Attempts at Honesty

Reflections on the interplay of the Bible and Culture

Home Archives for Christianity and Culture

Wanted: A Point of Reference

Posted on Written by 1 Comment

Traffic LightWhen you are sitting at a stop light in your car and see motion out of the corner of your eye, there are two responses. The first is to push harder on the brake pedal and the second is to look at a lamp post, building or some other stationary object to see if your car moving.

To gauge your own movement requires a fixed object as a point of reference.

In the same way, ethics or morality are only valid if there is some point of reference by which behaviors can be compared. There can be no discussion about ethics if there is not a shared moral code by which to judge.

If you start with the premise that there is no God and all that we see is a result of time plus chance, then statements about morality and ethics can only be expressions of preference since there is no basis on which to declare any particular behavior right or wrong.

It appears that a majority of those who espouse the mantra that “there are no absolute values” have not thought through the implications of this belief. If there are no absolute values, then there can be no real discourse to solve conflict. Conflict would then be resolved by the stronger dominating the weak. Do moral relativists really want to live by the evolutionary code of survival of the fittest? If this premise is true, on what basis would the Columbine shooters or the Virginia Tech shooter be condemned? Were they not doing what their DNA told them to do? Were they not pursuing what they thought was the best course of action? On what basis would Hitler or Stalin be condemned? Were they not doing what they thought was best for their respective countries?

Thankfully, these men have been almost universally condemned, but on what basis?

Tim Keller makes the point that if you start with a premise and the results are not in accordance with observed reality, the premise should then be reexamined. We can observe that a majority of people do not live as though there are no absolute values. We collectively value human life. We define some behavior as criminal and punish those who pursue it. Observed reality is that we do define some behavior as wrong, therefore the premise must be wrong.

There is something in humanity that seeks to know where to draw the line between acceptable and unacceptable behavior. Naturalism cannot explain this, nor can it provide a means of drawing that line.

But, if we start with the premise that we are here as a result of a creator God and that He has revealed to us universal principles by which we should live, then we have no problem explaining the desire for standards. In addition, such a God provides the point of reference by which the standards can be established. The premise of a creator God seems to better explain observed human behavior.

Corrective Cultural Lens

Posted on Written by Leave a Comment

cultural lens I had the opportunity to listen to a podcast of an interview with Mark Eckel while driving to my first appointment this morning. You can find this podcast and other information about Mark Eckel by clicking on this link.

Of the many good things that Mark said, I was struck by one in particular. He mentioned in passing that Scripture is a lens by which we can view the world. I like that word picture.

As a result of the entry of sin into the world, we are out of harmony with God, our world, our fellow humans and ourselves. This brings about a skewed view of the world. We do not have the correct perspective to see things correctly. We need a corrective lens to see clearly. We have such a lens in Scripture.

It is as I interact with Scripture that I begin to see things clearly. Through the Bible, God reveals himself to me and as that relationship deepens, he uses Scripture to teach me about myself and my world. By increasing my understanding of Scripture, I am increasing true knowledge of myself and the world around me.

Without my eyeglasses, I cannot read what is on the computer screen as I write. Without Scripture, I cannot understand myself or my culture. I thank God and acknowledge my dependence upon both.

Cue Johnny Nash singing “I can see clearly now . . . .”

When art becomes idolatry

Posted on Written by 7 Comments

Michelangelo's_Pieta_5450_cropncleaned_editA visit to just about any of the churches in Rome will allow the visitor to see brilliant works of art. Much time and money has been invested in statuary, paintings, mosaics, and marble decor among other artistic delights. There are representations of Biblical scenes and people; there are also statues of former church leaders and saints.

It seems to me that one aspect of being made in the image of God is that man was created to create. When we create, we are following in the footsteps of our creator. There is something good about creation, whether it is God’s creation ex nihilo, or if it is a work of art, literature or music produced by man.

Creativity is a form of worship. We ascribe worth by imitating the one we worship. I believe that this is true even when the artist does not acknowledge his dependence on his Creator God. By giving vent to his artistic skills, the artist is displaying that which was given him by his Creator.

Christians, who have been gifted in the arts, have the opportunity (obligation?) to use their artistic talents as an expression of worship. The Church should be providing a forum for those gifts to be used for worship. I think that the Roman church has gotten this part right.

From my recent visit to Rome, however, I need to offer a caution. While visiting the churches, I witnessed people venerating statues and paintings. I saw one man kissing the hands of a statue of a saint. Candles could be purchased and burned in front of many of these pieces of art, which I suppose to be some form of veneration. Much of what I observed seems misguided at best and idolatrous at worst.

How is a balance to be maintained? How can we appreciate the art and the artist without moving toward idolatry? Perhaps the answer lies in an understanding that all of the art, no matter how permanent it appears now, will one day all be consumed (see 2 Peter 3:10-11). While good art should be valued as such, it does not have ultimate value, it will not be carried into eternity.

Perhaps this gives us a clue as to the means of valuing art. Should we ascribe value to art by whether it encourages us to holiness and right living? After all, it is human beings alone that pass from this temporal existence into eternity.

What are your thoughts? How do we value art and avoid the danger of idolatry? Is there a difference between religious art and “secular” art?

Conflict is inevitable

Posted on Written by 1 Comment

Demonstrators-in-egypt A few days ago, I read 1 Thessalonians 3:4 where Paul writes, “For when we were with you, we kept telling you beforehand that we were to suffer affliction, just as it has come to pass, and just as you know.”

Why would Paul anticipate suffering? I believe the answer lies in his understanding that Christianity is a radical departure in world view from the pagan culture of the Roman Empire of his day. To follow Christ, who claimed to be the only way to God, requires a commitment to believing and proclaiming the exclusive claims of Jesus.

Growing up in a pluralistic society (that owes it’s philosophy of tolerance to a Judeo/Christian heritage), I struggle to connect with the level of animosity and conflict that a challenge to world view can bring. Yet, when I watch the news reports of the chaos that radical Islam is spreading around the globe, I see that a difference in world view will often result in violence, oppression and suffering.

I am reminded of Jesus’ command to embrace the Cross as the means of following Christ. Inherent in the Cross is an understanding of conflict and death. To embrace the Cross, implies that we are willing to experience physical death as a consequence of belief. The culture around us, be it neo-pagan, Islamic, pantheistic or materialist, will not tolerate being told that Jesus is the only way. Jesus is truly counter cultural.

Much of the “church” in America has lost the sense of being counter cultural. We capitulate to the surrounding culture on a wide variety of issues in order to be at peace. But the peace that this brings is the peace of the ostrich who does not know that the hunter is about to strike him down. This is the peace of those who capitulated to Hitler in the 1930’s. It is a false peace.

I am not suggesting that we go looking for trouble. Paul encourages us to live in peace with everyone if possible (Rom. 12:18). I am suggesting that if we are doing the work of making disciples, if we are accurately teaching Scripture, if we are proclaiming Christ, there is a high probability that trouble will find us. We should enjoy the freedom that we currently have and use it to make disciples before that freedom is taken away.

We can be disappointed when freedom is abolished, but we should not be surprised. We have been warned.

P. S. This post is first and foremost a reminder to myself. My affinity for comfort and people pleasing  makes me predisposed to compromise.

Categories

Archives

Blogger Grid
Follow me on Blogarama