Response to Rainn Wilson

Welcome back to Coffee with a Calvinist. This program is dedicated to helping you better understand the word of God and the doctrines of grace. The Bible tells us, do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth.

Get your Bible and coffee ready and prepare to study along. Here's your host with today's lesson, Pastor Keith Foskey.

Daily Bible Reading and the New Pop Culture Response Segment

And welcome back to Coffee with a Calvinist. My name is Keith Foskey and I am a Calvinist. Today is September 1st, 2020. And if you're following along in our daily Bible reading, today is going to be reading 1 Timothy chapter one.

If you're interested in following along with our daily Bible reading, you can find the daily Bible reading sheet at sgfcjacks .org. That is Sovereign Grace Family Church of Jacksonville, sgfcjacks .org.

And you can look up our daily Bible reading. We're doing a one chapter a day reading through the New Testament all through the year of 2020. We'd love to have you join us for that. And more importantly, we'd love to have you join us for worship.

If you are in the Jacksonville area and you do not have a church home, we would love to have you visit with us on an upcoming Lord's Day. All right, today on Coffee with a Calvinist, we're gonna start a new segment, something that I've been looking forward to for a while.

We're going to begin on a periodic basis, maybe about once a week or so, we're going to begin doing a segment that I'm calling a pop culture response. And basically what this is, this is an opportunity for me to address something that is going on in popular culture, something that's said or something that is part of a movie or a TV show, something that relates to the Christian faith in some way.

And I want to provide a response. And today we're actually going to be responding to a tweet. And for those of you who don't know what that is, I'm sure most of you do, but that is when someone goes onto Twitter and makes a statement.

Responding to Rainn Wilson's Tweet About Jesus

And today we're going to be responding to a tweet from the actor Rainn Wilson. Now, if you don't know who Rainn Wilson is, Rainn Wilson was shot to notoriety because of the television show, The Office.

He played the character called Dwight. Dwight was one of the characters on the show. And he was the one, if you ever watched the show, he was sort of out of his mind a lot of the time. He was very, he was an annoying character and he was very serious and oftentimes said things that were just outrageous, but he considered himself very, very serious.

But the person behind the character is named Rainn Wilson. And he's been in many other things. He's been in movies and television shows. And some people might say, well, why does anybody care what Rainn Wilson thinks?

Well, I don't personally care what he thinks, but I do think that it's important that when someone is a public figure and they make a statement about the Christian faith, we gotta remember that this is something that other people are going to hear and oftentimes may mimic what they are hearing from people in popular culture.

And for years, I've been looking at things like this. I've seen popular culture addressing Christian faith and saying things that are just wrong and just outrageous. And I say to myself, someone should provide a response to this.

Someone should be saying that this is not true. This is not right. And so I wanna make that a part of Coffee with a Calvinist. And again, this isn't directly speaking to an issue of Calvinism, but it is speaking to an issue that I think is important theologically.

And that is the issue of apologetics. Do we as Christians have a responsibility to give a defense for the hope that is within us? Well, of course we do. The Bible says that we do. The Bible says we're supposed to be able to give a hope, or excuse me, give a defense or an answer, an apologetic for the hope that is in us.

And oftentimes we see the hope that we have being attacked from various sources. And this often happens in popular media and in popular culture. So like I said, I'm gonna do this periodically. I don't know if I'm gonna do it every week, but I'm certainly going to begin making this a part of the program where we do our pop culture response.

And today we're going to again be looking at a tweet from Rainn Wilson. Now, a little history on Rainn. I did look up a little bit about him personally. And apparently he is not a professing Christian, but rather he is a, at least according to the internet, he is a practitioner of the Baha 'i faith.

Now, I'm not gonna critique Baha 'i. I may later in a later episode, because I am thinking of in the future doing some explanations of various religions, maybe doing some comparative religion studies.

Got a lot, you know, we do the show every day. So it's an opportunity to look at a lot of things, things that I don't often, not often able to get to in my preaching ministry because of time and things like that.

