The Victory of Reason. A Commentary from Breakpoint.org
"Although Western cultural elites deny it, non-Westerners know full well that the key to the West's success over the centuries is Christianity. This is Eric Metaxas. It never ceases to amaze me how modern western secularists are doing all in their power to purge Christianity from public life. As Chuck Colson told me once, “They’re sawing off the branch they’re sitting on.” Today on BreakPoint, we re-air a broadcast from 2006 in which Chuck explains the fact that the freedoms and scientific progress we enjoy in the West are due to the West’s embrace of Christianity. Here’s Chuck. When you hear the word “globalization,” you probably think of Chinese factories or customer service centers in India. What you probably don’t think about is Christianity. Yet globalization and Christianity are linked in ways you may never have imagined. Globalization is about more than markets and technology. It’s also about the spread across national boundaries of ideas and values—in other words, culture. While the spread and exchange of culture flows in many different directions, the ideas and values most associated with globalization are those of the West. And this is where Christianity comes in. In his marvelous book, The Victory of Reason: How Christianity Led to Freedom, Capitalism, and Western Success, Rodney Stark writes that “Christianity created Western Civilization.” Without Christianity’s commitment to “reason, progress, and moral equality, today the entire world would be about where non-European societies were in, say, 1800.” This would be a world “with many astrologers and alchemists but no scientists. A world of despots, lacking universities, banks, factories, eyeglasses, chimneys, and pianos.” The “modern world,” to which globalization aspires, “arose only in Christian societies. Not in Islam. Not in Asia. Not in a ‘secular’ society—there having been none.” Needless to say, Stark’s conclusions aren’t popular with academics and other intellectuals and have been savaged by liberal reviewers. These folks are all too happy to blame Christianity for some of the darker episodes in Western history, but they’re not about to give the faith credit for Western success. No matter. Non-westerners see the connection. For example, Chinese scholars were asked to “look into what accounted for the success, in fact, the pre-eminence of the West all over the world.” After considering possible military, economic, political and cultural explanations, they concluded that the answer lay in what the Chinese scholars saw as the “heart” of the West’s pre-eminent culture: Christianity. These non-Christian and non-western scholars had “no doubt” that “the Christian moral foundation of social and cultural life was what made possible the emergence of capitalism and the successful transition to democratic politics.” Apparently, many of their countrymen agree. Whereas there were approximately 2 million Christians in China when Mao came to power in 1949, today there are upwards of 100 million. What’s more, Christianity is especially popular among the “best-educated” and most modern Chinese. Why? Because like people everywhere, except, ironically, in the West, they see Christianity as “intrinsic to becoming modern.” For them, Christianity is an alternative to a way of life that bred misery and oppression. They understand Christianity’s role in the rise of the West, even as Western elites deny the connection. Of course, this isn’t the primary reason that Christianity is “becoming globalized far more rapidly than is democracy, capitalism or modernity.” That is due to the proclamation of the Gospel and the work of the Holy Spirit. Still, it’s a powerful reminder of how Christianity transforms not only individual lives but entire societies as well." http://www.breakpoint.org/bpcommentaries/entry/13/28621
0 Comments
Charles Colson, in his final speech, said, “I happen to be one of those who believe that societies are changed by movements at the grass roots. So how do we get the material out to people so they can use it with their neighbors? I think cultures are changed over the backyard fence and the barbecue grill. I don’t believe they’re changed from the top down.” It is not about imposing our beliefs on others, as some claim: “Don’t let them tell you that. We don’t impose anything, we propose; we propose … a better way of living, a better way of life. It’s the great proposal.” The culture battle is, as is any just war, one of self-defense, the defense of our families, our society, our way of life, our freedom and the legacy we leave our children. The battle needs to be fought because undermining vital foundations of our good society will harm people, especially children, undermine truth, threaten our freedom, and, crucially, threatens to keep people away from Jesus Christ, which is their single greatest need. Some further reading. By Eric Metaxas
