There is a fundamental principle for understanding a war, and that is to ask, “who” is proposing what and how? I wish to focus only on the conveyor of the message on this post. The “who” is to receive attention before the “what” and “how.” We can be easily deceived into accepting ideologies on the basis of emotional connection to particular causes. We are, after all, humans. But it is essential, nay, necessary, nay, crucial and essential and necessary put together, that we grasp what the underlying agenda of the “who” is. Of course, I am not suggesting we outright reject all ideas coming from the unbelieving mind. It is also true that anytime a celebrated “who” of our culture proposes only two options to solve gigantic matters, we ought to be looking for third.
Abraham Kuyper proposed a solution based on the Gospels called “common grace” which offers a dose of reality to unbelievers on a sunny day and occasionally on a rainy one. Sometimes unbelievers get electrified with common grace from their daily dispensary. I will be that guy in the corner cheering him on when his compatriots turn against him.
But we are poor interpreters of culture when we assume that some sexy Instagram star with 5 trillion followers who daily exposes her body to the virtual vultures is not trying to use her platform to propagate an agenda of dishonesty and disrepute. I am no longer amused by God-haters in Hollywood or in the woods of social media. As far as I can tell, they are all lost looking for meaning in nihilism and trying to find hope where hope is never to be found.
Again, there is truth to be found in all places, but it is fairly clear that even if a little ounce of truth is found in these simpatico characters from my favorite TV shows, by the time I get done with my analysis there will be little meat left in that ideological bone.
In more ways than one, we are imbibers of cultural norms. “We don’t want to be in the world,” we declare; but the first great cause propagated by our beloved “artista” seems good when it first meets the eye. So, we pour our wholehearted congratulations and kudos into their bucket, thus legitimizing their claim and clause. But, it’s the “who” that matters. The guy who says he loves life can also be the same guy who says you can kill a baby right to the point before he enters the world. The “who” matters, and we better be very confident that before we engage the “what” and “how” we consider from whence comes the “who.”
One Reply to “Consider the “Who””