Re: The greatest challenge facing mankind

From: janice matchett <janmatch@earthlink.net>
Date: Mon Sep 26 2005 - 12:48:27 EDT

At 11:07 AM 9/23/2005, George Murphy wrote:
>There's a fair amount of truth in what Crichton say: I think that all
>responsible environmentalists recognize that there are extremes to the
>movement.

## Responsible stewardship of our environment has always been a priority
for those whose conscience is constrained to put into practice the
admonishments in what they consider to be the "Word of God" which they look
to as their "only" standard. No other "laws" are necessary for such people.

Only those who adhere to the man-centered religion would attempt to enforce
their personal conscience on others so as to attain utopia (their brand of
it). Some of these totalitarian, elitist mentalities are professing
Christians, too. Moral busybodies (the politically/religiously correct),
never grow tired of tormenting people - attempting to force them to "do
what's right" - because, as C.S. Lewis so accurately stated, "they do so
with the approval of their own conscience."

Like C.S. Lewis, our Founding Fathers had their number, too. God, through
them, set up "we the people" to be king -- the only "bottoms-up" government
in the world -- where the citizens are in charge through their elected
representatives, and where it is impossible for any tyrant to obtain
absolute power and control.

Only tyranical mentalites call our Constitution a "living document" and
they are untiring in their attempts to destroy its purpose -- as protector
of absolute (self-evident) truth. It is a meaningless document otherwise.

  All activist "movements" eventually become infiltrated and then taken
over by extremists / radicals, who, because of the zealotry they exhibit
for "the cause", are allowed by the lazy and complacent to take the lead
(since they are so "eager to do the work"). Once their cover is blown and
people become aware of their real agenda (read, ACLU, EPA, Serria Club,
"Progressive" anything), they just move their operations and continue to
hide behind the skirts of benign-sounding re-named organizations. Radicals
don't go away.

You continued:

>What Crichton doesn't mention however is that there is also the other
>extreme which also has religious features - belief in the myth of
>unlimited progress. According to this myth there will always be the
>resources we need - or want - & we can't really do any serious damage to
>the environment. It's a religion that, more easily than the "deep
>ecology" extreme, can easily co-opt Christian language: God will make
>sure things are always OK if we just trust him.

### Those who believe that the Scriptures are God-breathed and thus
inerrant in the autographs - believe that God is a God of providence - that
he created and sustains all that is - that he knows the end from the
beginning - and that it is impossible for man to ever be able to figure out
what he has done, is doing, and will do. Only one who embraces one of the
various expressions of the man-centered religion would think that puny men
can thwart God's will unless the arrogant elites step in to "save the
planet", or some other such absurd ideas that appeal to those who actually
think that unless God gets our help "we're all gonna die!!"

You continued:
>
>OK, to that extent there's nothing wrong with the thrust of Crichton's
>talk - though of course a lot of the details can be debated. But in the
>present political and cultural climate it's highly irresponsible to make
>such a one-sided argument. The heresy that needs to be attacked is the
>heresy that presents a clear & present danger & today, especially in the
>US, it's the myth of unlimited progress & the chainsaw & bulldozer model
>of "dominion" that's the real threat. I have in mind not just the views
>of the present administration (though that's certainly part of it) but the
>popular culture in which the Hummer has iconic status.
>
>An analogy: Pelagianism and Manichaeanism are both heresies & should be
>condemned by Christians. But when everyone is flocking to Pelagius, it's
>irresponsible to devote much time to criticizing Mani. ~ Shalom George

### Religious extremists in the right-wing "utopian" Reconstructionist
"movement" are merely the flip-side of the religious extremists in the
left-wing "utopian" environmentalist "movement".

Rushdoony, Bahnsen, Gary North, and the rest of the "Dominionist"
screwballs who actually think that they will be doing God a favor if they
can ENFORCE "The Government of God" - a theocracy - on earth.

But they have the same problem as other tyrannical mentalities have. They
will have to dismantle our Constitution to succeed - because it stands in
their way, too - just as the Framers (who embraced the Biblical Worldview)
intended.

They understood that no man can be entrusted with absolute power over
others because of the WEAKNESSES that are inherent in human nature. There
are no "elites" who are exempt - all are subject to succumbing to weakness
from time to time. And that includes the activist "men in black robes"
sitting on the bench who think they should be able to ursurp the right of
the people to make laws through their own state legislatures, and instead
impose their own social / religious conscience on the rest of us.

~ Janice

>----- Original Message -----
>From: <mailto:janmatch@earthlink.net>janice matchett
>To: <mailto:asa@calvin.edu>asa@calvin.edu
>Sent: Friday, September 23, 2005 9:06 AM
>Subject: The greatest challenge facing mankind
>This is soooooooooooo guuuud. ~ Janice
>Remarks to the Commonwealth Club by Michael Crichton
>San Francisco, CA. September 15, 2003
>............................
Received on Mon Sep 26 12:48:49 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Sep 26 2005 - 12:48:49 EDT