Vision Viewpoint Blog

Words are Words, Promises are Promises, but Performance is Reality,

Archive for the 'Vision Viewpoint Newsletter' Category

Prominent atheists credit the Gospel

Two high-profile atheists recognize the practical help to the poor provided by Christians while agreeing it is the Christian worldview itself that makes such help feasible

What would you say if I told you that two prominent atheists – well known in their respective fields – shook up their colleagues (and a whole bunch of the rest of us) with an unabashed, pointedly sympathetic, portrait of the impact of the Gospel? The two atheists in question are both veteran British politicians, and best-selling authors.

You never hear of “Atheists Aid to the poor”. That is the sentiment of atheist and UK Labor politician, Roy Hattersley, in statements made public in January 2010. The actual statement was longer, though just as direct,

 

“I never hear of atheist organizations taking food to the poor. You don’t hear of ‘Atheist Aid.’”

Roy Hattersley is a well-known British politician, author, and journalist. He is the historian responsible for the best-selling biography of William and Catherine Booth and the origins of the Salvation Army.

That, of course, gives us the backdrop to the surprising statements of Mr. Hattersley on a recent BBC program. Peter Day, the narrator of the program, in statements which might be seen as a norm for accommodating atheistic posturing, put it to Hattersley:

 

“This sort of thing, a sort of social entrepreneurial drive which starts off out of a particular place and circumstances—those sorts of things often run out of steam after a generation or two. Is the Salvation Army in danger of running out of steam?”

Roy Hattersley’s reply was instant:

 

“I don’t think the Salvation Army is remotely in danger of running out of steam. And I think it remains a vibrant organization because of its convictions. I’m an atheist. But I can only look with amazement at the devotion of the Salvation Army workers. I’ve been out with them on the streets and the way they work amongst the people, the most deprived and disadvantaged and sometimes pretty repugnant characters. I don’t believe they would do that were it not for the religious impulse. And I often say I never hear of atheist organizations taking food to the poor. You don’t hear of ‘Atheist Aid’ rather like Christian aid, and, I think, despite my inability to believe myself, I’m deeply impressed by what belief does for people like the Salvation Army.”

Wow. Let me see. It’s one thing to quote people like the Booths in matters historical. It’s quite another to contrast worldviews – atheistic v. Christian – praising the Christian worldview as far superior to one’s own. More impressively, these aren’t the rantings of some fanatic. This is the position of a seasoned Labor professional.

Roy Hattersley is not the only high-profile atheist to point to the work and worldview of Gospel. Matthew Parris is yet another atheist who has come out with open and objective praise for the charity and virtues of the Christian faith. Parris is also a renowned UK politician and best-selling author.

Matthew Parris wrote in The Times a most remarkable piece entitled …

 

“As an atheist, I truly believe Africa needs God”

The article was subtitled,

“Missionaries, not aid money, are the solution to Africa’s biggest problem—the crushing passivity of the people’s mindset.”

The Parris article was written from a personal perspective. His childhood was spent in various countries in Africa and he has done extensive traveling throughout Africa as an adult, including a recent tour.

 

“It inspired me, renewing my flagging faith in development charities. But travelling in Malawi refreshed another belief, too: one I’ve been trying to banish all my life, but an observation I’ve been unable to avoid since my African childhood. It confounds my ideological beliefs, stubbornly refuses to fit my world view, and has embarrassed my growing belief that there is no God.

“Now a confirmed atheist, I’ve become convinced of the enormous contribution that Christian evangelism makes in Africa: sharply distinct from the work of secular NGOs, government projects and international aid efforts. These alone will not do. Education and training alone will not do. In Africa Christianity changes people’s hearts. It brings a spiritual transformation. The rebirth is real. The change is good.

“The Christians were always different. Far from having cowed or confined its converts, their faith appeared to have liberated and relaxed them…

“It’s a pity, I would say, that salvation is part of the package,” Parris wrote, “but Christians black and white, working in Africa, do heal the sick, do teach people to read and write; and only the severest kind of secularist could see a mission hospital or school and say the world would be better without it. I would allow that if faith was needed to motivate missionaries to help, then, fine: but what counted was the help, not the faith.”

On the other hand, Parris acknowledged,

“this doesn’t fit the facts”. He explained how Christian faith benefits the poor. It is not merely its “supportive effect” on the missionary. It is also important to understand that such faith “…is also transferred to his flock. This is the effect that matters so immensely, and which I cannot help observing.”

