Evangelicalism and hypocrisy
On my Saturday long walks with my dog Daisy, I try to catch up on podcasts of the White Horse Inn. Today I listened to the June 14 show, “God’s Story vs. Our Stories,” in which the roundtable discussion was on how modern evangelicals tend to rely more on sharing with others their subjective conversion experiences rather than what God objectively did for them—aka “the gospel.” As host and seminary professor Michael Horton explained in his commentary from that show:
The apostles refer to the gospel as a message concerning God’s Son, Jesus Christ: God made flesh, fulfilling all righteousness in our place, enduring our sentence on the cross, and being raised on the third day as the source of eternal life. Where are you in that definition? Where am I? Nowhere!!! That’s why it’s good news. The gospel is the good news about who God is and what He’s done in spite of who we are and what we’ve done. The gospel is good news for us precisely because it isn’t about us.
I started thinking about this in terms of the various scandals involving well-known Christians, everyone from Ted Haggard to John Ensign and Mark Sanford. When these men in their prominent positions—while trying to publicly proclaim Christian virtues to believers and nonbelievers alike—held up their own lives as an example and subsequently fell, they fell hard. The media and those who disagreed with their politics and/or beliefs were quick to label them as hypocrites. And they were, because we all are.
Here’s an exchange between Horton and Pastor Kim Riddlebarger from the White Horse Inn I listened to today (you can hear the entire show here):
Riddlebarger: What do you guys think about the thesis that if this is the state of American evangelicalism, to go to the subjective testimony, could this be why the moral scandals and the hypocrisy become such a huge issue in evangelicalism?
Horton: Sure. . . . Because we just told everybody, “Look at us. Look at us. Look at us. . . .”
Riddlebarger: “Oops, look at him. . . .”
Horton: “. . . Look at our improved lives. Look at how we’ve changed. This is my ‘before picture’ and this is my ‘after picture.’” And the person saying that messes up—as we all do—and . . . they’re there with cameras.
Riddlebarger: Boy are they ever. And nothing offends a non-Christian any more than hypocrisy. And I think non-Christians have every right to be offended.
I agree. While it is perfectly OK to share with others how Christ has made a difference in our lives or how we came to faith through the gospel and the work of the Holy Spirit, let’s remember that it’s not our experiences or our example that can make a difference in the lives of others; it is what Christ did for us and for them.
As sinners saved by grace alone, both prominent and not-so-prominent Christians cannot completely avoid the hypocrisy label, but we can lessen its blow by pointing more toward Christ instead of ourselves. As John the Baptist said, “He must increase, but I must decrease.”














Click to Print
Include Comments











back to top22 Comments to “Evangelicalism and hypocrisy”
This topic should get a million posts… all of repentance. We pharisees (hypocrites) are the very ones who are unable/unwilling to see our own self-righteousness. Of course non-believers are skeptical.
The Good News is certainly about transformation. But to focus on the one transformed is to demonstrate a fatal misunderstanding the grace and glory of the Gospel.
Report comment to moderator
Focusing on God in the Good News is not to ignore the marvelous transformation that He accomplishes. It simply puts it in the right order and degree, making sure that He (not me) increases. To ignore the transformations would be blind thanklessness.
Report comment to moderator
The title of the article could be the title of my life’s story.
Fish. I think repentance on a blog might be the very sort of hypocrisy Mr. McLean’s article is suggesting we guard against.
“Look at me repenting!” I grant you I need to, of course. But I’ve got a fairly sizeable closet that can accomodate my contrition; one which I ought to use more often for prayer and repentance rather than just hanging clothes and storing junk.
Report comment to moderator
OH
You are exactly right!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Report comment to moderator
Amen, amen and amen to this post.
And God bless those guys on the White Horse Inn. May they keep proclaiming the truth about returning to the gospel to the church in America.
