The Wonder of War

The wonder of war. The sharp edge of the razor of evil that scrapes and scars the face of the earth.

Words can do no justice to the horrors of war--especially those penned by one who has never entered into those horrors. But I can remark on the wonder. It is in war that we see the very worst of fallen mankind. On occasion, however, the tide of evil is met and rolled back by mankind at its most noble.

Men (like those pictured above) left the safety of these transports in order to wade through water, trudge through sand, and scale cliffs under merciless enemy fire. They willingly offered themselves to certain death--like sheep to the slaughter--in order to subdue a tyrant who wished to subdue the earth.

They are our heroes. What would lead a man to throw himself into death so that others may live free? Pure moral fiber. It is the epitome of courage: Sacrificing oneself for no immediate or certain gain, but for the possibility of a better world for one's posterity.

And I am left in wonder.

Reclusive No More

Dear Friends--none of whom likely read this blog anymore--I am coming back online. I disappeared for a whirlwind engagement, months of Army training, and a new marriage. My professional writing opportunities may be frustrated for a time, but God gives us alternative outlets. May God bless whoever amongst you happens to stumble upon this forsaken blog once more.

Your Friend,

Stephen

A Boon to Pickens, the Free Market, and American Pride

Gal Luft, the executive director of the Institute for the Analysis of Global Security, lambasted oil man T. Boone Pickens in the LA Times today. While Luft may have made some valid points in his critique of Pickens' proposal, his disparaging of Pickens, the man, for his pursuit of profit is discouraging. In a recent interview, a reporter asked Pickens about the allegation that he is trying to pursue a profit, to which he essentially answered "Of course!"

Since when has "profit" become anathema to the American mind and a curse word in the American vocabulary? We have a free-market economy, where success in productivity and innovation is rewarded. The American economy is rooted in the idea that there is no greater incentive for individual and corporate success than a potential profit. If a person becomes a mere cog in a nationalized economic machine, that person performs their function and nothing else. Yet if a person is allowed to run her own machine, maintain it as she sees fit, and even create a new machine, then she will strive do do so.

Boeing and Northrop Grumman are competing to build a new tanker for the Air Force. The winner of that competition will earn a government contract, which will provide better equipment for the defense of our country and a good deal of money for a private corporation. While our government squabbles over how best to punish corporations and regulate our way into a more sound energy policy, they should look to people like T. Boone Pickens for inspiration. He represents old-school American ingenuity. In his proposal, Americans are presented with the mentality that made American great--one which seeks to harness the power of the free-market to create and make a profit.

If the Pickens Plan is not one's cup of tea, new proposals should be put forth by the private sector, with the promise of government awards for success. I would love to see the federal government present Pickens with a monetary reward for his work on the issue and persistence in bringing it before the public. The government should offer free-market incentives and avoid regulation and taxation, lest their incompetence erode the foundations of our economy. Let the competition begin! Gal Luft would have a fit, but the economy that is the pride of America and the beacon for the world will breathe a sigh of relief.

Goldberg on the Postmodern Obama

One on my favorite political writers, Jonah Goldberg of National Review, wrote a column today on "Obama, the Postmodernist." As usual, Goldberg offers helpful philosophical insights into that amorphous concept we call "postmodernism." In addition, he does well in showing that Obama in many ways is postmodernism personified. What isn't as usual for Goldberg is that he fell short in two regards: One, our society as a whole can be generally labeled "postmodern" (perhaps even Goldberg himself). Two, that isn't necessarily a bad thing, especially compared with the worldview that is riding in on its coattails.

As a general point, we imbibe our thought patterns in large part from the philosophical currents of the day. Even in critiquing postmodernism, we are simultaneously immersed and heavily influenced by postmodernism. Postmodernism in is no way an exclusive trait of the Democratic party. Even in rejecting certain implications of postmodernism (i.e. moral relativity), Republicans and other traditionalists do so for reasons influenced by postmodernism. Often, traditionalists embrace and defend moral absolutes for pragmatic reasons, such as maintain social order and good governance. In justifying truth claims for pragmatic reasons instead of philosophical, traditionalists display their part in the postmodern milieu.

