The question was raised by Jared regarding the significance of Leftist concerns (to me and to this site) and our understanding of what it means to be “evangelical”. If we accept that evangelical theology is the most orthodox, the closest to the teachings of the Word, then it follows that, among other things, we respond to our critics.
The predominant world view today is not the Christian world view. It is Marxism. It shows itself in international affairs (our Wilsonian foreign policy), in national affairs (the many socialist and communist nations), in economic movements (the redistributive efforts of many who might call themselves evangelical), in psychology (i.e., Eric Fromm), in social agendas (the class wars of the social dialectic), and much more. Including the green movement.
Marxism represents Hegel’s godless theodicy as the ugliest which humanity can become. Marxism always leaves death in its wake. Whether Hitler (10M), Stalin (40M), Pol Pot (3M), or Mao (50M) – big numbers – too big to fathom. Still, every day in our country the Left promotes and protects the bloodshed of its continued eugenics program through abortion, euthanasian, and infanticide. We minister in these areas often and effectively, but I suspect lack an historical context for assessing the efforts of these killers.
Marxism provides an opportunity to minister, not only by working to clean up the mess that it leaves behind (the post-enlightenment philosophers were responsible for the deaths of roughly 1 of every 100 people who even lived on the earth in the 20th century), but to confront it as a heresy and present an alternative model (Mt. 5:13-14) for society. But alas, we have few models and the best we can do right now is to confront the heresy and the bloodshed that it leaves behind.
As one early anabaptist put it: True evangelical faith does not lie sleeping. And while we cannot make this a better world for the mere sake of goodness (nor should we try), we can minister in all areas for the advancement and clarification of the gospel against its challengers. Some of the challengers may appear to be mere philosophical entities, but, as Richard Weaver put it, Ideas Have Consequences. And so does silence.