I tend to be slow to respond to cultural crises, not because I lack an opinion, but because I often lack clarity. And when a professing Christian—be that a pastor, deacon, politician, military, or “ordinary” citizen—makes accusations, comparisons, or arguments from a position which lacks clarity, the result often causes more damage than healing. False facts routinely take the elevator while truth takes the stairs. The downstream effect of this that Christian credibility has become a casualty of our cultural era.

In other words, the credibility of the Christian witness often loses its trustworthiness in areas of the Gospel because it first lost its trustworthiness in the secular arena. Too many Christians have forgotten that when Christians speak, we are to be careful, fair, and committed to reality rather than tribal victory. And when that credibility erodes, our witness to Christ erodes with it.

The Cost of False Equivalency

A recent example has made this painfully clear. In the past week, I’ve seen many Christians equate Alex Pretti (who was shot in Minnesota this week) with Kyle Rittenhouse. The argument goes something like this: “Both were armed. Both were present during unrest. Therefore, both situations are the same.” But that is not careful reasoning. It is allowing emotions to shortcut the nuance, becoming a classic case of false equivalency, often propped up by straw-man reasoning.

Thus, whatever conclusions one ultimately reaches about either case, the situations are not equivalent. The Pretti incident involved an armed confrontation with law enforcement. Rittenhouse, by contrast, famously held his hands up, complied with police, and did not initiate confrontation with authorities.

To flatten these events into the same moral category is not nuance—it’s false equivalency. And when Christians do this, we communicate that facts matter less than the outcomes we prefer. That shifts the sphere of debate from questions of justice and righteousness to that of rhetoric.

The Other Side’s Inconsistency

But honesty requires we say more. For years—especially since COVID—some Christians have loudly argued for civil resistance, even armed resistance, against perceived tyranny. Rhetoric about standing firm, refusing compliance, “don’t tread on me,” and resisting unjust authority has been widespread in Christian circles. Given that history, those same voices should be slow and careful when condemning someone simply for being armed in a tense situation.

If we champion resistance in theory but denounce it reflexively when it becomes uncomfortable or politically inconvenient, we reveal that our commitments are not morally principled, rather they’re selective and flexible. Truth cuts both directions. And Christians must be willing to let it do so.

Straw Men Hurt More Than Arguments

And this brings us to the deeper issue. When Christians misrepresent situations—whether by exaggeration, oversimplification, or selective comparison—we aren’t merely making bad arguments. We are training the watching world to distrust us. And once people stop trusting our words about justice, law, or truth, they will not suddenly trust us when we speak about sin, grace, or Christ. The gospel does not need spin. It does not need inconsistent rhetoric. It needs credible messengers.

Scripture places a premium on truthful speech—not just sincere speech, but accurate, measured, fair speech. Wisdom literature repeatedly warns against hasty judgment. The New Testament ties our witness directly to our conduct and speech. When Christians become known for emotionalism rather than clarity, we stop being signposts. We become white noise, numbing culture to the uncomfortable sounds of sin and death unto their own destruction. Loving one’s neighbor means that truth—even if it means waiting for the stairs—trumps an emotional response of solidarity.

Consistency Of Principle Matters

Remember how many Christians pushed back against perceived government overreach during the COVID-19 era — asking governors, mayors, and other civil authorities to resist restrictions perceived as disproportionate or unlawful? That appeal to lesser magistrates (lower authorities) was rooted in a conviction that government must be held accountable to justice and the common good, even if it must move from the bottom-up instead of the top-down.

Now, in Minnesota, many citizens are asking Gov. Tim Walz and other state leaders to push back against what they see as federal overreach in immigration enforcement operations — including recent confrontations between civilians and federal agents that have led to the fatal shootings of Minneapolis residents. My honest observation at this point is that failures exist on more than one side—some rhetoric has encouraged civilians toward physical confrontation with government officers, while officers operating in high-stress environments appear increasingly reactive. The result can be (and has been) tragic and, in many cases, avoidable.

We don’t have to agree on every point of policy to sympathize with the principle — that government power should be exercised responsibly, transparently, and justly. And Christians who once demanded civilian restraint during pandemic responses should be slow to applaud violence now, simply because the political actors have changed.

Just as the answer to mask mandates was not to approach law enforcement officers with a gun, neither is the answer to perceived federal misconduct to celebrate or escalate violence in the streets. There are avenues for proper discourse: legal challenges, public advocacy, peaceful protest, requests for investigation, and sustained civic engagement. No matter the issue, Christians on either side of the aisle must remember that we stand together demanding accountability from those in power—because we are people of the Truth: united to Christ, who is the Truth. As people shaped by Him, there can be no room for deceit in us.

That reality ought to check our emotions and lead us toward public, open discourse rooted in truth — not cheering on violence, flattening situations into equivalency as if one turn deserves the other, or changing our tune when it no longer fits our agendas. When we lose that discipline of truth, we lose not just credibility but the very posture of Christlike witness that calls people to peace and justice.

What Faithfulness Requires

Faithfulness does not require us to have instant opinions on every breaking story. In fact, I would wager that we are much more likely to find agreeable solutions when we don’t. Sometimes the most Christian thing we can say is:

“I don’t know enough yet.”

Or:

“These situations are not the same, and pretending they are doesn’t help anyone.”

Or even:

“There may be failures on more than one side, and we should be honest about all of them.”

That posture signals maturity, wisdom, and teachability—not weakness or fear. The Church should be the place where truth-seeking outruns cultural outrage, where facts are handled carefully, and where moral clarity is grounded in reality rather than reaction. And this means: slow to speak, quick to pray, willing to talk.

A Better Witness

Christians are called to be a people shaped by truth—truth that exposes error on both sides of the political aisle. That will sometimes frustrate allies and disappoint critics. The odds are, your politicians or political party is not going to align with the principles of Kingdom of God. I know this, because the Bible tells me that. But holding for and to truth will restore something to the Christian witness that is desperately needed: trust.

And trust is not a small thing.

Because when people believe that Christians tell the truth—even when it costs them—they are far more likely to listen when we tell them about Christ.