Sunday, September 13, 2009

What Comes After Post-Modernism? (The History of Epistemology! - Part 1)

In this series, we explore epistemology, or “How do we know what we know?” I think such a question is as relevant as ever, especially given our culture’s fairly recent leanings toward postmodernism – the belief that traditional norms should be abandoned in favor of abstractness. Josh McDowell defines postmodernism as “a worldview characterized by the belief that truth doesn’t exist in any objective sense but is created rather than discovered.” In other words, a postmodernist would claim that truth is a variable, and that it is relative to each individual who attempts to discover it. In the postmodern world, there is the potential for more than one truth.

Is truth relative, or is it an absolute? And does it matter? Read on…
***************************************
Epistemology sounds scary – like it might hurt you. It’s a word that might make you want to hit the “Back” button on your browser and go read something else. Don’t. To keep you on the hook (because I think this series is going to be fun and meaningful), let me ask – what is truth to you? Do you believe it is the same for you as for everyone, or do you think it varies between people and changes over time as society matures?

I cannot tell you how many books I’ve read, classes I’ve attended, and conversations I have had where I was encouraged to be open-minded about things that I felt strongly about. Concerning topics that I feel a strong sense of right and wrong (abortion, baptism, the existence of God), I do not want to compromise or water down what I believe to be the truth. To me, the existence of God (and who He is) is not a relative concept. I may not know everything that I need to know about God or His character, but I am past the point of wondering whether or not He exists. He does - and anyone who refuses to acknowledge this point is going to deeply regret that they didn’t make the connection. My statements about what I believe to be absolute tend to be short and to-the-point (some would say rude and close-minded), but it is precisely because I believe them to be absolute that I insist on them. You wouldn’t jump off a thousand-foot cliff just because the person next to you doesn’t believe in gravity. You wouldn’t do it even if they agreed to jump with you. You would not suspend your absolute belief in the concept of gravity when your life is at stake…

Epistemology deals with the ideas of truth and knowledge – what is truth, what can I claim to be true knowledge, and specifically, how do I know this knowledge is truth? For the vast majority of people, when I ask “Do you believe that two plus two is equal to four?” they answer “Yes” because they know this statement to be true. They do not sit down each time they are asked and count on their fingers to be sure. They just know the answer, because they have seen the evidence in the past, and they recall that it is truth. It does not have to be rediscovered every time. Epistemology deals more with the knowing of truth, rather than its calculation or derivation.

The history of epistemology, and the various beliefs encountered along the way, are what this series is about. It began with the Greek philosophers, who assumed certain basic human beliefs to be true without really questioning where these beliefs came from. In the mid-seventeenth century, the Age of Enlightenment began and philosophers started to question how we really know what we know. This period was dominated by the thinking that reason alone was enough to justify power and “rightness”. God’s presence and authority were still given a great deal of consideration during this phase.

That began to change with the period of Modernism in the late nineteenth century, when people began to trust more in the scientific process and technology to determine what truth really is. Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution is a good example. It was during this period that philosophers began to wholly reject the idea of a divine Creator in their belief systems. Instead, the idea of man being able to save himself through learning and applying what he learned began to take shape (not that this idea didn’t occur before this time, but it became the primary philosophical way of thinking at this point).

Finally, in the 1960’s, mankind rushed into the next phase of philosophical thinking – Postmodernism. This period has been dominated by the abstract thinking that absolute truth cannot be known. Instead, philosophers (and religious leaders, and government officials, and many, many others) believe that the concept of truth is a variable – it is different for everyone. “We make our own truth” or “We discover our brand of truth as we live life” are familiar sayings. In essence, this chapter of epistemology says that “we can’t really know that what we know is absolutely right”. That can be a pretty frustrating argument to have with someone.

One thought occurs to me – what would the next phase of thinking encompass? As mankind has sped along the philosophical trail these last few hundred years, departing from centuries-old belief systems, he continues to accelerate into more arcane arguments than the last, until eventually there will be no regard for truth or morals or any real sense of right and wrong. What do you call the thing that follows Postmodernism?

This series will explore each of these phases and the history and thinking of the people who dominated the thinking in each – from Socrates to Plato, Rene DesCartes to John Locke, Kant to Hegel, Darwin, Nietzche and Marx. Through these, I hope to compare each phase with the “original” author of philosophy – Jesus Christ.

