Have you ever noticed somebody who seemed to live with disconnected presuppositions?
The first time I came across this reality was in a high school history class. During a discussion on the Civil War and the tragedy over lives lost, I brought up a different way of looking at the issue. You see, earlier that day in a biology class, many of the same students had heard a lecture on wildfires and how the destruction that occurs during the fire, actually enables new life. It was simply a natural system that not only prevented overpopulation, but also set the stage for what was to come. I proposed that we look at the fatalities of the Civil War like a wildfire and, therefore, while being destructive, they weren't really bad in the big picture, especially if we were to consider the overpopulation effects that we'd be facing.
I was honestly shocked by the absolute horror my peers had when responding to my theory. They couldn't believe that I could be so callous over the loss of human life. I on the other hand, couldn't figure out how they could happily sit in a biology class, declare that we're a few genetic mutations apart from a chimp, and yet not be willing to apply the same evidences we see in the natural world to humanity. There just seemed to be a disconnect.
Today, the biggest disconnect I see comes in the area of homosexuality, where there seems to be an abundance of people on both sides of the debate who are experiencing presuppositional disconnects. One of the groups I see not following up on their foundational beliefs are the strong proponents of evolution. They happily interpret life using phrases like the propagation of the species and the need for mutations that enhance the overall strength of the species, and yet, at least from the people I've met, tend to be rather lax on gay issues. The problem is, homosexuality is not helpful to strengthen the species because, as long as they hold to their orientation, homosexuals don't propagate. It seems to me that a strong proponent of evolution should also not care about the gay community because they consume resources that could be used by others.
A second group that seems to experience an extreme disconnect when it comes to homosexuality are Christians, many of whom are strongly anti-gay. Yet, at the same time, many of these same Christians would argue that, as a result of the Fall in Genesis 3, all people are sinful and, in various ways, destined to live outside of God's design, one manifestation of which could be, homosexuality.
In the end, no matter what the potential disconnect is, it seems it would be wise for all of us to think about what we believe, and how it plays out in how we live every day.
What other common disconnects to you see? Why do you think presuppositions and actions can, so frequently, not match up?
Self Gratification?
To answer your second question, it could be that man is just falling more and more into the desire to please himself rather than to know the truth.
------------
"I do not seek to understand that I may believe, but I believe that I may understand: for this I also believe, that unless I believe I will not understand." --Anselm of Canterbury
More and More?
Are people falling more and more into pleasing themselves or is it just becoming more noticeable to us?
Maybe one of the presuppositions is that we, as people, are either better or worse than the people that came before us. I've often listened to people say that we are different in a way that's better than the people of the past or worse. Is that really true?
truth or true lies?
Perhaps becoming more noticable is just a step on the path to where fulfilling desires is more important? Advertising is a good example. By advertising a product, a company increases awareness of it, thereby increasing the amount of people using it (provided it's a desireable product). I don't know of anything that became popular because it first became more noticable without there first being an increase in people buying into that thing.
Perhaps we're just getting better at disguising how much worse we are than the previous generations? An example of this is gay animals as rationalization for gay marriage. Some people acutally buy into the arguement (or maybe I'm just buying to the lie that media = popular opinion...*sigh*...or is it a lie?) that since it's ok for animals, it must be ok for us. And why wouldn't they? Kids have been taught for years that they've come from animals and are therefore a form of animal themselves.
Media Shapes Popular Opinion
When compared to the population the people within the media industry don't tend to hold the same ideals as the general population. But, the media is in the very best spot to shape popular opinion to be like their own.
In reference to what you say about gay animals that is within a framework. Specifically that we are just another animal. If we reomve God from the equation is what they are saying true? If we remove how God set us apart what are we than just another animal? This is where the God/no-god world view discussions can make a big difference in our everyday lives.
effects of the fall
Another angle on the gay animals would be, "What effects has the fall had on all of creation?" If we believe in a world pre-fall and a world post-fall then the world we live in now is entirely un-natural.
The doers are the talkers
Don't we often think that the people who talk about something a lot are the same people who are living the lifestyle they preach? For instance, when people talk about lining green. Don't we expect them to be the people who try to live greener than those who don't talk about it very much? The problem is that this just isn't the case.
I'm tempted to list examples but a number of them are as hot of topics as Joe points out with homosexuality but I'm just not as good as Joe at writing about them.
Doing shows what you really believe
I agree. When you don't walk the talk, it shows that you really believe something else, or there are conflicting views at work in you. Addictive behavior (our sin) shows the conflict inside. You may believe one thing but your behavior is different. Breaking addictive behavior is difficult. That is one reason why Christians are called hypocrites. We fail to live up to the perfection that we are called to. The other reason is there are those "Christians" who really believe something else.
(Offtopic: You can argue the statistics, but roughly 80% of Americans say they are Christian. About a third of Americans can correctly answer George Barna's question that defines them as "Born Again" and about 9% of those or 4% of Americans live a "Biblical Worldview" life according to George Barna. You can argue the statistics but the point is the Christian worldview is a minority worldview in America.)
hypocrisy
This brings up an interesting question on what it means, at the core, to be a Christian. Does it mean to follow a certain moral code? Does it mean to have certain rites and rituals? Or does it mean that we recognize our sin and to trust Christ for forgiveness?
