A few weeks ago, I read Brian McLaren's post on this blog that caused some intense soul-searching. In his post, McLaren cited a Pew Forum study showing that six out of 10 white evangelicals believe that torture is often or sometimes justified, making white evangelicals the religious group the most likely to support torture.
As a white evangelical myself, I realize that for many people, the torture question is morally ambiguous, especially in light of the infamous ticking time-bomb scenario, so it is not my intention to demonize those who participated in this survey and answered honestly. What troubles me isn't so much that some of my fellow white evangelicals believe that in a sin-cursed earth, morally complex situations arise in which Christians sometimes have to choose the lesser of two evils. What troubles me is that most white evangelicals think this way.
Think about it. If this survey is correct, then atheists and Muslims are less likely to support torture than white evangelical Christians -- and we are the ones who claim that if everyone on earth were to become like us, the world would be a more peaceful place.
Even if we allow the white evangelical survey respondents the highest benefit of doubt, assuming that they had the most morally complex situations in mind, there's still the question of what it is about evangelicalism -- and more specifically, white evangelicalism -- that makes us the most likely to respond to evil with violence? In his post, McLaren framed the question this way:
Why would white evangelicals be most likely to support torture? Could some conventional theological assumptions of evangelicals have anything to do with it?
I believe that one little-discussed factor is an exaggerated emphasis on total depravity in evangelical circles. Whether most evangelicals realize it or not, our underlying assumption is that those who are not born again are only capable of evil. Even if we notice good behavior in nonbelievers, our understanding of the Christian faith demands that we attribute it to selfish motives.
The translation usually goes something like this: If society is going to change, then hearts have to change. Only a personal relationship with Christ can take away the evil and murder in people's hearts. Therefore we must send missionaries to convert the terrorists/radical Muslims to Christianity.
I'm all for sending missionaries to preach the gospel. My life's work has been devoted to extending the gospel throughout the world -- and I refuse to apologize for it. But notice what happens next when we take the assumption that people apart from a personal relationship with Christ are only capable of evil (or at the very least good with tainted motives), to its logical conclusion: Unless we convert these people to Christianity, the only other way to deal with them is through force.
As harsh as this may sound, I think if the vast majority of evangelicals were honest with themselves, they would discover that this is their underlying assumption. The problem with this idea is that it fails to take into account that even fallen human beings are created in the image of God. And even though the image has been marred by sin, there still remains a trace of God's goodness in every human being.
Lest I be misunderstood, I'm a firm believer in the doctrine of total depravity -- as long as we define total depravity as the idea that only God is truly good and that no one will seek God on his or her own apart from God's gracious revelation. The problem comes when we turn a biblical proposition and stretch it beyond its intended meaning. When we take total depravity to mean that every nonbeliever at all times is only capable of sinning, we forget that even fallen human beings are created in the image of God and are therefore capable of reason.
According to Jesus, even "evil" people know how to give good gifts to their children. Jesus always affirmed the humanity of fallen human beings, and so should we. If we fail to affirm the humanity of others outside our fold, then we're left with a theology that says the only way to deal with people is to convert or kill them -- or torture them.
This is one explanation for why so many evangelicals support the torture of other human beings as a matter of national policy. Now as to why so many white evangelicals support torture, that's another subject for another day. I think I've done enough soul-searching for one day. I think I need to get saved again.
Aaron D. Taylor has traveled the world many times over sharing the good news of Jesus Christ with those who haven't heard. He is the author of Alone with a Jihadist, a book chronicling his conversion to nonviolence after a dramatic encounter with a radical jihadist. Aaron will be premiering the book at the Book Expo of America in New York City on May 29. Check out his Web site www.aarondtaylor.com.