***************************
Next in the series...

Wednesday, September 9, 2009

Thoughts on President Obama’s Education Speech

The President of the United States gave a fifteen-minute address to the school students of our country yesterday. Since I had read a lot of speculation about what he would say, and how he would say it, I decided to evaluate it myself. So, last night I opened up one computer window with the video clip, one with the text transcript, and one with Microsoft Word and I watched the whole thing, ready to make notes about the perceived fallacies in what he had to say.

After watching the whole thing, I have to admit that I didn’t come up with one single egregious statement worthy of intense criticism. So for those who think I may be an anti-Obama, all-the-time complainer, let it be known that I went into this video with an open mind and left with very little to say in the way of disparagement.

Obama’s speech really consisted of a few well-worn messages. Stay in school, do your homework, mind your teachers, and work hard. And my favorite – be sure to wash your hands often so you don’t get the flu this winter. That’s it. It wasn’t terribly presidential – in fact, it was pedantic. It wasn’t even that well written or delivered. It was…just a speech. I doubt many kids walked away from it with any more inspiration than they had going into it.

The whole thing got me to thinking about whether or not I would want my children to watch the speech (they did, at home, over the Internet). But was the uproar from many sides about his speech right or wrong? Little was said in his words, and the speech was largely devoid of politics, religion, (petitions for healthcare votes), or moralizing. It was…just a speech.

But consider this – does who my children listen to matter as much as what my children listen to? To this, I have to answer “Yes”. If Michael Vick was giving a benign and pleasant speech at the local Humane Society, would I want my kids to go? With Vick’s background of endorsing dogfights and animal abuse, I would have to say that his character would overshadow any words that he might have to say. Even if they were good words, I do not want my kids idolizing someone who lacks character.

“But you surely can’t compare our President to Michael Vick!”, I hear some people say. Well, in some ways, I suppose that is right. Our president has openly supported policies which enable and further the practice of abortion. The killing of innocent babies is far worse to me than the abuse of animals. So our president’s policies offend me even more than those of Vick. Truly, they do. And I do not want my kids watching a benign speech by the president and coming away thinking that everything is really okay with him – that he’s a decent sort of fellow, and one we would like to imitate in many ways. So, we train them to consider the character, as well, when listening.

Some people will think I’m crazy making such a comparison. But consider the numbers when comparing the Nazi holocaust alongside the abortion rates occurring in our country – right now. Six million Jews were killed during the holocaust. But in the United States alone, between 800,000 and 1,400,000 abortions are performed every year. Approximately the same number of abortion deaths will occur in one-and-a-half presidential terms as occurred during the entire holocaust. And our president, among many, many others (including the president before this one), does not have the courage to stand up to this atrocity and make it stop. Instead, he works to make access to abortion easier. He continues to allow my tax dollars to go toward the funding of this abomination – in this nation and beyond. Can I stand by while he allows this to happen? Will people look back on our nation in fifty years, and compare this time to the Jewish holocaust? And back to the topic at-hand, is this the kind of person that I want my kids to look up to and admire?

The point I make is this – at least as important as the words delivered by a speaker is the character of the speaker. Does his life honor God? Does he glorify God in his actions? The longer I look at politics and character, the more I believe that the next time I cast a vote for president, it will not be for Republican or Democrat. If I could not choose the man to be an elder in my own church, how could I vote for him to lead this great nation?

Please continue to be in prayer for our president, our leaders, our nation, and our children.

Friday, September 4, 2009

The Danger of Not Letting Them Go (Part 3 – When To Let Your Kids Go)

For some reason, this subject has been heavy on my heart lately. I have prayed daily for wisdom about whether or not to write about it – and for God to reveal His truth to me on the topic. I have many dear friends who are school teachers, public school parents, or who may simply disagree with the amount of protection that I give to my own children. The answer to the question “When should I let my kids go out into the world?” is not the same for every child or family. There is no easy formula. But for those who have children and who want to see them glorify God in their lives when they leave the nest, let me just say this – this is one thing that you don’t want to get wrong.

I plan to cover this topic in three segments:


Whether you agree or not – I encourage comments. I especially encourage other viewpoints when they are accompanied by scripture. Believe me when I say that this was written under prayerful circumstances, and with no accusing finger pointed at anyone. Really.
****************************
The year was 1982, and I walked into my high-school literature class with my Bible and a few things to say. I was fortunate enough to be in the Advanced Placement class where we were encouraged to debate and argue over what we believed. I was often at odds with many in the class and, more importantly, with the class teacher, who was a devout atheist. Nevertheless, I enjoyed the discussions we had, because they were very lively and forced me to carefully research why I believed what I did.

