I apologize for any offense I might have caused by my statement about Christianity and decision making. Of course I figured I'd get backlash considering I don't know anyone that reads this that isn't Christian - but I think the problem is that I may have been unclear. I will grant that members of the 44% can have good policies for the environment or toward progress. This must be true, as long as all presidents aren't lying to us because, unless I'm mistaken, every president in at least the last 100 years have been "avowed" christians, and yet we've had progress. That being said I still hold that a true belief, not a hope, a belief that Jesus will in fact return in the next 50 or so years is not compatible with coming to good, lasting solutions for present or future problems. I would argue that when someone attests to truly hold such a belief as that, and yet does propose constructive solutions, this is because of a disconnect in belief or them being in fact less sure of this idea than they're claiming.
For one, according to a literal reading of Revelation, the world has to break down and slip into chaos in so many areas in order for Jesus's return to happen. I can only speak for myself, but I do in fact remember telling someone several years ago, when a suicide bomber drove a boat full of bombs into a US Ship anchored...somewhere in the Middle East...that yes it's sad, but in a way it's exciting because it is setting up for the end times and Jesus's return, with everything going on over there in the "sand box." At that time I would have considered myself a fundamentalist, not quite an extremist. Among fundamentalists at the very least I really don't think I was alone in this sentiment. So to some people the collapse of civilization is in fact cause for celebration. These people are on the fringe, of course, but I don't think that everyday Christians can help but see at least some silver lining in similar, especially Middle-eastern, events. At the very least, I don't think we want these fringe individuals making world decisions - or environmental decisions for that matter, seeing as the worst for those of us on earth, could very well be the best to get Jesus back here.
Secondly, if you are truly positive that Jesus will return in the next 50 years(which is the situation of 22 of the 44%, the other 22 being "reasonably convinced") what motivation could you possibly have for fixing the world's problems? If I knew my house was being bulldozed next week, my vaccum would be one of the first things I'd pack. I may make provisional solutions - but ozone depletion, overfishing, oil spills, global warming - there will be no my children's children's children to suffer from these things anyway. So I will grant that it is a generalization for me to say that none should have a say in the future, and I will again reiterate that I don't think any of you who are reading this truly believe Jesus will - not may or I hope he will - come in the next 50 years. I'm guessing this is the case with many people (otherwise what could their reason possibly be for wanting to improve anything if it's all gonna burn inside 50 years anyway). So people in that 44% could make decent decisions regarding the future - However, that is due to being unsecure in the belief of Jesus's imminent return, not because of a possible harmony between the belief and good decision making.
Regarding atheists: I think it's important to learn more than propaganda regarding what atheists really think. This is a good general article about what atheists position regarding a lot of the things I see brought up. Obviously it doesn't represent ALL atheists points of view but it's fairly representative. In regards to an atheist getting elected (I'm responding specifically to my dad's comment now), at this point that seems almost impossible. So no worries.
6 comments:
Yay... I am not really celebrating about Darfur or AIDS in Africa or when those bastards crashed their planes into the World Trade Center... yep, not one bit. I think it is a little sad and pathetic that people find this stuff exciting... It breaks my heart and it breaks God's heart.
I'd like to see the data on the Poll about people being "convinced" or "reasonably sure" that Jesus will return in their lifetime. Those numbers seem pretty high if using those strong terms. Even so, I can be convinced or reasonably sure that I'm going to die in the next 15 years, but that doesn't dissuade me from taking care of myself in the event that the scenario doesn't turn out the way I expected.
There's this silly ancient Hebrew concept, and it goes like this:
We see violence and injustice all around us. We were created as good, but our hearts have turned to evil. This evil is so great that only God could save us. When we are taken captive, we will believe God will send a deliverer, a Messiah. He will come to his rule in peace, riding on a donkey and enter the eastern gate of the temple. His kingdom will be a just kingdom. He will be the Son of God, lit. the king.
The view from which the Church developed her christology (lit. study of the Messiah) is rooted in this concept. The New Testament does not teach a sneaky Jesus who comes in and steals a few souls away to some ethereal realm while burning the earth in fire. No, in fact it teaches a Messiah who will not suffer the death of his saints any longer. He has come, he has proclaimed the kingdom of God, he was put to death for it, he was resurrected from the dead (ensuing the New Creation), he gave out his spirit to work out the New Creation, and he will come to reign with justice.
This belief, widely held throughout church history and around the world today, believes caring for the creation is necessary, as Jesus will come to reign over it. There's a parable about servants who are given stewardship over some talents while their master leaves the country. When he comes back, they will be rewarded based on their stewardship.
I think you're right. If you believe that Jesus is coming, stealing some souls away, and burning the earth up, there's no point in caring for creation, or for your body. If, however, a person lets the New Testament speak apart from popular works of Christian fiction, she might find it teaches something very different.
Sorry, that's really long.
For the most part, I agree with you "aaahhh," whoever you may be. But I think that you're missing the point. Although you believe you have a sound doctrine built off of the new testament, and believe that your doctrine is the only correct one, or at least a reasonable one, others do not. What people specifically believe is very important, and by saying "That may be hard for a Christian to believe," in my first post, I fear I may have applied too broad of a term. Allow me to clarify.
There are, of course, crusading christians, "God hates fags/soldiers" Christians, Pat Robertson Christians, etc. I'm sure you disagree with these groups, but they are groups with their beliefs built off the same book that yours is, and I think that's why you, along with a lot of other people, feel the need to defend them. However, they draw different conclusions from that book - many of which are diametrically opposed to yours. In this area, they are, therefore, as different from you as are Jews or Muslims. So let me add to the term "Christians," that I am using, the caveat ":that believe these specific things (see the post you commented on for more clarification on this point)." I am not suggesting the validity of their position as a correct interpretation of the Bible any more that I am with yours. I am merely commenting on the consequences of the beliefs they hold - justified or not. So expounding what your church or theology book believes is the correct interpretation is not a correct approach - I don't care about what Biblical Hermaeutics says, I care about what the 700 club is saying. Your fight is with the people my fight is with, so we're allies of sorts, in this specific arena. Give them this speech and you may have a point, but with what I've said, you're just chasing a red herring.
Sorry, I forgot to sign my comment!
Thanks for clarifying; I didn't see your distinction. I wanted to make sure there was another voice being heard.
Still, and yes I like my herring red, there is a beauty to the whole concept of the new creation... a real hope. :-) Besides, I'm not so sure the slope is any less slippery for anyone else. Would you post something on why you personally believe people should be more ecologically concerned?
Peace and love,
Jonathan B.
"If I knew my house was being bulldozed next week, my vaccum would be one of the first things I'd pack."
This is one of the most succinct statements I've read made about people who don't believe we're going to be around much longer wading around in the voting pool.
P.S. The archives are nice and all, but really. Renaissance Soul has been up for about fifty kajillion years, now... come on, a lolcat picture of the Professor, as inane as both you and he might find the practice, would be welcomed at this point. :)
Post a Comment