Well, I started delving into some of the liberal methodology of the late 19th and early 20th century. I've reserved my reading for the Wellhausen school, and those who influenced him.
This biographical quote from Wellhausen is interesting. This quote is taken from The Pentateuch in the Twentieth Century: The Legacy of Julius Wellhausen. Oxford University Press. New York, NY. 1998.
“In my early student days I was attracted by the stories of Saul and David, Ahab and Elijah; the discourses of Amos and Isaiah laid strong hold on me, and I read myself well into the prophetic and historical books of the Old Testament. Thanks to such aids as were accessible to me, I even considered that I understood them tolerably, but at the same time was troubled with a bad conscience, as if I were beginning with the roof instead of the foundation; for I had no thorough acquaintance with the Law, of which I was accustomed to be told that it was the basis and postulate of the whole literature. At last I took courage and made my way through Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and even through Knobel's Commentary to these books. But it was in vain that I looked for the light which was to be shed from this source on the historical and prophetical books. On the contrary, my enjoyment of the latter was marred by the Law; it did not bring them any nearer me, but intruded itself uneasily, like a ghost that makes a noise indeed, but is not visible and really effects nothing. Evn where there were points of contact between it and them, differences also made themselves felt, and I found it impossible to give a candid decision in favour of the priority of the Law. Dimly I began to perceive that thorughout there was between them all the difference that separates two wholly distinct worlds. Yet, so far from attaining clear conceptions, I only fell into deeper confusion … At last, in the course of a casual visit in Gottingen in the summer of 1867, I learned through Ritschl that Karl Heinrich Graf placed the Law later than the Prophets, and almost without knowing his reasons for the hypothesis, I was prepared to accept it; I readily acknowledged to myself the possibility of understanding Hebrew antiquity without the book of the Torah.”
Even within this short quote, one is able to see the beginnings of the critical method. Being respected abouve that of Graf, Wellhausen became very influential, particularly for his J, E, P, and D document theory and the hexateuch. What he attempted to do, was apply modern historical and scientific criticism to that of the Scriptures. What I hope to research a bit more, is how this evolutionary process of the critical method's thought was being influenced by airless presuppositions.
Great conservatives did not respond in favor to the critical method for obvious reasons. Green comments with a most verdant quote, "Kuenen and Wellhausen have shown us by what clever tricks of legerdemain they can construct castles in the air and produce histories which have positively no basis whatever but their own exuberant fancy.” Likewise Hodge and Warfield resisted saying, "The writers of this article are sincerely convinced of the perfect soundness of the great Catholic doctrine of Biblical Inspiration, i.e., that the Scriptures not only contain but ARE, THE WORD OF GOD, and hence that all their elements and all their affirmations are absolutely errorless, and binding the faith and obedience of men. Nevertheless we admit that the question between ourselves and the advocates of [modern criticism], is one of fact, to be decided only by an exhaustive and impartial examination of all the sources of evidence, i.e., the claims and the phenomena of the Scriptures themselves."
Both quotes above quoted in: Mark Noll, Between Faith and Criticism, (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1991).
What I hope to find, is the connection between liberal Biblical criticism and Vos' taking Biblical Theology from the heaps of liberal ashes, resurrecting it, and at the same time opposing historical criticism. What I simply mean to say, is that I am wondering why in the times of a great struggle between conservative and liberal views of theology (e.g. inspiration, etc.), did Vos bring Biblical Theology to the fore? Is there a connection, or am I missing something? I believe he was trying to present a Biblical history that responded to the Wellhausen (and future) critics... but was he successful at his attempt?
Thursday, October 15, 2009
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
Biblical Theology II
Geerhardus Vos set his mark upon the Reformed tradition when he was invited to teach at Princeton seminary. In a (monumental) inaugural address, Vos prepared the seminary (and scholastic world) for a flavor of Reformed Biblical Theology. Teaching for nearly 40 years at Princeton, Vos left a legacy (all too ignored these days) on Biblical Theology as a theological science.
So what was this legacy? Vos contributed much to the Biblical Theology discussion of his days, especially through the writing of several books. Most notably is his work Biblical Theology of the Old and New Testaments. Reading through even the first couple of chapters, one learns quickly to appreciate Vos for several reasons:
1) He was an academic. He shows his thorough understanding of his times and works (especially the works of Wellhausen &c.) as well as a solid grounding in the Reformed tradition.
2) He “emancipates” as it were, Biblical Theology as a theological science for the school of criticism. Showing the weaknesses of the critic’s presuppositions, Vos not only diabolically opposes them, but he sets up a view that, at the very least, competes and undermines Biblical scholasticism in the field of Biblical Theology over the last century.
3) Vos’ aim (found in his inaugural address as well) is not only pointedly academic, but it is also largely practical – aimed at showing the glory of God as He has progressively revealed Himself in redemptive history.
4) What his study of Biblical Theology did, was show the place for Dogmatic (Systematic) Theology among the theological disciplines, but in a sense, he also wed together these two (opposing) disciplines.
5) One element of Vos’ thought that, perhaps, trumps above the rest, is that Vos showed people how to read their Bibles. Maintaining both unity and diversity within the covenant of grace, Vos gives people a methodology of reading Scripture as a “Divine Drama” of God’s self-revelation. Included in this, is Vos’ emphasis of eschatology; and understanding history through an eschatological lens.
Much more could, and should, be said about what Vos contributed to the discussion of Biblical Theology, but this will suffice for the present. Being thus appreciated, there are also several criticisms that not to be misplaced when discussion Vos’ view of Biblical Theology:
1) Contrary to some of Vos’ theological children, Vos was not working within a vacuum. Though Biblical Theology may have gained the notoriety and “science” from Vos, Vos relied heavily on the works of those who had been doing Covenant Theology for the previous three-hundred years.
2) Vos’ Biblical Theology of the Old and the New Testaments, is, unfortunately, an unfinished work. It is not as complete as a serious student of Biblical Theology would hope.
3) Throughout Vos’ work, much of his criticism is geared towards the Biblical critics – which reflects that Vos was a man of his time. Some of his writing seems a bit antiquated and out-of-date. However, it should here be noted as well, that such criticisms are largely appreciated and the Reformed thinker can, perhaps, attribute the triumph of the Gospel over Biblical criticism in part to Vos’ work.
4) There are other times, where Vos seems to have grown and developed his thought between his inaugural address and the publishing of Biblical Theology. There are certain areas where one is prone to agree more with him in his inaugural address than in his magnum opus (i.e. covenants, the protoevangelium, etc.).
5) Vos seems too driven and confined by a narrow definition of “covenant” that he doesn’t deal in any large degree with the Covenant of Redemption, the Covenant of Works, or the Davidic Covenant. He also seems to too narrowly define a covenant dealing with redemption, that the Noahic covenant, because its sign is a rainbow, is not redemptive.
