fbpx
Articles

How should Christians approach political conversations on college campuses?

/
August 9, 2022

From the morning the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, the discussion about abortion and the pro-life movement has been evolving constantly. Our country is having conversations and debates about legislation at the state level, criminalization of women, contraceptives, privacy, and so much more. These are discussions that are sure to affect many college campuses this fall as students return. As debate from activists on both sides begins again in this post-Roe context, how should a Christian college student approach these conversations?  

For many of them, they are walking into a spiritually dark and secular place. The Christian position in defense of the preborn is likely to be a minority position on many campuses, subject to intense challenges. They are going to be questioned on what they believe about abortion, whose “side” they are on, and how they can justify being on the “wrong side.”

This is not necessarily new. College students have conversations like this all the time. Sometimes they go well, and sometimes not so much. What is new, however, is the intensity, passion, and assumptions behind these conversations.

For the Christian, the answer to the question of how to engage is simple and revolutionary at the same time: speak the truth in love. Christians on campus need to approach these conversations in such a way that Christ is glorified.

Here are three thingsChristians on college campuses should remember when they approach these conversations. 

1. Our identity should not be found in policy or activism, rather it should be found in the love and grace of Jesus Christ.

The first thing college students need to remember is that our identity ought to be found in Christ. Typically, when we engage in conversation it is because we are passionate about what we are talking about. If you find yourself engaging in political conversations, then you probably find that immigration, gun control, or any other political issues are important to you and flow from your worldview. In essence there is nothing wrong with being passionate about these issues and discussing them. However, Scripture teaches that the love of God should be our priority (Matt. 22:37). Therefore, if we exalt Christ more in our own lives, then having political conversations may become seemingly less imperative in comparison to having gospel conversations.

The reality is that we talk about what we care about (Col. 3:2). So, anytime we engage in political conversations, we must first remember what our priorities are. As believers, our priority is to fulfill the Great Commission and share the gospel of Christ with all people. We know that political ideologies do not dictate eternity, but faith in Christ does. We can have hope and assurance that God is sovereign, and we can have hope regardless of the political issues we talk about. Our identity is found in an event on a cross over 2,000 years ago, not whatever is trending in the news.

2. Our goal should not be to prove somebody wrong, but to represent Christ.

The second thing to remember is that we need to stay humble. Far too often conversations about politics become more about ego than anything else. If we are being honest, we know that most of the time neither party in a conversation will change their mind, so the purpose of these conversations ends up being to prove who is smarter or more knowledgeable. As college students, it is important to remember that we are young and have much to learn. We do not know everything about every topic and should not act or talk as if we do. Therefore, our goal in a conversation should never be about exalting ourselves, rather it should always be about exalting Christ.

It is crucial to remember that if you profess that you are a Christian, then you are an ambassador for Christ. (2 Cor. 5:20). We represent Christ in every conversation we have. Think about how Jesus throughout the Gospels showed humility through the washing of feet. Let us, in the same way, be humble and treat people with kindness even in difficult conversations in which we may disagree. Let us not be argumentative, arrogant, hateful with our speech, or demeaning. Rather, let us be an accurate representation of Christ’s humility through being fair minded, open to listen, and wise with our words. 

This is not to say that we equivocate between harmful and unjust beliefs, or that we treat all perspectives as equally valid. But we do treat those who hold those views with respect and dignity as those who are made in the image of God. Before we represent a political party, activist group, or any other organization, we are first and foremost ambassadors for Christ. That is something that should be handled with reverence. 

3. Our conversations should always point back to the gospel.

The final thing to remember is that regardless of the subject of our conversation, it ought to point back to the gospel as we are able. Most of the time on a college campus, when a Christian’s worldview is challenged, you can expect it to be from someone who does not believe in Christ. Therefore, that makes these conversations all the more important.

Think about what we have talked about thus far: our identity is found in Christ, and our goal in any conversation should not be to prove somebody right, but to represent Christ. All of this points to the fact that as Christians, political conversations with nonbelievers are a perfect opportunity that ought to be taken advantage of. 

Political conversations give you the opportunity to be salt and light (Matt.5:13-16). You can show somebody what the love of Christ looks like in a time when they are least expecting it. You can demonstrate what it means to have hope in the midst of a dark and fallen world. These things speak volumes to somebody who is lost and in need of Savior.

I believe in the providence of God, which means that I do not believe in accidents. Thus, I think that every conversation we have with somebody was intentionally designed. As college students, we have a decision to make: Are we going to use these conversations for our own personal ambitions, or are we going to use these conversations to bring glory and praise to the name of Jesus Christ? Do not shy away from difficult conversations. The Holy Spirit is with you and will guide you (Luke 12:11-12). We are called to obedience and to be a witness for the sake of the gospel.

Kadin Christian

Kadin serves as assistant to the office of the president. An Alabama native, Kadin previously served as an intern with the ERLC, and then continued working under the leadership of the Chair of Research in Technology Ethics while he was a college ministry resident at First Baptist Church of Opelika. … 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