“A new Crisis and many Christians rush to try and uncover the conspiracy rather than seeking after and studying the God of Providence.”
Presbyterian Minister
1.) False dichotomy. One can both seek after and study the God of Providence while at the same time try to uncover the conspiracy. After all, the Providence of God may be found in understanding the Conspiracy.
2.) Why is it automatically more pious to “seek after and study the God of Providence,” as opposed to seeking to uncover a conspiracy to the glory of God?
3.) Why would any Christian ever not try and uncover the conspiracies that routinely accompany every new Crisis? It would be a violation of the 6th commandment to blindly accept the coincidence narrative inasmuch as accepting the coincidence narrative could well lead to our harm and the harm of our loved ones.
4.) Why couldn’t I just as easily say, “A new Crisis and many Presbyterian ministers rush to blindly accept the coincidence theory rather than seeking after and studying all the instances in Scripture of how history is driven by Conspiracy and then realize they should do the same?”
5.) Why should any epistemologically self-conscious Christian accept at face value the meaning of any new Crisis? Why should any epistemologically self-conscious Christian accept the interpretation of any new crisis as served up by the Lugenpresse and a Government that is long established as expert liars? I should no more, as a Christian, accept the meaning of any new crisis as given by my enemy then I would accept the Chinese explanation of the meaning of the Wuhan crisis. Not delving into the conspiracies that accompany every “crisis” and choosing instead to only focus on God’s Providence, as if I can completely discern God’s decretal will, is completely irresponsible and sentimental mush.
While we are at it, let’s take the opportunity to take a whack at those Ministerial types who teach that when visited by disaster the proper Christian response is to just stoically accept it and not seek to remedy the disaster. For example … “If God gives you a Stalin as a magistrate well, God knows what He is doing and Christian you should accept God’s judgment and get on with life.”
Please realize that if Oliver Cromwell and the Reformed Round-heads had taken this response England would have been Roman Catholic. If John Knox had taken the, “God sent Mary to us so I guess I will bar my neck to God’s judgment and submit to Mary,” Scotland would never have become Reformed. If our American forefathers had accepted the British Parliament being illegally pressed upon them we would still be part of Britain.
These Ministers who teach that Christians just need to submit to their misinterpreted meaning of God’s Providence. How do they know that God’s Providence didn’t intend that the bringing of a tyrant was for His people to repent, rise up, and throw off the tyrant instead of their cowardly interpretation of God’s Providence that Christians are supposed to cower and accept wickedness in high places until such a time that God brings it to an end.
“This is an intensely anti-biblical view of social cause and effect. The biblical view is that people get what they deserve politically. Moses warned that evil hearts in the masses would bring corrupt rulers (Leviticus 26; Deuteronomy 28). This was the message of the prophets. In short, ethics has consequences.”
https://www.garynorth.com/public/10681.cfm
Moses did indeed teach that evil hearts in the people would bring corrupt rulers (Leviticus 26; Deuteronomy 28) but that wasn’t the point of this article. The point of this article is that while God may well send us corrupt leaders as discipline it is not unbiblical to repent, seek to walk in obedience and so seek to overthrow wicked magistrates.
Ethics do have consequences. So does repentance.
It might be good, in the future, to be sure of the point in question before one writes that what I am teaching is intensely unbiblical.
Cheers,