No Gun Control Without Self-Control

What do firearms, knives, and words have in common?  All three can protect or save lives; and, all three can destroy by sharp and deadly replies. 

Thanks to the First and Second Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, we Americans have freedom of speech and freedom to bear of arms, respectively. These freedoms also mean relatively few restrictions against fiery tongues and fiery guns.  Nevertheless, our protection from both tongue and gun is rooted not in civil law but in the moral code.  The moral law is grounded in Jesus’ teaching that it is out of the heart [that] come evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, slanders (Matthew 15:19).  Therefore, the answer to a safe and civil society is not found alone in “tighter controls” on guns and speech.  Instead, there must be a revival within institutions that nurture a godly disposition of the heart; namely, the family and the local church, both within the context of caring communities.

All Violence Comes Ultimately from the Heart

I believe government is ordained by God to establish rule of law, execute justice for lawbreakers, and protect the nation from foreign invasion.    But, for such a system to work requires both leadership committed to just enforcement of the laws of the land; and, a citizenry that recognizes its individual moral and ethical responsibility to higher authority--and ultimately to God.  This relationship requires no less than a partnership between government and religious institutions, both functioning in their respective roles to maintain order.  While civil authorities encourage social behavior by external laws and deterrents to anti-social behavior; family and church nurture character qualities that promote self-restraint, personal responsibility, and benevolence.  Alexander Solzhenitsyn, in his essay "Repentance and Self-Limitation in the Life of Nations," underscores the necessity of strong character in individuals if a society is to prosper:

Whatever feelings predominate in the members of a given society at a given moment in time, they will serve to color the whole of that society and determine its moral character.  And if there is nothing good there to pervade that society, it will destroy itself or be brutalized by the triumph of evil instincts no matter where the pointer of the great economic laws may turn.[i]

Although many believe that government shouldn’t “legislate morality” or “engineer” society, still federal, state, and local governments continue to move in this direction.  Perhaps the moral laxity and the decay of the nuclear family have created the vacuum that government now seeks to fill.  Leadership in Washington, through “ObamaCare” has taken on the management of human health care and even the ‘health’ of planet Earth.  At the local level, the city of New York is attempting to ban big sugary drinks as If to occupy the vacuum left by an adult population that seems less responsible for both their own nutrition and that of their children. But government efforts to legislate individual and planetary health are both doomed to fail without a revival of godly human character and personal responsibility.

The Bible emphasizes individual or personal responsibility under the concept of stewardship.  Stewardship is managing that which is not ours but has been entrusted to us by our Creator—our abilities, our time, and our opportunities to become responsible, members of society.  Stewardship is taught in many parts of the Bible as I have previously highlighted in Oikonomia.  Of particular relevance here is Colossians 3: 23-24 where Paul states:

Whatever you do, do your work heartily, as for the Lord rather than for men,
knowing that from the Lord you will receive the reward of the inheritance.
It is the Lord Christ whom you serve.

In order to fulfill our responsibility as stewards of creation, we have been entrusted with great potential as image bearers of the Creator Himself.  We are to be God’s caretakers who represent His interests as we rule over His creation.  But instead of representing God’s interests, our father Adam acted on his individual interests and consequently brought God’s judgment upon him and all his descendents.

In spite of the fall of man and the curse upon the creation, mankind was allowed to remain as stewards of  creation.  What followed was a steady march of “human progress” in the development of more sophisticated technology.  Each development increased the reach and power of humans to utilize the richness of creation’s treasures of soil, water, minerals, metals, fossil fuel, and biodiversity.  And, with each new technological advance from club and arrow to gun and bullet, and then, to rocket and drone came the challenge to use the potential of that technology either for human benefit and God’s glory, or for human destruction and God’s dismay.

The table below lists several common technologies that are influential in today’s culture.  (Click on table to view.)  The middle and right columns demonstrate that most technology can lead to either morally “good” or “bad” outcomes.

