Tags
albert, Bible, catholicism, Christianity, chuck, Colson, declaration, emergent, evangelicalism, fellowship, God, john, macarthur, manhattan, Mohler, prison, roman, Truth
The Manhattan Declaration. It was a featured segment on Al Mohler’s radio program recently, and I admit, I’d not read it. But, eventually I became curious. Any time national religious leaders make allegedly ‘historic’ declarations, well, it makes you want to look doesn’t it? So I did. I read it, and afterwards, after being informed that it was going to be featured on Al Mohler’s program, I thought I’d call in and ask a question. Turns out I waited too late and, since there were only 3 minutes left in the segment, I was politely denied, and rightfully so. The questions I had couldn’t be answered in 3 minutes.
Let’s start here…
DemossNews.com tells us:
Today a group of prominent Christian clergy, ministry leaders and scholars released the Manhattan Declaration, which addresses the sanctity of life, traditional marriage and religious liberty. The 4,700-word declaration issues a clarion call to Christians to adhere to their convictions and informs civil authorities that the signers will not – under any circumstance – abandon their Christian consciences.
The site continues to describe the declaration as this:
The Manhattan Declaration is a 4,732-word statement signed by a movement of Orthodox, Catholic and evangelical Christian leaders who are collaborating around moral issues of great concern. Its 125+ signers affirm the sanctity of human life, marriage as defined by the union of one man and one woman, and religious liberty and freedom of conscience. The Manhattan Declaration endorses civil disobedience under certain circumstances. The Manhattan Declaration will be publicly released at a press conference at the National Press Club in Washington on Friday, Nov. 20, 2009. (online source)
Here are the three main descriptions given of those signing this declaration:
Christians, when they have lived up to the highest ideals of their faith, have defended the weak and vulnerable and worked tirelessly to protect and strengthen vital institutions of civil society, beginning with the family.
We are Orthodox, Catholic, and evangelical Christians who have united at this hour to reaffirm fundamental truths about justice and the common good, and to call upon our fellow citizens, believers and non-believers alike, to join us in defending them. These truths are:
1) the sanctity of human life
2) the dignity of marriage as the conjugal union of husband and wife
3) the rights of conscience and religious liberty.
Inasmuch as these truths are foundational to human dignity and the well-being of society, they are inviolable and non-negotiable. Because they are increasingly under assault from powerful forces in our culture, we are compelled today to speak out forcefully in their defense, and to commit ourselves to honoring them fully no matter what pressures are brought upon us and our institutions to abandon or compromise them. We make this commitment not as partisans of any political group but as followers of Jesus Christ, the crucified and risen Lord, who is the Way, the Truth, and the Life.
Well, Manhattan, we have a problem here.
The intention is “to call upon our fellow citizens, believers and non-believers alike, to join us in defending them.”
Wait a minute. How is it possible for a non-believer to hold dear “the sanctity of life”? Think about it.
Romans 1 tells us that unbelievers are haters of God, His cause, and His Word. Now, unbelievers can be moral, in a worldy sense, but that morality will send them to Hell. So how is it that an unbeliever, opposed to all things Godly, can hold dear, and be committed to defending, the sanctity of life? Come on. Does any ‘evangelical’ really expect non-believers to actually oppose so called abortion rights to the glory of God? Or is the glory of God a non-issue here?
Secondly, how is it that an unbeliever can possibly be committed to defending “the dignity of marriage” biblically speaking? You think Jay Bakker or the other emergent leaders will sign this? No. Yet they are being called to commit themselves to defending it aren’t they?
Thirdly, how is it that non-believers can possibly – and go ahead, stretch the imagination if you must – be called to commit themselves to defending “the rights of conscience and religious liberty”? Seriously. I’d recommend reading John MacArthur’s “The Vanishing Conscience” for starters. That is, of course, after reading Romans 1.
