Lying to a Generation: What I Learned at the Fair
Shirley and I recently enjoyed a day at the eighth largest fair in the world–The Puyallup Fair. Located in Puyallup, Washington, thirty miles south of Seattle, the “Western Washington Fair” sports a delightful twenty acres filled with carnival rides, animal shows and displays, a rodeo, stadium concerts, and numerous buildings filled with art, hobbies, flowers, and every consumer good imaginable (all at unbeatable fair prices!)
We “ate our way” through the Fair enjoying corn-on-the-cob, elephant ears, smoothies, ice cream swirls, and famous country scones. It was a memorable day filled with delicious sights and sounds and many reminders of our illustrious western history and way of life.
But I also learned something else at the Fair. I was reminded of two spectacular lies that were told to the Baby Boom Generation in the 60s and 70s that haunt us to this day:
- The lie of creation without a Creator (evolution), and
- the lie of love without God (lust).
We, as a generation, are still reeling from the impact of those untruths.
First, the lie of evolution.
This subject was on my mind because of some reading I’ve done recently on a new evolutionary book. Written by Stephen Hawking and Leonard Mlodinow, Grand Design is the latest atheistic attempt to explain the origins of the world through the lens of godless evolution. In the book, Hawking and Mlodinow brazenly state:
“Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist. It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the universe going.”
Really? The universe just creates itself? Like gravity?
Uh huh.
Grand Nonsense would be a more fitting title.
Back to Puyallup. How can you attend a fair of this type and not be struck by the wonder of God’s design on earth? As we walked around the hundreds of displays at the Puyallup Fair, we were amazed by both the incredible beauty of God’s creation as seen in the animal and plant worlds, and also in the unique creativity of human beings.
Watching the draft horses do their amazing stunts, seeing the hundreds of different species of foul and poultry–and gazing upon one of our favorites–a mother pig feeding her eleven little piglets–all these sights scream at the top of their lungs that a marvelous Designer made these things after their own kind. There is no other plausible explanation.
Macro-evolution says that time plus matter plus chance equals life as we know it. After seeing the glorious varieties of plants and animals at the Fair, that idea seems preposteous. Time plus matter plus chance equals dust–nothing more. It takes a very skilled Creator to shape elements and chemicals into the array of animal and plant life that our eyes feasted on.
And then there is the matter of man’s creation. Evolution also says that time plus matter plus chance equals you. A friend of mine summarizes this amazing process as “from goo to you by way of the zoo.”
No way. Human culture is amazing–from writing, to painting, to sculturing (even with chainsaws), to inventing products and tools (on sale everywhere at the Fair), to music, language, and invention–the creativness of man has no equal. No animals create tools or culture. Only man–made in God’s image–carries that unique spark.
No–if you look at the Fair with clear eyes, you must breathtakingly admire God’s glorious creation in the animal and plant worlds and also marvel at man’s unique creative abilities due to being made in the image of God.
My generation–the Baby Boom Generation (those born between 1946 and 1964) was raised on the lie of evolution. We were the first generation that accepted its erroneous conclusions in our textbooks and later, acted like animals in our individual lives.
Yet, every aspect of the Fair refuted that lie at every turn. God made the world and he made each one of us. We are responsible and accountible to him. We should worship him for what he’s made and do our part to create culture that benefits others and glorifies his name.
Then there is the lie about love.
One of the shows that Shirley and I watched at the Fair was a tribute to the Beatles by a group called Imagine. (I consented to listen to them to humor Shirley.) The “Fab Four” impersonators wore sixties suits, spoke with British accents (sounded fake to me) and really did look a lot like John, Paul, George, and Ringo. They were excellent musicians. During their ninety minute performance, they rattled off about twenty past Beatles hits.
It was very instructive to watch the crowd. Most of them were Boomers like us who were raised on this stuff. (I actually saw the Beatles in person in Seattle in 1964 when I was eleven years old. All I remember was their bright green suits.) There were also younger people in the crowd. Throughout the cascade of familiar songs, you could see the mouths of our generation singing along and enjoying the nostalgia of years gone by.
At the end of the performance, I was reflecting on the power of music. Even though I hadn’t heard most of these Beatles tunes for over forty years, I realized that I and an entire generation could remember every word to every song. Wow! Talk about power to affect the mind.
