Permitted does not mean equally valid.
Not all disparity is injustice.
Civil rights are a distraction when the soul is left enslaved.
A Pivotal Moment- Possible Outcomes
Back and Forth)
I have discussed how some aspects of America’s historical treatment of women and the black population were immoral, how many of those issues were addressed, and how the pendulum kept swinging so that now there is much that is immoral in the treatment of men and white people also.
Now, there is a movement pushing against that most recent unfair treatment, but does this actually represent change and progress? If all we’re doing is changing which side has the stick to beat the other with, that would only be a continuation of the same.
As I mentioned before, this sort of tribalism and zero-sum game and cyclical oppression all seem to stem from our loss of spiritual identity, and shared purpose, and sense of one another as children of God. Unless we see a positive change at this deeper level, then I cannot be optimistic about any shift happening on the surface. So long as we remain godless, each shift is more likely to be an escalation of offense, not a return to balance.
What is Happening Now)
So, do we see any of those deeper shifts that would represent a return to godly living? Unsurprisingly, the answer is mixed. Let us look at the dynamic of men versus women specifically. On the one hand, there does seem to be a real movement of men back towards religion. A recent Axios article noted that “Gen Z men are more likely to attend weekly religious services than millennials and even some younger Gen X-ers.” It also noted that while historically there have been more women in church than men, that the female decline in church attendance continues. Thus, if the latest trajectories persist, eventually there will be more men in church than women.
Of course, this trend must be observed longer to see if it is going to actually have any lasting results. The numbers are still developing. Speaking anecdotally, though, I have also perceived a shift of men around me moving back to God and religion. Even I, who always called myself religious, had a shift seven years ago that has made my relationship with God far more real.
But that’s just one side of what’s happening. At the same time, we are seeing movements like MGTOW, which is built on resentment and rejection of women and society as a whole. We also see figures like Andrew Tate growing in popularity, who encourage men to treat women as products. And just like I have seen some men around me moving towards God, I have also seen other men moving towards anger.
For an entire generation, men have been told that they are irredeemable monsters. This is a gross lie, but my great fear is that this oft-repeated incantation will summon forth a generation of men filled with cruel indifference, men who truly are beasts, and thus become a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Hope and Fear)
It is an unclear picture, with many parts still moving, and difficulty in telling how things will land. There is reason for hope and there is reason for fear. A time of potential, but also of danger.
I admit that my assumptions are pessimistic. I see the world following a downward trend overall. Also, I am a Christian, and I believe the Biblical prophecies that the world will be a hellish place before the return of Christ. I suspect we are in the last age before that return, so even if things do get better in the short term, I suspect that overall it is worse times that lay ahead.
Still, I could be wrong. There is reason for hope. Even if this shift turned out to be negative overall, there could still be a treasure of good within its midst. I will finish this series tomorrow by exploring that more hopeful view.
A Pivotal Moment- The Pendulum Swings Back
In the last post we discussed the deep spiritual sickness that society has progressed in for over a century. We have pushed God further and further from our hearts and never found a core purpose to take His place. We have become technologically and financially superior, but depressed and bitter at the same time.
We also discussed how we never found a unifying force either. Now that we no longer see one another as brothers and sisters, fellow children of God, our fractures have grown deep, dividing us into tribes that compete rather than cooperate.
In the last sixty years there have been dramatic shifts in society, and we have changed who is “winning” at the game, and we call that progress. But that is an extremely shallow and shortsighted perspective. There is no progress in taking turns oppressing one another. There will only be progress when we stop playing the game entirely.
Men vs Women, White vs Black)
Two of the greatest divides in our culture today are on the basis of sex and on the basis of race. Feminism looks to disable the patriarchy, and racial justice seeks to end differences of outcome. In both cases, I believe there were valid concerns at the origins of their movements, but they have also each been corrupted by overreach, tribalism, and faulty assumptions. Let’s look at each in turn.
With feminism, all one needs to do is watch classic movies from the ’40s and ’50s to see that there was a genuine tone of misogyny common to the time, and that’s never alright. Even worse, there was little recourse for victims of abuse, and women have always been more at risk for that then men. These were genuine concerns, and any society seeking to improve itself would need to address them.
At the same time, though, man-hating has been an angle of feminism basically from the very beginning. Also, the movement goes far too far in assuming that every cultural tradition, difference in sex responsibilities, and difference in outcome is necessarily a problem. It lacks the nuance to see that some differences were mutually agreed upon because they were beneficial to both men and women and still would be today.
With racial justice, again there were clearly many legitimate concerns at its roots. Even after the Emancipation Proclamation, Jim Crow laws and segregation prevented all races from enjoying the same freedoms. The Civil Rights movement was necessary to provide systemic equality to every person.
