Aug
2
Christians Cannot Ignore Politics in the Culture Wars
Despite the Judeo-Christian beginnings of the United States of America, there are some Americans these days who want to silence and marginalize Christians. (See my last couple posts.) While claiming to be “tolerant”, many will use bullying tactics to do so. (I suspect I’m not telling you anything new, here.)
Yet, some Christians seem to think that we (Christians) shouldn’t get involved in politics or fight for our freedoms in the public square. They typically argue that we should only be sharing the Gospel, and all other matters are mere “things of this world” or “God will protect His flock” or some such thing. They seem to take their very freedom to share that Gospel for granted. (Here, I’m speaking chiefly of those in the U.S., of course.)
I was listening to a recent podcast by Greg Koukl (str.org), in which he pointed out that the socio-political battle often has spiritual ramifications. Koukl then read the opening two paragraphs of the Preface to Hugh Hewitt’s book In, But Not Of. It applies here, so I transcribed Koukl’s reading of the text. (I did my best to guess the paragraph split.)
“If it’s true, as Jesus says it is, that He is ‘the Way, the Truth, and the Life; no one comes to the Father except through Me’ (John 14:6), then Salvation — happiness for infinity — depends upon the ability of individuals to hear the Gospel. The effective and mass communication of the Gospel depends upon the freedom to proclaim it.
Though it’s possible to proclaim the Gospel in the face of persecution, obviously, the unfettered freedom to do so is much, much more to be preferred. There are billions of souls who are up for eternal grabs, so the unfettered ability to reach them with the Good News is a great and wonderful thing. Hard to create, and difficult to defend. The creation and defense of religious liberty requires men and women with power and influence in the world.”
Now, to be honest, I would not use phrases like “happiness for infinity” and “up for eternal grabs”. There are also counterarguments to be made about Christianity’s history of growth under harsh conditions and oppression. Nevertheless, Hewitt’s point regarding religious liberty is well made.
Koukl also noted (though I’m paraphrasing a bit) that bad things happen to (or for) “good” people when we give up the field — surrender the battle — to those hostile to Christianity or to religion in general. This isn’t limited strictly to evangelization, either. We need to stand up to those who want to take away our constitutionally-recognized religious liberty, but we must do so in a principled way that is consistent with our values. This requires, as Hewitt said, having Christian (or, at least, Christian-friendly) people of power and influence in the world, who are in positions where they can fight the evil and promote the good.