Then I started thinking about the actual words we had heard in the 60s. Most of the Beatles songs were about two themes–love ( i.e. I Wanna Hold Your Hand, She Loves You, Please Please Me etc.) and a smaller group about relationship break ups (i.e. Ticket to Ride, Yesterday etc.).
The closer I listened to the lyrics, the more I realized that the words were not really about “love” as the Bible defines it–pure, self-sacrificing devotion to another person. Rather, the words described sexual attraction or lust for another person.
Love and lust are very different things. Love leads to lifetime commitment. Lust leads to break-ups.
I remembered reading a sad biography of John Lennon some years ago. It chronicled his well-known sexual promiscuity, deep involvement in drug addiction, broken marriage with Cynthia (she came home one day to find John in a drug stupor and in bed with Yoko Ono) and his generally debauched life. The book also described the quartet’s first foray to Hamburg, Germany in 1960 where they frequented prostitutes, and John, Paul, and Ringo gleefully watched as George lost his virginity with a stripper.
The Beatles sang about lust, not godly love. Our generation bought the message and dove into the “free love” scene hook, line, and sinker. Our carnal, selfish pursuit of “love” brought the same consequences of broken marriages and numerous relational break-ups.
As I looked around the aging crowd, I wondered how many had been poisoned by these lyrics that led to the ruin of their marriages or the break-up of numerous relationships. The Beatles taught us a lie and we fell for it. Its results have been staggering in the life of the American nation.
But the song that spoke most deeply to me may have been the Beatles “autobiography tune.” It was called Nowhere Man. Here are some of the words to jog your memory:
He’s a real nowhere man,
Sitting in his Nowhere Land,
Making all his nowhere plans
for nobody.
Doesn’t have a point of view,
Knows not where he’s going to,
Isn’t he a bit like you and me?
Nowhere Man please listen,
You don’t know what you’re missing,
Nowhere Man,the world is at your command!
He’s as blind as he can be,
Just sees what he wants to see,
Nowhere Man can you see me at all?
The words above point to the world the Beatles and many others gave us in our youth. They took us “nowhere” where we couldn’t see our own “blindness” and empty pursuit of lustful pleasure.
“Isn’t he a bit like you and me?”
The Beatles were Nowhere Men that influenced a Nowhere Generation. How sad.
The lie of evolution and the lie of human lust are very similar. One says you can have creation and culture without God–and the other says you can have love and relationships without God. The Baby Boom found out the hard way that these ideas are painfully false.
Fortunately, many of the Baby Boom generation are finding their way home. At the conclusion to our evening, Shirley and I visited a booth that displayed hundreds of hats. All were emblazened with messages like “I Love Jesus,” “God is My Co-Pilot,” and the one that I purchased, “Jesus is My Rock.” The owner told us he had sold eighteen hundred of them.
A Nowhere Generation can be transformed into a generation that loves and serves Jesus Christ.
That’s what I learned at the Fair.
Responding to Islam
The ninth anniversary of the 9-11 terrorist attacks was solemnly remembered on Saturday. The Mosque-near-Ground-Zero debate and the possible burning of Qurans in Florida seemed to heighten the tensions all across our nation. President Obama pleaded for “tolerance,” and everywhere on the air waves people grappled with how to respond to Islam.
There are three clear responses we must make to Islam and Muslim peoples. If we fail at any of them, we and they will pay dearly for our mistake.
Before we look at those responses, let’s remind ourselves of the historical context. The clash of Western (Judeo-Christian) culture and Muslim civilization is one of the paramount struggles of the 21st century. It’s not a new battle, but it is new to us.
We have entered the era of the third jihad.
Gary Randall has written an excellent article on the triumphalism aspect of the Islamic holy wars. You can read that article by clicking here.
But now back to the brief history.
The first jihad started with Mohammad when his armies conquered all of Arabia. In the hundred years after his death, they subjugated most of the Middle East, North Africa and Spain. The first jihad lasted from 622 AD until 750 AD.
The second major jihad started in 1071 AD. Islamic armies toppled Constantinople and spread into Europe, India, and further into Africa. The second jihad began to decline when the Muslim army was stopped on September 11th, 1683 at the gates of Vienna, Austria. (Notice the interesting date of 9-11-1683.) Its remnants lived on until the collapse of the Ottoman Empire after World War I.