On this one occasion, I was especially excited, because we had been having a discussion about morality and where the general feelings of right and wrong had originated. Since we were always reading from various pieces of literature to make a point, I thought reading from some select passages in Romans 1 would serve to demonstrate my side of the story, and make some people think about what God had to say on the matter.

I was wrong.

As the discussion progressed, I commented that I had some thoughts on the subject from the Bible. The teacher became very animated and refused to let me continue. She let it be known that I was not allowed to read from the Bible in her class, and that I was to never return with it again in my hands. Any other book was acceptable to argue the point with, but the Bible was not allowed. For the moment, I was crushed. No one came to my defense. I remember going for a week after that in silence in class. Without the Scriptures to refer to, anything I had to say would have simply been an opinion. To me, the class was simply “pooling ignorance”, adrift without a solid reference point on which to take hold. I thought I had lost. But you need to read to the end of this post to discover the real finish to this story.

I was raised in both a family and in a strict church environment which impressed upon me the importance of the Bible and the need be prepared to debate and argue for the truth. This upbringing readied me at a fairly early age to defend Christ and holy living. By high school, I was ready to accept bitterness, criticism, and even rejection from others without the possibility of losing the moral compass that guided me. My parents and a strong church family were responsible for this. But before this point, I don’t think I was ready to stand up to the abuse.

Proverbs 22:6 does not say, “Train a child in the way he should go, and when he is six he will not turn from it.” As I’ve pointed out previously, somewhere between the ages of two and thirty-five, there lies an age when a child is ready to independently go forth and defend the Christian faith. The age of maturity differs for each child (for some, it may indeed be six, though I think that is rare). Prior to that point, there is a danger that the world will have a mitigating effect on the child’s own moral compass. It is the duty of the Christian parent to be sure that they provide guidance, training and protection until that independent point is reached.

There is a popular phrase which goes like this, “That which does not kill you makes you stronger.” I respectfully disagree. There is an insidious design in Satan’s plan in which we are sometimes led to believe that getting close to evil, and then escaping it, is somehow more desirable than to never have been close to evil at all. The more desirable path for training is to keep our children away from evil to start with, without the need to later untangle the effects of sin (Proverbs 1:8, 6:23, and especially 23:19) . C. S. Lewis, in the preface to The Great Divorce, put it this way:
“I do not think that all who choose wrong roads perish; but their rescue consists in being put back on the right road. A sum can be put right: but only by going back till you find the error and working it afresh from that point, never by simply going on. Evil can be undone, but it cannot ‘develop’ into good. Time does not heal it.”
There are pictures and words in my head today which I cannot get rid of because of exposure to movies and conversations in my youth. These things are seemingly indelible on my mind – no amount of time or prayer seems to cure me of the exposure to them. It is a constant struggle to turn away from temptation, or remind myself to refrain from anger when I’m pushed too hard. I would have been better off if I had never had the experiences to begin with. And this drives my desire to shelter and protect my own children from the subtle influence of the world.

But…there comes a time when I believe we are called upon to send our children out – well-prepared – to defend the faith. The fact is this – the world is a lost and broken place, and it needs Jesus. And Matthew 5 does call upon us to be a light to the world, a city on a hill that cannot be hidden. The danger of not letting our children go forth to be that shining light is that the world may never see God’s salvation through them. Their wise and matured example is part of God’s plan, as we see in Daniel 12:3,
“Those who are wise will shine like the brightness of the heavens, and those who lead many to righteousness, like the stars for ever and ever.”
This has the effect of changing the world and us, as stated in 2 Corinthians 3:18,
“And we, who with unveiled faces all reflect the Lord’s glory, are being transformed into his likeness with ever-increasing glory, which comes from the Lord, who is the Spirit.”
Our example may even carry past our own life on this earth, as is seen with Abel in Hebrews 11:4,
“By faith Abel offered God a better sacrifice than Cain did. By faith he was commended as a righteous man, when God spoke well of his offerings. And by faith he still speaks, even though he is dead.”
To conclude the opening story - ten years after that disappointing moment in high school, I attended a class reunion. One of the most meaningful events of my life happened that evening when one of my old classmates approached me and told me, “I just want you to know how much I appreciate the stand you took on the Bible in our high school classes. I remember it well. And I’m happy to tell you that I have given my life to Christ since that time, and your Christian example had something to do with it.”

