Philosophos: Returning to our discussion of government, why don’t we now turn to the question of whether a government should be ruled by men or by law?
Nomodiphas: Not that I can explain why, but I think that it is pretty obvious that a government should be run by laws and not men.
Philosophos: Well if it is so obvious there must be some reason behind your assumption.
Nomodiphas: I am sure there is—it is just that this seems to be one of those basic principles we simply take for granted. Our country from its inception has been one ruled by laws and not men. I just can’t see how there could be any advantage to a rule by a man and not laws.
Philosophos: Consider what types of people are ruled by men. Within a tribe people follow the chief. It is similar with warring nomadic types; there the people follow the strongest warrior. What is common in both of these social structures?
Nomodiphas: Uncertainty?
Philosophos: Explain.
Nomodiphas: When I think of tribal and warring nomadic people I assume that most of them are pre-literate. So for starters it is impossible for them to keep a written law code. But this does not rule out an oral law code. Yet these groups are always on the move and generally live hand to mouth so they lack the leisure time needed to contemplate good laws—they generally follow the traditions that have served them best in the past. The counter argument to that of course is that men don’t need leisure time to contemplate the making of good laws for all men intuitively know what is good and evil.
However I think the most crucial reason that some are ruled by men and not laws is the uncertainty and the chaotic state of their existence. Tribal and nomadic peoples live in makeshift shelters that do little to shield them from the elements. These shelters offer little protection from neighboring tribes so they are in a constant state of war—or at least war is a constant possibility. They don’t live in well ordered, predictable cities. They live among nature and other unpredictable humans. For that reason chaos and disaster is always a very real possibility. In times of chaos having a wise, decisive individual is the best chance a group has for survival. There is no time to consult traditions, law, or history. Each situation is new and the person best adept to lead and navigate through these unpredictable times will naturally rise to the rank of leader. This is the advantage of the rule of a man. It is needed in situations where groups of people live in uncertainty and need a single, decisive individual to navigate them through their numerous periods of uncertainty.
Philosophos: Indeed, in a time of no government everyman is enemy to every man. The only security man lives with is the security that his own strength and invention provides. As Hobbes wrote, “In such condition, there is no place for Industry; because the fruit therefore is uncertain: and consequently no Culture of the Earth; no Navigation, nor use of the commodities that may be imported by Sea; no commodious Building; no Instruments of moving, and removing such things as require much force; no Knowledge of the face of the Earth; no account of Time; no Arts; no Letters; no Society; and which is worst of all, continuall feare, and danger of violent death; And the life of man, solitary, poore, nasty, brutish, and short.” In these times of chaos a well ordered government of laws cannot exist, people instead follow leaders who provide them with the best chance of survival.
You are exactly right to conclude that in times of chaos and uncertainty people turn to men and not laws. Consider the Pax Romana. During this long period of Roman peace most of Europe existed in a peaceful, predictable state. True there were wars, but these were on the frontier of the empire. France, Britain, Spain, North Africa, Greece, and Italy lived in peace and security for centuries. The countryside was secure, producing a predictable surplus of food. This surplus of food allowed men to become educated and engage in other trades. In this time of peace and predictability art, literature, learning, and trade all flourished. Because of this predictability and certainty there was no need for rule by a man.
But beginning in the fourth century this order began to unravel. Hundreds of thousands of German barbarians poured across the Rhine and into Roman lands: the Anglos and Saxons to Britain, the Vandals to Africa, the Visigoths to Spain, the Franks to France—Rome itself was sacked by Alaric the Goth in 410. These invasions shattered the certainty and order of the Roman Empire. The predictability that peace brought faded with the destruction of order. People fled to whatever stronghold they could for protection. The wealthy individuals that owned these strongholds quickly filled the power vacuum left by the breakdown of the empire. Each estate became a law unto itself.
The centuries that followed were filled with constant warfare between these small kingdoms. Similar to tribal conditions, these men existed in a state of constant uncertainty and chaos. This state of uncertainty once again necessitated the rule of one man—the local king, duke, knight, prince, noble—whatever he may be called. A time of uncertainty necessitates a strong ruler, not good laws, to protect the people for chaotic conditions require decisive actions. At that time there was no Spain, but there was instead a collection of autonomous regions: Castile, Leon, Aragon, Valencia, etc. The same was true with France. There was no France, but rather Normandy, Picardy, Auverrgne, Burgundy, Lorraine, etc. This situation was not unique to France and Spain; rather these conditions persisted in all of Europe.
At times, the most dramatic time being 800 AD with Charlemagne, these kingdoms were consolidated, but it wasn’t until the modern era that these independent kingdoms were consolidated into the nation states of Europe that we have today. Ferdinand and Isabella created the Spain that we have today at the end of the fifteenth century while the independent kingdoms of Germany and Italy were not united to their contemporary forms until the late nineteenth century. As kingdoms became more consolidated and, through consolidation, more secure there was less need for countries to be ruled by men. Some countries, like France, violently changed their system of government, but for most it was a gradual move from rule of men to a rule of laws. Why did this change occur? As order and certainty returned why was there a need to move to a system of rule by men to the rule of laws?
Nomodiphas: Rule by man is needed in times of external uncertainty, but rule by man at the same time creates internal uncertainty. As the kingdoms of Europe consolidated into modern nation states and external threats declined and order and certainty returned, the people got used to this certainty and security and desired more. When a man rules nothing is certain as far as internal affairs are concerned. He may be unjust and take the fruits of your labor, your children, your wife—or he may create unjust edicts, fail to give impartial judgments, and give privileges to his favorites. All of this creates uncertainty of internal affairs. One will be slow to plant if he is uncertain he will reap his harvest. One will be slow to invest in a business venture if the ruler can take the fruits of his labor at any time. This uncertainty of internal affairs is tolerated when there is uncertainty of external affairs and a decisive individual is needed to lead the people out of times of chaos, but when the external threat is diminished the people’s patience for internal uncertainty fades away with it.
This is what happened in the modern era. As peace and order returned to Europe (there have been great wars in the modern era, but these have been predictable, well ordered wars and not incessant raids and regular fights between neighbors) the people recognized there was not a need to allow a man to rule. Even though there were good rulers, their successors often were not good. Some were dominated by their fear or their greed, and many leaders were angry, impulsive, or just plain stupid. The people tired of being subject to the ever changing whims of one man when, because of the return of peace and predictability, the need for only one man to rule no longer existed. Men wrote, worked, and fought for a change and with time this change has come to encompass of all of Europe. This is why Europe moved from a system of rule by a man to a system of rule of laws.
