No one will take on Obama, and the Washington establishment, like Newt Gingrich
Fantastic: Obama would like to replicate Detroit’s foibles elsewhere
New York Times scandalized as NYPD is trained on Muslim-perpetrated violence
Detroit boldly choosing to crackdown on the innocent
South Carolina stopped Romney. For now
Cartoon: Down and out
In which I praise Mitt (but explain why I won’t vote for him)
Bernero the gambler sells Main Street for a shot at the slots
The Emergency Financial Manager law is undemocratic, but opponents need an alternative to guard against local fiscal calamities
Memo to Snyder: Don’t stop the radical reforms now!Glenn Beck can defend himself, but here’s why Jim Wallis is wrong about ‘social justice’ as a Christian doctrine
March 15th, 2010 | 
Author: 
Dan Calabrese
I was scanning headlines on HotAir earlier this morning when I saw one about a “liberal Christian leader” wanting to engage in a “dialogue” with Glenn Beck over the doctrine of social justice.
I thought to myself, “Ah, Jim Wallis is at it again.”
The one and only 'liberal Christian leader'.
The headline didn’t identify the “liberal Christian leader” as Wallis, but I can’t think of anyone else who fits that description, and sure enough, Wallis was the guy. I suppose part of the reason Wallis has to live with the “liberal Christian leader” label is that most high-profile Christians are assumed to be politically conservative unless they demonstrate otherwise.
But in Wallis’s case, the label fits because his agenda is usually about trying to use Scripture to justify liberal political policies – which is ironic coming from a guy who criticizes Christians on the right for supposedly doing the same thing.
Apparently, Wallis is peeved with Beck for labeling “social justice” as a euphemism for communism. I don’t carry water for Glenn Beck – in fact, I’ve never even seen his TV show, although I used to think his radio show was good before he hit it big – but I listened to some of Wallis’s arguments in defense of social justice as a legitimate Christian doctrine.
Well. I’ll talk now with my Bible fellowship teacher hat on, rather than any political hat you may think fits me. It’s not my agenda to smack Wallis around. I’m sure he’s a nice guy. But he’s just making it too easy.
First, Wallis argues that scriptural teaching concerning “the poor” is a higher priority for God than teaching on homosexuality because, while the latter is only mentioned a handful of times, the poor are mentioned hundreds of times. I’m not sure why Wallis brings homosexuality into it, unless he just figures that’s a boilerplate issue that matters to Christian conservatives. (Does Beck talk about this with regularity on his show? Beck fans, tell me if you can.)
Of course, any serious Bible scholar, or even just a serious Bible reader, can tell you that the importance of a doctrine is not necessarily measured by how many mentions it gets, but by what the Scriptures actually say about it. Scriptural narrative gives more space to the various ineffectual kings of Israel than it does to the crucifixion of Jesus. Does that mean the former is more important?
But more to the point, just because Scripture talks about the poor a lot – and it certainly does – doesn’t mean it teaches what Wallis wants to believe it teaches, or for the reason Wallis wants to apply.
A spiritual thriller by Dan Calabrese. Click the image learn more and to order a copy.
Yes, Jesus constantly tells his followers to give to the poor, just as he teaches them to eschew worldly wealth as an idol that might come before the Kingdom of God in their minds. He also condemns those who amass wealth dishonestly on the backs of others, and tells one young man he can’t follow him because he loves his wealth too much.
But what Jesus never does is advocate the redistribution of wealth at the hands of the state. Indeed, Jesus’s critics – and even some of his followers – were frustrated with him for his disinterest in politics, which should serve as a cautionary tale for modern day conservatives as well as liberals who think they can claim Jesus as a spokesman for their cause. Jesus accepted the necessity of Jews paying taxes to Caesar, but not by way of necessarily endorsing anything Caesar was doing with the money. He simply recognized that secular authority had its place, but that it was below the place of God as the pre-eminent Lord of life.