As I’ve stated before, this series is about effective, deliberate parenting. God has invested us, as parents, with the responsibility to take care that our children are trained, protected, and ready to serve Him in powerful ways. Guarding their lives from worldly influence will make them stronger. Yes, much good has been done by people who were rescued from evil lives – those who repented, and then chose to serve God in mighty ways (the apostle Paul was a good example). But many more people throughout history were not able to climb out of the pit of sin that entrapped them once they fell in. I encourage Christian parents everywhere to purposefully choose the best and most God-honoring path for their children. That path is not the same for every child – God’s plan is far more textured and complex than a simple list of rights and wrongs. I pledge to be diligent in prayer for God to reveal His plan to our families, and for our light to shine, ultimately, in the most powerful way for Him.

Saturday, August 29, 2009

The “Salt and Light” Argument (Part 2 – When To Let Your Kids Go)

For some reason, this subject has been heavy on my heart lately. I have prayed daily for wisdom about whether or not to write about it – and for God to reveal His truth to me on the topic. I have many dear friends who may simply disagree with the amount of protection that I give to my own children. The answer to the question “When should I let my kids go out into the world?” is not the same for every child or family. There is no easy formula. But for those who have children and who want to see them glorify God in their lives when they leave the nest, let me just say this – this is one thing that you don’t want to get wrong.

I plan to cover this topic in three segments:

1) The Big Test
2) The “Salt and Light” Argument
3) The Danger of Not Letting Them Go


Whether you agree or not – I encourage comments. I especially encourage other viewpoints when they are accompanied by scripture. Believe me when I say that this was written under prayerful circumstances, and with no accusing finger pointed at anyone. Really.
****************************
When I consider whether or not to let my children participate in an event or situation (one where they have interaction with something other than pure Christian influences), the number-one viewpoint I get from others is that God calls us to be “salt and light”. Excerpts from Matthew 5:13-16 tell us:
“You are the salt of the earth…You are the light of the world…let your light shine before men, that they may see your good deeds and praise your Father in Heaven.”
It is clear that God calls us to go into the world to season and shine. The danger of avoiding that altogether will be discussed in Part 3 of this series. I find no scriptures that say we should get all of the Christians together in one place and leave the world to its lost state – in fact, that would be unscriptural. We should not abandon the lost.

My point is that we need to be concerned about WHEN we send our children into the world on a regular basis.

Few would say their two-year-old is ready and equipped to be a light to a world dominated by Satan. Likewise, a thirty-five-year-old ought to have matured to fill that role. So, somewhere between two and thirty-five is the right time to release our children to be salt and light. Is that age six, twelve or twenty? The answer is not the same for every child or family. And please don’t misunderstand me – there are times when a six-year-old can have a profound influence through Christ on another individual. What I’m talking about is discerning the time to release our children to daily interaction and immersion in a corrupted culture. Should we free them to nearly any situation at a young age, no matter what, trusting that they will continue to shine, undamaged by the world? Is that what “salt and light” means?

The danger is revealed back in Matthew 5. In the latter part of verse 13, it says,
“But if the salt loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled by men.”
The warning from Jesus that I perceive in this verse is that it is possible for salt to “lose its saltiness”, that is, for a Christian to lose the spark and guidance that he or she obtained from God at one time. From Part 1 of this series – either our children will change the world, or the world will change them. Other verses bear this out:
“If they have escaped the corruption of the world by knowing our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and are again entangled in it and overcome, they are worse off at the end than they were at the beginning.” – 2 Peter 2:20

“Because of the increase of wickedness, the love of most will grow cold.” – Matthew 24:12

“Yet I hold this against you. You have forsaken your first love.”
– Revelation 2:4
Again, it’s clear that there is a danger of slipping backward in the wrong circumstances. And what are those circumstances? The Thompson Chain Reference Bible lists seven different reasons that a person could “backslide”, to use an old-school word (Chain Index topic #994, for those who would like to do further study), and they are these:
· Absence of spiritual leaders
· Evil associations
· Worldly success
· Shallowness
· Emptiness of life
· Lack of spiritual insight
· Love of the world
These considerations need to be taken into account when we choose our own activities, and certainly when we make parenting decisions about our children. Wise parenting means we should think on these things whenever we “send our kids out” – whether it is to activities with large time commitments like school or camp, or even to smaller situations like a youth function or a sleepover at a friend’s house.