Postmodernism is not a clearly definable concept, let alone an inherently evil one. According to scholars like Thomas Oden, postmodernism is best defined as that which is not modern. It is more a reactionary movement than a progressive one and has no cohesive agenda other than to undermine the modern worldview. The work done by postmodernism has actually done much to help conservatives. Twentieth-century modernism attempt to construct an edifice of truth to compete and eventually annihilate a Christian-revelatory truth. It embraced Darwinism as the authoritative scientific paradigm, "progress" as the authoritative social paradigm, and therapeutic-victimization as its psychological paradigm. In all of these ways, it made itself a competitor to Christianity and natural law governance, believing that these worldviews would not be able to survive their competition with "the fittest."

Postmodernism is America was largely precipitated by Vietnam and hippie disillusionment. The secular truth paradigms had largely failed in morally advancing the human race and a vacuum was created that created mass soul-searching. Christianity was not able to fill this void as it had largely capitulated to the modern worldview. In particular, Protestant Christianity had failed in bringing the Christian worldview to bear. "Christian" modernists continued to work in the intellectual realm, but without anything distinctively Christian; Christian fundamentalists had largely retreated from the intellectual realm.

Postmodern philosophy, vacuous in its own right, stepped into the void and began demolishing the secular edifices. Darwinism, "progress," and modern psychology had all failed in their promises for Utopian existence and had largely ignored their own philosophical assumptions along the way. But postmodernism by definition is not able to create anything, let alone an ideology. It has done positive and negative work in its deconstructing of truth paradigms (throwing the Christian baby out with the bathwater) and now leaves its own void.

As Christianity still struggles to regain its voice in America, it has largely left the work of reconstruction to neo-paganism. Instead of banishing God through pride in the intellect (like modernism), neo-paganism instill godlike spirituality into every crevice of this world. This modern pantheism, in its decimation of the transcendence of the Creator over His creation, subsequently blurs all other lines instituted by God (man/woman; human beings/animals/nature; etc.). As Goldberg helpfully notes, it also discards the quest for truth in employing empty rhetoric which is devoid of a telos.

Barack Obama is encapsulates the postmodern vacuum, but more importantly, the neo-pagan reconstruction. For that matter, President Bush displays similar characteristics (belief in human goodness, denial of Christianity exclusivity, etc.). The problem we face now is philosophical, not political. We have a captivating political figure rising on the wings of an ancient philosophy, which is soaring over the heights of all political factions (and even many religious traditions). There is a reason Obama has special appeal to the young, who largely belong to this new worldview. Traditionalists should not target Obama, the postmodern, but Obama, the neo-pagan. In order for Obama's messiahship to be made palatable, people must first come to view their need for this type of new-age messiahship. Let the Christian reconstruction of the postmodern intellect begin with haste before this pagan messiahship is realized and the kingdom of the pagan gods is brought to earth.

Of Mice and the Need for Men

The mighty men and women of yore have always had to face their inevitable decline. Very few have gone out in a blaze of glory at their peak, like the heroes in most movies. Hitler committed suicide while hunkering in a bunker. He had almost conquered Europe. Saddam Hussein, who only a decade before was running wild over the Middle East, was found in a hole and subsequently hanged. The same anti-climatic demise has held true for many heroic figures. The great missionary/scientist Livingstone died in the African bush. Twentieth-century theologian J. Gresham Machen died of pneumonia in a barren stretch of North Dakota. Ronald Reagan, after one of the most consequential presidencies in American history, was slowly dragged away by Alzheimer's.

