Dispatch on Dispatches - "In God's Name"
Shock, horror... "Hard-line Christian activists are now mobilising believers in an attempt to make an impact on society nationally." Apart from the "Hard-line" bit, which is a touch pejorative, isn't this a good thing in a democracy? Are Christians (hard-line or any line) not allowed to lobby or protest? Are they not supposed to be media savvy (although not many of those featured were), organised, educated, committed? If the beliefs encountered in the programme are only held by the lunatic fringe, then they are unlikely to achieve any political traction, given all the other views being lobbied for which are media savvy, organised and committed. If they are evidence-based, cogent and in particular if they speak to a deeper truth, then they may succeed. Indeed, ultimately they will be vindicated, even if not in the here and now. It seems to me the confident non-believer has nothing to fear from this. However, there appear to be more than a few non-believers who, never having really worked out what they don't believe and why they don't believe it, react with fear and intolerance, stirred up by caricatures of Biblical Christianity, rather than the real thing. The answer to that is surely to investigate the case the Christians put.
Interestingly the creation/evolution issue was used, in an attempt (I think) to portray directly one particular faith school, and by association all faith schools, as teaching "science" seriously out of step with the mainstream. The claim (and it seemed to be a fair one) was that "creation science" was being taught as scientific fact. Just for the record, I believe in God the creator of the heavens and the earth. I'm hazy on the exact mechanism, because He hasn't explained it in those terms in His Word. I'm not entirely sure that my rather feeble mind is capable of understanding in terms of mechanism how a God who is Spirit, calls a universe which is material into being out of nothing. I do understand that He did it, and that He had a particular purpose in mind in doing it. It is unfortunate if one particular institution teaches as fact that the Earth is only about 6000 years old. That is a possible interpretation of the early chapters of Genesis, but not a necessary one. And it conflicts with a lot of sound evidence from the scientific realm. That evidence, just like Scripture, has to be interpreted, but I find it compelling. However, it is not clear to me that the particular school portrayed is typical. And presumably the parents who send their children to that particular school know what is being taught, and along with the rest of what the school does, approve. Are they not to have the right to send their kids to such schools? I wouldn't, but then that's me. Who is to decide? The media? Let's hope not. Atheists? But they are hardly objective? The State? But hang on, the State has legislated to allow these schools to operate. They are State inspected, and have to meet agreed standards - which presumably they do.
That all said, this was a rather sophisticated and subtle hatchet job. A partial presentation from a particular standpoint (broadly a secularist one). How could it be otherwise. The thinking viewer will actually have seen and heard positively provocative stuff, as well as a bit of caricature. If it scares a few atheists, humanists or secularists into political activism, fair enough. But perhaps it might encourage more Chrsitians to take seriously our responsibility to be prayerful, gracious, Biblical, active citizens.
Shock, horror... "Hard-line Christian activists are now mobilising believers in an attempt to make an impact on society nationally." Apart from the "Hard-line" bit, which is a touch pejorative, isn't this a good thing in a democracy? Are Christians (hard-line or any line) not allowed to lobby or protest? Are they not supposed to be media savvy (although not many of those featured were), organised, educated, committed? If the beliefs encountered in the programme are only held by the lunatic fringe, then they are unlikely to achieve any political traction, given all the other views being lobbied for which are media savvy, organised and committed. If they are evidence-based, cogent and in particular if they speak to a deeper truth, then they may succeed. Indeed, ultimately they will be vindicated, even if not in the here and now. It seems to me the confident non-believer has nothing to fear from this. However, there appear to be more than a few non-believers who, never having really worked out what they don't believe and why they don't believe it, react with fear and intolerance, stirred up by caricatures of Biblical Christianity, rather than the real thing. The answer to that is surely to investigate the case the Christians put.
Interestingly the creation/evolution issue was used, in an attempt (I think) to portray directly one particular faith school, and by association all faith schools, as teaching "science" seriously out of step with the mainstream. The claim (and it seemed to be a fair one) was that "creation science" was being taught as scientific fact. Just for the record, I believe in God the creator of the heavens and the earth. I'm hazy on the exact mechanism, because He hasn't explained it in those terms in His Word. I'm not entirely sure that my rather feeble mind is capable of understanding in terms of mechanism how a God who is Spirit, calls a universe which is material into being out of nothing. I do understand that He did it, and that He had a particular purpose in mind in doing it. It is unfortunate if one particular institution teaches as fact that the Earth is only about 6000 years old. That is a possible interpretation of the early chapters of Genesis, but not a necessary one. And it conflicts with a lot of sound evidence from the scientific realm. That evidence, just like Scripture, has to be interpreted, but I find it compelling. However, it is not clear to me that the particular school portrayed is typical. And presumably the parents who send their children to that particular school know what is being taught, and along with the rest of what the school does, approve. Are they not to have the right to send their kids to such schools? I wouldn't, but then that's me. Who is to decide? The media? Let's hope not. Atheists? But they are hardly objective? The State? But hang on, the State has legislated to allow these schools to operate. They are State inspected, and have to meet agreed standards - which presumably they do.
That all said, this was a rather sophisticated and subtle hatchet job. A partial presentation from a particular standpoint (broadly a secularist one). How could it be otherwise. The thinking viewer will actually have seen and heard positively provocative stuff, as well as a bit of caricature. If it scares a few atheists, humanists or secularists into political activism, fair enough. But perhaps it might encourage more Chrsitians to take seriously our responsibility to be prayerful, gracious, Biblical, active citizens.
posted by Paul at 1:40 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home