What I hope to trace out in subsequent posts, is the methodology of Vos’ Biblical Theology and how this helped to reclaim Biblical Theology from
So what was this legacy? Vos contributed much to the Biblical Theology discussion of his days, especially through the writing of several books. Most notably is his work Biblical Theology of the Old and New Testaments. Reading through even the first couple of chapters, one learns quickly to appreciate Vos for several reasons:
1) He was an academic. He shows his thorough understanding of his times and works (especially the works of Wellhausen &c.) as well as a solid grounding in the Reformed tradition.
2) He “emancipates” as it were, Biblical Theology as a theological science for the school of criticism. Showing the weaknesses of the critic’s presuppositions, Vos not only diabolically opposes them, but he sets up a view that, at the very least, competes and undermines Biblical scholasticism in the field of Biblical Theology over the last century.
3) Vos’ aim (found in his inaugural address as well) is not only pointedly academic, but it is also largely practical – aimed at showing the glory of God as He has progressively revealed Himself in redemptive history.
4) What his study of Biblical Theology did, was show the place for Dogmatic (Systematic) Theology among the theological disciplines, but in a sense, he also wed together these two (opposing) disciplines.
5) One element of Vos’ thought that, perhaps, trumps above the rest, is that Vos showed people how to read their Bibles. Maintaining both unity and diversity within the covenant of grace, Vos gives people a methodology of reading Scripture as a “Divine Drama” of God’s self-revelation. Included in this, is Vos’ emphasis of eschatology; and understanding history through an eschatological lens.
Much more could, and should, be said about what Vos contributed to the discussion of Biblical Theology, but this will suffice for the present. Being thus appreciated, there are also several criticisms that not to be misplaced when discussion Vos’ view of Biblical Theology:
1) Contrary to some of Vos’ theological children, Vos was not working within a vacuum. Though Biblical Theology may have gained the notoriety and “science” from Vos, Vos relied heavily on the works of those who had been doing Covenant Theology for the previous three-hundred years.
2) Vos’ Biblical Theology of the Old and the New Testaments, is, unfortunately, an unfinished work. It is not as complete as a serious student of Biblical Theology would hope.
3) Throughout Vos’ work, much of his criticism is geared towards the Biblical critics – which reflects that Vos was a man of his time. Some of his writing seems a bit antiquated and out-of-date. However, it should here be noted as well, that such criticisms are largely appreciated and the Reformed thinker can, perhaps, attribute the triumph of the Gospel over Biblical criticism in part to Vos’ work.
4) There are other times, where Vos seems to have grown and developed his thought between his inaugural address and the publishing of Biblical Theology. There are certain areas where one is prone to agree more with him in his inaugural address than in his magnum opus (i.e. covenants, the protoevangelium, etc.).
5) Vos seems too driven and confined by a narrow definition of “covenant” that he doesn’t deal in any large degree with the Covenant of Redemption, the Covenant of Works, or the Davidic Covenant. He also seems to too narrowly define a covenant dealing with redemption, that the Noahic covenant, because its sign is a rainbow, is not redemptive.
What I hope to trace out in subsequent posts, is the methodology of Vos’ Biblical Theology and how this helped to reclaim Biblical Theology from
Friday, October 09, 2009
Biblical Theology Research Pt. 1
Well... It's been about a year and I've picked up a new project. I'm currently going to be working on a paper dealing with Biblical Theology. I've decided to map my progress on the blog as I go about pick and narrowing my topic. For anyone who reads this blog, I would appreciate feedback, criticism, or questions. I've never mapped my thinking like this before, but I hope that it will in some way be valuable to myself as well as others.
I am currently researching and getting as many online articles as possible. I don't have access to many reasons outside of the internet (I live in Indonesia!) so if you know of other articles or databases I would love to get them. I'm currently researching: Monergism, Kerux.org, and BeginningWithMoses.org. I've seen a lot of Kline and Gaffin stuff appear and I am interested in knowing their distinctives and similarities. I've gotten some Goldsworthy, I hear he's the stuff in and around Sydney when it comes to BT.
I've also recently read: O. Palmer Robertson "Christ of the Covenants," Herman Witsius "Economy of the Covenants," "The New Dictionary of Biblical Theology," Geerhardus Vos, "Biblical Theology of the Old and New Testament," John Owen, "Biblical Theology" (published by SDG), and Graeme Goldsworthy, "According to Plan." Please feel free to post thoughts on any and all of these authors.
As a last bit of interest, I've been doing some mulling around on the Center of Biblical Theology Study of St. Peter (or something like that). On this site, Dr. Scott Hahn has argued that Pope Benedict XVI takes a strong stance of BT within the Catholic tradition. Some introductory articles show that he has at least taken a strong stance against the critics, which leads to ignorance (perhaps a flavor even Vos wouldn't have minded 100%, but I'd rather read Vos). We'll see if this Catholic strain of BT develops any further and if it is of interest.
I am currently researching and getting as many online articles as possible. I don't have access to many reasons outside of the internet (I live in Indonesia!) so if you know of other articles or databases I would love to get them. I'm currently researching: Monergism, Kerux.org, and BeginningWithMoses.org. I've seen a lot of Kline and Gaffin stuff appear and I am interested in knowing their distinctives and similarities. I've gotten some Goldsworthy, I hear he's the stuff in and around Sydney when it comes to BT.
I've also recently read: O. Palmer Robertson "Christ of the Covenants," Herman Witsius "Economy of the Covenants," "The New Dictionary of Biblical Theology," Geerhardus Vos, "Biblical Theology of the Old and New Testament," John Owen, "Biblical Theology" (published by SDG), and Graeme Goldsworthy, "According to Plan." Please feel free to post thoughts on any and all of these authors.
As a last bit of interest, I've been doing some mulling around on the Center of Biblical Theology Study of St. Peter (or something like that). On this site, Dr. Scott Hahn has argued that Pope Benedict XVI takes a strong stance of BT within the Catholic tradition. Some introductory articles show that he has at least taken a strong stance against the critics, which leads to ignorance (perhaps a flavor even Vos wouldn't have minded 100%, but I'd rather read Vos). We'll see if this Catholic strain of BT develops any further and if it is of interest.
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
The Kingdom of Democracy, Pt. 3
The Kingdom of Democracy, Pt. 3
Man was placed in the Garden of Eden to till and keep the land. As image bearers of God, it was man’s joyous duty to be the stewards of God’s garden. The creation mandate stated that man was to have dominion over the Earth. It was man’s divinely appointed mission to subdue the Earth. This, of course, was given prior to The Fall. When Adam and Eve ate of the forbidden fruit, the world was thrown into sin. Man no longer had the unbroken and whole image of God, but it was stained, impure, and defiled. Man was sent from the presence of YHWH to work the ground by the sweat of his brow, the earth no longer yielding and cooperating with man in his endeavor to subdue it. Harmony was shattered; fear reigned from the basest creatures to the reasonable. Since that awful day, man has been attempting to subdue the earth, to be the rightful stewards and caretakers; but an interesting anomaly has occurred—the land we were destined to have dominion over, has dominated us. We have been subdued by the earth.
Freedom, liberty, autonomy—all similes for the same basic concept, but there has been a subtle shift; not only in the course of American history, but in the course of man’s existence. In our last post I closed by speaking of a freedom without form, the freedom that present day American’s are wanting and a freedom that is being testified throughout many of the recent crises.
