Truth Project: So What?

By now I think that I've seen enough of the Truth Project to get the big picture and so have you if you think about it. Del Tackett raises a profound subject and cites Scripture to show how the Triune God of the Bible relates to that matter. The primary goal is to glorify God by showing that while he utterly transcends the material universe, he is present and active (in the fullness of his being) at every point within it. The secondary goal is to show that Christian faith relates to every area of life and to provide some guidance in how we should live in God's creation while not being part of the passing world system.

Focus on the Family and Del are well aware that some of their interpretations about origins and about the social and political implications will be controversial among their Evangelical Christian viewers. They (and Pastor Mark) view this as a good thing; we ought to be aware of our differences and be willing to discuss them without condemning those with whom we differ over issues that have not been settled by the ancient councils and creeds as heresies (e.g., the age of the earth, the best form of government). No doubt there is a correct answer to some of these issues, but we may have to await the return of our Lord for certainty about them.

Last night I realized that because I did my graduate work in Political Philosophy and Literature at a Catholic University, I have a perspective on the Truth Project that perhaps few Evangelicals share. Did you notice, for example, that as an authority on the economics of poverty, Del cites a Catholic scholar? And did you ever wonder why, when Bush wanted to please his conservative Evangelical base, he was able to nominate two Roman Catholic judges with the academic and intellectual credentials to overcome the opposition of the Democrats in the Senate and the elites who love the "Living Constitution" instead of the document as written and intended? And why the Evangelicals welcomed Catholics John Roberts and Samuel Alito with open arms?

The answers go back, in part, to the retreat of conservative Evangelicals from engagement with the intellectual, political, social and artistic spheres of American life in the wake of their rejection by the mainline denominations. Indeed, as I understand it, J. Gresham Machen was, in effect, excommunicated from the Presbyterian Church for his outspoken opposition to Modernism (Liberalism) at Princeton. Many of the "Fundamentalists," as those who maintained the essentials of the faith such as the deity of Jesus, his Virgin Birth and his bloody atonement were called, accepted the Dispensationalist theology that emerged early in the 19th Century with its portrayal of Christians as always and only a beleaguered minority on the periphery of society.

Their theme song was, "This world is not my home, I'm just a passing through" and this truth was taken to mean that Christians had no cultural mandate to fulfill as a godly leaven in every legitimate aspect of society. Evangelism and Christian ministry was the way to really serve God and the concept of farming or business or even education as a calling or vocation from God as Luther had seen it waned. Without realizing it, Fundamentalists and the Evangelicals who emerged as a distinct group after WWII, were living on social and political capital borrowed from the Christians among the founders and the frontier evangelists of the 18th and early 19th Centuries. Only when the anti-Christian agenda of the secularist elites became law through critical Supreme Court decisions in the 1940s through the 1970s did Fundamentalists and Evangelicals wake up to the reality that their retreat from a holistic living out of the gospel was having dire spiritual consequences. Only with the earth shaking consequences of the Roe v. Wade decision's disregard of the biblical view of the sacredness of human life, did Fundamentalists and Evangelicals begin to awaken to what was happening.

More later. Gotta gather and stack the wood before my neighbor rebukes me more firmly.