And even Jesus’s command that his followers share with the poor was as much for their own spiritual good as for the good of the recipients, if not more so. The Bible consistently teaches that God’s people will be stronger spiritually when they love others, and obviously sharing with those in need is one powerful way to do so. If everyone does their “sharing” involuntarily under the force of a confiscatory state, what impact will that have on the spiritual health of those doing the sharing?
Jesus accepted secular government, but he certainly didn’t trust it to be the vehicle by which his own heavenly agenda was to be achieved. He wanted his faithful followers to choose freely to give and to share. Wallis, by contrast, seems to trust the state to compel generosity via forced redistribution rather than trusting individuals to do so out of obedience to God.
This is a “Christian leader”?
Finally, it’s hard to take Wallis seriously as a purveyor of Scriptural teaching when he is so selective in his own right. There is no Scriptural doctrine more dominant than that which states the only way to eternal life is through faith in Christ. When was the last time Jim Wallis preached on this? Or does he ignore that particular doctrine, pre-eminent though it is, because it doesn’t serve as a useful conversation point in the promotion of the political doctrine with which he associates?
The fact is that the needs of the poor can only be addressed as Christ intended by freely acting individuals within an economic system that produces prosperity, thus giving people the means to freely give.
If Wallis’s vision of social justice were to become policy in the United States, it would not only rob society of the wealth necessary to facilitate sharing, it would also rob individuals of the choice – and thus the opportunity – to give generously of their own accord, thus achieving obedience to God and spiritual fulfillment in their own right, which was always Christ’s plan for them when he commanded them to give.
Whether or not Wallis-style social justice is communism, as I guess Glenn Beck thinks, it is certainly not a Christ-centered doctrine, and it is a complete misappropriation of Scripture when a so-called “Christian leader” claims it is.
Become Dan’s friend on Facebook.
Become a fan of The North Star National on Facebook.
To book Dan as a speaker, contact Lourdes Swarts at Speakers Access.
Posted in Dan Calabrese
49 Responses to “Glenn Beck can defend himself, but here’s why Jim Wallis is wrong about ‘social justice’ as a Christian doctrine”
Leave a Reply
- Listen to compelling 911 tape of 2-year-old trying to help authorities save her great-grandmother's life (AUDIO)
- 'Simpsons' joke about Sharia threat in Dearborn
- Fire Marshal: Too soon to say whether fatal fire at 230 Myrtle in Muskegon is arson; investigation continues
- Electrical problems likely cause of Strong Avenue fire in Muskegon; Investigation ongoing
- WXYZ asks a blogger with no law enforcement experience to weigh in on escort murders
- By the numbers: Detroit has spent $20 million demolishing homes since 2009
- 'Simpsons' joke about Sharia threat in Dearborn
- Age-shy Warren Mayor Jim is officially 69, two years older than he claimed, so let's all move on
Glen Beck will say anything that will increase his ratings. The best thing anyone can do is to ignore his tirades. If you feel obligated to challenge his comments don’t use your religion or the holy book of your religion to justify your arguments. This just prolongs the arguments and clouds the original issue. The United States is founded on the separation of church and state and the freedom of religion. Any issue can and should be debated on its merits…. and generalities are anathema to any argument. (e.g. Capitalism is good or bad, social justice is good or bad). Capitalism and social justice are both intrinsically good and you need both but the application of either can be bad. (taking either to extremes is bad). A “good” government… “of the people, by the people, for the people” should have the needs of its people as a priority. I can’t see where this would be possible without the correct application of “Social Justice.”
As Christians we are called upon to help our brother. I do, but if my finances are pulled anymore- I can not support my church, donate food, drive my kids to their youth group volunteers slots (food pantry) etc.(and no I am not rich at all)
The social Justice idea while good intended will end up backfiring to those causes who need it the most.
Some may not like the message of Glenn Beck, but don’t shoot the messenger. He is simply pointing out by stripping what people have down to nothing- in the end- your cause will have nothing because the public won’t have anything left. You can not force compassion…If you need money for your cause- go tell it on the mountain and if others think it is worthy they will give. Money does not help people- people do! For those with Glenn issues.. Look within yourself- maybe the issue is not with Glenn Beck- but that you feel everyone owes you and your cause their time and money.
