The Salty Peanut Gallery

Conservative talk show host Glenn Beck fired the shot heard round the world last week when he begged Christians to “run as fast as you can” from their church if they encounter the words “social justice.” Almost immediately his comments incited a controversial reaction. The public debate that has ensued has made it pretty clear that this is a complicated subject that has different meaning to different people.

In his March 2 radio and television shows Beck told listeners:

“I beg you, look for the words “social justice” or “economic justice” on your church Web site. If you find it, run as fast as you can. Social justice and economic justice, they are code words. Now, am I advising people to leave their church? Yes! If I’m going to Jeremiah Wright’s church? Yes! Leave your church.”

He then went on to explain how “social justice” was the one common rallying cry of both Nazis and Communists.

The Rev. Jim Wallis, CEO of the social justice ministry “Sojourners”, was among the first to respond when he wrote, “Beck says Christians should leave their social justice churches, so I say Christians should leave Glenn Beck,” adding that from beginning to the end the Bible is clear that social justice is an “integral part of God’s plan for humanity.”

Jim McDonald, managing director of “Bread for the World” also responded:

“We say Jesus called us to care for ‘the least of these.’ No matter where you fall on the political spectrum, it is impossible for biblically-literate people to deny the thousands of verses in the Bible about hunger and poverty.”

“Sojourners” and “Bread for the World” are calling on Christians to send Glenn Beck a message to protest his comparison of church-based social justice and communism. According to Willis, some 30,000 Christians have sent messages to Beck in protest so far.

Dr. Albert Mohler, president of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Kentucky also weighed in on all the controversy:

“At first glance, Beck’s statements are hard to defend. How can justice, social or private, be anything other than a biblical mandate,” Mohler wrote on his blog. “But, there is more going on here,” he said. “A closer look at his statements reveals a political context.”

From a purely scriptural perspective, Mohler points out how “the Bible is filled with God’s condemnation of injustice in any form.” But is there anything to this idea that there are priests or preachers who would use “social justice” and “economic justice” as “code words?” He replies, “Of course there is.”

“Regrettably, there is no shortage of preachers who have traded the Gospel for a platform of political and economic change, most often packaged as a call for social justice.” He goes on, “The last century has seen many churches and denominations embrace the social gospel in some form, trading the Gospel of Christ for a liberal vision of social change, revolution, economic liberation, and, yes, social justice.”

“The urgency for any faithful Christian is this — flee any church that for any reason or in any form has abandoned the Gospel of Christ for any other gospel.”

There’s a passage of scripture that comes to mind that I think gets overlooked in this whole idea of social justice. In 2 Thessalonians 3:10 we read:

“For even when we were with you, we would give you this command: If anyone is not willing to work, let him not eat.”

For whatever the reason, Paul doesn’t really say, there were people in the church who weren’t working. This had been a problem from the beginning and now it was taking its toll on the spiritual harmony of the congregation. When Paul first planted the church at Thessalonica he had explained how they should work. He had given them an example to follow. Later he even wrote them about it. Now his message is one of discipline.

“As for you, brothers, do not grow weary in doing good. If anyone does not obey what we say in this letter, take note of that person, and have nothing to do with him, that he may be ashamed” – Thessalonians 3:13-14.

Paul says first of all, “Don’t you get weary in doing what is really good for people who genuinely have need.” Don’t let the deadbeats of this world rob you of the joy of helping those who need help, those who can’t help themselves. And secondly he says, “Mark those who won’t work.” Identify them. Point them out. Let them see what they really are, a wicked disobedient obstinate sinner. Shame them because they won’t work.

So what does “social justice” mean to you? To some social justice means a realization of the Kingdom of God on earth through a “new evangelism” which seeks salvation from social ills and injustice. To others social justice means government activism that seeks to take money from our neighbor’s hand and redistribute it to the poor. But I believe that true social justice is the result of the transforming power of the Gospel, that Jesus’ teachings on giving to the poor and supporting widows and orphans are a byproduct of redemption through Jesus Christ. That’s what social justice should be, though, sadly, far too often is not. That’s what social justice means to me.

Recently I received an invitation from our good friend Byron Harvey over at “The No Kool Aid Zone” to come see his acting debut playing the role of Harold Hill in the Broadway musical “The Music Man” at Towne Lake Arts Center in Woodstock, GA. He’s been getting into some community theater lately and this is his biggest role since high school. As a video tribute I offer you this Russian Harold Hill internet sensation “The Trololo Man.” Is that his real face?

Mark Driscoll, you either love him or hate him. Praised by some for his straight-forward, no nonsense “missional” approach, criticized by others for language that is tasteless, indecent and crude, he is the co-founder and preaching pastor of Mars Hill Church, an emerging reformed multi-campus megachurch in Seattle, Washington. Recently he condemned the movie blockbuster “Avatar” as “demonic paganism” for it’s portrayal of a “false incarnation…a false Jesus…a false resurrection…a false savior” and a “false heaven.” Driscoll said, “That any Christian could watch that without seeing the overt demonism is beyond me.” He also took issue with Christianity Today’s review of the film characterizing it as being “very disappointing” and “reflective of Christianity Today”.