There are differing viewpoints about the moral component of technology[ii].  However, I believe the quality of moral character, judgment, and personal responsibility of the individual user is the chief determiner of whether a morally “good” or “bad” outcome will result from the use of technology.  For example, the same firearm used by an elementary school policeman to protect the students and teachers from the murderous intent of intruders can also be used by the same policeman in a fit of rage to commit the horrible act he or she is hired to prevent.  It follows that our society will not prosper amid a myriad of guns, gadgets, and goodies unless greater attention is given to the importance of each individual taking personal responsibility for his or her actions.

Mass shootings like the ones at Aurora, Colorado [See Oikononia, July 25, 2012] and Sandy Hook, Connecticut have prompted requests for new laws to prevent such tragedies.  Sadly, the moral and spiritual principles voiced by our clergy at memorial services for the dead are not allowed into our public schools, universities, and halls of government where attempts are being made to make sense of such behaviors and to prescribe ways to stop needless killing

Dr. Alveda King told Newsmax (March, 2013) that both her grandmother and her uncle, Dr. Martin Luther King, were killed by guns; but her father was mysteriously killed with no gun involved.  She concludes that,

…rather than giving all of our effort to gun control, we need to start looking at the hearts of the people and even consider when you do things like taking prayer out of schools…or just cut off all efforts to give people value systems, and morals…

Solzhenitsyn claimed that the only “way out” is through repentance:

What way out remains to us?  Not the embittered strife of parties or nations, not the struggle to win some elusive victory -- for all the ferocious causes already in being -- but simply repentance and the search for our own errors and sins.  We must stop blaming everyone else -- our neighbors and more distant peoples, our geographical, economic, or ideological rivals, always claiming that we alone are in the right.  Repentance is the first bit of firm ground underfoot, the only one from which we can go forward not to fresh hatreds but to concord.  Repentance is the only starting point for spiritual growth. ‘For each and every individual.  For every trend of social thought.’

Shouldn’t we who are so rich and surrounded by gadgets—we who are even shaped by them, and who are killing and being killed by them (whether gun, knife, or pen)—shouldn’t we TAKE the only “way out?”  Solzhenitsyn’s “way out” of this rings consistent with God’s heavenly call recorded in the Old Testament:  If…my people who are called by My name humble themselves and pray and seek My face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, will forgive their sin and will heal their land (II Chronicles 7:13 (part)-14). 

Taking the only way out?   Perhaps during this Holy Week, we can begin by setting aside a quiet time (away from distracting gadgets if possible), obtain a copy of the Bible, and read God’s Word.  Christ’s “Sermon on the Mount” recorded in Matthew Chapters 5-7 may be a good place to start.  Then, pray in communion with our Creator God, allowing His Spirit to illuminate our reading and our medication upon His truth claims.  After all, isn’t …the Word of God is living and active and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing as far as the division of soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart (Hebrews 4:12)?

Prayer:   Thank you Father for being a loving God and even “Father” to those who have simply surrendered their pride and rebellious hearts to receive forgiveness for sin based on Christ’s sinless sacrifice on the cross.  Help us to recognize that our hearts are deceitfully wicked without your transforming work through your Holy Spirit.  Without your transformation of our dispositions from pride and hate to humility and love, no amount of man-made legislation will bring resolution to the problems we face in our homes, churches, schools, governments, and environment. Conversely, as we surrender to You, be pleased to mold and shape our hearts so that we are transformed by the renewing of our minds [so that we may] prove what the will of God is, that which is good and acceptable and perfect (Romans 12:2).

---

[i] I am indebted to Dean Ohlman for recent discussions in which he pointed me to Alexander Solzhenitsyn’s essay cited herein.   He has developed these thoughts very well at http://wonderofcreation.org/2012/07/03/confessing-for-the-church-part-2/

[ii]  Admittedly, there is disagreement as to where the moral component resides, whether in the technology itself, in the human creator, or in the interaction between creator and technology.  For example, see the following source:  Latour, Bruno.  2002.  Morality and Technology: The End of the Means.  Theory, Culture & Society  (SAGE, London, Thousand Oaks and New Delhi), Vol. 19(5/6): 247–260

“It’s Not Dark Yet, But…”