Richard – excellent comment. Exactly my sentiments on all of the issues you mention.
Julie – take Richard’s (and Dan’s) advice and ignore Glenn Beck. All he truly wants is your money and he’ll say anything in order to get it.
We have to get the MONEY out of our politics. That is the only way that we can get the government back into our hands to once again be a government of the people, by the people, for the people.
In the garden of Eden, Adam and Eve were given free will- the ability to make there own choices. A good government protects our rights from God, and pretty much leaves us alone after that. I also don’t mind roads and some defense spending, but that is a matter of opinion. The government can’t solve societies ills. Only Faith on Jesus’s name can do that, so yes- Social Justice is bad, capitalism is good. Why? One allows individuals to make their own decisions, good or bad. One (social justice), forces us through laws, taxes, and regulations, to a certain end. God doesn’t force. We cannot create heaven on earth. Go help your neighbor with your own money, and you will feel better about yourself, and society will benefit as well.
Richard said: The United States is founded on the separation of church and state and the freedom of religion.
You want to cite your reference for this?
You also keep using the word “good”, how about a definition, and a basis for such a thing?
MadHatter said: We have to get the MONEY out of our politics. That is the only way that we can get the government back into our hands to once again be a government of the people, by the people, for the people.
Yeah, it’s the money’s fault. So you want the people to be in charge, but no money in government. Now we know where you stand on poverty, you want us all to be poor and in charge… (and don’t say, that’s not what I meant, you don’t have a solution and you know it. who will be authorized to keep money out of politics? Will they get to have money? or just guns?) Idiot.
I can explain why people are concerned about marxism (socialism, communism, et.al.) from which derives the concept of social justice. The only way those systems will work is under a benevolent head of state. History has shown what occurs, due to the corruption, when humans try to run things under this form of government.
Accordingly the only time this will work for Christians is when Yeshua HaMoshiach returns. Phil 3:20-21 (NET) states: “But our citizenship is in heaven – and we also await a savior from there, the Lord Jesus Christ, who will transform these humble bodies of ours into the likeness of his glorious body by means of that power by which he is able to subject all things to himself.”
Wallis’ interview on The Ordinary Radicals documentary is pretty interesting. I’d recommend seeing it: http://www.theordinaryradicals.com/
Calabrese – The only difference between you and Beck is haircut.
As a strong Christian as well as a supporter of Glenn Beck, I enjoyed this article. And to answer your question, Glenn does not talk about homosexuality very much at all, I don’t even think I’ve ever heard him mention it. Also, for those of you who have commented and said that all Beck cares about are his ratings or his money, I’m going to have to disagree. The reason he’s so popular is because he talks about the issues and says what others won’t say. That’s why he made the social justice comment, because he believes it’s true and he wants to warn people so they won’t be tricked.
Richard,
I enjoyed reading your article. I am a supporter of Jim Wallis and I thought you had some good points about his liberal ways. However, I think that Wallis is on to something when he says that the poor are mentioned more times than homosexuality. I’m not sure what homosexuality has to do with any of this, but I know that the poor are mentioned more in scripture than almost anything else (missionally speaking).
But if we can forget theology for a second (that probably offended some) and look at how we, as people, speak. We tend to talk the most about things that have captured our heart. If we are in love with someone, we talk about them, if we have a hobby, we love to talk about that hobby and if we have a missional heart for someone, we talk about that all the time. I don’t think Jesus is any different in this regard. Jesus did say that we are created in his likeness and I believe this is one of the ways we are like Him. So when Jesus (and the Father) continue to talk about the poor so much, I think it is something big!
Just a note, when it comes down to the final product, we can agree that more “liberal” believers like Wallis and I’m guessing more conservative believers like yourself (I really haven’t read enough of your articles to know, forgive me if I am wrong) want the same thing, we just have different means. But I’d imagine we both want the God’s love to change the world and hope for as earth as it is in Heaven (Mt 6).
