|
I want to begin with Romans 1:16. "For I am not ashamed
of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to
every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek."
As Christians, we are to be wise as serpents; but at
the same time, we must never be ashamed of the gospel of Jesus Christ
which by extension includes the entire Word of God. Now, Romans Chapter
One, goes on to talk about those who are under God's wrath because they
have rejected Him, even though He has made Himself obvious to them.
This raises the question: Considering God has made
Himself obvious to men, then is it not wrong when Christians make Him less
obvious to men and even avoid referencing Holy Scripture when addressing
the issues of our day? Well, that's exactly what is becoming all the rage
in neo-evangelical circles today. There is a philosophy being peddled
which goes like this, "Pagans--excuse me--non-Christians, don't
understand the Bible; they don't accept the Bible; so we should not use
the Bible in public dialogue."
Chuck Colson, ecumenicist supreme, preaches this
message. A while back, he publicly rebuked several U.S. congressmen who,
during a debate over the Defense of Marriage Act, quoted from the Textbook
of the Patriots, the Lawbook of the Ages, the revealed Law of God,
referenced in our nation's charter as the supreme law of our land, the
Bible.
Bad idea, said Colson; people don't see the Bible as
authoritative. Christian politicians should only speak in terms which
appeal to the common good. This begs the question: How will our society
ever see the Bible as authoritative if Christians do not use it
authoritatively? Mr. Colson is only one of many calling themselves
Christians who hold that the Bible should be relegated to the rapidly
growing Christian ghetto.
A while back, World magazine contained an
article titled "And How to Fight Back" which detailed a
pro-family victory over the sodomites in the state of Ohio. One of the men
who orchestrated the victory was quoted as saying that providing secular
arguments to a secular audience is also vital . . . "Don't use
Christian words and arguments. That's not being ashamed of the
gospel--that's being prudent, as Paul was at Mars Hill. We've got to learn
to communicate our positions without citing chapter and verse--because
once you bring in the Bible, you turn a large number of people off . .
."
Popularity is everything these days, it seems. We must
at all cost avoid turning off large numbers of people, like Jesus did from
time to time with His hard sayings about eating His flesh and drinking His
blood. From my observations, I would say that horse is already out of the
barn anyway.
Now certainly when debating an issue in the political
arena, Christians should strive to have a comprehensive knowledge of the
issue; but why this drive to excise the Bible from the public debate? The
Bible with its law, its economic principles, its wisdom, its history, its
message of salvation. Interestingly enough, godless men such as Bill
Clinton make use of the Bible; Jessie Jackson quotes the Bible; are we to
leave the Bible in the clutches of such rebels who twist it to further
their agendas?
Apparently, some Christians, such as Chuck Colson and
apparently such as the man just quoted, now believe that a moral,
principled, lawful society can be built on subjective humanist notions of
common good. They are wrong. As James Otis pointed out, the people's
safety is in the law of God. The law of God is the only lamp which can
safely light the path of a nation.
While Christians may win short-term political victories
with humanist-based strategies, who is to say that the devil does not
revel and assist in such victories knowing that they tend to encourage
Christians to cling to a strategy which guarantees defeat for them in the
end?
If Christians are going to be involved in politics,
government affairs, and public debate as they must be, then our public
house, like our private house, must be built on the bedrock foundation of
God's law. Anything less is recklessness and lawlessness.
I cannot help but wonder, did that man just quoted read
the text of Paul's opening speech on Mars Hill when he spoke of God who
made the world; the Lord of heaven and earth; the One upon whom all men
live, and move, and have their being; the God who hath appointed a day in
which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath
ordained and raised from the dead? Hardly a message which avoided
Christian arguments!
At a time when a clear exposition of Biblical truth is
so badly needed, including in America's civil and political arena, we are
increasingly seeing Christian leaders urging the Body of Christ to avoid
using Biblical truth and Biblical language to frame and explain issues.
In a minute, I'll share with you the latest example of
this phenomenon that I have come across; but let me clarify something.
When it comes to the political arena, it is not always necessary or wise
to jump cold turkey straight into the Holy Scriptures. On the other hand,
there is no way a Christian can honorably be involved in politics without
openly basing his positions on God's true law.
I have been involved in politics and political debates
and have given speeches laying out my position on various issues.
Oftentimes, I have directly referenced God's law; but other times,
especially in debates, the way I have gotten into the Bible is through our
nation's charter, the Declaration of Independence which identifies God's
law as the supreme law of the world, God's revealed law which our nation's
founders clearly held was found only in Holy Scriptures.
