candidate. Therefore, I lean on Jesus and pray for wisdom and direction in how I interact in this republic. :O