As the years have gone by, however, there has emerged a movement for reverse oppression instead. DEI initiatives have brought back the very same racial discrimination practices that the Civil Rights movement sought to end! There also has been an increasing trend of casual racist sentiment, with mainstream media unabashedly disparaging an entire category of people on the color of their skin. It wasn’t right when that was permitted towards our black brothers and sisters, and it isn’t right when it is permitted towards our white brothers and sisters either.
Lost Progress)
In summary, things have gone from correcting genuine problems to hurting one another in a zero-sum game. What at first looked like barriers being broken and all becoming one, transformed into barriers being re-established, and one group elevated at the expense of the other. Many have noted that gender and racial relations seemed to be improving for a time, up until the turn of the millennium, but that the last two decades has seen a reversal into increasing racism and sexism.
But then, over the last two years, it has appeared as though things are starting to shift again. The revolution seems to be facing a counter-revolution. White men, previously submissive to the public agenda, now are pushing back against it. It took about a generation for this to happen, as challenging the narrative seemed like social suicide, but people will not forever tolerate playing a game that has unfair rules. Thus, the rules are changing.
But is it for the better? We’ll examine that in depth tomorrow.
A Pivotal Moment- Introduction
Shifting Tides)
It has been my perception that society has been shifting over the past couple years. This observation has inspired a few different posts from me as I have grappled with the larger implications and pitfalls that such a moment entail. My tone has been cautious, because even though I do see some positive changes, transitory periods are as full of danger as they are potential.
People seem more and more willing to have conversations now that they weren’t earlier, more and more willing to call out long-standing problems that used to be unspeakable. That is a prerequisite for needed improvements to be made, but it isn’t a guarantee that we will actually end in the right place. It is entirely possible that we will shove off from one dangerous shoal, only to run aground on another. Perhaps one that is even worse.
I don’t normally speak very directly about current affairs, preferring to let my messages be universally applicable. In this case I will be a little more specific, though hopefully my message will be able to stand separate from the details of this particular moment in time, being useful for all of the future pivotal moments that society will inevitably find itself in.
Examples of Change)
Of course, when I speak of shifting trends, the one that probably comes foremost to mind is the result of the 2024 US Presidential elections. Many have interpreted that election (and other similar ones around the globe) as an indictment of extreme progressivism, a sign that transgenderism and DEI would no longer be winning agendas for the left. There wasn’t even the predicted wave of retaliation votes for the overturning of Roe v Wade, suggesting that America was at the very least apathetic on the matter of so-called Abortion Rights, if not outright opposed.
Clearly something has changed, but so long as we only concern ourselves with these surface movements, we are missing out on the far more significant tectonic shifts happening deep underground. The changes in the political climate are but a sign of deeper ideological transformations, ones having to do with our spirituality and personal identity.
Before continuing further, I need to take some time to try and define these core issues and how they first came into being. Something took root in society decades ago, and it metastasized into various malignant forms, including the modern forms of abortion, atheism, depression, feminism, racism, and sexual and gender identity. What is it that lays at the core of all these? And what does the fact that some of these outer tumors are declining say about how things are developing down at that core?
These are tough questions, ones that I am admittedly still figuring out, but I will try to take a stab at them with my next post. After that, I will attempt to forecast possible futures that we might be moving towards, and whether we should feel enthusiastic or concerned.
Forced to Fit- Part Two
Accepting God as He Is)
Yesterday I shared the observation that our culture raises us with certain preconceptions about what is good and ideal. When we then engage with the idea of God, we find aspects of His revealed character that do not comport with our preconceptions. Either we discard Him, try to make Him fit our own ideals, or sacrifice our own values to embrace His.
If we elect that third option, this will likely see us surrendering to a God that we don’t fully understand or agree with. Based on our unrecognized bias, we might think that God is sexist, or unmerciful, or discriminatory, or antiquated. But if we surrender to Him even so, living according to His word in spite of our uncertainty, in time we will see our secret prejudices for what they are, and be able to let them go.
A Dangerous Justification)
For those that elect the second option, to try and change God, they often justify it by saying that the ancient records of Him were biased by the culture of their time. The irony of this generational snobbery is obvious. If you accuse another person of misrepresenting God according to his bias, how do you know that you are not doing exactly the same?
Another justification might be that the description of God’s standards was appropriate for that time, but there is a precedent for it to be updated now. After all, we do not still perform animal sacrifices or abstain from eating pork, so why couldn’t God update His opinion on certain social constructs today?
However, this argument ignores the fact that all of the aforementioned changes were never instituted by popular vote, only by those who carried divine investiture from God, Himself. Jesus was God incarnate when he approved of his cousin John’s use of baptism, when he corrected the Israelite conception of the sabbath, and when he began the practice of the sacrament. The twelve apostles were divinely appointed by Jesus with his authority, and guided by revelation, when they changed the sabbath to Sunday, opened the gospel to the gentiles, called for an end to animal sacrifice, and approved the eating of previously unclean animals.
