Thank God that Erick Erickson has decided to give us some lessons in theology. Now everyone will go make fun of him and prove his point that fundamentalists don’t get much respect from our cultural elites. The thing is, and maybe Mr. Erickson understands this, there is no reason to spend any energy disrespecting his literal reading of the Scriptures. The problem isn’t that he actually believes Jonah was swallowed by a fish. The problem is that he wants to impose his religious beliefs on the rest of us through the acquisition of political power. Here’s how he puts it:
Christians in politics must understand these things.
There was once a time when most everyone in public life professed a faith in the things of the Bible. That time is more and more becoming unacceptable to those who shape the news. These secularists have made a concerted effort to turn the world hostile to that faith and belief and have allied themselves with weak theologians to turn young Christians into more worldly, secularly focused milquetoast weepers worshiping an effeminate Christ who only hugs kids and cries, but does not fight, does not take sides, and is accommodationist to the world and its amorality and increasing immorality because, dude, he hung out with prostitutes and cried about another dude dying. They want to define the Christ they prefer to believe in, rather than believe the Christ that is…
…Christians must still believe. Christians must still engage the political process. There can be no sitting on the sidelines in the fight between Heaven and Hell and that fight takes place as much in the political arena as it does in the homeless shelter or the pulpit. Even now in the 21st century after the birth of Christ, there is still true Good and there is still true Evil and there is still true Truth…
…Christians can eschew partisan sides, but they must not eschew God’s side. They must not eschew Truth. Unfortunately, some within the center-right coalition and the left, as it expands within the Democratic Party, increasingly make that party hostile to matters of faith and Christ and have eagerly embraced a moral relativism that teaches the only real choice is embracing abortion, tolerating the subversion of marriage to a secular culture, and embracing a social gospel that has objectively made more and more dependent on government while relegating the Church and its mission to the margins.
Young Christians who have decided their path is to avoid the political fights that implicate the beliefs of their faith and old Christians who have grown weary of the fight must still fight and must still pick a side whether they think they must or not. The world continues to be at war with Christ and increasingly that fight takes place in the political arena. From Health and Human Services regulations to ridicule of believing politicians to Democratic Convention attendees opposing the inclusion merely of the word “God” in the Democratic Party platform, we are seeing that fight from the higher plane come down to eye level.
I don’t share Erick Erickson’s belief in the literal truth of the Holy Bible, but I have zero interest in discussing theology with him. He thinks I want to destroy him and that I am part of a political movement that is evil. Actually, all I want is for him to recognize that this is a pluralistic and multi-faith society and to realize that the law should reflect our diversity of opinion about moral matters.
A good example is his objection to the contraception mandate. That is a regulation that he finds morally offensive. That’s precisely why exemptions were provided for religious organizations. Good law recognizes the moral objections of significant portions of the populace without letting them hold good policy hostage.
This country was founded on the importance of religious freedom of conscience and tolerance of people from different faith traditions. That’s why I don’t mock Erick Erickson for his belief in Adam and Eve. I just oppose his decision to take his particular religious beliefs and try to translate them into political power and influence.
