By now, you've heard the news. A gunman killed five people and injured at least 25 others at an LGBTQ nightclub late Saturday in Colorado Springs, Colorado. Yesterday, authorities identified Anderson Lee Aldrich, 22, as the sole suspect whom they took into custody shortly after arriving on site at Club Q. Police are still investigating the gunman's motive and whether the attack constitutes a hate crime. Today, I want to take a moment to look at this story and unpack concepts like murder, hate, sin, and hate crime, from a Christian point-of-view. IS HATE A CRIME? Putting aside the reality that we'd be hard-pressed to actually come to a consensus on a definition of what hate actually means, we must press in for some semblance of clarity on the word. Especially since concepts like hate crimes and hateful rhetoric take center stage in unfortunate circumstances like what occurred at Club Q. So, the immediate question that needs to be asked and answered is this: is hate a crime? To say it a bit differently, since this is a blog post on a Christian Worldview platform, is hate wrong? Much to the shock and surprise of nominal Christians, the bible actually never condemns hate. At least not outright. In fact, biblically speaking, there are both positive and negative aspects to hatred. For example, a Christian should hate those things that God hates; indeed, this is very much a proof of a right standing with God. “Let those who love the Lord hate evil” (Psalm 97:10a). The closer our walk with the Lord and the more we fellowship with Him, the more aware and awake we will be of sin; first our own and then the sin of the culture. The more we understand God’s holiness and the more we love his character, the deeper our desire will be to be like Him. This means that we will not only hate the things that are contrary to His Word and nature, but we will also be bold in speaking out for these things; as God makes his appeal to the world through us. So, hate in and of itself is not anti-Christian. Though the world certainly defines this word in different terms, Christians must understand clearly that there are things in scripture God explicitly tells us he hates and tells us why he hates them. The God who loves all that is good and pure and holy must hate all that is evil and defiled and perverse...[In Scripture] we arrive at a list of more than 40 things that God expressly hates. They range from abhorrent sexual practices to pagan forms of worship to acts of grave injustice. Of course we must also understand that there are sinful ways to push against evil. There are many spiritually treasonous acts which have happened—throughout history in the name of God—which are themselves hateful, sinful, and evil. Evil is never overcome with evil, but rather with good (Rom. 12:21). IS CALLING SINNERS TO REPENTENCE A HATE CRIME? But here's the catch. Our culture has not only embraced certain forms of evil, but has also labeled certain forms of godliness as evil. Case in point: when the news broke of the violence and murders at Club Q in Colorado Springs, with it came the denunciations from the culture of those who have taken a biblical stance and condemned sexual immorality; including the practice and celebration of homosexuality. Here are a few examples: "Places that are supposed to be safe spaces of acceptance and celebration should never be turned into places of terror and violence. Yet it happens far too often. We must drive out the inequities that contribute to violence against LGBTQI+ people. We cannot and must not tolerate hate." | President Joe Biden "We can not, will not, allow hate to win. We must end this in our time. No rest until all of us, including all of us in the LGBTQ+ community, can be, and feel, safe." | Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg "You can draw a straight line from the false and vile rhetoric about LGBTQ people spread by extremists and amplified across social media, to the nearly 300 anti-LGBTQ bills introduced this year, to the dozens of attacks on our community like this one." | Sarah Kate Ellis, President and CEO of GLAAD So, it would seem, that culture's issue isn't simply one man's evil decision to murder people at Club Q—for reasons still unknown at this point—but also, and maybe even more pointedly, the inequalities, condemnation, and legislation which seems to be coming from those who refuse to affirm and celebrate the evil practice of sexual immorality. In essence, calling sinners to repentance is considered false and vile rhetoric. And at least according to some proponents of sexual immorality, should not only be considered extremism but should also carry direct responsibility for what happened at Club Q on Saturday night. THE CONFUSION WITH SIN & HATE Which brings me to my final point. What we've discovered in all of this mess is just how messy the rules of engagement can be, for Christians who are trying to stand with one foot firmly planted on side of cultural-acceptance and one teeny little pinky toe lightly touching the side of Biblical truth. On one hand, it is absolutely right for Christians to lament the sinful, hateful, dreadful, evil murders which took place at Club Q. Murder is evil. Murder is wrong. Murder is sin. Christians should be the loudest voices crying out over all forms of the devaluation, destruction, and dissipation of the value of human life. The lives that were taken, at Club Q, were connected to people who bore the image of God; regardless how they chose to represent him or reject him. There is no room, within Christendom, for any followers of Christ to do anything other than mourn with those who mourn and weep with those who weep; because of the (5) souls who were murdered. This is our biblical command and responsibility as followers of Christ. Yet, murder isn't the only sin in play here, is it? So, why is it that many professing Christians will openly and publicly wail at the loss of life in a gay bar, but refuse to openly and publicly mourn the very existence of the gay bar? A public display of godlessness should never be viewed, by Christians, as spiritually or culturally neutral. What other decadent establishments would Christians so lackadaisically embrace? The existence of a "gay bar" should be something that makes Christians weep. That brings them to the same kind of mourning and lamentation as the murders of those people who were killed in that very establishment. Murder is sin and so is homosexuality. Unrepentant murder leads to spiritual death and so does unrepentant homosexuality, sodomy, fornication, and sexual immorality. The only biblical distinction made between murder and sexual immorality is that Paul considers the later to be more egregious, because it is man's choice to sin against his own body. Flee from sexual immorality. Every other sin a person commits is outside the body, but the sexually immoral person sins against his own body. 1 Corinthians 6:18 So, while the nation mourns, rightly, about the (5) murders which occurred at ClubQ in Colorado Springs, Christians should also spend some time reflecting; asking ourselves whether we are more prone to grieve the loss of life because of one man's senseless acts of violence or the spiritual callousness of an entire culture because many men and women have embraced sexual immorality so much—that we literally establish public venues where this form of sin can be celebrated, elevated, and normalized.
