Archives for : Truth

The deadly hypocrisy of Black Lives Matter

Posted by :webmaster On : June 19, 2020
1

Category: Culture Wars, Humanism, Marriage, Socialism, Truth

“To destroy a people, you must first sever their roots.”[1]

The above quote is from one of the twentieth century’s greatest truth tellers—Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn (1918-2008). Born in Russia, Solzhenitsyn studied mathematics, philosophy, literature, and history at the university level. He was thrice decorated for personal heroism as a Russian Army Officer during the fight against the Nazis in World War II. In 1945 he was arrested for criticizing Stalin in private correspondence and sentenced to an eight-year term in a labor camp. From that experience he wrote One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich which was published in 1962, the first of many books. In 1970 he was awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature. In 1974, he was stripped of his citizenship and expelled from the Soviet Union whereupon he moved to Vermont with his wife and four sons.[2]

I have taken time to briefly describe Solzhenitsyn’s background because his experiences and quiet words in defense of truth from such a man speaks far louder than the din of lies shouted by Black Lives Matter and their toadies including spineless politicians, the corrupt media, universities in name only, complicit mega-corporation billionaires, ranting Hollywood leftists, self-proclaimed “intellectuals,” and many corrupt voices/false teachers in the Church. Such lies cannot long stand against the timeless truth of which God is the author and finisher.

Regardless of their self-professed good intentions, the devil-doing of those leading and promoting Black Lives Matter is exposed by its own words on BLM’s official website[3] with regard to its beliefs and true objectives.

Black Lives Matter Beliefs and Goals

A thoughtful examination of just three of BLM’s goals gives a clear and frightening understanding of the damage that is being done in the war against the soul of American life and liberty including the culture at large and the average American family, black or white.

1. “We are self-reflexive and do the work required to dismantle cisgender privilege and uplift Black trans folk, especially Black trans women who continue to be disproportionately impacted by trans-antagonistic violence.”

BLM wishes to dismantle cisgender privilege. The term “cisgender” means “of, relating to, or being a person whose gender identity corresponds with the sex the person had or was identified as having at birth.”[4] Although the word may be unfamiliar to many, the concept that the two sexes equate to two genders is obvious to the vast majority of Americans and needs no label to explain it unless one is of the “woke” crowd.

Carla A. Pfeffer expands on Merriam Webster’s definition: “I grew up in a family with a cisgender and heterosexually identified mother and father of the same race (White) who had 2 children when they were well into their late 20s and early 30s and after they legally married with the full support of both their families.”[5]

For BLM, cisgender privilege has been transformed to be equivalent to white privilege. Such privilege cannot be eliminated without suppressing the carriers of this disease (privilege) by denigrating their belief systems. Therefore, the supposed evil that adherents to BLM ideology desire to dismantle are the dominant Judeo-Christian beliefs in the nuclear family, heterosexuality, marriage, and monogamy from which “white privilege” supposedly arises. However, the fatal flaw of BLM’s ideology regarding cisgender families is that the very nature of these beliefs is color-blind. To the contrary, the strength of cisgender families (of whatever color) rests on the universal truth of the values, beliefs, and structure of Judeo-Christian families.

2. “We foster a queer‐affirming network. When we gather, we do so with the intention of freeing ourselves from the tight grip of heteronormative thinking, or rather, the belief that all in the world are heterosexual (unless s/he or they disclose otherwise).”

Now we come to “trans” by which is meant transgender and defined as “of, relating to, or being a person whose gender identity differs from the sex the person had or was identified as having at birth.”[6] And trans does not mean just male and female but a whole alphabet of identities such as LGBTQ+. However, deny it as they might, it is one’s biological sex that determines gender, and there are just two. BLM calls this belief being in the “tight grip of heteronormative thinking.”

3. “We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and “villages” that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable.”

BLM wishes to disrupt (disorder, upset) the nuclear family structure by supporting (replacing) it with extended families and “villages” (also infamously promoted by Hillary Clinton). This group care for children promises to limit such care “to the degree that mothers, parents, and children (what about fathers?) are comfortable.” Tell that to parents who have unsuccessfully objected to the things taught in their child’s classroom that made them uncomfortable (e.g., transgenderism).

History reveals the fatal flaw of BLM ideology with regard to the nuclear family, marriage, monogamy, and heterosexuality.

1. Nuclear family, marriage, and monogamy

Daniel Patrick Moynihan retired from the United States Senate (Democratic Senator from New York) in 2000. Near the beginning of his career he was an assistant Secretary of Labor in Lyndon Johnson’s presidency. At the time of his retirement, the senator was asked to describe the biggest change he had seen in his forty years of government service. Articulate and intellectual, the distinguished public servant, having served both Democratic and Republican presidents, replied, “The biggest change, in my judgment, is that the family structure has come apart all over the North Atlantic world” and had occurred in “an historical instant. Something that was not imaginable forty years ago had happened.” Author of the 1965 Moynihan Report officially known as “The Negro Family: The Case for National Action”, Moynihan knew that of which he spoke.[7]

Enormously controversial at the time of its release, the report continues to be a topic of debate in the twenty-first century. The report characterized the instability of the black families in America and the importance of the family unit in providing that stability.

At the heart of the deterioration of the fabric of Negro society is the deterioration of the Negro Family. It is the fundamental source of the weakness of the Negro community at the present time…The role of the family in shaping character and ability is so pervasive as to be easily overlooked. The family is the basic social unit of American life; it is the basic socializing unit. By and large, adult conduct in society is learned as a child…the child learns a way of looking at life in his early years through which all later experience is viewed and which profoundly shapes his adult conduct.[8]

Writing shortly after Moynihan’s perceptive summation of the condition of the family structure, William Bennett noted the deep concern of Americans with regard to the family. Bennett pointed to the general instability of the American family and the contributing factors such as the decline in the status and centrality of marriage in society, substantially greater percentage of out-of-wedlock births, and the significant increase in co-habitation. With the decline of social perception and necessity of matrimony, children are less valued, more neglected, more vulnerable to non-family influences, and have less resources devoted for their care and benefit. Bennett wrote that, “Public attitudes toward marriage, sexual ethics, and child-rearing have radically altered for the worse. In Sum, the family has suffered a blow that has no historical precedent—and one that has enormous ramifications for American society.”[9]

Two decades have elapsed since Moynihan’s diagnosis of the disintegration of the family unit as the major modern affliction of the Western world and Bennett’s reporting of Americans’ purported concern for the survival of the family. It is no longer the problem of the black population. The deterioration of the family unit is pervasive and crosses all ethnic, socio-economic, and religious lines although the poor and disadvantaged bear a greater portion of the misery. Yet, there has been no public hue and cry to reverse the decline, no urgency or sense of crisis in dealing with the problem, no new series of government studies explaining the situation, and no investigative reporting or meaningful media attention regarding the most profound change in society that has had no historical precedent. Why is this so? The answer is that the solutions to reverse the decline and devastation of marriage and the family unit stand as polar opposites of the prevailing and pervasive humanistic worldview of which Black Lives Matter is the current purveyor of this cultural carnage. Its own website condemns it.

2. Heterosexuality

Heterosexual marriage is the central organizing concept in society. By contrast, homosexuality is a disorganizing concept with regard to human relationships and ultimately disorganizing in building stable, enduring societies. Heterosexual marriage orders the soul whereas sexual intimacy outside of marriage, co-habitation, divorce (apart from infidelity and willful desertion), and homosexuality (with or without benefit of a civil union) are inherently disorderly and destructive. History and human nature attest to these assertions for according to researchers, heterosexual married life as opposed to all other similar social arrangements provides greater financial security, better health and sex, and a longer and better life.[10]

Bennett called marital love that rests upon a foundation of unconditional commitment as “…safer, more enduring, and more empowering that any sentiment yet discovered or any human arrangement yet invented.” He credits these attributes to the basic heterosexual complementarity of man and woman joined together as one in marital love. The complementariness of the relationship is based on the differences, not just the physical but also the emotional and psychological. As the physical differences make sexual union possible, so too do the emotional and psychological differences of the marriage partners complement and complete each other.[11] The union becomes stronger than its parts.

In the longer term, homosexuality and same-sex marriage undermine society. The central cultural vision upon on which the nation was founded was based on biblical Christianity and its understanding of the nature of man and his origins. The truth of the Christian worldview of marriage as being between a man and woman is supported by the fact that it is a cultural universal imprinted on human nature and common to all people groups, all cultures, and all ages in history. Heterosexual marriage is the well-spring of civilization, and its centrality in the human experience is indisputable. Humans have fashioned numerous methods by which to organize their societies, but the common link to all is the family unit—a father, a mother, and children living together in bonds of committed caring.

God created heterosexual marriage as a cultural universal, and the strength and unity provided by this universal is the foundation of a strong and enduring society. Where traditional marriage is in broad disarray, as it is in most Western societies, it does not disprove the truth of the heterosexual marriage universal but rather speaks of the ravages caused by the ascending humanist worldview. Where traditional marriage declines, so do those societies decline that allow it to occur.
______

During the turmoil in America of the late 1960s and early 1970s, Russell Kirk wrote The Roots of the American Order, a book of exceptional scope and insight into the origins of America. Summarizing the words of Simone Weil, Kirk states that “…order is the path we follow, or the pattern by which we live with purpose and meaning. Above food and shelter, she continues, we must have order. The human condition is insufferable unless we perceive a harmony, an order in existence.” Kirk identified two roots of this order: the order of the soul (moral order) and the order of the republic (social order), and they are intricately linked and dependent on each other. Disorder of one leads to disorder of the other.[12]

The American order that was established by the founders was not an “ideology” nor a “thing” created for the moment. Rather, the American order is a living culture whose roots have grown over millennia and were watered by the sound principles of moral and civil social order arising from eternal truths and the revelation of God to the Hebrews and the first century Christians. America was established on these eternal truths and the revelation in which the Founders believed, and upon these pillars they built the greatest nation in the history of the world.

Kirk’s roots of order are the same roots of which Solzhenitsyn spoke in the quote given at the beginning of this article. BLM is attempting to sever those roots along with America’s cultural norms, traditions, beliefs, and even our history and that of Western civilization. Those severed roots are to be replaced with a humanistic cultural Marxist society whose citizens will be subject to machinations of an autonomous socialistic state and its evil overseers. Such a society will be devoid of the three essential elements of the good society: divine order, justice, and freedom.

Do not fool yourselves by blithely dismissing the challenge of BLM. Our present struggle is an existential war of the highest magnitude between good and evil, and the conflict is spreading around the world. What must Americans to do who love this nation and its history? For the answer we look once again to the wisdom of Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn in which he gives us both the diagnosis of our plight and a prescription for preserving America’s Judeo-Christian cultural heritage and its attendant freedom.

