Reflecting on a Moment of Reflection

Here is a written analysis of a little dustup between Joshua Claybourn and a former classmate, recorded in A Moment of Reflection. The argument is over a leftist objection made by Eli and "goat" towards Claybourn's theistic conservative view. I started out writing something along the lines of "Eli and goat are idiots", which evolved to "Eli and goat are afraid of confrontation in the marketplace" which then turned into a blank piece of paper as it were. I wrote some more and then I realized that this last Sunday's sermon from Pastor Dan was made alive in that revival and transformation must start with the individual. Unfortunately, I end without an application. . .(sigh), but such is life.

Read the original message and ensuing thread that started all this here.

The response:

It seems that Eli and "goat" express the canard that America and the American Way is threatened by religious conservative thinking that runs counter to more liberal mindsets. It is a fear born from a desire to remain free of God.

"American conservatism is so dangerous. . .[it has]everything to do with who has a right to define society and culture. Mr. Claybourn would rather humans defined nothing, and left it up to God (his God, no doubt)."

This feeling, however, presumes that America can be intellectually hijacked and redefined by such conservatives--among whom I count myself one. I tend to disagree that such is possible.

Legislation of society and culture is a popular idea that appeals to many in the faith community, but attempts to transform a flawed world through government institutions who enfore self-secularization will not end in success. Such attempts at change require a foundation that simply does not exist; therefore, lasting transformation cannot be acheived. Bluntly put, you cannot force unbelieving people to act as if they do believe, nor do I think that you necessarily should. It is only the transformation of the individual where real change can occur with lasting effects. A bottom up approach if you will.

Lest anybody should think that I advocate no standards whatsoever, I recognize that a majority of our law does depend on a standard, a standard that I believe does not change as the seasons or fashions change. A standard that is worth working for. However, when it comes to defining society and culture in light of this standard, recognize that many people hold to a different set of norms. This means that action should be exercised fully aware of the disconnect in standards.

Reading back at my tripe, I realize that on one hand I appear to advocate NOT imposing God standards on society and then turn around and say that there IS a standard that must be held to. And there is the tension in bringing God to a world unbelieving.