Modern Reformation: What concerns you the most about evangelical action in the abortion debate?
Randall Terry: Most evangelicals aren't involved in the process. What they're doing that is a problem is that they are letting the wicked rule. The Bible says in Proverbs 29:2, "When the righteous rule, the people rejoice. When the wicked rule the people mourn." Now let's take a step back and ask the question, what is righteous, or what is righteousness? Righteousness is defined by the Word of God. So when the Bible says "when the righteous rule," it's talking about righteousness as defined by the Ten Commandments, the Mosaic law, that which was confirmed and expanded on through the Lord Jesus Christ. Now tragically, while there some good people involved in leadership in our culture (By the way, rulership does not just involve the political arena, it involves all the power bases: the medicines, the arts, the universities, the media, the press, the primary and secondary education), when the wicked rule in these areas, people mourn. And tragically, with a few good exceptions, the power bases are in the hands of the enemies of the gospel. The National Endowment for the Arts is funding homosexual pornography and blasphemy with our tax money! Universities are continually undermining the faith of young people who come to colleges. It's against the law to have the Ten Commandments on a wall in a public school, or for a public school teacher to read the 23rd Psalm, but she'll tell a kid where to get a condom, or how to fornicate, or how to rebel against his parents. So, the tragedy is that most of the Christian church is going on with business as usual while this country is being driven into the mouth of hell by godless, humanistic, prophets of Baal.
MR: Randall, one of the problems that we see and where we want to get your reflections, is that the evangelical church seems more preoccupied with power in terms of control than with the power of the gospel–there is almost a gospel of power, as opposed to the power of the gospel. I mean, how far are we going to get with our non-Christian neighbors by calling them "humanistic prophets of Baal"? Furthermore, isn't there a danger of some people confusing civil righteousness with the gospel?
Terry: Oh, of course. Individual conversion is a matter between the Holy Spirit and the individual. We are not talking about legislating faith. We are talking about legislating morality. And I would have to disagree, because most Christians still are in the "never-never-lands" of "I'm just called to preach the gospel," with a very narrow understanding of the gospel. In other words, a "Four Spiritual Laws" fire escape. That's what they mean when they say "I'm just called to preach the gospel." My contention is this–the gospel is from Genesis to Revelation. The whole counsel of God is from Genesis to Revelation . To understand God, to understand the Godhead, to understand his requirements for men, regenerate and unregenerate, you've got to look from Genesis to Revelation.
MR: You would say the Gospel includes the Law? That part of the Gospel is obedience?
Terry: Well, of course. I mean, Jesus said, "I did not come to destroy the law, I came to fulfill it." Paul said in Romans chapter 3, "Are we saying that through faith we nullify the law of God? May it never be!"
MR: Isn't that confusing the Law and the Gospel? Especially if we say that that is part of the Gospel?
Terry: No, because, frankly, I think what is confused is the Gospel that we have proclaimed in the modern church. Individual salvation, you and I agree wholeheartedly, it's a matter between an individual and God, conviction by the Holy Spirit, and regeneration by the Holy Spirit. But moral righteousness–that is where the crisis is! The crisis in this culture right now is that there is no definition of right and wrong and the sole pillar and support of the truth (Paul wrote to Timothy and said the church of God is the pillar and support of the truth) the light of the world, the salt of the earth–us— we who have moral standards that are unchanging, uncompromisable, unimprovable, unrevisable, we aren't heralding them! We are letting the humanists define the agenda and define the rule of debate! They are saying to us, "You can't talk about God, you can't talk about moral absolutes in school, in the judiciary, in the prison systems, you can't talk about [it] in universities." And we are saying, "Oh yes, okay, yes, we agree with separation of church and state, we'll do that." That's absurd! While we agree with separation of church and state institutionally, we certainly aren't saying that men and women like Henry Hide or Bob Dornan or any number of men in political office or any number of people in universities or media, that they can't participate in the process because the foundation of their beliefs is the unchanging principles of the Bible. Otherwise, you're saying only the pagans can rule. (Which is what the pagans would like to say, by the way.)
MR: We already have the transcendent absolute authority of God's Word in the Bible–the church has that. But if getting that out there and enforcing it, getting institutions to back it through legislation or through lobbying–if that really is the answer, then why is the church itself, the so-called depository of all of this, so remarkably adulterous itself? Isn't it the case that we're not preaching the Gospel–in spite of all the evangelistic programs, and therefore, not having the kind of response that we would expect? Aren't we going about it backwards?
