A fiery theologian once had harsh words for some fellow Christians. "When you ... pass judgment on [others], yet do the same things, do you think you will escape God's judgment?" wrote the apostle Paul. "God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you" (Romans 2:3, 24).
In some ways, Paul had nothing on Scott Munger, a Minnesota-born evangelist-author. In his new book, Rethinking God: Undoing the Damage (Living Ink Books), Munger, an American missionary, takes on fellow evangelicals - mostly a noisy few on the religious right - whose behavior and bad theology he says are repelling followers and widening the yawning gap between the religious and the secular.
"Those who claim to follow Jesus ought above all to think and act like him," says Munger, 52, a nondenominational pastor who has lived and worked in the Philippines and the old Soviet Union. "Sadly, 'insipid' and 'dim' describe many evangelicals today. ... Some of our most acclaimed leaders have damaged God's reputation."
A former agnostic who came to faith in God, he trained in both science (B.A., biochemistry) and humanities (M.A. and doctorate in linguistics). In addition to being a longtime student of biblical Hebrew and Greek, he has taught (university, seminary and church) in three languages and studied several others.
He has discussed religious issues on radio, CNN and FOX News, and has worked with Christian leaders from the United States and around the world.
With the eye of a narrative journalist, Munger traces his journey from agnosticism to Christian belief, and from that point of view lambastes "God's so-called representatives" in the evangelical movement - their "sex scandals, financial scandals, self-serving egotism, spiritual abuse of all sorts" - not to mention their preoccupation with political matters, something he says Jesus counseled against.
He names few names, but his point is clear. "Christians should take the utmost care that Jesus is not rejected because of our failures," he says, "whether in what we say or how we live." The book's subtitle: "God is a lot better-looking than many Christians portray him."
Munger replied to The Sun's e-mail queries from Nepal, where he works with a small school and children's home. Munger's wife, Jennifer, a nurse and fellow missionary, has worked with him at each stage of his career. Why "rethink" God now?
People need spiritual truth like they need food. If they can't get the good stuff, they'll eat things that don't smell very nice. [And] in the historically "Christian" West, Christianity is on the wane.
Many factors are involved. Financial wealth ... often puts people of all persuasions to sleep spiritually. We Christians often live at a level far below that of Jesus' high calling. [And] In part because of weak Christian testimony, new belief systems have stepped in to fill the West's spiritual void. Such as?
One ... is [an absolute faith in] "tolerance." Tolerance can sound appealing, but pure tolerance allows for evil to breed: mistreatment of the innocent, corruption, slavery, anarchy. [Pure] tolerance won't be worshipped forever, but by the time it's cast off, great damage will have been done.
In what ways have Christians, and Christian leaders, been falling short? Our neighbors, leaders, judges, schools and celebrities are, as often as not, non-Christian or even anti-Christian [today]. But are they against Jesus, or simply against us? Are we living as Jesus commanded, or as we [personally] wish to? Do the views of non-Christians about God come from [genuine] understanding, or from the ways in which we misrepresent [God]? I fear that an honest answer will not make Christians proud. What behaviors are the most damaging?
James, the brother of Jesus, says, "We all stumble in many ways." James was one of the most revered leaders in the early church, and included himself in this description (as I do myself). But thankfully, there is no record of James running off with Peter's secretary, or driving around in a gold-plated chariot, or teaching people that if they pray such-and-such a prayer, or give to his ministry, that good things will happen to them. ... This side of heaven, divine responsibility, not personal privilege, ought to be our focus.
In his day, Jesus chastised church leaders who went astray. Are American evangelicals any worse? If not worse than those of previous generations, [they] are in a worse position. The temptations to go astray may be greater today than at any time in history. Never have people had access to such wealth, immediate gratification, diversions and just plain worldly fun and sinful activity. Not that all of it is wrong, but Christians [always] need to weigh the trade-offs ... [involved in pursuing their faith].
Modern transportation and communication have shrunk the world. Christians now have an even greater responsibility to resemble Jesus - a life of truth and sacrifice in service to others. You're critical of the "pastor-as-CEO" model in many American churches, where a single leader sets the tone. Why?