The following entry grew from a brief response to Michael Brune, Executive Director of the Sierra Club, whose article, “It’s Not Dark Yet, But…”, in his blog “Coming Clean,” invites club members and other blog followers to urge President Obama to make “tackling climate disruption a top priority of his second term:” 

Hello Mr. Brune: 
 I appreciate your concern and zeal for a better environment.  However, the Sierra Club should not invest too much of its time and resources in the polluted waters of Washington with its failing leadership.  For example, I'm trying not to question the president's judgment as he has led Washington's effort to "pick winners" among companies promising "green energy" options.  Unfortunately, he gave us too many losers like Solyndra while wasting tax dollars in the process.  Indeed, my confidence in a leadership that has wasted trillions on bridges to nowhere has waned.   If the same trillions had been invested under the direction of knowledgeable business entrepreneurs guided by good scientific technology, we could be on the road to much cleaner energy and much less political cronyism from Washington.  Witness the difference between FedEx and the US Postal Service.  Or, consider some of the amazing successes coming from private investments in alternative energy based on new technology.

“Getting darker?”   It sure is.  And, unless the US addresses its penchant for borrowing from China, one of the Earth's biggest polluters, America will enter the kind of "darkness" known only to societies like the Soviet Union and China in the mid-20th century where the government had its way in social planning in every area of life.  Programs out of Washington, funded by borrowing more money, have never and will never produce the results possible in a free market economy that is allowed to function in an environment of real justice which is enforced by rule of law. 

Oil derrick of "fracking" operation  near Carrollton, Ohio

"Saving the Earth" is like "Saving Our Children" from the evil intentions of people with guns (or knives or drugs).  In both cases, the focus should not primarily be upon the "outward means" (guns, knives, smokestacks, pipelines and drilling rigs).  Rather, the focus should be upon reclamation of the moral and ethical disposition of those choosing and using the "means."  Aldo Leopold was not opposed to wise use of Earth’s natural resources when he stated:

By and large, our present problem is one of attitudes and implements. We are remodeling the Alhambra with a steam-shovel, and we are proud of our yardage. We shall hardly relinquish the shovel, which after all has many good points, but we are in need of gentler and more objective criteria for its successful use. -- A Sand County Almanac, pp 263-64 [Ballantine edition]

Mr. Brune, caring for the Earth and our children both have major moral and ethical requirements and I like what one of your predecessors, Carl Pope, said:

We sought to transform society, but ignored the fact that when Americans want to express something wiser and better than they are as individuals, by and large they gather to pray. We acted as if we could save life on Earth without the same institutions through which we save ourselves.  -- Sierra Magazine 83 (November/December 1998): 14–15, 14.

It's not dark yet, but... darkness will come unless we realize that climate change, mass shootings, out-of-control national debt, abortion, gay marriage, corporate fraud, etc. are all just the “tips of icebergs”  because we have submerged and suppressed the voice of moral conscience that had come from objective moral absolutes rooted in Judeo-Christian teachings.   If we return to these teachings and apply them, we will have hope of staving off the darkness and seeing a brighter day and a greener, safer Earth. 

Who Is James Holmes? Who Mentored Him?

On the night of July 19, excited movie-goers crowded into a theater in Aurora, CO for a sold-out premiere of the new Batman movie, The Dark Knight Rises.  Before the movie, it was just another evening at the theater as movie-goers allowed Christopher Nolan’s production of lights, sights, and sounds to transport them out of their work-a-day world into the action, adventure, and intrigue of Gotham City.

But while enjoying the imaginary world of Batman, the audience was rudely interrupted by James Holmes, thought earlier to be just another movie-goer.  But, according to ABC News, Holmes donned a “ballistics helmet, bulletproof vest, bulletproof leggings, gas mask and gloves.  Holmes detonated multiple smoke bombs, and then began firing at viewers….” allegedly killing 12 people and wounding 59 others.   After his apprehension by police, he informed them that his apartment was rigged with enough explosives to decimate the building and perhaps neighboring structures as well.

