Warped Christianity

Warped Reality

Sociologist Christian Smith introduced the phrase Moralistic Therapeutic Deism in his book Soul Searching:The Religious and Spiritual Lives of American Teenagers.  Smith, and his colleagues, assert that, from their research, this would be a fitting description of the spirituality of the typical American teenager – a spirituality they gained from watching and listening to their Baby Boomer parents.

Al Mohler, in a post titled Moralistic Therapeutic Deism – the New American Religion, describes Moralistic Therapeutic Deism as consisting of beliefs like these:

  1. “A god exists who created and ordered the world and watches over human life on earth.”
  2. “God wants people to be good, nice, and fair to each other, as taught in the Bible and by most world religions.”
  3. “The central goal of life is to be happy and to feel good about oneself.”
  4. “God does not need to be particularly involved in one’s life except when God is needed to resolve a problem.”
  5. “Good people go to heaven when they die.”That, in sum, is the creed to which much adolescent faith can be reduced.

What is perverse about these statements is that none of them is entirely wrong.  But it is the subtle errors that erode genuine faith, especially when the propositions fit together to form a worldview.  Together they create a warped perspective that, while borrowing the language of Christianity, is not actually Christianity.

Mormonism vs. Christianity

With the hubbub surrounding Baptist pastor Robert Jeffress’ endorsement of Gov. Rick Perry with a denouncement of Mitt Romney and his Mormanism, the bigger, more important point may be easily overlooked.

It is easy to get caught up with the politically related issues. I for one wonder what the opponents of California’s Proposition 8 think about Jeffress’ statement.  They vilified the Mormons after that referendum in defense of marriage was passed, accusing LDS activist of mobilizing a force that distorted the views of the population. (Click: here and here).  Those who protested this proposition will certainly not find Jeffress’ Consevative Southern Baptist ideals a viable alternative. Jeffiress’ morality views will be nearly identical (as are mine).  But as much  entertainment and intrigue as this political dilemma may offer, there is a question far more important to me:  Are Mormons Christians?

Despite the commendable moral values of the LDS, the answer is unequivocally “No”.  Morality is a by-product of Christianity, a demonstration of it, not the substance of it.  It is what one believes about Jesus Christ that makes one a Christian. And the Mormons have a dramatically different view of Jesus than do Christians.

Two respected Evangelical leaders recently expressed their own thoughts:

I think what Mohler &  Stetzer have to say should be considered.  It is far more foundational than the simplistic pragmatic question whether an Evangelical should vote for a Mormon.  The question of whether Mormons are a form of Christian will likely linger,  lasting long beyond the outcomes of the Republican Primaries next year.

Al Mohler is Right

I wonder, have I stepped into a beehive?  I have yet to get any flack but I wonder if it is coming.  I posted an article on my Facebook page titled: “Let’s Be Honest, A Lot of Christians Are Guilty of Homophobia“.

The article is in defense of the defense Southern Seminary president Albert Mohler gave about comments he made about homosexuality:

The Associated Press quotes Mohler as saying that homosexuality isn’t something that people can “turn on and turn off.” Mohler went on to say that “only the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ gives a homosexual person any hope of release from homosexuality.”

At the SBC Convention earlier this month Mohler was challenged to answer for his comments. His words of defense were:

“I made those statements. They are not alleged statements. I made them.”

According to reports, he then went on to outline how Southern Baptists had been homophobic and had misrepresented homosexuality. Mohler even called the Southern Baptists to repentance on the issue. However, he did all of this while maintaining that homosexuality is a sin that needs a Savior. One report…  said that the convention responded with applause.

On my Facebook post I commented that what Mohler said is also true in my denomination, the PCA, and is true of many Evangelicals.  Shoot, if I am honest with myself, it is probably true of me to some degree.  But the suggestion that some responses to homosexuality are themselves sinful is not tantamount to condoning homosexuality or the Gay Rights Agenda.

I appreciate what the author of the article pondered:

What did Albert Mohler say that was so outrageous? Was it the part about Jesus being the only Savior from sin? Was it the claim that our sinful nature goes beyond a simple choice? Any orthodox Christian should affirm salvation from our sin through Jesus and that we can’t simply decide to turn off our sinful nature.

That’s the thing. What is wrong with what Mohler said?  Is homosexuality merely a “choice”?  No doubt it is a choice in many respects. One can choose to indulge the desire or choose not to indulge the desire, just as with many expressions of sin.  It is this ability to choose that makes nonsense of the assertions that the Gay Agenda is somehow equivalent with the Civil Rights Movement of the Mid-Twentieth Century.  Folk could not choose to be Black of not.  Folks can choose sexual behavior.

However, what Mohler is pointing out is that sin is more than our behavior. However sin is expressed it is first  a condition of the heart and mind.  While choosing to not engage is preferable to hedonistic indulgence. it does not rid anyone of the condition or the consequential penalty. The wages of sin are death… Period.  This is true even if we suppress every inclination.

What Mohler is pointing out is that homosexuality is far more complex than a “choice” to act out on its desires and physical attractions.  He is reminding Christians that we need to recognize the true nature of sin – homosexuality and all types of sin.  And he is challenging us to realize we need a radical remedy. Fortunatley we have one. Mohler also reminds us of the power of the Gospel.

So, will I get any flack for concurring and posting the article supporting Mohler and his views.  Maybe a little.  But probably only from a few.  And hopefully not from anyone who actually takes the time to read the article.

Face-to-Facebook

eyes-of-the-pc

Not long ago I signed up for Facebook social networking.  I was hesitant to do so for quite a few reasons.  First, I suspect, because I was already blogging, and between that and simply responding to my e-mails each day, I assumed I really didn’t have the time.  Second, I had assumed that Facebook was for teenagers and college students. While a good tool to keep up with my kids and teens in our church, I didn’t see much other use for myself.  And probably the biggest thing was that I didn’t want to learn anything new.  To whatever degree each of these arguments resounded through my mind, I wasn’t interested.

But now that I’ve done it, now that I’ve signed on, I’ve enjoyed it.  I have been amazed at the number of long-lost friendships that have been rekindled.  I have found it a quick and pithy way to communicate with old friends and current church members.  In that line, Facebook has proven to be a tool that helps me to informally connect with people, something that had initially prompted me to start blogging in the first place.  While the first week of Facebooking  occupied more time than was probably wise, the end – and present – results made it a worthwhile investment. And now I am also managing my time on it more appropriately.

All that said, today is apparently the 5th Anniverary for Facebook.  And thanks to a friend, I discovered that Evangelical leader Al Mohler has offered some of his thoughts about Facebook on his blog, in a post titled:  Facebook Turns Five: Thoughts on Social Networking.

I appreciate both the benefits and cautions Mohler mentions. Some of them have occured to me, and some are more developed thoughts than I have to date mustered. 

Two last items:

1.  Now that I’ve got used to this Facebook thing, I expect to be able to get back to more regular blog posting.  I may change a few things, but I plan to make 3-5 posts each week. 

2. If you have not already done so, look me up on Facebook.  One can never have too many friends.