Are we headed "full circle?"

At the dawn of the Christian Church, the apostles faced some determined opposition in the Jewish Council, which met and agreed that this new sect of "The Way", as it became known, was getting too risky to just take a live-and-let-live policy. They brought in the ringleaders, Peter and John, and told them "not to speak or teach at all in the name of Jesus." (Acts 4:18) There was to be no attempts to enroll others in their religion, or they would risk prosecution and imprisonment; as did in fact happen.

2000 years later, the circle of intolerance seems to be coming around for Americans. Oh, it's not entirely new for Christians to get the crack-down from a government or competing religion. That kind of thing is routine in other nations, as Christians are persecuted by zealots and leaders of Muslim or Hindu religion, or a secular state like China. But America's constitutional freedoms of religion have precluded such discrimination.

But popular and prevailing culture is another force of opposition; less centralized and codified than government, but just as powerful in enforcing its will. And the evidence of current controversy in the forum of religious discussion and events suggests that an intolerance toward "speaking in the name of Jesus" is getting more and more of a foothold each year.

A current example of that is the uproar created by Fox News' Brit Hume, who "dared" to suggest that Tiger Woods should seek "forgiveness and redemption" which only the Christian religion offers. An editorial in today's Omaha paper points out the ire that's been aroused among liberal critics by such advice. Mr. Hume, say his critics, has crossed the line from a free exercise of religion to an unwelcome proselytizing that makes him, as one columnist said, a "sanctimonious busybody"; and so his conduct to another critic is "truly embarrassing."

At this point, Brit Hume is merely being scorned and ridiculed by his peers and others who reject any religious persuasion, and it seems Christian persuasion is especially rejected by a culture that insists that "all paths lead to God", and it's fine if my path leads nowhere at all. But how far will we need to proceed on this circle of intolerance toward evangelism before Christians are more than scorned and ridiculed by columnists, comedians and others who purport to speak for the majority culture?

We may or may not get to the point where our government explicitly forbids Christians to speak in the name of Jesus, as is already true in some places. But the tide of cultural disapproval of exclusive religion, insisting on "One Way" and "One Book", is continuing to rise around us. And those who challenge the standing policy of their culture will have to decide if they want to stand with Peter and John, who responded to the Council's prohibition by saying, "Whether it is right in the sight of God to give heed to you rather than to God, you be the judge; for we cannot stop speaking what we have seen and heard. "(Acts 4:19-20)