James Holmes' high school photo (L) and college ID photo (R)

When the Friday morning news reports were broadcast, James Holmes and Aurora, CO instantly became “household names.”   We all asked, “Who is James Holmes?”  Some of us tried to look within the man, asking about his mental and emotional stability.  Others searched for sociological influences or political motivations that would lead a person to carry out such a diabolical plan.   Many of us were simply stunned.

Writing on any aspect of this tragedy can easily become an “I told you so” exercise to support one’s political or religious agenda.  Nor is it possible now to give a neat and tidy account of why James Holmes committed the crimes for which he is being held.  For even as I write, James Holmes, his family, the families of his victims, and many others suffer by the hour in various ways.

Yet when tragedy punctuates the normal flow of life, we should take stock of our lives and ask questions that seldom occur during our weekday routines or weekend activities like movie-going.  Questions like the following:   What is wrong or missing in a person that would generate such a tragedy?  If we can know, can it be ‘fixed?’  Who are we as human beings?   Where did we come from?  What is our purpose and destiny?  This week’s blogs are raising these questions, at least “between the lines.”

Each individual must consciously or unconsciously address these fundamental questions of life. The manner in which we address them forms our worldview, or “lens” though which we process and interact with the world around us.  I admit my own inadequacy to answer the questions arising from Aurora.  But let me suggest the strong possibility that James Holmes allowed himself to be “squeezed into the mold” of our contemporary culture, and that he came to lose sight of his origin, identity, purpose, and destiny as an individual.

Perhaps we will eventually know more about whether James Holmes was nurtured in a home and community that helped him gain a sense of his origin, identity, purpose, and future.  Holmes’ neighbor for 15 years described him as a young man who “…washed the car for his parents, he cut the grass, he played soccer.”  Holmes graduated from Westview H.S. in San Diego, CA, in 2006 where he was described as “a smart kid,” “great in chemistry,” and as a “normal teenager.”   In 2010, Holmes graduated with honors with a degree in neuroscience from University of California-Riverside where he was described as an “impressive” student, and “a smart guy.”

Holmes’ choice to specialize in the neurosciences in a highly competitive environment ushered him into one of the frontiers of the biological and medical sciences; and, a field that challenges our very core beliefs about the origin and nature of humans and human consciousness and behavior.  It is likely that James Holmes was greatly influenced by a naturalistic evolution worldview no doubt presented by many of his school teachers and university professors.  Here, James would have learned that he and all of humanity are the product of undirected, random processes within matter that over billions of years have produced molecules, cells, and eventually an array of more and more complex life forms.  If he came to believe that he is the product of purposeless evolution, “survival of the fittest,” then Holmes’ naturalistic worldview would offer him little hope when the deeper questions of life confronted him personally: “What is my purpose for living?   Why should I care about other humans, or about improving our understanding of human health, consciousness, and behavior?

Again, I didn’t know James Holmes, and I don’t want to be overly simplistic.  Some suggest he was influenced by the Tea Party movement.  (Turned out to be a different James Holmes.)  Is my hypothetical scenario any less plausible?  Allow me to continue if you will.

I believe the Judo-Christian Scriptures provide solid answers to the deep questions we have listed here. The Bible teaches that God is the Creator (Genesis 1-2; Romans 1) and that His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made…  The passage goes on to say that this truth is so clear that …they [who deny that God is Creator] are without excuse (Romans 1: 20); instead, professing to be wise, [those who deny] became fools (Romans 1: 22).

The “world system of thinking” which denies the truth claims above can easily force each of us into its mold.   Later in Romans, we are warned not to allow ourselves to …be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, so that you may prove what the will of God is, that which is good and acceptable and perfect (Romans 12:2).  In other words, “be careful not to allow your way of thinking and defining reality to be molded by a world system that bases its “truth” on the pre-supposition that ‘all we see is all there is’.”

