Abandon the Evangelical Ship or Evangelical Idols? Reflections on the Prophet Jeremiah

Last updated on: December 14, 2017 at 6:39 am by Paul Louis Metzger

Abandon the Evangelical Ship or Evangelical Idols? Reflections on the Prophet Jeremiah 2017-12-14T06:39:30-08:00 Paul Louis Metzger

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Horace Vernet, Jeremiah on the ruins of Jerusalem (1844)

In my last blog post, I mentioned that a student asked me why I still call myself an Evangelical Christian. On account of all the conflicted positions and associations politically and culturally, many people connected with the movement are now abandoning the label. Should we abandon ship, or abandon the idols of power, wealth, comfort and privilege that serve as stumbling blocks to right relationship with God and others? In this post, I will consider the prophet Jeremiah as well as other prophetic voices, and what import they might have for our situation today.

In the paragraph above, I mentioned the idols of power, wealth, comfort, and privilege. Before proceeding with our analysis, it is important to specify what I have in mind by these idols. Here I turn to the late Evangelical statesman, James Montgomery Boice. In 1998, Boice wrote an article titled “Our All-Too-Easy Conscience.” It was a play on Carl F. H. Henry’s The Uneasy Conscience of Modern Fundamentalism. Boice said that Henry, in his 1947 work, had put his finger on a matter that was disturbing many fellow Evangelicals: “Evangelicals had been avoiding the great social issues of the day, above all racism and the plight of the poor and we were uneasy about it somewhere deep in our inmost thoughts and hearts.”[1]

In his historic manifesto, Henry called the fundamentalist-evangelical movement to rigorous theological reflection and social engagement: “Fundamentalism is wondering just how it is that a world-changing message narrowed its scope to the changing of isolated individuals.”[2] Later Henry writes, “Whereas once the redemptive gospel was a world-changing message, now it was narrowed to a world-resistant message. Out of twentieth-century Fundamentalism of this sort there could come no contemporary version of Augustine’s The City of God.”[3]

Boice notes that the time had come for another book to be written, this time “The Easy Conscience of Modern Evangelicalism.” Boice was referring to Martin Marty’s claim that the most worldly people in America at the end of the twentieth century would be the Evangelicals.[4] Boice concurred with Marty’s assessment: “We have fulfilled his prophecy, and it is not yet the year 2000.” Boice argued that Evangelicals have fixed their gaze on gaining the kingdom of the world and “have made politics and money our weapons of choice for grasping it.”[5] In addition to raising concerns about pop psychology and the like replacing sound biblical doctrine, he lamented the Evangelical movement’s preoccupation with “success, wonderful marriages and nice children,” in addition to being fixated on “numerical growth and money.”[6]

Troubled that Evangelicals cared very little for “getting right with an offended God,” Boice exhorted them to take seriously the words of the prophet Amos, who spoke the following words to a culture much like the present: “Woe to them who are at ease in Zion.” Boice said that fellow Evangelicals should become uneasy about their complacency and comfort. One area where this complacency is evident is the Evangelical community’s failure in the inner cities of America: “I would like us to become uneasy about our failure to establish strong churches in America’s inner cities, where the breakdown of American culture is so obvious and the needs of the people are so great.”[7]

Moving on from Boice to the present day, it is worth drawing attention to a recent Brookings report and analysis on the changing cultural norms in our society on how Americans view those politicians with ethical improprieties and lack of strong religious convictions. The report highlights a dramatic shift for many Evangelicals. The analysis is instructive, and so I will quote from it at length:

The breakdown along religious lines is instructive. Americans without any religious affiliation haven’t shifted much—63 percent in 2011, 60 percent today. Catholic acceptance of politicians’ personal misconduct has increased from 42 to 58 percent. White mainline Protestant support is up by 22 points, from 38 to 60 percent.

These large shifts are dwarfed, however, by the change among white evangelicals. In 2011, only 30 percent believed that personal immorality was consistent with an ethical performance of official duties. Today, 72 percent of white evangelicals—up an astounding 42 points–believe that the two can go together.

In a related change, fewer white evangelicals now believe that strong religious beliefs are very important for presidential candidates—49 percent today, versus 64 percent just five years ago.

The survey did not go on to ask why people have changed their minds. But the data are suggestive. Yes, the general public’s center of gravity has shifted toward greater acceptance. But white evangelicals have shifted more than twice as much. As recently as 2011, white evangelicals were the least likely of any religious group (including unaffiliated Americans) to say that personal immorality was compatible with an ethical political life. Today, they are the most likely to affirm this.

The article concludes by saying that Evangelicals cannot go back to claim the high moral ground in a future election:

One thing is clear: Now that evangelicals have crossed this bridge, they will not be credible if, in some future election, they try to cross back and return to the status quo ante of inviolable principles backed by stern anathemas for dissenters. Henceforth they are in the same boat with the rest of us, judging each individual as an ensemble of good and bad traits. They have forfeited the standing to regard as morally defective those who disagree with their conclusions.