Yet many mighty men and women of the present forget history's lessons and desperately cling to legacies which are quickly slipping away. Two such figures are very different in their politics--Dr. James Dobson and the Rev. Jesse Jackson. Both of these men were pivotal in the political landscape for a time, but now are mice in the hands of the movements they created. Dr. Dobson increasingly finds himself out of touch with younger evangelicals, who are becoming more heterodox in their theology and liberal in their ideology. Rev. Jackson has quickly aged beyond his usefulness, representing an era of civil rights pioneering that is lost on an increasingly heterogeneous population.

Both of these men have looked puny when up against the presumed man of the hour--Barack Obama. The presumed heir to the presidency represents and connects with the present generation's moral listlessness and vague platitudes. Along with the younger generations, he disdains those moral causes represented by figures like Dobson and Jackson in the name of a moral unity that merely seeks out the lowest common denominator. Dobson and Jackson both fought for substantive change in eras when change was needed--the family structure was under attack and people were still not treated as equals. The present populace, on the other hand, has embraced a restless contentment instead of guilt and a vacuous call for "change" rather than anything substantial.

Young people--blacks and evangelicals included--are embracing Barack Obama because he speaks in the "parsel tongue" (to borrow a Harry Potterism) that opens the door to modern (or rather, postmodern) affections. His hollow rhetoric and warm smile is exactly what many people want--the ability to feel good about themselves without any sense of responsibility. The time for Dobson and Jackson's demise has come and their adherents must make their peace with that reality. The more scary prospect is the demise of moral causes in America. The War on Terror demands moral resolve, as does a variety of domestic causes during a time of unprecedented prosperity. To relinquish ourselves to Obamian ambiguity at this juncture could prove fatal.

To Know and To Love

Famed theologian R.C. Sproul wrote in his book, The Intimate Marriage, that the two most important elements to marriage are those of knowing and loving. A person in a marriage cannot do without either of these elements. If your spouse knows you but doesn't love you, then you will constantly feel exposed and ashamed. If he or she loves you but doesn't know you, then you will constantly feel isolated and cut off except on the superficial realm.

In Tess of the D'urbervilles by Thomas Hardy, this axiom reaches poetic expression. Tess, the heroine, takes upon herself the shame of society's scorn for those who are sexually promiscuous. As the hero, Angel, tries to woo her to himself, he must convince her that any knowledge of her would not affect his love for her. After a prolonged resistance, Tess finally gives in to him and entrusts herself to his love. On their wedding night, she confesses to him her past infidelities, to which he grows cold, forsakes his love of her, and travels far away from her. Her worst nightmare--that the love of her betrothed might be forsaken with a more comprehensive knowledge of her--proved nightmarishly true. Thus the hero proves himself to be a demon; his betrayal ultimately ruining her.

Perhaps this axiom explains why movies like Pretty Woman and Moulin Rouge and even Good Will Hunting prove to be so moving for so many. In each of these stories, love proves unconditional with full knowledge and the mettle of that love proves unbreakable, but by death.

This in part is what makes divorce and estrangement so abominable. In marriage, you promise to love through better or worse 'til death do you part. It is a promise that transcends all social relationships--one that promises a lifetime of security and hope. When one's parents or spouse reneges on that promise, all hope for unconditional love seems lost. The next thing you say or do might be the last thing you say or do to/with the person you love.

People have this inherent yearning for an unconditional love based upon full disclosure because it mirrors the same love they need for present joy and eternal hope. Very few people argue over whether God is all-powerful. If He exists, then He knows us. Thus says David:

Psalm 139:1 For the director of music. Of David. A psalm. O LORD, you have searched me and you know me. 2 You know when I sit and when I rise; you perceive my thoughts from afar. 3 You discern my going out and my lying down; you are familiar with all my ways. 4 Before a word is on my tongue you know it completely, O LORD. 5 You hem me in-- behind and before; you have laid your hand upon me. 6 Such knowledge is too wonderful for me, too lofty for me to attain. 7 Where can I go from your Spirit? Where can I flee from your presence? 8 If I go up to the heavens, you are there; if I make my bed in the depths, you are there. 9 If I rise on the wings of the dawn, if I settle on the far side of the sea, 10 even there your hand will guide me, your right hand will hold me fast. 11 If I say, "Surely the darkness will hide me and the light become night around me," 12 even the darkness will not be dark to you; the night will shine like the day, for darkness is as light to you. 13 For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother's womb. 14 I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; your works are wonderful, I know that full well. 15 My frame was not hidden from you when I was made in the secret place. When I was woven together in the depths of the earth, 16 your eyes saw my unformed body. All the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to be.