The model [is] a carryover from several places, [including] priesthood as seen in the Old Testament. There is [also the] very human but sick tendency to want to rule over others. But God replaced that system with Jesus as the one and only high priest.
Jesus was strong against any non-biblical caste system. ... When church "services" revolve around a single person, non-pastors don't feel they have important roles ... and [fail to] mature as they ought. [And] pastors and their families take on too much. ... When they fall, get ill or move on, the church can be left in turmoil. Early churches [were] always led by a group of elders, never by one man.
Small group meetings promote the mutual give-and-take that should characterize the church. They are [also] nearly impossible to eradicate. Witness the church in China. In your book, many non-Christians see God as either a merciless absolute ruler or a "heavenly vending machine." Neither view conforms with Scripture. Where do they come from?
Bad theology. Christian leaders are human, too; they can derive ideas incorrectly, and once they do, it's hard to change. Beliefs may be ours since childhood; a respected teacher may have bequeathed them; they may fit our personalities or current understanding. But are they true? Most Christians would never own either caricature, but their actions and teachings [make you] wonder. [However], badly played Mozart is a poor excuse for hating the composer. You're critical of Christian leaders who focus on politics. Why?
Rome's cruelty and decadence surpassed anything we see in America. But politically, Jesus stood almost entirely aloof. Evangelicals who promote Christian political action don't mention that.
Too many Christians today hope to change people - or maybe simply to preserve their [own] lifestyles - by changing the government. Jesus rejected such temptations, and so should Christians. How should Christians behave if they see government as restricting religious freedom?
As good citizens, within the laws and their rights. But the question should not be first how they should react, but who are we? Are we first of all Americans or ... first of all Christians? Put another way, where is our home, here or in heaven? If the former, then we may do all sorts of things ... contrary to Jesus' teachings. If the latter ... we will act out of concern for our neighbors more than concern for ourselves.
When Christians focus on loving their neighbors, their friends, their co-workers, their God, then people will change. When people change, governments change. Should Christians avoid political involvement?
In the book, I write, "By all means involve yourself in politics. Do your duty. Inform yourself. Vote. Pay your taxes. ... But don't confuse earthbound, political posturing ... with the divine administration of eternity." On a more theoretical level, you say all politics really has a religious basis.
The Soviet Union was atheistic to the core, yet ... even the Soviets were believers - believers that God did not exist. Communism's battle cry is [itself] a religious statement: "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need." But the natural question screams back: Why care about anyone? Why provide for the needy? The USSR collapsed for many reasons, but central to them was a built-in antipathy toward the idea of God. Society must have a basis for morality, [and] apart from the existence of God, there is no such basis. The system was entirely inconsistent - hypocritical, if you will. How about the U.S.? What's the place of religion in public life?
The founders of the U.S. were right to declare: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights. ... " They didn't debate the existence or centrality of God; they held it to be self-evident truth. Life in the Soviet Union was a case study in what happens when that truth disappears.
Atheists and agnostics should have all the rights of any other U.S. citizen ... but let's not be fooled into thinking that a strict separation between politics and faith is a part of our history, or that it would be good if it were. Should leaders, such as President Bush, keep religious beliefs out of their decision-making?
Everyone has religious beliefs, even if they are beliefs like "religion is useless," "God is dead," or "God is only allowed here, not there." So President Bush is not to be singled out.
Religion ... rightly involves issues of morality. People want their leaders to act with basic integrity and generally accepted values. If [leaders] have different values, then let them be voted out. And the much-discussed "separation of church and state"?
Politicians ought to own up to the fact that as the Declaration of Independence states, rights come from a "Creator." Governments are therefore bound by moral principles, and thus a measure of "religion." A truly secular government would be a monster. Politicians need not follow a specific creed, but if they claim to be free from religious principles, they are either confused, or ... watch out. Throughout the book, you make it clear you, too, have your failings. Did that make it hard to write?
My biggest concern is not my reputation, the sale of the book, or whether people like it or not, but the image I myself portray of God. So this whole process of writing has frankly been rather scary. But the flip side would be to be quiet, and that seemed scary, too.
jonathan.pitts@baltsun.com