The news just stated today that the Democratic majority is hesitant, at best, to accept the bailout plan of the auto dealers. The auto industry has asked lawmakers to give them $25 billion to aid in failing profits. President Bush has refused to make such a bailout and act alone. It is being estimated that if even one large auto industry collapses, the States could be looking at losing around 2.5 million jobs next year through this crisis alone. Japan, earlier this week, announced that they have officially entered into a recession, not surprising considering they are the second largest economy and have been largely influenced by the United States’ crisis in recent months. Awhile ago, Washington approved a $700 billion bailout package for many of the banks that are suffering from their failure (and peer pressure) of handing out bad loans. Even, Warren Buffet’s Berkshire and Hathaway, has seen a devastating blow on Wall Street. The once nearly $4,000/share company has dropped nearly $1,000 in a matter of weeks. Last night, the worth of Berkshire dropped over 15%. The DOW Industrial average just dipped below the 8,000 mark ending in the high 7,990s—and on and on we could go. And despite all this, more and more Americans want to be ‘bailed-out.’ We have sown seeds that have germinated and grown, but we don’t want to reap our fields.
Meanwhile, we are preparing for a transition of power. President Bush is preparing to leave and President-elect Obama is preparing to enter. Bush has left $350 billion untouched for Obama to distribute as he wishes. Special interest groups are being rumored as having ‘high expectations’ and ‘hopes’ for their upcoming champion. Obama is responding by already saying one term isn’t enough to complete his mission. The world is watching as Obama is preparing to enter office.
These are the times that we find ourselves. We are in the midst of a horrible financial crisis, the worst since the Great Depression, and of CEOs asking for government relief as they fly to Washington in luxurious jets. When homeowners are begging for relief from bounced checkbooks and failing equities. We are finding ourselves in the midst of un-chartered territory: 1) Because we have never before faced a world of such interconnectedness, and 2) Because as history progresses, so does the culmination of the times. A culmination which has not been promised of a world ‘getting better’ but of a world that is being handed over to destruction that redemption might be fulfilled. It is in the midst of this, that we are looking for a Savior. And the savior will not be Wall Street, it will not be Washington, it will not be Barak Obama, it will not be a Band-Aid over a gapping wound, it will not be democracy and the cause of freedom.
Americans have long fought for the ideal of freedom. Millions have given their lives for the sake of freedom, thousands continue to fight. Freedom has been assailed time and time again, and has seemed to always triumph. Yet, the mortal enemy of freedom is not communism, it is not totalitarian rule, it is not enslavement of the people—the mortal enemy of freedom, is freedom itself. Freedom, liberty, autonomy—all similes for the seemingly same conception, yet how far from a true definition is the freedom of America? Pure freedom does not free, it enslaves. Freedom with no form of freedom, leads only to selfish autonomy, the state of nature. Yet, we are seeking freedom with no constraints. We are looking for the freedom of buying houses, cars, education, etc., without the form of accountability or responsibility. Banks have handed out loans with no background checks, no proof of income, no accountability, so that Americans can go and dry up every selfish desire. We live in a day and age when materialism rules the world, when instant gratification is the only ‘form’ to our freedom. We are raising children to believe that they need houses, cars, boats, toys like their parents who generally worked many years before being able to afford such things. Automakers are seeking a bailout for the failed industry, a failed industry of gross competition and rivalry, an industry founded on ‘bigger and better’ than the previous year. We are living in a time when our advertisements of ‘gimme, gimme,’ ‘you gotta have, you gotta have,’ are catching up to us as we realize we can’t have everything. People are walking around aimlessly, purposelessly, and indignant of the fact that: form, constraints, boundaries, accountability, no’s, and much more must frame our conception of freedom. Democracy in this light, is not freedom and liberty, it is enslavement.
Since The Fall, man has been driving this downward spiral of luxury, of advancement, of achievement, of ‘needing’ to subdue, and all the while, we have been subdued by that which we were meant to subdue. We cannot live without so much of what we have, yet this is not dominion, it is a form of tyranny, only the enemy isn’t a person, lest we destroy them, it isn’t a country, lest we declare open war, it isn’t an ideal or we would have counter-arguments; it is ourselves. We have become our own worst enemy—and should we believe that what is at the root of this is a sick, demented, and perverted freedom without form. Man was not created to live independent and autonomous—he was meant to be governed by a higher power outside of himself, not by his fickle desires, wants, and passion. This idea of autonomy has infiltrated into the fabric of our being, into our society, our politics, our philosophy, our theology. We are living in a day when we have the great potential to learn that freedom is only as good as the form that encompasses it, and where no form exists, no true freedom exists. We are at the crossroads of perhaps a great awakening, a great change, a reshaping of the world as we know it. It is not too great to think that cultures will soon be uprooted, nations will soon tumble, ideals will shift—this has been and is the way of the world. Yet amongst all of this, the world is looking for something to save, something to liberate, something to free—perhaps even something to rule and govern. We are in a climatic drama of life and who is it that will pull us from the depths of despair? It lies in the Church before a waiting world. If the Church does not act, we potentially give up this momentous opportunity of proclaiming the world. Financial crisis or not, to use the words of Francis Schaffer, ‘The Church Before a Watching World.’ How then should the Church respond? Will the Church respond? Will she rise to this great time and take her ancient prowress as the only hope of a dying world?
Man was placed in the Garden of Eden to till and keep the land. As image bearers of God, it was man’s joyous duty to be the stewards of God’s garden. The creation mandate stated that man was to have dominion over the Earth. It was man’s divinely appointed mission to subdue the Earth. This, of course, was given prior to The Fall. When Adam and Eve ate of the forbidden fruit, the world was thrown into sin. Man no longer had the unbroken and whole image of God, but it was stained, impure, and defiled. Man was sent from the presence of YHWH to work the ground by the sweat of his brow, the earth no longer yielding and cooperating with man in his endeavor to subdue it. Harmony was shattered; fear reigned from the basest creatures to the reasonable. Since that awful day, man has been attempting to subdue the earth, to be the rightful stewards and caretakers; but an interesting anomaly has occurred—the land we were destined to have dominion over, has dominated us. We have been subdued by the earth.
Freedom, liberty, autonomy—all similes for the same basic concept, but there has been a subtle shift; not only in the course of American history, but in the course of man’s existence. In our last post I closed by speaking of a freedom without form, the freedom that present day American’s are wanting and a freedom that is being testified throughout many of the recent crises.
