ADBC: 17 – Justice, AfterLife and Rejecting God

Here is my contribution to the ongoing blog conversation with the man widely regarded as the more intelligent, handsome, honest and creative Dryden, David. Here’s the premise.

Previously in the conversation: There is a time and a place to relax and enjoy life. There is also a time and place to reflect on what makes it valuable. Do yourself and your friends, family and enemies a favour and have a read of David’s latest part in the conversation. It’s worth your while to read and consider what he says about the pursuit of the wise life; the process of unschooling and a frank and honest consideration of skills and their application to income generation. This is another excellent piece of writing as far as I am concerned to think about what makes life valuable and worth enjoying. I commend it to you wholeheartedly and encourage you to take in what’s written and reflect on these matters for your good and the good of those you love.

I will now endeavour to address the questions my brother asked me:

Q – In Australia, there are reports of the army performing forced “vaccinations” on the indigenous people for the alleged disease “COVID-19.” The politicians of Austria are talking of mandatory vaccinations for all adults by the 1st of February 2022 enforceable by fines or imprisonment. What standards of morality would you apply to these actions and potential decisions? And can there be justice in this life for those decisions and actions, if you see it as an injustice or crime?

Standard of morality? I presume you’re asking would these actions be considered right and good on the standard of morality I refer to? If I’m wrong in that presumption I’m open to your correction. As I hope you’re aware, I’d refer to the standard of morality that I believe to be based on the ethics of the rule of God as I understand it at this time with the caveat that it’s always open to better insight and understanding of how God expects the righteous rule to take place.

With those disclaimers set, the immediate response is that I see no way that those who love God and love people can really institute such decisions based on what’s going on. In essence it makes taking the vaccine a standard of citizenship which is just patently ridiculous. Patently. To justify it in any shape or form has to adjust the nature of what’s going on and we have to enter the whole scenario of ‘ifs’. We are not in any of those scenarios, we’re in this one where people can have justifiable reasons for not wanting to take the vaccine. So imposing these restrictions and punishments on people for not taking the vaccine is not just disturbing – it can be argued to be morally abhorrent if you go on the premise that you don’t interfere with the way people live unless it is incontrovertibly proven to be essential for life.

So it is an injustice and a crime in my perspective of things. The next aspect of your question then considers the issue of justice. Now on a simplistic question of the possibility of justice in this life, I think it is possible. What justice looks like for the enactment of these morally reprehensible acts is interesting. Who is held responsible? Everyone who voted for it in the legislature? The statutory officials who enforce these? Those who influenced, authored and engineered these acts in the first place? OK going beyond those questions to address the matter of what justice looks like is intriguing because in as much as I’m not totally satisfied by the incarceration method of enacting justice, it’s the model I’ve been conditioned to accept and I haven’t explored alternatives sufficiently. However, in the light of the significant damage that these actions can have on personal and social cohesion as well as those cases of people who have suffered and died due to vaccine-related reactions the exercise of justice in these cases has to reflect the severity of the crime. It can happen in this life if those who love justice and can enact it pursue it with due diligence. I genuinely have to believe that such justice can take place in this life because I’m not the sort of person who shrugs my shoulders all the time and believe that true justice will only happen when Jesus returns. I can make that statement … and still say that in as much as I hope justice is dealt to those who commit these acts of injustice, that it might be somewhat unlikely in the world in which we live.

I acknowledge, however, that in as much as I have written what I have written it is done in the comfort of a home that doesn’t have to worry about these things directly. My life and wellbeing aren’t affected by these decisions either as the recipient and victim of this injustice or as the orchestrator and supporter of it. I pray for both for the sake of peace.

Q – The majority of the western world has rejected God. Do you agree with that statement? If you do, then what do you see as the implications of such a decision?

I agree with that statement. The basis of that agreement is a very casual look at how life is around me. How it works in the school that my daughters attend, how it works in the school that my wife works in, how it works in engaging with people at all levels of life. Just a casual look, nothing too deep or heavy. I don’t have to turn on any television, watch any video on a variety of platforms or watch how news is reported in this country. I don’t have to go that far. Likewise a casual look at what it is to reject God sees this country and others in the world – not sure why you limited it to the western world or even the majority of the western world, there is no evident exception I can think of, but you know – tick sufficient boxes to qualify. God is not the source and ultimate reference point for the way countries are organised and governed. God is rejected as such in preference to the gathered wisdom of those who do exercise influence and control on what takes place in this country and others. The implications of the decision are seen in widespread corruption, decadence, dysfunction, delusion, despair and a desire to ‘escape reality’ by any and every means available. Those are among the implications of rejecting God. The biggest tragedy is how many reject God whilst professing with their mouths a respect for, an adherence to and an implicit basis of life on God. Said with the mouth but with actions, behaviours, policies, procedures, ethos and cultures that contradict those things.

Q – How important is the afterlife to you? How often does it enter your mind or impact the reason you do certain things? Is it irrelevant? Or is the promise of everlasting life of some value to you? What makes it valuable or worthless?

To a large degree, the promise of the afterlife is what informs what I do before the afterlife. My understanding of what life is based on what I see in the life of Jesus and what He says about what it is to really live. Faith in Jesus thus shapes how I live and as it informs me of what life is all about so there is a promise that the life experienced won’t just be about what takes place in this mortal and corruptible side of things. Thus life including the afterlife is all-encompassing for me. I don’t live now with a particular rush to get this over and done with so I can get on with the afterlife. Neither do I look to live this life hoping to pick up brownie points that will be sufficient for good things afterwards. My view of Jesus sees sufficient worth in making the most of this life in seeing what His rule is like experienced in the here and now, with a promise of the perfect consummation to come and enjoying eternity with Him. In that sense, the afterlife is not irrelevant to me and what makes it valuable and worthwhile is enjoying life with the Creator who defines it and invites me to be with Him.

---

As ever, these questions are challenging and don’t let up in their quality! Here are questions that I’d appreciate your responses to, please:

Q – How have your parents influenced how you behave as a parent?

Q – Is the state system that currently runs Britain illegitimate? What source legitimises authority and how? (To be clear, I ask this from your perspective and understanding of authority, etc and feel free to define terms as you see as appropriate?)

Q – What is a marriage? Who defines it? What makes an exemplary marriage? How would you describe the marriage you observed in your parents?

It continues to be a privilege for me to have this conversation with you via this means, my brother. Your insights inspire and your questions motivate me to think deeper about the life I endeavour to live. For that I am grateful. Thanks for your time.

For His Name’s Sake

Shalom

C. L. J. Dryden