I was minding my own business today when a thought invaded, arrested, and held hostage my mind. It was let loose by a memory I have had for years of something a pastor said regarding those "old time Arminians". If memory serves, he went on to say (as if commending even such Arminians as John Wesley) that "they cared about God" in contrast to so many Evangelicals (of an Arminian stripe) who apparently seem not to. And then my thought came: what if, somehow, I were to find the sermon or message in which that comment was made and (if I had such a platform and audience online) I were then to post it, with comment, and decry such "sectarian", "divisive", "dogmatic", and even "unloving" words? I'm sure I could start quite a firestorm, especially if the comments were made by a high-profile figure and were a long time ago (so as to sound even more unguarded)!
But this seems increasingly to me to come precariously close to assuming a role that is not rightfully ours. In Matt. 12:36, 37 we read that Jesus said, "I tell you, on the day of judgment people will give account for every careless word they speak, for by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned." Now, it's not clear exactly who will be doing this judging, but I think it's safe to say that Jesus does not intend to leave open the option of letting one of us fill that apparent vacancy. More importantly, though, is the trend I see in political punditry and celebrity blogging (whether of evangelicals, pop-singers, actors, or politicians of a sort) when it comes to what Sarah Palin has so eloquently labelled as "gotcha" questions or moments. It seems that one's opponents spare no expense these days not only in digging up dirt from one's past but in finding it in this mornings news interview before the words even hit the ears of most Americans (who don't make a living off watching internet websites). This seems to be one of the many ways in which we've usurped God's rightful role as judge of our words.
We ought to be mindful of what we say, but let's be honest: how much of what is called "fact-checking" or "due-diligence" is nothing more than an uncharitable effort to sabotage one's opponent simply because his or her comments can successfully be spun to one's own advantage? If Jesus is right, then the opponent who disagrees with me and is trying to "bring me down" is not the one my anxious thoughts ought to focus one: I ought to be a bit more concerned with what the God of all creation heard me say; and, no, He doesn't spin. He doesn't need to.
BHT