If done rightly, it is very hard for the pagans to mock
your application of Holy Scripture to a political issue when you employ
that approach; and if they do, you did your best to be wise as a serpent
without compromising.
Now, I want to deal with the latest example I have come
across in which Christians are urged to be ashamed of the gospel, to trust
not in the Lord, and to help in the paganization
of America. Once again, our instructor is Chuck Colson, one of the
architects of the one-world religion treatise Evangelicals and Catholics
Together.
In a pamphlet put out by Focus on the Family, Colson
lays out some principles which he says Christians should follow when
involved in political activity; and I quote: "Avoid inflammatory
and derogatory language--For example, describing homosexuals as 'perverts'
or 'sodomites,' abortionists as 'Nazi butchers' or 'baby killers,' or
teachers as 'secular humanists' is not effective. Such phrases invite
media ridicule and mainstream repulsion. Above all they constitute a poor
Christian witness. Pro-family activists who use them appear hateful or
fearful."
The first question for Mr. Colson which comes to my
mind is: Where is God in all of this? He worries about media ridicule and
mainstream repulsion. Doesn't Mr. Colson understand that the enemies of
God are never satisfied? If we Christians allow God's enemies to dictate
the very words we may speak, they will never be satisfied until we
renounce Christ with our words. Would Mr. Colson have us be men-pleasers
rather than God-fearers? After all, he has arrived at the point where he
cautions against even calling secular humanists secular humanists!
Colson warns Christians to avoid inflammatory and
derogatory language. My dictionary defines derogatory as tending to lessen
or impair, detracting, disparaging, belittling. In other words, derogatory
terms should be avoided since they are of a sarcastic, cruel nature.
Derogatory terms are not helpful; in fact, they are hurtful and
counterproductive to good.
Several important points need to be made here. Chuck
Colson has labeled the word sodomite a derogatory word to be
avoided. In so doing, he has accused God of wrong-doing since the Hebrew
and Greek words for persons who commit so-called same-sex acts are rightly
and most consistently translated into sodomite in our English Bible. The
word sodomy is derived from the name of a town, Sodom, Sed-ome
in Hebrew, a town inhabited by persons given over to committing Sodomy,
sodomites.
The Bible makes many references to Sodom and the sin of
Sodom. Our civil laws once echoed the Biblical example by using the term sodomy
when dealing with that detestable sin, the very mention of which once
scandalized decent people. So we see that the word sodomite is
crucial to a righteous Biblical tapestry of witness against a grievous sin
which greatly provokes God's wrath and destroys individuals and nations.
It is wrong to counsel Christians to avoid using the
word sodomite; and it supports the deception that it is somehow
beneficial and Christ-like to downplay the grave seriousness and repugnant
nature of a sin to which God refers to with such words as filthy,
lawless, and abomination.
Chuck Colson and those like him--and he is far from the
only one--who counsel against using the word sodomite are doing
no favor to anyone, including sodomites, and certainly are not pleasing
the Lord.
Because many people are not accustomed to the word sodomite
and some do not understand it, I often alternate between sodomite
and homosexual, though I admit the latter term is a weak one in
many ways. We would all do well to make liberal use of the word sodomite;
and God will bless us for it, I am sure.
Chuck Colson also echoes a common theme when he urges
Christians not to call abortionists "baby killers" or "Nazi
butchers."
For the sake of honesty, the poor little babies being
murdered, and the effect which the sustained righteous use of sharply
defined words have on the public consciousness, I would urge every
Christian, when speaking about abortionists and their trade, to make
liberal use of not only baby killer and butcher but also
such terms as murderer, brute, death camp, and
so forth.
Remember, he who effectively frames the issue, usually
wins the debate in the end. Such words are accurate, descriptive, and
capture the real nature of what abortion is all about.
I'll bet those who try to tone down the description of
child-killing and child-killers would have a different approach if their
own born children were facing death at the hand of a murderer and they
were trying to rouse their neighbors to defend him or her.
Mr. Colson maintains that those of us who call a
murderer a murderer and a sodomite a sodomite appear hateful or fearful to
the general public. Once again, perhaps unknowingly, his words are, I
believe, an affront to Almighty God. If we are not to quote God by using
the mentioned words because to do so makes us appear hateful and fearful,
did God make a mistake? Should He have used milder terms so as not to
appear hateful and fearful?
If not, are we then better than God or ashamed of His
words or unconvinced that His Word truly is "quick and powerful and
sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of
soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the
thoughts and intents of the heart"? Funny, that's exactly what we
need today in public debate.
