winsome

  

In his book on spiritual discipline, John Ortberg tells the story of "Hank," a cranky fellow who had been attending church for years, with little to no visible growth or maturity. One observation made from this revealed the importance of expectation: "We didn't expect that he would progressively become the way Jesus would be if he were in Hank's place." There was no real prospect of sanctification, even though this fellow was part of the church community for so long. And this story is compelling, not simply because we all can think of a man or woman like Hank in our own experiences of church. Rather, this one example serves as a picture of the larger church. 

We are experiencing the fruits of an entire generation that has been brought up in a church with every conceivable cultural advantage imaginable. The American church culture is "doing church" at a more polished and professional level, on a more widespread scale, than ever before in world history. But what about the fruit that is being produced from this present culture of faith?

Biblical literacy rates continue to be quite low; processing Christian worldview is largely nonexistent; the consumerist culture has overtaken much of congregational dynamics; and socio-political activism has, in many ways, pushed out the unit of the Spirit.

These trends have not made for a more acceptable Christianity, as is constantly promised by those who advocate for such accommodation. In some cases, there has been a joining together of church and culture, although never without a loss of the distinctiveness of the gospel as a result. (The gospel with adjectives is always a distortion of the gospel itself, which is a natural human tendency to be guarded against, not celebrated.) What is the point of the church community? Why would the church want to be like everyone else?

The latter question is simple: the people of God have had a continual problem of wanting to be like everyone else. Just ask Samuel, who walked away frustrated at Israel's desire for a king even though he had just outlined all of the negative effects of having an instituted monarchy; or the author of Revelation, who pushed his seven congregations to stand firm against the shifting tides of cultural accommodation.

The point of a church community is to be, in Hauerwas and Willimon's words, a colony of heaven in a culture of hell. That means we are to be different: set apart: holy. Our present internal struggle as the people of God is revealing some disturbing truths about where we stand. This is not a political statement, except to say that our national politics have been granted too much power to influence the American church. 

And thus, the church is presently being drawn into the ugly rhetoric of politics, even going so far as to force-fit the message of the gospel into the language of political argument. The melody of love, however, cannot be communicated in chords of dissonance. The church is not called to wage war with the weapons of this world, and so must work to stand apart, driven by the Spirit, to be winsome.

What would happen if the church spoke of the gospel with the genuine expectation that it would change those who encountered it? What would happen if we thought that the message of the gospel had this power on its own, without our dressing it up or dumbing it down? (As though we could genuinely improve on the work that has been accomplished in Christ.)

In a world filled with anger and rage and hate and riots and conquest and bitterness and greed (and that is just the first five weeks of 2021), would it not be a radical statement indeed to have a community of faith that embodied an overwhelming love for one another, so genuine that it spilled out into the world around us? I am convinced that this would wreak more havoc on the world than a thousand protests, and would cause more disruption to the status quo than a million executive orders. A community that could speak truth in chords of love would upend the power structures so much that they would almost certainly be declared an enemy of the state, for there would be an undoubted allegiance being given to another kingdom and another king.

While so many Christians today are worried about national and international affairs, or the condition of the economy, or the wars and rumors of wars that swirl around us, it is good for us to remember that our greatest work is right in front of us: the Spirit has called and equipped us to love each other and to do our best to put others before ourselves, and to meet the needs of men and women right next door. This happens, not by winning online arguments or scoring political points. Rather, this comes from loving our neighbors as we love ourselves. Being winsome.

Lord, may we have tenacious winsome courage to live the gospel and see your kingdom coming no matter what the stuff of earth may be.

The Spiritual Danger of Anti-Trumpism

The Spiritual Danger of Anti-Trumpism

Michael C Thompson

In the middle of 2020 thirty self-identified evangelical Christians came together and published the book, The Spiritual Danger of Donald Trump (Cascade Books). Twenty-five chapters set out to criticize the character and leadership of the sitting President, unsurprisingly released in an election year. The fact that there were as many as thirty authors producing some twenty-five chapters of content was supposed to be a convincing and convicting statement, so bravely offered at such a critical juncture in our nation’s history. In reality, it wasn’t earth-shaking and actually failed to produce any critique that could be divorced from the narratives of other mainstream media. Nevertheless, it was an intentional statement: one that would give a certain reinforcement to many Anti-Trump voices in the ever-shifting demographic of evangelicalism.

Over the past four years there has been an ever-increasing decrying of what some have labelled, Trumpism. This term has a few meanings, but within the church it is intended as a criticism of any believer who may actually give any sort of political or personal support to President Trump. It is no secret that our governing elitists, along with their media cohorts, have been trying to ruin Trump and destroy his presidency since before the beginning of his term. One hit-piece after another has filled the media stage, often masquerading as news, regardless of the availability of supporting facts or credible sources. Especially in the early days of figuring out who Trump as President was going to be, many within the church took these accounts and felt a moral obligation to raise their voices against it. Although many have moved on from these juvenile attacks, others have not.

This idea of Trumpism has never been clearly defined, and even now remains vague. As a criticism of Christians its claim is that political support of President Trump is essentially wrapping the flag of nationalism over the commitment to the Cross. For this label to have its intended effect it cannot be more precisely defined, lest we discover that there are many who do not simply fit within the nationalistic categories. Like most socio-political labels, this one unfairly and uniformity lays over a wide range of people, discounting their layers of diversity, and works simply to make it easy to score public debate points against them. In reality, the vast majority of Christians who support Trump do not believe their political commitment has superseded their faith commitment. And yet, that is how they have been treated, even by those within the church.

Ironically, the push against so-called Trumpism has led to the rise of Anti-Trumpism, a movement with a simple purpose: to be against Trump and any of his supporters. This, I believe is taking place within the American church, not only in the production of critical books by evangelicals, but within the broader spectrum of our ecclesial communities. Because this backlash, like other movements, is based on politics, there is inherent spiritual dangers to be identified as well. Unsurprisingly, very few of these no-Trump evangelical voices have raised their concerns over things happening within the Anti-Trumpism movement, even though they posture themselves as prophetic enough to be above the fray. This essay is my attempt to outline some of these widespread dangers that I feel are working against the unity of the church. I am not a politician, though I can recognize my political biases. I am a biblical scholar and theologian, and so I will keep my concerns centered on the church. My aim is to balance out some of the rhetoric so that Christianity in American can return to a more responsible form of public discourse, for the sake of the gospel.

Instead of dragging this out into twenty-five needless chapters, I present five identifiable dangers that ought to be considered regarding the Anti-Trumpism movement: things that are particularly concerning in light of the biblical commitment Christians ought to have.

First, Anti-Trumpism presents a spiritual danger in allowing for a loss of commitment to truth as it stands. This can be a challenging claim to make, for it can be quickly dismissed as though I am simply declaring any competing political viewpoint from my own as a non-truth. This is most certainly not the case: instead, I am referring tot he priority that is being given to the narrative of Anti-Trumpism that overrides facts that may prove otherwise, or which might show some sort of nuance. In our national political discourse it appears that there is no place for nuance, which is quite troublesome, but it is most definitely harmful within the life of the church. The narrative that Trump is such a terrible human being has been so constantly pushed by the media, that one’s anger would certainly be justified if it were proven true. But the overwhelming majority of these claims have no credible evidence or witness. It appears the filter has been set, and adopted by certain people within the church.

One recent example I have seen has been in regards to President Trump’s pro-life stance. In two separate online discussions I read the criticism that Trump was only “apparently” pro-life, and that he secretly mocks the movement’s proponents behind closed doors. The intent of this claim is to overthrow Trump’s official statements, speeches, and policies that make him the most pro-life president in American history with some sort of random hearsay. Advocating for this assertion is a foremost dedication to the Anti-Trump narrative.

The same could be pointed out regarding the Capitol Hill riots: once the narrative was set that Trump “incited” the attack on the Capitol, he was decried by voices throughout the Anti-Trumpism movement, especially within the church. As more details emerged (and continue to come to light), showing the President’s distance from the event, the evangelical Anti-Trump crowd has contorted around the facts yet again, claiming he probably still had influence in planning the event.

