Have you been watching the news the past few days? I have, and I’m seeing some irate Americans out there at these town hall meetings. I suppose we can expect more of the same through the summer break for Congress, but what are we to make of such outbursts? If you agree with the tirade of the protester, do you smile a bit, vicariously living through them to express what you wish you could? Does your heart share in the anger and silently cheer them on?
I received a good quote from a friend today. He related these words from Vance Havner: “We are not going to move this world by criticism of it nor conformity to it, but by the combustion within it of lives ignited by the Spirit of God.”
What provides the combustion, the energy, the explosion? “For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek” (Romans 1:16). Take part in the rantings against your government if you want, in the privacy of your living room or out at your local TEA party. You’ve got the right to do that as an American, but before you do, consider this: You are exchanging the true power to change this world for an inferior, pathetic method.
It’s the difference between the H bomb and a firecracker. It’s internal versus outward change. It’s lasting versus superficial change. Eternal versus temporal. Your anger may be assuaged by winning some key seats in the next election, but you and I know what’s going to happen – those seats will be lost again sometime.
Also consider that if you are a follower of Christ, you don’t have the luxury of deciding how you will impact your world. You’ve been given your commission: “Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I commanded you...” (Matthew 28:19, 20). If the church would just focus there, even to our elected officials, we would be following Christ’s mandate.
Consider one last thing. Our anger does not bring about eternally beneficial results: “This you know, my beloved brethren, but everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; for the anger of man does not achieve the righteousness of God” (James 1:19, 20).
Did Jesus get mad? Sure. Did Paul get outraged? No question. Did Peter disobey his rulers? Yes. But why? Righteous indignation is borne from a desire to see God magnified and made known. In all biblical examples of righteous anger, the motivation is always centered on God and following His mandate to teach His truth to all nations. Is that the motivation of angry American Christians today?
Christianity is meant to be counter-cultural, but we Christians in America are blending in pretty well when it comes to our political involvement. Havner was right. Criticism and conformity will not only fail in changing our world, they will keep us distracted from the very power we’ve been given to make that change.
If we’re going to get hot under the collar, we’d better have the right reason behind it.
Rotunda Reflections 
August 5, 2009 at 3:38 pm
Hey Brent: I do read your blogs. This last one was very timely and needy. Thanks for using the good mind and gifts God has given you for His glory. PJ
August 5, 2009 at 4:06 pm
Our anger won’t bring about eternally beneficial results, but it could cause people to turn away from Christ because we reflect him so poorly. And that could have eternally harmful results.
August 10, 2009 at 1:49 pm
On the other hand, we also cause people to turn away from Christ when they see no difference between believers and non-believers. I do think there is a place for righteous anger in the health care policy debate, and I think there are many born-again believers who are justifiably angry and concerned about govt-run health care. There is no logical reason to believe that the US govt-run nationalized health care system would behave any differently than, say, Europe or Canada today. Nationalization has always meant rationing, and also a questionable moral basis for decision-making (cost-effectiveness) when it comes to human life. In the context of nationalized health care, where is Christian compassion in govt-supported abortion; in rationing based on years-of-life-left; in pain management based on cost-effectiveness?
As it always seems, it comes down to what’s in our heart. What is the impetus for the concerned anger in this case? Is it to be confrontational, to acquire political power, to “win” the debate? Or is it to point light onto practices that will debase our God-created humanity? We image Christ when we are in the world, but not of the world. Sometimes that calls us to “unnatural” kindness and grace. But sometimes it calls us to a rather unkind, confrontational table-turning. Sometimes we image Christ in division rather than unity. It’s not an easy walk, is it…?
August 11, 2009 at 6:25 pm
Pastor Brent,
To your reply to Thom, I believe the ‘marching orders’ are straightforward, but not always easy to follow. We all have times of struggle don’t we? I’m learning that our life needs to be ‘not I, but Christ’. Notice I said I’m learning. God has given me a friend that encourages me all the time; he ends his letters with Galatians 2:20 (his life verse), and adds ‘be loyal to the Royal within’.
