Who is Tom Krattenmaker?

In watching Lord Save Us, there is an interview of Tom Krattenmaker, where the narrator asks "How's that for symbolism?" The narrator is speaking in reference to a Christian group being shown in a footwashing ceremony performed on the homeless and street people. Tom Krattenmaker then appears in the video stating,

"I think it's hard not to be inspired by witnessing something like that. And, I think that if you want to talk about what is the best face of religion; the face of religion that is not divisive, but that brings people together and lifts us up? That's it."

But of course. [insert sarcasm here] But that is not the "face" that saves. It's the face that "brings people together and lifts us up", but it isn't the face that brings salvation to the lost - though it can be a tool to reach those within that group that is targeted who are receptive to the message of the gospel. And certainly, no decent Christian would speak against such an outward display of grace toward the community, because it seeks to express a central teaching of Christ to "love thy neighbor as thyself."

However, there is this common belief among modern-day evangelicals which is embraced by this neo-evangelicalism, which is this concept that we are to evangelize others primarily by the life that we live. In other words, that people should/would/will come to Christ by witnessing how Christians live. But this concept is rife with misunderstanding, because it assumes that Christians will never fail, and that the world at large (represented through our media outlets), would consistently show a balanced representation of Christianity. Of course, that is the furthest thing from the truth.

But, it's interesting that Krattenmaker mirrors the views of Dan Merchant, and his movie, especially since Krattenmaker, in his USA Today column, describes the Christian evangelicalism of Tim Tebow as "a far-right theology." And that is, afterall, what Dan Merchant is trying to marginalize, is "far-right theology."

Here's what Krattenmaker says regarding Christian Athlete Tim Tebow:

"Certainly, Tim Tebow must be applauded for the good he does working on his father's missions, but he should be seen, too, as one who promotes a form of belief that makes unwelcome judgments about everyone else's religion. Let's not forget the twinge that is felt by sports-loving Jewish kids and parents, for example, or by champions for interfaith cooperation, when adored sports figures like Tebow use their fame to push a Jesus-or-else message."

Yes, there's that pesky "Jesus-or-else message" that Dan Merchant and Tom Krattenmaker find so offensive, which is CENTRAL to Biblical theology: "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life. No man comes to the Father, except through the Son." (Jesus, as quoted from John 14:6)

What does the title mean?

Dan Merchant:

"If you were to meet ten average Americans on the street, nine of them would say they believe in God. So why is the Gospel of Love dividing America?"

The simple EASY answer: Not everyone believes in the same God.

Ok, I have to post this disclaimer: I have NOT seen the movie yet. It's only playing in one theatre, so I have a reasonable excuse, though I do hope to correct that today. I have seen nearly every clip that is available on the internet, and I'm assuming that those little vignettes are sufficient to give me an ideological centerline to the movie. I have read MOST of the book. I'm thinking that the book and the movie are parallel in their ideology. I could be wrong, but I seriously doubt that. If anything, the book is usually MORE comprehensive in its presentation.

I jumped into the fray initially out of concern for the title. The title speaks from an anti-Christian perspective "Lord, save US from YOUR followers." It doesn't matter that Merchant could mount a counter argument to my claim, because it is sufficient that many non-believers are quickly, and easily identifying with such a title.

Let us not be fooled into believing that Dan Merchant, et al, did not carefully consider the title. The title is the first thing that you will most likely consider. If you see a poster for the book/movie, you will see a giant Jesus holding the sign of the same title, superimposed, and centered, upon an outline of the United States. The imagery is clear, Jesus is dividing America - or, according to Merchant, His followers are dividing America. But even Jesus said that His ideas, when implemented in a believer's life, would divide between himself and others who rejected Christ.

To me, the question naturally comes, "Why is it that a Christian would advance such concepts TO THE WORLD COURT OF OPINION?" After all, isn't the Bible explicit in its commands against that very thing? Here's what the Bible says about Christ's followers airing their dirty laundry before the world:

When one of you has a complaint against another, do you take your complaint to a court of sinners? Or do you take it to God's people? Don't you know that God's people will judge the world? And if you are going to judge the world, can't you settle small problems? Don't you know that we will judge angels? And if that is so, we can surely judge everyday matters. Why do you take everyday complaints to judges who are not respected by the church? I say this to your shame. Aren't any of you wise enough to act as a judge between one follower and another? Why should one of you take another to be tried by unbelievers? (1 Corinthians 6:1-6)

Now, the context is taking a matter between two Christians to a worldly court/legal system. How is this any different than Merchant's movie being offered to the world as a means of convincing Christians that we ought to do what the world believes? The world judges by A DIFFERENT STANDARD than us. Their opinions on a subject rarely coincide with God's opinion on that same subject. And that is why Paul admonished Christians to settle matters amongst ourselves.

Going to the world not only opens up Christians to mockery, but Christ as well. I don't want to be guilty of that!

Dan Merchant visits me!

I was encouraged by Dan Case to write an email to Dan Merchant, and so I did. I received his reply today. I'm gonna converse with him a bit more to try and answer a few questions, and I'll report back on my findings.

Yes, Dan Merchant stopped by to see what I was saying about him and his movie. What do you think he thought?

Well, to put it in a nutshell, I've made a few "accusations" concerning Dan Merchant. Foremostly, I've "accused" him of being a Social Liberal. That was culled from an online news article which gave him a favorable review of his movie. Hardly a hostile source, so is it not reasonable for me to AGREE with them?

After reading his reply, I was left wondering if he was interested in defending against my statements, because he never once contested on any single statement that I had made. What shall I think regarding this non-committal approach to discussion of an extremely important issue facing Christendom?

I'll report back when I've formulated my thoughts concerning this...