Along with the loss of commitment to the truth is the unfortunate reality that so many in our society have become downright lazy in how they obtain their news. Admittedly, most people simply don’t have the time or leftover energy to be doing the work that news media ought to do (and used to do). But we do in fact live in an age where much of the news media has proven itself to be untrustworthy, and it is a necessary task of those who would be responsible citizens, especially within the church. If believers do not have the capacity to acknowledge truth, even when it is uncomfortable, then we cannot have a credible voice in the public square. Since the church is responsible for the much more powerful and significant gospel narrative, failure to rightly handle truth will be a serious detriment to the community of faith. Anti-Trumpism fails in its understanding of the great conversations of faith and freedom that have both served as foundational to our nation and history, and which can contribute today.

Second, Anti-Trumpism presents a spiritual danger in its giving rise to the tendency to question the validity of faith in others. Mostly this done implicitly, but every now and again it becomes explicit. It is unfortunate that social tensions can rise to the point of making political judgments the plumb line for one’s faith commitment as a whole. There seems to be a growing acceptance of this idea that agreement with Trump on anything simply exposes an individual’s lack of understanding or commitment to biblical faith.

The biggest offender of calling into question the genuineness of other people’s faith was former editor-in-chief of Christianity Today, Mark Galli, who in December 2019 published a rather standard Anti-Trump editorial in which he openly called for those who supported the President to remember who they are and who they serve. Implication: you cannot be politically supportive of anything this man says or does without compromising the centrality of your Christian commitment. Although this sort of rhetoric ought to be completely out-of-bounds for discussions within the church, Galli’s piece was lauded by many evangelical Anti-Trumpists as a bold statement. In reality, his comments were so poorly reasoned that the piece has already been tossed aside, and Mark’s fifteen minutes as a media darling are expired.

What we see in this second danger is that it comes from a rise of modern day public propheticism within American evangelical circles, using a rather formulaic approach to provide the individual (or group) to make an openly Anti-Trump statement using language that makes it appears that this person is, in reality, above the fray and thus speaking for God. Galli’s article is a prime example of this, even though the substance of his statement is no different than what one can find in other mainstream leftist commentary. Christianity in America needs to come to grips with the reality that our nation is in much more critical need of pastoral voices than pseudo-prophetic ones.

Third, Anti-Trumpism presents a spiritual danger in the perpetuation of moral double-standards in our society. Yet again, it appears that a leftist political maneuver has been adopted into evangelical language. There has been a multitude of moral concerns surrounding President Trump, most of which have been shown false and a few that have some degree of validity. Personally, I find him just as human as any other person who has held the office, with a life including behaviors that I can choose to accept or reject. So, yes, there are more than likely moral deficiencies that a committed Christian can identify. I have no particular problem with this, except that the Anti-Trumpism movement has so hammered this person while being very silent on other immoral public behavior in our country. The old political adage rings true: “If you don’t have standards you can’t be held accountable to them.”

The Christian ought to have clear moral standards, even though numerous believers on both sides of the political aisle have often lost sight of them. The Bible doesn’t give us clear answers for every ethical question for this life, but it does provide a worldview to properly approach and explore any issue. When so many would-be prophets from the Anti-Trump position join in wave of criticisms of the President’s faults, while at the same time remaining silent on the left’s numerous and repeated encouragement of lawlessness and the destruction of cities, then the church is being asked to serve as a shell for a political party. Christians can stand against immorality whenever and wherever it occurs, but being selective as we have seen from Anti-Trumpism is being irresponsible with the message of the gospel.

Fourth Anti-Trumpism presents a spiritual danger in aligning men and women of the gospel with morally reprehensible leadership. I am aware that this is one of the core concerns of the Anti-Trump movement, and perhaps this is an indication that no politician is completely above reproach. But the growing anger at the President and the push to have him removed from office at all costs has swept many evangelicals into its undertow. As a result, there has been both implicit and explicit advocating of a political candidate (and his running mate) who have repeatedly made racist comments, who ave openly supported riots and looters (both verbally and financially), who advocate for eight-year-olds to have the ability to choose their own gender, who have made egregious personal attacks on their political opponents and their families, that have been a part of an administration that started illegal wars, have supported ideas and policies that go against religious freedom, among other things. 

The 2020 election made it clear that not everyone is willing to have an open and honest conversation about these matters if it would potentially harm the efforts to oust Trump from office. So, through the Anti-Trump movement has allowed for the strange bedfellows of leftist politics and evangelical Christians. I do not believe that those evangelicals who helped push through this leftism have a real sense of the spiritual danger they have invited into the nation’s leadership.

Fifth, Anti-Trumpism presents a spiritual danger as it fosters a growing acceptance of the advantages in accumulating and achieving political power. For years, Christians on the right hav been criticized for this approach, and in many cases this critique has been warranted. For the Christian there is no power or allegiance greater than the Kingship of Jesus. The Religious Right movement of the previous generation may have been an out-of-balance approach, but Anti-Trumpism is equally flawed on its own. Political power should not be the aim of the church, although the work of politics is a necessary endeavor to preserve the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity. It has been shown that conservatives in American government are actually much less concerned with gaining power than are the leftists. Christians on the right have demonstrated a firm commitment to the rule of law and the Constitution, and this is what one will find among Trump supporters up and down the line.

From a Christian point of view there is room for criticism of Donald Trump, and I am intellectually honest enough in my faith to say so. However, the onslaught of personal and political attacks that have been levied against this President is unprecedented, without a close second, and if that were all I knew about him then I would very much be opposed. But what if there was a chance that the steady diet of negativity we’ve been fed wasn’t actually the truth?

As a Christ-follower I would suppose that it would be my responsibility to look deeper, if not for the sake of my politics but for the sake of the imago Dei that affords each person the respect of being created. I would look deeper, knowing what it’s like, for myself and my family, to be personally and professionally maligned publicly for things you’ve never said nor done. Behind all of this cost-of-doing-business mudslinging that is American politics is the issue of our humanity. If we do not like how another person conducts themselves in public debate, we can choose to roll around in the mud or rise above. Politicians may do what they like, but the church ought to have a different approach.

Christ calls us each to a life more abundant, which gives us the right to be called children of God and the responsibility to change the world around us with the gospel. The constant pounding of the Anti-Trump drum within the church is drowning out the chords of unity and truth and love. Some will read this statement and say that the exact opposite is true, and I would not necessarily disagree. I submit this statement as one seeking balance, not the short-sighted victory of my political opinion.

Many will dismiss me outright as a shill for Trump: someone so blinded in his political devotion to a President that he has sacrificed his commitment to the Cross. I assure you nothing could be further from the truth. Mine is a simple assertion that the church can do much better than yelling at one another, demeaning each other’s political commitment, and assuming that roughly half of the country is comprised by idiots. In that regard, I am cutting both ways and encouraging believers to stand together, even in our political disagreements, for something of much greater value. Even through my great love for this great country I wholeheartedly understand that freedom is both a right and a responsibility, and that all things will pass away, except the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ.

The spiritual danger is actually on many sides of the church. But even these, playing the role of the Gates of Hell, cannot overcome the people of God.

Christ in culture or Christ in culture?

I remember standing by the front doors after Sunday service when a woman walked up to me in a rather stern manner, grabbed hold of my arm and said, "Don't get political when you are preaching. Just don't."

What did I say to her? Well, what could I say to her? I had no idea what she was talking about, to be completely honest about it. After a few moments of a marginally less confrontational discussion I discovered that she was referring to a community issue involving the public school system, and I was completely unaware of what was going on. In the days that followed I asked around and, as it turns out, very few people knew much about the conflict, as it had something to do with mostly closed-door discussions involving the teacher union and upcoming contracts (and who knows what else).