THANK YOU
What is wrong with advocating social justice? Would Wallis’ opponents feel better if he advocated executing the wealthy instead? I’m not sure what Glenn Beck finds upsetting about the idea of social justice. He seems to have confused it with communism–which is odd, since he is a Mormon and the Mormons, in fact support social justice. Beck seems to have confused social justice with Nazism and/or Marxism. Jesus never advocates taking from the rich in order to make the lives of the poor easier; rather, he urges people to give to the poor insofar as they are able. He hopes to create community among his followers so that they will want to help those in need as much as they can. He makes no reference to any government agency connected to this. It’s simply what he hopes his followers will choose to do. Matthew 25 illustrates all of this quite nicely. At the end of the world some of the people to be judged have not taken care of their neighbors and some of them have. Jesus’ words to those who did not help their brothers and sisters “He does, however, hope that those who can will help those in need. I don’t believe we ever hear Jesus critique specific governmental practices (although he’s obviously no fan of the Herods). In Matthew 19-20 Jesus says it will be hard for a rich person to enter the kingdom of heaven. He goes on to say that he plans to give his life as a ransom for many; he never speaks of people being forced to follow his way of life if they don’t want to. Far from seeking splendor for himself, he is quite clear that he expects to die–as, in fact, he does. The kind of loving concern Jesus addresses to those in need seems to me to be quite different from the redistribution of property Mr. Beck seems to fear.
Charles:
Summarizing…(without going into great detail) The first Amendment reads…. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Often when someone speaks of the constitutionally guaranteed right to religion, they also speak of “the wall of separation between church and state,” or simply as “the separation of church and state.”
Although There is nothing in the Constitution that specifically says that there is a wall of separation between religion and government. The interpretation of the founding fathers…. specifically Thomas Jefferson, is directly responsible for giving us this phrase. In his 1802 letter to the Danbury Baptist Association, then-President Jefferson used the phrase — it was probably not the first time, but it is the most memorable one. He said:
Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his god, [the people, in the 1st Amendment,] declared that their legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between church and state.
My definition of “good” is what is considered to be right according to moral standards…..
Morality may also be defined as synonymous with ethics…. In its “normative” sense, morality refers directly to what is right and wrong, regardless of what people think.
Ethics (also known as moral philosophy) is a branch of philosophy which seeks to address questions about morality; that is, about concepts such as good and bad, right and wrong, justice, and virtue.
In this human experience we are granted free will by our God. We have a choice to use it with good intent or ill-intent. The state has NO BUSINESS in this “contract” between God and the human being. Each of us will individually attract to ourselves that which we emanate. When “social justice” is applied it is often by someone who wants to violate the personal relationship between another and their God. We can inspire others, but “social justice” occurs when we are forced to use our free will in a ways that others see fit.
Don’t forget that Mr. Wallis has only recently come out with a new book. Need some publicity, Jim? My family spent two unfortunate years attending an emergent/social justice church founded by another liberal Christian leader, Brian McLaren. I don’t think proof-texting is a strong enough term for what went on there. They preach on inclusion, but they are no more inclusive than the most rabid conservative denominations. They just exclude different people, particularly when they found out not only did my husband serve in the military and in Operation Iraqi Freedom, he wasn’t ashamed of it! But they’ll take your money, and they’ll ignore you til you leave and call it being hospitable. Their doctrine begins and ends in a voting booth. Mr. Wallis is no better than the televangelist of yore. They all want your money.
What’s wrong with social justice? Watch Beck’s show and you will see. He goes through a great deal of history to reveal those that espouse social justice. And the danger to our freedom in the name of social justice. People that believe that social justice is okay are ignorant of history. And to answer your question, Beck doesn’t talk about homosexuality on his program. I watch all of his programs. They are fantastic.
[...] The Huffington Post The North Star National Google News: “Glenn Beck Jim Wallis” AKPC_IDS += "493,";Popularity: unranked [...]
” Richard Pawlowoski:
15 March 2010 at 11:35 am
Glen Beck will say anything that will increase his ratings”……………..Not….Beck aready has the second highest ratings on cable……When will you all realize that Glenn speaks the truth. Nobody challanges him, never. you all just bash him with insults…..Untill someone actualy challanges him, STFU.
