Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission and Russell Moore, Dean of the School of Theology and Senior Vice-President for Academic Administration of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, are living demonstrations of the theological diversity of the SBC. The former is an example of cultural captivity, the latter of biblical fidelity.

On Sunday, Moore posted on his blog a thoughtful and provocative piece on professing Mormon Glenn Beck’s “Restoring Honor” rally on the National Mall the previous day. In it, he decried American evangelicals’ dearth of discernment that has led them to embrace Beck’s potpourri of religio-nationalistic rhetoric at the expense of the gospel.

On Monday, Land was interviewed on NPR’s All Things Considered explaining why he spoke at the rally. He admitted that most evangelicals would not consider Mormonism a Christian faith and noted that he probably has more in common theologically with Barack Obama than with Glenn Beck.

But his most interesting statement came later in the interview when he noted, “I think perhaps the most charitable way for an evangelical Christian to look at Mormonism is to look at Mormonism as the fourth Abrahamic faith.”

This was Land’s way of connecting the historical roots of Christianity, Judaism, Islam and Mormonism, but it’s worth noting that neither Jesus nor the Apostle Paul share his view. According to them, there is one Abrahamic faith, unified under one common denominator (see Matthew 3:9, John 8:38-40, Romans 9:6-8, Galatians 3:7-9, Galatians 3:16-17).

I’ve become convinced that Mormon radio personality Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin and others are part of a moralist cabal, who drape their political goals in the language of religious revival, spiritual awakening and moral reform. I was reminded of this vividly while watching parts of Beck’s “Restoring Honor” rally on the Washington Mall yesterday.

While this recent fervor has been orchestrated by a host of well-meaning Christians, Mormons and pagans of shared political views, the true “Organizer” for any campaign of societal moral improvement would be easily identified by Dana Carvey’s Church Lady.

An ongoing theme throughout C.S. Lewis’ The Screwtape Letters is the more experienced demon’s advice to his nephew to tempt his victim with the prospect of moralism, both personally and in society—all, of course, at the exclusion of and distraction from the gospel.

“We want very much to make men treat Christianity as a means; preferably, of course, as a means to their own advancement, but, failing that, as a means to anything—even to social justice,” Screwtape writes to Wormwood. “… The Enemy [God] will not be used as a convenience. Men or nations who think they can revive the Faith in order to make a good society might just as well think they can use the stairs of Heaven as a short cut to the nearest chemist’s shop.”

Some of the causes trumpeted by the conservative movement in America are noble ones and worth advancing in the political sphere. But Christians must be careful not to confuse the advancement of political conservatism with authentic spiritual renewal. This conflation of causes leads to the use of the Christian faith to advance an agenda.

At its heart, the gospel is political, but not in any sense that would be comforting to those who put their faith in democracy. After all, the gospel announces the ultimate overthrow of human government and the rise of a monarchy led by a King who does not share His power.

I wasn’t surprised when I read this article that cited a study revealing that, “when we fall under the spell of a charismatic figure, areas of the brain responsible for scepticism and vigilance become less active.”

The research used MRIs to examine the brains of believers and non-believers as they listened to pre-recorded prayers from someone posing as a faith healer. “Parts of the prefrontal and anterior cingulate cortices, which play key roles in vigilance and scepticism when judging the truth and importance of what people say, were deactivated when the subjects listened to a supposed healer,” the study noted.

This research is just the tip of the iceberg. Imagine if scientists were to explore the effects of certain subtle keywords and phrases, musical stimuli or hearing someone speaking in tongues. From experience I can say I have sat through Christian events and accepted things being said—only to later evaluate them in a more neutral (and biblical) light and realize that I had been completely hoodwinked.

Often in these settings, music was being played in the background, statements were prefaced with phrases such as “The Bible says …” and “The Lord told me …” or the speaker was introduced as “a pastor of a great church” or “a man used mightily by God.” Of course, these are subtle—and mostly unintentional—cues that have become part of religious subcultures. However, in some settings, the manipulation is anything but subtle, as audiences are instructed to “shut down your mind” or “don’t question what God is doing.”

I’ve learned–sometimes the hard way–that any religious system that openly discourages discernment, critical thought or reflection and instead encourages us to evaluate truth based on our feelings and emotional responses should be avoided.

I would point out that this phenomena is not exclusive to flakey Christians. Have you ever sat through a visually-stunning film or listened to a moving musical performance, only to realize after the fact that you were manipulated into accepting the artist’s worldview by the aesthetic appeal of their art?