The news just stated today that the Democratic majority is hesitant, at best, to accept the bailout plan of the auto dealers. The auto industry has asked lawmakers to give them $25 billion to aid in failing profits. President Bush has refused to make such a bailout and act alone. It is being estimated that if even one large auto industry collapses, the States could be looking at losing around 2.5 million jobs next year through this crisis alone. Japan, earlier this week, announced that they have officially entered into a recession, not surprising considering they are the second largest economy and have been largely influenced by the United States’ crisis in recent months. Awhile ago, Washington approved a $700 billion bailout package for many of the banks that are suffering from their failure (and peer pressure) of handing out bad loans. Even, Warren Buffet’s Berkshire and Hathaway, has seen a devastating blow on Wall Street. The once nearly $4,000/share company has dropped nearly $1,000 in a matter of weeks. Last night, the worth of Berkshire dropped over 15%. The DOW Industrial average just dipped below the 8,000 mark ending in the high 7,990s—and on and on we could go. And despite all this, more and more Americans want to be ‘bailed-out.’ We have sown seeds that have germinated and grown, but we don’t want to reap our fields.
Meanwhile, we are preparing for a transition of power. President Bush is preparing to leave and President-elect Obama is preparing to enter. Bush has left $350 billion untouched for Obama to distribute as he wishes. Special interest groups are being rumored as having ‘high expectations’ and ‘hopes’ for their upcoming champion. Obama is responding by already saying one term isn’t enough to complete his mission. The world is watching as Obama is preparing to enter office.
These are the times that we find ourselves. We are in the midst of a horrible financial crisis, the worst since the Great Depression, and of CEOs asking for government relief as they fly to Washington in luxurious jets. When homeowners are begging for relief from bounced checkbooks and failing equities. We are finding ourselves in the midst of un-chartered territory: 1) Because we have never before faced a world of such interconnectedness, and 2) Because as history progresses, so does the culmination of the times. A culmination which has not been promised of a world ‘getting better’ but of a world that is being handed over to destruction that redemption might be fulfilled. It is in the midst of this, that we are looking for a Savior. And the savior will not be Wall Street, it will not be Washington, it will not be Barak Obama, it will not be a Band-Aid over a gapping wound, it will not be democracy and the cause of freedom.
Americans have long fought for the ideal of freedom. Millions have given their lives for the sake of freedom, thousands continue to fight. Freedom has been assailed time and time again, and has seemed to always triumph. Yet, the mortal enemy of freedom is not communism, it is not totalitarian rule, it is not enslavement of the people—the mortal enemy of freedom, is freedom itself. Freedom, liberty, autonomy—all similes for the seemingly same conception, yet how far from a true definition is the freedom of America? Pure freedom does not free, it enslaves. Freedom with no form of freedom, leads only to selfish autonomy, the state of nature. Yet, we are seeking freedom with no constraints. We are looking for the freedom of buying houses, cars, education, etc., without the form of accountability or responsibility. Banks have handed out loans with no background checks, no proof of income, no accountability, so that Americans can go and dry up every selfish desire. We live in a day and age when materialism rules the world, when instant gratification is the only ‘form’ to our freedom. We are raising children to believe that they need houses, cars, boats, toys like their parents who generally worked many years before being able to afford such things. Automakers are seeking a bailout for the failed industry, a failed industry of gross competition and rivalry, an industry founded on ‘bigger and better’ than the previous year. We are living in a time when our advertisements of ‘gimme, gimme,’ ‘you gotta have, you gotta have,’ are catching up to us as we realize we can’t have everything. People are walking around aimlessly, purposelessly, and indignant of the fact that: form, constraints, boundaries, accountability, no’s, and much more must frame our conception of freedom. Democracy in this light, is not freedom and liberty, it is enslavement.
Since The Fall, man has been driving this downward spiral of luxury, of advancement, of achievement, of ‘needing’ to subdue, and all the while, we have been subdued by that which we were meant to subdue. We cannot live without so much of what we have, yet this is not dominion, it is a form of tyranny, only the enemy isn’t a person, lest we destroy them, it isn’t a country, lest we declare open war, it isn’t an ideal or we would have counter-arguments; it is ourselves. We have become our own worst enemy—and should we believe that what is at the root of this is a sick, demented, and perverted freedom without form. Man was not created to live independent and autonomous—he was meant to be governed by a higher power outside of himself, not by his fickle desires, wants, and passion. This idea of autonomy has infiltrated into the fabric of our being, into our society, our politics, our philosophy, our theology. We are living in a day when we have the great potential to learn that freedom is only as good as the form that encompasses it, and where no form exists, no true freedom exists. We are at the crossroads of perhaps a great awakening, a great change, a reshaping of the world as we know it. It is not too great to think that cultures will soon be uprooted, nations will soon tumble, ideals will shift—this has been and is the way of the world. Yet amongst all of this, the world is looking for something to save, something to liberate, something to free—perhaps even something to rule and govern. We are in a climatic drama of life and who is it that will pull us from the depths of despair? It lies in the Church before a waiting world. If the Church does not act, we potentially give up this momentous opportunity of proclaiming the world. Financial crisis or not, to use the words of Francis Schaffer, ‘The Church Before a Watching World.’ How then should the Church respond? Will the Church respond? Will she rise to this great time and take her ancient prowress as the only hope of a dying world?
Sunday, November 09, 2008
The Kingdom of Democracy, Pt. 2
Barak Obama just won the presidential nomination for the 44th president of the United States. McCain withdrew from the race with the comment that he was yet a servant of the U.S. Obama expressed his excitement in working with both McCain and Palin as he steps into the role as President. Already, it is said his ‘to-do’ list is huge and he is stepping into an economy that is in recession, foreign policies that are murky, and diplomatic relationships that have become tense. Should we pray for Obama? The answer is simply, ‘Yes.’ There is no way of avoiding the fact that God has placed him in the position that he is in to carry out His redemptive purposes.
It is being said that the face of the Democratic Party is/has been changed forever with the election of (an often called Socialist) Obama. On the night of November 4, Obama stated to his rallying crowd in Chicago that he will be a President for all Americans. This is nice of him, considering the fact that when he was candidating it was the Democratic Party—causing serious division between himself and the Republican President. The attempt at ‘reaching across’ party lines is a noble task… but when reality hits, I believe we’ll all see too clearly that this President (like most Presidents) has an agenda of his own, or perhaps a party agenda to push through, in hopes for re-election in 4 years.
Democracy: the lifeblood of government and the political structure of the United States. The democratic process, one in which ‘every vote’ counts and all people are considered equal. In theory, this form of government seems to be a well fit government. No one would deny that it is far better to live under a democracy (or even a Republic) than to live under the tyrannical rule of an oppressive government. Yet, if our hope of life, liberty, and happiness is constituted by a democratic form of government, we have fallen short of what it truly means to have life, liberty, and happiness.
In a recent news article I read that President-elect Obama is stepping into the most powerful position of leadership in the world. On the surface, many of us would agree with this statement. But taking even a moment to reflect on the implications of this, one is clearly led to see that this reaches the epitome of Satanic pride. The truth, the reality of the Presidential office, is not that it is the most powerful office in the world. I can’t help but think of the Isaiah 14 and the day star who attempted to usurp God from His rightful throne through his vain pride. Obama is no ‘vicar of God.’ No President in the course of American history has ever ‘ruled’ the most powerful office in the world. That office belongs to the King and the King alone. Obama will be nothing more than a tool that the great King will use to bring about His redemptive purposes… which ironically, Revelation doesn’t shed ‘positive, affirmative, golden-age’ adjectives too. The redemptive purposes, so far as the Bible has laid out, is a purpose of catapulting the world into more chaos, turmoil, and distress. Not to mention the death of myriads of the King’s followers. Obama is no messiah. He will not, contrary to popular vote, bring back a ‘golden-age’ to America. America is doomed. Its fate has been sealed. It too, will perish in the winds of time and be scattered to the wind; perhaps not by an enemy ab extra, but an enemy within, but it will be destroyed none-the-less.