Thursday, January 31, 2008
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
The Existance of God
Philosophos: You mentioned a moment ago that you define yourself as a Christian and you know that I consider myself one as well. This faith of ours has already largely shaped our discussion and it will continue to influence the things we talk about, so before we go any further I want you to briefly explain to me why it is that you are a Christian.
Nomodiphas: Ok. First off belief in God is rational. The world operates in cause and effect. We cannot have an infinite regress of causes, there must be some being or something that is causa sui. The law of cause and effect requires a first mover.
Philosophos: You are talking about God in the abstract, a being that is a cause in itself and the first mover of all else?
Nomodiphas: Exactly. People talk about the big bang as the cause of our universe, but from where did the material needed for the big bang originate? Did it create itself, or was there some force outside of it that created it? Though I talk of the big bang I don’t even believe in the big bang. My point is that even using the arguments of atheists, there needs to be some uncreated source; something that has it’s being in itself alone. In every conception of the universe there is a God concept—there is always the notion of something beyond time and the laws of nature that produced life in the universe. Atheists think this was eternal, unthinking matter that randomly produced an ordered universe with thinking creatures. I think it was the eternal, thinking God that created this ordered universe and gave man the capacity to think.
I also believe in universal, eternal truths. Take math for example. The angles of a triangle will always equal 180 degrees. This is true in any possible time or universe. It is a necessary truth. Because there are eternal truths, we can infer that there is an eternal mind that knows these truths. The eternal mind is, of course, God.
Philosophos: Is that all?
Nomodiphas: No, I have one more reason. Science shows us that order never comes from chaos. Order can and does descend into chaos, but chaos never, ever creates order. This is why I think the big bang and the whole of the modern theory of evolution is nonsense. The theory is totally contrary to science. Throughout the world we see order. Look at the different biomes, plant and animal life, look at the cosmos. Everything is ordered. As time goes on things fall apart, order denigrates into chaos, and plants and animals go extinct. We know of thousands of extinct or endangered plants and animals, but we have never documented a newly evolved species. This shows that the world once was perfectly ordered, but as times goes on disorder continues to set in. When you see order it is logical to assume that there is one who designed and ordered it, it is completely illogical to assume that order and design came out of a chaotic jumble. Think of a man finding a watch in the middle of the forest. What would be more logical: to assume the watch is some haphazard, random product of nature or to assume that because there is a well ordered watch there must be an intelligent watch maker who made the watch? Any rational man would choose the latter, but atheists in an attempt to live free of God’s laws irrationally choose the former.
Philosophos: I am really glad and proud to see that you have read Aristotle, Plato, and Boyle. It is good that you have pondered the existence of God through a number of different frameworks; however, I want to know why you, as an individual, believe in God.
Nomodiphas: Well, these men are much smarter than I am and I believe that their arguments prove the existence . . .
Philosophos: No, no one can ever prove God. We can state rational arguments that support the idea of His existence, but to believe in His existence is still an act of faith. I hope you have reason to believe in God outside of these abstract theories. I hope the God in whom you put your faith in is more than just an eternal mind or some first mover or a grand architect. I don’t want to hear anything more about God in the abstract. I don’t want you to repeat to me something from the meditations of Descartes or a reworking of Pascal’s wager; I want to hear something from you.
Nomodiphas: I feel my thoughts sound simple and dumb when compared to the wisdom of others.
Philosophos: I didn’t ask you how you felt about your thoughts, I asked you what they are, now answer my question.
Nomodiphas: Well God, as described in the Bible, is exactly the way I would expect God to be. That is why I believe in Him. . . . Does that make sense?
Philosophos: Not really, keep going.
Nomodiphas: I was thinking some time back, if I had never heard of God or knew anything about Him, what would I think He would be like? I would expect Him to be all powerful and all knowing of course. But I would also expect a perfect being to be all good as well. I would expect God to have created people for a purpose. Not to simply entertain God but to. . . . What is the deepest desire of all humans? Is it not to know others fully, to be known by others fully and from this place to love and be loved completely? The Bible says we are made in the image of God, by this I assume that it is God’s deepest desire to know and be known by others and to love and be loved from this place of full knowledge. This is the reason He created humans. I don’t just know this in the abstract, but this is the way God works in my life. I believe God is constantly drawing me into deeper relationship with Him, showing Himself more fully to me, wanting me to be more open and honest with Him, all the while reassuring me of His infinite love for me and His desire that I love him more fully. This is ultimately why I believe in God. Not because some guy made an equation that proved the existence of God, but because God is real and alive and active in my life.
Philosophos: This is good to hear. Belief in an abstract God will only carry you so far. Someone can always talk you out of a clever argument with an even more clever argument, but no one but yourself can convince you that someone you know and love and live in relationships with is not real. I know that you not only believe in God, but you know there is a God, and that is very important for our conversation. Your knowledge of God is essential when conceiving how government should function, for God is the only rational explanation of ethics. Without God we are merely an arbitrary collection of atoms and electrons. But what moral obligation does one arbitrary collection of atoms and electrons owe to another arbitrary collection of atoms and electrons? Evolution leaves men with no value and men need to have value for ethics to exist. The only way men may have value is in comparison to an absolute measure. That absolute measure is God.
Nomodiphas: Ok. First off belief in God is rational. The world operates in cause and effect. We cannot have an infinite regress of causes, there must be some being or something that is causa sui. The law of cause and effect requires a first mover.
Philosophos: You are talking about God in the abstract, a being that is a cause in itself and the first mover of all else?
Nomodiphas: Exactly. People talk about the big bang as the cause of our universe, but from where did the material needed for the big bang originate? Did it create itself, or was there some force outside of it that created it? Though I talk of the big bang I don’t even believe in the big bang. My point is that even using the arguments of atheists, there needs to be some uncreated source; something that has it’s being in itself alone. In every conception of the universe there is a God concept—there is always the notion of something beyond time and the laws of nature that produced life in the universe. Atheists think this was eternal, unthinking matter that randomly produced an ordered universe with thinking creatures. I think it was the eternal, thinking God that created this ordered universe and gave man the capacity to think.
I also believe in universal, eternal truths. Take math for example. The angles of a triangle will always equal 180 degrees. This is true in any possible time or universe. It is a necessary truth. Because there are eternal truths, we can infer that there is an eternal mind that knows these truths. The eternal mind is, of course, God.
Philosophos: Is that all?