The godless elite must cheer the reasoning which holds
that Christians should leave their Bibles at home and at church. For
years, they have been trying to silence, and short of that, dilute and
mute the Church's witness by labeling any expression of our deepest held
beliefs "fearful or hateful."
The goal is to get the public to believe that
Christians are either irrational idiots driven by groundless fear or that
we are psychopaths seething with hatred. Apparently, the enemies of God
have succeeded beyond their wildest dreams, seeing that individuals
calling themselves Christians have now taken to using the same tactic to
mute the voice of Biblical truth.
Mr. Colson also lectures that Christians involved in
public debate should not warn that God's wrath is upon this wicked
generation. He is wrong; dead wrong in that.
This culture needs to be warned that God's judgment is
upon it; and Christians in every arena, including politics, should seize
opportunities to do so out of duty and in hope that some sinners may
repent and come to Christ as they see our prophetic warnings become
reality before their eyes. At the least, we will be innocent of their
blood if they do not. America's political founding fathers, such as George
Mason, certainly sounded such warnings.
The truth is, the devil and his disciples are greatly
assisted by this current drive to empty the Church's public witness of its
power and to strip a whole generation of Christian men of their Christian
manhood.
Let's understand, we live in a nation under judgment
and perhaps on the verge of being given over to her enemies. As
Christians, we have nothing to gain from engaging in compromise or by
trying to be men pleasers. Our hope, our protection is under the shadow of
the Almighty. The incremental, world-pleasing, gospel-moderating,
ashamed-of-God's-Word, modernistic, syncretistic approach does not work.
It is a recipe for judgment, slavery, destruction.
To experience deliverance from God's hand, we must be willing to put our
cause squarely in His hands and expect the short-term defeats which will
come before we can experience anything like revival and reformation. Where
does this idea come from that we can be a vessel to bring America back to
God by distancing ourselves from God? How did so many of God's people
decide that there is safety in appeasing the world by deserting God?
Lamenting over His rebellious people, God says in Psalm
81, "Oh that my people had hearkened unto me, and Israel had
walked in my ways! I should soon have subdued their enemies, and turned my
hand against their adversaries."
Our adversaries are too big, too powerful, too
numerous, too entrenched, too well-funded, and too hard-hearted for us to
overcome. Our only hope is in the Lord, and He will only act on our behalf
if we harken to Him and walk in His ways. Psalm 91 tells of God's care and
protection for His people who trust in Him. "Because thou hast
made the Lord, which is my refuge, even the Most High, thy
habitation."
This flawed doctrine which urges Christians to avoid
using the Bible in public debates over issues is a very dangerous one
because it is a precursor, a prepatory exercise for denying Christ; and I
will tell you why.
We are told not to reference and quote the Bible
because our pagan neighbors do not understand the Bible and they do not
accept the authority of the Holy Scriptures. Further, we are told such
utterances on our part cause people to think we are hateful or fearful;
and thus we should remain silent rather than speak Biblical truth. I have
a question for those who preach such nonsense.
Which causes the world to be more offended, which
causes the world to more quickly say we are hateful and fearful, which
does the world least understand, to call homosexuals sodomites or
to say that Jesus Christ is not just Savior but also Lord and that every
knee will someday bow to Him as Lord and King of Kings?
Which causes the world to react more negatively toward
Christians, to say that abortion is child-killing or to say that every
last person who rejects Christ--every last person, including every Muslim,
every Jew, every Unitarian--everyone who refuses to repent and give his
life to Christ will be judged and spend eternity in a fiery torment?
I know the answer to that question because I have done
both in many a debate. In each case, the latter of the two choices
offended far more than the former; and of course, the world certainly does
not accept Christ's authority. So my question is: Should we avoid
preaching Christ? Isn't that the logical conclusion to the road Mr. Colson
and others have put us on? Isn't that the discipline he and others are teaching?
Yes, it is; and in Mr. Colson's case, he has joined
others such as Bill Bright and J.I. Packer to already agree to as much
through the Evangelicals and Catholics Together document which includes a
non-proselytizing clause.
Yes, it is true; and I urge all of you to reject veiled
attempts to silence the power of God's Word. In fact, next time you speak
with an elected official, you may want to share Christ with Him in this
way:
"Be wise now therefore, O ye kings: be
instructed, ye judges of the earth. Serve the Lord with fear, and rejoice
with trembling. Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the
way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put
their trust in him" (Psalm 2:11-12).
Back to
top. |