After that there was a sixty year lull in Islamic expansion. The Builder and Boomer generations grew up during this season of “Muslim quiet.” That’s why Islam was not on our radar screens. To us, the Muslim faith was a distant foreign religion of primarily poverty-stricken states scattered across the Middle East and Africa.
Then oil was found in Saudi Arabia. This launched the Wahhabiism era of the third jihad. Funded by petro dollars, militant Islamicists flexed their muscles once again, trying to remove Israel from Palestine and igniting a barrage of terrorism which continues to this day.
2740 Americans lost their lives on 9-11-2001 at the hands of the third jihad. The fight continues in America over building mosques and burning Korans.
What should be our Christian response? How should we react to increasing Muslim presence in our lives and world?
Let’s focus the question further. How does God want us to respond to Islam?
I believe there are three distinct categories of response.
First, there is our personal response to Muslim people. We are to love all people, including our enemies. This is the famous teaching of Jesus in Matthew 5:43:48:
“You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? And if you greet only your brothers, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.”
The Sermon on the Mount was written for individual behavior, not the role of governments. As individual people, we are to love all people, including our enemies. We are never to take vengeance in our own hands or act as vigilantes. On the a personal level, we must love and forgive.
Why? Because on a personal level, God does the same thing. Our “Father in heaven” does not harbor selfish rage or bitterness. He does not stoop to the level of his race of rebels on earth. He is personally gracious toward the unworthy. On the Cross, Jesus even expressed forgiveness to those who were violently killing him.
We must be like him–and personally do the same.
As hard as it is, all the victims of 9-11 or any other even atrocity must personally choose to love their enemies. This keeps us from becoming like them and also provides motives for them to individually change. God wants all Muslim people to also come to repentance and faith. He wants to deliver them and set them free. Our personal loving acts toward them can be used by God to touch their hearts and bring them into the arms of the Savior.
As a follower of Christ, I must love all Muslims–including jihadists–when in personal contact with them. It is not my job as an individual to execute vengeance or justice. It is my job to try and win them for Christ through self-sacrificing love. He died for them as much as he died for me.
That’s why I agree with the cover story of a recent US Center for World Missions magazine that was entitled “Loving Bin Laden.” It was filled with numerous articles on how we must love Muslim people into the Kingdom of God. On a personal basis, it truly asked the question: How would Jesus personally treat Osama bin Laden?
The answer is that he loves him and died for him. As individual human beings, we must do the same to all Muslims that we meet.
But secondly, there is also a necessary governmental response to the third jihad. The government’s job is to protect its people by punishing evil-doers.This is the role of civil authority in a fallen world–to represent the justice of God on earth by bearing the sword on behalf of innocent people (Romans 13:1-8) . This is what makes the War on Terror so right and important. It is the responsibility of civil governments to bring criminals to justice and to defeat enemy armies. That is their God-given duty.
The same Jesus who tells us to personally love our enemies also instructs government to punish evil. He inspired both Matthew 5 and Romans 13. But his teachings apply to different domains.
Individuals are to love and forgive. Governments are to punish and protect.
Let’s stop confusing the two. President Obama, for one, is completely baffled on this issue. As a political leader that many consider very “intelligent,” he wrongly believes that the Sermon on the Mount cannot be squared with having a national military. That’s ridiculous. it doesn’t even meet the common sense test. We all know that as individuals, it is not our role to punish crime. That is the role of the governmental domain. Civil governments lock up criminals for the public good. National armies win wars to protect their people from evil.
The Bible doesn’t contradict itself. It just needs to be read in context and with common sense. The real Jesus who personally loves all people will also return one day in the role of a conquering King to exact governmental vengeance and justice against every form of evil (see Revelation 19).
Jesus knows he wears two different hats. One is his personal response toward sinners. The other is his governmental responsibility. Maybe Jeremiah Wright didn’t teach the difference at the Chicago church.
Thirdly, there is our philosophical response to Islam. The Muslim faith is a false religion. Even in its benign sense, it does not teach the truth about God or how human beings can be reconciled to him. In its moderate form it discriminates against women, and in its militant forms it rewards those who callously kill innocent people.
Islam is a false, deceptive ideology. We must firmly and politely expose and reject its false teachings on life and religion. We do not believe in relativity. There is truth and there is error.