When considering democracy, when considering American legislation and government, we should remember, learn, and understand that freedom without form is tyranny. This we will address in a later post. The world is watching and waiting. Democracy as we know it, the democracy of Barak Obama (of both Republicans and Democrats) is largely a democracy without form—an enslavement of the American people and the world at large.
It is being said that the face of the Democratic Party is/has been changed forever with the election of (an often called Socialist) Obama. On the night of November 4, Obama stated to his rallying crowd in Chicago that he will be a President for all Americans. This is nice of him, considering the fact that when he was candidating it was the Democratic Party—causing serious division between himself and the Republican President. The attempt at ‘reaching across’ party lines is a noble task… but when reality hits, I believe we’ll all see too clearly that this President (like most Presidents) has an agenda of his own, or perhaps a party agenda to push through, in hopes for re-election in 4 years.
Democracy: the lifeblood of government and the political structure of the United States. The democratic process, one in which ‘every vote’ counts and all people are considered equal. In theory, this form of government seems to be a well fit government. No one would deny that it is far better to live under a democracy (or even a Republic) than to live under the tyrannical rule of an oppressive government. Yet, if our hope of life, liberty, and happiness is constituted by a democratic form of government, we have fallen short of what it truly means to have life, liberty, and happiness.
In a recent news article I read that President-elect Obama is stepping into the most powerful position of leadership in the world. On the surface, many of us would agree with this statement. But taking even a moment to reflect on the implications of this, one is clearly led to see that this reaches the epitome of Satanic pride. The truth, the reality of the Presidential office, is not that it is the most powerful office in the world. I can’t help but think of the Isaiah 14 and the day star who attempted to usurp God from His rightful throne through his vain pride. Obama is no ‘vicar of God.’ No President in the course of American history has ever ‘ruled’ the most powerful office in the world. That office belongs to the King and the King alone. Obama will be nothing more than a tool that the great King will use to bring about His redemptive purposes… which ironically, Revelation doesn’t shed ‘positive, affirmative, golden-age’ adjectives too. The redemptive purposes, so far as the Bible has laid out, is a purpose of catapulting the world into more chaos, turmoil, and distress. Not to mention the death of myriads of the King’s followers. Obama is no messiah. He will not, contrary to popular vote, bring back a ‘golden-age’ to America. America is doomed. Its fate has been sealed. It too, will perish in the winds of time and be scattered to the wind; perhaps not by an enemy ab extra, but an enemy within, but it will be destroyed none-the-less.
When considering democracy, when considering American legislation and government, we should remember, learn, and understand that freedom without form is tyranny. This we will address in a later post. The world is watching and waiting. Democracy as we know it, the democracy of Barak Obama (of both Republicans and Democrats) is largely a democracy without form—an enslavement of the American people and the world at large.
Friday, October 03, 2008
Self-Esteem
Have you ever wondered at those people who want to tell others that they are special, unique, and individuals in the sight of God? I've always wanted to ask these people, 'Why then does the Bible use such "non-self-esteeming" language to describe the reality of the human soul?'
I've been perplexed where we lost sight of the fact that there isn't anything as a healthy self-esteem that is positive, uplifting, and affirmative of one's nature. How much has pop-psychology infiltrated the way we are to view anthropology? The Bible is clear on what we are before we are united to Christ. The Bible uses all sorts of vibrant and offensive language to tell us what we are truly like.
These are just the late night thoughts of my mind.
I've been perplexed where we lost sight of the fact that there isn't anything as a healthy self-esteem that is positive, uplifting, and affirmative of one's nature. How much has pop-psychology infiltrated the way we are to view anthropology? The Bible is clear on what we are before we are united to Christ. The Bible uses all sorts of vibrant and offensive language to tell us what we are truly like.
These are just the late night thoughts of my mind.
The Parable of the Minas
In our family devotions, we recently read the parable of the minas found in Luke 19. We were greatly encouraged by this parable and the requirement of faith that seems to under-gird the whole parable.
We spent a lot of time talking about the master's return and his claiming of the money from his three servants. Back in Biblical days, a mina was worth approximately 3 months wage for a common laborer. Another Gospel records a denarii which was about 20 years worth of wages. The interesting thing about this, is that it is no small amount in either Gospel, rather it is quite a bit of money.
When the master returns he requires the minas from the hands of his servants. The first servant, who had received 10 minas, gave back 20. The second servant who had received 5, gave back 10. Yet the third one, in fear of being rejected by the master, knowing that he was a shrewd man, gave him back his one. He didn't gamble or take any chances with the mina; but returned to the master the same that he had received.
The master in turn praises the first two servants and makes them authorities over cities. He says, 'You have been found faithful with a little, now you will be entrusted with a lot.' But when it comes time to pay back the third servant, the master in a fit of rage tells the servant he should have at least invested it into a bank and gathered interest with the wages. He takes away the one mina and gives it to the man who has ten. He then says to bring all those who did not desire him to rule over them, so that he might kill them.
Lots can be drawn from this parable. But the one key thing that I want to bring out, is that the third servant, perhaps, thought he was offering and rendering up service to the master. He states that he knew the master, that he was a shrewd man. And in light of who the master was, he wanted to make sure he had all the money when his master returned. But the master is not satisfied with this-- he demanded more from the servants than merely having his gift returned.
What I think we can learn and apply to our own lives, is that in view of God, it does not simply help to know 'of' God. And more importantly, God has required, or demanded, from his servants very specific things (namely faith). Now it is not going to do anyone good to come before the Lord and offer their best efforts, subjective faith, or anything of the like. The Lord has required much from us, and we are to give everything to Him in an act of joyful obedience. We approach God on God's terms, not on our own. We give to God, what God requires of us. He isn't pleased with the simple conjuring thoughts of man. He isn't pleased with simple humanitarian efforts. What pleases God is a faith-- knowing that He is and that He gives rewards. The only way to approach God and offer an acceptable offering to God, comes through the blood of Jesus Christ alone. There is no other way we can approach the Throne and assail it for grace. Our own works righteousness will fall to the ground, and like the men who did not want the master to reign over them, He will cause us all to be condemned. May we remember, that we only approach God as God wants to be approached.
We spent a lot of time talking about the master's return and his claiming of the money from his three servants. Back in Biblical days, a mina was worth approximately 3 months wage for a common laborer. Another Gospel records a denarii which was about 20 years worth of wages. The interesting thing about this, is that it is no small amount in either Gospel, rather it is quite a bit of money.