By the way Pastor, when I do this, I feel like I could be the star of the new movie “Ernest Blogs”. The sophistication level here is way over my head, but I’m not shy – knowwhatimean?
August 11, 2009 at 6:53 pm
Buck, you crack me up. Who knew we’d be such “techno wizards”?
You make a good point, and none of us ever quit learning. And I’ll be the first to tell you that quoting the verses is easy and the spirit is willing, but doing it is something else. We just shouldn’t be confused about what the Word says on this or try to redefine how Christians are to impact the world. I see some believers “strategizing” how to turn around society’s moral decay and they completely leave out Matthew 28:18-20, especially in the political arena.
August 12, 2009 at 1:08 pm
Thom, thanks so much for your helpful comments. I’ve also enjoyed going back to Matthew 21 to look at that passage again.
I don’t disagree that we have the responsibility (and precedent from our Lord’s actions) to express righteous anger at times, but must take care in how it looks. Jesus tossed tables, yes, but also made it crystal clear WHY – with His words. For the Jewish rulers, this added to their hostility against Him (1 Cor. 2 definitely applied to them!) But right after this account of righteous anger, others who observed His rage came to be ministered to by Him. Something even in his public tirade attracted people, which is amazing. Why weren’t they scared or hesitant?
As we let the world know we are upset with the condition of things, I would hope that our words would clearly reveal the content of our hearts. Jesus was jealous for people to bow to God as their Savior and that should be the main thrust of our message as well. We should internalize 1 Timothy 2:1-4, having a spiritual concern for our leaders and their salvation as our default attitude toward them. All I’m saying is that when I say this to believers, many are shocked (but agree) or disagree outright. Either way, considering politicians as targets for disciple-making is foreign to many in the American church. That’s what should change.
What this boils down to, I suppose, is that I’m more concerned about how the church expresses itself in our world than how the world responds. You’re right when you say the Father is the One who draws people to Him. The power we’ve been given for that heart-change is the message of the gospel. When we get overinvolved in healthcare, tort reform, gun control, taxes, immigration, whatever – to the exclusion of the gospel, we have veered from our mandate. In the first century, many immoral policies needed to be changed. Paul himself, as a religious leader, killed Christians but his life, actions, and thoughts did not change as a result of outward public pressure. It was the gospel, and today’s church must take care not to water down that message, no matter how mad we get at our government.
Thanks again for challenging all our thinking on this, Thom!
August 12, 2009 at 11:23 am
Hi again Brent et al —
I’m sure that, to the eyes of non-believers (including those in authority), Christ’s actions (table-turning and confrontation) that day looked no different than any other hooligan’s. Indeed, they considered Him criminal. You are right in saying that “we could never say it was ‘rather unkind’ since He was without sin…the reasons for His outburst never had to do with public policy”. However, those who observed His actions did not know any of this; to them, they were just seeing anger and confrontation, but they had no understanding of what was behind it (1 Cor 2:14).
We are called to image Christ to the world. The vast majority of the time that means through actions that are perceived as love, patience, grace, humility, mercy, etc. But there are times when our image will be the table-turner. When Christ did that, His love was expressed through His righteous anger. I would suggest that we can similarly express His love for others in ways that would be perceived as being motivated by anger rather than love. But we cannot control those perceptions. Christ know exactly how His actions would be perceived and misunderstood, but He took action anyway because He knew it was an appropriate and correct way to express His love for them. The word is indeed a two-edged sword.
There is absolutely no question what our first priority is, as you said so well. Christ does not call us to change the world, but to participate in His work of changing hearts. That’s why I said it always comes down to what’s in our heart. But I do believe that what’s in our heart as a believer can appropriately be expressed in ways that will be perceived as anger and confrontation by non-believers — not because the actions of believers are “wrong”, but because as Paul says, non-believers cannot understand them. And such expression can also change hearts. As we know through His grace, only He can remove the blindness, which brings us back to the Great Commission, doesn’t it…?
Oh — Buck, you’re dead-on, brother. “Straightforward” is way different than “easy”. The path defined for our walk is straightforward, well-defined in scripture. But my stumblings and strayings continuously remind me of the need for my Savior to also be my Lord. For me, that’s the hard part…