This exposure of error includes the Quran. A few months ago I purchased a copy of the Quran because I hadn’t read it for over thirty years. I took the time to do so. I was again amazed at its poor writing style, bad grammar, historical errors, harsh attitude toward Jews and Christians, numerous ramblings, and open support of jihad (one hundred different verses).
Let’s stop apologizing for the “sacred writings” of Islam. There’s nothing sacred about them. In fact, probably one of the best things we could do in America is to encourage every person to read the Quran. If they did, they would purposefully reject the “recitations” (that’s the meaning of “Quran”).
Let’s not burn it. Let’s read it–and remind ourselves why we reject it. It doesn’t pass the muster of good literature, let alone Scripture.
To summarize, let’s be wise in our responses to Islam. On a personal level, let’s love all Muslims, including those who want to kill us. As citizens, let’s support our government and troops in winning the war against terror. And in the realm of literature and critical thinking, let’s civilly expose the falsehoods of an ideology that enslaves over one billion people.
If we respond rightly to Islam in these various ways, God’s love and power will be released to bring many Muslims into true “submission” (Islam” means submission) and his protection and blessings to our nation.
That will be wisdom for us and salvation for them.
Why Liberalism Cannot Cure the American Economy
Liberal politicians in Washington, D.C. are very nervous about the upcoming elections. The American economy is stuck in the doldrums–if not headed for a double dip recession–and the people just might vent their wrath against those holding the reins of power.
In fact, President Obama’s team is so concerned that they’ve been meeting around the clock to try to come up with a solution. Should they enact another stimulus? Should they unleash a new set of tax credits or incentives? How should the government intervene to get the economy going?
We are told that the president will make a major speech this week about what they plan to do.
There’s just one problem. Liberal solutions to economic problems don’t work. They do not “reckon with reality,” so they are doomed to fail. Liberal politicians and their media cronies just don’t get it.
It’s freedom that we need. Not more government.
As Ronald Reagan once wisely stated: “Government is not the answer to our problems. Government is the problem.”
I recently read a book that opened my eyes to the blindness and bias that exists in both liberal political and media circles. Peter Goodman’s Past Due: The End of Easy Money and the Renewal of the American Economy, was given to me by a friend who wanted my opinion on it. Mr. Goodman is an economics writer for the New York Times who previously served for ten years as a Washington Post correspondent.
Reading books like Goodman’s is a healthy thing to do. It helps me understand what the other side is thinking and keeps me honest in my own beliefs. If you don’t read your philosophical opponents, then you must be unsure of your own principles or afraid to have them challenged. I am neither. As a pursuer of truth, I am open to find it wherever it may be found—sometimes in unusual places.
My friend thought I might be helped by a book from the bastion of liberal thought—the New York Times. I was sadly disappointed. Though Mr. Goodman is an engaging and thorough writer, I was amazed at the conclusions he drew from his analysis of where the American economy went wrong and what we must do to right it.
To be fair, Mr. Goodman rightly points out that many American institutions and individuals got hooked on easy money and credit over the past couple of decades. We spent beyond our means because we used the increasing equity in our homes as a cash cow to fund a debt-ridden lifestyle. He is right in this analysis. Americans got careless with debt during the Reagan-led boom that lasted from 1982 to 2007.
So far, so good.
Goodman weaves many personal stories into his narrative to prove his point. All of these people, from many walks of life, over spent, over borrowed and got shellacked when the mountain of debt became due. He discusses how the big banks and financial institutions did the same—apparently motivated by capitalism and greed. There are some elements of truth here as well.
But then the analysis reverts to the liberal bias. George Bush is consistently mocked throughout the book because he was a believer in unrestrained free enterprise. He also takes to task Bill Clinton’s reform of welfare, Robert Rubin’s and Larry Summer’s leadership during the Clinton years, de-regulation policies, and especially Alan Greenspan’s guidance of the Federal Reserve which was too laissez-faire.
The biggest culprit is what Goodman calls “faith based markets.” He says, “The intensity of the recession… was the direct result of a massive abdication of regulatory authority, one that enabled Wall Street and Madison Avenue to get rich by selling the dream of immediate wealth.” In other words—the government wasn’t involved enough. He calls this neglect “living in a fantasy world or Neverland.” He labels the free enterprise proponents as modern day Peter Pans.
Thus Mr. Goodman shares a fond affection for the Keynesian view of economics—that government must assume control of the economy and take the lead. He says, “The government must once again regulate the financial system to protect the economy from investment binges.” His desired direction is the government establishing “seed investments,” especially in bio-tech and renewable energy (he’s really big on wind and solar), and should finance health care through expanding Medicare and Medicaid and promote a “collective enterprise” between government and industry.
Let’s just say it as it is. Goodman is a socialist—or a fascist. They’re the same thing in his Liberal Neverland. He decries Wall Street and Main Street—but he a cheerleader for “State Street.” Goodman wants the government to control it all.
That’s why he is admiringly pro-Obama and his liberal economic ideas in the book. There is not one negative or cautionary word about the president’s policies. He lauds the fact that the president declared on inauguration day, “We must pick ourselves up, dust ourselves off, and begin the re-making America.”
This re-making included the massive federal stimulus bill which Goodman applauded because it “took the edge off the worst economic fears and raised hopes that the suffering would diminish. It would generate needed paychecks. It would provide relief to those laid off. It would spare jobs that otherwise would have been lost by sending aid to cash-strapped states.”
Talk about Fantasyland. The so-called stimulus was a trillion dollar failure. And normal Americans don’t agree with Goodman’s enthusiasm over the government takeover of health care. They reject it by nearly a sixty to forty margin.
Goodman–and the Obama administration–believe that Big Goverment with its massive income re-distribution priorities are the best masters of the free enterprise system. What they fail to realize is this: It is government intervention that is the problem. Centralized governments always grossly misallocate currency and capital resources that are better guided by individual market decisions. The choices of millions of consumers provide much better checks and balances than a few bureaucrats do.
Here’s what Goodman amazingly missed in his research. He says that banks and other greedy financial institutions lent money they shouldn’t have. They were careless, reckless, and this is why the housing bubble inflated. There was too much money floating around with people abusing it via their home equity loans and re-financing schemes to get rich. He says there wasn’t enough regulation (government control) of the money supply.
But where did they get the money? Private companies cannot print money. Only governments can. It was short-sighted government regulation, through Richard Nixon, in 1971, that removed American finance from the gold standard, allowing trillions of dollars to be printed in the last thirty years that are backed by nothing. In 1971, gold was at $35 an ounce and the dollar was “pegged” to it for stability and strength.
In 2010, gold is over $1200 an ounce and the dollar remains incredibly weak. Bad government regulation has “inflated” our financial institutions with too many dollars. They simply used what they were unwisely given.
You can’t blame the Monopoly players when bank (the Government) is at fault for circulating all the funny money. If the government had left the money supply pegged to gold, there would have been no inflated home prices and no crash. The central planners messed up the system.
Goodman and his liberal friends are also disingenuous about other government agencies that heavily contributed to the financial meltdown. In Past Due, Goodman discussed the giant mortage companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. He calls them “private companies” and places no blame at their feet for the collapse of the housing market.
But they are not private entities. They are government subsidiaries that tried to regulate people into homes they couldn’t afford, breaking all the normal laws of wise lending practices. Freddie and Fannie are in bed with the liberals and contribute heavily to their campaigns.
Here’s the bottom line: The US government bears the major responsibility for screwing up the American economy by grossly inflating the money supply and then lending it to unqualified buyers. If the government had stayed out of the markets, they would have been far more stable and self-correcting.
They didn’t–and set us on a course that looks an awful lot like sinking Europe, depressed Japan, and the disgraced and fallen Soviet Union.
Peter Goodman and his ilk now want the Federal Government to lead the American renewal with what? More controls! This is not only dumb–it is suicidal.
Past Due: The End of Easy Money and the Renewal of the American Economy is a propaganda book with a ludicrous conclusion. I think it should be re-titled: Past Due: The End of Liberal Dis-Information About the Virtues of Big Government.
America’s economic engine runs on the fuel of faith and freedom–characteristics that liberal thinkers neither understand nor promote.
Fortunately, the American people are seeing the light and will be voting for freedom in November, not for more government regulations. They know that liberalism cannot cure the economy because it puts its faith in the wrong thing–the Almighty State–instead of Almighty God who dwells in the hearts and minds of a self-governing people.
