to much from jim wallis... I don't think this interview got at the heart of the question from skye.

poverty is unpopular on the right? that seems ridiculous... I don't think I've seen any boycotts or demonstrations from the right over the issue of poverty.

I do think Wallis is right that Christianity must not fit into categories of left and right. I'm glad that both Wallis and Dever drew the same line between the Gospel and the implications of the Gospel. Interesting to note that Wallis and Brian MacLaren both came from the Plymouth Brethren...at least, I think MacLaren is on record that he grew up in a PB church....

I stand pretty squarely with Wallis on this, although I also wish that this clip would have had more from Dever. I'd like to hear why he thinks making a clear distinction between a 'gospel' and 'action' is so important, what it stands to lose, and why the gospel cannot be proclaimed by action.

Also, poverty (and working to change it) is very unpopular. Always has been... and while rhetorically it is less so on the left, I actually think that real, radical, self-giving justice-work is unpopular (to those in power) in all corners of our culture. Most radical expressions of love are.

But you only need to look at the Glenn Beck silliness to find an example of what Wallis is referring to... there is a growing anti-social justice sentiment on the right, equating it with communism and socialism, which is slander.

Saying that you can care about poverty and not justice is like saying that giving food and water to impounded dogs is caring for their needs... it is, but the real need is for the dogs to be set free, and to have a home, and to be loved.

May I attempt an analogy? If someone were asked to define "Erin," they probably wouldn't list my heart, brain, liver, kidney, etc. They would talk about relationship things and personality, my job and hobbies.Yet, my heart, brain, liver, kidney, etc., are integral to my being. Without them, I am either severely sick or dead. Talking about them doesn't "ignore" who "Erin" is; it seeks to ensure that Erin is healthy. Erin isn't healthy (let alone alive) when those things are missing. The Church isn't healthy (alive?) when social justice is missing. The Gospel isn't the whole Good News if we're only offering an infirm version of it.

Wallis is sounding very evangelical and conservative here, guarding his words and stories and stories and stories carefully for this audience. In other settings, he is so different. It's sort of cunning. Many will be taken in by it. It's the nature of deception for wolves to put on sheep's clothing and use the same words the sheep know. I'm not biting the Wallis hook. There are many significant changes the household of faith needs to make to radically increase their involvement in serving the poor, but Wallis won't talk about those issues. He is more interested in believers keeping their old ways but merely add joining a political movement to tax believers into helping the poor, systemically controlled by a secular government. I think he'll succeed, but not for long.

Wallis accusing Olasky for lying that he has taken money from Soros is now out in the light. Sure puts Wallis' credibility at least in question...
http://blog.christianitytoday.com/ctpolitics/2010/08/wallis_admits_t.html

I loved this dialog. There was a hearty agreement in my opinion and MUCH less disagreement than the blog might have wanted to have to attract interest. They agree that the Gospel includes personal salvation first and foremost, but social action is an integral part of the it. Loved to hear Wallis' real approach to abortion and gay marriage, without the chance ot editing what he really said! My appreciation for him has grown!!

While we are certainly, as Christians, called to love justice (Micah 6:8), nowhere in the Bible is the term Social Justice used.
The term JUSTICE means that the same rules apply to all of God's children. When they don't, Christians should be the first to call for correction. Dever and Wallis largely agree on JUSTICE issues.
SOCIAL JUSTICE is entirely different. Social justice says the government should make EVERYTHING equal by taking from those who have and giving to those who have not (taxation for the purpose of redistribution).
Jesus never told us to reach into other people's pockets to give generously, he told us to personally store up our treasures in heaven.

"Social justice says the government should make EVERYTHING equal by taking from those who have and giving to those who have not (taxation for the purpose of redistribution). Jesus never told us to reach into other people's pockets to give generously, he told us to personally store up our treasures in heaven."

Actually "social justice" does not mean the government does it, it can equally mean that we as follower of Jesus should be living into a more fundamentally equal distribution of what God has entrusted to us. As for the notion that Jesus did not tell us to take from others, but to personally store our treasure in heaven, he did tell at least one guy to sell ALL he had and give to the . . . wait for it . . . poor.