God knows each person better than that person knows him or herself. That knowledge proves terrifying to the ordinary human heart, because knowledge necessarily entails exposure of sin and guilt to judgment. If known by God, then accountable to God; if accountable to God, then in need of love from God.

This is why the Christian may rejoice in the intimate knowledge of God of his or her heart:

Psalm 103:1 Of David. Praise the LORD, O my soul; all my inmost being, praise his holy name. 2 Praise the LORD, O my soul, and forget not all his benefits-- 3 who forgives all your sins and heals all your diseases, 4 who redeems your life from the pit and crowns you with love and compassion, 5 who satisfies your desires with good things so that your youth is renewed like the eagle's. 6 The LORD works righteousness and justice for all the oppressed. 7 He made known his ways to Moses, his deeds to the people of Israel: 8 The LORD is compassionate and gracious, slow to anger, abounding in love. 9 He will not always accuse, nor will he harbor his anger forever; 10 he does not treat us as our sins deserve or repay us according to our iniquities. 11 For as high as the heavens are above the earth, so great is his love for those who fear him; 12 as far as the east is from the west, so far has he removed our transgressions from us. 13 As a father has compassion on his children, so the LORD has compassion on those who fear him.

God knows His children and He loves them, promising "never will I leave you nor forsake you." As He loves us in Christ, who paid for our sin and placed His perfect life before God on our behalf, He loves us unconditionally. Never need we fear for the love of our God. And that, to use a borrowed cliche, makes all the difference...especially as it pertains to our confidence, love for others, and intimate, unconditional love for our spouses.

Christ--the Great Liberator

The mission of Jesus Christ in His coming to earth is often misunderstood. Many people "draft" Christ into their various political or socio-economic missions: social justice, egalitarianism, moral culture, democracy, etc. Such gross anachronisms give weight to argumentation (who wouldn't want Jesus on their side?), but ultimately obscures and perverts His true mission. Each of these various causes betray the belief that Jesus was the best conjured-up expression of an idealized humanity, setting an example for all of the most noble causes. Such beliefs are actually an insult to Christ an His mission. He did not come to epitomize humanity, but to save humanity. He was able to do so, not only because of His perfect righteousness as a human, but also by virtue of His deity.

Man does not progress into a state of godlikeness--there is nothing godlike about man. Man is created in the image of God, but is still pure creation in direct contradistinction from the Creator. Man is universally sinful, regardless of individual sins (i.e. adultery, homosexuality, murder, etc.). All people stand in the same natural state before God: rebels deserving of wrath. The forgiveness of sins does not capture the work of Christ, because human beings are sinners. People need to be forgiven--not simply thoughts, words, or deeds.

Therefore, any attempt to obscure the mission of Christ, the God-man, who lived the life that man couldn't live and died the death man couldn't bare--in order to save those who believed--is an insult to the power of God and callous toward the true needs of man. With regard to the persistent wrath of God against a rebel creation, man does not need a liberator of an economic, social, or political variety--but a Savior from sin. This need sets all sinners on level ground before the foot of the cross.

The Christian realizes (or should) this reality, and thus offers herself to the glory of God in a state of gratitude. This gratitude is not a mere legalism, nor is it a license to sin. It brings about a love in the Christian that reflects the love of God for sinners and seeks the salvation of all, that the world might indirectly be made more just, and ultimately, that God's name would once again fall upon the lips of His fallen creation. Here is one example of such gratitude in the African context from this past summer: