fbpx
Articles

Embracing The Colson Way

/
August 25, 2015

For the past nine years, I have spent a considerable amount of time among evangelicals in the millennial generation. Most of them I know are theologically minded and committed to such biblical priorities as evangelism, discipleship, the pursuit of justice, and global missions. They want to change the world. They want to be spiritual radicals.

Yet, when it comes to evangelical engagement of the public square, many range from ambivalent to downright pessimistic. They are especially critical of how their parents’ generation engaged politics. I can’t count the number of times I’ve heard millennials criticize the Religious Right, denounce the close ties between (white) evangelicals and the Republican Party, and mock leaders such as Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson. (Admittedly, the latter deserves most of it.) They argue that culture means more than politics, they believe that soul care is more important than statecraft, and they complain that too many evangelicals seem obsessed with politics. And to be clear, almost all of these millennial critics are theological conservatives who are pro-life, pro-marriage (traditionally defined), and pro-religious liberty.

I’ve become convinced that many of these jaded millennial evangelicals think the way they do because they aren’t aware of some of the most thoughtful and winsome role models they could draw upon, especially from the previous generation. This is why Owen Strachan’s new book is so important. The Colson Way: Loving Your Neighbor and Living with Faith in a Hostile World (Nelson, 2015) is an appreciative biography of Charles “Chuck” Colson (1931–2012), one of the leading evangelical public intellectuals from the mid-1970s to his death in 2012. I believe this is a timely book for a kairos moment among evangelicals navigating American culture.

Over the course of eight chapters, Strachan provides a narrative biography of Colson’s life that focuses on the latter’s spiritual journey, ministry accomplishments, and influence upon American evangelicals. Colson was raised in a family without much means, yet he became a driven overachiever with degrees from two elite universities: Brown and George Washington. He was a Marine officer, a successful attorney, and a dedicated political activist. After landing a key job in the Nixon Administration, Colson developed a reputation as Nixon’s “hatchet man” who was willing to do anything to advance the cause—even the ethically questionable. He became caught up in the backlash against the Watergate Scandal, leading to his eventual conviction for a crime that he technically didn’t commit. Yet, in the midst of this season of crisis, Colson was converted to faith in Christ. His seven months in an Alabama penitentiary pricked his nascent Christian conscience regarding the need for redemptive prison reform.

Following his incarceration, Colson wrote a bestselling spiritual autobiography—the first of dozens of influential books—and founded Prison Fellowship, a parachurch ministry dedicated to promoting evangelism and spiritual flourishing among prisoners. He became increasingly attracted to Christian worldview thinking and was mentored by a number of leading evangelical theologians and apologists, including Francis Schaeffer, Carl F. H. Henry, and R. C. Sproul. Throughout the 1980s and 1990s, the entrepreneurial Colson helped launch a number of other ministry initiatives, including his Breakpoint radio program, the Wilberforce Forum (now the Chuck Colson Center for Christian Worldview), Evangelicals and Catholics Together (with Richard John Neuhaus), and the Manhattan Declaration. Though Colson remained a political conservative until his death in 2012, he was always more of a thoughtful fellow traveler with the Religious Right rather than a card-carrying leader in the movement. Most important, he remained an evangelist with a particular burden for prisoners.

The Colson Way is not a critical scholarly study of Colson’s life and thought, but it is a well-researched biography that is meant to both inform and encourage readers. Strachan does a fine job of avoiding hagiography while also writing with a spiritual intent. Each chapter includes Strachan’s own reflections on Colson, his interaction with relevant Scripture texts, and suggestions for personal application—especially for millennial readers. The Colson Way is not just a biography of an influential man; it is a call to action.

For younger evangelicals who care about both evangelism and social justice, Colson offers a wise role model who seamlessly integrated both biblical concerns into his own spirituality and activism. For millennials who are theological and moral conservatives, but are hesitant to cast their lot uncritically with the GOP (or any other political party), Colson provides an example for how to engage in politics without becoming rankly partisan. For younger millennial believers who are unapologetically evangelical, but who also believe that the Church transcends their particular ecclesial corners, Colson points to a vision of Christian unity and cooperation that is both convictional and strategic—what Colson’s fellow Southern Baptist and frequent collaborator, Timothy George, calls an “ecumenicity of the trenches.”

I’m a little bit too old to be classed with the millennials. (I’m on the tail end of Generation X.) But I can speak first-hand to the way that Colson can help a younger evangelical think through these questions. When I was a college student, Chuck Colson’s books helped rescue me from a reactionary piety and changed the way I think about the Christian life. I learned from him that worldviews matter, cultural engagement is more than political engagement, and the Church is bigger than I thought it was. I believe he can teach millennial evangelicals the same lessons. I’m thankful that Owen Strachan has offered millennials—and the rest of us—such a helpful introduction to Colson’s vision of the Christian life. My prayer is that this book will play a role in helping an entire generation of believers embrace the Colson way of following King Jesus.

