Saturday, September 11, 2021

Some of This and Some of That

Philosophy, or the love of wisdom, has been with us since the dawn of creation. Man cannot help but be an inquisitive creature who is constantly attempting to understand the environment that surrounds him. Perhaps the clearest example of this urge to know is the exploration of space. Nothing is more challenging than understanding what is "out there." In the same way, the quest to find God has occupied man's thoughts for all of his existence. Some have sought to do so through the Scriptures, and rightly so. Others, however, do so primarily through philosophy. It is this latter group that has gone off the rails, albeit in many cases with good intentions.

Since Thomas Aquinas attempted to apply Aristotelian categories to the effort to prove the existence of God, philosophy has dogged the Christian and his defense of the faith. In our present day, people such as William Lane Craig, make use of philosophy, in many instances discarding what the Bible has to say about a particular subject, in an attempt to prove that God exists and in order to try to win over the "scientifically-minded" unbeliever. Craig goes so far as to point out that humanity supposedly did not begin as Genesis tells us, God making man out of the dust of the ground and breathing into him the breath of life, but rather the mythical Adam was the product of a long line of "hominids" that evolved into the first humans. As the saying goes theology matters. Craig's theology is man-centered (in his case the philosophy of Molinism) and when theology is of that kind, it cannot but seek to explain everything based on what man thinks rather than with the Bible first and foremost.


Recently, the Supreme Court allowed a Texas law restricting abortion (which is really not restricting the practice as much as allowing others to seek to financially punish those who violate the law) to stand. And the outcry from those who approve of the murder of babies, the so-called "pro-choice" crowd, was as shrill as it was predictable. It is astounding that people would hold to a position that approves, and in many cases celebrates, the murder of the unborn. The key to understanding how such individuals are actively suppressing the truth of their actions, is their use of language. Rather than "pro-murder" they are "pro-choice." Rather than "the culture of death" they are the "my body my choice" crowd. Of course, these are the same folks who don't think your body is sacrosanct when it comes to vaccines (I’m not arguing pro or con when it comes to mandates. I am simply pointing out the inconsistency; see below). 

Perhaps the most interesting aspect of this whole debate is the fact that the left, which is overwhelmingly pro-abortion often decries what it sees as the pro-life side's "religious" beliefs in their stance. That, they will say, is mixing religion and politics to an extent that is dangerous and unlawful. Yet, when you read or hear the language coming from the pro-abortion side, you will often be struck by the sheer religiosity of it all. Take for example the dissent of justice Sonia Sotomayor in this latest case. In it, she moans about how the Texas law violates the "constitutional rights" to abortion and how this decision negatively impacts the "sanctity" of the court's precedence. As Albert Mohler pointed out in his briefing, to the left there are things that are holy. The simple fact is, however, that what they consider holy is what defines a culture that values death and depravity above all else.

In the 19th century, slave owners convinced themselves that blacks were not people in the strict sense of that word. Thus, this mindset allowed them to enslave blacks and often treat them like animals. To be sure, there were slave owners who were beneficent and kind to those whom they enslaved. The terminology itself, however, tells the tale: those whom they enslaved. Today, the abortion industry uses the same type of language to justify their abhorrent practice. It is not a child; it is a clump of cells. It is not a living human being but a growth growing in a woman's body who has the right to do with it what she wants. None of the abortion-supporting people would argue that slaves were not people. Yet, they claim the same thing when it comes to the unborn. The inconsistency of the worldly mind is glaring and obvious to all who want to see it.


It is impossible these days to escape the debate about the COVID virus and its repercussions for our society. Not only are we constantly treated to everyone’s opinion, “expert” or not, but we are also bombarded by the constant facts and figures about how many are getting sick, how many are hospitalized, etc., etc. Seems that just about everyone is exhausted from the constant barrage of information or misinformation concerning the illness, its effects, and the cost to our society and world. The one issue that appears to be gaining intensity rather than slowing down, however, is the debate about whether vaccine mandates and other governmental measures to combat the virus are strong-armed tactics to compel people who would otherwise not be vaccinated to do so.

The language that is often used to describe whatever the other side from your point of view may be is strident as it is scary. Just today I saw the following photo (courtesy of a brother in the church) which must have come from some sort of protest against the vaccine mandates (I don’t know where the protest was or what it was all about, so I can’t explain it beyond that). 

The implication is that, if you comply with the government mandate and get vaccinated, then you’re basically a spineless jelly fish who, had you been living in the 30’s would have quietly complied with the dictates of the Nazi party concerning their view of how society should work. I think it is unnecessary for me to say that such a comparison is, at least at this stage, ludicrous. To compare a vaccine mandate with Nazi oppression is to minimize that episode of history and the unspeakable evil that it brought in the name of national socialism. Furthermore, we have all kinds of mandates today about all kinds of things, the most immediately obvious comparison being that we are mandated to vaccinate our children if we want them to attend school.

Small pox, rubella, and a host of other diseases have been practically eradicated by vaccines and the mandates that come with them. One may argue that we should not have acquiesced to these either, but that is an argument that, in light of the effects of the medications, would have little to commend it. And none of those mandates created a government that is throwing us into jail for refusing to comply. I can understand it if some folks have misgivings about the vaccine because it has not been, in their minds, properly tested. The issue here, however, is not a matter of prudence. The issue is that many folks seem to think that taking the vaccine is akin to being subjugated and becoming servile nothings that will give in to anything and everything. I also understand the “slippery slope” argument. That, however, has to be considered on its own merits and not used as an excuse for comparisons that devalue the suffering of the WWII generation.

The bottom line in all this is that there are avenues for a person to take if they don’t want to be vaccinated. The companies requiring the vaccines could be sued, the courts could be appealed to in order to stay the mandates, and so on. To protest against the mandates by comparing them to Nazi oppression, however, is not only irresponsible and reckless, but also makes light of the true suffering that countless millions underwent because of the whims of one unhinged man and his sycophants. And that, my friends, is a real tragedy.



  1. Well, you served up a full plate this time! A few thoughts. As to the vax comparrison you already know what I think, as you echo my point of view. Finding parity between the COVID shot an Nazi oppression is simply intolerably asinine. It ranks among the most empty-headed assertions I've seen in my 67 years. It has zero merit. Zero. The picture you show did indeed come from an anti-vax enthusiast. Finally, as for proving God exists, in reality it is unnecessary. Romans 1:18 and following makes clear everyone knows God is. That some whine of disbelief, or bury their head in the sand of feigned atheism is irrelevant. Very, very good post!