This letter is addressed by Paul to “the churches of Galatia” (1:2), but it is not concerned with their institutional but rather their personal faith and life. In the modern era and earlier, society has been institutionally oriented, primarily in terms of the state, secondarily in terms of the church. Scripture, however, assigns a secondary place to church and state. It addresses itself throughout to man; it is personal but not individualistic. God’s law-word requires man to live in community, the family being the basic one, and to govern himself, his family, and his vocation in terms of that law. The modern attitude is that the institutions remain but the generations pass, and so men work to build up the state, and some to build up the church, as though this is primary. There is no resurrection for churches and states: there is for men. The world will continue to flounder in its self-created evils as long as men seek to erect their institutional Towers of Babel, their world-centers for the their gospels according to man. Until men cease their institutionalization of faith and life, church and state will both continue to be obstacles to the Kingdom of God, Towers of Babel will be confounded. (RJR, Romans & Galatians, p. 394f)
I'm a communications guy, so I try to keep my mouse roaming the web for innovative thinkers with important things to say. Guess what? There ain't much. Oh, others believe there's a great deal out there. I just don't believe it, because I haven't seen it.
People make much ado about guys like Seth Godin, but I can't say I care much for what he's written. In all honesty, I can't see what all the fuss is about. A case in point: he recommended a young man's blog that sports some awful advice. In particular, a post he wrote, "How to Retire the Day After Tomorrow," in which he applauds a University of Washington professor for getting out of teaching undergraduates:
Most of us will opt for partial retirement, and that’s because most of us are not working at jobs we completely hate.We just don’t like certain parts of them, and those tasks are what we need to retire from.
One of my professors told me last year that he only teaches one class a year, and never to undergraduates. (The undergraduate classes at the University of Washington are pretty large, with an average of 300 students in each one, while a graduate class has less than 30 students.) He said that he had a disagreement with the student union a few years back and decided to stop teaching.
“You just told them you wouldn’t do it anymore?” I asked him.
“Pretty much,” he said. Apparently there was some negotiation later on, which always takes a while in academia, but he never did teach another undergrad class.
The pay scale for full professors at the top ten public universities in the U.S. brings up an average salary of $108,921 at the University of Washington. How would you like to teach one class a year for $108,921?
This is supposed to helpful advice? Getting out of work? Adding insult to injury, this portion of his post was directly across from a link to another article of his entitled "The Decision to be Remarkable!"
This guy is just another example of the neo-gold rush of the internet age where immediate accessibility to a vast audience provides the alluring freedom of saying anything you want to anybody. And if you play to their greed and gullibility, you can become their guru and then advise them to stop giving an honest day's work for an honest day's pay.
This professor he mentions should be fired on the spot. Teachers teach. That's what they're supposed to do. It matters little the size of the class, or the grade level. If you understand the Biblical concept of calling, you'll act in terms of faithfulness, not look for the least amount of work for the most amount of pay.
A great deal is being made of Phil Gramm's recent comments about America being a nation of whiners entrapped in a mental recession. And after spending most of his preliminary campaigning touting his close trust of Gramm as economic adviser, Senator John McCain has been forced to distance himself from Gramm's assessment.
The keyword here is psychology. Gramm believes America is in a mental recession and McCain has often stated that a part of our economic problems are psychological.
Now, I'm not sure if some talking points were recently released by White House advisers, but even the president is now engaging in the same rhetoric. When Bush said that he wouldn't demand the American people conserve--trusting them to make the right choices--he later retorted concerning rising gasoline prices, and the need for more domestic drilling: "I readily concede it won't produce a barrel of oil tomorrow, but it will reverse the psychology."
So, how much does psychology have to do with it? A great deal, I'm afraid. Anyone in communications understands that, and I'm sure economists perceive the same reality. But the issue is really whether or not the psychology of receding ("recession") is based upon fact.
McCain is correct. It is psychological. But in saying so, he's said nothing at all. It's all psychological, Sherlock! Always has been. If people are paying over $4 for a gallon of gas while the weekly grocery bills skyrocket, you can bet your bottom devalued dollar that this will have an adjustment in their thinking. What you're really concerned about, Mr. McCain, is whether or not they blame your ilk.
Recession is unavoidable, in my opinion, and though the pain be difficult, it is a necessary evil if there is to be any semblance of preserving this economy. I'm not convinced Republicans care one iota about the economy, unless it's tied to their maintaining their political seats. You can expect that the Democrats will exploit the issue in order to obtain political seats. Either way, nothing will likely be fixed.