When the master returns he requires the minas from the hands of his servants. The first servant, who had received 10 minas, gave back 20. The second servant who had received 5, gave back 10. Yet the third one, in fear of being rejected by the master, knowing that he was a shrewd man, gave him back his one. He didn't gamble or take any chances with the mina; but returned to the master the same that he had received.
The master in turn praises the first two servants and makes them authorities over cities. He says, 'You have been found faithful with a little, now you will be entrusted with a lot.' But when it comes time to pay back the third servant, the master in a fit of rage tells the servant he should have at least invested it into a bank and gathered interest with the wages. He takes away the one mina and gives it to the man who has ten. He then says to bring all those who did not desire him to rule over them, so that he might kill them.
Lots can be drawn from this parable. But the one key thing that I want to bring out, is that the third servant, perhaps, thought he was offering and rendering up service to the master. He states that he knew the master, that he was a shrewd man. And in light of who the master was, he wanted to make sure he had all the money when his master returned. But the master is not satisfied with this-- he demanded more from the servants than merely having his gift returned.
What I think we can learn and apply to our own lives, is that in view of God, it does not simply help to know 'of' God. And more importantly, God has required, or demanded, from his servants very specific things (namely faith). Now it is not going to do anyone good to come before the Lord and offer their best efforts, subjective faith, or anything of the like. The Lord has required much from us, and we are to give everything to Him in an act of joyful obedience. We approach God on God's terms, not on our own. We give to God, what God requires of us. He isn't pleased with the simple conjuring thoughts of man. He isn't pleased with simple humanitarian efforts. What pleases God is a faith-- knowing that He is and that He gives rewards. The only way to approach God and offer an acceptable offering to God, comes through the blood of Jesus Christ alone. There is no other way we can approach the Throne and assail it for grace. Our own works righteousness will fall to the ground, and like the men who did not want the master to reign over them, He will cause us all to be condemned. May we remember, that we only approach God as God wants to be approached.
Friday, August 15, 2008
The Purity of Words
12:1 'Save, O Lord, for the godly one is gone;
for the faithful have vanished from among the children of man.
2 Everyone utters lies to his neighbor;
with flattering lips and a double heart they speak.
3 May the Lord cut off all flattering lips,
the tongue that makes great boasts,
4 those who say, “With our tongue we will prevail,
our lips are with us; who is master over us?”
5 “Because the poor are plundered, because the needy groan,
I will now arise,” says the Lord;
“I will place him in the safety for which he longs.”
6 The words of the Lord are pure words,
like silver refined in a furnace on the ground,
purified seven times.
7 You, O Lord, will keep them;
you will guard us from this generation forever.
8 On every side the wicked prowl,
as vileness is exalted among the children of man.'
This psalm seems to be divided into four sections; vss. 1,2; 3,4; 5,6; 7,8. As is typical with the Psalmist, he first delivers a crying petition for the salvation of YHWH (vss. 1, 2). This is then met with a prayer against those who misuse their lips (vss. 3, 4). Then YHWH responds to David's prayers, He answers it and gives the reasons for His actions (5, 6). Finally, we have what I believe is a response of faith from David to the working of the LORD.
David pleads for salvation from God. He cries out in anguish of heart at the loss of the faithful of the LORD. The people have turned aside from the LORD and followed the vanities of their own deceitful lips. It is the sin of speaking that is introduced in this Psalm, and this theme is recapitulated throughout the entire Psalm. 'With flattering lips and a double heart they speak.' David knows of the bitter gall that a flattering tongue can have. The son of Jesse knew more often the wrath of Saul, only to have Saul respond with, 'David my son,' and pretend to love him as such. Flattering lips and a lying tongue are an abomination to the LORD, and as Christ tells us, 'Out of the overflow of the heart the mouth speaks.' So too, David draws on the reality of their sin. It is not so much that their words are impure, as their hearts are stirring up all sorts of evil to flow from their mouths. Their mouths are a clear mirror into the state of their hearts, and in the Psalmists mind, they are double hearted; meaning they are hypocrites. They are of those who with their tongues, 'Bless the LORD and speak evil to their neighbor.'
David responds with a prayer of condemnation against those who thus sin. David asks the LORD to 'cut off all flattering lips, and the tongue that makes great boasts.' David calls down a curse upon those who have turned aside to their own boasts and those who have put confidence in their own abilities. They are claiming to be masters of their own lips, overconfident they don't realize that their lips have mastered them. David asks the LORD to destroy those who speak lies, who boast, who have trusted in their own abilities. This mindset we too should have. If only we might be so vehement in cursing everything that keeps us from Christ and honoring His Name. David saw rightly, when a man lies, it is not the hearers he is primarily sinning against, it is the LORD. It is casting God off of the throne and setting a new standard of holy living, it is disregarding the beautiful and precious laws of YHWH given to His holy people. For this, only curses hang over the sinners head.
In this Psalm we hear the LORD responding to the prayer of David. The LORD says that He will arise. As a King suited for battle, so the LORD will rise from His throne to put down the cursed rebellion of those who lie against the LORD with their lips. He will see the oppression of the people and will not remain silent. Though His justice may tarry for awhile, we can be assured that it is coming, and when it does, not even the angels will be able to keep back His fury. But mark what David immediately says of the LORD, 'The words of the LORD are pure words, like silver refined in a furnace on the ground, purified seven times.' The extremity of the people's sin comes from the fact that the LORD's words are pure. The voice of the LORD is pure, it speaks truth, it is spoken in holiness and uprightness; it aims at His own glory in all things. The voice of the LORD is purified seven times; a poetic expression to describe the vast holiness of the LORD's words. For silver to be purified seven times would mean that no dross, no taint, no remnant of imperfection would exist within its bullion-- pure silver. So too, the LORD's words are pure-- no taint of imperfection, no dross, no disillusionment. Everything about the LORD's words are true, upright, and holy. This means that the LORD's words can also be trusted. They have been tried and are found true. Not only is the promise of the LORD in the preceding verse to be true, but all of the words of the LORD are true. They can be relied upon.
It is with this assurance of the steadfast faithfulness of the LORD's words, that David closes this verse with a prayer of confidence and faith in the LORD. The LORD's protection against the wicked and perverse generation is known by David and he is confident that He who promised is able to perform. David can have faith that God will do what God has promised, because the LORD's words are pure and holy.
Now the thought of the LORD's words should spur us on to have speech that is beyond reproach in all things. This Psalm, overall, teaches us that words are important. Why are they important? They are important because they, (1) Reflect our heart, but (2) and more importantly, because they reflect our trust in the reality of the LORD's words. When we sin with our lips, it is against the lips of the LORD that we sin. When we lie, slander, gossip, malign, speak perversely or abuse others with our words; it is making little of the word of the LORD. It is not holding the value of God's word to be true and it is not trusting His words with our words.
