Social Justice

If you watch the news, you’ve likely heard the name Jim Wallis and the issue of “social justice” pop up as Mr Wallis argues social justice lies at the core of the Gospel, while others disagree. Fortunately the issue of social justice and the Gospel can be quickly and easily settled with facts so obvious disagreement isn’t possible. In the dispute over social justice, just who is right? Does social justice lay at the core of the Gospel, as Jim Wallis claims, or not?

Perhaps nothing differentiates “modern” and traditional Christianity more than the role of men and women. Those promoting a recent social justice version discard parts of the Bible not fitting their position, frequently by arguing those parts have historical meaning only. Does that make sense? Can we pick and choose what is God’s Word and what isn’t? If so, how can that be done, and who gets to make the rules (since it isn’t God)?

Reverend Jim Wallis’ article “How Christian is Tea Party Libertarianism” contains several errors. Our previous article examined Mr. Wallis’ error understanding both the Tea Party and Libertarianism. In this article, we’ll examine his other major error—using Romans 13 to support his brand of government, and its forced use of “social justice” (to use his term). Does Romans 13 imply Christians must unconditionally support government actions? The answer (not surprisingly) has been answered long ago, and remains amazingly simple when considered in context.

A White House adviser compares the Tea Party to libertarian philosophy, declaring it as “Un-Christian” while he supports his brand of “social justice”. Is the Tea Party libertarian? Is it Un-Christian as the adviser claims? And the big question, in view of Romans 13, how should Christians view the government and its actions?