Wow, looking at the date that I last posted, it is almost exactly a year ago! I just reread my posting then, and, my, it is so relevant today – and so accurately true to the developments over the last year! I intend to spend a bit more time over here writing both on things political and things having to do with Christianity.
First, though, I want to muse a bit about some memories over the last several years. I recall Yuri Volkov and me meeting most Thursdays in downtown Holland during the summer and fall when we weren’t fishing. We talked theology and we talked politics. My recollection is that we both spoke of things that have since become reality in our country.
The first thing was the war in Iraq. It was clear to us both that the Bush administration wanted to go to war with Iraq because of sour memories from Bush 1’s perceived “failure” in the first Iraq war. We also were completely clear that there was no connection with Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein. In fact, they were competitors, if not enemies, but it was a stretch too far to make a case for the connection to justify war. Even two persons in Holland, MI, were fully aware that such was not true at all. And we were perplexed that Bush did not pay any attention to Al Queda and Osama bin Laden. In addition to that, there were UN expert inspectors in Iraq telling us that they did not have weapons of mass destruction. We all know where that went, right?
Then Yuri reminded me that the way to assess these kinds of situations was to follow the money, or figure out who it was that would profit from such a foolish intervention. It did not take us long to figure that out! We were fully aware that Cheney had never left Halliburton really, but had continued to take retirement and other investment benefits [and luxurious ones at that! I remember one article that claimed that Cheney was making something like $58,000 an hour while working in the Bush administration]. We knew also that there were Bush administration designs for the oil in Iraq, though right-wingers would howl if you were even to suggest that the war was over oil – it was, actually, but it did not turn out the way that Bush and Cheney, the oilmen, wanted.
We also noted the economic indicators over the last 5 years were ominous and seemed to portend something bad coming over the time horizon. Wow, were we prophetic on that point! I think it was I that came up with a slogan to suggest how the government ought to handle the oil crisis: Just Say No!
Sure, I know that that slogan was Mrs. Bush’s slogan for anti-drug programs, but I adapted it to read Just Say N.O., meaning “nationalize oil.” In retrospect, I wonder if we had nationalized oil production and refining and gotten some control over that “shock doctrine” debacle, would we have had the deep depression that we face in 2009 now? One wonders.
But my “Just Say N.O.” was a bit misdirected, it seems. I should have known that banking drives the oil business, too. So my lack of economic expertise showed up, much to my chagrin. But I was not far off.
Enough for my re-baptism into the blogosphere. I will return soon with some more rumination about current event and religious disorder in our nation in a bit.
ttyl
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
Yeah! Hi, Vic.
Is that your photo, Vic, or is it Tom Cruise? I get you two mixed up, except for Tom's weird religion.
Greetings! Glad to hear from you, Webfoot. Yes, I am often mistaken for Tom, and other handsome men. I am hoping to start posting again to my blog soon, though as of late my life has been "medicalized," and I have had little time to devote to the blog.
I am hoping to do something on the Two Kingdom Doctrine, something on abortion and something on homosexuality [hitting all the hot spots, eh?]
We are doing as well as can be expected here in Holland, and wish we could see you sometime. Of course you and hubby are always welcome to come out here any time you like.
Spring is beginning to peek around the snow drifts here, but it can't come too soon for me! This has been a particularly long winter and I am ready to go fishing again.
I hope you have my email. You can mail me there any time, also.
Hope God is watching over your for blessing sake - I know He is.
Vic
I'm sorry to hear that you have not been well. I don't like hearing that.
I'll look forward to reading more of your thoughts. I stay out of the big issues on my blogs, mostly.
You are a brave man.
What is the Two Kingdom doctrine? Is that like Augustine's City of God?
I'll look forward to reading more.
God bless, and give my love to Bev,
Mrs. Webfoot :-)
Yes, the Two Kingdom doctrine is the Reformed doctrine that was most prominent in Luther. It is related to Augustine, a direct descendent idea, really. The reason I discuss it is because there is a modern idea that we have to govern the kingdom of this world according to the rules and principles of the kingdom of God. That is impossible, though, and that is why we cannot support the notion of theocratic rule as some would like today.