Now when we hear of the words of the LORD being refined seven times, and we are wondering what practical application this can have on our daily lives, it is important to see Christ in this passage. Not only are the words of God refined and purified, but the very words of Christ are. They are a sure and steadfast promise of salvation and reprobation, of the coming Kingdom and the destruction of the kingdom of darkness. These verses speak to the reality of Christ's words, 'On whose lips no deceit was found.' Jesus spoke the truth. He spoke words that were consistently edifying, sharpening, and refining. His words were words of assurance and promises and communicating Himself in grace to people. The joy of this passage, is that we see that God speaks. That He has words. That His words are pure and holy. The Christ, the Word, is also as such. We rejoice that where man has failed, namely in the speaking of his lips and the devotion of his heart, Christ has succeeded. That He has spoken every right word, not to man only, but to God on our behalf, that we who are unrighteous might be made the very righteousness of God in Him.
And it is because of this, that we as Christians are to have pure words. If we listen to the voice of the Psalmist, and if we are to emulate Christ, we are to have words that are 'refined seven times.' This expression is used to show, as we stated above, the absolute holiness of our words. They are to be pure, tested, and tried. They are to be refined seven times, having no hint of evil or wickedness. Refined speech that is uplifting, edifying, encouraging at all times. Our tongues, as James says, are set on fire by hell; yet this too can be redeemed if we harness our mouths, if we have self-control over what we say. We want our words to not just glorify God mostly, or sometimes; but at all times we want to magnify the LORD (Psalm 34:1, 2).
for the faithful have vanished from among the children of man.
2 Everyone utters lies to his neighbor;
with flattering lips and a double heart they speak.
3 May the Lord cut off all flattering lips,
the tongue that makes great boasts,
4 those who say, “With our tongue we will prevail,
our lips are with us; who is master over us?”
5 “Because the poor are plundered, because the needy groan,
I will now arise,” says the Lord;
“I will place him in the safety for which he longs.”
6 The words of the Lord are pure words,
like silver refined in a furnace on the ground,
purified seven times.
7 You, O Lord, will keep them;
you will guard us from this generation forever.
8 On every side the wicked prowl,
as vileness is exalted among the children of man.'
This psalm seems to be divided into four sections; vss. 1,2; 3,4; 5,6; 7,8. As is typical with the Psalmist, he first delivers a crying petition for the salvation of YHWH (vss. 1, 2). This is then met with a prayer against those who misuse their lips (vss. 3, 4). Then YHWH responds to David's prayers, He answers it and gives the reasons for His actions (5, 6). Finally, we have what I believe is a response of faith from David to the working of the LORD.
David pleads for salvation from God. He cries out in anguish of heart at the loss of the faithful of the LORD. The people have turned aside from the LORD and followed the vanities of their own deceitful lips. It is the sin of speaking that is introduced in this Psalm, and this theme is recapitulated throughout the entire Psalm. 'With flattering lips and a double heart they speak.' David knows of the bitter gall that a flattering tongue can have. The son of Jesse knew more often the wrath of Saul, only to have Saul respond with, 'David my son,' and pretend to love him as such. Flattering lips and a lying tongue are an abomination to the LORD, and as Christ tells us, 'Out of the overflow of the heart the mouth speaks.' So too, David draws on the reality of their sin. It is not so much that their words are impure, as their hearts are stirring up all sorts of evil to flow from their mouths. Their mouths are a clear mirror into the state of their hearts, and in the Psalmists mind, they are double hearted; meaning they are hypocrites. They are of those who with their tongues, 'Bless the LORD and speak evil to their neighbor.'
David responds with a prayer of condemnation against those who thus sin. David asks the LORD to 'cut off all flattering lips, and the tongue that makes great boasts.' David calls down a curse upon those who have turned aside to their own boasts and those who have put confidence in their own abilities. They are claiming to be masters of their own lips, overconfident they don't realize that their lips have mastered them. David asks the LORD to destroy those who speak lies, who boast, who have trusted in their own abilities. This mindset we too should have. If only we might be so vehement in cursing everything that keeps us from Christ and honoring His Name. David saw rightly, when a man lies, it is not the hearers he is primarily sinning against, it is the LORD. It is casting God off of the throne and setting a new standard of holy living, it is disregarding the beautiful and precious laws of YHWH given to His holy people. For this, only curses hang over the sinners head.
In this Psalm we hear the LORD responding to the prayer of David. The LORD says that He will arise. As a King suited for battle, so the LORD will rise from His throne to put down the cursed rebellion of those who lie against the LORD with their lips. He will see the oppression of the people and will not remain silent. Though His justice may tarry for awhile, we can be assured that it is coming, and when it does, not even the angels will be able to keep back His fury. But mark what David immediately says of the LORD, 'The words of the LORD are pure words, like silver refined in a furnace on the ground, purified seven times.' The extremity of the people's sin comes from the fact that the LORD's words are pure. The voice of the LORD is pure, it speaks truth, it is spoken in holiness and uprightness; it aims at His own glory in all things. The voice of the LORD is purified seven times; a poetic expression to describe the vast holiness of the LORD's words. For silver to be purified seven times would mean that no dross, no taint, no remnant of imperfection would exist within its bullion-- pure silver. So too, the LORD's words are pure-- no taint of imperfection, no dross, no disillusionment. Everything about the LORD's words are true, upright, and holy. This means that the LORD's words can also be trusted. They have been tried and are found true. Not only is the promise of the LORD in the preceding verse to be true, but all of the words of the LORD are true. They can be relied upon.
It is with this assurance of the steadfast faithfulness of the LORD's words, that David closes this verse with a prayer of confidence and faith in the LORD. The LORD's protection against the wicked and perverse generation is known by David and he is confident that He who promised is able to perform. David can have faith that God will do what God has promised, because the LORD's words are pure and holy.
Now the thought of the LORD's words should spur us on to have speech that is beyond reproach in all things. This Psalm, overall, teaches us that words are important. Why are they important? They are important because they, (1) Reflect our heart, but (2) and more importantly, because they reflect our trust in the reality of the LORD's words. When we sin with our lips, it is against the lips of the LORD that we sin. When we lie, slander, gossip, malign, speak perversely or abuse others with our words; it is making little of the word of the LORD. It is not holding the value of God's word to be true and it is not trusting His words with our words.
Now when we hear of the words of the LORD being refined seven times, and we are wondering what practical application this can have on our daily lives, it is important to see Christ in this passage. Not only are the words of God refined and purified, but the very words of Christ are. They are a sure and steadfast promise of salvation and reprobation, of the coming Kingdom and the destruction of the kingdom of darkness. These verses speak to the reality of Christ's words, 'On whose lips no deceit was found.' Jesus spoke the truth. He spoke words that were consistently edifying, sharpening, and refining. His words were words of assurance and promises and communicating Himself in grace to people. The joy of this passage, is that we see that God speaks. That He has words. That His words are pure and holy. The Christ, the Word, is also as such. We rejoice that where man has failed, namely in the speaking of his lips and the devotion of his heart, Christ has succeeded. That He has spoken every right word, not to man only, but to God on our behalf, that we who are unrighteous might be made the very righteousness of God in Him.