“In keeping silent about evil, in burying it so deep within us that no sign of it appears on the surface, we are implanting it, and it (evil) will rise up a thousand fold in the future. When we neither punish nor reproach evildoers . . . we are ripping the foundations of justice from beneath new generations.”[13]

“The simple step of a courageous individual is not to take part in the lie. One word of truth outweighs the world.”[14]

Larry G. Johnson
June 19, 2020

[1] “Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn,” AZQuotes, https://www.azquotes.com/author/13869-Aleksandr_Solzhenitsyn (accessed June 18, 2020).
[2] “Biography,” The Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn Center, https://www.solzhenitsyncenter.org/his-life-overview/biography (accessed June 18, 2020).
[3] “What We Believe,” Black Lives Matter, https://blacklivesmatter.com/what-we-believe/ (accessed June 18, 2020).
[4] “Cisgender,” Merriam Webster, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cisgender (accessed June 18, 2020).
[5] Ibid.
[6] “Transgender,” Merriam Webster, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/transgender (accessed June 18, 2020).
[7] William J. Bennett, The Broken Hearth, (New York: Doubleday, 2001), pp. 2, 85.
[8] Lee Rainwater and William L. Yancey, The Moynihan Report and the Politics of Controversy, (Cambridge Massachusetts: M.I.T. Press, 1967), p. 3.
[9] Bennett, pp. 1-2.
[10] Ibid., pp. 14-188.
[11] Ibid., pp. 186-187
[12] Russell Kirk, The Roots of American Order, (Washington D. C.: Regnery-Gateway, 1991), pp. 3-5.
[13] Solzhenitsyn, AZ Quotes.
[14] Ibid.

The “damnable heresies” of Kristin Chenoweth

Posted by :webmaster On : March 24, 2017
2

Category: Archives, Christianity, Homosexuality, Truth

Kristen Chenoweth was born in Broken Arrow, Oklahoma. Adopted by Jerry and Junie Chenoweth soon after her birth, she grew up in Broken Arrow and graduated from high school. After graduation, she studied Musical Theater at Oklahoma City University. Over the next three decades, the forty-nine year old singer-actress became a well-known star of Broadway, screen, and television.[1] Ms. Chenoweth also became a spokesperson for various organizations and causes including Americans for Marriage Equality which supports laws that allow same-sex marriage and for whom she made a promotional video. In a Huffington Post interview, Ms. Chenoweth said, “Look, the bottom line is that regardless of how you were made or who you love, you should be able to get married if you want to get married. I truly believe it’s that simple.”[2]

Chenoweth professes to be a Christian but doesn’t want there to be any confusion about what she believes.

I don’t believe gay people are going to hell. I believe that judgment is left to the one upstairs and I believe Jesus is all about love. If I can live my life even just a smidgen the way God made his son for us as an example, I’m happy. I do not judge other people for what they believe, but for me, this is what works…I don’t believe if you’re gay or you have a drink or you dance, you’re going to hell. I don’t think that’s the kind of God we have. The Pat Robertsons and Jerry Falwells of the world are scary. I want to be a Christian like Christ – loving and accepting of other people.[3]

Although Chenoweth claims she doesn’t judge other people for what they believe, that absence of judgment does not extend to Christians who disagree with her rejection of the biblical view of homosexuality as a sin.

…I just want it [gay marriage] to hurry up and not be an issue anymore! I’m very proud of the work that has been done so far, I want us to hurry it up a bit more. I think it’s important to say this because a lot of people think if you’re religious or you have any sort of faith, you’re automatically against equality in marriage.

It is the antithesis of what I believe. It is the antithesis of what you should believe if you
believe in Jesus. It’s not what he taught, it’s the opposite of what he taught. If Jesus was to walk the Earth today, or Buddha or anybody, they would be horrified. Those people saying they’re doing it in the name of God? No, no, no, no, no.[4]

Chenoweth credits her grandmother for instilling her with some of her pro-gay beliefs.

Even as a young child, I thought, “Why is being gay bad?” I didn’t understand it. So I asked my grandma, who is the best Christian I ever knew. I’d say, “What about my friend Denny, he’s gay, is he going to hell?” She told me, “I read the Bible like I eat fish. I take the meat that serves me well but I don’t choke on the bone.”[5]

Chenoweth’s outspoken opinions reveal her basic beliefs about Christianity, Jesus, the Bible, and homosexuality, all of which are heretical to biblical Christianity. From her remarks, we may glean the following beliefs.

• Homosexuality is not a sin because homosexuals were made that way and ought to be allowed to marry.
• Christians should not judge other people for what they believe or do.
• Jesus is all about love and accepting people so we should not judge anyone.
• The Bible is not the inspired word of God. Therefore, not all of what the Bible says is true because the Bible contains error and false teachings.

For the Christian, truth is found in the inerrant word of God—the Bible—which forms the basis for one’s the opinions, doctrines, and practices of Christianity. The definition of heresy is an opinion, doctrine, or practice contrary to the truth or to generally accepted beliefs or standards. Ms. Chenoweth’s beliefs, opinions, and practices are unquestionably heretical by any standard or measure whether it is the plain language of the Scripture, reason, tradition, historical record, or scholarly study. Yet, Chenoweth’s beliefs are not uncommon but widespread in the general culture at large and within the church world as well. We shall examine her beliefs in light of what the Bible has to say.

Homosexuality is not a sin

Chenoweth believes that one who is engaged in homosexual activity will not be condemned to hell, but the Apostle Paul says that homosexuality is a sin, and the wages of sin is death.

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and wickedness of men who by their wickedness suppress the truth…Therefore, God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed for ever! For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. Their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in their own person the due penalty for their error.” [Romans 1: 18, 24-27. RSV] [emphasis added]

Because of Ms. Chenoweth’s defense of homosexuality and homosexual marriage, in Paul’s words she has suppressed the truth and embraced the lie. Therefore, she is preaching a false gospel.

Christians should not judge other people for what they believe

The world often chastises the Christian for judging non-Christians. They point to the phrase “judge not lest ye be judged” and thereby demand tolerance for the sinful behavior of non-Christians (see Matthew 7:1-5). But these verses generally apply to fellow believers. What Jesus is saying is that believers should not get in the habit of criticizing others while ignoring one’s own faults. For a Christian brother or sister who sins, Matthew 18:15-17 provides a specific manner for dealing with those situations.

However, the world takes the “judge not” verses of Matthew 7:1-5 out of context when dealing with non-Christians in an attempt to defend sinful behavior that clearly violates the commandments found in the Bible. Christians are allowed to make judgments with regard to sin in others.[6] But making such judgments is not done for the purpose of condemnation. Christians and the church should gently reach out to individual non-believers with love and kindness in the hope of a sharing the truth of the message of Jesus Christ.

There is a third area in which Christians are to judge sinful behavior in the world. Christians would be remiss if they did not speak out about sinful behavior and beliefs which debase and corrupt government and society as a whole. This becomes even more crucial when such sin invades the church. This occurs when Christians-in-name-only are in reality false teachers in the church whose goal is to lead the flock astray. Christians are to use discernment when making judgement of those who appear to be Christians but are really false teachers and false prophets (see Matthew 7:15-20). How are these false teachers recognized? If anyone teaches other than the word of God, they are false teachers and must be vehemently and publicly confronted as Jesus did with the Pharisees in Matthew 23. Chenoweth falls within this category of judgment because she is promoting/teaching a heretical gospel that opposes the truth of the word of God and therefore is a false teacher.

Jesus is all about love and accepting people, and he will not condemn homosexuality as a sin

In an attempt to continue as a moral force within the culture by becoming culturally relevant, many churches gradually have compromised the biblical message, mixed the light with darkness, and preached nonjudgmental love without the necessity of repentance and turning from sin. This is also the message of Kristen Chenoweth—Christ’s love is all that matters. But martyred German theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer preached that this message of nonjudgmental love produces only a cheap grace.

Cheap grace is the deadly enemy of our Church…In such a Church the world finds a cheap covering for its sins; no contrition is required, still less any real desire to be delivered from sin…Cheap grace means the justification of sin without the justification of the sinner…Cheap grace is grace without discipleship, grace without the cross, grace without Jesus Christ, living and incarnate.[7]

Cheap grace is the end product of preaching the world’s definition of nonjudgmental love which attempts to redefine, hide, or deny sin but does not eradicate it. Rather, it makes a mockery of Christ’s death on the cross to purchase forgiveness for mankind’s sin. Cheap grace makes the shedding of His blood at Calvary irrelevant for man’s redemption.

The Bible is not the inspired word of God but contains error and false teachings

For Chenoweth, the Bible is comparable to a plate of fish. One may pick and choose what one wishes and discard the rest. Her belief is that Jesus would love, accept, and have relationship with the homosexual while they continue in their sin. But this belief contradicts Paul’s warning to the Romans when he called such activity dishonorable passions and shameful acts which lead to eternal separation from God. Because of Chenoweth’s twisted view, the Scripture cannot be divine revelation but is in effect the product of changing conceptions of God within an evolving culture. When partaking of Chenoweth’s biblical smorgasbord, one may consume the meat of God’s love but leave bones of contrition, repentance, and turning from sin. But Christ said, “If you love me, keep my commandments.” [John 14:15. KJV]
______

Kristen Chenoweth is but one of a massive number of high-profile people in the arts, media, entertainment, and other fields who profess to be followers of Christ but are false teachers. This is not surprising for the Bible warns that there will be false teachers within the church.

But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive (damnable KJV) heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing upon themselves swift destruction. And many will follow their licentiousness, and because of them the way of truth will be reviled. And in their greed they will exploit you with false words; from of old their condemnation has not been idle, and their destruction has not been asleep. [2 Peter 2:1-3. RSV] [emphasis added]

And what of the multitudes being deceived by these false teachers? Paul tells us the reason people follow them.

For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables. [2 Timothy 4:34. KJV]

In his letter to Timothy, Paul described these Christians-in-name-only in the emerging apostasy of the last days in which men and women who once knew Christ reject or abandon their faith.

This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, traitors, heady, high-minded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away. For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts, ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. [2 Timothy 3:1-7. KJV] [emphasis added]

True Christians must turn away from the Kristin Chenoweths of the world. God commands it.

Larry G. Johnson

Sources:

[1] “Kristen Chenoweth – Biography,” IMDb, http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0155693/bio?ref_=nm_ov_bio_sm (accessed March 20, 1017).
[2] Curtis M. Yong, “Kristen Chenoweth Speaks Out For Gay Marriage As Part Of HRC’s ‘American’s for Marriage Equality’ Effort,” The Huffington Post, updated February 2, 2016.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/21/kristin-chenoweth-gay-marriage-hrc-_n_5697743.
html (accessed March 20, 2016).
[3] “Kristen Chenoweth – Biography,” UNDb.
[4] J. R. Tungol, “Kristin Chenoweth Talks Marriage Equality, Anti-gay Christians,” The Huffington Post, updated February 2, 2016. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/07/kristin-chenoweth-gay-marriage-christianity_n_2828968.html (accessed March 20, 2016).
[5] Sheila Marikar, “Kristen Chenoweth Defends ‘GCB’s’ Gay Plotline,” ABC News, March 5, 2012. http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/kristin-chenoweth-gcb-christians-gays/story? id=15828618 (accessed March 5, 2017).
[6] Commentary on Matthew 7:1-5, The Full Life Study Bible, King James Version, ed. Donald C. Stamps, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Bible Publishers, 1990), p. 1691.
[7] Erwin W. Lutzer, When a Nation Forgets God, (Chicago, Illinois: Moody Publishers, 2010), pp. 117- 118.

Take heed that no man deceive you – Part I

Posted by :webmaster On : September 9, 2016
0

Category: Archives, Christianity, Truth, Worldview

The Apostle Paul’s second letter to Thessalonians speaks of the great falling away from the Christian faith in last days of the age just before the rapture of the church.

Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, that ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand. Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition…[2 Thessalonians 2:1-3. KJV]

As the end of the last days nears, great numbers of the professing church will depart from biblical truth in both word and deed. This departure is called apostasy and means to “fall away” which is characterized by rebellion and abandonment of truth. Within the church, the apostasy will take two forms. The first is theological apostasy in which false leaders will depart from and reject part or all of the New Testament teachings of Christ and the apostles. Under these false leaders and teachers, a false salvation and cheap grace will replace salvation through Christ’s atoning sacrifice at Calvary, repentance, turning from sin, and adherence to God’s standards of living. The false leaders and teachers will offer a gospel centered on the self and its needs and desires. The second type is moral apostasy in which one severs his relationship with Christ and embraces sin and immorality. Although proclaiming right doctrine and New Testament Christianity’s teachings, they will abandon the moral standards as taught by the New Testament. These moral standards are exchanged for money, success, honor, and a large following.[1] Others ignore the Bible’s moral standards because they have been deceived into believing such compromise is necessary in the modern culture in order to accomplish Christ’s great commission of winning the lost.

The collective worldviews of the inhabitants of a civilization or a nation becomes the central cultural vision which informs and directs that civilization or nation with regard to ultimate questions of reality, truth, and right and wrong behavior. For fifteen hundred years the Christian worldview has been the foundation and central cultural vision of Western civilization. However, beginning about AD 1200, humanist ideologies began challenging the Christian worldview for supremacy in Western thought with regard to reality, truth, and concepts of right and wrong. America resisted the humanist onslaught far longer than Europe because of the biblical foundations for governance established by the early colonists and later Founders of the American republic. But by the latter part of the nineteenth century and early twentieth century, humanism had displaced the once dominant Christian leadership in all spheres of American life.

The erosion of Western civilization’s Christian roots had been a gradual process until the twentieth century when the forces of humanism had gained critical mass in the various spheres of culture. The once powerful and culturally dominant Christian Church was rapidly displaced and subsequently abandoned the culture—one segment by surrender (the liberals) and the other by retreat from the culture (the fundamentalists-evangelicals).

The liberal church had become fully apostate by the 1930s, and much of the leadership of many once conservative evangelical churches was well on the road to apostasy by the end of the twentieth century. Elements of the Catholic Church have been apostate for much of its history (certain popes, universities, certain congregations, and other elements of the church hierarchy). These apostate elements have recently been joined in their apostasy by Pope Francis, the current Pope of the Catholic Church. Considering what has happened over the last two hundred years in Europe and America, Kevin Swanson called this period “the most significant Christian apostasy of all time. As measured by sheer numbers, there is no other apostasy so extensive in recorded history.”[2]

Christians who know God’s word should not be surprised at this raging apostasy in the church in our time because the Bible records numerous prophesies in both the Old and New Testaments that these events would occur just before the end of the last days. In their respective ministries, both Jesus and John spent considerable time warning against apostasy and impending judgement.[3] In Matthew 24, after Jesus and His disciples left the temple, they went to the Mount of Olives where the disciples asked questions with regard to the sign of His coming and the end of the world. In verses 4 through 14, Jesus gave them general signs and events leading up to the rapture which will be followed by the seven-year tribulation period that will bring about the end of the age. The signs that Jesus gave in these verses characterize the events preceding the rapture, and these events will intensify as that time approaches. In verse 4, Jesus warned His disciples to “Take heed that no man deceive you.” One of the signs of the end of the last days is found in verse 11, “And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many.” [Matthew 24:11. KJV] Because so many false prophets and religious compromisers have emerged in recent times, religious deception has become rampant throughout the planet.[4]

Apostasy may occur on a national scale where an entire nation may move away from the biblical foundations upon which their civilization was built. This has occurred in Europe and has substantially happened in America. Apostasy may also happen within segments of peoples within a nation, large denominations, local churches, and individuals. At whatever level apostasy occurs, it is the result of a shift in perspective and decrease in the commitment to a biblical understanding of reality, truth, and right and wrong. This ultimately causes large numbers of people to abandon their Christian faith entirely. Although they may retain some peripheral link with the church and Christian culture, the life sustaining connection with Christ has withered and died.[5]

The Bible has much to say about false prophets. Listed below is just a sampling of verses from both the Old and New Testaments that deal with false prophets and religious compromisers.

I have given heed and listened but they have not spoken aright; no man repents of his wickedness, saying, “What have I done?” Every one turns to his own course, like a horse plunging headlong into battle…How can you say, “We are wise, and the law of the Lord is with us”? But, behold, the false pen of the scribes has made it into a lie. The wise men shall be put to shame, they shall be dismayed and taken; lo, they have rejected the word of the Lord and what wisdom is in them. [Jeremiah 8:5-6, 8-9. RSV]

Your prophets have seen for you false and deceptive visions; they have not exposed your iniquity to restore your fortunes, but have seen for you oracles false and misleading. [Lamentations 2:14. RSV]

Let no one deceive you with empty words, for it is because of these things that the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience. Therefore, do not associate with them. [Ephesians 5:6-7. RSV]

Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves…Thus you will know them by their fruits. Not every one who says to me, “Lord, Lord,” shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of my Father, who is in heaven. On that day many will say to me, “Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many might works in your name?” And then will I declare to them, “I never knew you; depart from me, you evildoers.” [Matthew 7:15, 20-23. RSV]

For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ. And no wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light. So it is not strange if his servants also disguise themselves as servants of righteousness. Their end will correspond to their deeds. [2 Corinthians 11:13-15. RSV]

For false Christs and false prophets will arise and show great signs and wonders, so as to lead astray, if possible, even the elect. [Matthew 24:24. RSV]

The Bible tells us that “My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge.” [Hosea 4:6. KJV] One of the reasons for the ease with which false prophets and religious compromisers have gained great followings in the last days is a lack of knowledge of His people. Much of the modern church is being spiritually destroyed because of the deadly combination of a lack of knowledge of God’s word and a lack of knowledge of the humanistic spirit of the age that has infiltrated the church. Without a thorough knowledge of the word of God, people cannot have a worldview that gives a rightly-ordered understanding of reality, truth, and right and wrong. Apostasy arises and spreads within His church because of deception. Lack of knowledge becomes the breeding ground for deception and apostasy.

The principal conflict of worldviews is between humanism and Christianity. Where Christians, see God as the ultimate authority in truth, reality, law, man’s salvation, man’s life and worship, humanists see man himself as the ultimate authority. That is why there is a war of worldviews in which Christianity battles against humanism’s materialism, egalitarianism, utilitarianism, abortion advocacy, evolution, socialism, and deviant sexuality.[6]

In this series we will look at specific instances of religious compromisers and false prophets that have risen to leadership within the church during these last days at the end of the age. To varying degrees they have become theologically and morally apostate. Their words, works, associations, and worldviews will be examined and compared to the unchangeable words and meaning of the Bible, and by their fruits we shall know them for what they are—apostates!

Larry G. Johnson

Sources:

[1] Donald C. Stamps, Study Notes and Articles, The Full Life Study Bible – New Testament, King James Version, gen. ed. Donald C. Stamps, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Bible Publishers, 1990), p. 478.
[2] Kevin Swanson, Apostate – The Men who destroyed the Christian West, (Parker, Colorado: Generations with Vision, 2013), p. 19.
[3] Ibid.
[4] Larry G. Johnson, “The Growing Apostasy in the Last Days– Part IV,” culturewarrior.net. June 3, 2016. http://www.culturewarrior.net/2016/06/03/growing-apostasy-in-the-last-days-part-iv/
[5] Swanson, p. 20.
[6] Ibid., p. 34-35.

The America Church – 2 – Knowing God

Posted by :webmaster On : September 11, 2015
0

Category: American Church, Archives, Truth

To know God is the universal and unending quest of all mankind. No culture or age is exempt, whether ancient or modern. In man alone among all of God’s creation there exists an incompleteness which compels him to seek solace. Earthly things do not satisfy, and man’s gaze is inevitably drawn to the heavens which stir in him vague memories and ancient voices from the past that pierce the soul and hint of a time when he was whole. It is God whom he seeks and must know to assuage the loneliness and emptiness of his existence.

Ancient man knew there were “…things, not of this world, but mysterious and superior, and worthy of being sought to the exclusion of everything else.”[1] And through religion he sought to know his Creator. Speaking of a time before God revealed himself to the ancient Hebrews and first century Christians, the Apostle Paul wrote of this perceived truth.

For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. Ever since the creation of the world his invisible nature, namely, his eternal power and deity, has been clearly perceived in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse; for although they knew God they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking and their senseless minds were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man or birds or animals or reptiles. [Romans 1:19-23, RSV]

The perceived truth of which Paul spoke, those things not of this world, are the norms, the permanent things, to which mankind must adhere in order to live. It is a moral order that transcends time. It is not instinct or learned behavior through time. Those norms or permanent things are applicable to all of mankind and to all ages. Following the fall of man and separation from God, men knew of good and evil.[2] But as time advanced man’s understanding of good and evil diminished.[3] Recorded over a 1,600-year span of time, the revelation to the Hebrews and the first century Christians brought illumination, order, and meaning to those pre-revelation norms or permanent things and which mankind had forgotten but perceived and endeavored to know. Man could not only know of God’s power and deity, they could know Him as Father God.

J. I. Packer asks a question and then answers it with regard to the purpose of mankind: “What were we made for? To know God.”[4] John the Apostle gives the answer as to “why” knowing God is the most important quest of one’s life. “And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent.” [John 17:3, KJV] It is only through knowing God, not just knowing about Him, that we can have eternal life with God. And we can only know God through knowing his Son Jesus Christ the mediator for “…I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the father but by me.” [John 14:6, KJV] To know God is to repent of sin and accept Jesus Christ as one’s Lord and Savior. Christ’s sacrificial death on the cross bridged the chasm caused by man’s broken relationship with God. This is the only remedy that will provide solace for lost man’s loneliness and emptiness in this life and eternity hereafter.

The essence of God is truth. To know God is to know truth. Christ came to earth as man but also God incarnate to testify unto the truth. The night of his betrayal, Christ stood before Pilate who asked Jesus, “…‘Art that a king then?’ Jesus answered, ‘Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Everyone that is of the truth heareth my voice.’” [John 18:37, KJV] [emphasis added]

For 2000 years this has been the goal of the faithful who claim to hear his voice: to know God and therefore to know truth. Why is it then that the various branches of the church who claim to know God preach truths that point in so many different directions? Several answers suggest themselves: man is a fallen creature and has a corrupt nature, man has freewill, and there is tempter who seeks to strike at God through destruction of His creation. And every generation of the church (the people of God) have faced Satan’s snares and deception in their quest for truth.

Every generation since Christ’s crucifixion has faced the same difficulties. Even the apostles and early giants of the church encountered dissension and corruption while sorting out truth under the direction and guidance of the Holy Spirit. Perhaps one of the most important disputes within the early church is recorded in Acts 15 and Galatians 2.

The dispute arose over some men who came from Judea to Antioch and taught that unless the Gentile brethren were circumcised as commanded by Jewish law that they cannot be saved. Paul and Barnabas took great exception to this teaching and traveled to Jerusalem to meet with the apostles and elders regarding the matter. The essence of Paul’s argument was that nothing, be it circumcision or anything else, was necessary for justification other than faith in Christ Jesus. James and the other apostles readily agreed with Paul and sent letters of instruction to the Antioch church that circumcision was not a requirement of salvation. [Acts 15]

These instructions were compatible with an earlier revelation to the Apostle Peter while visiting Simon the tanner whose house was next to the seaside in Joppa. After falling into a trance, Peter had a vision that challenged his Jewish conception of the larger issue of who could be a part of God’s kingdom. Somewhat doubtful of the message brought by the vision, God had arranged a divine appointment for Peter with a Roman army officer by the name of Cornelius, a Gentile but a devout man who feared God. Through this encounter Peter recognized that Gentiles were to be included in Christ’s kingdom. [Acts 10]

Even with all of his faults and impetuousness, Peter was the pre-eminent disciple of the twelve. Deeply emotional, he was passionate in his love and devotion to the Savior. It was to Peter that the Father revealed Jesus as “…the Christ, the Son of the Living God.” [Matthew 16:15-17. KJV]

Paul, having neither Peter’s spiritual credentials nor having been a disciple when Christ was on the earth, counted himself unworthy to be called an apostle because he had persecuted the church of God. Yet, he was bold in his proclamation of the truth and not apologetic about his labors. “But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace toward me was not in vain. On the contrary, I worked harder than any of them, though it was not I, but the grace of God which is with me.” [1 Corinthians 15:10, RSV]

In his letter to the Galatians, Paul spoke of his encounter with Peter when he came among the Gentiles at Antioch. At first, Peter fellowshipped and ate with the Gentiles. But when other Jewish Christians from Jerusalem arrived, Peter feared their disapproval and separated himself from the Gentiles. Because of his stature and influence in the church, other Jews and even Barnabas followed Peter’s example (see Galatians 2:11-13). Commenting on Peter’s cowardice in the face of possible criticism from other Jewish Christians, Matthew Henry wrote of “The weakness and inconsistency of the best of men, and how apt they are to falter in their duty to God, out of undue regard to the pleasing of men,” and of “The great force of bad examples, especially the examples of great men and good men.”[5]

Led by the Spirit, fearless Paul rose to the challenge and publicly rebuked Peter, his elder in age and prestige, because of Peter’s actions and example and the others for following him (see Galatians 2:14). This was a monumental moment in the history of the church because the whole course of Christianity and the way of salvation were at stake and depended on the correct understanding of truth. Peter’s actions and example could not be ignored for the sake of unity or the greater good. If one accepts that all scripture is inspired by the leading of the Holy Spirit, Paul’s account of the confrontation in his letter to the Galatians is divine affirmation of Paul’s understanding of the truth and is also consistent with Peter’s earlier acknowledgement of the inclusion of the Gentile’s in Christ’s kingdom.

The modern evangelical church in America is in great distress and suffering attack from within and without. In the following chapters we shall briefly survey the history of the church down through ages. With this foundation as a guide, we shall extensively examine the afflictions and failings of the evangelical church over the last 125 years that have led to its demise as a moral force necessary to stem the decline of American culture. These afflictions have arisen over the centuries because the church has made its authority the equal or superior to the Bible in many areas, has absorbed the spirit of the world, and has misinterpreted its proper role and relationship with government and other spheres of life.

Christians must once again plumb the depths of truth found in the unadulterated Word of God and follow the examples of Paul and others of the faithful from generations past who faced persecution and death as they spoke truth in the face of error, heresy, weakness, worldliness, and inconsistencies within the church. The revival of the church rests on knowing God. And knowing God begins and ends with the sola scriptura—the scriptures only.

Clarification of the meaning of truth

In the following chapters we may speak of biblical truths, scientific truths, or attach some other adjective to truth or truths. This is done for purposes of narrowing the discussion and illumination of the topic under consideration. However, these various labels applied to truth are not meant to imply that there are categories or types of truth in which each stands alone. This is what modern secular society does when it compartmentalizes truth and labels each compartment as containing a different kind of truth. For example, the world classifies scientific knowledge as fact which is binding on everyone. Such truths are termed rational, objective, and universally valid and apply to science, economics, politics, and the rest of the public arena. The remainder is consigned to religious truth deemed to be personal preferences, feelings, and individual choices which are non-rational, subjective, and relative only to particular groups. One of the consequences of this dichotomy is that religion is no longer considered a source of objective knowledge and therefore does not have a voice or authority in other realms of society. Thus, values are detached from the realm of true and false.[6] But as Francis Schaeffer points out, there is only one truth.

Christianity is not a series of truths in the plural, but rather truth spelled with a capital “T.” Truth about total reality, not just about religious things. Biblical Christianity is Truth concerning total reality—and the intellectual holding of that total Truth and then living in the light of that Truth.[7] [emphasis added]

Larry G. Johnson

Sources:

[1] Larry G. Johnson, Ye shall be as gods-Humanism and Christianity-The Battle for Supremacy in the American Cultural Vision, (Owasso, Oklahoma: Anvil House Publishers, 2011), p. 77.
[2] Genesis 3:22, KJV.
[3] William Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England, Vol. 1-Book I & II, (Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott Company, 1910), pp. 25-28; Acts 17:30, RSV.
[4] J. I. Packer, Knowing God, (Downers Grove, Illinois: IVP Books, 1973), p. 33.
[5] Matthew Henry, Commentary on the Whole Bible, ed. Rev. Leslie F. Church, Ph.D.,(Grand Rapids, Michigan, Zondervan Publishing House, 1961), p. 1840.
[6] Nancy Pearcey, Total Truth, (Wheaton, Illinois: Crossway, 2004, 2005), pp. 20-21
[7] Ibid., p. 15, quoted from Francis Schaeffer’s address at the University of Notre Dame, April, 1981.

The American Church – 1 – Love letters to my family

Posted by :webmaster On : September 4, 2015
1

Category: American Church, Archives, Truth

Following the feast of the Passover the night Jesus was betrayed, He spoke to his disciples of a new commandment.

A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another; even as I have loved you, that you also love one another. By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you have love one for another. [John 13:34-35. RSV]

Clearly, Jesus intends for there to be a special love between all true Christians by which is meant everyone in the world who has been born again and walks in the historic biblical faith regardless of denomination or fellowship. This special love binds the church in oneness or unity as expressed by Christ when he prayed for the church.

I do not pray for these only (the disciples), but also for those who believe in me through their word, that they may all be one; even as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. The glory which thou hast given me I have given to them, that they may be one even as we are one, I in them, and thou in me, that they may become perfectly one, so that the world may know that thou hast sent me and hast loved them even as thou hast loved me. [John 17:20-23. RSV]

We Christians haven’t done a very good job of becoming “perfectly one” before a watching world, especially when differences arise within the church. But differences will always occur within the body and must be resolved. It is how those differences are addressed that determines our witness before the world. If there is a lack of true love one for another, those differences will lead to great strife, turmoil, and bitterness. To achieve God’s standard of oneness requires Christians to simultaneously practice God’s holiness and God’s love. God is holy and God is love. Love without holiness is compromise. Holiness without love leads to harshness, strife, and discord.[1]

So how does the church and individual Christians do a better job of addressing their differences before a watching world? Francis Schaeffer believes that we must obey the Bible equally in doctrine and the way we live in all facets of life.

But if we truly believe this, then something must be considered. Truth carries with it confrontation. Truth demands confrontation; loving confrontation, but confrontation nevertheless. If our reflex action is always accommodation regardless of the centrality of the truth involved, there is something wrong.[2] [emphasis in original]

I have titled the first chapter on the American evangelical church as “Love letters to my family.” They are love letters which I write with a grieving heart. I love the evangelical church and all of my born-again brothers and sisters in Christ. But today’s evangelical church is not simultaneously practicing God’s holiness and God’s love, and we are at a time of confrontation. There are many godly men and women who are far superior to this author in biblical knowledge, Christian love, and spiritual maturity but who also believe it is a time to confront the spirit of the world that has invaded the church.

In the first part of this book we shall briefly survey the history of the church since its inception two thousand years ago. Understanding the central themes, successes, and failures in its history is important and will give insight and perspective to the issues faced by today’s Christian church. More importantly, we shall extensively examine the infiltration of the modern church by the spirit of the world which has led to its demise as a moral force necessary to stem the decline of American culture.

The spirit of the world

Over the course of its history, the church has suffered attack from within (theological compromise) and without (cultural compromise), but the principal thrust of both attacks can be described as nothing less than the diminution and final abandonment of biblical truth. As will be seen in the upcoming chapters, this diminution and abandonment of truth has occurred because the church has failed to recognize and resist the spirit of the world which has invaded the church.

To recognize the spirit of the world is to know that it is the complete antithesis of the nature and character of God. Where God is truth, it is a lie. Where God is just, it is injustice. Where God is love, it is hate. Where Godliness means life, it leads to death. Where God is goodness and mercy, it is sin and cruelty. The spirit of the world is Satan’s chameleon—always refining its outward allure to match the demands of a culture but remains unchangeably corrupt within. The spirit of the world has plagued mankind since Satan tempted Eve in the Garden. It has been Satan’s tool of choice by which he attempts to destroy the church.

The spirit of the world during an age of rampant humanism has redefined and compartmentalized the meaning of truth in all spheres of American life. Decades of this humanistic view of truth has been absorbed by most Christians and evangelical churches. They now unconsciously accept the heresy that there are two sources of truth—religious truth and all other truth newly enthroned by the enlightened age of science and reason. In one half of the dichotomy are matters of science and reason. This truth is considered to be public truth and applies to all individuals and to all spheres of public life including the physical sciences, social sciences, politics, economics, and the arts. The other half of humanism’s dichotomy of truth is limited to religious truth which is oriented toward religion and involves matters of personal opinion such as the existence of God, values, and morality. Since these are deemed to be personal beliefs, they are considered as being non-rational, subjective, and have no basis in fact in the natural world and therefore privatized which is to say they have no voice in the affairs of the other spheres of American life.[3] Particularly since the age of Enlightenment and its codification of the humanistic philosophy, this false dichotomy of truth is the modern veneer which covers the unchanging spirit of the world present since the fall of mankind.

However, biblical truth can never be shoved into a compartment in which religious matters are only allowed to contribute suggestions as to values and standards of morality in a pluralistic, independently functioning culture. To the contrary, the biblical revelation is the only correct answer to the scientists’ perpetual quest for a “theory of everything.” The Bible gives truthful answers as to where man came from, describes what went wrong with the world, and tells man how he can get out of the mess man he has made. Nevertheless, many evangelicals have bought into the humanistic dichotomy of truth, and it has been a catastrophe for the church and culture in America.

The evangelical church has been especially susceptible to the humanistic spirit of the world for two reasons. One is theological and the other is cultural.

Biblical illiteracy

Within the theological realm, the evangelical church has exhibited a marked growth in biblical illiteracy in the last decades of the twentieth century and continues to the present day (by which is meant a remarkable lack of familiarity with the Bible and its central themes and teachings). In the spirit of the age, consistent and thematic biblical teaching has substantially declined in many evangelical churches. Here we speak of the decline in Sunday school training for all ages and the discontinuance of children and youth organizations within the church that promoted scripture memorization and biblical knowledge for decades.

At the same time, there has been a significant decline in expository preaching as preachers began emphasizing the therapeutic realm of personal relationships and feelings. This has led to a drift away from preaching the great organizing themes of the Bible such as the nature and character of God; the creation, fall, and redemption; the historical narratives of the Old and New Testaments; and the Christian walk in a hostile world.[4] There is a time for pulpit teaching on topical and peripheral subjects, but for many it has become the rule rather than the exception. An excess of topical preaching leads to fragmentation by which is meant fragmentation of the Christian worldview. Furthermore, fragmentation of the Word causes man to descend from the glorious heights from which one can clearly see truth to a forest of facts and minutia that hide truth and ultimately destroys within men’s minds the concept that truth exists. Fragmentation tends toward relativism in which selected facts are arranged to fit the desired outcome and results in loss of context.

Evangelicals must evangelize, and it does not occur under sterile laboratory conditions but in a messy, hostile culture residing in Satan’s domain. To effectively evangelize is to spread the gospel message but not in a hit and run fashion. We have a responsibility to engage individuals and the culture by being prepared to give reasons which support the credibility of the Bible, especially when challenged by skepticism and pagan philosophies.

In the early part of the twentieth century, the fundamentalists effectively disengaged from and abandoned the culture to the secular humanists and their toady colleagues in the liberal churches. Later mid-twentieth century evangelicals once again began engaging the culture to counter the spirit of the world. But following the tumultuous 1960s, the last three generations of the evangelical church have retreated and failed to adequately defend the culture from alien philosophies such as humanism and false religions in a skeptical, post-modern age. Even when past generations of evangelicals knew their Bible exceptionally well, historically they were not well-versed in apologetics, the history of the church, and the wisdom of the great Christian thinkers and writers of the past. As a general rule, evangelicals have never fared well in presenting and defending their faith when challenged by skepticism and hostile ideas and ideologies. This must change.

Accommodating the spirit of the world

On the cultural front, the evangelical church has not only not countered the spirit of the world but accommodated much of it in the church. Instead of evangelizing the world, the world has evangelized the church. Many in evangelical leadership will vehemently deny this assertion and point to their success in reaching out and being relevant to the culture in which we find ourselves. We cannot dispute the fact that the church must translate unchanging Christian theology into the contemporary language of each generation. But irrespective of the claims of many in evangelical leadership, there is a difference between evangelism through accommodation of the spirit of the world occurring in many evangelical churches today and that of earlier eras when evangelism meant an uncompromised presentation of the word of God in the face of ridicule and rejection by a hostile culture. While the evangelical churches proudly boast of their effectiveness in fulfilling the great commission by winning the lost, such conversions accomplished through accommodating the spirit of the world ring hollow when large numbers of those converts do not subsequently exhibit commitment to a Christian lifestyle.

To a significant extent, the modern church has not stood against the spirit of the world in the church or in the public arena. Whether occurring through compromise, adding to, taking away, misinterpretation, disregard, neglect, or ignorance, the process of accommodation, however subtle, has diminished the authority of scripture. Writing thirty years ago, Schaeffer succinctly describes the importance of fidelity to scriptural authority in both word and deed.

What seems like a minor difference at first, in the end makes all the difference in the world…in things pertaining to theology, doctrine, and spiritual matters, but it also makes all the difference in things pertaining to the daily Christian life and how we as Christians are to relate to the world around us. In other words, compromising the full authority of Scripture eventually affects what it means to be a Christian theologically and how we live in the full spectrum of human life.[5]

Schaeffer points out that the pre-Reformation church believed in the inerrancy of scripture, but they had allowed many non-biblical theological ideas to infiltrate the church. These ideas were placed alongside of the Bible and in some instances were regarded as superior to the Bible. Eventually, these non-biblical teachings and practices led to abuses which brought about the Reformation.[6] Likewise, many of today’s evangelical churches are allowing questionable practices to infiltrate their churches which are contrary to both the words and meaning of the scriptures. Although the statements of faith of many evangelical churches proudly list the inerrancy and authority of the scriptures, their preaching and practices say otherwise.

In summary, the diminution and/or abandonment of the Bible as the infallible and inerrant truth of God is occurring in varying degrees in many evangelical denominations, churches, fellowships, and organizations. It occurs because of a growing ignorance of evangelicals in Bible knowledge and accommodation of the spirit of the world within the churches.

Evangelical churches arose during the First Great Awakening and have been at among those at the forefront of all that has been good in the church world and America for over three hundred years. They are not perfect and never have been, and they will continue to make mistakes. But the evangelical church must continually examine itself and make necessary course corrections when error enters in order to avoid those heartbreaking words spoken by Christ in the Sermon on the Mount.

Not everyone who says to me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that does the will of my Father who is in heaven. On that day many will say to me, Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many works in your name? And then will I declare to them, I never knew you; depart from me, you evildoers. [Matthew 7: 21-23. RSV]

Larry G. Johnson

Sources:

[1] Francis A. Schaeffer, The Great Evangelical Disaster, (Westchester, Illinois: Crossway Books, 1984), p. 168.
[2] Ibid., p. 64.
[3] Nancy Pearcey, Total Truth, (Wheaton, Illinois: Crossway, 2004, 2005), pp. 20-21.
[4] Ibid., p. 301.
[5] Schaeffer, pp. 44-45.
[6] Ibid., p. 45.

The American Church Series – Will your house be left unto you desolate?

Posted by :webmaster On : July 10, 2015
0

Category: American Church, Archives, Christianity, Truth

[This is the 125th article I have written over the past 125 weeks. I feel it is time for a short sabbatical. This article will be the last for about eight weeks and serve as an introduction for a series of articles beginning in September on the plight of the American church. Given the significant moral decline of America over the last half decade, it is necessary to examine the symptoms and root causes that have been present for well over a century. In this series of articles we shall briefly survey the history of the church since its inception two thousand years ago. Understanding the central themes of its history is important and will give insight and perspective to the issues faced by today’s Christian church. More importantly, we shall extensively examine the afflictions and failings of the modern American church that have led to its demise as a moral force necessary to stem the decline of American culture.]
———
The modern American church is in great distress and suffering attack from within and without. The forces of attack include secular humanism and false religions. But the greatest threat to the church comes from within and can be described as nothing less than the diminution and for some the abandonment of biblical truth.

This series of articles focuses on the American church and its role in the nation’s moral decline. However, regardless of how dark the future may appear for the church, we must always know that God is still on His throne and born-again Christians are ultimately on the side of victory. I was reminded of this by a sermon preached this last Wednesday night by our associate pastor at the church I attend. The text for his sermon was taken from Isaiah.

Arise, shine; for your light has come, and the glory of the Lord has risen upon you. For behold, darkness shall cover the earth, and thick darkness the peoples; but the Lord will arise upon you, and his glory will be seen upon you. [Isiah 60:1-2. RSV]

Matthew 5:14-15 tells us that, “You are the light of the world. A city set on a hill cannot be hid. Nor do men light a lamp and put it under a bushel, but on a stand, and it gives light to all in the house.” And even the “thick darkness” that covers the people of this age can be driven out by the light of God’s people. But if His people fail to be the light of the world and do not remember their first love, God will remove their lampstand unless they repent. [See: Revelation 2:4-5.] The lampstands of many American churches have been removed or are in danger of removal because they have let the light of God’s truth be dimmed if not completely extinguished which has resulted in the deterioration of American moral culture.

In his letter to the Ephesian church, the Apostle Paul described the nature of the enemy and the Christian’s preparation for battle.

Finally, my brethren, be strong in the Lord, and in the power of his might. Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand. Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, and having on the breastplate of righteousness; And your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace; Above all, taking the shield of faith, wherewith ye shall be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked. And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God: Praying always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit, and watching thereunto with all perseverance and supplication for all saints. [Ephesians 6:10-18. KJV]

The church’s first essential in putting on the armor of God is girding its loins about with truth. To gird means to surround, enclose, and prepare oneself for action. Writing three hundred years ago, Matthew Henry describes the importance and centrality of biblical truth in the Christian’s armor.

The apostle specifies the particulars of this armour, both offensive and defensive. The military girdle or belt, the breastplate, the greaves (or soldier’s shoes), the shield, the helmet, and the sword. It is observable that, among them all, there is none for the back; if we turn our back upon the enemy, we are exposed. Truth is our girdle. This is the strength of our loins; and it girds on all other pieces of our amour, and therefore is the first mentioned. I know no religion without security.[1] [emphasis added]

It appears that the majority of modern American churches are failing to gird themselves with the truth of the Word of God. Through compromise, adding to, taking away, misinterpretation, disregard, ignorance, perversion, or complete abandonment of biblical truth, they have little or nothing on which to hang the other pieces of their armor. To varying degrees this diminution and/or abandonment of the teachings and prophecies of the Bible as the infallible and inerrant truth of God has occurred in substantially all Protestant denominations, fellowships, and associations and the Catholic Church as well.

Not only has the church diminished or abandoned biblical truth, it has turned its back on the enemy and lies exposed. The modern church has not stood against the onslaught of the enemy in the public arena but fled in silence all the while trading away America’s Christian heritage of virtue, morality, justice, and decency through accommodation, compromise, and even abject surrender. Unless there is repentance by the church for its apostasy and cowardice in its failure to stand against the wiles of the devil, the glory of God will depart America, and its shame shall be a byword unto the entire world as “Ichabod”[2] is written above the door of its house.

Although this series of articles focuses on the dire straits of the church in America, it is not a time for Christians to run and hide in a cave as Elijah did following death threats from Jezebel after he had the 450 prophets of Baal put to death. In great fear Elijah fled for his life into the wilderness and eventually to Mount Horeb where he hid in a cave. God asked Elijah, “What are you doing here?” Elijah complained to God that although he had been faithful to Him, “…the people of Israel have forsaken thy covenant, thrown down thy altars, and slain thy prophets with the sword; and I, even I only, am left; and they seek my life, to take it away.” [1 Kings 19:13-14. RSV] But God told Elijah that He had seven thousand faithful servants in Israel who had not bowed to Baal.

Many in the church have the fearful mindset of Elijah. But faithful American Christians are not a small remnant that must cower in fear and silence in the face of enemy attacks. There are millions of God-fearing, born-again Christians in thousands of churches across America that unflinchingly stand for the truth of His word and who shine forth His glory. They are the hope of the church. But they must not be silent but speak the truth of God’s word so that their churches “…may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand.”

Larry G. Johnson

Sources:

[1] Larry G. Johnson, Ye shall be as gods – Humanism and Christianity – The Battle for Supremacy in the American Cultural Vision, (Owasso, Oklahoma: Anvil House Press, 2011), pp. 123-124.
[2] Ichabod was the grandson of Eli and son of Phineas. When Phineas’ pregnant wife heard the news that the Ark of the Covenant was taken during a battle with the Philistines and that her father-in-law and her husband were killed, her travail caused her to give birth to a son. “And she named the child Ichabod, saying, The glory is departed from Israel: because the ark of God was taken, and because of her father-in-law and her husband. And she said. The glory is departed from Israel, for the ark of God is taken.” [1 Samuel 4:21-22. KJV] Christ also portrayed the glory of God departing Israel as He left the Temple for the last time following his warnings to the Jewish religious establishment. “Behold your house is left unto you desolate. For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.” [Matthew 23: 38-39. KJV]

Creative Evolution – Screwtape’s science for Christians – Part II

Posted by :webmaster On : January 23, 2015
0

Category: Archives, Christianity, Humanism, Truth

C. S. Lewis’s World War II radio broadcasts came almost immediately on the heels of the publication of The Screwtape Letters. When Lewis’s broadcasts were published as Mere Christianity, he added a footnote on creative evolution which he labeled the “In-between” view that attempts to navigate a path between the religious and the materialist views of creation.

But to be complete, I ought to mention the In-between view called Life-Force philosophy, or Creative Evolution, or Emergent Evolution…People who hold this view say that the small variations by which life on this planet “evolved” from the lowest forms to Man were not due to chance but to the “striving” or “purposiveness” of a Life-Force. When people say this we must ask them whether by Life-Force they mean something with a mind or not. If they do, then “a mind bringing life into existence and leading it to perfection” is really a God, and their view is thus identical with the Religious. If they do not, then what is the sense in saying that something without a mind “strives” or has “purpose”? This seems to me to be fatal to their view.[1]

In spite of Lewis’s assertions, BioLogos Foundation still attempts to plant one foot in each worldview—the religious and the materialist. BioLogos Foundation did not invent creative evolution as it has been around for over one hundred years. The Foundation merely took it off the shelf, dusted it, adjusted its mechanisms, painted a new face on it, and presented it as a culture-friendly version of creation to a wavering, powerless church struggling for survival in a post-Christian and post-modern world.

Origin of man according to the gospel of BioLogos

In an attempt to weave a path between Lewis’s stark take-it-or-leave-it choice between godless materialism and the young-earth implications of Genesis, the modern proponents of creative evolution introduced a series of options as to how God might have used evolution to create man.

The first option offered by creative evolutionists is to view the biblical Adam and Eve as archetypes of humanity, that is, historical figures chosen to represent mankind living about 10,000 years ago. A second option presents an allegorical Adam and Eve that merely symbolize a large group of man’s ancestors who lived 150,000 years ago. The third option is to treat Adam and Eve’s story as a parable of each person’s individual rejection of God. BioLogos does not bet the farm on any one view as being the correct model for man’s origin but simply “…encourages scholarly work on these questions.”[2] Irrespective of how God may have accomplished the creation of man, BioLogos firmly rejects Adam and Eve as the first man and woman created by God by reducing them to a mere symbol for a larger existing population of humans.

BioLogos staffers such as program director Kathryn Applegate believe that miracles did not play a role in the earth’s natural history but that the evolution process worked on its own without special intervention from God. “I don’t think there’s evidence from the science that He supernaturally zapped something into existence.”[3] But, in its statement of fundamental beliefs, evolution is “…a means by which God providentially achieves his purposes.”[4] Other words for providential are pre-ordained, God-given, and heaven-sent. On the one hand, BioLogosians deny God’s interference in the process of evolution. On the other hand, BioLogosians believe the evolution process was pre-ordained to produce a specific outcome. These assumptions raise additional questions for creative evolutionists. Did God just assemble the parts needed, give the universe a spin to jumpstart the process, and then leave it for evolution to work its magic? More specifically, was man created by chance through the highly improbable evolution process or did God somehow rig the system so that man as we know him had to be created in His image through evolution? BioLogosians appear to answer yes to both questions.

In the center of all the speculations of BioLogos, questions remain as to the appearance of three essential ingredients necessary to explain mankind: the divine imprint, freewill, and original sin. Were these ingredients implanted before, during, or after this multi-billion year evolution process? Whenever these essentials were imparted to man, seemingly insurmountable conflicts and problems arise for the purveyors of creative evolution as an explanation for the creation of mankind.

Origin of sin

When, why, and how did sin enter the supposed evolutionary chain of events in mankind’s development? Sinful man is a fact. The Apostle Paul’s letter to the Romans states that, “For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God.” [Romans 3:23. KJV] For creative evolutionists, original sin refers to the current state of humanity. They agree that all men have sinned, but they cannot answer the question as to when the first sin occurred and permanently infected mankind’s gene pool. Although creative evolutionists claim the sciences of evolution and archeology can provide some insight, they conveniently punt the question of original sin into the theological arena which has many possible answers, some of which they claim correspond to scientific evidence currently available.[5]

Both creative evolutionists and their opponents must agree that man cannot have evolved as inherently sinful. Otherwise, we negate the fundamental belief that there was a point when man was sinless and then became sinful. The Apostle Paul agrees. “Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned.” [Romans 5:12. KJV] [emphasis added] If Paul is correct, then BioLogosians must agree that man (and not pre-man) was fully evolved before he sinned. Otherwise, we must assume Paul meant well but got it wrong because he didn’t have benefit of the modern creative evolutionists’ correct understanding that Adam and Eve were only historical or allegorical placeholders to mark the group appearance of our first ancestors. But, if there was not an historical first couple through whom sin entered the world, what then?

Freewill

And what of the appearance of freewill in man, that sure-fire sin generator? Was man given freewill before, during, or after the evolution of man? Freewill can’t have arrived by chance for it is an essential ingredient in the grand meta-story of the creation, the fall, and redemption. Therefore, we must believe that freewill entered man after he was fully formed. If freewill entered mankind long before man was fully man, then so too would original sin have entered. As we have previously determined, that cannot be.

Whether by miracle or through the unaided evolution process, BioLogosians can do little more than say that, “God gave us our spiritual capacities and calls us to bear his image.”[6] It also appears that original sin and freewill must have entered mankind through God’s miraculous magic—or not.

It’s time we push speculation aside and read the words of Jack Collins who leads us back to sanity with regard to man’s origins.

The actual historicity of Adam and Eve is extremely important as a fundamental Christian doctrine…Christian doctrine is best understood as the true story of who we are and how we got to be where we are…It will come apart if we don’t tell the story with the proper beginning…The Bible leads us to expect a special creation of humankind…If we take the idea of a purely natural process from molecules to mankind, then I think that is very difficult to square with the Bible…It might even be impossible.[7]

Creative evolutionists offer only flawed science and no biblical validation for their theories. They must rely on man’s puny reason, speculations as to what the Genesis story really means, and their faith in the accepted fact of evolution. This is hardly the stuff to win over skeptical anti-God evolutionists let alone Christians.

The Apostle Paul wrote to the Romans of the deplorable condition of the Gentiles. Paul stated that even though the Gentiles did not have the revelation of the Hebrews, they were guilty of violation of God’s laws evident in His eternal power and deity as revealed in nature.

For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. Ever since the creation of the world his invisible nature, namely, his eternal power and deity, has been clearly perceived in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse; for although they knew God they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking and their senseless minds were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man or birds or animals, or reptiles. [Romans 1:19-23 RSV.]

Prior to the rise of humanism (aka naturalism or materialism), nature was viewed as an imperfect imitation of divine reality. However, modern man has been taught that he need only “…to reason correctly upon evidence from nature.”[8] But man’s effort to explain the nature of God through creative evolution is both unnecessary and impossible. It is unnecessary because God’s invisible nature is already plainly understood by man’s perception of the things He created. It is impossible because imperfect nature cannot add clarity to the picture of divine reality as revealed by the Bible. The biblical record brought clarity to nature, not the other way around. This is the fundamental error of BioLogos when it attempts to humanize religion by embracing creative evolution to give a better understanding of divine reality through the workings of imperfect nature.

As was the case in the early days of World War II, the fate of Western civilization in the twenty-first century hangs in the balance. And once again the outcome may be determined by how well we get it right with regard to what Christians believe.

Larry G. Johnson

Sources:

[1] C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity, The Complete C. S. Lewis Signature Classics, (New York: Harper One, 2007), p. 31.
[2] “Questions Categorized As “The First Humans,” BioLogos. https://biologos.org/questions/category/the-first-humans (accessed December 17, 2014).
[3] Daniel James Devine, “Interpretive dance,” World, November 29, 2014, 38.
[4] “About the BioLogos Foundation,” BioLogos. https://biologos.org/about (accessed December 16, 2014).
[5] “How does original sin fit with evolutionary history?” BioLogos. http://biologos.org/questions/original-sin (accessed December 17, 2014).
[6] “Questions Categorized As “The First Humans,” BioLogos. https://biologos.org/questions/category/the-first-humans (accessed December 17, 2014).
[7] Devine, World, 39.
[8] Richard M. Weaver, Ideas Have Consequences, (Chicago, Illinois: The University of Chicago Press, 1948), pp. 5-6.

Creative Evolution – Screwtape’s science for Christians – Part I

Posted by :webmaster On : January 16, 2015
2

Category: Archives, Christianity, Humanism, Truth

In the early days of World War II the survival of Western civilization hung in the balance. With memories still fresh in their minds of the horrific carnage and sacrifice caused by the Great War that ended a mere twenty years earlier, the British people were in danger of being overwhelmed by a sense of foreboding and self-doubt as to the defense of their civilization and its values. James Welch, Director of Religious Broadcasting at the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC), described the religious climate of Britain at the time. “Two-thirds of BBC listeners…were living without any reference to God. God was simply not a factor.” They were either unresponsive or openly hostile to Christianity.[1]

The British government saw the necessity of keeping their people from becoming demoralized amid the destruction of English cities by German bombs, massive loss of life, and threatened invasion by the German army. Welch believed the church acting through BBC broadcasts could be a major factor in giving the British people a reason for hope and answers to their questions of why this was happening and what they were fighting for.

In a time of uncertainty and questioning it is the responsibility of the Church – and of religious broadcasting as one of its most powerful voices – to declare the truth about God and His relation to men. It has to expound the Christian faith in terms that can be easily understood by ordinary men and women, and to examine the ways in which that faith can be applied to present-day society during these difficult times.[2] [emphasis added]

To accomplish this task, Welch called upon an Oxford don who was not only an academician and superb writer but also a Christian apologist who had the essential quality that Welch sought: a remarkable ability to explain profound truths of God and the universe to ordinary men and women seeking answers to the basic questions of life. C. S. Lewis’s series of war-time talks from 1941 through 1944 were eventually published as Mere Christianity. The major themes of Lewis’s talks were “Right and wrong as a clue to the meaning of the universe,” “What Christians believe,” “Christian behavior,” and “Beyond personality – The first steps in the doctrine of the Trinity.” In his talks on the BBC (and later in Mere Christianity), Lewis’s goal was to defend the beliefs that had been common to nearly all Christians for almost two thousand years.[3]

The reason for this rather lengthy back story to the subject of this article is to demonstrate the utmost importance of getting it right with regard to what Christians believe. Christians dare not experiment with new theories of divine truth, the biblical understanding of creation, and the origin of man by introducing extra-biblical philosophies that fuel speculations and suppositions which undermine faith in the commonly held beliefs of Christians since the time of Christ. More specifically, the church must not undermine and weaken an understanding of the truthfulness of the Christian message by incorporating into Christian theology the tenets of the false and anti-God philosophies of materialism (humanism) in hopes of opening the doors for dialogue and witness to non-Christians.

One of the most alarming examples of this mixing of Christian and anti-Christian beliefs is the re-emergence of creative evolution which has spread rapidly since 2007 and which is being given a measure of legitimacy and respect by the leadership of many Christian colleges, organizations, and churches. The driving force behind creative evolution is the nonprofit BioLogos Foundation which is promoting a significant and well-funded effort to “…change the way Christians understand Genesis and the origin of man.”[4] [emphasis added] Dr. Francis Collins, founder of BioLogos in 2007, was the former director of the Human Genome Project. In 2009, he was appointed by President Obama as director of the National Institutes of Health.[5]

When one begins to read the listing of beliefs of BioLogos, one may think he is reading the tenets of faith of the most conservative churches in America. Its beliefs are sprinkled with many phrases familiar to conservative Christians: “We believe the Bible is the inspired and authoritative word of God…We believe that all people have sinned against God and are in need of salvation…We believe in the historical incarnation of Jesus Christ as fully God and fully man. We believe in the historical death and resurrection of Jesus Christ…” So far, so good. But as the reader continues he arrives at the essence of BioLogos beliefs that create spiritual heartburn for most Christians.

We believe that the diversity and interrelation of all life on earth are best explained by the God-ordained process of evolution with common descent. Thus, evolution is not in opposition to God, but a means by which God providentially achieves his purposes. There, we reject ideologies that claim that evolution is a purposeless process or that evolution replaces God.

We believe that God created humans in biological continuity with all life on earth, but also as spiritual beings. God established a unique relationship with humanity by endowing us with his image and calling us to an elevated position within the created order.[6]

Three of the core commitments of BioLogos reveal its purposes which are to “…affirm evolutionary creation, recognizing God as Creator of all life over billions of years…seek truth, ever learning as we study the natural world and the Bible…strive for humility and gracious dialogue with those who hold other views.”[7]

From the language of these core commitments we see that BioLogos views creative evolution as an established or accepted fact (as we are frequently reminded by evolutionists of all stripes). For BioLogosians, all other truths and interpretations must bow to the absolute truth of creative evolution when studying the natural world and the Bible. In other words, if creative evolutionists deem truth to be one thing but the biblical beliefs that have been common to nearly all Christians for two thousand years deem truth to be something else (or the Bible is silent on the subject), then BioLogosians must choose the truth as dictated by creative evolution.

Proponents of creative evolution are devoted evangelists for their cause, and their technique for evangelism is dialogue as described on the BioLogos website. “Evolution and Christian Faith supports projects and network building among scholars, church leaders, and parachurch organizations to address theological and philosophical concerns commonly voiced by Christians about evolutionary creation.”[8] [emphasis added]

The bait of dialogue is particularly appealing to the academically inclined, seminarians, and many in church leadership. Following the obligatory disclaimers that the views of BioLogos do not necessarily represent the views of the participants (and likewise, the views of participants do not necessarily represent the views of the BioLogos), the BioLogos website lists a surprising array of respected and influential participants which include: Fuller Theological Seminary, Calvin College, Bethel University, Westmont College, Oxford University, Trinity Western University, Wheaton College, Northwest Nazarene University, Gordon College, and Oral Roberts University. The stated purpose of some of the BioLogos projects is “to engage in meaningful and productive dialogue to reduce tensions between mainstream science and the Christian faith.”[9] The John Templeton Foundation is the funding source for the missionaries of creative evolution and their willing participants. Dialogue takes the form of projects funded by Templeton grants ranging from $23,000 to $300,000. Thirty-seven projects have been funded to date.[10]

As the bait is consumed, many of the academicians, seminarians, and pastors carry the heresies back to their unsuspecting students and congregations. Even if the participants don’t buy into creative evolution, their joint-participation with BioLogos lends an air of creditability and respectability to creative evolution and its emissaries.

Written by Lewis in 1941, The Screwtape Letters brilliantly satirize the tactics of Satan used to undermine faith and biblical truth. In this fictional but all too true account, Screwtape is a senior demon that is mentoring his nephew Wormwood, a Junior Tempter. Screwtape offers detailed advice to his nephew with regard to various methods of undermining faith and promoting sin in a British man known as Patient. Let’s peek over the shoulder of Wormwood as he reads portions of the first of his uncle’s letters.

I note what you say about guiding your patient’s reading and taking care that he sees a good deal of his materialist friend. But are you not be a trifle naïve?…Your man has been accustomed, ever since he was a boy, to have a dozen incompatible philosophies dancing about together inside his head. He doesn’t think of doctrines as primarily “true” or “false”, but as “academic” or “practical”, “outworn” or “contemporary”, “conventional” or “ruthless”. Jargon, not argument, is our best ally in keeping him from the church. Don’t waste time trying to make him think that materialism is true! Make him think it is strong, or stark, or courageous—that it is the philosophy of the future. That’s the sort of thing he cares about…[11]

Through the enticement of dialogue creative evolutionists implant doubt about the common beliefs of Christians which have been sustained by the biblical narrative for almost two thousand years. When doubt has taken root in the heart of Christians, they are prepared to accept the lie. Heresies clothed in the soothing words of “meaningful and productive dialogue” and reduction of “tensions between mainstream science and the Christian faith” are still heresies.

Evolution may be considered by many as accepted fact and presented as the face of mainstream science, but it is still the creation story of the false philosophy of humanism (aka materialism or naturalism). Creative evolution stands firmly in the camp of this false philosophy and no amount of “meaningful and productive dialogue” can bridge the abyss that lies between Christianity and evolution.

In Part II we shall briefly examine the mechanics of creative evolution and how BioLogosians and many other Christians have succumbed to Satan’s tactics as they attempt to paint a Christian face on mainstream evolution.

Larry G. Johnson

Sources:

[1] Justin Phillips, C. S. Lewis in a Time of War, (New York: Harper San Francisco, 2002), pp. 38, 78.
[2] Ibid., p. 78.
[3] C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity, The Complete C. S. Lewis Signature Classics, (New York: Harper One, 2007), pp. 3-4, 6.
[4] Daniel James Devine, “Interpretive dance,” World, November 29, 2014, 35.
[5] “Our History: 2006 to Today,” BioLogos. https://biologos.org/about/history (accessed December 16, 2014).
[6] “About the BioLogos Foundation,” BioLogos. https://biologos.org/about (accessed December 16, 2014).
[7] Ibid.
[8] “Evolution & Christian Faith,” BioLogos. https://biologos.org/ecf/overview (accessed December 17, 2014).
[9] “Meet the Grantees,” BioLogos. https://biologos.org/ecf/grantees (accessed December 17, 2014).
[10] “Evolution & Christian Faith,” BioLogos. https://biologos.org/ecf/overview (accessed December 17, 2014).
[11] C. S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters, The Complete C. S. Lewis Signature Classics, (New York: Harper One, 2007), pp. 185-187.

Progressive view of American history: The good old days were all bad.

Posted by :webmaster On : October 31, 2014
0

Category: America, Archives, Education, Progressivism, Truth

There seems to be few things that are exempt from the battlefields of the culture wars. The latest casualty is history…you know, the stuff that is learned in high school or at least what people used to learn in high school. But the history lessons taught in American schools for 200 years following the founding has been dumped by the education establishment in recent years. American history is no longer the grand story of American culture since the arrival of the first Europeans but has become a tool to promote the liberal political/cultural agenda. The nation’s history recorded by each generation’s citizens and eye-witness historians is an accurate record of America’s story. But now we have the latest two or three generations which claim the five hundred years of American history recorded by thousands of historians over the period is distorted and not reflective of the real story. Therefore, it must be trashed and replaced by a revised interpretation of history consistent with the current enlightened understanding of what really happened.

This approach to history is not new for it has been around since the early 1800s. It is called the Whig theory of history and is also known as the Progressive theory of history. This theory rests on the belief that the most advanced point in time represents the point of highest development. It assumes “…that history is an inevitable march upward into the light. In other words, step by step, the world always progresses, and this progress is inevitable.” [1] Thus, the historical record must be judged only in light of current beliefs, assumptions, and politics, all devoid of timeless truths, wisdom accumulated through the ages, tradition, and heritage. The roots of the Whig theory reach back to the humanistic concept of human perfectibility of the French philosophers which arose during the Age of Enlightenment during the eighteenth century. Known as progressivism, the theory contradicts the Christian view of man as having a fallen nature.

The progressive theory of history is alive and well in the twenty-first century halls of academia and the organizations that serve its needs. One of those organizations is the College Board whose membership is comprised of 6,000 institutions of higher education. Its mission is to expand access to higher education by helping students to achieve college readiness and college success through such programs as the SAT and the Advanced Placement Program. The organization also acts in areas of research and advocacy for the education community. [2] It is in the College Board’s new Advance Placement course in history that dramatically advances the progressive view of history and which has caused considerable concern to many including the Texas State Board of Education and the Republican National Committee as well as some of the more conservative members of the Golden, Colorado school board.

