Prager: Mel Gibson or Naveed Haq
Dennis Prager's most recent column pointed out an irony that I missed--and I'm surprised that I missed it because it should have been plain as day.
The column is titled "Jews shot in Seattle, Left angry at Mel Gibson," and points out that although the two "anti-Semitic" events that happened so near each other are obvious in their relative importance and newsworthiness, the press and media seemed to make a judgment call that defied all reason:
It's amazing how much damage the old mistake of viewing Christ's kingdom in earthly terms can do to the reputation of the church.
The column is titled "Jews shot in Seattle, Left angry at Mel Gibson," and points out that although the two "anti-Semitic" events that happened so near each other are obvious in their relative importance and newsworthiness, the press and media seemed to make a judgment call that defied all reason:
Prager's conclusion is obvious:
Question: Which story has most troubled the Left?
The answer is known to any American who can hear or read.
So, the real question is: Why? Why has the shooting and murder of Jews elicited less angst from the Left than the anti-Semitic statements made by Mel Gibson when drunk?
We should be worried about this: The liberal world fears -- and much of it loathes -- fundamentalist Christians considerably more than it does fundamentalist Muslims.I agree with this conclusion. But I don't know that I should be surprised considering that such a large portion of American evangelicals are “reconstructionist” in their thinking--acting (whether consciously or not) like society has to be changed from the top down.
It's amazing how much damage the old mistake of viewing Christ's kingdom in earthly terms can do to the reputation of the church.
posted by Mark at 5:13 PM
Hmmm...I don't buy it. I think the reason more articles are running about Mel Gibson then the murders is not because the 'Christian-hating media' loves Muslims and wants to damage Christians somehow through this, but just because we are more interested in movie stars then in shootings. Case in point: four out of the five previous posts on your blog have been about movies.
I'm curious though, could you elaborate on "reconstructionist" American evangelical thinking...I haven't heard about that before - and how is it connected to viewing Christ's kingdom in earthly terms?
A couple thoughts...
First, yes and no to what you said. Yes, I think you are right, in that the media is a perpetual gossip machine under the cloak of "professional legitimacy." Some do it better than others by avoiding "tabloid" style presentation, but most reporters and editors are still subject to the same impulses, which, from what I have been able to distill, is primarily a simple urge to gossip and to build one's self-importance through impartation of knowledge.
However, I must take issue with the idea that we are all more interested in movie stars. Neither do I think the content of my blog substantiates anything of the sort. My purpose in writing about movies is to, first, challenge myself to think about something others might only glance at, and second, to perhaps be helpful in forming an insightful judgment on the merits of a given work of art. Whether I am successful is another matter.
Second (regarding your second paragraph), I think this is why I am reluctant sometimes to do posts like this. It would take a lot of painstaking contemplation and composition to state exactly what I mean as accurately as a desire--new as I am to some of these ideas. I think I sometimes just assume some will know what I mean and ignore it and the rest won't care and ignore it :)
But reconstructionism more specific a word than perhaps is good. It would be more specific to branches of reformed thinking (primarily among some post-mils). Dominionism, fundamentalism, theonomism are similar ideas within differing contexts and circles. Like I said, they tend to view the world around us (in the case of the reconstructionist in particular) as the physical place that Christ will hold physical dominion after society has in general accepted his rule. The rest of society will then have it imposed on them.
If I am misrepresenting any terms or viewpoints and someone can correct me, please feel free!
I should already know this, and you did kind of explain this in your comment. But what is a “reconstructionist?" I never heard that term before, so what do they believe? You don't have to explain it if you don't want to I'm curious.
Hey I was just going to post about Dennis and then here he shows up on your blog! Did you listen to the interview he did with Walid Shoebat a while ago? Have you even heard of Mr. Shoebat? Stay tuned for me or check my blog later and I will post about him if you haven't heard of this very interesting man.
How about something on the attempted terrorist attack in Britain?
Interesting about reconstructionist beliefs...my family went on vacation in Wenatchee and took the Amtrak over there so we went to the closest church we could walk to which was a fun experience. It is neat to see how other parts of the body worship. But from what they said it appears they were pretty reconstuctionist.
Post a Comment