Beck is who he is. While I agree with much of what he says, I’ll admit he gives me pause more times than not. He does “fuse entertainment with enlightenment”, sometimes making the former the priority. That being said, when the truth is stated it matters little who said it. Even Obama speaks the truth… from time to time. The issue here is Wallis speaking as a “Christian leader”. I agree 100% with the the contents of this article as they relate to the Christian perspective of civil government and the responsibilities of the believer. Until the King Himself comes again, we’ll muddle through with what we have… and if each sphere of society would do what we’re meant to do we’d be a whole lot better off.
“The fact is that the needs of the poor can only be addressed as Christ intended by freely acting individuals within an economic system that produces prosperity, thus giving people the means to freely give.”
Like uh, in Feudalism? ‘Cause back then, people were pretty strong Christians in a system of service and slavery.
[...] those who may be interested, you can find a brilliant essay here on what is wrong with social justice as a Christian [...]
Just on religion: we will have your current US president in Australia for my 33rd wedding anniversary, (March 25th 2010), and I will be in L.A. in order to attend Dick Cheney’s 30th Anniversary Dinner held by The Claremont Institute. The significance of March 25th should be known to Christians: when I married in 1977 the last 3 Amendments to our Australian Constitution were passed. (My divorce went through on Clinton’s watch on 18 August 1998, but for various reasons some people find this, nostalgically perhaps, hard to accept. Hence Hollywood puts out movies like “It’s Complicated.”) My understanding of Jefferson’s spirituality is that he was a deist not a theist: something like God created the universe and then took a nap in the 16th-17th centuries in order for people to work things out for themselves, politically. Many of these ideas started in Britain and on the Continent. So, we have the Vatican with a top-down hierarchical approach (nothing wrong with that) and the American Republic with a bottom-up 16th-17th century approach, intended to be Federalist. Eventually, of course, the communists came along to exploit that deist-theist gap in the middle. Many of your problems, I believe, came about with the “special relationship” with Great Britain about 100 years ago. Beck is onto something when he highlights this, as he sometimes does. (I watch him for a few minutes now and then. He isn’t incorrect – just “over the top” and “populist”. I watch O’Reilly for an hour at a time as he amuses me and I am “comfortable” with his views.) Anyway, a simple solution is for me to marry an American. I assume all the baby elephants currently being born over here indicate that this is probable. And thank you to Bob Franken for his cautionary words on R.I.N.O’S. He’s right, of course.
Richard,
So you WOULD hold that the Ten Commandments could be in a Federal or State Courthouse without violating the First Amendment, that prayer could take place in public schools by school employees and what not (I’m basing this on your second comment)
I’m still pretty confused as to where you stand based on what I’ve read from you.
Charles
Carol-
Social justice IS a communist concept. Study some poli-sci and history. You people are obviously new to the term social justice. It doesn’t hold the literal meaning you think it does. It means to take money and power by force from one group of people and giving it to another group of people just because you think the first group doesn’t deserve money or power.
There are no good intentions behind the idea. As an idea it is just a nice sounding phrase that political leaders use to convince people that they only care about doing the right thing, but in practice it is the process by which whole demographics are turned into political enemies and stripped of their belongings.
Social justice doesn’t mean helping out the poor. It means liquidating assets of whites and giving them to blacks as reparations for slavery. It means taxing wealthy people into poverty and giving their wealth to people who have never lifted a finger to support themselves. It means giving the entire continent back to the indians.
Also, as an active Mormon who has served in leadership positions in my church, I guarantee that our church does not support social justice in any way whatsoever. Our church promotes individual acts of charity and condemns the types of governments that use political bullying tactics like social justice to limit free agency. Any Mormon who tells you that the LDS Church preaches social justice has put their liberal political ideals ahead of their religion and they are lying, either intentionally or out of ignorance to their own church’s doctrine.
P.S.
Jim Wallis said “Mormon leaders” have called him to apologize for Glenn Beck’s comments. I would really like to know who these nameless, mysterious, anonymous “leaders” are. Any such “apology” would have to be approved by the presidency of the church in order for it to be made officially. Considering that the church goes out of its way to avoid divisive political figures, especially ones like Jim Wallis who touch on peoples’ religious sensibilities to manipulate them into voting a certain way, I completely doubt that LDS leadership would offer any support to Jim Wallis.
