Driving home in my car just now I turned my radio on to the local Christian talk station just in time for the Jay Sekulow Live program. The topic of discussion for today was tax reform. Even though it is not the topic I want to write about, nor what I really want to discuss here, I will come out and say it right up front anyway, since I imagine some commenters will want to direct the conversation that way anyway: I am not, in general, a big fan of the Jay Sekulow show. The main reason why I am not has to do primarily with the topic of my article: I do not believe it is generally a good idea for specifically Christian ministries to focus their time and energy on political issues over which biblically orthodox Christians may legitimately differ.
Now that I have gotten that bit of information out in the open, let me back up a little to clarify that: 1) this article is not specifically about Jay Sekulow; 2) it is not specifically about tax reform; and, 3) it is not specifically about Christian radio (though that is getting a little closer, perhaps, to the main point I want to talk about here). The truth of the matter is I don’t personally have an axe to grind one way or another about tax reform. I am not totally sure what I feel about various tax reform options. And if another Christian program were to present the opposite political view to that of Jay Sekulow on tax reform, it would bother me just as much as when Jay Sekulow presents his view.
And it is not that I am totally disinterested in the topic of tax reform. I agree that it is a valid point of discussion on which many different people, Christian and non-Christian alike, have perspectives that are worthy of hearing and taking into account. I agree that it is an important topic that merits serious discussion in general. And while I may not necessarily be a fan of a good amount of secular political talk radio–whether of the right-wing variety or the left-wing variety–I do think it is a good thing that the airwaves are free for various commenters to air their opinions on these matters. But I think there has been an unhealthy tendency in the the past, let’s say, thirty years for Christian ministries to venture out into the realm of offering opinions in the name of Christ, the Church, and Evangelical Christianity that are best offered in different venues and with different implications.
Let me unpack that a bit. I think it is perfectly fine for individual Christians to have opinions on any number of issues that the Bible and our specifically Christian religious beliefs do not directly address. In this respect, Jay Sekulow has just as much of a right, and indeed a prerogative, to defend his personal views on tax reform as any other free American citizen. And the fact that he publicly identifies as a Christian does not in any way disqualify him from doing so. But it seems to me that the fact that he presents his program and ministry as a specifically Christian ministry carries along with it the tacit understanding that the views he propagates on his program are views that can be defended from the Bible and views that he not only considers politically correct but also biblically correct.
Now perhaps Sekulow (along with many other Christian interlocutors who defend a wide array of political positions on a number of different issues) has some sort of convoluted biblical defense of his particular take on tax reform that he can pull out of his coat pocket if asked to do so. But I am not personally convinced there is any clear biblical position one way or the other on the particular issues at stake in the contemporary discussion on American tax reform.
If he wants to talk about abortion, I am right there with him–though there may be several different valid political approaches toward working to limit and eliminate abortion from our midst, and I would be opposed to anathematizing or excoriating fellow believers in Christ who advocate other political approaches. If he wants to talk about a Christian understanding of marriage, or what the Bible teaches about the sin of homosexuality and other sexual sins, I am right there with him as well. As Christian ministers, we need to give the full counsel of God, without holding back, even on issues that may be considered controversial in our society. If he wants to talk about immigration (though, from what I gather, I may likely disagree with some of his views on this topic), I likewise think that is a valid point of discussion for a Christian program or ministry to address. But there are a whole slew of issues that I am convinced are not specifically Christian or biblical issues with regard to which I think it is vitally important to clearly delineate between personal political opinions and purportedly orthodox religious opinions.
I think what I am proposing here is related to Paul’s admonition to the Corinthians to not go “beyond what is written” (1 Corinthians 4:6). Ultimately, arguing in the name of Christ, the Church, or Evangelical Christianity for debatable positions on topics the Bible does not clearly address draws a line in the sand that serves to divide the Body of Christ over matters that ought not to divide us. I also think that a large degree of friction and abrasiveness within the Body of Christ that has also infected our society at large in recent years can be traced to the tendency of many Christian ministries to do just this–to go “beyond what is written.”
On the other hand, it is not hard for me to understand how or why this has happened. We live in a media-soaked society in which controversial political posturing generally raises ratings and sells advertising. In Christian ministry, taking public views on this or that issue may well help to build a donor base, compile a mailing list, and rally the constituents. And in many ways and on many topics vital Christian voices have often been ostracized from the public square. We should indeed be legitimately reluctant to hand over the mike on all public policy issues to everyone but biblical Christians.
But I believe it is important to choose our battles wisely. When we cultivate the habit of pontificating on every issue that crosses the airwaves, we concurrently lose our prophetic edge on those issues that really matter from the perspective of eternity. When I get to heaven and am asked to give an account of how I lived my life on earth, I don’t believe I am going to be asked about how I defended my view on tax reform.
Once again, this is not to say that we as Christians ought to isolate ourselves from society at large and not contribute to discussions on everyday issues on which fellow citizens who are not Christians also participate. There is a time and a place for Christian legislators, attorneys, doctors, business executives, scientists, etc., to express their opinions on current issues debated in their respective fields of inquiry. The rub is when you express your personal view in such a way that it comes across as if you are speaking for the Church at large.
“The Bigger the Government, The Smaller the Citizen” and “There is no greater power of Government on Earth (beyond wielding the sword) than taxing citizens” As stated, Christians can have views on such things a taxation. Those views might even derive explicitly or implicitly from Scripture (either by direct command, or by the ‘world view’ of the Scripture itself. This may be one of those areas that speak towards the implicit nature of God’s Word. While the Scriptures themselves speak not a word about taxes themselves (besides the innocuous “render unto Caesar that is due Caesar” and further the commands… Read more »
I agree with David on this. I’d ask Rob what the tax rate is that is unchristian.
I have often made this argument. Far too many Christians conflate their Christianity with their Republicanism (or their Americanism). Abortion and gay marriage are not controversial. But I’m quite sure there are genuine Christians who are socialists and communists, as well as capitalists. Just as I’m quite sure there are genuine Christians who are pro-gun and anti-gun, pro-universal health care and anti-universal health care, for and against a strong social safety net, for and against pacifism, and for and against amnesty for illegal aliens. It’s fine to stake out a position on these issues, but not so fine to unequivocally… Read more »
Ever since the days of Constantine and Theodosius, supposedly Christian rulers, together with the aid of their more theologically savvy court sycophants (see Eusebius, Drollinger, Jeffress, et al) have eisogeted support for their regimes and policies from supposed underlying scriptural principles (see divine right of kings, et al). By the way, in compiling your list of relevant Scripture passages that speak to a biblical basis for tax policy, don’t forget to include Genesis 47:13–26.
Are you suggesting that Sekolow here is a sycophant or that I am? I have always supported just tax policy before the current regime so…. your point exactly? Or just a hangup about inferred Scriptural principles that make up a general Christian worldview? Your comment David comes off as a bit of Freudian slip if all you wanted to talk about was if tax policy was Scriptural or morally neutral. My comments were made generally without getting into the nuts and bolts of what makes up specifics. In terms of justice I have always supported a flat tax on individuals,… Read more »
I’ve always wondered if something like a 12% personal Flat tax for everyone excepted the first 25k which is taxed at 6%. *Everyone* pays taxes. All deductions and loopholes go away – including programs that actually return more money to people equal to or more than they paid in payroll taxes. Only remaining exemptions : charity and mortgage. Here’s how my plan would work… LOL Someone makes $50k taxable income (after mortgage and charity): 25k x 6% = $1,500 25k x 12% = $3000 Total FED tax = $4500 Someone make $5m taxable income (after mortgage and charity) 25k x… Read more »
Oh….if someone makes only 25k they only pay $1500
If someone makes 12000….they pay $720 in federal taxes.
The point about sycophants applies to those people specifically named. I suppose, now that I think of it, Sekulow also has some marked sycophantic traits as well. As far as you are concerned, Rob, I am not even totally sure who you voted for, so I guess you don’t qualify for now. If you have always supported a flat tax, more power to you. If I had taken the time to study all the ins and outs of different taxing options and their mathematical implications, I might well be right there with you. To be honest, based on what I… Read more »
“Sycophant – a person who acts obsequiously toward someone important in order to gain advantage.” Yet your definition encapsulates who I might of voted for. Pleaseeese. For the record (like him or not) Jay Sekolow has been in the public eye for over 30 years and has held to fairly distinctive and consistent views throughout. Nothing he has said recently is different from what he talked about from the beginning. He is attempting to please no one. Neither am I for that matter. For once – just one time David – I would like to entertain a conversation without getting… Read more »
Okay, Rob, I receive your extended hand. Peace. Just by way of explanation, I did not mean to infer that voting for someone makes one a sycophant. The intended point, rather, is that if I don’t even know whom you voted for, much less a whole lot of other things about you, how can I presume to call you a sycophant? As far as Sekulow is concerned, yes it is true he has been publicly promoting right-wing approaches to the combination of faith and public policy long before anyone ever dreamed of a viable Trump candidacy. But it does seem… Read more »
David: This is an excellent post. Even though tax policy was the example you used as an area where Christians may have different thoughts, and that you might disagree with Sekulow on that, and you expected more agreement on abortion, marriage, sexuality, the intersection of morality and government is not a fixed position and changes based on the times etc. Slavery is a good example. I know of no Christian I have ever met today who would not say that slavery is not acceptable, and that we should do all we can to oppose it, including taking up arms. But… Read more »
Louis, That is a mouthful to mull over. First of all, I appreciate your appreciation of my article and affirm that in a broad sense we do seem to be tracking together on this. That being said, though, a few additional observations are perhaps in order. 1. With regard to slavery, biblical teaching, and the views of our theological forebears: The whole question of whether or not the Bible addresses the abolition of slavery and whether the seeds of abolition are implicit in the gospel is an interesting and complex question that in some ways goes beyond the scope of… Read more »
I agree with you, David. Yet I am finding it more difficult to avoid wading into politics because there are so many self-identified “Christian” sources on the web promoting misleading information designed to promote President Trump’s agenda. I have read several “analyses” of the president’s tax proposal, lauding it as “pro-family”, while ignoring the fact that it would result in a tax increase for many low and middle-income families (especially large families). Meanwhile, there is no question that the proposal would be a boon for the wealthy. What are we to think of this? I have seen the policy of… Read more »
David: You are welcome. Agree with you on all points. Intelligent discussion would be welcome on ethnic issues, and I am hopeful that might occur. Most “discussion” I have heard is not all that intelligent, frankly, and has led to strife. And its mainly over posturing – who can condemn this group more etc.? Hence, my lack of enthusiasm for more of what I have seen. Also would be glad to hear more intelligent discussion on migration, immigration etc. Mohler commented recently, and I have noted, the lack of any limiting principle. That is, if what people advocate ends up… Read more »
Once again, thanks for the insights. I think indeed we are tracking on this. One more observation: I think in the past several years our friend Alan Cross has been a great model for us on intelligent and biblically-balanced discourse on immigration.