In the latest game of "look at those lunatics over there but don't look at us doing the same thing," plenty of online mockery was being directed at conservatives and Christians who disapproved of superstar Rihanna's Super Bowl halftime performance.
A couple quick caveats:
(1) I'm not a Mark Driscoll follower, and so maybe Barber's criticism had more to do with Driscoll personally than it did believers in general who were displeased with what they perceived to be a raunchy performance.
(2) I didn't watch the halftime show, so I have no opinion on its content or appropriateness for television.
But what intrigues me are all the progressive eye rolls directed at what they call predictable outrage on the part of the right, all while their own leading prophets are simultaneously out in force, predictably outraged over the 30-second Jesus commercials that aired during the game:
What's really humorous is that there are a number of theologically conservative voices that didn't like the "He Gets Us" spots either, but for an entirely different reason. They criticized the ads for failing to adequately present key Christian concepts like sin, redemption, or the cross, and instead offering a watered-down, social justice gospel.
Understand what all that means. This is the same progressive movement that screeches about how Jesus was actually a left-wing socialist who never talked about gay people but did spend a lot of time discussing the perils of greed and lacking hospitality. Yet, when a group funds Super Bowl ads that focus entirely on those very attributes of Jesus, those same progressive voices are livid about it.
Call me crazy, but that sure makes it seem as though their real problem is with Jesus, not merely the manner in which He is presented.
Still, my favorite take on the whole thing had to be the one from Democratic strategist Sawyer Hackett who tweeted to the masses:
Got it? Proclaiming the name of Jesus publicly in an effort to bring people to know Him personally and spiritually is of less value than providing for the physical needs of the poor. Where have we heard this before?
"But one of his disciples, Judas Iscariot, who was later to betray him, objected, ‘Why wasn't this perfume sold and the money given to the poor? It was worth a year's wages.'" John 12:4-5
For the uninitiated, Judas isn't typically known for his sound theology.
Of course no one who understands Christianity would downplay the significance and blessing of freely giving to the poor. But anyone who would elevate such charity above the proclamation of a crucified Savior simply doesn't know Jesus.
