Tag Archives: politics

News

What the Assassination of Charlie Kirk Means for America and Christianity

Leave a comment

I have abstained from commenting on the abominable and anti-American tragedies that have occurred back-to-back recently, as my indignation has tempted me to speak unkindly and unhelpfully. But now that I have had time to allay my anger, pray for wisdom, and contemplate the biblical, historical, and national ramifications of what I believe has changed the United States overnight—for better or worse—here are a few observations:

1. This is not the America I want—not the America any of us want. The humanity, morality, and decency we possessed following the catastrophe of September 11, 2001 has largely diminished. And I want it back. I yearn for the America of yesteryear when politics was a take-it-or-leave it issue, seldom dividing everyday Americans.

2. Contrary to popular belief, religion has not become increasingly political—politics have become more religious. The political realm has invaded and usurped fundamental matters of morality, to our detriment. For decades, the federal government has encroached upon marriage, sexuality, and human life at its most precious stage. And know this—its futile attempt to redefine, and thereby undermine, these societal cornerstones has brought us to this moment. These tragedies are symptoms of a moral disease.

The United States cannot and will not exist so long as these erosions continue. As John Adams said, “Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” This is not Christian nationalism. I am not even saying our laws must necessarily follow the Bible. But, a moral society cannot survive when it jettisons basic truths—truths found most of all in the Scripture—truths such as:

– God-ordained marriage is between one man and one woman for life.

– You are the gender your chromosomes say you are.

– Children in the womb should not be slaughtered—but protected by the law.

– Those who take human life should be penalized to the highest extent of the law.

– The government’s job is to inflict terror upon evildoers which, therefore, allows morality to flourish on its own.

3. You have the right to vehemently disagree with my views on these matters. And I would die for your right to speak freely and dissent. I will stand beside you as an American, regardless of your political affiliation. You are my neighbor, and I love you. But no bullets should be fired because we disagree.

4. Politics has evolved into a god many are willing to die and even kill for. This golden calf must be smashed to smithereens. Vote how you will vote, speak freely about what you believe, but leave it at that.

5. We must devise a way to legislate political terrorism out of existence, while preserving free speech rights. Freely expressing opinions and even rigorously criticizing a politician or party is one thing, but demonizing a demographic simply because of their beliefs, justifying violence against them, even encouraging it, I believe, ought to be classified as hate speech, and therefore, punished. Criticize and critique whom you will, but it is carelessly irresponsible and inhumane to call any politician “Hitler,” to classify millions of Americans as “a basket of deplorables,” and it is reprehensible to call for violence against your political opponents such as Rep. Maxine Waters who said years ago,

“And if you see anybody from that Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get out and you create a crowd. And you push back on them. And you tell them they’re not welcome anymore, anywhere.”

This is not entirely one-sided. It is not even two-sided because most Americans do not speak this way. But the fringe fanatics do—regardless of their party—and their extreme rhetoric, which tones down following a tragedy and amps up a week afterwards, may require punishment from the law to curb it. I will admit, I do not know the solution to this, but we have to find a way to eradicate it from public discourse.

6. None of us are invincible. Neither Iryna Zarutska, Charlie Kirk, nor the children who lost their lives in recent shootings anticipated the day they tragically passed. I do not diminish the gravity and severity of their awful deaths, but all of the living should take this to heart: death is inevitable and often sudden. It is inescapable. Therefore, I plead with you: repent and believe in Christ Jesus. Only He can grant everlasting life. And no excuse for not doing so is not worth losing your own soul.

7. We all must do better. We have no other choice. We must engage in healthy and in-person dialogue more often, and learn to agree to disagree and move on. And believers in Christ, we must not retreat into the shadows. More than ever, we must expose the works of darkness and bring Christianity back into the public square.

Frankly, we cannot afford for even one day more to sit on the sidelines and seal our lips about the moral erosion of our culture. We must speak the truth in love much louder. We must love harder than ever before and proclaim the gospel of Christ bolder than ever. And we must elect and support lion-hearted and constitution-following men and women who possess unbreakable moral backbones, and refuse to settle for anything less.

