It's deceptively simplistic to try to boil this all down to a straight metaphor of 'war' - killing, peace negotiations, the analogy doesn't fit. 'War' is used in all kinds of ways that don't fit with Don's definition of killing (until complete annihilation or surrender) like the 'war on drugs' and the 'war on crime' and the 'war on poverty' - no one is suggesting (I hope) that we kill all the poor people until the problem is solved.
In this discussion of 'culture wars', we've left culture undefined. This all seems to be an attempt to say "there can't be a culture war because there is no mass killing going on."
"Culture" does not mean politics, nor political parties, nor sets of laws.
A culture is like an ogre - or an onion. It has layers. Three of the most important from inside out are 1) shared beliefs that lead to 2) shared values that lead to 3) common behavior. We (as a group) behave in certain ways because of what we (as a group) value, which flows out of what we (as a group) believe. We often get so caught up in behavior we never ask what values are behind the behavior, and what our values reveal about our even deeper beliefs. For example:
An example (click on my name for my full example):
1) Belief: That people have a Creator (see footnote).
2) Value: Human rights not endowed by a government, but by God, superior to any government
3) Behavior: We fight for human rights (often even outside our own borders)
or
1) Belief: God created perfect humanity in a man and a woman and blessed their union.
2) Value: Marriage (and the subsequent family) is important and foundational to society.
3) Behavior: We have a special term (marriage), a ceremony, official recognition, and even rewards and incentives for marriage.
Under attack? All of the above.
There are many in significant positions of power and influence (the leaders of political parties, university professors, politicians) who are trying to rid the American culture of all of the above shared beliefs, values, and behaviors. Once they aren't shared anymore, the culture has changed, and only fringe groups share these beliefs.
True, Jesus didn't get involved in politics. He wasn't here be to a community organizer or a senator or a governor. He was here to die.
Paul, on the other hand, went to Rome to appeal to Ceaser to make Christianity a politically acceptable alternative religion. Judaism was legal, but now that non-Jews were becoming Christians, they were breaking the law, and Paul set out to change that on a political level.
Early Christians by their lives changed culture by saving lives of babies born alive and left outside city gates to die, and adopting them. Christianity has always brought about changes in culture, where some shared beliefs and values and behaviors die and others take their place. That's why cultures influenced most heavily by Christianity have some shared cultural values, even if the religious beliefs aren't there - values on human rights, and helping the sick and poor and orphans. Because of Christianity's influence, despite saying that we believe that we're all just random lumps of chaotic chance - the belief that humans are unique and valuable is still (for now) deeper and stronger (see the same footnote).
I think those of us who deny the existence of a war over the culture, while sounding cool and progressive, don't understand what 'culture' means, or we choose to ignore what 'culture' means and talk about political bickering instead.
Other short thoughts:
- When we change from one thing to another, whether political perspectives, religious affiliations, etc., we tend to become extremely critical of where we came from and very uncritical of where we are now.
- No media has ever been without bias, nor should we expect them to. We should use our brains and the discernment that God gave us and think critically. It's foolish to think you get unbiased news. They can only keep doing what they're doing if they keep their viewership/readership, so they make everything extreme, from vilifying the current president to only covering Iraq when it's bloody, to highlighting the stupid things that current candidates say. This holds true for tv, radio, and yes - even blogs.
Oooh, that footnote:
At some point we'll change our values and behavior because we no longer hold to the belief that God created humans unique. At that point human rights will suffer, and it won't just be those on the fringe of our culture who believe that two chickens are more valuable than one human.
I like this final version. And I really like the onion/ogre image.
A question: do you think people like Don Miller over-think all of this? Is that how they end up not-thinking and just feeling out what seems good and pretty and the nice thing to say?