Next month we'll observe Religious Freedom Day. And I want to help you and your public school get ready. Right up there with Christmas music on the radio and festive lights on people’s houses, it's become an annual tradition during the Christmas season for people to criticize schools for daring to display Christmas trees, sing Christmas carols, and acknowledge the birth of Jesus. And of course, a lot of schools avoid the controversy all together because they have long ago stripped Christmas of its meaning and even stopped children from talking about Jesus as the reason for the season. As Eric Buehrer of Gateways to Better Education reminds us, when it comes to education, as the saying goes, “More is caught than taught.” The tone or atmosphere in a classroom can have a great impact on students. When a generation of young people is raised in public schools where they aren’t allowed to freely express their faith, is it any wonder they become adults who think that religious expression should only be a private affair in their homes or churches? This generation of children and teens need to be taught that they have the freedom to express their faith at school. Faith isn’t just a private matter that can only be expressed in the evenings and on weekends. Americans are free to articulate their faith in their words and by their actions in all areas of their lives. That's why it is important that we all draw attention to Religious Freedom Day, January 16th. Each year since 1993, the President declares January 16th to be “Religious Freedom Day” and calls upon Americans to “observe this day through appropriate events and activities in homes, schools, and places of worship.” January 16th is the anniversary of the passage, in 1786, of the Virginia Statute on Religious Freedom. Thomas Jefferson drafted the legislation and considered it one of his greatest achievements. The men who drafted the U.S. Constitution leaned heavily on Jefferson’s statute in establishing the First Amendment’s guarantee of religious freedom. Today, that protection is as important as ever--whether it involves Obamacare trying to make religious organizations pay for abortions or judges forcing bakers, florists, and photographers to participate in same-sex weddings. When it comes to public schools, in too many instances, teachers tell students they cannot include their faith in their homework assignments or classroom discussions. These teachers are often simply unaware that the U.S. Department of Education has issued guidelines explaining students’ religious liberties. According to the guidelines:
Our friends at Gateways to Better Education have put together all the resources you need to promote awareness of Religious Freedom Day in your church, your schools, and your community this January. Their mission is to create a better future for our children by keeping God in our schools. And that includes promoting students’ freedom of religious expression. So, here’s the plan: On the Sundays before and after Religious Freedom Day I urge you to get information to the families in your church about their children’s religious freedom at school. Make sure all the educators in your church get it, too. You can find the link to Gateways to Better Education’s resources at www.breakpoint.org. Source By Eric Metaxas
An amazing find in Israel has set the archaeological world on its ear. And once again we see the veracity of biblical history. Five years ago, a team of archaeologists digging “at the foot of the southern part of the wall that surrounds Jerusalem’s Old City” came across a refuse dump dating to the eighth century before Christ. As the New York Times told its readers, it’s “an area rich in relics from the period of the first of two ancient Jewish temples.” Among their findings were thirty-three clay imprints or seals, known as bulla. These seals were catalogued and stored. It wasn’t until recently that these bulla were examined more closely, and what the closer examination revealed is rocking the archaeological world. One of the bulla bore the inscription “Belonging to Hezekiah (son of) Ahaz king of Judah.” That would be the Hezekiah of which the Bible says, “He trusted in the Lord, the God of Israel, so that there was none like him among all the kings of Judah after him, nor among those who were before him. For he held fast to the Lord. He did not depart from following him, but kept the commandments that the Lord commanded Moses” (2 Kings 18:5-6). As Eliat Mazar of Hebrew University told the Times, “It’s always a question, what are the real facts behind the biblical stories . . . Here we have a chance to get as close as possible to the person himself, to the king himself.” Breakpoint.org “With what mercy does He overthrow their prospects of worldly wealth and bring down their hopes of earthly power and greatness that He may give them the heavenly treasure … With what love does He ruin their reputation among men, breaking in pieces their good name which was their idol that He may show them the vanity of human praise, leading them to desire the honour that cometh from God and to know that in His favour is life and that the light of His countenance is the very sunshine of heaven.” Horatius Bonar.
By John Stonestreet
The Paris climate accord was announced with much pomp and self-congratulations… but let’s examine the worldview behind it. This past weekend, representatives from 195 countries approved what the New York Times called a “landmark climate accord” in Paris. Not surprisingly, President Obama, who has made fighting global warming a cornerstone of his foreign and domestic policies, was delighted. He told reporters the accord “sends a powerful signal that the world is fully committed to a low-carbon future.” And then added that “We’ve shown that the world has both the will and the ability to take on this challenge.” With all due respect to the president, the Paris agreement shows no such things about our collective global will, and even less about our abilities. What it shows is a commitment to a certain worldview. By way of evidence, let me quote Secretary of State John Kerry. In his December 9th address at the Paris summit, he told the audience, “The fact is that even if every American citizen biked to work, carpooled to school, used only solar panels to power their homes … if we somehow eliminated all of our domestic greenhouse gas emissions, guess what—that still wouldn’t be enough to offset the carbon pollution coming from the rest of the world. He continued: “If all the industrial nations went down to zero emissions . . . it wouldn’t be enough, not when more than 65 percent of the world’s carbon pollution comes from the developing world.” Well then why were we in Paris in the first place? American proponents of the accord, including the administration, argued the U.S. was trying to set an example for the developing world. But this is, to put it charitably, naïve. Nations like India and China have their own priorities, which include building more than 1,000 coal-fired power plants between them over the next decade. This would swamp any reduction in emissions from the industrialized west. Another reason is money, at least for lesser-developed countries. The accord calls on industrialized countries to transfer an estimated $100 billion to them by 2020 and each year thereafter. And the UN would administer the funds. Nothing could go wrong with that plan, right? But the most important reason isn’t a matter of science or even money. It’s a function of worldview. The key lies in the president’s claim that “the world has both the will and the ability to take on this challenge.” The Paris summit was nothing less than a chapter in a sort of secular, technocratic salvation history, complete with its own account of creation, fall, and redemption. In the worldview that produced this salvation history, the world and everything in it—to borrow a phrase from our friends at World Magazine—is what we make of it. There is no problem beyond the reach of human ingenuity. What stands between us and the world we desire is just the right policies arrived at with the aid of science. In this version of salvation history, “nature” replaces creation, and, at least until the coming of homo sapiens, functioned just as it should. Then came the fall, what environmentalists have taken to calling the Anthropocene, in which human beings messed things up and threatened all of nature. And what about redemption? Well in this story, it comes from enlightened humanity who take it upon themselves to “save the world” through a combination of science, in the form of computer models, public policies, and regulations. It doesn’t matter to them that the models have been proven inaccurate or that developing nations, the source of two-thirds of CO2 emissions, choose fighting poverty over curbing emissions every time. Now there is of course a moral and prudential case to be made for not just spewing stuff into the atmosphere. That isn’t proper stewardship of creation. But neither is insisting that the steward—us—has salvation-like powers to restore the creation to its intended state. For that, only a real salvation history with a real savior will do. Source The Paris climate change meeting has managed to arrive at an agreement of nations in what could be the biggest legal heist in human history. A massive but extremely clever deception to legally transfer trillions of dollars from dozens of countries around the world over the foreseeable future.
The full agreement is available online at: http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2015/cop21/eng/l09.pdf By Craig Manners
8th December 2015 Political leaders can do their best to try to abolish God from our community, schools and society. Men have tried this many times before over thousands of years, always unsuccessfully in the long run. They are wasting their time, and our taxpayer funds. Give it up and focus on things that will help our society, not undermine it. Are they being paid to dismantle the good foundations of our society? We the people have big questions about life, death, eternity, morality, truth. We have legitimate questions such as, "Where did we come from?" "Is there a God?" "If so, what can we know about God." "What are the truths about God and the falsehoods about God?" "How do we know the difference?" There must be some evidence about God, and about false religions, fruits such as: does one point to genuine love, forgiveness, true tolerance, true freedom and peace and another result in terrorism, lack of freedoms, hate, intolerance, despair, slavery and eternal death?" "If so how will we ever know any of this if our government has abolished any freedom to investigate these vital subjects and banned the study of religion in our society?" These efforts to "secularize" the West come out of an anti-God, atheistic humanist worldview. If this worldview/religion is correct we should be allowed to investigate it openly and fairly, which