Matthew Parris grew up in southern Africa, and often stayed with Christian missionaries (friends of the family). When he revisited Africa in his twenties, he concluded, after years of observation, that Christians, whether black or white, were ‘different’ from other people. It didn’t matter if he observed them in Algiers, Niger, Nigeria, Cameroon, the Central African Republic, the Congo, Rwanda, Tanzania or Nairobi, Kenya. It was the same everywhere. His recent trip to Malawi confirmed it once more—a truth he has been trying to ‘banish’ all his life.

Parris notes:

 

“The Christians were always different. Far from having cowed or confined its converts, their faith appeared to have liberated and relaxed them.”

Matthew Parris also notes that Christians had a confident “liveliness, a curiosity, an engagement with the world—a directness in their dealings with others”, lacking in non-believers. As he puts it, “They stood tall”.

Parris observed that the difference between Christians and non-Christians was particularly striking in “lawless” parts of the sub-Sahara.

 

“Whenever we entered a territory worked by missionaries, we had to acknowledge that something changed in the faces of the people we passed and spoke to: something in their eyes, the way they approached you direct, man-to-man, without looking down or away. They had not become more deferential towards strangers—in some ways less so—but more open.”

Parris admits he would prefer to believe  the virtues of the Christians - their “honesty, diligence and optimism in their work” - had no connection with their unmistakable personal faith. But, he concedes they are “influenced by a conception of man’s place in the Universe that Christianity had taught.” In other words, their ethic is ROOTED in their conception of God, the Bible and their faith in Christ.

 

“Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ…”- II Corinthians 10:5

In Christ,

Wayne C. Sedlak,

ICHR (Institute for Christian Heritage Research)

Director, Leveraging Influence Institute for Online Training

Ps. SolomonsToolbox for information about history, economics, logic and other biblical subjects and information.

Pps. If you are interested in being alerted for issues NOT usually reported in the media, yet important to Christian people, go to ParentInformationNetwork and sign up (there is no obligation, and your privacy is protected). We do not sell, rent, lease or otherwise give out your information to others.

Ppps. For information on how you can increase your ability to reach more people interested in your message, blog, website, services, or products, call us at our 1866. 735. 5871. Class is now opening. It is brought to you in the comfort of your home or office, and you can begin to use the training online immediately. You can access all lessons 24- 7 – 365. No previous experience is needed. But, classes are filling up. So, there is some urgency to a call now.

A View of the Problem Most Don’t Understand

What’s All the “Fuss” about “Socialism”? A Christian Critique

Socialism: The Hate Thy Neighbor Theology Exposed by Frederic Bastiat

Shall the throne of iniquity have fellowship with thee, that frameth mischief with a law ?– Psalm 94:20

Frederic Bastiat was a 19th century French journalist, who became famous for his public commentary on political economy.  From the time of the French Revolution of 1789 right on through a century of socialistic turmoil leading to the rise of the Third Republic of France, the French nation experienced one economic recession after another. Frederick Bastiat understood  the underlying problem was not primarily economics. To be sure, it was manifested in political economy. But all ethics have their origin in worldview and Bastiat was wise enough to understand that the new political plaything now taking the rather innocuous sounding name of  "socialism" was really an attack upon the Christian faith.

Bastiat became the leading defender of free market thinking and the outspoken advocate of Christian principle in the strife-torn revolutionary — socialistic France of the 19th century. He was not ashamed to reference the Lord’s oversight in the affairs of men and society, using the term "Providence" repeatedly despite the mockery and scorn heaped upon him by the atheistic-socialistic scholars of the day.  His observations, listed below, deserve special scrutiny as they identify, in a concise manner, part of the problem we call "Socialism". Here are a few of his observations (with my Notes attached):

1. It is evident that the socialists set out in quest of an artificial social order only because they deemed the natural order to be either bad or inadequate; they deemed it bad or inadequate only because they felt  man’s interests are fundamentally antagonistic, for all the otherwise they would not have had recourse to coercion. It  is not necessary to force into harmony things that are inherently harmonious.

Note: When Bastiat states that the Socialist believe man’s interests are fundamentally antagonistic, what he’s referring to is the fact that they believe — along with most government-school taught Americans, and even many so-called Christians  — that the natural order ( the physical world around us) and societal order ( mankind’s propensity to organize in communities) are ALWAYS given to strife, and therefore, "someone" ( usually the State) must, of necessity, restrict human freedom in order to bring about progress and peace. In other words, all socialists of all types believe that the social order — whatever it might be and however constituted — MUST BE REGULATED by the State or else "chaos" will reign throughout society.