Associating with political activists like Wallis could potentially jeopardize the LDS Church’s tax-free status, and the church works too hard at constantly making sure that doesn’t happen to allow themselves to be linked to people like Wallis.
Jesus never forced anyone to give to the poor. He asked His people to, but not those outside the Faith. And even God asked the poor to pull their weight (having farmers not glean the fields so the poor could pick up the fallen kernels, in Leviticus). God NEVER told the poor to sit home and watch TV, get drunk, do drugs and rest upon the backs of others, as many modern-day welfare recipients do (though not all).
And having the government redistribute our money via taxation is basically theft (Ten Commandments, anyone?). The original purpose of taxation was to provide the means to defend ourselves from foreign enemies (military), provide public security (police) and provide a means to have disputes heard (judicial system). Nothing more, nothing less.Obviously it is completely out of hand these days.
Jim Wallis is just using theology to provide a spiritual support for Marxism/Communism/Leftist ideology.
Kudos to Glenn Beck. He generally speaks the truth to issues, as earlier commented, that others will not.
I think the issue is being simplified. Dan seems to be saying that what is written in the Bible, in first century Palestine, should be practiced here in 21st century America. The problem is, Jesus or no ancients, knew of an economic model of capitalism or of representative democracy (not to mention the scientific method, or for that matter heliocentrism) but all this seems to matter not to Dan. But if one were really to think about it, well it does matter. Jesus may have advocated for a democratic state to take care of the poor—we really can’t answer that question either way! In fact, poverty may have looked completely different in Jesus’ day, for instance, most ancient economic structures had 100% employment (that’s why the images of the poor in the bible are never able bodied workers) but capitalism can’t function with 100% employment ( have you ever known the unemployment rate to be 0, and that only counts people who are actively looking for employment). So I think Dan simplified the issue by implying that no historical developments have any impact on the way we care for the least of these.
Great piece Dan. I have been doing a lot of reading on the “social justice” angle myself and I like you don’t believe Mr. Wallis’ beliefs are sound biblically or secularly. He definitely has an agenda which is a mix of religion and politics. I have heard him say that he is a Marxist and the things he has written that I have read certainly suggest his Marxist tendencies.
Mormons do NOT support Social Justice. As a matter of fact, in their General Conference this last weekend, one of the twelve apostles gave a shout out to Beck, by saying it was false doctrine.
“God uses scripture to unmask erroneous thinking, false traditions and sin with its devastating effects….They have imagined a Jesus who wants people to work for Social Justice but who makes no demands upon their personal life or behaviour.”
Elder D. Todd Christofferson
Glenn Beck tells the truth. Those in hiding run from it. Tell me why those he challenges will not openly debate with him in front of the American people. The fact that they will not–speaks volumes. Those in question may fabricate reasons why they won’t allow themselves to be confronted on these issues but, I’m not buying it. If they didn’t have anything to hide, they’d stand up and tell the truth.
Charles Churchill:
Look it up yourself. You might learn something,
Suggestion: Start by reading the Bill of Rights and the Constitution.
Buy Soft Toys & Childrens Toy online now!…
I’m categorically disappearing to bookmark you! Thank you pro your info….
That’s undeniably a nice post. An publishing like this indicates how profoundly the style is believed by the person responsible.
In reference to Ross’s comment,
“Jesus or no ancients, knew of an economic model of capitalism.”
IMO, this is an ignorant statement. The Bible teaches much about private property & the acquistion of it & accumulating it through working honestly, otherwise the commandment & the injunctions not to steal would be meaningless. Ancients like Abraham & Job ( friends of God) were very rich businessmen who owned large herds & flocks who made lots of profit. Some of the apostles had privately-owned businesses(fisherman). Joseph & Jesus were self-employed carpenters who made profit. Paul’s family business was tentmaking (they had contracts to make tents for the Roman military). He also made a living tentmaking as an apostle. In the Marxist & totalitatarian models in theory all property is owned by the state who distributed it concerning to one’s needs. We know how that worked in practice throughout history.