But, this particular woman – a retired teacher – had heard my morning message in the context of the world she had dragged in with her that particular Sunday morning. Truth be told, we all do this, and even the best of us get tripped up in our worship and prayer when we cannot shake off the storms that so often whip around us. My point is the perspective that was revealed in her comment: Don't get political in the work of the church has been something that I have been warned against (mostly in more constructive ways than this instance) my entire ministry career. I understand this concept, though I do not believe there is such a thing as an apolitical Christianity. Yet, I am increasingly disturbed when the flag gets draped over the cross and our allegiance to Christ made subservient to our nation.

At this point comes the "full disclosure" for this issue: I am a Constitutional conservative as well as a biblical conservative (though I am not what would be considered a fundamentalist). I am an evangelical pastor presently working in a socially mixed (and somewhat evangelical) denomination. I work hard to understand the matters of faith and freedom so as to be responsible to both. Yet, I also work diligently to keep my political and social ideology held captive to the kingship of Christ Jesus. My ministry work becomes "political" only in those times when social issues decide to cross into the realm of faith and morality – which is increasingly so. But it must be said that my goal is not to support a party, candidate, legislation, or position. My aim is to be a faithful interpreter of Scripture.

Having said that, I wish to make a brief comment on the present nature of our public discourse, especially that which is coming from the church. Yes, don't be political has been the resounding message, in part as backlash to the Moral Majority and Religious Right movements of years past. This is understandable, but now the pendulum is swinging too far the other way. Many contemporary voices within the church have warned against being political, frowning upon evangelical voices engaging in public policy. But as I struggle to make sense of all that's being said and done around me right now, it has become evident: Don't become political ... unless your politics agrees with me.

There is a movement within American Christianity that is moving along these lines, increasing their level of political rhetoric with the implied tag-along of if you don't agree with these political positions you are probably not seriously following Christ.

Our culture is presently working through the emotional aftermath of a mass murder at a high school. There are many who are (rightfully) disturbed by this event, and the recent string of such violence over the past few years. It is unfortunate that so many rush to advocate their position rather than to grieve and pause and pray before speaking. Far too many politicians and pundits race to be the first one to call for an advancement of their position, and the church doesn't need to contribute to that noise. If the gospel is as emotionally-reactive as the world, then what good is it?

The voices that have clamored Don't get political have reminded us that the answer doesn't come from improved legislation or policy. On this we can find agreement. But in the wake of this tragedy even voices from within the church are jumping on the law-making bandwagon because, "thoughts and prayers are not enough without policy and action," as one on-liner has said. Of course, there are many secular voices who have already seized this opportunity to mock the effectiveness of prayer (their heyday was Sutherland Springs). Does the church need to contribute to this?

When I speak about the atrocity of abortion, with more than 60 million lives violently ripped out of their mother's wombs in this country alone since 1973, I am told that it is not my place to become political (as if this were a political problem and not a moral issue). And many in the church remain silent. When gun deaths reach into the thousands in our society (a number that has decreased in the last number of years), we must take up the cause loudly.

When I speak about the millions of lives that are caught up in human slavery and trafficking, the issue is typically mulled over for a moment and then shrugged off (sometimes, even a joke about prostitution is thrown in). And many in the church remain silent. When the cultural crowd gets loud about DACA then it is a Christian 'duty' to picket prayer breakfasts and label dissenters as hate-filled individuals who lack the love of Jesus in their hearts.

What is missing from all of it is an actual discussion, and actual facts. This is a sad place to be for the church, which is supposed to be the primary place for pursuing truth and life and justice and righteousness in this world. Those who for so long have preached Don't get political have done so on the basis of government not being the forum for such societal change. In a blatant and pathetic irony, those same voices are now unsettled by the thought what needs to change is the human heart. In other words, the gospel is suddenly in need of governmental support if it is to make a difference in our nation. And, what is much worse, it seems to be acceptable from this position to caricature and name-call those with whom one disagrees.

Social issues are social issues, and politics is a terrible place to be the church. I disagree with men and women whom I otherwise admire in the faith on a number of such issues. But it has always been my position to hold together in the unity of Christ more than being divided by national discord. Unfortunately, the emotionally-driven nature of many of the current issues has changed the tone of many in the American church (and not all of them leftist or mainstream – there are many 'conservative evangelicals' who have found their way along this path as well).

I spent many years overly engaged in the political rhetoric of our national culture. It made me angry and miserable most of the time, and there were voices telling me to back away from it. They were right, and the same needs to be said to many today who have suddenly found themselves on the receiving end of political right-and-left and whatever else. It is not for us to be disengaged from public discourse, but to remember that we are to be centered on Christ and tenacious for truth, no matter where it might lead us. The challenges will always be in front of us to live as though Christ were King of this world ... because he most certainly is.

Though I wish I could have a conversation about these matters with many of my friends, I so often refrain for the damage it could do to our relationship and the Spirit of Christ that presently binds us together. That, in and of itself, is a sad sign of our present situation. I do not pray against any other believer, nor do I regard any person (in the faith or otherwise) as an enemy. But I do continually and repeatedly ask for God to show all things in the Light so that all may see and know the truth. I hope that this can invade the church before it is too late.

to the one who has an ear

"I have told you these things so that in me you may have peace. In the world you will have trouble and suffering, but take courage — I have conquered the world." (Jesus, recorded in John 16:33)

Tragedy once again dominates our headlines. Such news is becoming too common for us, as the cultural hysteria seems to confirm. There are those who, in a rush to push their political agendas, trample over the victims in their anger-driven vitriol. And then there are those who will be "shocked" by the news, but will quickly move about their day as though nothing was really going on.

One Christian writer recently connected the divisions and animosity towards one another to the Twitter habits of President Trump. A secular commentator referred to America's "culture of violence" as the reason for mass shootings. And a hundred more voices are already buzzing about the lack of gun control as the primary cause for violence in our country.

I am looking for the reassuring voices that echo the words of Christ: take courage – I have conquered the world. My present post is not directed to those who stand outside of the kingdom of God, who do not consider themselves serious disciples of Jesus. This one is for the church, and for one very good reason: there are matters of faith that those who are not receptive to the Spirit will not understand. When Jesus said, "But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth" (John 16:13), he was speaking about the ability to hear and understand his message. And coming to understand and accept the gospel — every part of it — is difficult and demanding. Living in the gospel is impossible without the presence of the Spirit, and so is having a mind to understand it.

My concern for the church in this hour is that we are looking at tragedies, especially acts of terrorism against the gathered assemblies of believers in our country, and we are too quick to follow worldly cues in searching for answers. At this point, I should make it clear that we will now have to further limit our discussion to the church in America, as we are so unaccustomed to having our churches come under such attack. Our dialogue must be limited here, because there are believers throughout the world who suffer tremendous tragedy and horrific evil as an ongoing reality of their commitment to Christ. In such places, the church is doing a tremendous work and the work of the Spirit is active and vibrant, and they never get stuck on the question of Why us?

These suffering believers throughout the world already know the problem and the answer: Jesus.

For many years I have heard pastors and church leaders talk about the potential for backlash and violence that can come upon their congregations with a smug, "Well, if we are attacked then we must be doing something right." That overconfidence is quickly reduced to rubble at the slightest sign of trouble, and it is utter theological chaos when a bona fide tragedy arrives. It seems to me, in the words of our songwriting friend, Rich, that "we are not as strong as we think we are."

We say that a person's faith commitment will be evident in the things that they say and do (see Matthew 15:11). We believe that if a person is devoted to the gospel that this will have an effect on their thoughts, their words, their behavior. We say that prayer is essential to the life of the Christian, and that it will form us into the believers Christ has called us to be, and that this will give us the words of Spirit when they are needed most. These are central convictions of spiritual growth and maturity in the faith, and yet so many things are said that do not sound like the gospel.