The answer is not black and white, and again, it’s not the same for every child. Jesus was found in the temple “listening and asking questions” of the religious leaders when he was twelve years old (Luke 2:46) – a great start. It was not until he was baptized, had been tempted directly by Satan, and had turned thirty that he began his ministry (wouldn’t you love to know for certain what he did with his time before this?). Luke 4:14 says that he returned from the temptation in the desert “in the power of the Spirit”. Could he have started his ministry earlier than age thirty? I wouldn’t limit Jesus’ ability in any way. But it seems important to me that God (and his father and mother) chose this path of learning and progressive exposure before he immersed himself in a depraved culture in order to save it. He had unwavering strength to complete the task by the time he was thirty-three.

Yes, we are called to be salt and light. And there are times when our children will be thrust into that role. But we must take care when and how they are placed into that position. Proverbs 22:6 tells us to “Train a child in the way he should go, and when he is old he will not turn from it.” I focus on the words “train” and “old” in that passage. It is a parent’s direct responsibility to be sure that their child is trained and ready. And a parent should pray for wisdom to know WHEN that time should be. Satan is doing everything he can to dilute our precious “salt” and have it be “trampled by men”. With God’s grace, and with vigilant parents, we will together see him fail and our children become victorious.

One final thought, again from Matthew 5. What does it mean to be a “city on a hill”? Why did Jesus use that image? I need to think on that one.

Next: The Danger of Not Letting Them Go

Wednesday, August 26, 2009

The Big Test (Part 1 – When To Let Your Kids Go)

For some reason, this subject has been heavy on my heart lately. I have prayed daily for wisdom about whether or not to write about it – and for God to reveal His truth to me on the topic. I have many dear friends who may simply disagree with the amount of protection that I give to my own children. The answer to the question “When should I let my kids go out into the world?” is not the same for every child or family. There is no easy formula. But for those who have children and who want to see them glorify God in their lives when they leave the nest, let me just say this – this is one thing that you don’t want to get wrong.

I plan to cover this topic in three segments:

1) The Big Test
2) The “Salt and Light” Argument
3) The Danger of Not Letting Them Go


Whether you agree or not – I encourage comments. I especially encourage other viewpoints when they are accompanied by scripture. Believe me when I say that this was written under prayerful circumstances, and with no accusing finger pointed at anyone. Really.
****************************
Imagine for a moment this scenario. Your child, along with every other child in your neighborhood, must prepare for, and one day take, a written test administered by the local school district. The ground rules are pretty simple. They go like this: 1) the questions are not a slam-dunk – they require real knowledge and preparation about a known topic, 2) your child may take the test any time between the ages of six and twenty-one, 3) they have only one opportunity to take the test – no re-tests are allowed, and 4) the test is truly “pass-fail” – that is, if they pass, your child will be allowed to live, and if they fail, the school district will execute your child.

How much preparation would you insist on before you let your child go take the test?

I’m sure that most parents would insist on their child’s attention to the subject matter, and would enforce a great deal of preparation time. I think most parents would worry enough about the consequences that they would establish a study routine that would guarantee success. Many parents would take over the training personally, just to leave no doubt that their child is ready for the Big Test. No one would simply look at the test casually, and send them off one day saying, “I think they’re probably ready.”

My analogy is not perfect, but I believe it is very much like the multiple decisions we must make as parents to give up precious hours and oversight of our children– to public school, sports, and even to church youth group. When they are not under the care and attention of me and my wife, bad things can happen. Minds can be changed. Respect and allegiance may shift. Our children may see things that they will not be able to get out of their minds – things that may never leave their thoughts, even into adulthood. Yes, some of these things can happen at home, too, but I firmly believe that my wife and I stand a better chance of providing the proper oversight to my own children than any other people on the planet.

Things are different today than they were for most of the last five thousand years. “Progress” which we now take for granted, like cars and buses and the ability to move about and gather into large groups many times a week have changed the face of the family – and I think eroded the importance of the parents in a child’s life. The practice of stratifying children into age groups at churches, through youth ministry, is fairly recent. Public schools in the United States have only been in existence for the last 150 years. Before this, families would learn together, often huddled around a Bible or a copy of Pilgrim’s Progress. There were no youth group activities or PTA meetings in Bible times.