0 Comments
An interesting thing has been happening in advertisement over the past several years. If you've been paying attention, and not simply falling for the subliminal messaging of the marketing manipulators, then you've noticed a slight change in what is being presented as normal in television commercials and social media ads. Now, mind you, I'm fully aware that my white privilege and bigotry likely disqualify me from speaking on such things. However, since we're both already here, why not stick around a little bit longer to see if I have anything of value to say. GAY DADS, SINGLE MOMS, AND MULTI-RACIAL FAMILIES Now, please don't misunderstand what I'm saying or even implying. I'm not trying to equate every form of representation we see on TV as immoral or shameful. In fact, there are many examples of representation that are not only biblical but are honorable, noble, and helpful. Is a multi-racial family sinful? Of course not. However, I'm also trying to expose the reality that there is an intentional effort to normalize certain things that are marginalized, while removing or replacing things are actually more normal (i.e. common, traditional, usual). Some of these things are morally neutral, but many of them are not. There was a time, in the not-too-distant past where marketers actually cared about presenting a form of normality and morality most Americans agreed was good. Because of these idealistic efforts, far more time was spent, by marketers, trying to shape a positive image of American culture rather than simply celebrating the things within the culture that were shameful. Today, marketers spend way more time formulating and baking-in as many virtue signals as they possibly can, into their 30 second bits or their promotions on social-media. That's why modern commercials are filled with gay dads, single moms, and multi-racial families. It's not because they are trying to present a fair representation of the general population. On the contrary, they're trying to manipulate the general population into believing that things—many of which were considered wicked, unprincipled, depraved, and perverted—are not only normal but are also pervasive and prevalent. And why is this you might ask? Because representation has now become a primary aim when trying to peddle products and manipulate people. WHERE ARE ALL THE STRAIGHT, WHITE, CIS-GENDER MEN AT? But if that's truly the case, and representation matters, then where have all the straight, white, cis-gendered men gone? Seriously. If a person being able to "see themselves" rightly represented in advertisements and media is as important as we're being led to believe, then why aren't we seeing more of the predominant population of American males in advertisements and other media? Again, the answer is simple. Equity. NORMALIZATION, REPRESENTATION, AND MARGINALIZATION The one major theme that normalization, representation, and marginalization all have in common is their connection to a very specific way of viewing the world and its structures. This ideology or worldview, can be summed up as the dynamics of power. Marxism, which is primarily a political philosophy, assumes that the ruling class has historically oppressed the lower classes, and thus social revolution is needed in order to create a more far and equitable society. Marxism teaches that the best system of government is one in which wealth and power are distributed equally. And not just equally, but also equitably; meaning, the inequalities and inconsistencies in outcomes must be traced back to the differences in power which either provided or prevented equal outcomes. So, in advertisements—and other forms of media—it is important to ensure the people with power are not able to hold onto that power. It must be taken from them and redistributed to the marginalized. This is done to ensure that marginalized people are more equitably represented, so they might have the ability to rise above the implicit biases and systemic oppression which have prevented them from achieving and/or obtaining power. LEVELING THE PLAYING FIELD BY ELIMINATING THE COMPETITION Since equity is the chief aim, in this line of thinking, then the rules of the game must be rewritten. In fact, because we've been led to believe that the teams are stacked in favor of white men, the new rules don't even need to be fair, just, or principled. The game must be played, with advantages that favor the underdogs. And since this is a zero-sum game, it cannot end in a tie. Those without power must be assured victory and those with power must be defeated. TWO GAY DUDES AND A CAMPFIRE With the social-media algorithms being as eerily accurate as they are, there is absolutely no reason why the social-media feed of a straight, white, cis-gendered, Christian, married father of three white, Christian, cis-gendered kids would have advertisements depicting two gay men collecting wood for a campfire. And yet, it's things like this that I see on my social media feeds all the time. As the userbase on these platforms—Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and every other social media application knows everything about us. They know what we like, what we buy, what we say, how we vote, how we spend our money, and ultimately how we think. Yet, efforts are still being made, not simply to sell us products, but also to sell us ideas and worldviews and culture. We are being manipulated. We are being desensitized. We are being reprogrammed by intentional media programming. There is a certain worldview that these advertisers, platforms, and mainstream media organizations are trying to sell. A world in which two gay men (and their faux-family) are just as normal as a God-fearing and Christ-exalting nuclear family. A world in which a single mom—with her three fatherless children—has just as much power, influence, and acceptability as a woman who is married to the father of her children and raising them (to fear the LORD) under the headship of her husband's teaching, instruction, and shepherding care. THE ENEMY'S ENDGAME Pilgrims, there is an endgame here. It's the deconstruction and devaluation—of the importance to our culture—of the biblical nuclear family; through the overrepresentation and attempted normalization of the marginalized but modern family. The enemy has spent his entire existence, since his own fall from God's grace, trying to cast a shadow at the foundations of God's creation and the things which God called very good. He does this in the same way he always has. Through deceit and manipulation; as he misrepresents truth and offers false freedom. He peddles fake-power, to those who are tempted by it, and offers the illusion of equity to those convinced that their guilty conscience is actually just a product of religious engineering, social-injustice or the intolerant brutality of those who have chosen to live under the mighty and repressive hand of religious bigotry. The enemy accomplishes his aims, by normalizing the feelings and experiences of godlessness. Through his manipulation, in the media, those who are enslaved by their own sin begin to see themselves represented as righteous and virtuous and normal. In this fake morality, people are convinced that the real injustice is God's restrictive commandments or his repugnant rules as-well-as his minions who continue to enforce his unjust injunctions, in order to maintain their own power over those who have been marginalized by biblical tyranny. THE GATES OF HELL SHALL NOT PREVAIL But here's the thing. God wins! Evil will not get the final word. Victory has already been achieved, through the person and the finished work of Jesus Christ. Certainly sin continues to have some authority in this world, but only as much as God allows, in order to accomplish his purposes for the fame and glory of his name; and the joy and blessing of those whom he has set apart as holy. The enemy knows this. The daemons know this. They recognized Christ when he was casting them out of sinners and rebuking them in the name of God. The question isn't if God will get the final word, but rather who will be found in his favor when he finally says, "ENOUGH". This is where Christians come into the picture. We are Christ's ambassadors and he is making an appeal to the world, through us. In a culture that is becoming increasingly hostile to the things of God, when Christians refuse to make waves, cause trouble, stir the pot, or push back against the gates of hell—with the power of the gospel—we are not thwarting God's plan. We are, instead, rejecting what he has called us to; namely, to be holy as he is holy (1 Peter 1:16). The godless world is being lied to and manipulated by forces of evil and principalities of darkness which have mastered their craft. Their one and only goal is to rob from God the glory due his name by creation which was made for that single purpose. This evil mission is accomplished when sinners are convinced that their sin isn't a matter of right or wrong, but rather a matter of marinization or a lack of power...representation...and normalization. They have been convinced that the best way to push back against this repressive righteousness is to silence the majority and ensure their lifestyles and sin are being celebrated, marketed, glamorized, and normalized; while those who hold to Biblical convictions are being subtly desensitized or eliminated along the way. Will we push back against the enemy's efforts or will we stay silent and watch as a godless world continues down the path of destruction; on their way to hell? The question isn't whether God will hold unrepentant sinners accountable for their choices. We know he will, because he told us he will. The real question becomes: will there be Christians who are brave enough to intercede for sinners and plead with them—to repent and believe in Jesus and be rescued from the wrath and righteous judgment of God. If sinners be damned, at least let them leap to Hell over our dead bodies. And if they perish, let them perish with our arms wrapped about their knees, imploring them to stay. If Hell must be filled, let it be filled in the teeth of our exertions, and let not one go unwarned and unprayed for. Charles Spurgeon
I've been thinking about this a lot over the past several weeks. I can't tell you how many times I've heard people say something to the effect of: "well, it seems like the majority of people feel differently, so it looks like you're in the minority". There is so much emphasis placed on what the "majority" thinks. We see it all over the place—especially in the news—where headlines stressing this reality are commonly used to make people stop and question whether or not they are, indeed, on the wrong side of history and whether or not they are comfortable being there. Here are some examples:
And when I see these headlines or receive comments like these on social media, I do feel like a minority voice. But here's another reality: I actually don't care! THERE IS NO MORAL AUTHORITY IN THE MAJORITY Thankfully, I came the the realization a long time ago, that as a Christian man—whose primary aim in life is to glorify God and honor his word—many of my views, decisions, words, and actions won't be viewed by the majority of people in my culture as good. In fact, many of my convictions—the things I stand for at the very core of my being—are not only seen as problematic, but are also considered (by many) to be wrong or even evil. Don't believe me? Do you think I'm being overly-dramatic? Follow me on this thought experiment, if you'd be so kind. THE (MORAL) BATTLE OF THE BULGE Which of the following two people do you think has the greatest risk of being called out, criticized, or cancelled by American culture? Person One: A man—who dresses up as a caricature of a women and has over 8-million followers on TikTok—who makes clownish efforts to normalize the phallic-shaped bulge which he suggests women can have when they put on hotpants and parade their perversion in public. OR Person Two: A woman, a Senator from Tennessee to be precise, who pushes back on the efforts of the aforementioned wackadoodle, and publicly rejects BOTH the pervert and those who support his efforts to subjugate God's law and reject the authority and sovereign rule of the Author and Creator of life. We already have our answer folks. While President Biden, who self-admittedly struggles to remember he is President, has remained busy calling out the deplorable Ultra-Mega-MAGA types, he still found time to invite the TikTok Tranny, also known as Dylan Mulvaney, to the White House so he could exploit Dylan's "celebrity status" to gain a few virtual virtue-signal points with all the Americans who are hellbent on celebrating depravity. And the woman who had the courage to call out this nonsense, Sen. Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee to be exact, was rebuked by the wokies for her audacity to actually call out the obvious. One mainstream media outlet ran a hit piece on the senator, with the following sub-headline: Sen. Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee joined right-wing activists' vitriol campaign against a 25-year-old trans woman who has been chronicling her gender transition on TikTok. So, yes! It's seems very clear to me, to those who are paying attention to such things, that humanity is once again entrenched in a culture who shamelessly calls evil good and good evil (Isaiah 5:20-21). 20 Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter! 21 Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes, and shrewd in their own sight! THIS IS NOT THE FIRST TIME HISTORY HAS REPEATED ITSELF And while history doesn't always repeat...it definitely rhymes. So, I'd like to look back at ancient history to try and prove my point. While many people focus a lot of their energy and effort to ensure they aren't found on the wrong side of history (i.e. the minority side of the majority) the truth is, sometimes the majority is just dead wrong. Case in point. Turn with me, if you will to the book of Genesis, chapter 18 and 19. Here is a story that most of you pilgrims are probably fairly familiar with, but just so we don't leave anyone behind, let's take a moment to paint a picture of what is going on. God had just had a decent meal and a conversation with Abraham about some things he'd been hearing about a place called Sodom. And it wasn't good things he'd been hearing. In fact, he had heard of their evil and was sending in his hitmen to destroy the entire city because of it's debauchery and perversion. Being the good uncle he was, Abraham pleaded with God to spare Sodom, if he could find 50 righteous people in the city. God humored Abraham's plea, but Abraham had second guesses about how far he may have overshot on his prediction. He negotiated with God several more times, asking that if he could find forty or thirty or twenty...oh, heck even ten righteous people that he would spare the Sodomites his wrath. Then God sent his angels to Sodom. They entered the city in the evening. Abraham's nephew (Lot) saw them and greeted them and invited them to his house to spend the night, wash their feet, and share a meal with Lot and his family. At first, the angels refused, saying they would spend the night in the town square, but Lot pressed them strongly; imploring them to come to his home instead. We quickly find out why Lot was so adamant that they not stay the night in the town square. Before the men were even ready for bed, all the men of Sodom (both young and old) surrounded Lot's house and made the following demand: Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us, that we may know them. Genesis 19:5 SEX IN THE CITY Now to be clear, this wasn't an act of hostile hospitality; as some liberal theologians would like us to believe. The demand, from the men of Sodom, was for Lot to send out the angels so the townsfolk could "know" them in the gang-rapey sense of the word. To restate it, the majority of the men in Sodom had come into agreement that the most appropriate way to welcome new-comers into their city was to pull them into the town square and rape them. And Lot found himself on the wrong side of history. He was the only man in the entire city, willing to call out the wicked desires of the moral majority. Lot went out to the men at the entrance, shut the door after him, and said, “I beg you, my brothers, do not act so wickedly. Behold, I have two daughters who have not known any man. Let me bring them out to you, and do to them as you please. Only do nothing to these men, for they have come under the shelter of my roof.” But they said, “Stand back!” And they said, “This fellow came to sojourn, and he has become the judge! Now we will deal worse with you than with them.” Then they pressed hard against the man Lot, and drew near to break the door down. Genesis 19:6-10 Now, of course, we must also recognize that Lot was far from a model citizen, himself. Instead of giving into the perverted lust of his townsfolk, he instead offered them a consolation of his two virgin daughters. Not really a great example of father of the year. However, the point I'm trying to make here isn't how wonderful Lot was, but rather how depraved and perverted the men of Sodom were; you know, those who found themselves in the majority. A culture which is dead set on rejecting what God calls good and celebrating that which God calls evil, will often use horizontal measurements to try and compel others to join them in their sin. In fact, that's basically what a mob does. Mob mentality—also called herd or hive mentality—is the inclination that some humans have to be part of a large group, often neglecting their individual feelings in the process, and adopting the behaviors and actions of the people around them. Now this doesn't mean that individuals aren't held accountable for their own decisions or that they have no capacity to examine and then reject the behavior of the majority. On the contrary, what it actually means is that there is a psychological and spiritual explanation for why they don't. Temptation seeks to disguise itself with many different forms of validation. For example, a piece of fruit looks good to the eyes, so it must be good for the body, right? Or a desire to be accepted or not rejected by others certainly has some immediate payouts; and how can it be wrong if so many people say it's right? There are countless ways which sin temps us to reject God's word—which he has made explicitly clear in scripture—and make excuses for why it's outdated, irrelevant, confusing, or worse of all flawed. Yet, these are the excuses that so many professing Christians make, when they do theological gymnastics in order to justify their decision to be in the majority; even when the majority is embracing and celebrating sin. IT'S BETTER TO FRIENDLESS AND FAITHFUL, THAN POPULAR AMID THE GODLESS Pilgrims, here's the point I'm trying to make in all my rambling. When it comes to the Christian journey, it is far better to find yourself on the wrong side of history, than it is to find yourself on the wrong side of eternity. Jesus told us, in the Gospel of Matthew: Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. (Matt. 7:21) History has given us countless examples of people who rejected God, in order to be counted among the majority. However, when we stand before God (alone) on judgment day; we will not be able to give our excuses, blame our associates, or offer futile justifications about why we chose to reject God's law in order to be accepted by the lawless. So, before you decide to lay down your cross and join the mob, remember that even thought the voice of the majority may be the loudest voice you hear, it is the voice of God—found in the word of God and the finished work of Jesus Christ—that matters for eternity. I know I'm going to raise some hackles with this post, so I'm trying to be up front about it in hopes that it will help reduce the shock and eliminate as much of the offense as humanly possible. KINDNESS, APART FROM CHRIST, IS A HEAPING PILE OF **** Seriously. Kindness makes a horrible substitute for a Savior. It's true. Whatever you want to call it—whether it's altruism, generosity, charity, goodwill, philanthropy, humanitarianism or one of the other 10,000 names we've given it over time—kindness, without Christ, is a heaping pile of poop. Why? Because kindness can't save anyone. Kindness can't earn or restore righteousness. The Bible is very clear that even our righteous deeds are like filthy rags (Isaiah 64:6). And not just any rags either, but rags which have been used by a woman (or for those playing silly word games, "menstruating people")—during her menstruation cycle. So kindness, albeit it a decent way to measure character, fails when it comes to salvation because no amount of kindness can save a person from God's wrath. THE DECEPTION OF KINDNESS Now, please hear me out. I want to be clear. I am not anti-kindness. I may be pugnacious, and I might have the guilty pleasure of enjoying Nick Lowe from time-to-time, but I don't actually think it's cruel to be kind! In fact, it's cool to be kind. It's right. It's good. It's honorable. It's just. It's moral. But it's not sufficient. And that's the real rub for me on this issue. There seems to be some kind of misconception about kindness and its value to the human soul. We see it all over the place. Yard signs, t-shirts, bumper stickers, coffee cups, and social media posts all leading us towards the same lie. That kindness matters more than anything. So, whether you're a Christian, an atheist—gay, straight or anything in between—the one thing that matters all the time is whether or not you are kind. Yet the Apostle Paul's words in Philippians 3 tell a very different story. In fact, his quest for righteousness crumbled, when he came face to face with Jesus. Paul's self-righteous high castle, which he built brick-by-brick in his lifelong pursuit of righteousness, was destroyed; and he was all the better for it. That's why his words have so much relevance in today's culture of kindness. Let's take a look. 7 But whatever gain I had, I counted as loss for the sake of Christ. 8 Indeed, I count everything as loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. For his sake I have suffered the loss of all things and count them as rubbish, in order that I may gain Christ 9 and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God that depends on faith Phil. 3:7-9 And there you have it. As clear and plain as one could hope for, from a guy whose self-righteousness was utterly destroyed by the eternal power and surpassing worth of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Paul tells us, in his letter to the church, that he counts everything as loss compared to the surpassing worth of knowing Christ and receiving Christ's righteousness; through faith in the finished work of Christ on the cross. CHRIST IS THE KEY TO KINDNESS As we already eluded to, righteousness apart from Christ is a sinful pursuit. It's roots are in pride and self-sufficiency, and arrogance, and self-righteousness. Good deeds, done apart from Christ are not good. They may be seen as good and in fact they may be tied to goodness; but they are not good because they can never be good enough. When Jesus was called good, he immediately asked the question: why do you call me good? He then followed up his question with a statement that is so important for us to hear and acknowledge: No one is good--except God alone. (Mark 10:18, Luke 18:19). Any efforts by man to do good fall short of the standard God has created for what it means to be good. This includes kindness. No matter how hard we try to be kind, without Christ's righteousness, our kindness is like a used tampon or menstrual pad. I know we don't like hearing this, but that doesn't make it any less true or necessary. In fact, it might make it even more important or imperative because our sinful hearts try to reject truth and replace it with lies that tickle our ears. OUR KINDNESS CERTAINLY HAS TO COUNT FOR SOMETHING, RIGHT? When it comes to eternity, everything that a man does to earn the favor of God, will burn. And if the only thing a man has is a list of all the kind and compassionate things he did in order to find favor with God, the saddest news of all is that a man's efforts will always fall short of the standard God has for holiness; namely, perfection. Only Christ's finished work on the cross is sufficient for reconciling man to God. Therefore it is a fool's errand to seek to do kind things, if those kind things are not connected to or extensions from Jesus. And not only that, when we look at the things which the culture considers to be kind, we quickly see they often contradict what the Bible says is good and righteous and holy. This is why the Apostle Paul can so confidently say, everything he did was like rubbish (i.e. human excrement) compared to what he received—by grace alone through faith alone—in Jesus Christ. It was not Paul's righteousness or kindness that put him in good standing with God. It was Christ's finished work on the cross. NOT ALL KINDNESS IS CREATED EQUALLY. It's right to be kind, but kindness is only good when it is rooted in the source of every good and perfect thing. God is the source of good and only what God calls good can, in fact, be good. Anything else is an imposter. If kindness is defined or measured based on how it makes a person feel, then validation of kindness is subjective. However, if kindness is measured based on what God calls good, then there is an entirely different standard by which it should be measured. Affirming someone in a decision they are making or a lifestyle they are choosing may leave them feeling validated, supported, and honored. But these feelings—and the actions taken by people to stimulate the feelings in others—should not be confused or conflated with kindness. It is very possible, especially in a world corrupted by sin, for a person to be validated in a choice that dishonors God and themselves; even when it feels good and seems right. In this case, the validation is neither kind nor good. In fact, by the objective standard of God's word, it is more rightly considered cruel and evil. Sin always distorts the truth and often times leaves people feeling good about themselves and their choices, but goodness is not assessed by subjective feelings. It is assessed by the objective truth of God's Word. Our culture wants us to believe and accept that true kindness will produce happy feelings, but the Bible is clear that true kindness produces the fruits of godliness. For this very reason, make every effort to supplement your faith with virtue, and virtue with knowledge, and knowledge with self-control, and self-control with steadfastness, and steadfastness with godliness, and godliness with brotherly affection, and brotherly affection with love. For if these qualities are yours and are increasing, they keep you from being ineffective or unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. 2 Pet. 1:5-8 True kindness will always line up with the truth of God's word. Any efforts at kindness which contradict what God has clearly stated in the Bible or lead a person to sin against God or others should always be seen as evil; regardless how it makes a person feel.
God's word calls us to love one another, and love is patient and kind. However, kindness will never undermine God nor will it lead a person to sin. True kindness will always lead to freedom and freedom is never found in the bondages of sin or enticing others towards spiritual slavery and death. Now, for those who are still hellbent on making kindness the chief end of man, let me leave you with this thought. A Christian can, indeed, come into agreement that kindness is man's highest aim, as long as he first acknowledges that any acts of kindness must be rooted in man's primary objective in life; namely, to glorify God and fully enjoy him forever. This can only be accomplished when a man chooses what is morally good over what his culture tells him is kind. True kindness is not the absence of feelings but rather the presence of a fuller joy. A joy which is rooted in Christ, and never cedes truth in exchange for trite accommodations like acceptance, tolerance, or celebrations of sin; which always makes promises it can't keep at the expense of a hope which could never be lost. So, apparently we're talking about mermaids again? That's right, one of most trending subjects on social media this week has been mermaids...and boy has it caused quite the stir. Well Played, Algorithms Before we dive too deep into this, forgive the pun but it was too easy, let's take a moment to acknowledge the exceptional work of the social media algorithms. On a week that included evidence of the increasing politicization of the FBI, the bromance of Vladimir Putin and Chinese leader Xi Jinping, the border crisis which has turned into a real life game of chess (including human pawns), or President Biden's ill-timed celebratory speech on the impact Build Back Better has had on the economy (the very same day a economic report hit the press about how inflation continues to rise) Americans were far too busy dealing with imaginary problems to deal with things that actually matter. So, even though this isn't the main course of today's pugnacious pill, well done algorithms. You've done your part in distracting Americans from the stories that should matter the most and have convinced gown adults (including a great deal of men) to jump into the argument. But I digress. Floundering Around So, back to the primary purpose of today's article; namely, the outrage over what is happening under the sea. Disney, who has been no stranger to controversy, sent some loyal fans into a frenzy when they released the trailer for the new live action rendition of The Little Mermaid. And the biggest issue, this time, wasn't the addition of an LGBTQ+ character or a gay kiss, or some kind of satanic undertones hidden within the main story. No, this time, it was something we've actually known for several years now. The color of the main characters skin. Yep, you heard me right. The major offense, for many Americans, was the fact that Arial—who used to be an animated fair-skinned red-headed teenager—is now a real life fair-skinned black woman named Halee Bailey. This awoke the anti-woke crowd and sent them floundering on social media, where they struggled to put their angst and trepidation into coherent or reasonably articulated arguments. It's hard to pinpoint exactly what the real issue is for most people. There are many accusations being flung around—like a giant black cod at Fisherman's Warf in Seattle—about racism, and white privilege, and the great replacement. However, what is impossible to overlook is the sheer amount of time that Americans are willing to waste on frivolous controversies which add little to no value when it comes to civil discourse. Not Everything is Racist but Some Things Are Now, to clarify my position before I start a controversy of my own, I'm not ignorant to the reality that racism exists. We are sinners in a sinful and fallen world. Racism has existed for nearly as long as sin has existed. It isn't an American trend and it certainly isn't exclusive to white Christians. That being said, is it racist to be disappointed about Ariel's recasting as a black woman? Well, it could be I suppose, but it doesn't have to be. It is possible for people to have regrets when it appears that there is an agenda that runs deeper than the surface (or in this case the skin). As we are well aware, Disney has made a point over the past several years at disrupting the norms of culture—which they see as problematic—while also pushing and peddling inclusive (i.e. progressive) ideologies along the way. We get a taste of what that means here: But enough about drag queens, we were talking about racism, right? That's right. We certainly were. And I was trying to make the point that just because someone labels something as racist, it doesn't necessarily mean that it is racist. But some things are racists. For example, here is a tweet by the Department of Defense's Equity Chief that is pretty clearly racist: Caudacity, for those who may not be up on modern-day slang, is a term that is used to describe audacity demonstrated by white people. In other words, it is a word to shame and degrade white people, based on the simple fact that they are indeed, white.
This is a pretty clear example of racism. And even though Ms. Wing would like to have us believe black people can't be racist, because they don't have power (even though she is the Chief Equity officer for the Department of Defense), most reasonable people understand that "antagonism directed against a person or people on the basis of their membership in a particular racial or ethnic group", is indeed racism. So, is it racist to be upset about a black mermaid? Maybe. Why are you upset? Mermaids aren't real. So whether they are black, white, Asian, or translucent (as one conservative pundit recently proposed) it really shouldn't matter. Yes, I get it. Ariel, for many people, has nostalgic significance. But she is also a fictitious character based on a Danish fairy tale written by Hans Christian Andersen. Did you know that in his version of the story, a young mermaid is willing to give up her life as a mermaid to gain a human soul? Seriously! And much like it is in the Disney movie, the mermaid in his tale makes a deal with a sea queen and exchanges her life for a chance at winning the heart of the prince. However, there are some pretty big differences between the stories. Even though the prince likes the little mermaid (as a friend) his romantic affections are for another woman; whom he marries and breaks the little mermaid's heart. She is given the opportunity to avenge the scorn and kill the prince to save her own life, but because of the love she has for him she can't bring herself to do it and instead jumps to her death—out a window into the sea—where her body dissolves and turns to foam. Yeah, not quite the romantic fairly tail you're used to, now is it? And not even a single mention of a lobster named Sabastian? What the heck! And that's the point. Stories change. They evolve and get remade and shaped into various different tales to connect with various different cultures and people. That's what makes stories so intriguing. The best ones elevate themselves above a specific culture or people or a specific time and draw people into the feelings and realities of the human experience. The Little Mermaid isn't a red-headed white girl from 1989. She's been many things in her lifetime and that's what makes the story so enchanting and timeless. So, is it racist to be upset about a black mermaid? Maybe. Why are you upset? Not Everything is Worth Fighting Over, but Some Things Are. Looking at this whole ordeal, through a sociological lens, is an interesting task. As a white Christian man, it's pretty easy for me to see that whiteness—for many—is not only viewed as a problem but is also viewed as the cause for many other problems that exist in America and the western world at large. Maybe you don't believe me. That's OK. I'm not getting paid to convert anyone here, I'm just trying to take a bit of time to talk about certain things many people don't want to address. And one of those things is the very real ideology, held by some people, that in order for Black Lives to Matter, we must first acknowledge that white lives have not only disproportionately mattered, but have also set up systems in such a way that black lives can't matter, equitably, until those systems are demolished, defunded, or destroyed. For BLM, this includes the police, the military, and other forms of government which—in their minds—are systems of systemic racism that can't be redeemed. And the donations, from those struggling with white-guilt, during the Summer of Freedom in the wake of George Floyd's murder, have helped to fund the spread of this ideology in America and American schools. So, it's not fair to assume this is all about a black mermaid. The mermaid is simply the medium of the moment. And it's a decent ploy too. How do you make a bunch of white people look like Caudacious Karens? Take a beloved story from their recent memory, and rewrite it; replacing their white heroine with someone else. Someone who isn't white (because white is guilt and white is privilege and white is racist). And make sure you do it, while letting them know your intentions are not charitable, but are instead being done to reshape the norms of society and demolish the racist culture they built and have been preserving since its founding; in 1619. You see, the reality for most people who are upset about a black mermaid has nothing to do with race at all. It has far more to do with what appears to be an intentional effort to erase something they see good in. Something they see value in. Something they see virtue and character in. And something they've been told, over and over and over again, is not only racist but is also responsible for all kinds of evil that exists in America today. And what exactly is that? Whiteness. The Insufficiency of Identity Politics The problem with racism and anti-racism is not that they are in opposition to each other. On the contrary, it's the fact that they are actually clones of one another. Sure, they present themselves differently, but in the end they actually lead to the same end result. The haves and the have nots. Us vs. Them. The Divided States of America. And herein lies the problem with identity politics. When systems are created or dismantled based on identities which are inherent, it is no longer virtue or character which are measured but rather where you fall on the melanin scale. Nobody born white can be anything other than white. No matter how hard they try, repent for their whiteness, or grovel at the feet of minorities...at the end of the day they will still be white. And when white is bad, they are bad, regardless how virtuous their character may be or how much effort they put into being anti-white. Let's take a look at another exchange with the Department of Defense Equity Czar, Kelisa Wing. In this Twitter exchange Wing responded to a white-ally who was worn-out by the whiteness of her racist white colleagues. "I am exhausted by 99% of the white men in education and 95% of the white women", said the user. "Where can I get a break from white nonsense for a while?" Wing responded by letting the Twitter user know that her whining and feelings would not be tolerated, under any circumstance. Not because she was wrong in her assessment, but rather because she was white. Wing responded, "If another Karen tells me about her feelings…I might lose it". Do you see how this works? Like racism, it is the color of your skin that dictates your place in society and how you will be viewed by those who don't look the same as you. In this example, regardless how virtuous a white Karen attempts to be, she will never gain her freedom from white guilt. She will always be culpable, because of her own whiteness, regardless how hard she works to demand equity for non-whites or how ruthless she attacks other white people. In an anti-racist world, a White Karen is never able to shed her whiteness or earn a place at the table of the oppressed. She must not only continue to fight racism, with racism, but she must also be willing to accept her place—as an oppressor who has no right to share her feelings or complain to a black person about how evil white people are. Anti-racism asserts itself as the avenue to conquer racism, but beneath it's altruism is a reality that is far more evil. Anti-racism is racism, prejudice, and wicked and it causes deep divisions between people as it segregates them based on the color of their skin, in spite of their character or lack thereof. The Sufficiency of Identity in Christ However, there is another way. One which makes prodigious promises of equality, justice, freedom, and reconciliation as well as guarantees that are sure and faithful. Of course it comes with a catch. One that doesn't pass Disney's woke mandate, but in matters like these we must be willing to ask ourselves tough questions. Questions like, what means more to me, freedom or ideologies? Social reform or orthodox principles? Resistance or revival. Retribution or repentance? Jesus or justice? You see Christ came to fulfill the law. The law demanded justice. An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. That's justice and God's holiness demands justice. The problem is, no human institution or ideology can ever lead to a just world because every single human being is a sinner. No matter how idealistic the aim, it will always be imperfect because people are involved and the human heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately sick (Jer. 17:9). And that's really the issue. Whether a man is a racist or an anti-racist, he is still a man and he is still wicked. That is his identity apart from Christ. But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ—by grace you have been saved (Eph. 2:4-5). And that's the point of all this. In Christ men are made alive. In Christ there is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female (Rom. 3:28). This is our identity in Christ. We are all one, in Christ. We don't need anti-racism in Christ. We don't need arguments about white privilege in Christ. We don't need to reset power structures or tear down systems in Christ, because our identity is not found in any of these things. Our identity is firmly established and eternally secured in Christ. This is something a mermaid, whether she be black white or transgender, can never provide. That's why people are so upset. They saw themselves in a fictitious, fair-skinned, red-headed teenage mermaid. And when her identity was stripped away and replaced with something else, they felt a sense of loss; as if a part of who they were was lost as well. To wrap our identities in anything other than Jesus is to set ourselves up for disappointment or division. No ideology or institution or revolution can ever provide to us what we were created to find in Christ. He is the only eternal identity that leads to true oneness and peace and rest. In the words of Augustine of Hippo — 'Thou hast made us for thyself, O Lord, and our heart is restless until it finds its rest in thee.' This is an eternally significant truth. One that leads to true joy and will never leave you disappointed, fearful, anxious or alone. There are so many identities which make grandiose promises, but in the end they all turn out to be nothing more than fish tales. Putting aside what should unquestionably be considered weird; namely—the state (or anyone else for that matter)—lusting after the opportunity to teach other people's children about sex, can we have an honest discussion here? National Public Radio, in their typical impartial and publicly-funded approach, ran a story about the importance of comprehensive sex-education for children as young as 5 years old. Unapologetically stated within the story, the following claim was made: Even though it may seem like sex education is controversial, it absolutely is not, and it always is in the best interest of young people Nora Gelperin, director of sex education and training at Advocates for Youth But, who gets to be the judge of of what is in the best interest for our kids and by what standard is the claim being made that it even is in their best interest? NPR's story goes on to talk about some of the specific ways children should be taught. One example given in the story is the "normalization" of children's various experiences; specifically around gender, gender stereotypes, and gender confusion. Gelperin went on to say, "normalizing the experiences of young people is a crucial component of comprehensive sex-ed". But what exactly should be normalized? Are we talking about basic biology or even anatomy? No, absolutely not. What Gelperin is really advocating for is grooming and manipulating children, in hopes that they will embrace the norms and perversions of progressive ideology. In case you don't believe me, here's an example of what I mean: And therein lies the problem. When it comes to public education, parents (i.e. the primary authority over their children's education) must not only have a basic understanding of what is being taught to their children but should also have the primary role of shaping that education. However, when it comes to sex education and definitely comprehensive sex education—which is defined as complete; including all or nearly all elements or aspects of something--parents also need to be aware of the fact that the godless culture wants their children. No, not so they can sacrifice them on the alter of Molech. I'm talking about something far more nefarious.
The Problem and the Hope Parents, even if you are viewed as a lost cause for this Brave New World, the next generation of Christians will either be shaped by God's Word—as well as those parents and churches who aim to reinforce the authority of scripture—or by a culture that long ago determined that the leading cause of bigotry, injustice, and hatred in America is Christian parents raising Christian kids under the authority and influence of Christian doctrine and Christian community. That's right. You, parents, are the biggest hurdle in the minds of many progressives. Why? Because you stand in the way of their unrestrained efforts to reshape humanity into a more tolerant, inclusive, equitable, and just people. And are these things bad in and of themselves? Well, I guess it depends on who is defining the terms and how they are being defined. But there is good news. You, parents, are also a beacon of hope for a godly future. While progressives seem hellbent on rejecting and suppressing God's truth (Rom. 1:18), Christian parents have the opportunity to stand firm on their convictions and say, like Joab on the cusp of battle, "Be of good courage, and let us be courageous for our people, and for the cities of our God, and may the LORD do what seems good to him" (2 Sam. 10:12). Why Does It Always Come Down to Violence? I know, I know. You want to know why it always comes down to violence, right? Can't we all just get along?!?! Well, in short, no we can't. Because we are at war. There is literally a culture war going on and the battle is for the minds of the future generation of Americans. Still not convinced? That's OK, but humor me for a few more minutes by walking out this thought experiment with me. What would you do if you came home from work to find your child with someone you casually know, looking at X-rated content on the Internet together? Would it bother you? Would you be angry? Why? There are few situations in life that award a person the kind of carte blanche freedom to react on instinct, like a parent who sees another person harming their child. Good luck trying to find a jury willing to convict a mother who did whatever it took to protect her babies. Well, listen up mama bear. I'm talking to you. When schools make intentional efforts to normalize things which God calls evil, and vilify biblical convictions or those who hold to them...the damage is being done. It might not be as overt as a teacher watching porn with your student but that doesn't make it any less perverse or fatal. So, why do we hold back our anger and outrage? Why are we so afraid to call it out for what it is? The enemy often comes, disguised as an angel of light (2 Cor. 11:14), making all kinds of promises that if we simply compromise on this one little truth than everything else will be fine, fine, fine. But it's never fine. And we must keep a wartime mentality, because no matter how far you attempt to bury your own head in the sand, so you aren't forced to look at the truth, we are in a spiritual war. But What About the Good Teachers I get it. We all know teachers and deep down we know that they're good people. They care about our kids. They aren't reprobates seeking to destroy our children's minds and lead them down a path of destruction. Come on. They're just trying to do their job. Give them a break, would ya? They're heroes. Look, I'm honestly not trying to be uncharitable here. As I've said before, I come from a long line of teachers in my family and have some very good friends who are currently teaching in public school systems across the United States. But it's time to be honest. Any teacher, in a public school system which has embraced and intentionally put into practice the kind of unbiblical normalization of sin that we see from these comprehensive sex-education advocates, bears responsibility for allowing it to happen on their watch. And any parents, who have knowingly allowed their children to be subjected to this kind of nonsense—because they were too afraid to speak up or cause trouble—bears responsibility as well. These agendas are no longer covert operations. They are bold, brazen, and shameless. And they will continue, unchecked, as long as good teachers refuse to push back or parents continue to assume that just because their kids are in the hands of a good teacher that they don't have anything to be concerned about. It's All an Overreaction One of the best mechanisms available, to distract people from the truth, is to villainize the people who have started to ask questions and demand answers. I'm not suggesting that some people haven't taken things too far, but how many examples of schools or teachers promoting sin and pushing its normalization do we need before we start to realize that someone might be lying to us. And now, NPR is running a story promoting comprehensive sex-education for children as young as kindergarten. They're saying the quiet part out loud and they're placing their bets on the hope that parents are going to stay quiet. The only question left to ask is this: will you call their bluff? Sometimes the last people who are willing to acknowledge the present are those who are so deeply entrenched in the past that they simply refuse see it.
Sadly, and in most of the cases I've witnessed in my life, the people who are most prone to ignore the blessings of the progress and growth which have occurred in America—over the past several decades—are those who have the most to gain from the pain of the past. AOC, who has reached such celebrity status in American culture today that she is literally best known by her her initials, is a leading voice in the fight for those who live in a perpetual state of oppression; under the mighty hand of White Republican Men. Now, from the platform granted to her by GQ (Gentlemen's Quarterly), AOC takes her personal holy war directly to her adversaries. As a woman, on the cover of a magazine marketed to men—albeit likely not the kind of men who would see their masculinity as an honorable virtue—she proceeds to peddle the propaganda which helped elevate her to a position of prominence in the progressive party. When speaking with GQ about an interaction she once had with a young and sanguine girl—who had hopes seeing AOC become President—AOC struggled to hold back her tears. "I hold two contradictory things [in mind] at the same time. One is just the relentless belief that anything is possible," AOC said. "But at the same time, my experience here has given me a front-row seat to how deeply and unconsciously, as well as consciously, so many people in this country hate women. And they hate women of color." So much in this statement makes me legitimately angry. Not because I'm ignorant to the realities of hate and racism which certainly exist in the world (including America), but rather because I'm more keenly aware of the truth. An overwhelmingly large percentage of Americans have grown up in a feminist, egalitarian, and integrated America. The median age in America today, is 38 years old. This means that most Americans don't know a world before astronaut Kathryn D. Sullivan became the first American woman to perform a space walk. And you might be tempted to ask, what does this have to do with what AOC said? If racism and misogyny exist (even on a small scale) shouldn't we address this reality? Of course we should. But problems should be addressed within a reasonable balance to the level at which they exist. If a father comes home from work—or better yet a mother, since we wouldn't want to offend anyone with this analogy—and finds that one of her young children has left their shoes in the middle of the kitchen floor, it would be wrong for her to go on a tirade, attacking all the children in her house or all the children in the neighborhood because of one child's lack of concern for a clean house. Did that child leave their shoes in the middle of the kitchen? The certainly did. But what this doesn't indicate is that there is a systemic problem of moral decay within the home. It's possible that one of her children has an issue with cleanliness and obedience, but it's more likely that she simply caught them on a bad day and vice versa. All of this to suggest that the real issue I take with AOC's constant selling of a racist, tyrannical, and patriarchal America is that it simply doesn't exist; at least not as she claims it does. Let me help to make my point a little more clear. Circling back to the GQ article, here's how AOC finished her previous story: "People ask me questions about the future. And realistically, I can’t even tell you if I’m going to be alive in September", said AOC. "And that weighs very heavily on me...This grip of patriarchy affects all of us...ideologically, there’s an extraordinary lack of self-awareness in so many places." The Problem The issue I have is not that AOC would dare to embellish a story. Hyperbole can be a very effective way to make a point, and people do it all the time (see what I just did there). No, the issue I have with AOC is that she a charlatan and she knows it. She said she "realistically couldn't say whether or not she was gong to be alive in September". Now, as much as I'd like to believe this was an act of humility—acknowledging that our days are numbered by God and only he knows when our lives will be required of us (Luke 12:20)—a much more logical explanation of AOC's claim is that she wants people to believe she lives under a constant threat of assassination because she is a non-white woman of color. She basically implied as much in the statement she was making. Her fear wasn't tied to the reality that she doesn't control her own breaths, but rather that she lives in a world with racist misogynists who hate her. A Lack of Self-Awareness One statement which AOC made, that I can actually get behind, is that there is a lack of self-awareness that is directly tied to the ideologies which we hold. AOC believes that America is controlled by racist men who hate women of color. Well, it might be an exaggeration to suggest that she actually believes this, but it's fair to suggest that she wants other people to believe this. And when this becomes a person's ideology and worldview, they naturally begin to see the work through that lens. When a man makes the charitable effort to hold a door for a woman, she can assume two things. Option-A: he's being a gentleman and was likely raised by a gentleman. Option-B: he's a sexist and he refuses to acknowledge that the woman doesn't need a patronizing man; she can hold her own damn door. This may be a pithy or extreme example, but I hope the point isn't lost. Without further attempts at man-splaining, I hope we can understand that the way in which we choose to view the world will begin to shape our worldview. And our worldview will begin to shape how we interact with the world. When AOC continues to call out the worst of America, in order to sell snake oil (i.e. political solutions which rarely work) she actually is shaping the minds of future generations who would probably be better off looking at history, comparing it to the present, in order that they might have hope for the future. When people constantly allow the most negative or heinous—albeit most infrequent—examples of America to become the norm, it will begin to change their perception. And since people's perceptions become their reality, it will actually begin to shape their reality; even if their reality isn't in line with reality. There is Hope Not wanting to become guilty of the very thing I'm calling out in this blog post, I think it would be important for me to close with a positive—and hopefully beneficial—encouragement. There is hope. When we rightly look back at history, in order to learn from it and use it to help us interpret and discern the present, we should acknowledge that America has not only come a long way but also has a great deal of hope for the future. Yes, there will be some disagreements with just how far we've come or whether the path we've taken has really even been a path of true progress. But the point I'm attempting to make here is that if we rightly look at history, at least when it comes to equality, we should be able to see the world in a different lens that the one AOC chooses. While she continues to see a world of oppression and imbalance of power, the rest of us don't have to. Leaning into a quote by Queen Elizabeth, a day after her passing: "I believe that, young or old, we have as much to look forward to with confidence and hope as we have to look back on with pride." — the Queen's Golden Jubilee message, June 2012 So, you're about to send your precious little angels off to school again are you? And you're about to enjoy the peace of mind that has evaded you for the past three months? Ahhh, breathe that long overdue sigh of relief. But wait! That's right!!! I forgot that I'm sending my innocent children into the wolf den, where they'll be inundated with Critical Race Theory and Diversity and Inclusion propaganda. I've seen this scene play out on social media more times than I care to admit. And then comes the "Teachers are America's heroes" crowd ready to pounce on anyone who would even slightly suggest that teachers have some kind of hidden agenda and are looking to proselytize children with their hidden agenda of woke, progressive, and socialist doctrine. The Obligatory Disclaimer In an attempt to avoid significant or unmerited backlash, I feel it is prudent—albeit likely futile—to make the following disclaimer: I come from a family of teachers. I have many close friends who are teachers. I love them and I know they are passionate about teaching. Otherwise, they would have chosen a profession which would pay them a whole lot more for being forced to deal with a whole lot less. They genuinely cherish the children who are entrusted to their care. They value the responsibility they have been given and certainly don't desire to undermine the parents, who bear the primary responsibility of teaching and raising their children, or to cause them harm or unrepairable damage. The Truth Lies Somewhere In-Between However, we all teach towards our biases. It's natural, and it's not just what is in the curriculum that is taught in public schools, that matters. Many of life's most important lessons are not taught or learned from a textbook. They are taught and learned by our worldviews and how we interact, interpret, and engage with the world. When the choice was made to take God out of schools, it was all but guaranteed that something else would replace him. Education is the process of giving systematic instruction. Knowledge is defined as the facts, information, and skills acquired by a person through experience and education. Children don't go to school to learn how to pass tests, they go to school to gain an understanding about the way the world works—both historically and currently—and to gain the skills and tools they will need to be critically-thinking and productive members of the world in the future. When morality and truth become subjective, the objective of education becomes less clear. Children are no longer taught right from wrong, but are instead taught that it is wrong to judge something rightly; based on the objective truth of God's Word. This becomes increasingly problematic in a society which is hellbent on the cultural mandate to call evil good and good evil, to put darkness for light and light for darkness, and to put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!" (Isa. 5:20.) The Slow Drip Though it is right for parents to have a concern about what their children will be taught in the six hours a day they will be in the hands of the state, the issue is far bigger than the curriculum. In fact, I don't believe the the curriculum is even an issue. While parents are distracted by words like Critical Race Theory, the education of their children is already well underway. Parents willingly place their children under the watch and care of TikTok, Disney+, Netflix, PBS, and other sources of entertainment so they can jump on social media and rant about the progressive agenda. They send their children out to play with their neighbors—who proudly display their In This House We Believe yard signs—while they head to the monthly school board meetings to squawk at their elected school board members, accuse them of being groomers, and make exasperated demands that books their children will likely never read be removed from the school library. And all the while, the infusion of worldliness continues to flow through the veins of their children, who have been hooked up to a steady drip of secular entertainment and amusement for the majority of their lives. It's Not About the Curriculum Dummy What am I trying to say here? Well, in no uncertain terms, it's not about the curriculum dummy. "It's not what goes into the mouth that defiles a person, but what comes out of the mouth; this defiles a person" (Matthew 15:11). Though Christ was specifically talking about food, in this instance, the principle applies to well more than what we eat. To be clear, I'm not suggesting that it doesn't matter what we consume. It most certainly does. Bad fruit is never good for the body. However, when a person is able to rightly judge the difference between good and bad fruit, and when they are aware of the blessings which come from good fruit and the consequences which come from the bad, the the chances of them choosing good fruit instead of bad fruit grow exponentially. Parent's have been so concerned with what their children might be exposed to in public schools, that they have failed to see what their children are actually being exposed to in their own homes. They spend so much of their free time worried and concerned with what some teacher might be teaching their children, that they are failing to use their free time to actually teach their own children. In an effort to make sure their children aren't left behind by the culture's unquenchable lust for acceptance and affluence, parents have ignorantly invited all kinds of influences into their homes while simultaneously failing to guard their children's heart or equip them to be able to discern good from evil within the walls of their own home. It's Time to Get Offended By Our Own Offenses Parents, it's time to hold ourselves accountable, with the same zeal we aim to hold others accountable. We are guilty. We deserve criticism, not teachers. They're going to do what they do; namely, teach in accordance with their worldview and experiences. But what about us? Are jealous for our children's time and attention and affections? Do we care about their education or just what someone else is choosing to teach them? And what are we teaching them when we are more offended by what they might learn in school than what they are actually being taught in our own homes? If you want your children to have a solid Biblical foundation, then build it for them. Get serious about it. Get active in their lives with as much passion as your activism about CRT or cat boxes to accommodate the Furries in your local school district. We certainly need parents who are active in their community and public schools, but it's far more valuable for parents to be active and intentional in teaching their children God's word, right from wrong, and good from evil. 4 “Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one. 5 You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might. 6 And these words that I command you today shall be on your heart. 7 You shall teach them diligently to your children, and shall talk of them when you sit in your house, and when you walk by the way, and when you lie down, and when you rise. (Deut. 6:4-7) They Are Still Your Children Parents, be encouraged. No matter what happens in the public schools, these are still your children. They are yours. Not the school's, not the village's, not the enemy's. They are your kids! Teach them. Take your role and responsibility as a parent seriously. Own it and get involved in their lives. Know what they're doing, who they're doing it with, and what their reason for doing it is. Shape their worldview by saturating their world with God's word and godly examples of how it works day in and day out. Fill their hearts and their minds with so much truth that they can't help but see the lies. Teach them the scriptures, diligently, and talk about Jesus when you sit in your house and when you walk by the way. Remind them of God's promises and why they need to resist the devil. Show them the blessing that come from submission to God's Word, even when it's hard, and remind them that temptation always promises what it can never give and always gives what it never promises. They are your children and they are counting you to teach them how the world works—both historically and currently—and how to gain the skills and tools they will need to be critically-thinking and productive members of the world of the future. Don't miss the opportunities God has give you to shepherd and shape their hearts, because you are too concerned with how someone else might be attempting to fill the role that only you can. Your kids are counting on you. And so are we. Full and absolute bodily autonomy is the loudest battle cry for most abortion advocates. We all know the chant. We've seen it on signs, shirts, Internet memes, and even tattoos. However, it is also the earliest and predominant schism caused by sin; namely, humanity's choice to reject God's goodness and moral law in an effort to pursue life apart from its Author & Giver. Jumping into the nuance, Christians must embrace the fact that at first glance, authority over our bodies seems not only reasonable, but good. Shouldn't individuals have the right to say "yes" or "no" to what they allow to happen to or within their own bodies? What's the alternative? Seriously! Chase that thought for a minute. But then recognize that, in reality, this really isn't the reason most abortion advocates carry signs saying, "my body...my choice". Every civilized society has recognized the evil of things like rape, forced or coerced sexual encounters, and the manipulation or taking advantage of the most vulnerable people in a society. That's why laws against these things exist. Moral societies, with a desire to see others treated with dignity and respect, have always been advocates of ensuring mechanisms exist to hold evil people accountable for their evil acts. But that's not enough. As sin has continued to damage, confuse, and destroy God's creation, humanity's efforts to rid themselves of God's morality has also continued to spiral out of control. Generation upon generation of men have given themselves over to all kinds of perversion and sexual immorality and as these sins have been celebrated—within an open-minded and indulgent culture—the natural result has been the suppression of shame and a callousness towards the damaging effects of such a lifestyle. In short, the godless culture has forgotten how to blush. Naturally, as men have embraced and endorsed these sinful lifestyles—and the culture has looked upon them with lust instead of scorn—women looked at men with envy and bitterness. Why should men be able to live these kinds of carefree (albeit careless) lifestyles, without consequences? Why are women always the ones left to deal with the byproducts of baseness or the collateral damages of corruption? Enter Feminism Disguised as the advocacy of women's rights, what it really has shown itself to be is the advancement of feminine decadence. Peddled as a pathway to equity, egalitarianism hasn't paid-out the dividends it promised. Instead of elevating women, it has further corrupted the goodness of God's design. In their pursuit of justice, women found themselves in the exact same predicament they were in before; namely, left to deal with the calamities and natural consequences of unchecked autonomy. And as the culture has gyrated, unapologetically, further down the hole of moral corruption the only remedy our culture has been able to provide, to stop the bleeding, is to create band-aids to try and hide the hideous results of hedonism. Abortion, birth-control, child-support, OnlyFans, pharmaceuticals to treat STDs, legalization of prostitution, HPV vaccines for children, erythromycin eye ointment for newborns, and many other things are the culture's efforts to erase the aftermath of iniquity. But unlike true cures, the side-effects of these treatments always come with a cost. The True Cure It would be easy for Christians to throw our hands up in the air and say, "to hell with them". And sadly, many Christians have not only taken an apathetic approach to addressing these things, but they have even gone so far as condoning them or participating in them. But there is a cure. Not only for those who profess Christ, but also for those who would be blessed to live in a society where professing Christians actually choose to submit to the authority of scripture and model their life—and their culture—after the moral principles laid out in God's word. This is precisely what the Apostle Paul was aiming at, in his first letter to the Church of Corinth. Dealing with a church of young believers, who found themselves in the middle of an immoral culture who lived by the motto: "food for the body and the body for food". This statement was often used, in a flippant way by the culture, to imply that if something feels good, then therefore it must be good. Just like food was meant for the stomach and the stomach was meant for food, so too was a man's body meant for sexual pleasure. Therefore—as the culture suggested at that time—if pleasure was the end result of a sexual activity, than that activity must be good for the man. But we know this isn't that case. Just because something feels good, it does not indicate that it is good. Good is defined by the source of Good; namely, God. What God calls good is good and what God calls evil is evil; regardless how it makes us feel. The appropriate response of any Christian, when facing questions about whether something is good or evil, is to examine the word of God. If the Bible condemns something—whether explicitly or implicitly—it doesn't matter how it makes a person feel. Returning to Paul's letter to the church in Corinth (1 Cor. 6:13), he helps us see this clearly. Food is meant for the stomach and the stomach for food”—and God will destroy both one and the other. The body is not meant for sexual immorality, but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body Though food is meant for the body, the body is meant for God. This captures the very center of the human experience. Man was not created for our own pleasure. Man was created, by God, to glorify him and fully enjoy him forever. Therefore, any efforts we make to do things—which feel good for our body—must be done with an awareness of and submission to what God has called good. For man, pleasure is not the treasure. Glorifying God is the treasure, and enjoying peace in our relationship with him is the natural pleasure that comes from this aim. God's Body. My Choice. This is why the mantra, "my body...my choice" is not only foolish but also a lie. No man, woman, or child owns themselves. We are either slaves to sin or slaves to righteousness. We are all owned, and more specifically as Christians, we have been bought with a price. Our body, is God's body, and the only choice we have is whether or not we will submit to him as our Savior and King.
When Christians understand and choose to live into this reality, not only does it lead to their own pleasure—a pleasure which lasts eternally and never leaves guilt or shame—it also becomes an invitation for others to taste and see that the Lord is good. Pleasure, in its truest and fullest sense, is not a fleeting feeling. This is why people don't make an idol out of pleasure, but rather, make an idol out of the things they take pleasure in the most. In the words of John Piper, "Pleasure is not the object of worship; pleasure is the worship". But when we worship false gods, we also come to realize that the pleasures they promise don't last. Why does sexual sin continue to get more and more grotesque? Why is porn hub the 13th most visited website in America; above Hulu and Netflix? Because as much pleasure as people hope to find in their false gods, it is always futile; like chasing after the wind. Pleasure isn't our treasure. It can't be. On the contrary, the Treasure—namely God—leads us to the pleasure of being freely and fully satisfied in him forever. When Christians gladly submit to God and his good and perfect design, we are lovingly led to an abundant life. This life is not a fleeting feeling or a passing amusement. This life profoundly surpasses all other counterfeits, which always leave a bitter taste and a lasting scar. When God's people taste the kind of pleasure, which can only be found in the true Treasure, we can gladly and unapologetically say: "God's body...my choice". And this is the battle-cry our culture so desperately needs to hear, so they too can taste and see that the Lord is Good. Why on earth would a conservative Christian, who believes in the sanctity of life, speak out in concern over progressives canceling the work of a liberal democrat? The outrage, by conservatives, over the white-washing of Dr. Seuss's (6) questionable (or racist or culturally-insensitive) works seems to be counter-productive, since the good doctor was an unapologetic liberal Democrat. So, why would I be so outspoken in my efforts to call foul? Answer: Because it's not the content of his message or even his political affiliations that drive my concern. It's the precedent being set. According to Wikipedia, Geisel was a liberal Democrat and a supporter of President Franklin D. Roosevelt and the New Deal. His early political cartoons show a passionate opposition to fascism, and he urged action against it both before and after the United States entered World War II. His cartoons portrayed the fear of communism as overstated, finding greater threats in the House Un-American Activities Committee and those who threatened to cut the United States' "life line" to Stalin and the USSR, whom he once depicted as a porter carrying "our war load". Dr. Seuss also supported the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II. He also created several satire cartoons, expressing his concerns with Japan and the Nazis. The question isn't whether or not Dr. Seuss ever did anything wrong. All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. The question isn't even whether or not these (6) books should have been considered appropriate in the first place. For me, the issue is the precedence being set; especially with the books no longer being published (i.e. being cancelled). If they are insensitive, remove them from the classroom. If they need a disclaimer, add it. But to cancel these works, outright, seems like a dangerous precedent to set, no matter what side of the political isle you find yourself on. The idea that we can create a "safe place" for humans, by removing all content deemed offensive is not only ignorant of how sin works, but is also opening up Pandora's box that very well may come to burn down your house in the future.
Cancelling these (6) Dr. Seuss books takes nothing away from me. I'm not financially or emotionally tied to any of these works. Cancelling Mr. Potato Head or Aunt Jemima or Uncle Ben doesn't impact my day-to-day in any tangible ways. I'm a Pop-tarts guy who prefers Rice-A-Roni anyway. However, the precedent, which is not only being set but also celebrated in these decisions, is what really has me concerned and compelled to speak up and speak out. For those who are only willing to stand up against censorship and the rewriting of history--when it impacts your own tribe or camp--if history is any indication of the future, which it often is, then when that time comes it may already be too late. |
Archives
August 2024
AuthorS(profiles coming soon) |