When Red Is Blue: Why I Am Not a Red-letter Christian
by Stan Guthrie
Though I own several Bibles with the words of Christ printed in red, I've always found the concept a bit iffy. After all, we evangelicals believe in the plenary, or full, inspiration of Scripture, don't we? Setting off Jesus' sayings this way seems to imply that they are more holy than what is printed in ordinary black ink. Sure, Christians understand that Jesus the incarnate Word fulfills the written Word. But if all Scripture is God-breathed, then in principle Jesus' inscripturated statements are no more God's Word to us than are those from Peter, Paul, and Mary—or Ezekiel. That's why I felt a bit queasy when I heard about a group calling itself "Red-Letter Christians." In the book Letters to a Young Evangelical, Tony Campolo says RLCs have an "intense desire to be faithful to the words of Jesus as recorded in the New Testament." That's a worthy start, of course—but only that. More >
My response:
While Stan may score some points for exposing the disingenuity of Tony's professed non-partisanship, he fails miserably in his refusal to admit that the Republican party and mean-spirited, agnostic radio talk show hosts OWN more than half the evangelicals in this country. Most evangelicals equate doctrinal conservatism with political conservatism but sometimes the two are radically antithetical. I have been called a communist by a fellow ministry leader because I made a positive remark about the first century church's all-for-one economic model mentioned in Acts. His thinking was, "It's communalism, therefore communistic, therefore atheistic!" Never mind that it's scriptural. If it doesn't fit the social Darwinism espoused by modern-day conservatives, it's considered un-Christian. Is that irony or what?
Another thing: In context, when Jesus said "The poor will always be with you", he wasn't saying "Therefore, they aren't a priority." His point was, "I won't always be here. Focus on me now, and them when I'm gone." In fact, Matthew 25 makes it harrowingly clear that He says, "They ARE me, as far as you're concerned. If you don't take care of them you aren't mine. Get that through your head!"
1 comment:
Interesting post. You make a very good point regarding how adherence to mainstream Christianity expects you to also follow all far-right politics. I find your view of how we should treat others flawless, but I think I disagree on its implementation. Jesus clearly recognized (and subjected himself to) human law and government. I don't believe that Jesus' message was ever that our faith and love should be legalized and forced on everyone in the nation, but I also don't believe Christ would have us sit idly by and allow the nation we are a party to become something wildly immoral. I really don't see a simple dividing line between the two. As I see it, the individual should follow Christ's example regarding dealing with humanity - the government on the other hand should always focus on sustaining and protecting the liberty and freedom of its people. I hope that the leaders of our government make their decisions with compassion towards mankind, but that isn't really the place of government. Sadly, any views regarding politics are sure to be full of holes...someone always loses out when people are running the show.
Post a Comment