I am a relatively active user of Facebook. Although I try to be careful of the things I post, I enjoy making a witty comment about my world or the world, for all the world to see. And I have Facebook friends of all stripes, and I don't think I have ever defriended anyone, even when I found some of their postings to be personally offensive.
I saw a link to an article with a purposefully provocative title, "Why Evangelicals Hate Jesus". So I just had to read it. And after reading it, I just had to write. I would normally labor over my blog post a little more than I am this one. I may come back to it later for that. Right now, I just want to get it out there. Here is my response to this article.
Wow - I don't know where to start with this article. As an overarching comment, I would say that Jesus' teachings applied to individuals, not governments. Governments have responsibilities and capabilities that individuals do not, and vice versa.
The first accusation this article levels against evangelical Christians has to do with Jesus' teachings about mercy. It is not the government's job to show mercy, but to bear the sword, as Paul states (as he gives the principle of Jesus' pronouncement that Pilate had the power to crucify Him because God gave him that power). It is in the context of a government that shows some semblance of justice that the mercy of an individual can be demonstrated. Biblical Christians must demand justice for evil from their government (i.e. Amos 5:15), even as they show love and mercy and forgiveness to evildoers.
The second accusation has to do with Jesus' teachings about peace. Again, there is the intertwining of government and individual responsibilities. But there is also a misunderstanding about peace. But Jesus said there would be. He said, "My peace is not like the world's peace" and "Don't think that I have come to bring peace into the world. I have not come to bring peace but a sword." Jesus did come to bring peace, but it is a peace between a sinful individual and the Holy God. As for Jesus being completely non-violent, take a look at Luke 22:36 - he instructs us to buy a sword. Our Founding Fathers knew it was important to be able to be armed, and codified it as the Second Amendment. And as for the government, it has a responsibility to protect us from those who would kill us. We can't just say "Let's not fight" if the other side isn't willing to say the same thing. This is not war-mongering, this is protecting the people under its care.
The third accusation has to do with Jesus' teachings about money. In this section, there is an outright lie that Jesus condemned the rich. He did warn in very strong terms that riches have a way of making us not dependent on God, and thus it is very hard for a rich man to put his trust in God and thus go to Heaven. But keep in mind, Abraham, Job, David, and Solomon were all blessed by God with riches (among other things). This is the same God in both testaments. And God did not give governments the responsibility to be generous as he did individuals. If I give my money to the poor, it is charity. If the government takes my money and gives it to the poor, it is theft. By taking my money from me, the government robs me of an opportunity to be generous. And remember that the Bible also says he that doesn't work doesn't eat.
But even though this article completely misunderstands Christianity and the teachings of Jesus, there is a point that Biblical Christians are not perfect followers of God's commands. But they are not complete failures either. Southern Baptists were one of the biggest groups giving help of all sorts (clearing debris, feeding, providing showers, etc.) after Hurricane Katrina. We have been responding in very significant ways to some of the world's biggest crises, like the earthquakes in Haiti and Japan.
So social scientists say evangelical Christians are failing, but they are looking at our results with the wrong answer sheet. And that's to be expected. If they really understood what Christianity was all about, they would be one.
The third accusation has to do with Jesus' teachings about money. In this section, there is an outright lie that Jesus condemned the rich. He did warn in very strong terms that riches have a way of making us not dependent on God, and thus it is very hard for a rich man to put his trust in God and thus go to Heaven. But keep in mind, Abraham, Job, David, and Solomon were all blessed by God with riches (among other things). This is the same God in both testaments. And God did not give governments the responsibility to be generous as he did individuals. If I give my money to the poor, it is charity. If the government takes my money and gives it to the poor, it is theft. By taking my money from me, the government robs me of an opportunity to be generous. And remember that the Bible also says he that doesn't work doesn't eat.
But even though this article completely misunderstands Christianity and the teachings of Jesus, there is a point that Biblical Christians are not perfect followers of God's commands. But they are not complete failures either. Southern Baptists were one of the biggest groups giving help of all sorts (clearing debris, feeding, providing showers, etc.) after Hurricane Katrina. We have been responding in very significant ways to some of the world's biggest crises, like the earthquakes in Haiti and Japan.
