Wheaton college is a place that produces enemies of the Cross and of Biblical Christianity (Witness Michael Gerson). But then why should they be an exception to Evangelical Colleges that are anti-Christ?
Recently, Wheaton came out with a study exploring the, “Intersection of Government, Foreign Assistance, and God’s Mission in the World.” In a preliminary statement that still has to go through the revision stage they affirmed,
The extraordinary power of the United States and the daily impact of the United States on the world’s poor requires special vigilance on the part of American Christian citizens as to the effects of the US role and policies and assistance programs. Our goal should be to bend the power of the United States toward a maximally effective impact on the world’s poor”
And in a press release they offered a series of Affirmations,
1.) We affirm that active concern for the poor is a non-negotiable aspect of Christian discipleship.
2.) We affirm that Christians need to become more competent in addressing the full range of government policy as it relates to the poor in the United States and globally.
3.) We affirm that Christians should advocate for just, generous, and fair government foreign assistance and related policies.
Now the fact that these statements are just so much “social justice” window dressing to disguise a Marxist agenda is seen by the reality that one of their speakers was one Ron Sider whose position was totally decimated by David Chilton’s, “Productive Christians in an Age of Guilt-Manipulation: A Biblical Response to Ronald J. Sider,” in 1990.\
Now, on the surface there isn’t much to disagree with in these statements. However, if one scratches the surface of these statements one begins to smell the sulfur of Marxism. There is no absolute affirmation that wealth should be redistributed from the US to the world in order to pursue equity but the idea seems to lie just below the surface. For example, in that #3 above we find ourselves asking what standard they are using to define “just,” “generous,” and “fair.” I would be willing to bet the farm that the standard is a Marxist standard.
If we really wanted to “bend the power of the United States toward a maximally effective impact on the world’s poor” we would first realize that poverty often (not always) is a result of the death that always follows pagan religions. What impoverished countries need more than anything else (what this country needs more than anything else) is the Gospel of Jesus Christ and the Worldview that that Gospel creates. Countries that are institutionally and politically impoverished will never escape their impoverishment no matter how many resources we send their way, as long as they, as a culture, are haters of Christ. Concern for the poor demands that we cure their poverty with the totalistic impact of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
Secondly, if we really wanted to “bend the power of the United States toward a maximally effective impact on the world’s poor” we would advocate destroying the IMF and Centralized Banking as it exists throughout the world. These Central Banks exist in order to impoverish nations by placing them in huge debt that can never be overcome. If Christians really desired to put a dent in global poverty they would end our own Federal Reserve and then demand that these united States pull out of every international banking cartel. Concern for the poor requires us to oppose the depredations of Global banking which always works to keep the poor, poor for the sake of the wealthy.
Thirdly, if we really wanted to “bend the power of the United States toward a maximally effective impact on the world’s poor” we would criminalize Marxism and social justice theories that are spun from Marxism. Marxism, insures poverty whenever it is pursued. People like Ron Sider and those who support Marxist inspired social justice theories should be deported or put in hospitals for the criminally insane. Concern for the poor requires us to marginalize those people who advocate policy that will create poverty.
I appreciate that you do not find much to object to on the surface in this statement. As someone who was there I’m glad to say there was no Marxist agenda lying below the surface.
Ken,
You are a Statist. You will forgive me if I don’t trust a Statist declaring that other Statists are not Statists.
“As someone who was there I’m glad to say there was no Marxist agenda lying below the surface.”
Ken, may I ask what the agenda is that lies below the surface, for all recommended actions and calls for “social justice,” etc., have an underlying worldview by which they operate. And all worldviews reveal the God or god behind them and the law by which they are worked out in the real world. And there are only two in this world: The LORD of lords, Jesus Christ, and His Law contained in the commandments or man, especially as he is embodied and empowered in the god of the State, and the laws that come forth from it. These two are diametrically opposed, as the bloody history of mankind has shown. Since the fall mankind has continually sought to empower himself in the state for the expressed purpose of casting God’s restraining law so as to impose His own, as his own savior (Psa. 2). All “isms” such as socialism, Marxism, fascism, etc. are but various manifestations of paganism, that is, the ages old religion of fallen man. They differ only by how far they go in human depravity to rule on earth in bringing death and destruction to their fellow man. The worst forms, however, are these isms that have been given the good seal of “Christian ” approval, thereby putting God’s name on them, as though He approves of them.
Well spoken Tom.
I would also add that this statement is the tell tale sign of some kind of Marxism.
Where in our Constitution does it allow the Federal state to be just, generous, and fair in its government foreign assistance? Where in the Constitution does it allow for any foreign assistance? This is international redistributionism and all restributionism has Marxism as its foundation.
Here, here. How about we do away with all foreign aide which is somewhere in the 20-50B/year range (including economic and military $$) and reduce taxes and let the true taxpayers contribute directly.