And this concludes the experiment that began below with "The Intention of Posts to Come."
Whew. Think I'll take a break. Now I can get to those emails that have been piling up. In the meantime, I'd be interested to hear anybody's thoughts on the fifteen or so posts below, either individually or collectively, whether on content or process.
Posted by Justin Katz at June 6, 2004 9:37 AMVery interesting little project there, Justin. I detect a few themes, but the best may be tied to the response you received from Ben Bateman to your "Reaching Those Who Can Be Reached" post. There is something in there about the definition of Truth. The historian Bernard Bailyn based much of his theory on the origins of the American Revolution (eloquently stated in his Ideological Origins of the American Revolution) as a war between Power and Liberty. The founders believed they were natural antagonists. I wonder if the 21st century version of this could be Power versus the Truth? Or perhaps more accurately, Power equals the Truth? As one of my long term philosophic goals, I would like to attempt to formulate a cogent "theory of history" (a monumental, some would say impossible, task). The last great theory was the so-called Progressive theory which basically said, things are getting better. Post-modernism took a shot at it, essentially asking the question, "For Who?" Hence, the post-modern definition of truth having to be absolute, thus impossible, thus only relative. The spiral downward toward moral-relativism and "truth-is-relative" followed. Now we seem to be seeing a version of the old "history is written by the winner" axiom; but now it is "truth is written by the majority." If most of those who write, who broadcast, in short, the media who deliver information and attempt to shape opinion are allowed to prevail, their truth will indeed become so, regardless of the truth of it, so to speak. Perhaps that is why those of us who fight the good fight on talk radio, Fox News and the internet in particular need to keep it up. Hm. You've got me thinking about this now, I'll be around.
Posted by: Marc Comtois at June 6, 2004 9:32 PMI don't pretend to have any great insight here, but I think Marc is on the money when he says the theme is about the definition of Truth. The point is made more explicit when you say "post-Christian ideologies are unstable and weak". Even more explicit would be to quote the apostle John: "I am the Way and the Truth and the Light". God's Truth (or the Truth of God) is always there - it can be ignored, or twisted, or supressed, but it will always shine through eventually. It's just that denying it causes untold pain and misery.
I am continually amazed at Francis Schaeffer's simple explanation of how belief in Christ manifests itself in the world in "How Shall We Then Live?" - that book shed light on most of world history for me, as well as on a lot of contemporary issues. He no doubt oversimplifies some aspects, but as with President Reagan, the style of the message is not as important as the content. And the content is, "You shall know the Truth, and the Truth shall set you free."
I don't know if this is the "something big" you were sensing, but sometimes the Truth is quite simple. I also think this is one reason I like your blog so much - you regularly get at the fundamental issues, as opposed to discussing more incidental ones (which may be of interest, but I tend to lose interest in them more quickly), but you don't do it in a simplistic manner.
Posted by: Mike S. at June 7, 2004 2:40 PM
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
| 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 |
| 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 |
| 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 |
| 29 | 30 | 31 |