So this affords me more time. So not gonna look at the Baha 'i faith today, but it's important to know that is where Rainn is coming from. And so he's not a professing Christian, but he makes a statement about Jesus that I think it's important for us to be able to hear and respond to.

Now, if you're watching the video, I'm gonna put this up on the screen, but if you're not watching the video, I'm gonna read it. So you won't be missing anything if you're doing the audio podcast rather than watching the video.

So here is the quote. On Twitter, Rainn Wilson, at Rainn Wilson says, the metamorphosis of Jesus Christ from a humble servant of the abject poor to a symbol that stands for gun rights, prosperity theology, anti-science, limited government that neglects the destitute and fierce nationalism is truly the strangest transformation in human history.

I'll read it again quickly. The metamorphosis of Jesus Christ from a humble servant of the abject poor to a symbol that stands for gun rights, prosperity theology, anti-science, limited government that neglects the destitute and fierce nationalism is truly the strangest transformation in human history.

So that's Rainn's statement. Now let's look at this, and again, from a Christian perspective, we should always try to be fair when we're offering a response to something that someone says. We should try to be fair to what they're saying, try to be honest with what they're saying, try to deal with it in an honest way, not create straw men just to build them down, build them up to tear them down, but rather say, okay, let's see what he's saying and make a educated and biblical response.

Why Jesus Cannot Be Reduced to a Servant of the Poor

The first thing that we have to note is that he's saying that modern Christians are not properly representing the Jesus of Scripture. Now, right away, I wanna stop and say, I agree with that, at least on the surface.

Many modern Christians do not rightly describe the Jesus of Scripture. Many modern Christians have an unbiblical view of Jesus. So on that, I would say, Mr. Wilson, that's correct, but that's not all you said.

If that's all you said is that many modern Christians have an unbiblical view of Jesus, I would say yes and amen, you got it right. But you see, you instead, Mr. Wilson, take in this tweet and you describe Jesus in an unbiblical way, and then you describe those who are believing in Jesus in an unreal or untrue way.

So let's break down your statement. First, you say, the metamorphosis of Jesus Christ from a humble servant of the abject poor. First of all, is that what Jesus was? Was Jesus a humble servant of the abject poor?

No, that is not the best way to describe Jesus Christ. In fact, if you can read the four Gospels and that's what you take away from it, that Jesus was a humble servant of the abject poor, then you have absolutely missed what the Bible says about Jesus.

If you say Jesus was a person who loved the poor, then I would say yes. If you said Jesus is a person who served people who were poor, I would say absolutely. But Jesus was not, that was not the only part of Jesus's ministry.

In fact, I would say Jesus's ministry to the poor, while important, was not the most important part of his ministry. The most important part of Jesus's ministry was the fact that he was the Son of God who came into this world to live a perfect life, a life that in his active and passive obedience would demonstrate his righteousness, and then when he went to the cross, would pay the sin debt of all who would believe on him, and his perfect righteousness would then become their righteousness, their sin would become him, or he would become sin for them, and they would be forgiven.

That's the most important part of Jesus's ministry. The most important part of Jesus's ministry is that he came to keep the law. This is what the Bible says. The Bible says that in the fullness of time, God sent forth his Son, born of a woman, born under the law, that he might redeem those who were under the law and give us the adoption of sons, that we would become part of the family of God.

That was Jesus's mission, and Jesus did that for all kinds of people, not just poor people. So to limit the ministry of Jesus to a, quote, humble servant of the abject poor, I think is an absolute misrepresentation of who Jesus is.

Now, was Jesus a person who loved the poor? Yes. Was he a person who served the poor? Yes, but to limit him to being a servant of the abject poor, and that's the most important thing that you get from the Gospels, then you've missed it.

You've missed who Jesus is. And see, that's often what happens. I've heard Jesus be described as a socialist. I've heard Jesus be described as a liberal, because Jesus cared about feeding hungry people.