Nathan A. Finn

Nathan A. Finn is provost and dean of the University Faculty at North Greenville University in Tigerville, South Carolina. His latest book is Historical Theology for the Church (B&H Academic, 2021), co-edited with Jason G. Duesing. He serves as a Research Fellow of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission. Read More

Article 12: The Future of AI

We affirm that AI will continue to be developed in ways that we cannot currently imagine or understand, including AI that will far surpass many human abilities. God alone has the power to create life, and no future advancements in AI will usurp Him as the Creator of life. The church has a unique role in proclaiming human dignity for all and calling for the humane use of AI in all aspects of society.

We deny that AI will make us more or less human, or that AI will ever obtain a coequal level of worth, dignity, or value to image-bearers. Future advancements in AI will not ultimately fulfill our longings for a perfect world. While we are not able to comprehend or know the future, we do not fear what is to come because we know that God is omniscient and that nothing we create will be able to thwart His redemptive plan for creation or to supplant humanity as His image-bearers.

Genesis 1; Isaiah 42:8; Romans 1:20-21; 5:2; Ephesians 1:4-6; 2 Timothy 1:7-9; Revelation 5:9-10

Article 11: Public Policy

We affirm that the fundamental purposes of government are to protect human beings from harm, punish those who do evil, uphold civil liberties, and to commend those who do good. The public has a role in shaping and crafting policies concerning the use of AI in society, and these decisions should not be left to those who develop these technologies or to governments to set norms.

We deny that AI should be used by governments, corporations, or any entity to infringe upon God-given human rights. AI, even in a highly advanced state, should never be delegated the governing authority that has been granted by an all-sovereign God to human beings alone. 

Romans 13:1-7; Acts 10:35; 1 Peter 2:13-14

Article 10: War

We affirm that the use of AI in warfare should be governed by love of neighbor and the principles of just war. The use of AI may mitigate the loss of human life, provide greater protection of non-combatants, and inform better policymaking. Any lethal action conducted or substantially enabled by AI must employ 5 human oversight or review. All defense-related AI applications, such as underlying data and decision-making processes, must be subject to continual review by legitimate authorities. When these systems are deployed, human agents bear full moral responsibility for any actions taken by the system.

We deny that human agency or moral culpability in war can be delegated to AI. No nation or group has the right to use AI to carry out genocide, terrorism, torture, or other war crimes.

Genesis 4:10; Isaiah 1:16-17; Psalm 37:28; Matthew 5:44; 22:37-39; Romans 13:4

Article 9: Security

We affirm that AI has legitimate applications in policing, intelligence, surveillance, investigation, and other uses supporting the government’s responsibility to respect human rights, to protect and preserve human life, and to pursue justice in a flourishing society.

We deny that AI should be employed for safety and security applications in ways that seek to dehumanize, depersonalize, or harm our fellow human beings. We condemn the use of AI to suppress free expression or other basic human rights granted by God to all human beings.

Romans 13:1-7; 1 Peter 2:13-14

Article 8: Data & Privacy

We affirm that privacy and personal property are intertwined individual rights and choices that should not be violated by governments, corporations, nation-states, and other groups, even in the pursuit of the common good. While God knows all things, it is neither wise nor obligatory to have every detail of one’s life open to society.

We deny the manipulative and coercive uses of data and AI in ways that are inconsistent with the love of God and love of neighbor. Data collection practices should conform to ethical guidelines that uphold the dignity of all people. We further deny that consent, even informed consent, although requisite, is the only necessary ethical standard for the collection, manipulation, or exploitation of personal data—individually or in the aggregate. AI should not be employed in ways that distort truth through the use of generative applications. Data should not be mishandled, misused, or abused for sinful purposes to reinforce bias, strengthen the powerful, or demean the weak.

Exodus 20:15, Psalm 147:5; Isaiah 40:13-14; Matthew 10:16 Galatians 6:2; Hebrews 4:12-13; 1 John 1:7 

Article 7: Work

We affirm that work is part of God’s plan for human beings participating in the cultivation and stewardship of creation. The divine pattern is one of labor and rest in healthy proportion to each other. Our view of work should not be confined to commercial activity; it must also include the many ways that human beings serve each other through their efforts. AI can be used in ways that aid our work or allow us to make fuller use of our gifts. The church has a Spirit-empowered responsibility to help care for those who lose jobs and to encourage individuals, communities, employers, and governments to find ways to invest in the development of human beings and continue making vocational contributions to our lives together.