means that the whole discussion of religion should be encouraged not abolished. Does a leader's personal religion of secular humanism stand up to honest investigation and scrutiny? We will never know, because they have conveniently just abolished the study of all religions from our government schools. Is their aim to abolish all competition and set up "Secular Humanism" as the new totalitarian state religion? That would explain the current scheme to try to abolish the competitors. Why though? What are they hiding? Do they know that secularism/atheism doesn't stack up intellectually? Why was it that Daniel Andrew's government, practically the day after banning religious education in our state schools, insisted that our state schools should screen an pro-secular humanism, anti-Christian, propaganda film (Gayby Baby), and replace the religious education classes with classes to indoctrinate children to believe that unnatural human relationships should be "respected"? Did the people give him a mandate to abolish our good, tried and tested foundations and to replace them with something he personally and ideologically prefers? We didn't elect him to act like an authoritarian communist leader. Will Daniel Andrews ban the study of politics next? Maybe introduce a curriculum subject which argues that the ALP should be the only political party? Maybe demand that a short film promoting Daniel Andrews as the supreme leader be shown at all government (and Christian) schools? Maybe, having banned freedom of religion, freedom of speech and freedom of conscientious objection he will ban all public protests and any freedom of association within 150 metres of Daniel Andrews or any member of his politburo? We want our children to be educated, not kept in the dark, which means they must be taught about the big things of life, they must have the answers provided so they can make discerning choices in life. Keeping them ignorant about the big questions of life is not an education. Secular does not have to mean keeping our children ignorant. Christian societies have always encouraged robust intellectual investigation and debate about the big questions. Secular societies do not. Which do you want your children to live in? The main threats to our freedoms in the present generation come from enemies fueled by false religious/worldview convictions, ones which are intolerant of all competition. How can we ever defeat them if our state schools ban and discourage all free thought and investigation into them and the more beneficial alternative. You can give a child an education but it is not a very good education if you leave out the things that matter most to a human being. Sure they are only carols, and many non-Christians will not think too much about it, but this sort of totalitarian bent always starts with seemingly small things. The danger is though, that It never stops there. In fact it does not stop until ALL opposition is defeated. Any government who tries to tell us which songs we can and cannot sing, which books we can or cannot read, which religions we can or cannot investigate and practice, should be opposed in the usual Australia manner, such as was done at Eureka Stockade. Historically Australians have not stood for such authoritarian attempts to remove our freedoms. This requires effort from the people to speak up and act. So far there has been too much silence and inaction. The following is an excerpt from the Age on the 24th November about Mr. Andrew's active pogrom against those nasty Christians, who afterall want to help our children to love everyone, forgive, obey parents, be tolerant, respect people, pay taxes, avoid drugs, be non-violent, obey the law, choose good friends, get good jobs, be good husbands and wives, be good parents, good citizens, good employees. "Christmas carols: too religious for schools? While Jingle Bells is safe, Little Drummer Boy, may not make the cut. According to new Victorian education guidelines, children in state schools can sing carols in class, but only if they're not hymns. State school students can sing Christmas carols in class time, but they can't sing hymns. And honey-dipped apples are allowed for Jewish New Year, but programs that use the Koran and bible are banned from class time. The Andrews government has released detailed new guidelines for special religious instruction in state schools, after announcing in August that it would scrap the controversial program from the curriculum." Read more from the Age article. 30th November 2015. The Paris climate change conference starts today. This YouTube video is interesting, as it predicted in early 2015 that the forces in favor of orchestrating a signed treaty at Paris this year, which like the EU did to European free nations, will reduce the sovereignty of free nations who sign up to it, would do everything they could to topple Tony Abbott, which they in fact did do. Malcolm Turnbull is all in favor of creating this new global political body and to fund it with our money and to submit to its demands on our economy. He is on the verge of signing over some of our sovereignty to a group of people we did not elect. |
Craig MannersWhile much of what is written in this Blog may currently appear to be counter-cultural, given our post-truth culture, it is in no way counter-human beings. I am always for people no matter what they think, do, or may have done in their past. Where I put forward ideas or debate against certain ideology, behaviour, ideas, movements, politics, I remain very much on the side of the human beings even though I may be opposed to their worldview, behaviour and politics. Such opposition is generally out of concern for the ultimate consequences of such behaviour or ideas, especially for children. |