Perhaps it is true that we are not called to judge anyone for their words or behavior. This is reserved for Almighty God. But perhaps there is enough in scripture to show us that we are indeed called to be fruit inspectors, those who can hear and evaluate one another and speak in ways that sharpen the sword of truth in our lives. Perhaps this means that we can read and hear responses to evil that comes against the Church and know whether the Spirit is present or not.

My current concern is that there are many churchgoers who do not study the Word of truth, do not pray and listen to the Spirit, and are thus sharing a belief that is shaped more by the world than by Christ, and that such messages are readily accepted by others who cannot evaluate from the Word or Spirit.

How can I know these things?

If you believe that hatred is a byproduct of the election of a particular president, then you have not understood the gospel.

If you think that abolishing firearms will put an end to violence (or take a dramatic step in that direction), then you have misunderstood the gospel.

If you consider a church community to be inherently at fault for an act of terrorism against them, then you most likely have not comprehended the gospel.

Specifically to that last point: let me quickly say that I understand that certain religious groups and organizations can say or do things that cause difficulty for themselves. But at no point does this provide justification for shootings and acts of hatred to this degree. To those who suffer as a result of their faith, for the work they are doing to live out the gospel in environments hostile to the message of Christ, again I submit that this is not justification for the work of evil to come upon them. When we consider the "culture of violence" that so many wish to cite, it is important to note that the gospel — by its very nature — works to strip all violence of its power, through the sacrificial service of the Lamb, to be followed by each of his followers. For these reasons, I submit that my last point stands, for there is no justification, even within the gospel, for such evil to come upon the church. What we have instead, is a reason for those who follow Jesus to know that such things will occur.

The promise that Christ gives to his disciples is that he has conquered the world, and evil's fury will not have the final word. In the past number of years those who have modeled this as believers — the demonstration of faith to degrees more shocking than the violence they faced — were those in the Amish community near Nickel Mines in 2006. For so many churchgoers who would consider the Amish faith to be no more than a humorous novelty, when life became deadly serious it was them who showed us the power of the gospel in acts of love and forgiveness. And they showed us courage to walk forward in their faith, with the eyes of the world upon them, unhindered in their devotion.

Such a contrast to the blaming and shaming and shouting that dominates our mainstream culture so much that it dictates the way in which most churchgoers will even begin to process such tragic events. And therein lies the greater tragedy of all, perhaps the very reason why our nation rages in this hour: we have ignored the Spirit's leading, and have now lost our ability to hear.

I mean, just listen to everything that is being said from within the church today ...

you don't have to explain this one

"Come now, let us settle the matter," says the LORD. "Though your sins are like scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they are red as crimson, they shall be like wool."

Isaiah 1:18


In the overnight hours the news came that our nation had elected our next President, thus bringing to a close another election cycle that had long grown weary and tired. To some degree or another, every election season wears on the American people and brings families, friends, and communities to feverish debate over which candidate will be the best in moving forward. This year the election is being called historic, for the presidency has gone to someone with no prior political or governing or military experience, and who has defied the odds put up by those who thought he had no legitimate chance of winning.

There have been fifty-eight presidential elections in our nation's history, and this is not the first time scandal, corruption, and immoral behavior have tainted the candidates. I am not a historian enough to know if these items have ever before been such a considerable factor for both candidates throughout the process, but at least in my lifetime this is unique. As a Christian pastor I have spent a considerable amount of time considering, speaking about, and listening to the moral issues that have surrounded this election and the persons involved. And I have had many conversations with Christian men and women who have labored and thought and prayed over how best to handle the choice between these two. From my finger-in-the-water sense of it, this has not been an easy road for many.

And now that it is over we are entering into the post-election onslaught of second-guessing, lamenting, and even moralizing. Let me say that I understand the general sense of frustration and uncertainty that presently exists, and even that there are some who are taking the results of this election rather personally. What is more, I have seen enough to know that such reactions are part and parcel for the days and weeks after an election (then it usually gets 'back to normal' after that). As we stand at this particular point of our history, however, the nature of the questionable moral character of the President-Elect has made for some very sharp criticism of him, and for those who voted for him.

There are many levels of this aspect of the election that need to be examined, but this post will only be able to deal with one in particular: the moral superiority of many Christians who are choosing to be overly critical of other Christians who voted for Donald Trump. Of course, there are many self-identified Christians in our country who aren't particularly serious about their faith, or who aren't necessarily 'biblical' in their worldview. Perhaps we can set this sub-group to the side for a moment. But, based on the statistics, there are many men and women of biblical faith who have cast their votes for the President-Elect.

And now the questioning has been set loose on all the country: Why? How could you? What are you thinking? Do you not even care about what the Bible says? These are some of the sentiments that have been running across my social media feeds throughout the day. The vast majority of these comments are not intended to hear and understand, but to express disappointment and frustration. I have rolled right on by most of these because they are emotive reactions. There have been, however, a couple of times today where I have the statement that evangelicals who cast their vote for Trump "have some explaining to do."

I am beside myself that some self-appointed moral authority has decided to call out other believers to justify their choice, as though we answer to some national spiritual parental presence. Even still, this is not the language of understanding, but of accusation for doing something that is so clearly in the wrong – this coupled with the conclusion that just over half of our nation has gone off the rails in that they would even think of voting this way in the first place. This is not the language of reason, and it is a fundamental truth that one cannot reason with emotion. However, you can respond, and that is what I feel I need to do here.

Rather than passing judgment from one believer to another, let us reason together what happens when there is a choice between two people (no, third party candidates are not viable to this election and very few were under the impression that they were). The Republican primary cycle was quite interesting, for a few reasons. One of the more fascinating pieces is that Trump won states that had 'open' primaries (in which people from any party could vote on the Republican ticket), and did not win states that held 'closed' primaries (where only registered Republicans could participate in the vote). American Evangelicals, for the most part, tend to be socially and politically conservative, and so their role in the primary process is worth considering. Without getting into a sea of nuance and overly-justifying every statement, suffice it so say that conservative evangelicals in large part were not in overwhelming support of Trump. This warming-up to the Republican nominee started to happen when other viable candidates had fallen by the wayside.

Where I live, the primary race was decided before we had a chance to cast our ballots. And so, between those who voted for another person in the primary or who had no choice to cast a meaningful vote in the primary, there were a good number of American Evangelicals who were left between two people with whom they had serious issues of moral and political leadership and character. But – and this is important – November 8 came anyway, and these were the names before our country. This is where the prayer and consideration really hits hard: some will say 'Never Hillary' and I can understand that as a reason; some will say 'Never Trump' and I can understand that as a reason; some will find some virtue in her and in him and, though I strongly question this, I can understand this as a reason; some will refrain from voting for either, and I can understand this as a reason.

Add to this the social and political climate that has been over the past six months, not only among the candidates themselves, with their brash talk and manipulative speech. I find it fascinating that the moralizing voices that are calling fellow believers to explain themselves and their choices, that any attempt to have a serious discussion about these candidates up to this point has been met with dismissive attitudes and demeaning response. It is hard to have a reasonable conversation about issues and candidates when the very mention of either candidate brings eye-rolling, scoffs, and an overall dismissive response. Speaking politics in the realm of the church community has become tense and fearful and divisive. Believers have allowed modern politics to divide the church quite easily, and our fellow brothers and sisters who struggled with how to live out their faith in this election might very well have appreciated a place where we could edify one another instead of looking down upon those with whom we disagree.

Now is the time for these to offer explanation? No. Within the church community the time to hear one another every day. And those who are stunned by this election and who cannot comprehend why so-called evangelicals could cast their votes en masse for Donald Trump are simply not hearing the frustration with the issues that is plaguing the church today. You see, this is not a simple issue of checking-a-box – a great many of our fellow believers struggled with this through and through. I know that I have wrestled with this election each time it has crossed my television, radio, mailbox, and conversation.

The Christian knows that we live before Almighty God, who sees into the human heart. When we are right and when we are wrong he knows our thoughts and our motives. He understands our struggles and our entanglements, and he loves us just as we are. And our Creator is the only one who can rightly judge the individual for what has been done, thus making him the only one who ever requires explanation. All other attempts to push this issue are simply the feeble acts of moral superiority that strip us of our humility in all of this and attempt to give us the role of examiner.