It is not the Christian view that we can change any of God’s commands or practices at will. We have not instituted the changes from Mosaic law to Christian values at random, or due to popular preference. Every change that we observe is founded in a heavenly mandate, not in popularity. In contrast, where is the divinely invested steward who declares God’s approval of our modern social ideals? Where is the heavenly vision that roots our “progressivism” in God and not the earth?
Rejection)
This leaves the final possible response to our personal ideals differing from God’s: rejection. We can say, “yes, the God of the Bible is that particular way, and I will never be okay with that, so I will reject Him.” This, at least, is a more honest response than trying to change the divine.
But to the person making this decision I would encourage them to consider the origin of your values. Are they not directly from the society around you? Are they not from the material, fallen world? Ideals based in the world are doomed to the same fate as all the rest of mortality. These ideals will go out of fashion, and those that lived by them will similarly perish and fade. It is the natural endpoint of every worldly path. If you reject the transcendent, transcendence will respect that decision and similarly abandon you. If you wish to have no more reality than materialism and popularity, then you will have no more than them, and you will die with them.
If, on the other hand, you wish to have a hope for life, and renewal, and the transcendent ideal, and ultimate truth, if you wish to belong to those things and be transfigured by them, you should only expect to do so by embracing a message and a perspective that transcends from on high. One that comes from an ancient God, whose long-standing ways you should naturally expect to contradict many of the messages in our modern, constantly changing world. If you reject that God, then you must realize you have rejected your only option for eternal life, and you must accept the nihilistic void in His place.
Forced to Fit- Part One
Prerequisites for the Divine)
We are a culture that approaches God by first establishing a foundation of worldly ideals that we believe in, and then trying to make Him fit them. We reject God or alter Him because He simply doesn’t match our modern presuppositions about what ultimate good is supposed to be.
Some require a God who isn’t patriarchal. Some require a God who doesn’t wage war on His enemies. Some require a God whose sovereignty doesn’t supersede our own authority. Some require a God who can be validated by scientific methods. Some require a God who is socially progressive.
In these cases, feminism or pacifism or individualism or materialism or progressivism are our first God, and for God to be God He must be in alignment with that first ideal, or He must not exist at all. He is forced to fit, or He is discarded.
This is, of course, an inversion of the proper order. When man recognizes that he has a different life philosophy than God he is supposed to change himself to conform with the Almighty, not change the Almighty to conform with him!
A Modern Lens)
Let us note that differences between God’s ideal and our own is inevitable. Even setting aside personal selfishness and flaws, our modern culture has been far removed from the Judeo-Christian ethic for a while now, and we have been immersed in that climate from before we had any understanding at all. Even if we were raised in a traditional, Christian home, it is certain that we have absorbed presuppositions that we are not even aware of, reasons why we feel that we cannot accept God entirely as He has been described to us.
I have never met the person who did not have some baked-in misunderstanding of the Lord, including myself. I have never met the person who did not struggle with some aspect of who God is declared to be. This is a common challenge that we all grapple with in one way or another. Indeed, we could make a case that most of our path of discipleship is simply us coming to terms with God as He is, surrendering our inclination to try and change Him, and choosing to change ourselves instead.
There is a little more that I wish to say on this subject, but I will save it for a second post tomorrow.
Fickle Popularity
I may not be very old, but I have already witnessed the way society can swing from one trend to another. I see the masses scramble onto today’s favored platform, only to be embarrassed when it becomes tomorrow’s laughingstock.
I believe that a key component of this is that too often we choose our stance more off of who else is standing there, and not by the merits of the platform itself. The fact is, there are values to be respected in most every position. Conservatism and liberalism, inclusivity and solidarity, faith and skepticism, individualism and collectivism, a solid case can be made for each of these, and it is my personal belief that the correct position comes by taking the good parts of each.
But balance is not the typical position of society. Typically, people go all in on one or another, believing that they do so because of their commitment to its underlying ideals, but more so because of the attractiveness of the community that is built upon it.
Whenever a platform becomes too popular, it starts to attract “all kinds.” Some of the meanest and least understanding jump onto it, and they bring out all the worst extremes of that particular ideal. The rest of society can see the growing ugliness in that position, and so they take up the opposition. In order to escape the depravity of the old platform’s worst tenets, people fully commit to its opposite, until it becomes the popular thing to do. As the masses invest in that side, then they also start to attract even the uglier parts of society to their platform and the cycle repeats, over and over again.
Playing this game is exhausting. Great effort is made, but any short-term progress is eventually undone by an over-correction in the other direction. It’s a pity, because I don’t think it has to be that way. I see the potential for mankind to balance one another out, to elevate the most powerful ideals in each platform, but to circumscribe them by the bounds of all the others. By this I believe we could continually progress towards greater and greater virtue, rather than rising only to fall as has been our historical pattern. I believe this unified progression is a vision of heaven, the society that we shall have when our Lord reigns supreme.