The economic controllers and speculators were reckless with a fiat monetary system already headed towards more inflation. The sub-prime mortgage fiasco was immoral to begin with. The rampant availability of credit was immoral to begin with. In this sense, Americans deserve a dripping spoonful of economic castor oil. If they were Biblically informed, then laws concerning sound money, debt, and slavery would have imposed a moral restraint. Instead, their parallel recklessness empowered and emboldened the organized criminality of Wall Street. I hold myself equally responsible. My hands are certainly not clean in this.
The Federal Reserve will fight to stabilize the American psyche, but it's difficult to tell how long they can maintain the facade. Just take a look at any recent photo of Fed Chairman Ben Bernake. In a few short months, he's almost gone completely gray. Nobody is getting any sleep at America's central bank.
New Articles from the Latest Issue of Faith for All of Life
Entrepreneurial Dominionism By Christopher J. Ortiz
Wisdom, as I stated in the last issue, is God’s technology.1 It is the hidden glory that permeates creation and is waiting for man to discover. Wisdom was in the “other trees” that Adam and Eve could freely eat (Gen. 2:16), but they chose a forbidden wisdom, which instead of “making them wise” (Gen. 3:6), brought them a frustrating awareness of their nakedness. This sin consciousness moved them away from the center of the garden to hide among the trees—the trees they should have been exploring. Read more...
The World in God's Fist: The Meaning of History By Martin G. Selbrede
...In the words of Ecclesiastes, history is “the work that God accomplisheth from the beginning to the end.” But the study of history, and more particularly of eternal things, is a source of travail because “man is unable to reach unto the work which God accomplisheth.” We are driven to try to grasp the scope of it, to get our arms around it … but cannot do so. Read more...
The Biblical Philosophy of History and Worldview Evangelism By Roger Schultz, Ph.D.
Years ago Francis Schaeffer, while teaching at Covenant Theological Seminary, was invited to lecture at Yale University. This was a great opportunity, and Schaeffer asked his colleagues to recommend Biblical topics and lecture ideas. One professor friend quickly urged him to give a gospel message on John 3:16. But Schaeffer decided against it, arguing that his humanistic and post-Christian audience would have an insufficient framework to understand the Christian message. Instead, he thought his message should be on Genesis 1 and should cover God’s sovereignty, the Biblical account of origins, and man’s creation in the image of God. Calling this “worldview evangelism,” Schaeffer insisted that this was the best way of opening contact with an ignorant, disillusioned, and skeptical audience. (Afterwards, Schaeffer added, the InterVarsity students could follow up by evangelizing their interested classmates.) Schaeffer’s choice of text and theme for the Yale lecture is intriguing—and it follows precisely the apologetic approach of the Apostle Paul. Read more...
Capitalization is the product of work and thrift, the accumulation of wealth and the wise use of accumulated wealth.
This accumulated wealth is invested in effect in progress, because it is made available for the development of natural resources and the marketing of goods and produce.
The thrift which leads to the savings or accumulation of wealth to capitalization is a product of character (Proverbs 6:6-15).
Capitalization is a product in every era of the Puritan disposition, of the willingness to forego present pleasures to accumulate some wealth for future purposes (Proverbs 14:23). Without character, there is no capitalization but rather decapitalization, the steady depletion of wealth.
As a result, capitalism is supremely a product of Christianity, and, in particular, or puritanism which, more than any other faith, has furthered capitalization.
This means that, before decapitalization, either in the form of socialism or inflation can occur, there must be a breakdown of faith and character. Before the United States began its course of socialism and inflation, it had abandoned its historic Christian position. The people had come to see more advantage in wasting capital than in accumulating it, in enjoying superficial pleasures than living in terms of the lasting pleasures of the family, faith, and character.
When socialism and inflation get under way, having begun in the decline of faith and character, they see as their common enemy precisely those people who still have faith and character.
How are we to defend ourselves? And how can we have a return to capitalism? Capitalism can only revive if capitalization revives, and capitalization depends, in its best and clearest form, on that character produced by Biblical Christianity.
This is written by one who believes intensely in orthodox Christianity and in our historic Christian American liberties and heritage. It is my purpose to promote that basic capitalization of society, out of which all else flows, spiritual capital. With the spiritual capital of a God-centered and Biblical faith, we can never become spiritually and materially bankrupt (Proverbs 10:16).
From page 3 of her 1985 Bachelor's Thesis at Princeton:
"My experiences at Princeton have made me far more aware of my 'Blackness' than ever before. I have found that at Princeton no matter how liberal and open-minded some of my White professors and classmates try to be toward me, I sometimes feel like a visitor on campus; as if I really don't belong. Regardless of the circumstances underwhich (sic) I interact with Whites at Princeton, it often seems as if, to them, I will always be Black first and student second."
Can you discern her hypocrisy? She claims that she'll always be "Black first and student second," yet she begins by highlighting her "White professors and classmates." So, Michelle, it seems that to you these people will always be "White first and students and classmates second."
