I'm not sure exactly the overall point Jon Schaff is trying to make in "What's God's View on Booster Seats;" the point I think he is trying to make (if I'm right) is obscured by his opening statement, with which I strongly disagree:
There are many things God is against. Universal health care is not one of them. Here's a good rule: if you don't need to invoke God's justice to defeat an idea, then don't. Government run health care is bad enough in its own right. We don't need to invoke the almighty. As a rule, it is a bad idea to assert biblical sanction or injunction when a.) Scripture does not speak directly to the subject, and b.) there are good secular arguments to be made. The argument against government run health care is not an argument about God's justice, but an argument about what is the best way to create a health care system that works for all, including the poor.
While I agree that we should not stretch and twist and misinterpret Scripture (as liberals are quite fond of), there are many things in Scripture which are not "directly" addressed that can nevertheless be determined with great certainty to be true ( for example: the word "Trinity" is never used in Scripture, yet it is easy to determine the accuracy of Trinitarian doctrine through references to the Father, Son and Holy Spirit). Does God tell us whether we should buy domestic cars or foreign cars? No, but He does leave plenty of evidence in the Bible, as Rev. Creech pointed out, that socialism is a bad thing because, among other reasons, it denies the spiritual state of man and fosters envy.
But more to my point, I take great exception to Professor Schaff's assertion that God's insight is something we should only refer to as a kind of last resort, or something to fall back on if practical reasons elude us.
This kind of "compartmentalized living," and the acquiescence of Christians toward it, is exactly what has marginalized Christianity in the last century or so. It is the unnecessary surrender of solid ground in exchange for a "hiding place" in the attic of irrelevancy.
If God is worth listening to in the first place, then He should certainly be worth consulting in any and all areas of life. God invites us to come to him for wisdom and providence, not keep him tucked neatly away in the closet until all our secular avenues fail.
God says
All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness
This indicates Scripture is given to us by God, and it's useful for teaching and learning. The Bible also says in Deuteronomy 6:6-7:
These commandments that I give you today are to be upon your hearts. Impress them on your children. Talk about them when you sit at home and when you walk along the road, when you lie down and when you get up.
In other words, God's wisdom should be a part of our everyday lives--so much a part that it invades all areas of life.
And if God takes note of when a sparrow falls to the ground, certainly he has a handle on the health care of humans.
We should include the practical, secular reasons for or against something in a public discussion because there will always be those non-Christians who won't understand the moral reasons (even though they still apply to them). But for those who call themselves Christians, who call themselves believers, those Scriptural reasons should be no less legitimate than the practical reasons. And while I'm under no illusions about the genuine validity of such a claim, the majority of Americans--and South Dakotans--say they believe in God. If they believe in Him, why don't they start acting like it...or just be real about what they do and don't believe?
I can trust God and come to him for wisdom on my eternal destiny, but I can't do these things for everyday life on earth? I have a hard time buying that one.
A God that can't be trusted to address the more practical aspects of life, or has no interest in them, is a pretty limited god that doesn't sound like the one described in the Bible.
0 comments:
Post a Comment