Unbelievers do not truly care about “human dignity and the well-being of society”, much less the claim they are “inviolable and non-negotiable.”
And finally, this:
We make this commitment not as partisans of any political group but as followers of Jesus Christ, the crucified and risen Lord, who is the Way, the Truth, and the Life.
Manhattan, you’re asking non-believer’s to agree to this?
Who wrote this? Is this the collaborative effort of the national, evangelical leaders of America? If it is, God help us. Where is your biblical discernment? Did you trade it in for a politically correct career? Did you trade the truths of God’s Word for a nice place in the suburbs?
More importantly, is the Written Word of God not sufficient enough? By that, I mean, has the Lord not informed us what we are to think, believe and do in regards to the sanctity of life? the rights of conscience? religious liberties? dignity of marriage? civil disobedience when necessary?
Of course He has, and it is sufficient!! Christians need no other declaration. This is why you will not find my signature on the Manhattan Declaration. We need to proclaim the one the Lord’s already given on these issues.
This declaration is a nice idea, but the problem is the theology behind it is all wrong, because it implies that unbelievers have the ability to commit themselves to upholding biblical, God honoring truths. And unbelievers can’t.
By the way, which one of you national evangelical leaders would like to come forward and declare Roman Catholicism “Christian”?
Roman Catholicism is not Christianity, and the two can never, ever be reconciled, ever.
Thank you for being bold enough to say this, even though I know it won’t be the “popular” opinion. I wish you had gotten through on the radio program today because I really would like to hear what Mohler has to say about this. I’m not sure what he’s thinking by signing this.
As a fellow Christian, I’m quite disappointed to hear your perspective on a variety of levels. I know many faithful Catholics who follow Christ sincerely and value scripture deeply. Certainly there are arms of the Catholic church which have a misguided focus, but this exists frequently within the protestant church as well. I, for one, am glad to hear Christian beckoning the world, especially the non-believer, to value the sanctity of life, though quite disappointed they left the care for the poor out of this statement. I also know a fair amount of non-believers who value life deeply – through general revelation they are capable of this – some who do far more to show this value than most Christians I know. Why would we not want to encourage all people in this endeavor when the value for life stems from our faith.
I urge you, brother, please reconsider how you speak of those you consider to be ‘outside’ your acceptable version of faith. It keeps Jesus and his message from being truly heard by so many who are hurt by the kinds of things you say.
Thanks for your comment.
You should know that I have no issues with Catholic folks. It is the doctrines of the Catholic organization that are not reconcilable with biblical Christianity (as opposed to ‘American christianity’). For example, the RC doctrine of justification is non-biblical and anti-Christian. If there are those within the RC org, who are truly regenerated by the work of the Spirit of God and have been born again, they will eventually leave the roman catholic organization.
As for the Manhattan Declaration, all lines have been crossed, hands are joined for yet another ecumenical effort. Doing good works jointly is fine, but asking unbelievers to uphold and be fully committed to “the rights of conscience” and “religious freedom” along with other biblical morality is an impossibility while yet being enemies of Christ. It can be feigned, it may be a good fleshly show of ecumenicism, but of what eternal value is it, if those unbelievers who participate end up in Hell?
The last thing I desire is to ‘keep Jesus and His message from being heard”. By all means, His message of repentance and faith should be trumpeted.
Here, here. Joel is correct. Just because we join hands and attempt to fight a noble cause does not mean it is Biblical. Christians can indeed agree with nonChristians for civil and political purposes as citizens BUT we cannot join ecumenically with nonChristians in a spiritual effort because it gives our endorsement to the other parties to the effort.
There may be some catholics who are Christians. However, I do not see how they could continue to call themselves catholic since the catholic church is built upon false beliefs (pope is God on earth, Mary is divine, pergatory, works-based salvation…).