While the author of the article says that Evangelicals will not be credible in the future if they go back to their earlier moral stance, many today (including those inside my Evangelical movement) are already claiming we are no longer credible.

So, in view of Boice’s rebuke and the Brookings report, why don’t I abandon ship? It is not because I disregard or seek to justify the sweeping changes in our moral stances. Rather, it is because I don’t think abandonment of my tradition is the solution, but rather repentance and renewal. We find an example for this orientation in the prophet Jeremiah. Jeremiah prayed to the Lord God to have mercy on his people and not condemn them to destruction, even while rebuking them for their unfaithfulness to their covenantal relationships with God. He never abandoned ship on Judah or his Jewish faith, even while opposing their conduct at every turn. The NIV Study Bible puts the matter well:

… an aura of conflict surrounded Jeremiah almost from the beginning. He lashed out against the sins of his countrymen (44:23), scoring them severely for their idolatry (16:10–13,20; 22:9; 32:29; 44:2–3,8,17–19,25)—which sometimes even involved sacrificing their children to foreign gods (see 7:30–34 and notes). But Jeremiah loved the people of Judah in spite of their sins, and he prayed for them (14:7,20) even when the Lord told him not to (7:16; 11:14; 14:11).

Not only did Jeremiah pray for his people, but also he identified himself with them in solidarity with their sin. Here are a few of the verses that were noted above:

Though our iniquities testify against us,
act, O Lord, for your name’s sake;
for our backslidings are many;
we have sinned against you (Jeremiah 14:7; NIV).

We acknowledge our wickedness, O Lord,
and the iniquity of our fathers,
for we have sinned against you.
Do not spurn us, for your name’s sake;
do not dishonor your glorious throne;
remember and do not break your covenant with us (Jeremiah 14:20-21; NIV).

Like God’s messenger Jeremiah, righteous Ezra, Nehemiah and Daniel identified with the people in their sin (See Ezra 9, Nehemiah 9 and Daniel 9). Moses interceded on behalf of his people Israel and begged God not to destroy them. Moses pleaded with God not to start anew with him and his descendants, as God intended on account of Israel’s sin (See Exodus 32, Numbers 14, and Deuteronomy 9). Even more radical is the sinless Lord Jesus who knew no sin, yet became sin, so as to make us the righteousness of God (2 Corinthians 5:21). If these righteous saints of old did not abandon their people, and if the Lord himself does not abandon us, but remains in solidarity with them and us, why should we who do not hold a candle to these holy leaders of the faith abandon a movement that has changed its convictions for political expediency and power in many cases?

2 Corinthians 6:14 informs us to come out from among unbelievers in certain cases, but not from believers. Moreover, the New Testament gives examples of people being expelled from the Christian community due to sin, as in the case of the immoral brother in Corinth, or due to false doctrine, as in the case of false teachers (1 Corinthians 5:1, 5, 12-13; 1 John 2:19), but I don’t find examples of changing churches or movements because of them. While I do not wish to claim one should never leave a church or movement due to moral and doctrinal failings, I believe we should be extremely slow in considering the possibility of abandoning ship.

Like Jeremiah and the other prophetic leaders noted here, we must see ourselves in solidarity with our people. The point is not to condone or excuse sin, but to bring about change from the inside out—starting with us. It begins with acknowledgment, with joint confession and repentance, for we are not immune to the charge of sin or beyond scrutiny. So, the transformation of thought and conduct must include all of us. If he were hear today, I doubt Jeremiah (or Boice after him) would encourage us to abandon our faith communities, but our idols. In keeping with his context and message noted above, may we all return to the Lord, forsaking our idols of power, wealth, comfort and privilege, and ceasing to sacrifice our children and orphans, widows and aliens in their distress to those gods. Lord, have mercy on us!
_______________

[1]James Montgomery Boice, “On My Mind: Our All-Too-Easy Conscience,” in Modern Reformation 7, no. 5 (September/October 1998): 44.

[2]Carl F. H. Henry, The Uneasy Conscience of Modern Fundamentalism (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1947; reprint, with a foreword by Richard J. Mouw, 2003), page 14.

[3]Henry, The Uneasy Conscience,” page 19.

[4]Boice, “Our All-Too-Easy Conscience,” page 44.

[5]Boice, “Our All-Too-Easy Conscience,” page 44.

[6]Boice, “Our All-Too-Easy Conscience,” page 44.

[7]Boice, “Our All-Too-Easy Conscience,” page 44.

Uncategorized

Previous Post

December 7, 2017

The Politicizing of the Faith Is Leading to Evangelical Christianity’s Spiritual Demise

Next Post

December 10, 2017 Are We Looking for Jesus in the Right Place—Bethlehem?

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Uncategorized

Select a Month June 2025 April 2025 March 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz