Chris Turner
Is it possible to be salt and light in a culture where Evangelical Christians champion individual freedom, autonomy, and liberty while seeking to legislate societal morality through majority rule?
This question reveals a genuine tension for Evangelical Christians. How do we advocate for personal freedoms while using the democratic process to influence and enforce our biblical understanding of moral standards in society?
I formulated this question a month ago while studying the “Scopes Monkey Trial” in preparation for the 100th anniversary reenactment of the “Trial of the Century” held this week in Dayton, Tennessee.
The tensions argued 100 years ago over individual liberty and majoritarian democracy remain prescient today. Watching actors portray Clarence Darrow and William Jennings Bryan, the central figures in the Scopes trial, argue vastly different worldviews stirred my dilemma. How do Christians living in the “now but not yet” reconcile this paradox?
This dilemma is a “liberal paradox,” revealing a deep tension between two cherished principles in liberal democracies that cause societal conflict. In balancing respect for individual choice with fair collective decisions, we hit a limit: not all values can coexist harmoniously.
Adding to the tension is the clear mandate from Jesus Christ to be salt and light in this cauldron of malaise.
How do we honor both the biblical call to be “salt and light” (influencing society toward godliness) and the principle that faith should be freely chosen, not coerced?
I shared my question with 18 insightful Christians — pastors, scientists, doctors, lawyers, politicians, apologists, and educators. Their responses were varied but showed consensus that Christians must pursue biblical righteousness through legislation that “influences society toward godliness.” Issues like abortion, human sexuality, and defining marriage were frequently mentioned.
However, there was also agreement that Christians often pursue the right objectives in the wrong way. One politician noted that too often we seek to advance God’s kingdom and righteousness by enacting laws to enforce a moral code prescribed by God, but such efforts are often “in vain,” according to 1 Corinthians 15:58, because they are self-serving and not done “in the Lord.”
Former Tennessee Gov. Bill Haslam writes in his book, Faithful Presence, “Too often, Christians shape their faith to fit their politics rather than forming their politics from their faith. They seem to forget their calling is to be used by God in service of others rather than to use God to reach their own desires and ends. Faith can be a redemptive, healing presence in the public square, as it must be, if our nation is to flourish.”
An apologist responded that for the unbelieving world, “our testimony of faith in Christ, our involvement in Christian community, and our stand for truth, regardless of which way the winds of society blow, should have a far greater impact than legislative or societal movements in the name of the Lord.
This doesn’t mean Christians should avoid legislation faithful to Scripture, but we can’t rely on legislation (or judicial action or executive orders) to change the human heart.”
A Christian educator put it succinctly: “Morality as a goal is misguided. Morality is fool’s gold. The dead are burying the dead.” A pastor added, “What good is it if we win the moral battle in society yet lose the souls of men in the process?”
Many respondents highlighted a prevailing shallowness in biblical literacy among Evangelical Christians, a lack of understanding of how the Bible intersects with contemporary issues, and an inability to engage in meaningful, reasonable conversations with those of differing perspectives.
One pastor said, “We are so divided we don’t know people with other viewpoints, and most don’t want to [know anyone with another viewpoint]. Our politics influences our evangelism more than the Holy Spirit does.”
Ironically, a 1925 Memphis Commercial Appeal editorial about the Scopes trial noted a lack of confidence among Christians in defending their faith against secular challenges.
“Most sincere believers in religion have their religion but are afraid if they go out and mix in the fray, they will lose it. Some fear they will be put to confusion. Some believe but fear they cannot prove their belief, so they leave the field to extremists like Darrow and Bryan.”
Are Christians toothless lions, reduced to shouting at the culture rather than engaging it? We shouldn’t be. Everything the editorial mentions can be corrected. We know God. We have His truth in the Bible. We know God’s desire is to see hearts changed. We have the gospel. We have the Holy Spirit. We have each other.
The bigger question is: What will we do with all that we have, and how will it guide us to be salt and light “in the Lord” in a decaying society of individual freedoms while graciously pursuing righteousness, loving and serving those who may hate us?
It is a complex question, and demands both an individual and collective response. B&R
