Almost twenty-five years ago, I was among a group of students provided an article from Newsweek magazine. The author was posing the question of whether Jesus of Nazareth was tolerant or intolerant. Although I haven’t been able to track down the article from two decades ago, Newsweek has continued to have voices ask the same question. For example, you can find an article from 2023 here.
This particular article was written by Aila Slisco. Slisco recounts an interview on NPR with Russell Moore. Moore is the editor for Christianity Today, but once served as the leader of the Southern Baptist Convention. According to Moore, pastors are now quoting Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount, while also facing accusations of overstating the Gospel message. That is, a group of people believe the teachings of Jesus to be “subversive” or even out of date. Those same people would dismiss parts of the Sermon on the Mount or at least the once-held conservative teaching.
I should mention Slisco is interested in Evangelicalism and it’s influence in recent decades. Chances are you are aware the definition of “Evangelical” has been bantered about. Some are proud of the moniker, while others think it vague or even a condescending label. Wear “the hat,” if you’re so inclined. But I think the term should be understood in context. Slisco chooses to use the term in the article to make a point about those considered politically conservative. If you didn’t read the article (I hope that you will), the title says a lot.
Evangelicals Are Now Rejecting ‘Liberal” Teachings of Jesus
That title caught your eye, right? The first sentence is just as piercing.
Slisco writes, “An evangelical leader is warning that conservative Christians are now rejecting the teachings of Jesus as ‘liberal talking points.’” Most readers are now really intrigued. The balance of the article includes a few quotes from Moore and words like “crisis” and “church culture.” Much of Slisco’s article is concerned with American politics and former President Trump. That is not the purpose of this post!
Whether you consider yourself a conservative Christian or not, would you want to be thought of as “rejecting the teachings of Jesus as liberal talking points?” I’d think not. Yet Slisco takes a few statements from Russell Moore, creates some great marketing, and puts many (religious) conservatives in the same “bowl.”
You should know I have always been put off by stereotypes, labels, and the like. After all, being lumped together means the loss of individual thought. For my own benefit, let me attempt to lay out a few thoughts. If you find them helpful, it’s a bonus!
I’m completely fine wearing the label Religious Right, although I’d like to know who’s using the label and how it might be defined.
I’m a bit uncomfortable with someone using the moniker Evangelical, when referring to my ideology. As I mentioned above, the term is couched in vague assumptions. And the meanings of words change over time.
Russell Moore may have been the primary leader for the Southern Baptist Convention. He may have had the conversations with the various pastors he mentions. But Russell Moore doesn’t have the ability to speak on my behalf. In other words, it’s naive to think he speaks for more than the pastors to whom he has spoken.
Here’s the trouble: Slisco uses the opinion of one individual (in this case, Russell Moore) to make a general statement about an entire segment of society. Battle lines are drawn by Slisco, Moore, and political pundits. Labels will be used, whether they are accurate or not. This is what I despise about stereotypes and the categories. Without a firm definition, those labels can be used at anytime by anyone without any evidence.
Tolerant or intolerant? I suppose we need to decide who decides that as well.
Welcome to the new subscribers. I’m glad to have you along. My hope is you find something of value or at least something that makes you think. Hit that heart or share the post. Better yet, use the comment section!
Every word in the Gospel is God breathed. God is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. That said, I believe certain people have been trying to "change " the Word of God to suit their own interests and desires. Beware of wolves in sheep's clothing. Deny Me on earth and I will deny you in Heaven. That's enough for me!
Newsweek and pretty much every other major magazine and newspaper is interested in only one thing when it comes to Christianity - demonizing it. That is to say, their goal is to lump all Christians into one group and paint them as hypocritical, backwards, delusional, or whatever else they can to make them look bad.
If you look at this from a spiritual point of view it makes perfect sense. One of Satan's greatest weapons is turning humans against each other. He wants the world to hate those who serve God. Jesus told us this would happen. So, those who aren't Christian will always try to divide and destroy us.
From a political point of view, it is useful to divide us and put us in a bad light because it diminishes our political power. And it works.
It works because many who start out as Biblical believers cannot handle the idea that people hate them for being Christian. There are pastors who water down the gospel or avoid controversial subjects because they are afraid of making people angry, losing parishioners, or losing donations. They still believe they can have it both ways. But this isn't what the Bible teaches.
So, the media, in general, groups us together because it is an efficient way to denigrate us and what we believe. It's effective because some people want to be liked more than they want to serve God.