Report comment to moderator
Fish
Thanks for the extra exclamation points. I am unworthy.
Report comment to moderator
This is a great observation. So much public discourse among Christians in America (especially political discourse) goes along the lines of, “well, if y’all over there would quit doing what you do and act like us, everything would be great!” That isn’t the Gospel. At the same time, evangelicals left and right focus so much on obtaining and using political power and turn the spotlight on ourselves to do so. Instead we should be lifting up and exalting the name of Christ above all and letting transformation flow out of that. When our message is one of grace, love, repentance, obedience, and sanctification at the foot of the Cross our the screw-ups will only point people more towards Jesus.
Report comment to moderator
“And they were, because we all are.”
So we all are today, and you can count on it tomorrow?
Would God commend you tomorrow, if the most you could be was a hypocrite?
Christ liberates from the penalty of sin, but not its power?
“Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God,” (Heb 6:1)
Report comment to moderator
Were these men entangled?
No man that warreth entangleth himself with the affairs of [this] life; that he may please him who hath chosen him to be a soldier. (2Ti 2:4)
Report comment to moderator
MTS
What do you believe 2 Timothy 2:4 is advocating? Monasticism or the proper arrangment of priorities? Or is it one of dependency and trust in a system for well-being? What is meant by “the affairs of this life” do you think. I ask because I’ve never been “comfortable” with this verse. It has to mean more than simply withdrawing from the world, doesn’t it?
Does God commend us based on our work or Christ’s?
The most I am without Christ is a hypocrite. Even with Him, I have those tendencies.
Sin, according to 1 John. Does it ever fully go away, penalty or power, this side of eternity do you suppose?
What do you mean by entangled?
Not trying argue, of course, just trying to clarify what you’ve posted. Is there a place you believe to which a Christian may come where he or she is free of sin and temptations and engagement with the world?
Report comment to moderator
Let’s not ignore the fact that if “Christians” just stopped committing adultery, accusations of hypocrisy would significantly diminish. Adultery among professing Christians is one of the most serious blots on American Christianity. There is no excuse for this.
There are lots of non-Christians out there who never commit adultery. It’s not that hard to live an adultery-free life. So, please, just stop the adultery.
Report comment to moderator
I like this quote from Bill Gillham:
“God’s Definition of a Hypocrite: Pretending to Be What You Are Not. Satan’s Definition of a Hypocrite: Acting Contrary to How You Feel.”
Report comment to moderator
I tend to agree with Mytwosense. While we can recognize the commonality of our sinful tendencies i.e. the flesh, we now have a new identity in Christ and that new identity is not “Hypocrite”. We have been “delivered from the power of darkness and have been translated into the Kingdom of His dear Son” (Col. 1:13),and, yet, we still label ourselves as hypocrites? The flesh will always be hypocritical. The flesh never changes or gets better. However, we have died with Christ to the sin of hypocrisy. If we find ourselves walking as hypocrites, chances are we are engaged in some kind of behavior that is contrary to our new identity in Christ i.e. “pretending to be what you are not”. So, we repent, and walk in newness of life.
(But, we don’t need to remember to wear the hypocrite sign around our necks.)
Report comment to moderator
This is the paradox of the Christian life. We are new creations in Christ. Yet we have sin for which we need to ask forgiveness (for fellowship, not salvation). It is true that we ought not write “hypocrite” across our forehead. But, we must recognize that we have this awful tendency to both pretend and to act like what we are not. While God’s powerful grace has made us like Christ, but we won’t live out the fullness of that amazing blessing this side of Heaven.
Report comment to moderator
Excellent piece, MICKEY.
Perhaps this “state” of Evangelicalism is a result of 50 or 60 years of emphasizing “the personal”: my personal relationship with Jesus Christ, my personal testimony.
Even Sunday worship services seem to center around what we personally “get out of it” where we center more on ourselves (felt needs, preferences, how we feel about it all, etc.) rather than focusing on Christ and what He has done.