Brandon is the pastor of Bandana Baptist Church in Bandana, Kentucky, where he lives with his wife, Dakota, and their three dogs, Susie, Aries, and Dot. Brandon and Dakota are also foster parents through Sunrise Children’s Services of Kentucky. Brandon is also a published author and a religious columnist for the Advance Yeoman newspaper in Ballard County, Kentucky. He is also a devotional contributor for Kentucky Today, a news publication of the Kentucky Baptist Convention. His columns are also featured in the Times-Argus newspaper of Central City, Kentucky, West Kentucky News of western Kentucky, and the online blog, Reforming the Heart.

book reviews

Review: The End of Secularism by Hunter Baker

Leave a comment

Freedom from God is desirable only by those who wish for their own destruction. In fact, the desire for this freedom is what caused humanity to plunge into sin and death—so there is no reason to pursue it. But somehow, freedom from God in the political realm is the greatest pursuit. A society which is free from God and religion is the highest and inevitable goal of human society—and that is the heartbeat of secularism. According to secularism, human society flourishes when it is free of both God and religion so that we can focus on our fundamental interests, which we all supposedly have in common. History demonstrates that religion has resulted in only demise for human society—wars, division, and strife. Therefore, politics and the public square shouldn’t be guided by superstition or the supernatural. Moreover, as the human species progresses in knowledge and rationality, there simply is no need for religion anymore.

By observation of our surroundings, it would appear that secularism is indeed our inevitable destiny as a society, given its dominance in our government and among our institutions, colleges, and culture. But quite frankly—nothing could be further from the truth. Nothing more than a second glance at secularism is required to reveal that such an idea is far from the best option for a flourishing human society. Secularism is simply not the answer to the question of how we can function in society with so much plurality—and that’s what Hunter Baker establishes in The End of Secularism. Baker succinctly demonstrates that secularism offers no such neutral ground which it claims, and it is not something into which society must unavoidably drift. Instead, it is merely a disproportionate reaction to the numerous calamities resulting from church-state alliances in Western history.

Baker reveals that secularism fails to accomplish what it was designed to do—create and sustain social harmony without religion. Instead, the way to have social harmony is by valuing a public square that welcomes all voices into the discussions surrounding the interests of society. That is the only way to preserve free speech, religious freedom, and a democratic society. The title of the book is very fitting, for Baker explains the end goal of secularism and the end of it, because it is a poor idea coming to its death.

Summary of the Book

Baker accomplishes his goal in two major parts: history and rebuttal. In the first portion of the book, spanning chapters 1-8, he walks quickly through the development of secularism in Western history. Baker demonstrates through historical events and key figures that there has been a struggle for power between the church and the state, and how various solutions have been proposed for how to maintain balance between the two. In the second portion of the book, from chapter 7 to the end, he offers a reasoned rebuke of secularism as supposedly the best answer to this struggle. He evaluates and analyzes the results of the happenings of history and applies that assessment to America’s founding and current situation. The most powerful part of the rebuke comes in chapter 10 on through to the conclusion of the book, where he explains that secularism utterly fails to accomplish peace in human society.

Personal Impact

Prior to reading this book, I had not realized how much secularism dominates in the public square. It appears that any view which even smells of the Christian religion is marginal, while secularism is regarded as not only normal but noble. Separation of church and state has been misinterpreted as a comprehensive privatization of religion, and Baker powerfully demonstrates this in a way I had never realized before. I come away from the book with a new perspective on both secularism and religion.

A Few Issues

Although this book is probably the best on the subject, there are several things that could have made the book even better, in my opinion. First (and this may be a matter of opinion), Baker takes too long to get to the main point of the book. Obviously, the history in the first portion of the book makes a powerful and necessary point. But the book would have read much better had he woven the failures of secularism through the journey of history he explained. The beginning of the book starts by explaining some of secularism’s failures, but that is seemingly dropped until the second portion of the book. In the history section, there are hints here and there of secularism’s detrimental goals, but it isn’t as clear as it could have been. The meat of the book in the second portion was like eating a delicious supper you’ve been waiting for hours on. I feel like he could have at least given appetizers in the first half of the book.

Secondly, there appears to be no clear solution offered for how we can move forward with all of this information. It’s possible that this is not even part of the purpose of the book—but it would have made it better. The last page of the book (194) is the clearest explanation of what we should do regarding secularism:

“Pluralism is better than secularism because it is not artificial. In a pluralistic environment, we simply enter the public square and say who we are and what we believe. We make arguments that advert to religion or other sources of values, and they are more or less convincing on a case-by-case basis . . . In order to preserve our freedom to talk about him [God] in all that we do, even in politics, we need only respect others by seeking to persuade rather than to coerce. Surely that is preferable to replacing the organic heart of our civilization which a mechanical one.”

This is very general, however—a detailed plan would have been better. I don’t feel like there is sufficient application of the ideas presented in the book.

You Still Need This Book

Although there are a few shortcomings in this book, its strengths far outweigh its weaknesses. The book is a much-needed rebuke of secularism. Christians who fear vocalizing their ideas in the public square should be emboldened by Baker’s unmatched work. He is the best person to write such a piece—he has been on both sides—once a secularist himself. And his penetrating words are timely—written in 2009 but written as though Baker could see into the future as our culture has become increasingly secularized.