Jesus cared about people who were hurting and people who were destitute. Yes, all of those things are true, all those things about Jesus loving people, but Jesus was no socialist. Jesus was no liberal, not in the sense that modern liberalism tries to run away with Jesus.

This is just a very untrue representation. If you read through the Gospels, if you read the story of the life of Jesus, this description of him is very unbiblical. But that's not all that he says, so let's go back and look at what he says as well.

He says, the metamorphosis of Jesus Christ from a humble servant of the abject poor, which again, was he a servant? Yes, did he do good to the poor? Yes, but to describe him that way is unbiblical. But then he goes to say, to a symbol that stands for gun rights, prosperity theology, anti-science, limited government that neglects the destitute and fierce nationalism is truly the strangest transformation in human history.

Gun Rights, Personal Protection, and Benevolent Violence

Well, let's go through these one at a time. The idea that Jesus stands for gun rights. Understand this, this is a shot across the bow at those on the right who believe in the ability and the right of individuals to protect themselves with weapons if so necessary.

And a lot of those people, like myself, are Christians. I believe in what I would describe as called benevolent violence, meaning I do believe there are times where violence is necessary for the protection of life.

Augustine talked about just war. He said, if you were walking past a person who was being beaten, would it be more loving to walk away or would it be more loving to intervene and stop the person from beating the other person?

He said he believed the more loving thing to do would be to intervene and stop the person being assaulted. And currently, right now in human history, one of the best ways that people can protect others and protect themselves is with firearms.

This is why, as many of you know this, I am a certified instructor. I teach people how to use firearms and I do not believe this violates my faith. I have written and spoken on this extensively in the past and am continuing to do so because I do not believe that Jesus would say that it was wrong for me to protect my family, for me to protect my wife, for me to even protect myself from a person who was trying to kill me.

So understand this. Do I think Jesus stands for gun rights? No, not in the sense that I don't think that that's the way we should understand Jesus as his purpose was not to come and give us gun rights.

But at the same time, do I believe that Jesus would command me as a father to protect my family? I do believe so. I believe the three roles of a father are to pastor his family, to provide for his family, and to protect his family.

And a man who doesn't do those three things, I think, is not living up to the responsibilities he has as a man. So I think, again, I think this is poorly worded. I think he's attacking Christians who believe in gun rights as if they are violating Christ.

I don't believe they are. I don't believe I am. And I think that this is a wrong representation. And it doesn't have anything to do with the poor. Whether or not you believe in gun rights doesn't have anything to do with the poor.

So this is a non-sequitur anyway. It doesn't connect to what he's already said. Jesus was a humble servant of the poor. Now he stands for gun rights. It's not as if the two are mutually exclusive. It doesn't make any sense.

But again, he's building a argument in his, I understand the tweet is very short, and so he's limited in what he can say in the time. But the gun rights thing is a, it's a straw man. He's trying to build up something that he can destroy, and it doesn't work.

Prosperity Theology, Anti-Science Charges, and Limited Government

Now, prosperity theology, I just want to quickly say, I agree, prosperity theology is evil, it's ugly, it's unbiblical, and I would agree with him that prosperity theology is not something that I can defend or should defend, and I won't defend it.

However, let me say this. Most, well, all biblical Christians, those who believe the Bible, are not pushing prosperity theology. The prosperity theology is being pushed by a sect of Christians, and they're not even, I would say they're not Christians.

It's a sect of evangelicalism that is unbiblical and is being led by false teachers. And those of us who are biblical point to them, and we say, those men are false. And so to lump everything together like this, I think is unfair.

Now, the next one is the one I really wanted to key in on, and I'm trying to keep this in my normal time of 20 minutes, but anti-science. Everybody in the modern culture who attacks Christians who believe the Bible as anti-science, that is a false attack.

Christians are not anti-science, but we do not believe that the modern understanding of the scientific method allows us to deny the existence of God or the existence of the truth of the resurrection of Jesus Christ or the miracles that are spoken of the Bible.