I agree that action must be taken against bad political and social policy. However, Christians must take action as a force by itself. We have no spiritual fellowship with unbelievers…
http://www.truthinator.wordpress.com
I’d maintain that all branches of the church hold some measure of heretical doctrine because we are human and don’t have the capacity to fully know – this is why we have so many denominations, theological perspectives, etc. However, maintaining unity on the basics like the Apostles Creed (not non-essentials like purgatory, the pope, etc.) and other basic doctrine is important. Many Evangelicals and fundamentalists have added plenty of ‘doctrine’ (no dancing/drinking/card-playing, explicit use of the KJV, insistence on political alignment with Republicans, etc.) which are equally heretical and unbiblical, yet no one is dismissing their faith for these heresies.
I understand I’m arguing an unwinable battle here with 5 point Calvinists, just wanted to point out for other eyes that may come across this discussion that not all Christians agree on this point, and that we can disagree respectfully (and amicably – thank you for the response, Joel).
You’re quite welcome. Disagreeing respectfully is a good thing, and I appreciate your input in this discussion.
You are correct in saying there are heresies and unbiblical teachings within protestantism. I think you err however, in thinking they are not being addressed from within.
For the record, it’s not just ’5 pt. calvinists’ who reject the roman catholic doctrine of justification, it’s all true Christians. Again, although there may be Christians within the RC organization, it would be erroneous to include the RC organization itself as Christian. It is not. It is actually the world’s largest cult. Those truly in Christ who are now within the RC organization, as well as any other false religion are being called, by the written Word of God, to leave it.
Thanks again for your comments. – Joel
thanks joel. one further question out of genuine curiousity… following this line of thinking, would you say there are mormons, buddhists, muslims, etc. who are also Christians even though the doctrine they follow is false?
Quite a few presuppositions in your statement!
I don’t think any true believer is going to intentionally, knowingly follow false doctrine or stay within the realm of any false religion. They may be immature in their knowledge, however.
Having said that, Scripture is clear that God calls mankind to salvation from all nations, all religions, and all walks of life, etc.
“And this is eternal life, that they know you the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent.” – John 17:3
All Christians do not agree on some items. However, you cannot extrapolate this into meaning that all people who call themselves Christians are indeed Christians despite what they claim is the source of their Christianity.
Examine the RC belief statements. You will find they are a nonChristian cult. Now, just because there are Baptists and Lutherans who disagree about immersion or dancing (the Baptists are correct
), this is not the same type of disagreement as the one between Bible-believing protestants and the RC cult.
Then there are the word of faith, new mystics, emerging church, prosperity and other heretics who call themselves Christian. There may be some immature Christians who have not yet been led out of these false cults by God. They will be led out at some point however.
Let me go out on a limb here. I would bet that you (link between) do not spend a great deal of time in your Bible? Toss the message, NLT, and other paraphrases and get a real Bible. Read it from Genesis to Maps and you will find out where the 5pt Calvinists are coming from.
Thanks for your interest and please continue to dialog here. Joel posts some great articles.
T.
I am not here to engage in a battle of who is a Christian and who is not – that is not within my power to decide. The comments section of a blog is, IMHO, one of the worst places to do that. Your assumptions are inaccurate – the Bible is an old, dear and frequent companion of mine. While I can understand (and even support, in some cases) where Calvinists come from, it is not particularly an argument I care to have these days. I have spent far too much breath arguing over such things that create far more heat than light.
Dear Linkbetween,
Nice try. You can sing that old “I’m a Christian but I don’t support what the Bible teaches about truth” all that you want. Some may not see through it. If accuracy and truth are not important (my summation of what you have said thus far), why even have a Bible? The “I’m not one to decide; it’s above my paygrade” is a tired old liberal argument. The Bible tells us plainly who is and is not a true believer. Those who hear and follow Christ, suffer persecution, and contend for the faith are likely on the narrow path to eternal life (not because of their actions but their actions reveal salvation) and those who just bob along through life living a contented and uncontested life may be on the broad road…
Remember, Genesis to Maps…and pray for God to open your eyes. Peace out.