Nomodiphas: No, I have one more reason. Science shows us that order never comes from chaos. Order can and does descend into chaos, but chaos never, ever creates order. This is why I think the big bang and the whole of the modern theory of evolution is nonsense. The theory is totally contrary to science. Throughout the world we see order. Look at the different biomes, plant and animal life, look at the cosmos. Everything is ordered. As time goes on things fall apart, order denigrates into chaos, and plants and animals go extinct. We know of thousands of extinct or endangered plants and animals, but we have never documented a newly evolved species. This shows that the world once was perfectly ordered, but as times goes on disorder continues to set in. When you see order it is logical to assume that there is one who designed and ordered it, it is completely illogical to assume that order and design came out of a chaotic jumble. Think of a man finding a watch in the middle of the forest. What would be more logical: to assume the watch is some haphazard, random product of nature or to assume that because there is a well ordered watch there must be an intelligent watch maker who made the watch? Any rational man would choose the latter, but atheists in an attempt to live free of God’s laws irrationally choose the former.
Philosophos: I am really glad and proud to see that you have read Aristotle, Plato, and Boyle. It is good that you have pondered the existence of God through a number of different frameworks; however, I want to know why you, as an individual, believe in God.
Nomodiphas: Well, these men are much smarter than I am and I believe that their arguments prove the existence . . .
Philosophos: No, no one can ever prove God. We can state rational arguments that support the idea of His existence, but to believe in His existence is still an act of faith. I hope you have reason to believe in God outside of these abstract theories. I hope the God in whom you put your faith in is more than just an eternal mind or some first mover or a grand architect. I don’t want to hear anything more about God in the abstract. I don’t want you to repeat to me something from the meditations of Descartes or a reworking of Pascal’s wager; I want to hear something from you.
Nomodiphas: I feel my thoughts sound simple and dumb when compared to the wisdom of others.
Philosophos: I didn’t ask you how you felt about your thoughts, I asked you what they are, now answer my question.
Nomodiphas: Well God, as described in the Bible, is exactly the way I would expect God to be. That is why I believe in Him. . . . Does that make sense?
Philosophos: Not really, keep going.
Nomodiphas: I was thinking some time back, if I had never heard of God or knew anything about Him, what would I think He would be like? I would expect Him to be all powerful and all knowing of course. But I would also expect a perfect being to be all good as well. I would expect God to have created people for a purpose. Not to simply entertain God but to. . . . What is the deepest desire of all humans? Is it not to know others fully, to be known by others fully and from this place to love and be loved completely? The Bible says we are made in the image of God, by this I assume that it is God’s deepest desire to know and be known by others and to love and be loved from this place of full knowledge. This is the reason He created humans. I don’t just know this in the abstract, but this is the way God works in my life. I believe God is constantly drawing me into deeper relationship with Him, showing Himself more fully to me, wanting me to be more open and honest with Him, all the while reassuring me of His infinite love for me and His desire that I love him more fully. This is ultimately why I believe in God. Not because some guy made an equation that proved the existence of God, but because God is real and alive and active in my life.
Philosophos: This is good to hear. Belief in an abstract God will only carry you so far. Someone can always talk you out of a clever argument with an even more clever argument, but no one but yourself can convince you that someone you know and love and live in relationships with is not real. I know that you not only believe in God, but you know there is a God, and that is very important for our conversation. Your knowledge of God is essential when conceiving how government should function, for God is the only rational explanation of ethics. Without God we are merely an arbitrary collection of atoms and electrons. But what moral obligation does one arbitrary collection of atoms and electrons owe to another arbitrary collection of atoms and electrons? Evolution leaves men with no value and men need to have value for ethics to exist. The only way men may have value is in comparison to an absolute measure. That absolute measure is God.
Monday, January 28, 2008
A Lost Cause?
Nomodiphas: But the Bible says that things are destined to get worse and worse until the end of time when all will be destroyed and recreated in perfection. If that is so why should we expand our energy on something we can’t ultimately change anyways?
Philosophos: Why do we try, why do we invest our energy in 'earthly' matters if we know things will get worse, not better, despite our work? To begin with, the worse things get the more important, I believe, our work will become. God desires a testimony. God wants to show people His character in a number of ways. As society at large reflects God’s character less and less it is important for Christians to live out this testimony in their respective domains in life—the fields they have passion for and in which they are gifted. Even though God brought the flood everyone was given warning of it, because God had Noah warn the people for one-hundred years before the flood came. God did this because He is just, no one perished out of ignorance. God did not let loose His wrath on the people until everyone had fair warning and ample time to repent and change their ways.
No, I'd go further than that; God’s warning wasn't an act of justice, but rather an act of mercy. People already knew the Truth before Noah. God has revealed His Truth to mankind in an infinite number of ways. No one perishes from ignorance. Even though men knew the Truth and had already rejected it, God sent Noah to them in mercy; He wanted to give man one more chance. That is our function. Though things are bad and will only continue to grow worse, God in His mercy desires to offer the world the truth in a number of arenas. We do this by demonstrating God’s truth in the fields we work within. To do this we must first realize that God cares about temporal issues for through them He may reveal His truth. (Though God values them as more than just means of revealing Himself—He values them in and of themselves. Think of what Christ said. A sparrow does not fall without your Father in Heaven taking notice, and of how much more valuable than a sparrow are you? If God cares for the temporal lives of birds, surely he cares for the temporal concerns of the men whom He has made in His own image). Second, we must seek to know what God says about the issues that we are involved in so that we may be able to demonstrate God’s truth.
I have two other thoughts about your question of investing ourselves in earthy matters when the earth is bound to continue to deteriorate. 1) God isn't necessarily concerned with results. We are to obey Him and do His will no matter what result our obedience brings or fails to bring. 2) When we say our efforts are futile (and this is how many people view them who avoid the public arena altogether), we are looking at things through our own eyes and not God’s eyes. We have a limited perspective, but God's perspective is complete. That is why we must obey even when we don't understand why we are to obey the things that God has commanded. Though we view the results that our obedience produces as failures, they could be successes in Gods eyes. God’s goals are not always our goals. The death of Christ on the cross freed us from sin, but to all those who witnessed it, it appeared to be the tragic end of Christ’s ministry. If the Disciples of Christ viewed His death as a failure (even though it was His central goal and purpose), then how are we to judge whether an action of ours is a success or a failure? Our views are clouded and distorted. We must look to and obey Him who sees all clearly and truly.
Further, like the boy with the loaves and the fish, sometimes our obedience produces tangible results of which we could have never foreseen. It is for these reasons that we must obey God and disciple the nations even though God Himself told us that in the last days things are bound to get worse and worse.
However it is important for us to know up front that we will never create some earthly paradise or utopia. We must remember this lest we fall in with certain heretical philosophies like "Dominion" or "Kingdom Now" or other false models of discipleship that revolve around OUR taking over the world for Christ as a prerequisite for ushering in His millennial reign. Even short of heresy, I think there is another danger. It is what happened to me for a period of my life and it happens to many others as well. It is that more and more common trend of merging Christianity and humanism, with the focus on humanism. This occurs when we make improving temporal things our primary goal and subjugate Christ and evangelism to a secondary or merely supportive role. We make Christ and Christianity the means to improving the world rather than remembering that He is the End. He is our telos, our final goal, the purpose for which we were created. As we talked about before, to be involved in temporal things is good and required of us, but we must always keep them in perspective. We are to place no things above God, not even good things, like works done in the name of God.
Lastly, when we focus on temporal things and make it our end it always leads to weariness and an ultimate disillusionment from involvement, because we cannot create perfection on earth. Mark my words, you will never meet a socialist over the age of forty who is both joyful and loves his fellow man. After years of failure to change man, he will come to hate men.
Nomodiphas: That is a sound and complete explanation. Thank you for answering my question.
Philosophos: Why do we try, why do we invest our energy in 'earthly' matters if we know things will get worse, not better, despite our work? To begin with, the worse things get the more important, I believe, our work will become. God desires a testimony. God wants to show people His character in a number of ways. As society at large reflects God’s character less and less it is important for Christians to live out this testimony in their respective domains in life—the fields they have passion for and in which they are gifted. Even though God brought the flood everyone was given warning of it, because God had Noah warn the people for one-hundred years before the flood came. God did this because He is just, no one perished out of ignorance. God did not let loose His wrath on the people until everyone had fair warning and ample time to repent and change their ways.
No, I'd go further than that; God’s warning wasn't an act of justice, but rather an act of mercy. People already knew the Truth before Noah. God has revealed His Truth to mankind in an infinite number of ways. No one perishes from ignorance. Even though men knew the Truth and had already rejected it, God sent Noah to them in mercy; He wanted to give man one more chance. That is our function. Though things are bad and will only continue to grow worse, God in His mercy desires to offer the world the truth in a number of arenas. We do this by demonstrating God’s truth in the fields we work within. To do this we must first realize that God cares about temporal issues for through them He may reveal His truth. (Though God values them as more than just means of revealing Himself—He values them in and of themselves. Think of what Christ said. A sparrow does not fall without your Father in Heaven taking notice, and of how much more valuable than a sparrow are you? If God cares for the temporal lives of birds, surely he cares for the temporal concerns of the men whom He has made in His own image). Second, we must seek to know what God says about the issues that we are involved in so that we may be able to demonstrate God’s truth.
I have two other thoughts about your question of investing ourselves in earthy matters when the earth is bound to continue to deteriorate. 1) God isn't necessarily concerned with results. We are to obey Him and do His will no matter what result our obedience brings or fails to bring. 2) When we say our efforts are futile (and this is how many people view them who avoid the public arena altogether), we are looking at things through our own eyes and not God’s eyes. We have a limited perspective, but God's perspective is complete. That is why we must obey even when we don't understand why we are to obey the things that God has commanded. Though we view the results that our obedience produces as failures, they could be successes in Gods eyes. God’s goals are not always our goals. The death of Christ on the cross freed us from sin, but to all those who witnessed it, it appeared to be the tragic end of Christ’s ministry. If the Disciples of Christ viewed His death as a failure (even though it was His central goal and purpose), then how are we to judge whether an action of ours is a success or a failure? Our views are clouded and distorted. We must look to and obey Him who sees all clearly and truly.
Further, like the boy with the loaves and the fish, sometimes our obedience produces tangible results of which we could have never foreseen. It is for these reasons that we must obey God and disciple the nations even though God Himself told us that in the last days things are bound to get worse and worse.
However it is important for us to know up front that we will never create some earthly paradise or utopia. We must remember this lest we fall in with certain heretical philosophies like "Dominion" or "Kingdom Now" or other false models of discipleship that revolve around OUR taking over the world for Christ as a prerequisite for ushering in His millennial reign. Even short of heresy, I think there is another danger. It is what happened to me for a period of my life and it happens to many others as well. It is that more and more common trend of merging Christianity and humanism, with the focus on humanism. This occurs when we make improving temporal things our primary goal and subjugate Christ and evangelism to a secondary or merely supportive role. We make Christ and Christianity the means to improving the world rather than remembering that He is the End. He is our telos, our final goal, the purpose for which we were created. As we talked about before, to be involved in temporal things is good and required of us, but we must always keep them in perspective. We are to place no things above God, not even good things, like works done in the name of God.
Lastly, when we focus on temporal things and make it our end it always leads to weariness and an ultimate disillusionment from involvement, because we cannot create perfection on earth. Mark my words, you will never meet a socialist over the age of forty who is both joyful and loves his fellow man. After years of failure to change man, he will come to hate men.
Nomodiphas: That is a sound and complete explanation. Thank you for answering my question.
Sunday, January 27, 2008
Involvement
Nomodiphas: We have established that God is concerned about how governments function and He does have an opinion about how they should operate. Yet, like you mentioned before, the thought remains with many Christians that as Christians we should not be involved in politics. Men like Dr. Boyd say our focus should be on the Kingdom of God alone and not on worldly affairs, in fact when the church becomes involved in world affairs it hurts itself and the gospel. I told you that I think because we have been given the dignity of causality as individuals, it follows that we retain this dignity as a whole. But to be completely honest with you, I am not entirely convinced by my own argument. What do you think about this?
Philosophos: I would agree that as Christians our principal focus should be on the Kingdom of God; however this does not preclude involvement in earthly matters. Let me ask you this: can a person be both an active artist and a Christian, can the domain of art be a legitimate full time job for them.
Nomodiphas: I see no reason why not.
Philosophos: What if they become obsessed with their art and elevate it to a point where it becomes a higher priority than God?
Nomodiphas: In that case no. Nothing can take priority over God.
Philosophos: So one can be an artist so long as their art is kept in correct proportion to God? The problem is not their art itself, but rather how they view their art?
Nomodiphas: Correct.
Philosophos: What about business? Can a Christian man be a business man?
Nomodiphas: Of course.
Philosophos: What about the temptation of greed? What if he puts money ahead of God?
Nomodiphas: No man can serve two masters. A Christian can be a businessman so long as he does not make money his primary focus.
Philosophos: If these things are true then why would we view the domain of politics any different? Why is it that a man cannot be both a Christian and involved in politics?
Nomodiphas: Because there is a huge temptation for those involved in politics to put their focus on worldly affairs and not on God’s Kingdom.
Philosophos: But the temptation of greed does not preclude Christians from being involved in business. The fact is there are temptations in every field that have the potential to prevent Christians from keeping a correct focus on the Kingdom of God, but these temptations alone do not preclude us from being involved in them. There is no command in the Word of God for us to flee the world so that we may be free from temptation. On the contrary we are told that we must live in the world while not becoming of the world. We cannot say that the possibility of temptation disqualifies Christians for involvement in a particular for if that was the case Christians would be barred from all human activity. And if we excluded ourselves from all human activity, what witness to the truth would the lost souls of this world have?
Nomodiphas: I understand that we have to live on earth and we must work and interact with others and we shouldn’t view politics as some inherently evil field. But still, isn’t salvation the most important choice we will make in life? Shouldn’t that be our primary focus?
Philosophos: Undoubtedly it is. But consider the ministry of Jesus. Did Jesus go around just trying to get people saved? No, rather he invested his life primarily into twelve men and taught them how to live, He discipled them. When Jesus left He didn’t tell his disciples to go out and get the whole world ‘saved’ rather He told them to disciple the nations. All too often we Christians go into an area and evangelize and then leave. Without following up conversion with teaching, newly Christianized areas do not see the transformation that they should. They often look no better, sometimes even worse than non-Christianized areas. This should not be. God has given us the truth of how to live and obedience to this truth should be accompanied by blessings. There are Godly principles of how education should work, how business should operate, how a family should function, and how the government should be structured. While these are temporal concerns and less important than eternal salvation; they are important nonetheless because it is through these spheres that we Christians can demonstrate God’s heart on a number of issues.
For example, when family operates according to God’s principles we can demonstrate community and belonging. When government is run in a Godly fashion it shows God’s justice. The church is designed to demonstrate God’s mercy, art illustrates beauty, and the purpose of education is to give knowledge. God has given people passion and ability to operate within these spheres in order to demonstrate the things that He values. In order to get people saved we need not leave our jobs, we can be witnesses to God’s truth by rightly understanding His principles and demonstrating them in the areas in which we have gifting and passion.
Within these spheres we are to act differently depending on the situation. As a citizen of God’s Kingdom and member of the church I am to have mercy and forgive those that harm me. However, if I am a judge I have a duty to be just and punish those that break society’s laws. If someone strikes me I am to turn the other cheek, but this reaction would not be appropriate if I was a police officer in uniform. We are to be just and merciful always, but demonstrate one depending on the situation (just as God is both just and merciful, but advances these values in different ways at different times). The church is to demonstrate mercy and the government is to be just. While working within the sphere of the church it would be wrong to not forgive just as it would be inappropriate to show mercy while in the position of a representative of the government. . . . That is enough of this for now; I am getting ahead of myself. We’ll discuss these distinct spheres and how they interact with each other and the damage that is done when they are confused at a later time.
To quickly sum things up, the Bible is full of examples of Godly men who are involved in government. Moses and King David would be obvious examples, but consider men like Joseph and Daniel. Both of them lived in secular societies. They did not think it was wrong to be involved in the government even though the people around them did not know the Truth. Instead they sought to demonstrate God’s truth in the domain they were gifted in and passionate about—it is their example that we should try to follow. We live in a secular society, yet we may be involved in politics and by doing so we can be a witness to God’s truth. We should never put our hopes in the things of this world nor should we make them our primary focus, but it is ok and even good to invest energy into temporal things for by doing this we can reveal God’s values and lead people to the Truth.
Philosophos: I would agree that as Christians our principal focus should be on the Kingdom of God; however this does not preclude involvement in earthly matters. Let me ask you this: can a person be both an active artist and a Christian, can the domain of art be a legitimate full time job for them.
Nomodiphas: I see no reason why not.
Philosophos: What if they become obsessed with their art and elevate it to a point where it becomes a higher priority than God?
Nomodiphas: In that case no. Nothing can take priority over God.
Philosophos: So one can be an artist so long as their art is kept in correct proportion to God? The problem is not their art itself, but rather how they view their art?
Nomodiphas: Correct.
Philosophos: What about business? Can a Christian man be a business man?
Nomodiphas: Of course.
Philosophos: What about the temptation of greed? What if he puts money ahead of God?
Nomodiphas: No man can serve two masters. A Christian can be a businessman so long as he does not make money his primary focus.
Philosophos: If these things are true then why would we view the domain of politics any different? Why is it that a man cannot be both a Christian and involved in politics?
Nomodiphas: Because there is a huge temptation for those involved in politics to put their focus on worldly affairs and not on God’s Kingdom.
Philosophos: But the temptation of greed does not preclude Christians from being involved in business. The fact is there are temptations in every field that have the potential to prevent Christians from keeping a correct focus on the Kingdom of God, but these temptations alone do not preclude us from being involved in them. There is no command in the Word of God for us to flee the world so that we may be free from temptation. On the contrary we are told that we must live in the world while not becoming of the world. We cannot say that the possibility of temptation disqualifies Christians for involvement in a particular for if that was the case Christians would be barred from all human activity. And if we excluded ourselves from all human activity, what witness to the truth would the lost souls of this world have?
Nomodiphas: I understand that we have to live on earth and we must work and interact with others and we shouldn’t view politics as some inherently evil field. But still, isn’t salvation the most important choice we will make in life? Shouldn’t that be our primary focus?
Philosophos: Undoubtedly it is. But consider the ministry of Jesus. Did Jesus go around just trying to get people saved? No, rather he invested his life primarily into twelve men and taught them how to live, He discipled them. When Jesus left He didn’t tell his disciples to go out and get the whole world ‘saved’ rather He told them to disciple the nations. All too often we Christians go into an area and evangelize and then leave. Without following up conversion with teaching, newly Christianized areas do not see the transformation that they should. They often look no better, sometimes even worse than non-Christianized areas. This should not be. God has given us the truth of how to live and obedience to this truth should be accompanied by blessings. There are Godly principles of how education should work, how business should operate, how a family should function, and how the government should be structured. While these are temporal concerns and less important than eternal salvation; they are important nonetheless because it is through these spheres that we Christians can demonstrate God’s heart on a number of issues.
For example, when family operates according to God’s principles we can demonstrate community and belonging. When government is run in a Godly fashion it shows God’s justice. The church is designed to demonstrate God’s mercy, art illustrates beauty, and the purpose of education is to give knowledge. God has given people passion and ability to operate within these spheres in order to demonstrate the things that He values. In order to get people saved we need not leave our jobs, we can be witnesses to God’s truth by rightly understanding His principles and demonstrating them in the areas in which we have gifting and passion.
