Bumper Stickers: Some Thoughts

I've always found some truth in the quote that claims bumper stickers represent both the highest and lowest aspects of American culture. I cannot recall who said it, and I'm too lazy to open a new tab and Google it, but it rang true while I was running today. Downtown St. Augustine does have its fair share of lefties and assorted political regressives. Most have a bumper sticker or two, or in the case today, twenty-seven. Being curious, I stopped to check'em out while running one day. The irony in liberal ideology is truly delicious. While some of the stickers decry Western religion, Christianity, and the church as repressive, backward, and superstitious, other stickers (on the same bumper mind you) exalt "mother earth" and claim "god is nature." What in the name of Gaia are people thinking? Historic, orthodox Christian theology (particularly in the magisterial reformed vein) is the most advanced and mentally engaging form of religion; "Christianity in full bloom," I've heard said. Where such beliefs take root, virtue, science, community, and liberty all flourish. Where such beliefs are cast aside, immortality, irrationality, and tyranny are soon to follow. For a historical example, take the French Revolution. Rather than acknowledging that Divine Providence is the fount of man's reason and liberty as the Americans had, the Jacobins claimed that man's reason WAS divine. The result: heads rolled and terror reigned.

Now, let’s go back to the bumper. Another was Einstein's oft-quoted phrase "Imagination is more important than knowledge." Now, I think this phrase is taken out of context and misunderstood by many. I don't think old Albert was calling imagination more real or reliable than scientific fact. In the quote, knowledge is more properly understood as information; facts that can be catalogued and looked up when needed. Examples include lists, statistics, measurements, dates, and the like. In other words, Einstein was saying that the ability to think abstractly was superior to having the ability to rattle off every president or every Super Bowl champion in chronological order. As a repository of useless knowledge myself, I gracefully accept Einstein's critique. I don't believe that if a liberal thinker can conceive of a socialist utopia whose very existence would require the very suspension of human nature that such an "imagined" idea is "more important than knowledge" or superior to objective reality.

One last point to tie everything together: let's assume that Einstein's quote is to be taken literally. Knowledge is inferior to imagination and should be subject to it. Imagination is important because it can change society for the better. Isn't that the goal of every liberal? Tear it all down, man, and rebuild a brave new world? After all, we’re just one big “human family”!* Then, if liberals hold to such a view, why do they decry religion? By liberals’ own assertions, shouldn't religion be superior to scientific reality in their eyes since religious belief is "all made up"? If imagination is more important than knowledge, and religion is all imagined, then religion is more important than knowledge.

Now, to close, I'll admit that we conservatives have our fair share of winners. One that springs to mind is the sage "I believe in the Big Bang Theory...God said it and BANG!, it Happened." It is little wonder that creationism and intelligent design aren’t gaining ground given the number of minivans brandishing this message about town. Another is the perennial favorite "If 10% is good enough for God, then it’s good enough for the government." I admire the intent, but I’ll read Milton Friedman for economic advice rather than take this tidbit to heart while waiting in line at a drive-thru.
Here’s one we can all get behind: Keep on trucking! Or, for liberals, keep on hybriding! I welcome anyone else with any pet bumper sticker slogans, political or otherwise to share them in a comment.

* Yeah, tell that to the jihadists who would slice our infants’ throats if they got the chance. Of course, liberals support such behavior, so long as it’s a woman’s choice to do it. Don’t tell Al Qaeda, but if they want to win the war on terror, they just need to tell liberals that they are blowing up their victims for the health of the mother. The only response the Democrats could muster would be “how much public funding do you need”?

Fruit Without the Root

(Once again, I have grown much in my faith since I wrote this. I still hold to a six day creation, but it is not an issue which I will break fellowship over. Don't get me wrong, a belief in special creation by God ex nihilo is essensial, but I can allow for various interpretaions as to how He did it)
As a Biblical creationist, I seem to be in the minority. I know of very few issues that Christians will compromise over as much as Creationism. I fear that many professed Christians would rather be ripped asunder by lions than be seen as "scientifically" backward. I would remind my brothers and sisters in Christ to remember Paul's teaching to the Corinthians: "Where is the wise man? Where is the scholar? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?...For the foolishness of God is wiser than man's wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than man's strength." I would like speak on morality and how it relates to evolutionary thought. For those of the Judeo-Christian persuasion, we have an objective standard for truth: God. God is the foundation; Christ is the cornerstone. His Word is the Rock upon which we base our beliefs on what is right and wrong; good and evil. The evolutionist/materialist has a problem. They believe in a universe that came into being on its own; there is no supernatural cause. It follows that without a cause, there is no purpose. Likewise, there is no true definition of right and wrong. They themselves are concepts that have evolved chemically in the brains of man.Now, nearly all who you ask, religious or not, will condemn the death camps of the Nazis, the gulags of Stalin, and the killing fields of Pol Pot. Now, why would I, as a Christian, condemn these acts? Simple, I know that murder is immoral. According to what? Answer: God's Word. Why would they condemn these acts?...no answer. The fact is that logically, the acts of Hitler and Stalin can be fully justified by the tenets of Darwinism, but only condemned by the teachings of Christianity. Rape, murder, genocide, theft, and violence are all equally condemned by believers and nonbelievers. It is safe to say that even nonbelievers can see the merits of Christian morality. However, it is fickle and utterly subjective to pick and chose parts of the Bible to hold as useful or applicable. Thomas Jefferson did this with the New Testament by removing all of the supernatural aspects of the Gospels, leaving only Jesus' teachings on morality and ethics. How could a bright, knowledgeable man like Jefferson see some part of the Bible as reliable and reject what he did not care for? Unfortunately, too many people engage in this "cafeteria Christianity." I find that liberal Christians are mostly guilty of this. "Do unto others"? Sounds good. "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life. No man comes to the Father but by Me"? Uhhh, not so good. Liberals, who too often condemn conservatives as Nazis and/or Theocrats, are quick to use Jesus' words that extol the virtue of giving to the poor as justification for social welfare. As a conservative Christian (with libertarian tendencies), I still am lost on the Nazi comparison. Nazis, first off, were pagans. Hitler was a teetotaler who favored euthanasia and animal rights. The central tenet of Nazism is the hatred of the Jews. Who is the most outspoken supporter of the Jewish people? Conservative Christians. Who is openly opposed to Israel, supports animal rights, and embraces trendy pagan beliefs (New Age, Wicca, etc.)? I'd have to go with modern day, socialistic liberals. Back to my point, how can willful, personal acts of charity be compared to an involuntary, impersonal welfare state? Redistribution of wealth is a tenet of Karl Marx, not Jesus Christ. But, if liberal humanists want to legislate morality, let’s start by banning homosexuality, abortion, and extramarital sex. No? Then I suggest they leave people's hard earned money alone.All who read and study the Holy Scriptures come to what C.S. Lewis called the Trilemma. Jesus is either Lord, liar, or lunatic. He can not be just a great prophet; He can not be just a wise teacher; He can not be a pacifistic moralist. He is either a deluded megalomaniac who could turn a phrase or the Promised Messiah who reigns in glory forever and ever. There is no middle ground. Evolution holds that progress, advancement, and higher order come only through death, strife, and chaos. Yet, even most evolutionists don't like to acknowledge these inevitable consequences of their flawed world view. Jesus' teachings have shaped the world for the better. The fruits of his teachings are human rights, compassion, mercy, charity, forgiveness, and loving-kindness. However, if you enjoy these fruits, you must accept the root (or should I say, the "True Vine"?).