Most of our friends are aware that we homeschool our children. We don’t do this to provide them with a superior education (though I think that is indeed a benefit). We do it for this reason: a study conducted by the National Home Education Research Institute and presented by Pastor Voddie Baucham shows that 70-88% of professing Christian teens fall away from their faith at the end of their freshman year in college. Yet, only 6% of homeschooled, professing Christian teens fall away in that time frame. Consider those statistics again…there is at least a seven out of ten chance that a publicly-schooled child will reject God after their first year of college. Less than one out of ten will do so if they are homeschooled.

This study may be tough for some to accept, especially when so few of us believe that such a result could possibly occur in our own family. And we should understand very clearly, the study does not explicitly prove that schooling is the only factor that determines a child’s grasp on God’s grace. It stands to reason that a homeschooled child will have more parental involvement in his or her life, and this is a big contributor to the Christian walk. I believe further study would conclude that public-schooled children who enjoy a devoted father and mother, and a family who prays and worships together regularly will improve on the 70-88% odds greatly. But once again, any study that concludes with such a diverse result – 70-88% versus 6% - is either flawed, or else it has uncovered a fundamental issue to be considered.

Either our children will change the world, or the world will change them. It’s a rare situation where two opposing views are thrown together for hours a day without at least one side’s viewpoint being changed. These are hard words to read. They were hard words to write. But in the end, isn’t the goal of every Christian parent to ready their children…for the Big Test?

Next: The "Salt and Light" Argument

Sunday, August 23, 2009

Radical Environmentalism – Is Global Warming A Bad Thing? (Part 8)

I’ve written before that the claim that the earth is warming is dubious at best. Much scientific evidence is suddenly emerging that shows that the reverse may actually be true.

In an unusual step for me, though, I’m going to assume for the moment that the earth is really warming, and that man may be the biggest contributor (more than sunspot changes, El NiƱo, and other phenomena). Here I go – flipping on the big global warming switch. The next question I would ask is this – if the average temperature of the globe went up a degree or two, would it be a good thing or a bad thing?

Arguments have been made that the shift will cause enough melting of the polar ice caps to bring about a global sea level rise that would affect us negatively. Al Gore, in his movie An Inconvenient Truth, did a masterful job of scaring everyone with this very scenario.

But some evidence given by the U.S. Department of Agriculture shows something different. See http://www.ars.usda.gov/is/pr/1997/970109.htm?pf=1 The DOA conducted a study in which they grew grain sorghum and soybeans in an artificial environment with twice the carbon dioxide content of the atmosphere today (the study claims that at current CO2 rate increases, we will double the current amount in the next century). Their expectation was that yield would drop by as much as ten percent.

Instead, the increased CO2 levels caused the plant leaves to grow larger. Without using any additional fertilizer to help the plants, the soybean production was increased by thirty five percent! Sorghum yields from plants placed in the high CO2 environment were up eighteen percent.

My point : the global warming scare is just that, a scare put on by people who know that they can fool some of the people all of the time. Many people operate under the incorrect thinking that any change from the current standard must carry bad consequences along with it. Their deep-seated thinking is that the world is operating under ideal circumstances right now – that any deviation, whether it be hotter or colder temperatures, or more or less CO2 in the atmosphere - must bring negative results to mankind.

The study cited above shows that food shortages could be made much better by increasing CO2 levels in the atmosphere. Put more succinctly, world hunger could be solved by increasing our carbon footprint. At what cost, you ask? Would we melt polar ice caps and cause the oceans to rise by two feet? Maybe – though this is still speculative. Would curing world hunger be worth it? The tradeoff between rising oceans and more crop production would need to be weighed – if human-caused global warming is even a fact (it’s still highly speculative). The purpose of this whole analogy is to demonstrate that we do not necessarily live in a perfect world right now, where everything is working at optimum efficiency. When changes happen, some things will get better and some will get worse. Where is the ideal point that we should live?

Okay – having made the point, can I flip off my global warming switch now? And go back to believing that mankind has very little to do with the temperature of the globe?
************************
Next in this series.......
or
Back to Part 1 of this series...

Sunday, August 16, 2009

What’s The Worst Thing That Could Happen To Our Country?

Those of us who have grown up in the United States have experienced a time in history like no other. Tremendous prosperity, a large measure of freedom, and incredible technological advances have graced our nation throughout its history. We live in a time where we can drive 50 miles each way to work, in under an hour, in the comfort of our car heater or air conditioner, listening to classic books on compact disk that we can pick up, free of charge, from our local library, enjoying paved roads and highways designed for both comfort and safety. For less than $150, I carry around a device, barely bigger than a credit card, which contains nearly every music album that I listened to in college. I can take pictures of my kids at their church play, and post them on the web, for free, for all to see that same afternoon. Our lifestyle and the freedom we enjoy in this country is unsurpassed.

So what’s the worst thing that can happen to our country? Is it economic failure? Politics, cable news, and water cooler discussion seem to focus on the state of our nation’s economy. We see a lot of people paying attention to their stock portfolios and the recent jobs report. Loss of our economic leadership and wealth could be viewed by some as the most terrible thing which could happen to the United States. Could China be the next economic world power?

Is it the threat of war with another country? Is it the possibility of losing both a war and our country’s role as an international leader on the global stage? Many people have intense moral opposition to one nation asserting influence over another sovereign nation, especially when it comes to firing weapons at each other. If Russia became a superpower once again and won a war with the United States, would that be the worst thing that could happen to us?

Is it the breakdown of an educational system that no longer produces the world’s brightest students - one where 27% of graduating high school students are rated “Below Basic” on standardized reading level assessment tests (Center for Public Education study here)? Have we failed our children and doomed our nation to a second-class future? Is that the worst thing that can happen to the United States?

No, I think the worst thing that could happen to our nation is the loss of God’s blessing. It is my opinion that for the last 250 years, God has given the United States special favor because our nation was founded first on His principles, and by men who were not afraid to mention His name in their speeches and writings. Witness the following:

“Whoever will introduce into public affairs the principles of Christianity will change the face of the world.” – Benjamin Franklin

“It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religion, but on the gospel of Jesus Christ.” – Patrick Henry

“We have staked the whole future of American civilization not on the power of government, far from it. We have staked the future of all of our political institutions upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God.” – James Madison, fourth President of the United States

“The highest glory of the American Revolution was this: that it tied together in one indissoluble bond, the principles of civil government with the principles of Christianity.” – John Quincy Adams, sixth President of the United States

“God has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation, to select and prefer Christians for their rulers” – John Jay, first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court

I believe that it was these men, and their unwavering grasp that God and politics do mix well together that has enabled us to enjoy a special, divine blessing for over two centuries. This is not the first example of God showering a nation with special attention and success. Like Israel of old, God has blessed the United States with wealth, freedom, and a leadership role.

But now, we have elected a president who openly says that we are no longer a Christian nation, intimating that other gods are acceptable. We elect leaders who have demonstrated poor ethical choices, who are perverted, or who have no regard for God the Creator. I ask you – when you read the words of the founding fathers above, do you see the difference between then and now?

Above all, we now live in a nation where it is acceptable to kill our unborn children. In fact, our government is now considering taxing the practice of abortion. Our leaders have become so twisted that they strive to collect money – legally – on infanticide. I know this one thing – the founders of our nation would have been horrified at what we have become. It is certain that God is profaned as we promote this practice (Leviticus 18:21).

Has God already removed our blessing? Perhaps. When you look at the recent economic and moral record of our nation, does it seem inconceivable that He would take away this blessing that we have enjoyed for so long? I find it is no coincidence that our struggles – economic, educational, and moral – correspond with the time frame when Roe vs. Wade was handed down by the Supreme Court in 1973. To be sure, the 1960’s put us on a downhill slide preceding that time.

It is not too late to rescue our nation from a godless, blessing-deprived existence. I believe it is time for revival and revolution. It is time for men and women who are devoted to God to stand up and say “Enough!” It is time to cast out the current leaders in our Capitol and state houses – all of them - who refuse to acknowledge the sovereignty of God– and start over. It is time to unabashedly insist on laws which honor God’s purpose. It is time to stop ignoring our children under the assumption that school and church youth group are enough to mold them into the next generation of godly leaders, and spend time in deep family conversation and prayer with them. It is time to believe and act toward the reversal of Roe vs. Wade. It is time to be on our knees in prayer for the eternal salvation of this world.
.
Who will join with me?