No, you need not explain yourself for any of the votes you cast on any level of your ballot. This is not only the virtue of the American system, but also the moral reality that is before Almighty God. But you do need to live your life tomorrow, the next day, and every day that he gives you breath, and you do need to walk in a way that honors the rightful king of the universe. Elections are neither the problem nor the solution – they are events that can reflect and affect the climate of our culture. As for what we do with them as believers, this begins with the simple truth that we will never find political answers to spiritual problems. Electing the "right person" will never achieve that which is given to the church as a daily exercise in making disciples of all nations with the continuing presence of Christ Jesus.

Perhaps once we have begun to truly rely on his kingship, beyond the snarky internet memes, we will stop the over-dramatizing of fear and loathing and dread that make us all look like a hopeless lot. Fear drove both of these campaigns, and believers were wrong to get swept up in it. Fear is now driving a lot of the response to who won (it would have been the same from the other side), and believers are wrong to get swept up in it. There is no fear in love. But perfect love drives out fear, because fear has to do with punishment. The one who fears is not made perfect in love. (1 John 4:18)

Let us as a church not betray the love that we have experienced because we have disagreed with many of our brothers and sisters in how they voted – either direction. If we cannot work in genuine love, devoid of self-aggrandizement and backhanded moralizing, then we have surrendered the unity of the Holy Spirit to the empty shell of political power. "By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another." (John 13:35)

It will be an incredible experience for the American Christian to realize that he really isn't surrounded by bad or stupid people – it's just that evangelicalism seems to be hurting from what we've allowed our church experience to become. And there is so much more when we all surrender everything we hold dear – even our candidates and elections – to the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus our Lord, to which all else is abandoned to the dustbin of eternity.

peace and war

Blessed are the peacemakers,

for they will be called children of God.

Matthew 5:9

Jesus once spoke a blessing upon those who would work to bring about peace in this world. This was no starry-eyed platitude, expressing the niceties of a beauty pageant or second-rate political campaign. It was rather a declaration set within the context of God's kingdom making its way into our present experience. The notion of peace was central to the Jewish concept(s) of the messianic kingdom that was to be established on the earth (Isaiah 9:5–6; Zechariah 9:9–10). And so, Jesus is commending those whose lives will demonstrate the reality of God's rule by working to bring about peace.

We should remember that Jesus also commends those who hunger and thirst for righteousness (Mt. 5:5), and so would envision the peace of God's reign to come in the context of justice in our world. So, again, this peace cannot be taken on the level of throwing pennies in a wishing-well, but rather the demonstrable outworking of the ethics of God's kingdom in a way that establishes peace and righteousness as a reality for the poor and oppressed among us.

It is interesting that Jesus would give to his followers the task of establishing a righteous peace in the world, for he lived in a world that was saturated with systems and images of worldwide peace. The empire that ruled the day would idealize a Pax Romana (Roman peace), an achievement that was believed to validate the Roman's right to rule, so given by the gods who had blessed their expansion and influence. In many ways Pax Romana was indeed a great accomplishment, especially in a world that had never been without constant tribal wars and conflict among regional leaders. And to bring about such peace not only gave demonstration to the superiority of Roman culture, it also demonstrated the legitimacy of Roman power.

The Romans believed that peace was established when their empire was able to conquer a region and put down any rebellion that opposed their rule. Perhaps this was the first example of the peace-through-strength model of governance (though that phrase has taken some variation throughout history). The idea of Pax Romana was not pursued as some utopian desire for worldwide friendship, but rather for the unashamed benefit of Rome itself, especially those in positions of power and leadership within the empire.

When Jesus calls his disciples to be peacemakers, he is making a summons to do so in contrast with the powers that be in the world – those who would so narrowly-define peace as 'we win, you lose' and use their might to get their own way. And Jesus does not teach us this in the context of running empires or influencing the masses. Instead, his words are spoken to the few that will follow the demands of discipleship and will work in their interpersonal relationships to transform individuals with the presence of his kingdom of righteous peace. He knows that this will not bring an immediate change to the culture – empires are not toppled overnight – but he also knows that politically-enacted change will not endure.

In the current political climate of American evangelicalism, the notion of being a peacemaker has taken a back seat to a gospel driven by influence and cultural significance. We have been convinced that we are in the throws of a crisis, and that the only way forward is to get as much control as we can as quickly as possible. Obtaining this sort of power is how we can save ourselves, keep the world from disaster, and establish our peace.

When we examine the current state of our presidential political campaign, there are many within the church who are choosing to find the one person who will secure this sort of strength within our government to establish the nation we think is best for ourselves. Never mind the moral failures, disregard the dishonesty, and look past the plans that isolate us from one another, our behavior appears to say that there are more pressing matters today than whether or not we will live for the gospel. Perhaps once we have secured our own liberty and peace, then we can consider Jesus' teachings of love for one another. It is much easier to join movements that fight for power and control of a nation than to be a people who carry the transformative change of the gospel to individuals who are hurting, poor and oppressed.

It seems that everyone wants to speak about where we go from here, and how we are going to make this work (or which of these is the lesser-of-two-evils). But nobody is interested in examining how we arrived at this point in the first place – our willing dismissal of the gospel is not a recent development, but rather a pattern of disregard that has been building to this moment of national moral crisis. This is why a church can be looking for conquering leaders and militant solutions, despite the fact that our Lord told us to speak and act in a radically different way.

The church needs to lay down the world's weapons of war, and become people who work for God's rule to take its place, one life at a time. Peace and life are found in this kingdom, not in the poor copies we have tried to make for ourselves. The Romans did not have a monopoly on running empires of military might, and we still must make the choice of which kingdom we will choose to be a part of, even if we self-identify as Christians. Our nation will not return from this brink until the people of God can return to the message of the gospel.

the Lion has roared

The Lion has roared —
who will not fear?
Amos 3:8


It has become a foil in the game of modern politics to suddenly ask a self-proclaimed Christian candidate about their 'favorite' verse of scripture. These answers are then replayed, combed over, and analyzed to find every pause or discrepancy imaginable. Incredibly, this approach works a good percentage of the time, even though everyone in the room knew that such a question was coming. And, after all, how hard is it to keep something like John 3:16 at the ready — actually, probably something slightly more nuanced to demonstrate intimacy with the text, but basic enough to have wide-appeal and to not become confused over the actual ignorance of the text. Nevertheless, this practice goes on, mostly because Americans have allowed the Christian faith to become a rather benign political tool, aimed more at scoring points at the ballot box than transforming lives for the kingdom of God.

In my lifetime alone there has been such a ridiculous handling of religious beliefs in the realm of politics: some candidates run as committed believers and are ridiculed for wanting to govern out of their core convictions; other candidates score points for going to church but never appearing strange-enough as to pray or believe scripture. In some cases, we want to expose the oddities of those who stand in nuanced religious tradition; for others, it is all about hiding the radicalism of their beliefs. There is no pattern here that does not reek of double-standards. And it continues forward because there is a public that still falls for it – every time.

By allowing faith to become a weapon of political warfare the American church has diminished the effectiveness of the gospel. When we draped the flag over the Bible we obscured its message; we have allowed our culture to become darkened by covering up the message of light.

And we are still playing games with scripture and belief. The same foils are being played out in an effort to determine who is can win "Most Christian Candidate" in this race. Those who work so hard to defend whether or not their chosen runner is able to speak intelligently about scripture do so while ignoring behavioral-patterns that are so wrong, Christian belief isn't even necessary to identify such as evil. (Now, based upon that description, you cannot presently tell if I am speaking of him or her. And that should speak volumes on its own!)