Terry: No, I don't believe so. Historically, the church of Jesus Christ (just let's say in this country or even since the Reformation), the church has always had a holistic view of its mission. For example, Wilberforce in England, who fought to end slavery. Here is a man who would preach the Gospel to prisoners. He would go into prisons and preach the Gospel of personal regeneration. But here is a man who also fought to end slavery. The church in America for two generations has been preoccupied with a Gospel of personal salvation and social escapism. We get a guy saved, and then we get him into our church, and then that's it. We have no self-conscious plan or agenda or strategy for raising up bankers, raising up editors of newspapers, deans of universities. I mean, think about it! Witherspoon, the president of Princeton, who signed the Declaration of Independence–a Presbyterian minister. If a minister of the gospel signed a revolutionary document today he would be denounced from every pulpit in this nation, I would assume, or most of them, as being a betrayer, as being somebody who's into Marxist ideology, as being a rebel, as being someone who broke the law of Romans chapter 13. I mean, we would go on and on and on because we are severed from our history. Psalm 88:12 says righteousness cannot be done in the land of forgetfulness. And as long as the church is severed from its history, we've got people saying all kinds of insane things that have no foundation in biblical right and wrong and have no foundation in Christian history. But hey, they sound good because nobody knows any different!
MR: And on pietism–the escapist impulse of American revivalism, we would certainly agree, and Reformation Christians have always been actively involved in the culture. At the same time, Søren Kierkegaard made the comment that the Reformation began as a religious movement that became a political movement, whereas what he saw going on in his day with Romanticism and Nietzsche and so forth was a political movement that was becoming a religious movement. I suppose our concern would be, isn't there a danger of marrying Christianity to a particular political ideology that may actually have very little in common with biblical faith? We ought to get involved, of course, but there is a danger of being shaped by the very world we're trying to change. It's not an "otherworldly" pietist asking that, but a Reformation Christian who really wants the Gospel to be clearly understood and proclaimed.
Terry: Well, again, I don't think it's "either-or." I think that we're seeking to make a division here that doesn't exist. I don't want the Gospel to be confused with a conservative ideology, and I think you've struck something here because the evangelical community that avalanched into political activism in the late 70s and early 80s basically took up the banner of conservative Republicanism, which was fine, but I don't think that people thought through the fact that, for example, we don't want liberal judges, and we don't want conservative judges. We want God-fearing judges. Just look at the recent Supreme Court decisions with this supposed conservative block that has shattered before our eyes. The conservative justices, O'Conner, Souter, and Kennedy have all stabbed biblical morality in the back. So obviously, they did not make their decisions in the fear of God. And that brings me back to my original quotation from the Bible: "When the righteous rule"–not the conservatives, not the liberals, when the righteous rule. Now, am I saying only Christians can run or rule? No! People who fear God. "The fear of God is the beginning of wisdom."
MR: But Randall, when you speak in that kind of military language, viewing the world as a battle-field instead of a mission-field, doesn't that feed the caricature of the conservative Protestants as dangerous prudes who get all excited at the thought of book burning, especially when journalists see Little Red Riding Hood on the list of….
Terry: Listen! Listen, don't play to your enemies. Don't let your enemies set the standard. They are going to try to caricature us, they are going to try to stigmatize us with some fluke, weird thing out there. Forget about them. We march to the drum beat of the Lord Jesus Christ. We do what he says is right. They called the master of the house Beelzebub, prince of demons, and he said they will do the same to his followers. So why do we give a hoot what the crucifiers of Christ think about us? Why do we cuddle up and try to win the approval of those who reject our Savior? Forget what they think. What matters is what God thinks. Now obviously, as much as lies within you, live peaceably with all men. All right, be kind, gentle unto all men, especially those of the household of faith. I'm not talking about being obnoxious, but I am saying we must be courageous, forthright in our stand for what is right. See, Jesus didn't just say "Blessed are you when they persecute you because of me." He said, "Blessed are you when they persecute you because of righteousness," because you stood up for what is right. When Jesus went into the temple and started throwing tables around, chasing people with a whip, I don't envision three little Jewish ladies in the corner saying, "He's such a nice Jewish boy." And we are trying to be nicer than Jesus!
MR: When is someone going to do that here? I mean, turn over some of the tables at this convention?
Terry: Oh please, don't get me going.