And it is because of this, that we as Christians are to have pure words. If we listen to the voice of the Psalmist, and if we are to emulate Christ, we are to have words that are 'refined seven times.' This expression is used to show, as we stated above, the absolute holiness of our words. They are to be pure, tested, and tried. They are to be refined seven times, having no hint of evil or wickedness. Refined speech that is uplifting, edifying, encouraging at all times. Our tongues, as James says, are set on fire by hell; yet this too can be redeemed if we harness our mouths, if we have self-control over what we say. We want our words to not just glorify God mostly, or sometimes; but at all times we want to magnify the LORD (Psalm 34:1, 2).
The Kingdom of Democracy Pt. 1
As I sit here, its Friday night. We have just heard the Friday night prayers that are heard city-wide. They tend to go longer these nights. We are also looking forward to celebrating our first independence day. It is ushered in with lots of fireworks blasting in the streets. From my knowledge, this country gained independence from J---- within the last century. The I---------- rose up against the J------- to gain it and thus they have celebrated the freedom of a (quasi-) democratic state.
As I sat in on some classes the other day, the teacher led a discussion revolving around the Roman Republic. Though she gave more insight from a democratic state, she asked the students to think why they should vote. For their own good, or for the good of the state; perhaps the summum bunom. She also asked the students if something akin to a democracy is what is the best form of government.
America just celebrated her 232 birthday last month. The presidential elections are in full swing now. Barak Obama and Hilary Clinton will face off in the DNC in September. The slogan I read about today was that they want to 'unite the party' and that the millions of votes cast for Hilary would be 'listened to;' the mantra of democratic America. This election has seen, so I am told, an unprecedented challenge as thought-to-be-underdog McCain and first-African-American-presidential-nominee-of-a-major-party Obama face off in the last few months of their campaigns. A campaign that stresses and urges, 'Every Vote Counts.' Freedom is never free, and 'life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness' are the core ethics which the United States was built upon.
I recently finished taking my TEFL (Teaching English as a Foreign Language) Certificate through online classes with the London Teachers Training College. I paid them $325 and received a 115 page manual of how to teach English to students. It was a surprise to me that they suggested children not be punished, and that a teacher shouldn't lecture-- these things don't favor a democratic classroom. Instead, teachers need to facilitate and discipline isn't a means to and end. The classroom needs to make every child feel special, like they count.
I don't have anything against Democracy; I rather like it. I am thankful for the men and women who died to purchase a democratic freedom for me. I am grateful to my grandfather and all those who have fought in wars to keep liberty. I hope no one misunderstands me. Democracy is, I believe, the greatest man-made form of government out there. But that is what it is, 'man-made.'
It is interesting to me to see how democracy, liberty, individual votes have infiltrated everything in our society. Whether it be social functions, politics, schools, even Churches-- everything is drawing closer to a democratic form of rule. Authority and submission rarely have a place in our public schools or work places. Men and women are fighting about equal rights in and out of the home-sphere, and on and on the list could go. The wars of our recent past have been done in the honor and name of spreading democracy to foreign countries that have not known a democratic form of government in the history (which is longer than America's) of their existence. What are we to make of this?
My thought is, is that we are making democracy into the Gospel of the present day. Many men and women gladly (and I admire them) lay down their lives for the sake of democracy. Those caught up in social welfare are preaching equality and liberty and stopping the oppression of the needy (good things when viewed as being a means). Little school children are learning of the earnestness of spreading freedom values, and our conception of freedom has changed from submission and servanthood, to a freedom from all boundaries. Not even in Church (Protestants) can we have authoritarian rule, but we cast the majority vote. The lens through which we are interpreting life is democracy. The message of freedom we have for people is freedom from oppressive governments, social injustices, and inhumane treatments.
This leaves me with the begging question, 'Why?' Why is this what we hold dear? Is this the hope of a nation? Is this a comfort to people who are being oppressed? Why is democracy viewed as the end-all of governments and people? These are questions I would like to address in a series of blog posts as I am unwrapping this theme of democracy in my mind. I welcome challenges, agreements, and disagreements. I am a pilgrim on a journey. I am thankful that I am a pilgrim. I am thankful that I am on a journey. Being thus, I don't have all the answers, nor have I arrived.
As I sat in on some classes the other day, the teacher led a discussion revolving around the Roman Republic. Though she gave more insight from a democratic state, she asked the students to think why they should vote. For their own good, or for the good of the state; perhaps the summum bunom. She also asked the students if something akin to a democracy is what is the best form of government.
America just celebrated her 232 birthday last month. The presidential elections are in full swing now. Barak Obama and Hilary Clinton will face off in the DNC in September. The slogan I read about today was that they want to 'unite the party' and that the millions of votes cast for Hilary would be 'listened to;' the mantra of democratic America. This election has seen, so I am told, an unprecedented challenge as thought-to-be-underdog McCain and first-African-American-presidential-nominee-of-a-major-party Obama face off in the last few months of their campaigns. A campaign that stresses and urges, 'Every Vote Counts.' Freedom is never free, and 'life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness' are the core ethics which the United States was built upon.
I recently finished taking my TEFL (Teaching English as a Foreign Language) Certificate through online classes with the London Teachers Training College. I paid them $325 and received a 115 page manual of how to teach English to students. It was a surprise to me that they suggested children not be punished, and that a teacher shouldn't lecture-- these things don't favor a democratic classroom. Instead, teachers need to facilitate and discipline isn't a means to and end. The classroom needs to make every child feel special, like they count.
I don't have anything against Democracy; I rather like it. I am thankful for the men and women who died to purchase a democratic freedom for me. I am grateful to my grandfather and all those who have fought in wars to keep liberty. I hope no one misunderstands me. Democracy is, I believe, the greatest man-made form of government out there. But that is what it is, 'man-made.'
It is interesting to me to see how democracy, liberty, individual votes have infiltrated everything in our society. Whether it be social functions, politics, schools, even Churches-- everything is drawing closer to a democratic form of rule. Authority and submission rarely have a place in our public schools or work places. Men and women are fighting about equal rights in and out of the home-sphere, and on and on the list could go. The wars of our recent past have been done in the honor and name of spreading democracy to foreign countries that have not known a democratic form of government in the history (which is longer than America's) of their existence. What are we to make of this?
My thought is, is that we are making democracy into the Gospel of the present day. Many men and women gladly (and I admire them) lay down their lives for the sake of democracy. Those caught up in social welfare are preaching equality and liberty and stopping the oppression of the needy (good things when viewed as being a means). Little school children are learning of the earnestness of spreading freedom values, and our conception of freedom has changed from submission and servanthood, to a freedom from all boundaries. Not even in Church (Protestants) can we have authoritarian rule, but we cast the majority vote. The lens through which we are interpreting life is democracy. The message of freedom we have for people is freedom from oppressive governments, social injustices, and inhumane treatments.
This leaves me with the begging question, 'Why?' Why is this what we hold dear? Is this the hope of a nation? Is this a comfort to people who are being oppressed? Why is democracy viewed as the end-all of governments and people? These are questions I would like to address in a series of blog posts as I am unwrapping this theme of democracy in my mind. I welcome challenges, agreements, and disagreements. I am a pilgrim on a journey. I am thankful that I am a pilgrim. I am thankful that I am on a journey. Being thus, I don't have all the answers, nor have I arrived.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)