Socialism is ALWAYS guided by the presumptuous attitude that all societies, all men everywhere, must be CONTROLLED, especially in matters pertaining to economics. (See Plato’s view, listed under Bastiat’s point 3, below.)

2. The Socialists conjure up a society out of their imagination and then conceive of a human heart to fit this society.  - Frederic Bastiat, Economic Harmonies, p. xxv

Note: Bastiat has hit the nail right on the head. Socialists, of all types, dream up a society as they believe it should be constituted but because they have no sound view of human nature ( fallen, sinful and made in God’s image) nor of the Lord, His Will, or His Kingdom, they must dream up a new kind of human being and sort of retrofit this "new creation" of social engineering to their utopian plan. This is the reason our society is overwhelmed by the presence of expensive, uncaring, and even brutal bureaucracies. It is also the reason our land swarms with social agencies of all sorts. It also explains why modern psychological, psychiatric, and sociological theories (of all sorts and approaches) inundates the land because it is precisely these "disciplines" which are needed to reshape human thinking and behavior. Additionally, they become the "thought police" as well as the "behavioral police" determining the nature of Good and Evil. In other words, they become the Standard; you dare not oppose them or you are considered unfit, and a "hater-of-mankind", as early church Christians were called in the Roman Empire.

3. Although they [the socialists] have a kind of sentimental love for humanity in their hearts,  hate flows from their lips. Each of them reserves all his love for the society that is dreamed up; but the natural society, that in which it is our lot to live cannot be destroyed soon enough to suit them, so that from its ruins may rise [their version of] the New Jerusalem.

Note: Bastiat has again hit the nail on the head. Socialism derives its greatest strength from "the best" and "the worst"of society. The worst kinds of individuals are those insidious individuals who understand the real agenda of radicalism and forward it is a function of their own personal advantage. However, socialism always gains its "public image" from its humanitarian appeals. It’s humanitarian appeals become the foundation for its political strengths and successes. Issues such as "feeding the poor", "defending the helpless against injustices", "providing health care for all people", "ending exploitation", "doing away with "special privilege" that would include an endless litany of privileges needing correction such as,

- private ownership of property,

- profitability and the profit system,

- inheritance,

- sexual fidelity with one’s spouse,

- child rearing under parental authority and guidance,

- business ownership,

- vocational choice/calling

- the right to contract

- true liberty

… the list is almost endless.

Socialism professes a love for humanity. However, the "love" they profess is only a love for that which they "imagine".in other words, they’re in love with their own preferences and self-professed ideals. it’s simply another version of what God warned Adam and Eve to avoid: to be as gods knowing good and evil.

Socialism ALWAYS professes love for mankind but ALWAYS nourishes HATE,stirring strife throughout society by creating factions among different groups who are taught by the Socialist propaganda HOW TO HATE EFFECTIVLEY.

Witness the following opinions of socialistic thinkers:

"The Revolutionary is a doomed man. He has no personal interests, no business affairs, no emotions, no attachments, no property and no name. Everything in him is wholly absorbed in the single thought and the single passion for revolution." - Sergei Nechayev, Forerunner of the Bolshevik ( communist) Revolution of 1917. It was his influence upon Vladimir Lenin which was to determine the revolutionary approach of the Bolsheviks.

Note: We should note here, as Bastiat noted concerning all socialists, the disdain with which this man viewed a society in which he lived. He always taught his followers they were building a new society. Of course, the old one had to be completely destroyed. He penned this instruction to his followers -  his description of such hatred:

"The Revolutionary knows that in the very depths of his being, not only in words but also in deeds, he has broken all the bonds which tie him to the social order and the civilized world with all of its laws, moralities and customs and  with all its generally accepted conventions. He is their implacable enemy, and if he continues to live with them it is only in order to destroy them more speedily." - Sergei Nechayev

"Vladimir Ilich Ulyanov had the courage to come out and say openly that famine would have numerous positive results, particularly in the appearance of a new industrial proletariat, which would take over from the bourgeoisie. Famine, he explained, in destroying the outdated peasant economy, would bring about the next age more rapidly, and usher in Socialism, the stage that necessarily followed capitalism. Famine would also destroy faith not only in the Czar, but in God also."  -Fellow revolutionary and friend of Vladimir Lenin describing Lenin’s "courage" in opposing any or all aid to victims of the 1891 Russian famine.

Note: Lenin believed the famine to be a necessary precursor to the rise of socialism. Lenin also believe that the destruction of faith in God was absolutely necessary for the attainment of socialistic goals.

Note: Socialistic planners of the  future ruin in America follow Lenin’s model. They believe in the necessity of mass genocide, upwards of 150 million Americans (or more) must be genocidally removed they say!  They posit the position that, if multitudes of Ameicans "rise up" against them, they will allow the consequent destruction of the economic system to usher in famine, and kill off the oppostion throught starvation, plague and strife.

"The greatest principle of all is that nobody, whether male or female, should be without a leader. Nor should the mind of anybody being habituated  to letting him do anything at all on his own initiative; neither out of zeal, or even playfully. But in war and in the midst of peace — to his leader he should direct his eyes and follow faithfully. And even in the smallest matter he should stand under leadership. For example, he should get up, or move, or wash, or take his meals… only if he has been told to do so. In a word, he should teach his soul, by long habit, never to dream of acting independently, and become utterly incapable of it."   - Plato, Greek philosopher, c. 380 BC

Note: Notice how the appeal for socialism by Plato in his  Republic subordinates ALL FREEDOM and ALL PERSONAL INITIATIVE. in all respects, the state REMAKES the individual in its own image and punishes the whole concept of individual maturity and responsibility, even as Bastiat stated.  Note too, the "long habit", "teaching his soul", "subordinating all freedom" behavioral conditioning of the individual.

4. Therefore, they [Socialists] have found fundamental antagonisms everywhere:

- Between the property owner and the worker

- Between capital and labor

- Between the common people and bourgeoisie

- Between the farmer and the city dweller

- Between the native born and the foreigner

- Between the producer and the consumer

- Between civilization and the social order

Note: Socialism of all types, in all eras, has exploited the weaknesses, flaws and especially, the points of envy in society. By pointing to private ownership, accumulation of wealth, business ownership, material blessings, inheritance and other advantages, the Socialist can arouse envy in others. By recasting these things in the mind as injustice and privilege, the Socialist conjures up factions. Factions create rivalries in society. Rivalries bring discord and the approach of chaos within society. Since people cannot live for long safely in a society dominated by chaos and discord, society at large cries for Big Brother to step in. Since Socialism thrives upon alleged or actual injustices, the Socialist always uses revolutionary fervor to bring about the All Powerful State.

Reaction to discord by the general population brings overbearing action by the State, in the hands of the socialists. Or as radical revolutionaries like to put it, “All the action is in the reaction.”

5.  If humanity is inevitably impelled toward injustice by the laws of value, toward inequality by the laws of rent, toward poverty by the laws of population, and toward sterilization by the laws of heredity, we cannot say that God’s handiwork is harmonious in the social order; as it is in the physical universe.  We must instead admit, with heads bowed in grief, that He has seen fit to establish His social order upon revolting and irremediable discord.  – Frederic Bastiat, Economic Harmonies, p. xxviii

Note: Here we find the heart of the matter with socialism, of all kinds. The socialist, as Bastiat points out, believes that any God who would be at the head of this created order (the world around us) must be imbecilic because He has built the creation upon revolting principles which must be “corrected”, a  thing the socialist is only too happy to perform. Of course, since any concept of “God”, by definition, could not include “imbecile” in His nature, there must NOT be a “God” in any sense of the term. Hence, the vast majority of socialists (except, for example, the so-called “Christian socialists”)  are atheists or agnostics.

The real point to see in #5 is this: when Adam and Eve were warned concerning the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, the warning saw them as attempting to become “as god” to “know good and evil.” Socialism is one major expression of that issue. Socialists, according to what Bastiat has written here, are always motivated to critique the social order as fundamentally “evil”. Therefore, they feel they know better than God. They feel they know what kind of social order they should bring about. Obviously, they conclude, somebody must do it. They then step up to the plate with their theories… and engineer strife among us and from positions of rule." To be as god, to know good and evil" meant  God charged mankind as those who charge Him with folly - and say they can "do better."

6. I raise my voice to make men hear these words which, if true, may silence all protesting voices: It is NOT true that the great laws of Providence are hastening society along the road to disaster.    – Frederic Bastiat, Economic Harmonies, p. xxix

Note: Amen.

-submitted, Wayne C. Sedlak, ICHR

Welcome To The Vision Viewpoint Newsletter

Welcome.

If you have any problems, or have any questions, please contact us right away.

Vsvion Viewpoint Staff