Within these spheres we are to act differently depending on the situation. As a citizen of God’s Kingdom and member of the church I am to have mercy and forgive those that harm me. However, if I am a judge I have a duty to be just and punish those that break society’s laws. If someone strikes me I am to turn the other cheek, but this reaction would not be appropriate if I was a police officer in uniform. We are to be just and merciful always, but demonstrate one depending on the situation (just as God is both just and merciful, but advances these values in different ways at different times). The church is to demonstrate mercy and the government is to be just. While working within the sphere of the church it would be wrong to not forgive just as it would be inappropriate to show mercy while in the position of a representative of the government. . . . That is enough of this for now; I am getting ahead of myself. We’ll discuss these distinct spheres and how they interact with each other and the damage that is done when they are confused at a later time.
To quickly sum things up, the Bible is full of examples of Godly men who are involved in government. Moses and King David would be obvious examples, but consider men like Joseph and Daniel. Both of them lived in secular societies. They did not think it was wrong to be involved in the government even though the people around them did not know the Truth. Instead they sought to demonstrate God’s truth in the domain they were gifted in and passionate about—it is their example that we should try to follow. We live in a secular society, yet we may be involved in politics and by doing so we can be a witness to God’s truth. We should never put our hopes in the things of this world nor should we make them our primary focus, but it is ok and even good to invest energy into temporal things for by doing this we can reveal God’s values and lead people to the Truth.
Saturday, January 26, 2008
God Cares about our Beliefs
Nomodiphas: Of course one can be a Republican or a Democrat and still be a Christian, just as one can be an activist and be a Christian, a non-voter, an environmentalist, a monarchist, a terrorist, or a Maoist and be a Christian. In fact one can be a meth addict or a child molester and come to Christ. Christ does not ask that we act a certain way or think a certain way before we come to Him; God loves and accepts us, and desires us to come to Him as we are. However, when we do go to Him our lives change. When we open our lives up to God, God impacts them in deep ways. He brings healing and forgiveness, He changes the way we view Him, view others, and view ourselves, and God changes the way we act. . . .
So one can act, believe, or vote any way they want and be a Christian, but it does not necessarily mean that their beliefs or actions are God’s will for their lives. God does care about how we act and what we believe, He desires that we live by His truth, but He will never impose it upon us. It is our choice to what degree we allow God’s truth to impact our lives.
Philosophos: Passionate answer, you are spot on. One can indeed think or act any way and still be a Christian, but it does not indicate that they are living the way God desires them to live. Certainly the way we live as individuals is significant to God. He gave us a whole host of guidelines: don’t be given over to drunkenness, don’t live in sexual immorality, don’t steal, don’t lie, don’t murder, be generous, be kind, be forgiving, etc. One may be liberal or conservative and be a Christian just as one may be a murderer and be a Christian. One need not act any certain way or have certain political beliefs to be saved, for we are saved by grace and not works, yet just because one may have false beliefs and still be saved does not mean that God desires us to hold unto those false beliefs after we are saved.
You answered wisely the second half of my question on how government relates to people on an individual level, but now consider again the first half of my question. You assume that God has an opinion on government, why? What gives you that idea? Should we even be concerned with earthly institutions? Is not our kingdom in another place? Shouldn’t our primary concern be with ‘getting people saved?’ After all respectable men like Dr. Greg Boyd have said Christians should not worry about the government (even injustice perpetuated by the government) for all is in God’s hands. He thinks government is inherently evil and involvement in it constitutes a compromise of faith for Christians.
Nomodiphas: For whatever reason God has decided to let us affect things on earth. Yes the general story of humanity is fixed, but we are allowed to fill in many details. The fact of the matter is that God has given us the ‘dignity of causality.’ It is a mystery why we are allowed to cause any real events at all, but since we are why would one way be acceptable and another unacceptable? We are allowed to choose where we will work, who we love, what friends we have, how we dress, etc. If we eat too much we’ll grow fat, if we work too little we’ll grow poor. Our actions are causes that bring about real effects. Not only are we allowed to affect things through the material realm, but God allows us to change things by means of our prayers. If God allows us to live our lives in such a way that changes the world around us on the individual level, why should it be any different for the collective? What is so different between me deciding to change the layout of my house or helping to change the framework of my government?
Of course evangelism should be our primary focuses. We live in a transient world; nothing will survive this world save the souls of men. However, the Bible makes it clear in a number of spots that God is concerned not only with the lives of individuals, but with how human life is organized as a whole. I’ll give you three examples.
To begin with, consider the Law of Moses. God separated a people unto himself, the Hebrew nation. God chose Moses to lead the people out of Egypt and into a new land. God not only gave Moses instructions on how the people should live as individuals and how they should worship Him, but God also gave Moses directions on how the people should set up their government. This included guidelines for a legal system, limits on the power of the monarch, rules about property, and a structure for the economy. It is obvious God cared how their government was run just as He cared how they worshiped Him and how they conducted their private lives.
A second example is the role of the prophets and their relationships to the monarchy. The prophet Nathan confronted King David when David overstepped his power and had an innocent man killed so that he could cover up his adulterous affair with Bathsheba. In the same way, Elijah faced King Ahab when Ahab unjustly judicially murdered Naboth in order to take his vineyard. The records of Isaiah, Jeremiah, Micah, and Amos are full of extortions against the rulers of Israel and Judah to stop exploiting the poor and to govern justly. God did not send these prophets solely to the people in order to convict the people of their wicked ways, but also to the heads of state when they had gone astray in their leading of the people. The fact that God dealt with the Israeli government through His prophets is evidence that God cares about how governments function.
Finally, in the New Testament both Jesus and the apostles taught the early Christians how they should rightly interact with their governments. Jesus declared that we should ‘give to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s.’ Everyone has a duty to their state and it is important that no one shirk their responsibility. The apostles Peter and Paul wrote that we should obey and respect our leaders in all things, except when our rulers make decrees that run contrary to God’s commands. They also said that we should always pray for our leaders. It is true that these instructions are only for Christian subjects and not leaders. But the reason there are no instructions for Christian rulers is that at the time these letters were composed there were no Christians in high governmental positions.
So there you go, three examples from three different areas of the Bible that demonstrate that God is concerned and does have an opinion about how the government should function.