Monday 24-Jan-2011, London
Just taken a look at your article on Jim Wallis with interest. (Jim Wallis just finished giving an interview on a London Christian Radio, 5 minutes ago and I did not find much agreement with him.)
I found some of your observations refreshingly insightful. They are useful on such subject matter that often confuses Christians. I have a particular view on such issues derived from my early Christian experience. My first church base after my conversion was in East London and the large leadership base comprised non local, educated Christian Socialists. It was my view that (though well meaning) they did not understand the true position of the local people and largely set about effecting a sort of Liberation Theology ethos. Wallis, Sider, Campolo were key influences. The long term effect was the imposition (probably unintended) of a very weak Neo-Evangelicalism / Theological Liberalism. The first casualty was the power of the Gospel unto salvation, closely followed by a high view of Scripture.
I quote Jim Wallis’s interview when he said the greatest theological impact upon his formative Christian experience was the teaching of Archbishop Desmond Tutu. A brief study of the theological position of the former Archbishop will disturb any genuine Bible believing Christian. There is also from the Christian social justice camp an uncomfortable closeness and collaboration
with politicians – some calling themselves Christians and some not; but all actively supporting extreme unGodly agendas. All my former Christian friends have over the last 30 years suffered loss of strong Biblical principles. Whilst still flying the Christian colours they are now in support of anti-Christian movements and initiatives.
Christian Socialists become eventually comfortable with compromise and accomodation. True Biblical Christians cannot. That’s why I question the Evangelical label that Jim Wallis et al assign themselves. Neo-Evangelicals need to redefine themselves and leave historic Evangelicals with the designation of ‘Evangelical’ – it aids clarity
Tony Beasley
Keep the faith, my Internet friend. You are a first-class writer and deserve to be heard.
You don’t come and I can’t play and I love to play21
Hi there, I discovered your blog via Google while searching for a related topic, your web site came up, it appears great. I have bookmarked it in my google bookmarks.
magnificent post, very informative. I wonder why the opposite specialists of this sector don’t realize this. You should continue your writing. I’m sure, you’ve a great readers’ base already!
Hello! I’ve been following your web site for a while now and finally got the bravery to go ahead and give you a shout out from Houston Texas! Just wanted to mention keep up the excellent job!
ladbrokes stave
Very cool opinion, bye.
I simply want to tell you that I am all new to weblog and absolutely savored your web blog. More than likely I’m want to bookmark your blog . You really have terrific articles and reviews. Kudos for sharing with us your webpage.
Admiring this hard work you’d put into your blog Glenn Beck can defend himself, but here’s why Jim Wallis is wrong about ‘social justice’ as a Christian doctrine plus in depth advice u offer. Its good to come upon a different website once in a time that isn’t the same outdated rehashed information. Great info! I have saved your blog post and I’m including this Feed to my Aol address ! Anyway have you read Bahrain amazing news flash! Salam Flash Website Builder
Hi author! Can I take photographes from your webpage for my school research work?
I simply want to mention I am new to blogging and truly loved you’re web-site. Very likely I’m want to bookmark your blog post . You definitely come with good posts. Thanks for revealing your website.
These days you will observe a whole lot details in addition to ideas therefore it is simply just wonderful to learn some thing fresh for just a modify. My partner and i take pleasure in your endeavours written along with publishing in which and Let me convey a link to your home by my own, personal blog
Fantastic beat ! I wish to apprentice while you amend your web site, how can i subscribe for a blog web site? The account helped me a acceptable deal. I had been tiny bit acquainted of this your broadcast provided bright clear concept
This site is actually a walk-through for all with the details you wanted about it and didn’t know who to question. Glimpse here, and you will undoubtedly discover it.
Hey from the Adelaide Church, Rostrevor Baptist Church. Just looking around at different church websites from all around the world to get ideas on how to make our site amazing. You have a great site. We hope your site and church bless the community greatly. Thanks Adelaide Baptist Church