So it's been a while since I've posted. These are things that I have been thinking about / invested in thus far this summer.
1. World War II and specifically Winston Churchill's role within it. Arguably, this is one of the greatest statesman the world has ever known, and yet, if he were running for office in the US, he probably wouldn't get elected because he wouldn't appeal to the evangelical right and he was far too conservative for the liberals. Very little evidence for him being "saved" as it were. Moreover, a hard drinking man - nay, scratch that, an alcoholic - who left quite the wake in his own personal family. And yet ... exactly the right man for the those times. As Roosevelt and Stalin sat around waiting to be dragged into the war, Churchill stood on principle and entered the fray for moral reasons. All this to say, I find that I really am not all that bothered by John McCain's lack of faith. I mean, certainly, I want the man to be saved. I'm not arguing that. But what I'm saying is that his credentials as a potential president don't need to include worship on a Sunday morning. I'm not asking him to teach me about eternity. I'm asking him to defend the vital interests of this nation; and thus, in my mind, defend the interests of liberty abroad by maintaining a strong America. So I wish he would just quit pandering and say: "Look, I don't believe. Not in the way you do. But we have common interests and I am the right man to lead this nation for reasons x, y, and z."
2. On the subject of the apocalypse, I find myself wondering if the issue that will unite the world is actually going to be the environment. Scripture teaches that there will arise one world movement, lead by one charasmatic leader, etc, etc... But what issue would unite a world after thousands of years of acrimony. Peace isn't it. We watched the world tear itself apart twice in the last century and peace didn't arise simply because people were tired with war. The end of world poverty sure ain't it because quite frankly, mostly people who live in the relative wealth of the West don't give a rat's rear end about poverty in the Developing World. So what could the issue be that would unite a world. How about self-interest? Or, perhaps more appropriately (given the lack of definitive data), perceived self-interest. If I believe that the world is going to burn due to the technology of men and its impact upon the environment, I might - just might -- be interested in doing something about it. But the thing is, I can't do it alone. I can't even do it as a nation. Because no matter how "green" we make the US, Developing nations worldwide will still continue to produce allegedly toxic gases by the boatload. So if we are going to go "green" in the interest of self preservation (as a people), we're going to need to do it in mass, as a united world. Moreover, there is a certain ... spiritual bend to the whole green movement as well. So what do you think. Going green as a sign of the end times ...
3. I find myself wondering why none of you responded to my most excellent suggestion to check out Black Rebel Motorcycle Club. Seriously folks, this is solid music.
That is all ...
1. World War II and specifically Winston Churchill's role within it. Arguably, this is one of the greatest statesman the world has ever known, and yet, if he were running for office in the US, he probably wouldn't get elected because he wouldn't appeal to the evangelical right and he was far too conservative for the liberals. Very little evidence for him being "saved" as it were. Moreover, a hard drinking man - nay, scratch that, an alcoholic - who left quite the wake in his own personal family. And yet ... exactly the right man for the those times. As Roosevelt and Stalin sat around waiting to be dragged into the war, Churchill stood on principle and entered the fray for moral reasons. All this to say, I find that I really am not all that bothered by John McCain's lack of faith. I mean, certainly, I want the man to be saved. I'm not arguing that. But what I'm saying is that his credentials as a potential president don't need to include worship on a Sunday morning. I'm not asking him to teach me about eternity. I'm asking him to defend the vital interests of this nation; and thus, in my mind, defend the interests of liberty abroad by maintaining a strong America. So I wish he would just quit pandering and say: "Look, I don't believe. Not in the way you do. But we have common interests and I am the right man to lead this nation for reasons x, y, and z."
2. On the subject of the apocalypse, I find myself wondering if the issue that will unite the world is actually going to be the environment. Scripture teaches that there will arise one world movement, lead by one charasmatic leader, etc, etc... But what issue would unite a world after thousands of years of acrimony. Peace isn't it. We watched the world tear itself apart twice in the last century and peace didn't arise simply because people were tired with war. The end of world poverty sure ain't it because quite frankly, mostly people who live in the relative wealth of the West don't give a rat's rear end about poverty in the Developing World. So what could the issue be that would unite a world. How about self-interest? Or, perhaps more appropriately (given the lack of definitive data), perceived self-interest. If I believe that the world is going to burn due to the technology of men and its impact upon the environment, I might - just might -- be interested in doing something about it. But the thing is, I can't do it alone. I can't even do it as a nation. Because no matter how "green" we make the US, Developing nations worldwide will still continue to produce allegedly toxic gases by the boatload. So if we are going to go "green" in the interest of self preservation (as a people), we're going to need to do it in mass, as a united world. Moreover, there is a certain ... spiritual bend to the whole green movement as well. So what do you think. Going green as a sign of the end times ...
3. I find myself wondering why none of you responded to my most excellent suggestion to check out Black Rebel Motorcycle Club. Seriously folks, this is solid music.
That is all ...
posted by Just a Few Things about Scott ... | 8:33 AM
5 Comments:
Questions:
1. Does God use (unsaved) non-Christians to further His will? (My guess is--yes. Without a doubt. Although I'm curious to hear others' opinions.)
2. Scott--your second point, the Green movement being the anti-Christ... it's good, but incomplete. What I think you're missing is that the very basis of the "green" movement is the worship of nature. Pantheism, if I'm not mistaken. But behind that layer, it is ultimately the worship of mankind; the worship of the self.
1. If you believe (as I do) that God is sovereign over all things, than He absolutely utilizes non-Christians to further His will/purposes. The only real question, in my mind, is HOW does He do it? And that is probably something we will not understand this side of eternity.
2. You make an interesting statement: "the very basis of the 'green' movement is the worship of nature." My admittedly subjective sense is that this statement is probably true for SOME people. But for the masses, I still believe that the only thing that is truly worshipped is the radical autonomy of the individual. Thus, going 'green' isn't so much about worshiping nature as it is about protecting something that may come back to bite me if I don't change my ways.
Let me try to expound how green is the worship of the self, and we'll see if you bite.
To accept the green premise, you have to also accept that the earth is fragile. This undermines God's creation. Granted, this is a debatable point--but there's a fine line between being a 'steward' of the earth, and being enslaved to it. And based on the preference to grow food and use it as a crappy fuel source suggests that this line has been crossed. So in short:
1. God's creation is fragile.
2. Since God's creation (the earth) is fragile, God does not exist.
3. Man can ruin the fragile earth. (Implying that man can also fix it.)
4. If man does not believe that man can ruin the earth, then that man is evil.
5. Ipso-facto, the fight between good and evil leaves out the whole satan / God thing, but rather "good" man (green) vs. "evil" man (non-"green").
6. Belief in the "good" man, and the "good" man's science will save the earth, and thus mankind.
I just find it funny. Not too long ago, humanity would have thought that changes in the earth were a result of the gods getting pissed off. Now, it's a result of evil man. God (or gods)aren't even in the equation.
I have a friend at church that has begun to equate Oprah to the anti-Christ. I laughed at him.
But if you combine Oprah and green, maybe you've got something.
Scott - on a random aside (semi-related to item 2 in your original post) - have your read anything by Joel C Rosenberg? He has a really good (fiction) series that I'm working my way through that circles around the end times but not in a Tim LaHaye way - more realistic and more ...well, terrifying honestly. :) Fist in the series is The Last Jihad - recommend it highly if you're in the market for good fiction.
Oh--and for what it's worth... I listened to the music. It's alright. It's just not where I'm at--at the moment.
Believe it or not, I'm in an "industrial" music fix. (Didn't know that's what it's called until some tech stopped by and said, "Oh, you like industrial music?")
Post a Comment
<< Home