Philosophos: Good answer, you truly are a bright student. Because this is such a broad topic we must have structure in order to engage in any type of a productive conversation. I am sure we will get off track from time to time, but I don’t want us to get sidetracked with important, but non-related issues, or bogged down in details. Here is what I propose. First we will discuss what government’s function is. Next we will examine general, foundational principles of government—we will define justice and consider the ideal form of government. While doing this we will also have to reflect on questions regarding the nature of man, like his value and free will, as well as how the government should relate with other areas of society, such as education and the economy. After discussing all of this it we will be able to apply the principles we have discovered to contentious issues like war, trade, abortion, and gay marriage. While the Bible will be our primary source, we will not limit our discussion to the Bible alone. All wisdom is from God and we can find this wisdom in the writings of wise men as well as in examples from history. I doubt we will reach any conclusions that are radically different than the conclusions that other Christians have come to, in fact I would be worried if we did. I am hoping we will merely come to a better understanding and justification of long established truths. How does this sound to you?
Nomodiphas: Sounds great, but before we get going can I ask a quick question?
Philosophos: Of course! Don’t be bashful, feel free to ask a question whenever you have one, even if it is not completely related to what we discussing.
So one can act, believe, or vote any way they want and be a Christian, but it does not necessarily mean that their beliefs or actions are God’s will for their lives. God does care about how we act and what we believe, He desires that we live by His truth, but He will never impose it upon us. It is our choice to what degree we allow God’s truth to impact our lives.
Philosophos: Passionate answer, you are spot on. One can indeed think or act any way and still be a Christian, but it does not indicate that they are living the way God desires them to live. Certainly the way we live as individuals is significant to God. He gave us a whole host of guidelines: don’t be given over to drunkenness, don’t live in sexual immorality, don’t steal, don’t lie, don’t murder, be generous, be kind, be forgiving, etc. One may be liberal or conservative and be a Christian just as one may be a murderer and be a Christian. One need not act any certain way or have certain political beliefs to be saved, for we are saved by grace and not works, yet just because one may have false beliefs and still be saved does not mean that God desires us to hold unto those false beliefs after we are saved.
You answered wisely the second half of my question on how government relates to people on an individual level, but now consider again the first half of my question. You assume that God has an opinion on government, why? What gives you that idea? Should we even be concerned with earthly institutions? Is not our kingdom in another place? Shouldn’t our primary concern be with ‘getting people saved?’ After all respectable men like Dr. Greg Boyd have said Christians should not worry about the government (even injustice perpetuated by the government) for all is in God’s hands. He thinks government is inherently evil and involvement in it constitutes a compromise of faith for Christians.
Nomodiphas: For whatever reason God has decided to let us affect things on earth. Yes the general story of humanity is fixed, but we are allowed to fill in many details. The fact of the matter is that God has given us the ‘dignity of causality.’ It is a mystery why we are allowed to cause any real events at all, but since we are why would one way be acceptable and another unacceptable? We are allowed to choose where we will work, who we love, what friends we have, how we dress, etc. If we eat too much we’ll grow fat, if we work too little we’ll grow poor. Our actions are causes that bring about real effects. Not only are we allowed to affect things through the material realm, but God allows us to change things by means of our prayers. If God allows us to live our lives in such a way that changes the world around us on the individual level, why should it be any different for the collective? What is so different between me deciding to change the layout of my house or helping to change the framework of my government?
Of course evangelism should be our primary focuses. We live in a transient world; nothing will survive this world save the souls of men. However, the Bible makes it clear in a number of spots that God is concerned not only with the lives of individuals, but with how human life is organized as a whole. I’ll give you three examples.
To begin with, consider the Law of Moses. God separated a people unto himself, the Hebrew nation. God chose Moses to lead the people out of Egypt and into a new land. God not only gave Moses instructions on how the people should live as individuals and how they should worship Him, but God also gave Moses directions on how the people should set up their government. This included guidelines for a legal system, limits on the power of the monarch, rules about property, and a structure for the economy. It is obvious God cared how their government was run just as He cared how they worshiped Him and how they conducted their private lives.
A second example is the role of the prophets and their relationships to the monarchy. The prophet Nathan confronted King David when David overstepped his power and had an innocent man killed so that he could cover up his adulterous affair with Bathsheba. In the same way, Elijah faced King Ahab when Ahab unjustly judicially murdered Naboth in order to take his vineyard. The records of Isaiah, Jeremiah, Micah, and Amos are full of extortions against the rulers of Israel and Judah to stop exploiting the poor and to govern justly. God did not send these prophets solely to the people in order to convict the people of their wicked ways, but also to the heads of state when they had gone astray in their leading of the people. The fact that God dealt with the Israeli government through His prophets is evidence that God cares about how governments function.
Finally, in the New Testament both Jesus and the apostles taught the early Christians how they should rightly interact with their governments. Jesus declared that we should ‘give to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s.’ Everyone has a duty to their state and it is important that no one shirk their responsibility. The apostles Peter and Paul wrote that we should obey and respect our leaders in all things, except when our rulers make decrees that run contrary to God’s commands. They also said that we should always pray for our leaders. It is true that these instructions are only for Christian subjects and not leaders. But the reason there are no instructions for Christian rulers is that at the time these letters were composed there were no Christians in high governmental positions.
So there you go, three examples from three different areas of the Bible that demonstrate that God is concerned and does have an opinion about how the government should function.
Philosophos: Good answer, you truly are a bright student. Because this is such a broad topic we must have structure in order to engage in any type of a productive conversation. I am sure we will get off track from time to time, but I don’t want us to get sidetracked with important, but non-related issues, or bogged down in details. Here is what I propose. First we will discuss what government’s function is. Next we will examine general, foundational principles of government—we will define justice and consider the ideal form of government. While doing this we will also have to reflect on questions regarding the nature of man, like his value and free will, as well as how the government should relate with other areas of society, such as education and the economy. After discussing all of this it we will be able to apply the principles we have discovered to contentious issues like war, trade, abortion, and gay marriage. While the Bible will be our primary source, we will not limit our discussion to the Bible alone. All wisdom is from God and we can find this wisdom in the writings of wise men as well as in examples from history. I doubt we will reach any conclusions that are radically different than the conclusions that other Christians have come to, in fact I would be worried if we did. I am hoping we will merely come to a better understanding and justification of long established truths. How does this sound to you?
Nomodiphas: Sounds great, but before we get going can I ask a quick question?
Philosophos: Of course! Don’t be bashful, feel free to ask a question whenever you have one, even if it is not completely related to what we discussing.
The First Key to Knowledge is an Acknowledgement of your own Ignorance
Nomodiphas: No, seriously, what do you think about it?
Philosophos: About what?
Nomodiphas: About all of this, about the state of the world, how its run—what is right and what is wrong and how we can fix what’s broken.
Philosophos: What on earth gave you the idea that I could answer that?
Nomodiphas: Come on you have an answer for everything, or at least a theory on everything, let’s hear what you have to say.