The issue is very important in our day as we deal with issues that divide people under the best circumstances. But when we become polarized in our society, we Christians are sometimes no longer salt and light to a dark world. I think the Christians are somewhat to blame for now distinguishing the difference between the two kingdoms and requring that the kingdom of this world comply with our spiritual principles. In fact, it cannot do so, and to expect it to be so governed is fruitless and will only perpetuate the decline of our world.
On the medical matters, I can assure you I would prefer it to be otherwise, but since I have this as God's purpose in my life, I will make the most of it. Now I *really* know what Paul meant when he said, "When I am weak, then I am strong."
that should be "not distinguishing," not "now"
I am reading - well, I'm not out of the introduction, but... - Agustine's City of God.
We spent some time in Europe lately, viewing the "City of God" firsthand - or should I say what's left of it. Fascinating.
I'll look forward to your comments.
God bless, and please stay well,
Mrs. Webfoot
"Whenever the doctrine of the atonement has been obscured in the church in any measure, to that extent the power of the church has declined, but you shall find that whether there is a clear declaration of justification by faith in Jesus Christ, then the church comes forth in her glory, and bruises the dragon's head. "
- Spurgeon
Do you like this quote, Vic?
God bless,
Mrs. Webfoot
I most certainly like that statement! There is a strong connection between the preaching of the atonement of Christ and the progress of Christianity. Sadly, there are millions of professed Christians that would look at you with a blank look if you asked them what they thought about the atonement of Christ or even what the doctrine of justification by faith alone means! It is one of the main drivers of my own ministry, to restore the blessed message of justification by faith alone to the church.
I am no fan of what I call the radical two kingdom theology that has spread into some sectors of the Christian church, demanding pure isolation of the church from the state. While this radical teaching often sites Augustine's and Luther's theories as the foundational platform from which they build their own structures, I am not sure that they completely understand the historical positions of Augustine and Luther.
Luther's position is taken largely from his Render unto Caesar, which was written when the enemies of the gospel were everywhere in power. This writing follows a series of attacks upon the spread of reformation. In 1521, the emperor issued the Edict of
Worms, declaring Luther an outlaw; in 1522, the Imperial Council of Regency had condemned clerical marriage;in November, Duke George of Saxony, commanded that copies of Luther's German New Testament be turned in.
While Luther understood and argued that the state could not enforce religion and press the gospel upon the conscience of its subjects, I don't think a proper understanding of Luther requires one to make the radical distinction between the church and the state that some do.
He argued that the civil magistrate, for example, should suppress false teachers and heresies and that godly rulers must advance the gospel and its preachers.
"For if God's Word is protected and supported so that it can be freely taught and learned, and if the sects and false teachers are given no opportunity and are not
defended against the teachers who fear God, what greater treasure can there be in a land?"
He utilized the magistrate as a means of establishing reformation and in his introduction to the chatecism mentioned that the civil magistrate would wage the sword against the ungodly.
While Luther argued for the distinctions between the realm of the magistrate and the church, his line was not drawn anywhere near the modern understanding of the church and state that we see today.
The gospel is quick and powerful. I think as God's people properly preach and live the gospel, it is inevitable that its effect will "turn the world upside down." All authority belongs to Christ and he sits on the right hand of the Father, as Lord and King of Heaven and Earth. Calvin goes on to say: " by constraining men to obey him in the preaching of the gospel, he establishes his throne on the earth;"
The tension between Christ and culture is difficult to unwind. I tend to appreciate John Frame's article on "Christ and Culture", although I admit that I am far from dogmatic considering all the potential nuances that this issue raises.
Hello, Vic and Bob,
How are you guys doing? I just got back from Cuba. We had a good time of ministry there.
The president of the denomination that invited us told me that the government had asked the churches of Cuba to help them with the moral crisis, - including the breakdown of marriage - in their country. He was glad that they had asked the churches for help, but then pointed out that they were not given the freedom or the means to act!
Of course, in their own churches, they teach their own people, but how should that affect the society at large?
I don't know how that relates to the two kingdom idea, but I found it interesting.
I am wondering what you guys think of same-sex "marriage" and how Christians should respond.
What do you think?
Well, if you get time.
God bless,
Mrs. Webfoot
Post a Comment