I would disagree with VANESSAT is #11. I don’t think it’s EASY to “live an adultery free life” in our selfish, hyper-sexed culture that shamelessly promotes an insatiable obsession with our human passions.
Report comment to moderator
Sometimes we limit hypocrisy to a matter of truth claims, where we aver one thing and do another. Yet it seems to me there is also the no less damaging matter of the manner of one’s life; this often is how I hear the secularists use “hypocrisy” when it comes to Christians. The secularist is less concerned with the words/deeds mismatch, as the words/character mismatch. Speech matters (or is that the speech coach talking? huh.) There is so much practical advice on this in Colossians, though I especially like Paul’s counsel that we “season our speech with salt” (Col. 4.6).
Report comment to moderator
OH: We come to Christ as babes, grow into young men, and then fathers, as John addresses us in I John 2:12 FF. Where would you say, upon contemplating the passage, you are in your growth? I judge not, but I am trying to understand.
Blessings
Roger
Report comment to moderator
The story above on the homeless shelter in Denver reminded me of an incident I thought would be more appropriate here. I used to volunteer at a Rescue Mission in Syracuse, NY, where we held a short worship service before a free meal for anyone. Occasionally I would give someone a ride afterwards. When I reminded one passenger to be sure and lock her door in bad neighborhood, she accused me of hypocrisy and immediately began to say something like – I thought you said that God will protect us. That’s how easy it is to be accused when people delight in looking for double standards. But if it isn’t one thing, it’s another – big, small or concocted.
Report comment to moderator
Unortunatly, much Christian hypocrisy reveals itself in televangelism. Way to many sheep fleecers promising God’s superabundant blessing if the viewer will simply ‘Plant a generous “seed” offering into their ministry’. It shames me to see these things happen. They are a blot on the precious name of the Lord our provider.

Nevertheless He will ultimatly judge all things in righteouness.
Blessings
Roger
Report comment to moderator
“Evangelicalism is inherently a vain and misleading attempt to turn the society into the church. . . . It is a black hole of wasted energy for moral reform as we misrepresent the gospel in the process.”
Darryl Hart affirmed this statement in his recent interview with Mark Dever. Though one could quibble with Hart’s bluntness, he has a point: The purpose of Christ’s death and resurrection was not to initiate moral reform movements the likes of which we see from both right-wing and left-wing evangelicals.
Report comment to moderator
Moreover, it’s not even clear what right-wing evangelicals want, other than to hear their own voices.
Take, for example, the hissy-fit that conservative evangelicals are throwing over the President’s planned speech to the nation’s schoolchildren.
I can’t even understand what the “controversy” is. George HW Bush gave a similar speech with similar content in 1991. Why is the evangelical world reacting differently now than in 1991? The collective flip-out that’s happening this weekend among conservative evangelicals simply smacks of hypocrisy.
Is this really the reaction that one would expect from people who believe that Christ has secured victory over sin and death through the finished work of Christ?
Besides, why are so many evangelicals quick to compare the President to Hitler, Stalin, and Kim Jong-Il? These kinds of statements only demonstrate that the speaker has no sense of moral judgment whatsoever.
Christianity in the US suffers the misfortune of being the nation’s folk religion. Thus, true Christ-centered Christianity must compete with the various strands of folk Christianity. Sometimes I wonder if we can ever untangle Christ from Branson, Missouri?
Report comment to moderator
#21 The president does have the right to address school children, as any president has had. I believe that we should hear him and then, at that time we should judge without a closed mind , and then discuss it with our children. Compareing Mr. Obama to Hitler, and others? Perhaps they remember the continous trashing that Mr. Bush got from the left. I know, I know, that was then this is now.
Blessings
Roger
Report comment to moderator
back to topJoin The Conversation
You need to be a registered user of WORLDonTheWeb.com to "join the conversation."
If you are not a member yet, what are you waiting for? Register / Login Now!