T.
to the link.
Maam, I must admit that the teaching on salvation of the RC are false. However I must also say the 5pt crowd is false as well. I mean think about it…..why are the calvinists so upset with you in the RC??? Really God must not love you….you must not be part of “the elect” WORLD. Your in the RC and going to hell because GOD has SOVEREIGNLY DETERMINED that you will.
In all seriousness, trust in Christ and His work alone……..and leave all the teachings of men whether they are popes or Luther/Calvin.
John,
I’m not sure how many Calvinists you know but you do not know me. I am Christian first and I trust the Bible. Calvin merely summed up things as he saw them and did a pretty good job. Election or predsetination is of God. If someone is in the RC and God calls them, they will come out and be saved. It is not a fact of man’s ‘decision’. God is indeed sovereign. The Bible shows us this. Read it from Genesis to Maps…
Peace (predetermined),
T.
Pingback: Soli Deo Gloria » The Manhattan Declaration
I agree wholeheartedly with Romans 1 that unbelievers suppress their knowledge of God. But that doesn’t mean that all unbelievers suppress their knowledge of God as much as they possibly could. To assert that ‘Unbelievers do not truly care about “human dignity and the well-being of society”, much less the claim they are “inviolable and non-negotiable”‘ absolutely forgets the idea of man made in the image of God. There are many unbelievers who, while suppressing their knowledge of God and living in willful rebellion to him, still have care and concern for people and the society — because they’re made in God’s image. Doesn’t mean that this love is meritorious, but it is real.
Be careful Luke. It sounds as if you are suggesting that, with a little help from pop-psychologists, man can save himself. I think you are misinterpreting Romans 1. The rest of the Bible does not square with your conclusion. Man is hopelessly lost and totally depraved. He cares nothing for God. God does a miracle over man’s dry bones when He saves someone. God is sovereign. Man is lost. We do not have a God-shaped hole in our self esteem. God elects and saves those whom He will. It is not our idea to ‘get right with God’. It is His idea to redeem those whom He redeems.
Peace.
T.
Truthinator, I don’t think we’re talking about the same thing. I fully agree with you that man is totally spiritually dead and unable to do anything that merits salvation before God (see my previous final sentence). God initiates and completes salvation from start to finish. What I was talking about was the idea that unregenerate people, made in the image of God, still have some measure of morality and love that is beneficial to society. This morality does not save them and doesn’t earn God’s favor, but makes the world a better place to live. Jonathan Edwards called this “common virtue” and said that without it, society would be an unlivable place. Common virtue allows many people who are unsaved and have no heart for God to still see abortion as the murder of unborn children and same-sex marriage as a morally wrong and unnatural and freedom of religion as a positive thing for a society.
http://rachelheldevans.com/letter-to-young-calvinist-from-young-arminian... reminded me of this long ago conversation…well said.
LukeSimmons: Sorry, I sounded like a snit to you. I thought you were making an attempt at “man is only partly depraved and can come to knowledge via effort” stuff. I had a heated exchange with some reformed baptists at another blog shortly prior to this post so I was “predetermined” to head off this argument. Now I see what you meant.
Link: I sort of sounded like a snit to you also and I apologize. My zeal for truth sometimes gets in the way of the compassion I have for people. It’s there even when it doesn’t show
.
To answer your question about believers from false religions, yes, I know many people from false religious backgrounds who God sovereignly saved and they came out of those false religions to join God’s church. I do not know of any true believers according to Biblical description who stay in false religions indefinitely, however. Why would they? I do not believe the roman catholic religion is true. Look at what they believe and compare it to the Bible. Not the same… not even close.
Truthy
Thanks. Communicating kindness and respect to those with whom I disagree is certainly something I’ve struggled with as well, so I do understand! Romans 12:9-21 and 1 Corinthians 13 have convicted me greatly in this regard.