So, with all of this in the air I notice that political candidates don't take the opportunity to share their scriptural beliefs from certain areas of the Bible. The prophetic literature from Israel, for example, is widely ignored by those seeking office. This is somewhat calculated, no doubt (as is the whole campaign), for there would be questions about whether this person actually accepts prophetic speech as possible. And then there is the language of morality that pervades the message, though I am not entirely certain why it is easier to dismiss Jesus' teachings than the prophets, though it happens. But perhaps the biggest reason is that the prophetic literature is straightforward in reminding all the nations of the world who the real Sovereign is. And I think that most of those seeking political power in our nation today simply do not want to hear that.

But again, it is the people who enable such behavior in a culture such as ours. And we continue to play games with our faith, so long as it requires little cost or commitment from us. We want to do whatever we want to do, and find the quickest and easiest path to our own comfortable lifestyles. So, we choose the candidate that is best at destroying the opposition, believe that they are a Christian because they say so (that other candidate says so, but is lying!), and wait for the blessings of government to fall upon us. Repeat this every two–four years.

It is not working.

Our ongoing dismissal of God's Word, even among most American evangelical churches, has brought our culture to the brink of ruin. There are many who will agree that there are widespread problems that we face as a nation, though the majority of these will still look to the corrupt powers of today to find the solution to those corrupt powers. Until we look to the Creator of heaven and earth we will not find the peace and salvation and life that we need. But this must be a commitment with the whole of our lives – walking away from the powers of this world and embrace the power of God's love.

The prophet Amos is a confrontation brought about by Almighty God, for his people had abandoned his ways and had decided that they knew what was best for themselves. However, what they saw as being good God sees as being evil, and he was on the move. Amos 3:4 asks, "Does a lion roar in the thicket when it has no prey? Does it growl in its den when it has caught nothing?" The answer to this comes in 3:8: The lion has roared — who will not fear? The Sovereign Lord has spoken — who can but prophesy?

In the same way I believe that Almighty God looks down upon our feeble attempts to govern ourselves, and our despicable behavior that turns his eternal Word into an impotent political instrument. And I believe he is done with the game. What we are witnessing in our culture — a society that is quickly losing its ability to tell its right hand from its left — is the coming to fruition of our choices to walk without God. The houses and the high places, the luxury and the liturgy, is all crashing down because we lost sight of him who stands at the center of it all (Amos 3:14–15).

It wasn't about whether the people of God could create impressive worship and sacrifice, just like it isn't about how good we can make ourselves appear to be devoted disciples. It is all about the work we carry out as we demonstrate our commitment. Unfortunately, the church will continue to be overtaken by these games, so long as we focus on winning the political battles (by any means necessary, no doubt) over the message of the gospel. God's word through Amos demonstrates that what he deems as good for his people "is of little significance within the national set of values (3:10)" (Carroll R., 190). The same remains true for us.


So, if the Lion has roared, will we be terrified?


Away with the noise of your songs!
I will not listen to the music of your harps.

But let justice roll on like a river,
righteousness like a never-failing stream!

Amos 5:23–24

1989

A few years ago I sat listening to Charles Colson as he spoke about the challenge of Christian living in our world. The most memorable moment in the talk was when he spoke about the fall of the Berlin Wall: "In the summer of 1989 nobody expected that the Berlin Wall would be coming down, and by November it was being dismantled."

His main point in saying this was to encourage the faithful work of the church in the world, even when it appears that such work is not making a difference.

This is quite an important lesson for American evangelicals, who often become desperate for certain victory that they are willing to do all sorts of things in order to win the short battle. This behavior arises out of the frustration of making no apparent headway into the cultural wars that confront the church. When we feel as though our efforts to live our faith are not changing the world, so often we decide to change our course of action and consider alternative means. This ought to raise the question: To whom is the church listening?

If we come to think that our faithfulness to the gospel is in vain, then we are being influenced by voices that do not align with God's Word. Within scripture the single evaluation of the church's effectiveness is faithfulness to Christ Jesus. It is when the church begins to listen to the world that we forget to focus on what really matters. It is no secret that the vast majority of media is engaged in a full-on assault on traditional Christian values. Yet, somewhat surprisingly, many in the church still give credence to the reports of the church's diminishing that are published by this overly-biased media.

But even if we were to take a look at the many negative trends in our modern culture, regardless of the media's biases, it is clear that the church's voice in our nation suffers a lack of influence. There are so many struggles within our culture that it can be discouraging to think about all that must be confronted. And, once again, this is when believers can be most susceptible to winning the world by speaking and acting as a moralized version of the world's ideals. We must resist this desire and remember that our calling is to be faithful to the gospel in all things, regardless of whether we win or lose in the public square.

At any given point leading up to November 1989 the leadership of our nation, who were strongly opposed to the Soviet regime and the Berlin Wall, could have used military might to break down the wall by force. However, this would have caused much more damage and destruction, and such conflict never broke out. Instead, the pinging of the rock-hammer against that wall continued until it cracked and crumbled.

The work of the church so often feels as though trying to break through a seemingly indestructible wall with nothing more than a rock-hammer – too small of an impact to make the difference. And yet, we do not know what lies just beyond the horizon of our present gaze — that which God is going to accomplish in his time, by his power, through the faithfulness of Christ Jesus at work among his people. And this understanding, seen throughout the course of history, ought to quiet the worldly desires among the believers that we might place our confidence in Almighty God alone.

If we are focused on our faithfulness to the gospel, then we will not be overcome by the victories and defeats that we will experience in our work. For God will give us enough for today, whether that be in the provision of daily bread or in the coming of his kingdom to the earth.

When Moses stood before the people of Israel, who were preparing to enter into the promised land, he encouraged them to be faithful to the covenant, and promised them the presence of God that would go before them: Do not be terrified by them, for the LORD your God, who is among you, is a great and awesome God. The LORD your God will drive out those nations before you, little by little. You will not be allowed to eliminate them all at once, or the wild animals will multiply around you. But the LORD your God will deliver them over to you, throwing them into great confusion until they are destroyed (Deuteronomy 7:21–23).

God's kingdom will be established in his time, not according to our political schedules. The work of the kingdom does not operate on four-year cycles, nor does the gospel's effectiveness depend upon legislative action, executive order, or judicial decree. And it is beyond time that the American evangelical movement be reminded of this, lest we surrender the demands of discipleship to the temporary fame and power of immoral men and women who seek to take advantage of the church's frustration and impatience. Whether or not the church wins politically is no longer relevant when we have lost the heart of the gospel in seeking such victory.

And we too will not win this nation in one sweeping movement, but little by little — through the work of transformed lives, in which a more lasting and significant change will occur. This is known as making disciples, which can have a powerful effect when taken seriously. (In the last twenty years the abortion rate has consistently fallen, not because of judicial reform, but through the efforts to strengthen the message of life in our country, though much work still lies before us.) The work of the Holy Spirit does not need government intervention to enact change, but it does call for the faithful partnership of the church to reach into the world.

Rather than giving in to the fastest paths to power — those things that are touted by our culture as significant, but which scripture so often holds in contempt — it is time for the church to return its focus on the transforming work of discipleship, that we may see changed hearts and renewed minds. Though it may appear to some as an insignificant step, in the eyes of faith it will be the pinging hammer that will, one day not far from now, be that which God uses to reduce the mighty walls of this world to a rubble.

den of robbers

This is the word that came to Jeremiah from the LORD: "Stand at the gate of the LORD's house and there proclaim this message:

"Hear the word of the LORD, all you people of Judah who come through these gates and worship the LORD. This is what the LORD Almighty, the God of Israel, says: Reform your ways and your actions and I will let you live in this place. Do not trust in deceptive words and say, 'This is the temple of the LORD, the temple of the LORD, the temple of the LORD!' If you really change your ways and your actions and deal with each other justly, if you do not oppress the foreigner, the fatherless or the widow and do not shed innocent blood in this place, and if you do not follow other gods to your own harm, then I will let you live in this place, in the land I gave your ancestors for ever and ever. But look, you are trusting in deceptive words that are worthless.

