"The primary reason for this war against [Jesus] is He is interfering with the plan to make this a socialist nation. Mark it down. It is the truth."

I hope this wasn’t a church service. What a waste if it was.

I believe it is refreshing to hear a preacher sound the warning. It is time for Christians and Americans to be concerned about this Country.

He did it on Friday 7/2. Not a “regular” service. A pastor has to warn… no subject areas are excluded.
But the quote there isn’t the best moment in the message. Probably sounds worse than it would in context. In general though, he is absolutely right. There is a definite agenda among the folks currently in power and it’s an agenda that derives from unbiblical beliefs about human nature, sin-related social problems, the role of government… and how to really help the poor.

(I’m reading Money, Greed and God by Jay W. Richards right now. I dare all Christian skeptics of the value of free markets to read it.)

Where the quote is weak is that the attack on Jesus is actually a much bigger war and socialism is a small component. So the “primary” reason has more to do with the cosmos that hated Christ and hates His followers, too—and the “god of this world.” But he’s really not too far off on that point.

Pastor Stanley currently before his congregation feels the need to rise up to oppose socialism. A few years ago before his congregation Pastor Stanley felt the need to lend support for the preemptive war in Iraq based on the idea that they posed an imminent threat to our security. Is Pastor Stanley engaging in partisan or ideological politics?

Aaron’s qualifications help me some, but I have to agree with JobK. This kind of thing is too often politically driven rather than Christianity driven.

There is confusion of categories. All socialism is not diametrically opposed to Christianity. Some types are. Some of you believe you can prove Capitalism or Free-Market economy from Scripture. Well, OK, I suppose. I don’t see it. But saying it violates a Biblical principle is not the same as the kind of shrill rhetoric many hurl at Obama and his socialist agenda.

Is Obama a Christian? Almost certainly not.
Is he so sold on pluralism that he will directly challenge what he believes to be Christian hegemony in America? Surely.
Is he (knowingly or unknowingly) leading us toward socialism? Absolutely.
Is the current course of our nation going to produce economic devastation? Pretty sure. If not, everything economics says is wrong.

Is Obama the Anti-Christ (in the last-days sense)? Almost certainly not.
Will Jesus be returning shortly? Don’t know.

I add the last two not because of Pastor Stanley, but because the top 5 and bottom 2 are inextricably interwoven in the minds of many.

Last Sunday night, I spoke against the kind of Conservative Christianity that attempts to provoke terror in people over the state of America. I spoke from Psalm 11, where David’s counterweight to those wanting to be driven by fear when the wicked are taking over is the fact of the Lord’s power, awareness, and judgment.

These guys (meaning Christian Right leaders) use fear to rally the troops to get out the vote and fight the good fight, but they dilute our energies! If half of the passion put into the battle against Obama were put into evangelism, we’d be making a greater difference in this nation. So, I stand by my first statement: “What a waste of time!”

I recommend the book “Less than Conquerors: How Evangelicals Entered the 20th Century” by Douglas Franke. It’s out of print now, but generally available used. He makes a powerful case that the church seeking political influence is always associated with a loss of spiritual power.

America has been steadily moving towards socialism since Theodore Roosevelt if not sooner. Also, America has participated in the move towards a “one world government” since we joined the United Nations (again if not sooner). So, the pastor who is concerned with socialism (and globalism) should address those issues consistently, and not just “discover” them based on which party is holding the White House. I made reference to Iraq for a reason: if it was based on some imminent threat to our security, why did the buildup and invasion process take 2 years? So was it because Iraq was an imminent threat to launch military or terrorist attacks against us, or a desire for a pro-western (or pro-U.N.) democracy in the Middle East that would be a model for a future Palestinian state? George W. Bush vigorously supported a Palestinian state (as did his father) and set a timetable for one by the end of his second term in office. Bush calls the failure to see and help secure the establishment of a Palestinian state as one of the biggest disappointments of his presidency.

If a pastor is going to address issues like these, it needs to be done even-handedly. Talk about NAFTA, China into the WTO and how both parties supported it. Talk about the U.N., the Federal Reserve, the IMF and the World Bank, and how both parties support those as well. Talk about how George W. Bush publicly supported Roe v. Wade, gay rights, claimed that Muslims and Christians serve the same God (Bush said that he prays to the same God as those with different religious beliefs), claims that the Bible was probably not literally true but teaches a lot of good moral things, and what it meant for our country that a president with this view of God and the Bible claimed that God told him to invade Iraq. And if one opposes socialism, then talk about Social Security, MediCare, public education (by that I mean their existence AND compulsory education laws, not just what public schools teach), farm programs and college financial aid. I am curious, for instance, if Pastor Stanley mentioned the socialist attacks on the gospel of Jesus Christ after George W. Bush enacted No Child Left Behind in public education, expanded MediCare to cover prescription drugs, and tried his level best to give amnesty to illegal immigrants. I also wonder how school vouchers, where taxpayer money is used to subsidize - and also heavily regulate - “private” and religious education doesn’t qualify. Incidentally, one should note how many regulations that taxpayer supported private and religious schools in England and France and have to put up with.

