On a recent journey from our little hamlet in middle Tennessee to the bustling metropolis of Nashville, I was accompanied by my 10-year-old son, Calvin. The journey takes about an hour, which gives ample time to listen to a lecture en route. Dr. George Grant willingly rode in the mp3 player on the dashboard, while Calvin was happy to have the whole backseat to himself. I asked Dr. Grant if he would tell me about Alfred the Great again, and he obliged. (more…)
What is the role of the government? To be sure, this question is answered in different ways by different people.
Libertarian: to get out of the way.
Conservative: to protect and defend us, our property, and our rights.
Liberal: to protect us from ourselves.
Bible: to punish evildoers and reward the righteous.
At first glance, these seem to be mutually exclusive, especially when we consider what each group means by those statements. (more…)
With, of course, the obvious implication that the Bible’s morals are awfully unreliable. Because it “condoned” things that we find offensive, and that even Christians seem embarrassed about. (We Christians, after all, seem agreed by now that both polygamy and slavery are bad.)
And then, having cast aside the Bible as a reliable guide, we enlightened moderns can take on that role of deciding for ourselves what is right and wrong.
Now, there are several answers to that line of argument, one of which is that the Bible does not simply condone either slavery or polygamy; it regulates them, which is not the same thing.
Moreover, the slavery the Bible countenanced was never based on kidnapping, an offense which in fact carried with the death penalty under the Mosaic law (Exodus 21:16). “Slavery” among fellow Israelites was a form of indentured servitude, and “perpetual slavery” was only countenanced in connection with prisoners of war. Even in their case, the Mosaic law did regulate things to avoid their mistreatment. If a slave ran away, other Israelites were forbidden from assisting in his return (Deuteronomy 23:15); and if a slave’s master seriously harmed him, the slave was automatically authorized to go free (Exodus 21:26). Even a slave wife (concubine) was to be granted freedom if her husband ever diminished her marital rights (Exodus 21:10-11).
But there is much more involved in understanding the Bible’s position regarding both slavery and polygamy than scouring the Mosaic law and ensuring a balanced and proper interpretation of these situations through its case laws—as important an exercise as that indeed is. (more…)
A couple months ago, Mary Elizabeth Williams posted a column at Salon.com entitled, “So What If Abortion Ends Life?” The vitriolic nature of the piece prevails from the title to the final phrase, designed to enflame the most seasoned of post-Roe veterans on both sides of the debate. Her flippant handling of what’s often considered a sacred issue does its job. The article was low on fact and high on accusation, but it is still able to accomplish its goal of engendering strife and perhaps, even a little bit of nausea. However, as acerbic as the article is, Ms. Williams makes two salient points. The first is about the use of language in public debate and the second about the arbitrary philosophical distinction in the “life-begins-somewhere-other-than-conception” camp.
Her immediate use of the phrase “diabolically clever” is diabolically clever, because it automatically brings to mind thoughts of a red-clad, pitchfork-wielding imp, mostly drawn from religious allusions. Comparing the religious-right with the devil will certainly get folks stirred up in a hurry. Then they’re not seeing straight when she gets to her arguments later. But her use of rhetoric is not as prominent as her analysis of how rhetoric is used. Her opening paragraph begins,
Of all the diabolically clever moves the anti-choice lobby has ever pulled, surely one of the greatest has been its consistent co-opting of the word ‘life’. Life! Who wants to argue with that? Who wants to be on the side of…not-life?
Then with all the hubris she can muster, she boasts, “that throughout my own pregnancies, I never wavered for a moment in the belief that I was carrying a human life inside of me. I believe that’s what a fetus is: a human life. And that doesn’t make me one iota less solidly pro-choice.” (more…)
I spent eight days in Ireland recently, and while I was there I was struck by the way the Irish people approach their government–along with similarities I’ve seen in my travels in other European countries. What follows is an overly simplistic description of that approach. I want to compare it to the approach we take in the States. The result will be not so much a judgment of which is better or worse, but rather what the ramifications of each are.
The United States is a nation of people whose identity is defined by two things: (more…)
There is a lot of hubbub in education circles right now about President Obama’s Common Core Standards (CCS). Some are praising it, others not so much. In December, when some of the standards were first announced, I wrote this, “A Response to President Obama’s New State Standards for Education.” Below is an excerpt:
The loss of reading these [fiction rather than non-fiction and informational fiction] books, and therefore the learning and experiencing of the ineffable, will simply further serve to exacerbate the problem (more…)
In Ephesians 6, the apostle instructs fathers to bring their children up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. Paul did not speak English, so instead of ‘nurture’ and ‘admonition’, he said paideia and nouthesia. These Greek words carried the weight of their culture in their meaning and usage, just as ‘nurture’ and ‘admonition’ hold a cultural connotation for us. Off the top of my head, ‘nurture’ reminds me of ‘promoting life and growth via food and warmth’. It reminds me of gardening just as much as child-rearing. The word ‘admonition’ comes across as stern and rigid. When I’ve been ‘admonished’, no one has to be there holding a dictionary for me to know it.
Since God did not reveal himself in English, we have to translate, and that’s not a problem in and of itself. God likes translation. Jesus taught in Aramaic, so I’ve been told, and the gospel writers wrote in Greek. Therefore, the original texts of the gospels are themselves translations. Some translations are simple, like when Jesus was called ‘Rabbi’ and the gospel writers had to tell us that meant ‘teacher’. The translation requires very little work when it comes to ‘common stuff’ like: dirt, fire, water, or donuts. “This means that” and the translator could point to it. However, some words require a little more background to understand, not merely because they’re antiquated, but because the meaning is not as superficial. (more…)
I write this post from a hotel room in Ireland. I am on vacation here this week with my beautiful wife, and we are enjoying every moment of our stay. It was the travel here that was less than desirable. (more…)
Last week, I wrote a blog post on Abortion, Gay Marriage, and the Good Life. In it, I mentioned this idea that Christians need to operate on a different plane from the rest of the world as we engage them in debates like abortion and gay marriage. Our tactics should not allow us to be confused with them because they are utterly indistinguishable from theirs. We should approach the world with the truth in a way that inspires the moral imagination and demonstrates “the good life.”
What do I mean by moral imagination, however? The best definition may be Russell Kirk’s, “The moral imagination is an enduring source of inspiration that elevates us to first principles as it guides us upwards towards [sic] virtue and wisdom and redemption.” It, however, may need some explaining. The way I was using it was probably a bit more simple, reduced even. The moral imagination, as I was using it, is the story we carry around in our minds that helps to make sense of the world we live in. It is what gives us meaning and purpose, helps us to know what is right and what is wrong, and moves us toward living a better life, whatever it is we view as the “the good life.” (more…)
On Wednesday the Arkansas Senate overrode the veto of Gov. Mike Beebe (D) to pass a law which bans abortion after the 12th week of pregnancy. Governor Beebe cited his gubernatorial oath to uphold the Constitution of Arkansas and the U.S. Constitution as the reason for his veto. He also said that passage of the law would lead to an expensive legal battle that would cost the tax payers money. In other words, Gov. Beebe invokes “truth-telling” and “penny-pinching” in order to resist the legislature’s efforts to lower the infanticide rate in the state of Arkansas. How noble of him. (more…)
Kuyperian Commentary Podcast