The school board wants to review the College Board’s Advanced Placement U.S. history course which they believe contains significant anti-American content. The school board proposed to establish a committee to review texts and course plans to assure the course materials were balanced and “promote more citizenship, patriotism, essentials and benefits of the free-market system, respect for authority and respect for individual rights” and “don’t encourage or condone civil disorder, social strife or disregard for the law.” [3]

Now, who could argue with teaching that promotes a good citizenship and patriotism in a well-ordered and lawful society? Well, hundreds of students, parents, and teachers are bothered by such radical ideas and have been protesting the school board’s planned review for weeks. The protesters claim the board is attempting to change the course content to suit their views (what about the views of the people that elected them?). The College Board’s Advanced Placement history course content being taught for the first time this school year “gives greater attention to the history of North American and its native people before colonization and their clashes with Europeans, but critics say it downplays the settlers’ success in establishing a new nation.” The College Board stated that the course was built “around themes like ‘politics and power’ and ‘environment and geography’.” However, what is missing from the course framework is as significant as that which is included. For example, Martin Luther King isn’t mentioned, but the Black Panthers are. The Board explained that the content was not to be considered exhaustive, but one New Jersey teacher cut to the heart of the College Board’s unspoken agenda. He argues that the course “…has a global, revisionist view” and “depicts the U.S. as going from conquering Native Americans to becoming an imperial power, while downplaying examples of cooperation and unity.” [4]

To a large extent, Americans are a people that are ignorant of their history. Because they don’t know where they came from, they are unaware of the dangers into which the dominant humanistic worldview is leading America. This was not always so, and it has occurred by design and not by accident or neglect. The teaching of history falls within the sphere of education, and education has been in the hands of progressives for a hundred years. Of all of the institutions of life in America, the educational establishment is the one that is most saturated in the humanistic worldview which stands in direct opposition to the biblical worldview upon which the nation was founded.

The founder and architect of America’s progressive education was John Dewey who was bitterly hostile to Christianity and traditional Western thought. Dewey did not believe in the existence of God, supernatural religion, and life after death. Man was an evolutionary product and nature is all there is. The only thing that mattered was human self-realization through interaction with nature. On this foundation he built the progressive theory of education which emphasizes experience, observation, social responsibility, problem solving, and fitting in to society as opposed to centuries of traditional education by which is meant the acquisition of knowledge. [5] For progressives, the historical record holds little importance as a guide to the present and future unless it is used as the “horrible example” of America’s past sins for the purpose of leading ignorant citizens to surrender their values and freedom. From this denigration of American history, we see the obvious disconnect between progressive education and the traditional understanding of that history. If one holds the progressive view of history, the views of the present generation must be superior to those of past generations and by default superior to their concepts of timeless truths, ancestral wisdom, tradition, and heritage. In this denigration of America’s past, the progressive theories of education and history support and promote the larger all-encompassing philosophy of humanism which has been described in several earlier articles.

Ashley Maher is an eighteen year old Chatfield High School senior who helped organize the protests against the Golden school board’s plan to review the content of the Advance Placement history course. She assures that, “We are going to fight until we see some results.” [6] By “results,” it must be assumed she means that the school board’s desire to promote citizenship, patriotism, the free-market system, respect for authority, respect for individual rights, civil order, national unity, and respect for the law will be duly censored from any Advance Placement American history courses in Golden’s high schools. It would be interesting to hear Ms. Maher’s response to the question as to why her values and interpretation of American history are superior and should be taught while at the same time suppressing and/or misrepresenting the factual historical record about which she knows nothing. Following that moment of silence from Ms. Maher, it is also doubtful her parents or her Boomer grandparents peopling the picket lines could give a coherent, logical answer. Should they manage some sort of response, we counter with the words and actions of those eye-witnesses to American history: the Pilgrims and Puritans; colonial farmers and frontiersmen; Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison, Benjamin Franklin, Patrick Henry, and the rest of the founding generations; Alexis de Tocqueville’s Democracy in America, the Abolitionists and Abraham Lincoln, the Doughboys of WWI and soldiers, sailors, and airmen of WWII, and millions of others who made America the greatest nation in the history of the world. For most modern-day Americans of the last three generations, it would be an answer they have not heard thanks to humanism’s revisionist view of American history and suppression of the historical record of our ancestors.

Larry G. Johnson

[1] Murray N. Rothbard, “The Progressive Theory of History,” Ludwig von Mises Institute, September 14, 2010. http://mises.org/daily/4708 (accessed October 28, 2014).
[2] College Board, https://www.collegeboard.org/about (accessed October 14, 2014).
[3] Colleen Slevin, “Colorado board backs review of curriculum,” Tulsa World, October 3, 2014, A9.
[4] Colleen Slevin, “Critics slam school board over history course review,” Tulsa World, October 4, 2014, A4.
[5] Larry G. Johnson, Ye shall be as gods – Humanism and Christianity – The Battle for Supremacy in the American Cultural Vision, (Owasso, Oklahoma: Anvil House Publishers, 2011), pp. 23-24, 289-290
[6] Slevin, “Critics slam school board over history course review,” A4.

Statistics: Facts often used to replace truth.

Posted by :webmaster On : September 12, 2014
2

Category: Archives, Government, Truth

Leonard Pitts’ recent syndicated column was provocatively titled “If GOP is so right, why are red states so far behind?” Pitts raised the question because of the results of a recent study by two Princeton economists that found the economy has grown faster under Democratic presidents. From President Kennedy to and including President Obama the economy grew at 4.35 percent as compared to 2.54 percent growth under Republican presidents during the same period. He also pointed to a statistic supplied by Occupy Democrats, a left-wing advocacy group, that of the ten poorest states, nine are red states and of the poorest 100 counties, ninety seven are in red states. Based on the report’s statistical revelations, Pitts asked several questions, “If Republican fiscal policies really are the key to prosperity, if the GOP formula of low taxes and little regulation really does unleash economic growth, then why has the country fared better under Democratic presidents than Republican ones and why are red states the poorest states in the country?”[1]

To be fair, Mr. Pitts does note that the ability of presidents to influence the economy is “vastly overstated.” He even cites the Princeton researchers who stated that their study does not support the idea that Democratic policies are responsible for greater economic performance under Democratic presidents. Further, he concedes that red states and counties tend to be more rural and likely to have modest incomes while at the same time may enjoy greater spending power than wealthier states and counties. Yet, Mr. Pitts can’t resist the assumption that the fiscal economic policies of the Republicans are inferior to those of the Democrats. He states that, “…the starkness and sheer preponderance of the numbers are hard to ignore.” After comparing the true blue state of Connecticut’s first place in per capita income of $56,000 with red-state Mississippi’s last place at $32,000, Pitts says that, “At the very least, stats like these ought to call into question GOP claims of superior economic policy…”[2]

“There are three kinds of lies: lies, d**n lies, and statistics.” Mark Twain popularized this quote in America but attributed it to former British Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli. How does one lie with statistics? One way is to erroneously assume a correlation between two variables and simply imply that one causes the other. Although Mr. Pitts agrees that the study’s findings do not support the idea that there is a correlation between the economic policies of Democratic presidents and the above-mentioned superior economic statistics, that is, one does not cause the other, he does believe that, given the sheer magnitude of the numbers, we must assume there is some correlation between the economic policies of Republican presidents and the lesser economic growth experience thereunder.[3]

Mr. Pitts has not lied (in a manner suggested by Twain), but he has been seduced by the power of statistical “facts” and as a consequence has “…drawn a mathematically precise line from an unwarranted assumption to a foregone conclusion.”[4] To summarize, Mr. Pitts’ conclusion is that, although the statistics provide no correlation between superior economic performance and the economic policies of Democrat presidents, the statistics must almost certainly provide correlation between the Republicans’ lesser economic results and their economic policies. Therefore, Republican economic policies are linked in some unexplained manner with the poorer results and consequently must undermine Republican claims of superior economic policies. Calling the Republican claims of superior economic policies as “overblown, at best,” Mr. Pitts ends his column with a challenge. “If that’s not the case, I would appreciate it if some Republican would explain why.”

If Mr. Pitts had done his homework, he would have found the explanation given by another nationally syndicated columnist less than ten days earlier. Robert Samuelson has written about business and economic issues since 1977. He is the author of three books on the American economy, a columnist for the Washington Post, and formerly was a columnist for Newsweek magazine for twenty-five years. Like Pitts, Samuelson also wrote a column about the Princeton study which he titled “Do Dems run the economy better? Nope.”[5]

Samuelson’s interpretation of the results of the Princeton study was very different than that of Pitts. Samuelson stated that “Democrats would no doubt like to attribute the large…growth gap to macroeconomic policy choices, but the data do not support such a claim.” Samuelson called about half of the gap that favored Democrats attributable to their “good luck” with regard to outside events or trends beyond their control. Three of those events and trends that dominated (and whose timing favored Democrats) were the global oil shocks that hurt Republicans more than Democrats, productivity gains, and military buildups that boosted economic growth.[6]

To the Princeton researchers the cause of the remaining half of the gap favoring the Democrats is a mystery. But for Samuelson the reasons were obvious and contrary to what the study’s statistics seem to suggest. He explained that, “Democrats focus more on jobs; Republicans more on inflation. What resulted was a cycle in which Democratic presidents tended to preside over expansions (usually worsening inflation) and Republicans suffered recessions (usually dampening inflation).” Without thoughtful interpretation, the surface implications of the Princeton study suggest that the “…economy’s performance during a president’s tenure in office is a good test of the soundness of policies.” Samuelson disagreed and explained that there is a long lag between the adoption of policies under a current administration and their true effects over time (usually after the administration has left office). He points out that expansive policies that feed an economic boom spawn hurtful consequences (e.g., inflation and overconfidence resulting in financial crises) that must be addressed with more painful policies, usually during the next administration. However, those painful policies can (and generally do) result in long-term dividends.[7]

Samuelson’s diagnosis of America’s economic roller coaster is somewhat akin to the analogy of visits of grandchildren to permissive, over-indulgent grandparents. It’s party time for the grandkids. High sugar diets, new toys, fun and games, few rules, and a good time is had by all. However, when mom and dad pick up the kids, they have to deal with the belly aches, renew and enforce rules and restraints, and re-establish the connections between work-reward and rebellion-consequences. In other words, the kids must return to the real world under mom and dad’s rule. For close to six decades Americans have ridden the economic roller coaster, alternately driven by Democratic children and their Republican parents. Hopefully, the American electorate will eventually understand the cause of much of America’s economic ups and downs. If so, there is hope for Republican economic prescriptions.

In the information age, facts have grown exponentially. We have become a fact driven society. Richard M. Weaver wrote, “One notes that in everyday speech the word fact has taken the place of truth…And the public is being taught systematically to make this fatal confusion of factual particulars with wisdom…The acquisition of unrelated details becomes an end in itself and takes the place of the true ideal of education.”[8] The myopic acquisition of unrelated details by a society results in fragmentation through loss of wisdom. Such societies retreat from the glorious heights from which one can clearly see truth and descend into a forest of facts—minutiae that hide truth and ultimately destroy in men’s minds that even the concept of truth exists.

Larry G. Johnson

[1] Leonard Pitts, “If GOP is so right, why are red states so far behind?” Tulsa World, September 4, 2014, A-13.
[2] Ibid.
[3] Ibid.
[4] Leonard Louis Levinson, The Left Handed Dictionary, (New York: Collier Books, 1963), p. 218.
[5] Robert J. Samuelson, “Do Dems run the economy better? Nope.” The Washington Post, August 24, 2014. http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/robert-samuelson-do-democrats-run-the-economy-better-nope/2014/08/24/1e3d847c-2a0c-11e4-86ca-6f03cbd15c1a_story.html (accessed September 5, 2014).
[6] Ibid.
[7] Ibid.
[8] Richard M. Weaver, Ideas Have Consequences, (Chicago, Illinois: The University of Chicago Press, 1948), p. 58.