"Will you steal and murder, commit adultery and perjury, burn incense to Baal and follow other gods you have not known, and then come and stand before me in this house, which bears my Name, and say, 'We are safe' – safe to do all these detestable things? Has this house, which bears my Name, become a den of robbers to you? But I have been watching! declares the LORD."

(Jeremiah 7:1–11)

Though written centuries ago to a specific people, these words are strikingly applicable to our modern society. In the face of a political and military threat that loomed on the horizon, the message of Jeremiah is incredibly inward-focused. Instead of trying to deal with the foreign problem, the word of God instead examines the actions and attitudes of his own people. The nation that was selected out of all of the other nations to carry the covenant is now at risk of losing the privilege of the presence of God in their midst. All is not lost – not yet. There remains the hope that this people will return to Yhwh, though it will require a radical change of behavior to break the status quo.

Those who who are self-serving and deceptive will not facilitate the divine presence. Even when they rush into the house of the Lord their worship will not be acceptable. There is no place for those who give lip-service to the presence of God without enacting his justice and righteousness to those who are poor and oppressed. Those who oppress others cannot be the people of God, no matter how great their acts of liturgy. Those who work to embody the kingdom of God – who hunger and thirst for justice and righteousness – are those who will remain in God's presence.

What had become of the people of God in Judah is that they accepted the belief that they were safe under divine protection, even when they did not live according to the covenant. They shrouded their immoral behavior with the words of faithfulness – hollow words that might have been powerful statements of faith, if they were recited with meaning. Whatever one needed to do in order to make it through this life was increasingly accepted, so long as you could 'tip your cap' to values that sounded good and a worship that gave the outward impression of fidelity.

Instead of the temple facilitating the presence of God, affecting a broken world with righteousness, it had itself become defiled by the pagan practices that had infected the nation. When Isaiah stood in the temple as unclean, it was the divine presence that transformed him, touching his lips with fire from the altar to make him clean. The work of holiness in the temple was to make a holy people who could carry that holiness to the world. Isaiah's vision has broken apart in Jeremiah's reality, and the temple was no longer a place of holiness, because the covenant had been disregarded by God's own people.

When Jesus cleared the temple he enacted a warning of judgment upon a people who refused to follow God's way. They too had become ensnared with self-serving political games that led to physical, economic, and spiritual oppression. The people of God were trying to live by the sword of that day's power, shrouding their behavior with the traditions of the covenant. A faithless rendering of a religion that had become a way for the powerful to enact their influence. Jesus declared that this temple which was to be a house of prayer had become instead a den of robbers (Matthew 21:13). With this declaration he points to the reality that Isaiah's vision had become Jeremiah's reality yet again among the people of God.

As history examines our own nation and our current battles, one cannot help but fear that the same ruin might be at the end of our current road. The focus for such a theological critique must be the church, which is currently struggling on its own identity within our culture. The present political cycle has shown that there are many who are willing to play the political games that promote the powerful and leave many trampled as a result, and yet still give lip-service to the gospel. Instead of going around proclaiming, "This is the temple of the LORD!," we are told to rest assured in that this is "A Christian nation! A Christian nation! A Christian nation!"

But without the presence of God's justice and righteousness there is no gospel. Without the care for the poor and the oppressed, without the bolstering of peace over the shedding of innocent blood for the sake of achievement and prosperity, there is no gospel. And a political process that is so corrupted by hatred, lies, threats, anger, militarism, and self-salvation leaves no room for the gospel.

So, why would a people who claim to be disciples of Jesus so willingly support and moralize such a corruption of morality and righteousness? In some cases this may simply be a misunderstanding of the gospel, or a different understanding of how to live as the kingdom of God in the world. But, by and large, when so many who claim to be the church embody such worldly means of winning power and securing influence, even at the expense of leaving so many in physical, economic, and spiritual oppression, something is seriously wrong. And the greatest threats to who we are do not lie outside of ourselves, but in who we have become – hiding our godless behavior behind hallow words of worship.

Do we have any reason to think that the words of Jesus' judgment on the temple are so far removed from who we have become?

Will we listen and renew our hearts?

that hideous strength

As he sat alone on the island, exiled from the mainland of the empire, John had a vision of what must soon take place. He composed his work apocalyptically – a manner given to those who will have eyes to see and ears to hear a revelation through the Spirit of God. It is not so much that John had a series of dreams that would predict the final days before the end of the world, but rather that John saw a depiction of the increasing conflict between the kingdom of God and the peoples of the world, and all of the evils that challenge divine sovereignty and peace. He does not give us timeless messages, but rather timely truths – a worldview from God's perspective – intended to inspire faithful diligence and evoke terror at the prospect of God removing his presence from Creation.

At a certain point in the vision an evil trinity arrives on the stage: a dragon, a beast from the sea, and a beast from the land (Revelation 12–13). There is no doubt to the identity of the first, for John readily identifies the head of this wicked threesome as Satan himself, and leaves the remaining two to their descriptive traits as they mimic the divine Son and Holy Spirit. The description of the Sea Beast has brought about much discussion, the vast majority of which seems to focus on the wrong parts. Often there are attempted equivalents to some sort of antichrist figure, even though the Apocalypse never once uses that word. But in making this into a particularly sinister figure we are quick to think of the worst of the worst, most typically a figure such as Hitler. And once the figure did not bring about the end-of-the-world scenarios that are woven into these narratives, it is commonplace to think that someone much worse will fulfill the biblical text. In looking for these narrowly-defined super-villains, we are misreading the text and missing out on what is happening right in front of our eyes.

Embedded in this evil trinity is a way of life that has caused all sorts of people to be deceived by that which appears to be divine and good and gospel, but which is, in reality, a grotesque and hideous force that wages war against the Creator and brings destruction upon the earth. There are many who come and worship this Beast, and the one who has given it authority (13:4), and it rose to power and prominence for a season, convincing those many that they were in the right because of that initial success and its appearance of invincibility. All the while, this Apocalypse is working to warn us that something very wrong is taking place.

Of course, we think of ourselves as too sophisticated for mythical dragons and evil cosmic forces (even though our entertainment industry would tell a different story). But our society's saturation with mythological tales, along with our increasing desensitization to vulgarity and graphic violence, has brought the worship of this evil trinity into the center of our culture. We casually dismiss ancient tales of beasts and think they have no relevance for us today. And we who read the Apocalypse may think it absurd that any modern people would be lured into the worship of such monstrous figure as is described in this text.

And that's when the trap springs.

Let us remember that the vision of John's Apocalypse is God's vantage point, not ours – unless we are open to the Spirit to see through the eyes of faith. That is to say, nobody in their right mind would willingly give their worship and allegiance to such a hideous beast, let alone to a figure readily identified as Satan (or even some antichrist figure, if we were to find a description of one). But do we not move our commitment away from the gospel whenever we adopt worldly definitions of victory, success, and achievement? Do we not abandon our faith each time we pursue power and authority through the destructive and self-indulgent means? Have we not each become anti-christ in our lives when we choose to speak and act in ways that betray the sacrifice of the Lamb of God? Indeed, there appear to be many anti-christs among us (1 John 2:18).

And when you look around it appears that indeed the whole world is falling prey to the promises of success through militant power over-and-above the call to character in all things. Men and women are quickly showing their lack of integrity at the prospect of being on the winning side of some political-cultural struggle that, in reality, will lead us further down the path of destruction. Astonishingly, there have been many who self-identified with the kingdom of God grab hold of worldly ideals and methods, driven out of fear and anger rather than love, sacrifice, and compassion. Very few are choosing to stand this day on the characteristics of the kingdom, and are giving the living sacrifices of their lives over to a hideous and horrific evil.