Philosophos: Before we begin our discussion we must first recognize and admit our limitations. Only by recognizing our limitations can we learn anything. Don’t look to me as some infallible teacher. There are some opinions and beliefs that I will have, even passionate ones, that I am wrong about. Obviously if I recognized them, I would correct them, but as of now I do not recognize them. This is a limitation shared by all humans. We are finite creatures, with finite minds, limited by time and space. No man’s knowledge is perfect or complete. This is true even with the help of God’s revealed Truth. Keep that in mind as we discuss things tonight. There are some things, there could be many things for all I know, that I am wrong about that I don’t even know I am wrong about. I will argue things both passionately and confidently, but I am sure that some beliefs I advocate are incorrect. As we discuss things do not be passive, but seek to keep a keen and discerning mind. I hope to learn from you as well. Though you have wrong beliefs as do I by having a two way discussion rather than a lecture hopefully we will be able to minimize our wrong conclusions and together come closer to the truth.
Nomodiphas: I never would have pegged you as a modern Socrates. Though it is true you have a reputation as a wise man, I figured you would be a bit surer of yourself. You have contemplated a number of issues and have well thought out opinions. I came to you to learn and I want to learn. You know my family, my connections, and my background. There is a good chance I will soon be in a position of influence. I want to understand how the world works, how it should work, and how I can help bridge that gap.
Philosophos: The Apostle Paul wrote in his first letter to the Corinthians “anyone who claims to know something does not yet have the necessary knowledge.” Remember this as we talk today. There is no place for pride and thinking either one of us has all the answers. We must keep in mind that we may well be wrong on a number of things for only by being humble may we ever attain true wisdom. For if we think we know all we will be prevented from the correction of our false views and will never progress beyond them. Only in humility can we receive correction and progress toward the truth. I do not doubt the likelihood that you will soon be in a position of great influence, for you have been groomed for it since birth. Still, even though you have had great teachers, they have failed you, and you know this. I perceive it is from this place of knowing their failure, knowing the shortcomings that they left you with, that you have sought me out. I admire your zeal for justice, but zeal without wisdom is dangerous. It is indeed wise of you to seek wisdom now. But tell me please why it is that you desire to see justice? From where does your passion to right the wrongs of this earth come?
Nomodiphas: To begin with you know that I am, as you are, a Christian. My faith affects the way that I live my life. It enlightens my worldview and guides my interactions with people. I want it to inform every aspect of my life and to direct the way I think about everything, especially justice for justice is the field I have passion for and it is the area I will likely work within. As for the origin of my passion for justice and my desire to see wrongs righted, I can’t explain that. I suppose it is an inborn desire. Why am I more interested in politics than painting? I have no idea. I reckon it is simply the way I’ve been made. Because of my enthusiasm for justice and the likelihood that I will be working in this area, I really want to know God’s opinion on justice and government.
Philosophos: God’s opinion on justice and government? Well, we know God’s opinion on justice: God is just because He values justice; it is a part of His character. As far as God’s opinion on government, isn’t it a bit presumptuous to assume that God has an opinion on government? Can’t one be a Republican and be a Christian just as easy as one can be a Democrat and still be a Christian?
Philosophos: About what?
Nomodiphas: About all of this, about the state of the world, how its run—what is right and what is wrong and how we can fix what’s broken.
Philosophos: What on earth gave you the idea that I could answer that?
Nomodiphas: Come on you have an answer for everything, or at least a theory on everything, let’s hear what you have to say.
Philosophos: Before we begin our discussion we must first recognize and admit our limitations. Only by recognizing our limitations can we learn anything. Don’t look to me as some infallible teacher. There are some opinions and beliefs that I will have, even passionate ones, that I am wrong about. Obviously if I recognized them, I would correct them, but as of now I do not recognize them. This is a limitation shared by all humans. We are finite creatures, with finite minds, limited by time and space. No man’s knowledge is perfect or complete. This is true even with the help of God’s revealed Truth. Keep that in mind as we discuss things tonight. There are some things, there could be many things for all I know, that I am wrong about that I don’t even know I am wrong about. I will argue things both passionately and confidently, but I am sure that some beliefs I advocate are incorrect. As we discuss things do not be passive, but seek to keep a keen and discerning mind. I hope to learn from you as well. Though you have wrong beliefs as do I by having a two way discussion rather than a lecture hopefully we will be able to minimize our wrong conclusions and together come closer to the truth.
Nomodiphas: I never would have pegged you as a modern Socrates. Though it is true you have a reputation as a wise man, I figured you would be a bit surer of yourself. You have contemplated a number of issues and have well thought out opinions. I came to you to learn and I want to learn. You know my family, my connections, and my background. There is a good chance I will soon be in a position of influence. I want to understand how the world works, how it should work, and how I can help bridge that gap.
Philosophos: The Apostle Paul wrote in his first letter to the Corinthians “anyone who claims to know something does not yet have the necessary knowledge.” Remember this as we talk today. There is no place for pride and thinking either one of us has all the answers. We must keep in mind that we may well be wrong on a number of things for only by being humble may we ever attain true wisdom. For if we think we know all we will be prevented from the correction of our false views and will never progress beyond them. Only in humility can we receive correction and progress toward the truth. I do not doubt the likelihood that you will soon be in a position of great influence, for you have been groomed for it since birth. Still, even though you have had great teachers, they have failed you, and you know this. I perceive it is from this place of knowing their failure, knowing the shortcomings that they left you with, that you have sought me out. I admire your zeal for justice, but zeal without wisdom is dangerous. It is indeed wise of you to seek wisdom now. But tell me please why it is that you desire to see justice? From where does your passion to right the wrongs of this earth come?
Nomodiphas: To begin with you know that I am, as you are, a Christian. My faith affects the way that I live my life. It enlightens my worldview and guides my interactions with people. I want it to inform every aspect of my life and to direct the way I think about everything, especially justice for justice is the field I have passion for and it is the area I will likely work within. As for the origin of my passion for justice and my desire to see wrongs righted, I can’t explain that. I suppose it is an inborn desire. Why am I more interested in politics than painting? I have no idea. I reckon it is simply the way I’ve been made. Because of my enthusiasm for justice and the likelihood that I will be working in this area, I really want to know God’s opinion on justice and government.
Philosophos: God’s opinion on justice and government? Well, we know God’s opinion on justice: God is just because He values justice; it is a part of His character. As far as God’s opinion on government, isn’t it a bit presumptuous to assume that God has an opinion on government? Can’t one be a Republican and be a Christian just as easy as one can be a Democrat and still be a Christian?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