Some Christians are looking for ways to opt out of ObamaCare. But how many of them are opting out of Social Security and MediCare, send their children to private schools and refuse to use Pell Grants and similar to help defray the cost of college education? And as for the idea that it is time for Christians to be concerned about this country … was there ever a time NOT to be? If so, when? 1800? 1850? 1950? 1983? 2005? If not, why not? These issues need to be addressed consistently and even-handedly. Otherwise, it is just party politicking.

I’m pretty sure this is not even close to the first time Stanely has decried socialism from his pulpit. Don’t have proof of that, but I think he’s probably been agin’ it for many decades.

As for inconsistency on opposing Ocare vs. social security etc., I think thats valid criticism, but many did not recognize SS and MCare for what they were back in the day but do now and do not want to see “more of the same” kind of expansion of gov’t. and loss of freedom. So, in a way, SS and MCare are a big part of why many are so passionately opposed to Ocare.

As for “the church seeking political influence is always associated with a loss of spiritual power,” … I don’t know about that either way. What I do know is that we ought to teach people to think biblically about these matters and not neglect them because they seem “political.”

I haven’t listened or read anything that Stanley has said on this yet. It does sound like Mike and I handled 4th of July similarly. I preached from Titus 3:1-8 in both services. My thrust was being a Godly citizen no matter who the politicians are. What I wanted to address is most was dealing respectfully with leaders. I am finding that many of my fellow conservative believers are not treating Obama the way Paul commands us to do in Titus. I think we can stand for truth and not malign. I think that is an area that I see many of us need to work on. I think that is more important at this point. I say that knowing full well that I agree very little with what President Obama stands for.

Stanley’s message is valid. The believer is to participate in government. The believer is obligated toward the betterment of his nation. This may not be his first priority but as a citizen of two worlds the Bible does not dismiss the secondary role. We have certain obligations, duties and liberties.

And as Christians we must be informed regarding such matters. If certain forms of government move away from or threaten the premiums we now have which extend clearly to our freedom, without governmental interference or retribution, of Christian expression then I would weigh carefully the wholesale condemnation of such instructions by a teacher of Scripture. One might identify elements with which they disagree but objecting to the premise on which such instructions are given, I believe is on rather brittle ground.

Little room for exegetical study in this list

If a pastor is going to address issues like these, it needs to be done even-handedly. Talk about NAFTA, China into the WTO and how both parties supported it. Talk about the U.N., the Federal Reserve, the IMF and the World Bank, and how both parties support those as well.

Suggest that Pastor stick to teaching the Word of God

[Mike Durning]
I recommend the book “Less than Conquerors: How Evangelicals Entered the 20th Century” by Douglas Franke. It’s out of print now, but generally available used. He makes a powerful case that the church seeking political influence is always associated with a loss of spiritual power.

I ordered this book based on your recommendation, so I’m holding you responsible if it’s not worth the 7 dollars. By the way, it is back in print in a slightly different title by Wipf & Stock.

[Mike Durning] He makes a powerful case that the church seeking political influence is always associated with a loss of spiritual power.

True!

[Jim Peet] Suggest that Pastor(s) stick to teaching the Word of God

Amen!

[Jim Peet] Little room for exegetical study in this list
…Suggest that Pastor stick to teaching the Word of God

Agreed. That is one sense in which I posted that I thought this entire exercise was a waste of time. I had too much experience with the kind of preaching that just “tells it like it is” with a verse attached (or mis-attached) to justify it. We need exposition!

The other sense in which I believe it is a waste of time is that we (conservative Christians or “the Christian Right”) spent decades trying to push this thing in the other direction directly. We elect candidates who will “stand against abortion”. We get almost nothing. We elect candidates who will “stem the tide”. We get “negotiation”.

There’s a reason why every presidential candidate since Carter has claimed to be a Christian (many of these claims I find dubious). If you require spirituality of your politicians as a price for your vote, you will get a mantle of spirituality. It’s their nature.

It’s time to focus on prayer, evangelism and revival (in the truest sense of the words). A new Great Awakening would do more for America than any conservative political victory.

[Charlie]

[Mike Durning]
I recommend the book “Less than Conquerors: How Evangelicals Entered the 20th Century” by Douglas Franke. It’s out of print now, but generally available used. He makes a powerful case that the church seeking political influence is always associated with a loss of spiritual power.

I ordered this book based on your recommendation, so I’m holding you responsible if it’s not worth the 7 dollars. By the way, it is back in print in a slightly different title by Wipf & Stock.

Back in print! Hurrah!
Hold me responsible indeed! I buy it used to give to pastor friends all the time. I’ve given away about 10 copies over the years. If you don’t like it, send it to me. I’ll buy it from you and give it to someone else.