This has become who we are because we did not open our hearts and minds to the Spirit of God, bur rather to the many voices that call us to a way contrary to the gospel. It is the third figure, the Land Beast, that goes out across the world to inspire worship and allegiance to the Sea Beast, that is echoed all over our nation today. We hear this summons from every corner, announced in our news, lauded by our politicians, glorified in our entertainment, and enacted in the brutality of politicized violence. This call to follow invites us each to make a choice; we must decide if we are going to overcome evil by finding ourselves a bigger thug, or if we will have the courage to act on the moral conviction and sacrifice of the Lamb.

Today, this battle is raging with great fury, and it has become difficult not to be swept away from the center of the gospel. The call of the world is loud and persuasive, a temptation not unlike Jesus' when Satan offered him victory without sacrifice (Matthew 4:8–10). Perhaps we believe that, even though we have temporarily suspended our commitment to the gospel (because the times are perilous), we will be able to reenact our faithful lifestyle once we have arrived. This is yet another lie that is woven into the narrative of those who seek to justify the world's means of power. Whenever we willingly align with that which is contrary to the gospel we do damage to ourselves and to others – often in ways that are irreversible – and we show that our trust does not rest in Almighty God alone.

There is a reason why the gospel demands sacrifice to self: surrender to a cruciform life is the only way to be conformed to the image of Christ, which will bring about a greater transformation to the world than every political promise could ever hope to achieve. We must learn the message of the Apocalypse that there is a victory much greater than that of politics – namely, the singular call to faithfulness that Christ gives to his church. He cares not that we are successful in the world's estimation, that we are ridiculed and narrow-minded and outdated by our culture, or that the outworking of our commitment is threatened by the laws of our land.

"This calls for patient endurance and faithfulness on the part of God's people" (13:10). The only evaluation of the people of God found in the Apocalypse (or anywhere else in scripture, for that matter) is whether faithfulness to the gospel alone is their defining characteristic.

As the people of God, let us no longer lay our living sacrifices upon the altar of this evil trinity, adopting the methods and messages that prey on fear and inspire hate, clinging to a vicious cycle of power that unleashes destruction upon the earth. Perhaps we can quiet the noise of a thousand political voices screaming to be heard, enter into the silence of Word and Spirit, and once again hear his still small voice. For the Word spoken in that voice holds the power of Creation itself, bringing the universe into existence, and holding the power to restore all things in peace and love.

And so, John tells us, "This calls for wisdom" (13:18). Will we choose our path because of a thousand worldly voices calling to us, or will we follow along the narrow way that leads to life, to which the Spirit beckons each of us to come? In the vision that John had it was the Spirit and the Bride (church) that work together in saying, "Come" (22:17). It is very much a decision of life and death, and each person must now choose for themselves if it will be the wide road or the narrow path. It is with considerable anguish that I look around and see so many of God's people speaking and acting in ways that betray the gospel of Christ Jesus, all for the sake of winning an ill-fated cultural war – a shortsighted and temporary triumph of evil that will give way to the ultimate redemption of this world by its Creator.

"Whoever has ears, let them hear."

of preachers and politicians

(Or, The Gap Between Jeffress and Lucado Explained by a Pastor Who Has Met Neither of Them)


I can still remember quite vividly the encounter I had when, in the church entry after the morning service, a visibly upset woman moved towards me with a determined look on her face. Her words were clear, "I am so often blessed by your sermons. But, let me tell you, don't get political up there." In that moment I could not for the life of me figure out what she was talking about, at least in a way that would call for such a reaction. We spoke for a few moments, though I was unable to convince her that I do not, as a rule, preach politics. I did make it clear, however, that I would preach the gospel, and if our overly-politicized culture steps onto that road, then it would probably get run over.

I would find out later that this particular woman, who was a retired school teacher, had been actively involved in some tug-of-war that was happening between the teacher's union and the school board. I didn't even have children in that school district, and was unaware of the issue. But I made a reference to education as a whole and she simply thought the two were connected. That conversation was an important reminder that no matter what the preacher may say, there is always a translation of sorts as it is heard and understood through the filter of everyday life that any particular listener may have.

There are always a multitude of variables and factors to consider in the preaching experience, and I have had many moments where public discourse, political positioning, and cultural issues have been a part of the gospel message I have sought to convey. However, I stand in a firm commitment that I will not endorse (publicly or privately) a political candidate on any level, nor will I share my personal opinion on legislative or judicial issues. (Since I have strong opinions on such things, there are days when this can be more challenging than others.) But I will speak the truth of the gospel in love, and I will understand that it will get me into enough trouble without become a political mouthpiece or commentator.

This is why I have difficulty with pastors, mostly in large churches, making their political endorsements known, often going so far as to use the pulpit as a soap box – either themselves, or by inviting candidates to stump during morning worship. It is not hard for us to understand why pastors do this: it reinforces themselves as culturally relevant and influential and successful. Such activity masks the desire to "win" with doing a good work for the kingdom. And, for some reason, it viewed as an extension of the work of the gospel – even it is not.

Robert Jeffress is pastor of First Baptist Church in Dallas, TX, and has had no problem telling his congregation of about 10,000 that they should vote for Trump in the upcoming election. This is ludicrous on two levels: first, the body of believers who gather for worship should not be subjected to a campaign rally, even if it refers to scripture; second, it is highly questionable that a Christian minister should openly endorse someone who is as devoid of character as Donald Trump.

When people endorse candidates they are signing-off with what that particular person stands for, and when a pastor endorses there is, attached to this, a sense of moral and ethical agreement. So, Mr Jeffress endorses a man who has openly and publicly demeaned women, is advocating that our military engage in illegal actions (war crimes), repeatedly threatens those who question his "facts," belittles others with crude comments while dodging discussions of substance, and most recently sought to clarify the size of his anatomy in the last presidential debate. (This list could continue, but that is far enough to make the point.) I might question what sort of a congregation Mr Jeffress is leading, or what it means to be a "Values Voter," since he speaks at their events. Instead, I will keep to my primary point – this is the sort of man he has chosen to use his position as a pastor in the church of Jesus Christ to endorse to those who are under his spiritual care.

(No, there is no morally perfect candidate, which might even give us that much more of a reason not to endorse from our pulpits.)

At the same time, another pastor in Texas, Max Lucado of Oak Hills Church, a San Antonio congregation of about 4000 people, has published a challenge to the words and behavior of Trump, asking for "decency" to be a part of this political process. He does not make this a political discussion, but rather a cultural critique that rises from the standards in scripture. Based upon the reactions of Trump and his followers, I can only imagine what sort of angered responses Mr Lucado has received. But such is the work of the gospel – not to endorse or defame a candidate, but to bring the values of the kingdom to the discussion, even when (especially when) they run against the grain of culture.

There is a gap that exists between these two approaches, and the state of our nation makes the difference stark. Of course the gospel message will divide – Jesus was straight with us on that. But it divides as it reveals one kingdom coming against another; and it divides, oddly enough, when the followers of one kingdom work out God's love, not cultural anger and frustration. Considering Jesus' mission we see that he intentionally did not seek political change – he was too radical for that, and he knew that those who live by the sword will die by the sword. His followers have always done best when they have followed on the path of changing hearts and minds rather than candidates and court cases.

The Founders themselves were always cautious that we should keep our priorities in order, and this is why you find God atop anything that is Country. Yes, they had a synthesized faith and freedom understanding that looks different that ours today, but theirs was a calling to follow the Almighty in their quest of patriotism. What has happened instead is that the modern preacher who seeks to conform to the image of the patriot has forgotten that we are to be conformed instead to the image of Christ. This is true for all of us. We cannot shroud the church with the flag, making the radical message of the gospel subservient to the whims of election cycles. In so doing we damage the work of eternity which has already been placed in the human heart. Shrouding the church with the flag is tantamount to laying it to rest in the ground, for the true work of the church is, at that point, done.

There are many pastors who are choosing to break their silence as I have just done, and the temptation to take this too far is going to be great. But let us remember the role of the pulpit and the congregation to facilitate transformation through the work of the Spirit upon human hearts. All that we gain or lose outside of that wither away, like the flowers of the field when the breath of the Almighty blows upon them.