And so we're not anti-science, but what we are is we are pro-Bible. And so if the Bible says something is true, we are going to interpret our experience in light of scripture, because what the Bible says is the truth.

Now, I don't have time to go into it today, but that's not anti-scientific. That is a statement of faith. We do believe the Bible is true, and our faith is our foundation. And so we're not anti-science.

There are many, many, many solid biblical believers who are also scientists. And to say that modern Christians are anti-science is a false statement. And the next one really gets me. Limited government that neglects the destitute and fierce nationalism.

Borders, the Church's Care for the Poor, and Nationalism

Again, liberals, they attack the idea that limited government automatically equals the neglect of the destitute. That is not true. We do not believe that it is the role of the government. I would say we, I would say conservatives and conservative Christians.

As a Christian, I do not believe it is the role of the government to take care of the citizens by taking from some citizens and giving to others by force. And here's the thing. Jesus did call us to be good to the poor, but he never called us to look to Caesar to take care of the poor.

He called us to care. And that's why throughout history, you don't see churches going to the government and saying, government, you need to do this. No, the churches are the ones that are doing it. And historically, it's the churches that were setting up the homeless shelters.

Historically, it was the churches that were setting up the food ministries. It was the churches that were setting up the children's homes and the orphanages. It was Christians who were doing this. It was Christians who were setting up hospitals.

This is why the hospital is called Baptist Hospital, you know, St. Vincent's Hospital. These are named after Christians, St. Luke's Hospital. The idea that Christians, because they want limited government, don't care about the destitute, that is a non-sequitur.

That is not, one does not flow from the other. Limited government, the idea of limited government is the idea that the more power the government has, the less freedom individuals have to worship, the less freedoms individuals have to have free speech and to speak freely within the marketplace, and the idea that Christ would want us to be communistic, where the government has all control.

Just look at China. Look at China and say, that's what Christ would want us to be. He would want us to have a government that would not allow for the church to be the church. He would want the government to not allow for people to be able to speak freely in his name, that that's what Christ would support.

I think that's foolishness. I think that's wrong. And again, this concept of fierce nationalism. I don't understand, in my heart of hearts, I don't understand what liberals have against borders. I don't understand what liberals have, even in the scriptures, there is an understanding of the concept of borders and nations and the role of nations.

And again, I look at this whole argument and basically what Rain is saying, is he's saying that the Jesus of the Bible doesn't look like the Jesus of the conservative Christians. And again, on some of that, I would agree, but all of the arguments he used, except for the prosperity theology, all the arguments he uses here are bad arguments.

Because basically what he's trying to say is Jesus was a liberal. And let me tell you something, I know this, Jesus was not like me in many ways because I'm a sinful man. But I will say this, Jesus was also not a Marxist.

Jesus was not a liberal. And this kind of an argument saying that we are misrepresenting Jesus because we believe Jesus stands for personal protection, that we believe that Jesus would allow for personal protection, that our faith would encourage us towards personal protection and property rights and limited government.

Again, this is a misrepresentation of who Christ was and who he is and who he continues to be. Jesus is the same yesterday, today, and forever. So that's my response to his tweet. I hope that this was helpful to you to see how when you begin to break down the argument, it does not stand.

It does not stand firm. So that was something. I hope that you enjoyed it. It was something I wanted to do looking through this tweet. I hope it was an encouragement to you today, a way to get your morning going, get your mind going, thinking about some of these things.

And I hope that this has been an encouragement to you. Thank you again for listening today to Coffee with a Calvinist. I look forward to seeing you on tomorrow's program. And again, my name is Keith Foskey, and I've been your Calvinist.

May God bless you.

Show Closing and Listener Call to Action

Thank you for joining in for today's episode of Coffee with a Calvinist. Keep in mind, we have a new lesson available every weekday morning at 6 .30 a .m. on YouTube and Facebook. If you enjoyed this lesson, please take a moment to respond by hitting the like button, leaving a comment, and subscribing to the channel.

On behalf of Pastor Foskey, thank you for listening. May God bless you.