In June, 2011, Holmes enrolled in a highly competitive graduate program in neurosciences of the School of Medicine at the Aurora campus of the University of Colorado.   A classmate described him as “a loner,” and he reportedly dropped out a month ago.  The last course in which he enrolled was on “mental illnesses and psychiatric disorders.”  Holmes’ parents and neighbors observed changes in his behavior; and, for reasons not yet clear, he had become reclusive and left an impression on neighbors in Aurora that he was “deeply troubled.”   When asked whether he takes drugs, his answer: “Prefer not to say.” And, “Am a nice guy. Well, as nice enough of a guy who does these sort of shenanigans.”

So, the question is, “What was becoming of James Holmes during this past year?”  Maybe you’ll say I’m oversimplifying that which brought about the change in James Holmes’ behavior.  Perhaps we will never know.  However, we do know that human health and well being are strongly dependent upon a clear self-awareness, social affirmation, sense of purpose, and an understanding of their relationship to the natural world and reality beyond the material world.

I’m curious that Holmes and his family attended a local Presbyterian church where it is reported that “Jimmy was clean-cut, well-spoken and a good kid.”  What influence did the social and spiritual environment at his church have on James’ life?  After all, God’s plan is for His Truth to be taught, witnessed, and applied consistently within local churches, His body at work on Earth.  Here and in a “Christian home,” James’ life and worldview might have been transformed (changed) by a regular renewal of his mind (Romans 12:2) by regular reading, meditation, and application of the truth of Scripture.   The Book of Psalms opens with this proclamation:

How blessed is the man who does not walk in the counsel of the wicked,
Nor stand in the path of sinners, Nor sit in the seat of scoffers!
But his delight is in the law of the LORD,
And in His law he meditates day and night.
He will be like a tree firmly planted by streams of water,
Which yields its fruit in its season
And its leaf does not wither;
And in whatever he does, he prospers.   -- Psalm 1: 1-3

Blessed (happy; having much joy in our “happenings”) are the man and the woman who “delight,” “meditate,” and “walk” according to God’s plan outlined in Scripture.  The human heart is, spiritually speaking, the seat of our worldview and value system; our mind, the seat of our decision-making (or “will”).  Both heart and mind must be continually nourished by the truth claims of the Scriptures.  Result:  We are armed against the false claims from a “world system” of thought that denies the authority of God and Scripture.

The tragedy in Aurora is that many lives were suddenly taken or changed forever by a person whose mind had become disoriented and darkened, perhaps by genetic and physiological causes; or, just as likely, by allowing his mind to be “programmed” in such a way that he exchanged his purpose for living and learning about the human mind for the diabolical purpose of destroying human lives.

I close with two applications.   First, I disagree with those who claim that gun control laws need to be stiffened to prevent such disasters.   If my logic above is correct, this was not about access to guns and ammo; it was about the spiritual and emotional health of a person.  Senator Ron Johnson (R-Wisconsin) said it well:  I don’t think there is a solution here in Washington to solve this problem.  Just as I don’t believe Washington can produce a health care program that will meet the physical health needs of its citizens, neither can it address the emotional and spiritual health needs.  That must come from individual accountability fostered within healthy families, communities, and churches.

Second, I believe there is a somber lesson for those of us who would be teachers—whose “profession” is to be professors of truth.  As professors on college campuses, we should be good stewards of our profession of faith and of our academic discipline.  Students will observe and learn from our profession of truth through both our words and our actions.   Such “professing” helps students to acquire understanding about the world around them as they examine truth claims about human origins, purpose, and destiny.   School teachers and college professors have the privilege and responsibility to nurture young men and women who are looking for answers to these important questions.   May God be merciful to teachers and professors who have rejected the Creator’s clear message of hope that has been revealed in creation (Romans 1: 20) and in God’s Word, the Bible.   As the Apostle James states:   Let not many of you become teachers, my brethren, knowing that as such we will incur a stricter judgment.  James 3:1

Related Topic from Oikonomia:    Of grave concern is the tendency within the evangelical church and associated college campuses to question the biblical account of the origin of human life by the special creation of Adam and Eve as given in Genesis 1-2, Matthew 19:4, and elsewhere.  See Caution at the Gate to a Perilous Path (Feb 06, 2011) and Could He? Would He? (Apr 30, 2011)