We deny that human worth and dignity is reducible to an individual’s economic contributions to society alone. Humanity should not use AI and other technological innovations as a reason to move toward lives of pure leisure even if greater social wealth creates such possibilities.

Genesis 1:27; 2:5; 2:15; Isaiah 65:21-24; Romans 12:6-8; Ephesians 4:11-16

Article 6: Sexuality

We affirm the goodness of God’s design for human sexuality which prescribes the sexual union to be an exclusive relationship between a man and a woman in the lifelong covenant of marriage.

We deny that the pursuit of sexual pleasure is a justification for the development or use of AI, and we condemn the objectification of humans that results from employing AI for sexual purposes. AI should not intrude upon or substitute for the biblical expression of sexuality between a husband and wife according to God’s design for human marriage.

Genesis 1:26-29; 2:18-25; Matthew 5:27-30; 1 Thess 4:3-4

Article 5: Bias

We affirm that, as a tool created by humans, AI will be inherently subject to bias and that these biases must be accounted for, minimized, or removed through continual human oversight and discretion. AI should be designed and used in such ways that treat all human beings as having equal worth and dignity. AI should be utilized as a tool to identify and eliminate bias inherent in human decision-making.

We deny that AI should be designed or used in ways that violate the fundamental principle of human dignity for all people. Neither should AI be used in ways that reinforce or further any ideology or agenda, seeking to subjugate human autonomy under the power of the state.

Micah 6:8; John 13:34; Galatians 3:28-29; 5:13-14; Philippians 2:3-4; Romans 12:10

Article 4: Medicine

We affirm that AI-related advances in medical technologies are expressions of God’s common grace through and for people created in His image and that these advances will increase our capacity to provide enhanced medical diagnostics and therapeutic interventions as we seek to care for all people. These advances should be guided by basic principles of medical ethics, including beneficence, non-maleficence, autonomy, and justice, which are all consistent with the biblical principle of loving our neighbor.

We deny that death and disease—effects of the Fall—can ultimately be eradicated apart from Jesus Christ. Utilitarian applications regarding healthcare distribution should not override the dignity of human life. Fur- 3 thermore, we reject the materialist and consequentialist worldview that understands medical applications of AI as a means of improving, changing, or completing human beings.

Matthew 5:45; John 11:25-26; 1 Corinthians 15:55-57; Galatians 6:2; Philippians 2:4

Article 3: Relationship of AI & Humanity

We affirm the use of AI to inform and aid human reasoning and moral decision-making because it is a tool that excels at processing data and making determinations, which often mimics or exceeds human ability. While AI excels in data-based computation, technology is incapable of possessing the capacity for moral agency or responsibility.

We deny that humans can or should cede our moral accountability or responsibilities to any form of AI that will ever be created. Only humanity will be judged by God on the basis of our actions and that of the tools we create. While technology can be created with a moral use in view, it is not a moral agent. Humans alone bear the responsibility for moral decision making.

Romans 2:6-8; Galatians 5:19-21; 2 Peter 1:5-8; 1 John 2:1

Article 2: AI as Technology

We affirm that the development of AI is a demonstration of the unique creative abilities of human beings. When AI is employed in accordance with God’s moral will, it is an example of man’s obedience to the divine command to steward creation and to honor Him. We believe in innovation for the glory of God, the sake of human flourishing, and the love of neighbor. While we acknowledge the reality of the Fall and its consequences on human nature and human innovation, technology can be used in society to uphold human dignity. As a part of our God-given creative nature, human beings should develop and harness technology in ways that lead to greater flourishing and the alleviation of human suffering.

We deny that the use of AI is morally neutral. It is not worthy of man’s hope, worship, or love. Since the Lord Jesus alone can atone for sin and reconcile humanity to its Creator, technology such as AI cannot fulfill humanity’s ultimate needs. We further deny the goodness and benefit of any application of AI that devalues or degrades the dignity and worth of another human being. 

Genesis 2:25; Exodus 20:3; 31:1-11; Proverbs 16:4; Matthew 22:37-40; Romans 3:23

Article 1: Image of God

We affirm that God created each human being in His image with intrinsic and equal worth, dignity, and moral agency, distinct from all creation, and that humanity’s creativity is intended to reflect God’s creative pattern.

We deny that any part of creation, including any form of technology, should ever be used to usurp or subvert the dominion and stewardship which has been entrusted solely to humanity by God; nor should technology be assigned a level of human identity, worth, dignity, or moral agency.

Genesis 1:26-28; 5:1-2; Isaiah 43:6-7; Jeremiah 1:5; John 13:34; Colossians 1:16; 3:10; Ephesians 4:24