Your answer will determine if you're a hypocrite or not.
By Grace Alone
It is by grace alone that I am a Christian. There is nothing I can do to save myself. I continue to fall way short of God's standard of perfection. It is not about who I am or what I have done. I trust in Christ to save me and forgive me, and even that faith comes from God. I thank God for his love, grace, and mercy. It is because of Him I am a Christian. That is true of all Christians.
What makes someone a Christian?
There is an interesting question wrapped up in this. Sure, we are saved by grace through faith and no amount of our works can save us. But, does that make us a Christian? Is a Cristian someone who is simply saved or someone who attempts to live the life Christ called us to?
Maybe this question can be phrased in a different way. Can we be saved because we have faith in God yet not actually follow him. And, if someone doesn't follow him are they a Christian?
By grace alone we are saved. Is it by grace alone that we are a Christian?
Walking With Christ
I believe once we are saved the question to ask is do we walk with Jesus or do we walk away from him? I believe God allows us to walk away from him and lose that faith we were given. We are called to walk with Jesus and with the help of the Holy Spirit to live the Christian life. God knows who are His. He can look at the heart and tell whether you are a dead branch or just a withered vine. I don't think we can. It is part of our calling to encourage others to live the good abundant life in Christ, and to strive to live that life ourselves. Eph. 2:8-9 is followed by verse 10 which tells that God has good works that he has prepared beforehand for us to do. Do we follow Jesus and do them (with his help), or do we walk after our own desires? I believe God gives us Christians that choice.
grace and faith
by grace, through faith ... what does this mean?
I'll admit, I'm really not comfortable with the idea of separating salvation from being a Christian. So let me sort of fly by that and suggest that figuring out what the whole "by grace, through faith" thing means.
The first question there is, "What's grace?" The old acronym seems to be fairly accurate ... God's Riches At Christ's Expense. Basically, grace means something is a gift ... it's something we don't deserve.
Now, and perhaps more challenging, "What's faith?" Some would argue it's an intellectual ascent or an acknowledgment of a set of truths. I would say it's more of clinging to grace because you realize you don't have anything else to hold onto.
So, why discuss this? For me, it beautifully sets up the question of, "If grace is the only thing you have to hold onto, how does that shape the way you live your life?" while also allowing the for the very important reality that, even when we're Christian, we still have that inner battle going on that prompts us to crave to hold onto something other than grace.
This explains, as part of our very identity as Christians, both our positive and negative behaviors, as something we would expect. If the behavior we witness is what we expect, then we're not hypocrites.
meta-ethics
one area that is apparent to me in terms of a presuppositional disconnect would be in meta-ethics, and specifically how relativism pertains to truth. If truth is understood as purely relative, the only 'meaning' that can be applied to our ethics would be subjective, yet nobody lives 'ethically' as such. Most people believe that when they are wronged, that the wrongdoer has violated a standard of behavior that he/she should have objectively observed.
This is difficult to explain in a comment post, but that's a condensed explanation.
simple test
What you're touching on here is a simple test to determine if somebody is truly a relativist or not. In reality, most people who claim relativism, really don't believe it.
For me, this entry point has been useful to move towards a, "truth is bigger than any of us" point and allows for a discussion about truth being there, but being, at least in it's fullness, unattainable (hum, reminds me of an Indiana Jones comment).
ethical relativism
right, but specifically in ethics (meta-ethics) is where I believe the relativist paradigm fails. This is observable in human behavior. I do think a relativist 'believes' his/her claim but cannot live as such, which is what I think you are alluding to.
I can't help but recall C.S. Lewis' first three chapters in Mere Christianity as a good resource (quick read) on the presuppositional breakdown in ethics.
We all have our own
We all have our own presuppositions. As Christians, we tend to see the world through our own lens, and we feel any and all our opinions are TRUE. All we need to say is, "Well, my opinion is based on biblical principles so YOU CANNOT EVEN ARGUE WITH ME and SHOULD NOT TRY.." I've seen so many Christians use this as an excuse not to listen, not to learn, and not to reach out to anyone. They refuse anything or any other thought. They don't even think about how there are multiple interpretations of scripture - they prefer to use their own and not hear a second of any others.
Through this lens, they also fail to see their own sin, but rather have a zoom lens on everyone else's. I think this disconnect is unhealthy. The most gentle, intelligent and useful Christians I have seen are those that have an open ear, mind and a mouth that stays closed unless the love and experience of Christ comes out of it.
The plank and the speck
Your comments bring to mind Jesus' teaching about pointing out the speck in someone else's eye whilest ignoring the plank in your own eye...in terms of sins, such as self-gratification.
Far worse than "unhealthy," this is death inducing! (many times physically as well as spiritually.)
Here's to having more useful Christians around! And in the Fishbowl!
;-)