Mark Moring of the “Christianity Today Entertainment Blog” takes issue with Driscoll’s rant against the film. Moring writes, “I saw some distinctly Christian themes in the ideas of self-sacrifice, unconditional love, incarnation, and even a model for missions.” Moring also cites responses from other critics such as Menachem Wecker, faith-and-art blogger for the Houston Chronicle who disagrees that the film is demonic and applauds the film for its spiritual approach to life and its “Christian undertones.” Keith Johnson and Larry Shallenberger of the Children’s Ministry and Culture blog cite four mistakes that Driscoll made in his evaluation:
1) Misunderstanding or Oversimplifying What the Author is Saying; 2) Not Letting the Author’s Universe Exist on Its Own Terms; 3) Choosing Combat Over Conversation; and 4) Failing to Find the Redeemable in the Movie.

Let’s face it. Mark Driscoll is a lightning rod. And like most lightning rods they like to say outrageous things in order to make a point. In this case Driscoll thought it would be attention grabbing to criticize a pop culture icon to illustrate a point he was making in a sermon. Pastors do this all the time. But not every pastor is Mark Driscoll. And not every pastor posts their sermon illustrations on YouTube because, quite frankly, unless you’re Mark Driscoll most people couldn’t care less. But setting aside the sensationalism for a moment, does Driscoll have a point?

Is Avatar a sermon on paganism? Certainly pantheism is pagan in its origin and I definitely believe James Cameron is preaching a message. But I really think Cameron’s use of pantheism in the film is intended as more of a medium than a theology.

Cameron has been quoted as saying he wanted to make “something that has this spoonful of sugar of all the action and the adventure and all that.” He wanted to produce something that was thrilling, but also that has a conscience “that maybe in the enjoying of it makes you think a little bit about the way you interact with nature and your fellow man”. He added that “the Na’vi represent something that is our higher selves, or our aspirational selves, what we would like to think we are” and that even though there are good humans within the film, the humans “represent what we know to be the parts of ourselves that are trashing our world and maybe condemning ourselves to a grim future.” Cameron also admits the film specifically criticizes America’s role in the Iraq War.

So if Cameron is in fact preaching a religion in “Avatar” then the message is unquestionably an apologetic for the religion of Liberalism. Like so many other Hollywood pinheads, Cameron is bowing down at the altar of environmental extremism, anti-war, anti-capitalism. It’s the good agrarian natives who live in harmony with the earth versus the greedy money grubbing imperialists who are hell bent on pillaging the planet for financial gain. This is “Pocahontas” in the twenty-second century. Can’t you just hear the lovely Princes Neytiri singing “Colors of the Wind” to Corporal Jake Sully (or was that Captain John Smith) explaining to him all about the wonders of nature:

The rainstorm and the river are my brothers
The heron and the otter are my friends
And we are all connected to each other
In a circle, in a hoop that never ends

How high will the sycamore grow?
If you cut it down, then you’ll never know

Okay, so what does all that mean to you and me? Can a Christian watch “Avatar” without seeing the overt demonism? I don’t know. Can a Christian watch “Star Wars” without seeing the overt Buddhism? Can a Christian watch any fantasy story without seeing something overtly offensive to their Christian faith? The answer’s up to you. If your conscience is pricked then don’t do it. But if watching make-believe creatures living in a make-believe world practicing a make-believe religion doesn’t tempt you to sin then exercise your Christian liberty and enjoy it with a clean conscience.

This just in….

Nancy Pelosi embraces the Tea Partiers. Here’s an interesting compilation of news clips featuring the Speaker of the House commenting on the Tea Party movement.

This is so laughable one wonders how Ms. Pelosi can even say these things with a straight face. After repeated well documented comments last summer in which Pelosi tried to downplay and disparage the Tea Party movement, referring to it as “AstroTurf” and “faux-grass roots” and mischaracterizing it as swastika carrying hate-mongering, now we find the House Speaker singing a different tune. When reminded of her remarks in an interview over the weekend she responded, “No, what I said at the time is that the Republican Party directs a lot of what the Tea Party does, but not everybody in the Tea Party takes direction from the Republican Party and so there was a lot of shall we say AstroTurf as opposed to grass-roots.”

Oh really? So that’s what you meant. You didn’t really mean to belittle the entire Tea Party movement, just those who are supposedly taking their marching orders from the Republican Party. You know, all those conservatives and independents and moderate Democrats that are showing up by the droves.

But then came the crème de la crème, the pièce de résistance. Nancy went on to say, “But you know we share some of the views of the Tea Partiers in terms of the roll of special interests in Washington DC and that just has to stop.”

Wow. This statement is so outrageous even the interviewer can’t resist chuckling, “So common ground between Nancy Pelosi and the Tea Party movement.”

Now I don’t know which is funnier, Nancy Pelosi feigning agreement with the Tea Party movement or Nancy Pelosi suggesting that Tea Party goers are protesting special interests in Washington. You go girl!