The Narrowing of Privilege- Part One
A Troubling Narrowness)
I was recently in a Sunday School class where the teacher asked for a definition of privilege. It was a surprising request, given that our Sunday School classes usually steer clear of social commentary. In any case, the definition that was ultimately given to us was that privilege means to have an unearned advantage.
This was a single passing moment, and I didn’t think too much about it at the time. In hindsight, though, I’ve realized that I don’t hold with that definition at all, and I believe it represents a troubling narrowing of the definitions we have for words. I call it a narrowing because the word “privilege” means several different things, and not all of them match the strictly negative connotation that modern society tries to limit it to. Today we will go through three valid applications of the word “privilege,” tomorrow we will cover two more, and then make our final analysis.
Three Forms of Privilege)
For example, as a husband and a father, I make great effort to provide and protect for my family. It is the primary function of my life to consecrate my time, effort, and resources to keeping those that I am responsible for fed, clothed, sheltered, enriched, and protected. If any of those under my care express gratitude for my sacrifice I have but one response: “it is my privilege.”
This is a common sentiment among fathers, and one that doesn’t line up at all with the idea of unearned advantage. Yes, I consider it a gift and a blessing that I get to provide for those that I love, but it isn’t like I am receiving this “privilege” at no cost to myself. From this definition, the word privilege means something along the lines of “a joyful obligation.”
A second definition of the word comes to mind when I think of my father-in-law, who built a successful company from scratch. I have heard stories of the many years and long nights spent getting a foothold in the industry, slowly but surely building a solid foundation that only yielded fruit far, far down the road. Now, decades later, my father-in-law is finally ready to retire, and selling his company has meant being wined and dined by prospective buyers who are eager to receive the keys to his little kingdom.
Does that wining and dining constitute a privilege? Absolutely. But is it a privilege that was unearned? Absolutely not. Yes, it is a reward that most people won’t attain in life, but it’s one he did the work to receive. What the word privilege means in this context is: the reward for labor.
A third definition of privilege takes place downstream of the “joyful obligation” and the “reward for labors” mentioned already. Many of us enjoy gifts and opportunities that we personally did nothing to earn, but which our forefathers sacrificed greatly for. My ancestors fought to make my country a free nation. They left their homes and crossed the plains to obtain religious freedom. They fought a war to bring liberty to all the people of this nation. They toiled before the sun and the furnace to grow crops and build infrastructure. They innovated and invented to create convenience and security. Did I earn all the benefits I now enjoy because of their labors? Absolutely not. But that doesn’t mean that they weren’t unearned!
A Complex Picture)
Here we have seen three definitions of privilege that have nothing to do with the more negative uses of the word. These definitions describe people who are dutiful, hard-working, and with a noble heritage. Tomorrow we will look at two more definitions, the last of which will acknowledge the more negative aspect of the word. It should already be clear that this word is much more nuanced and deep than modern rhetoric would have us believe.
The Air is Getting Thinner
Just Letting Go)
Sometimes I’m actively, vibrantly living with purpose. I’m trying to identify what my calling is, what God put me here for, what sort of person He wants me to be, and I’m trying to fill that measure day-by-day.
And then at other times, in many times, I just kind of give up on trying and coast. I fill my spare time with mindless media, ignore my personal health, let the house get messy, and don’t really contribute anything to the world.
I feel very disturbed by how low I can go when I just stop trying. I would have hoped that when I tried to coast I would still have a basically meaningful life, but I really don’t feel that way at all. When I stop striving I feel like I drop into a godless world, something vain and artificial and inconsequential. The only options seem to be constant striving or descending into absolute nihilism.
Worldly Decline)
And as I look around at the world, I don’t think I’m the only one this happens to. I think we are experiencing this sharp dichotomy as an entire society. Our world has become more godless and quality everywhere is in decline. Our stories are less creative, our vocabulary is diminishing, our aspirations are waning. We live for Netflix and food delivery and the latest iPhone, leaving behind community, achievement, and virtue.
I believe that we were once a more Godly, more purposeful sort of people. Even if someone tried to let go of God they would still find themselves living a relatively meaningful life because they lived in a cultural atmosphere that was richer and deeper, where the base expectations were higher. Now, though, there is so little standard left to hold you up once you let yourself go. In other words, the air is getting thinner, so you have got to have your own oxygen mask, you can’t rely on breathing what you get from the culture.
Perhaps Jesus saw this when he gave the parable of the 10 wise virgins. In the darkest part of the night we’re just not going to get by with coasting. We have to be intentional about living in connection to God and with purpose, or we will die.
Scriptural Analysis- Exodus 18:13-17
13 And it came to pass on the morrow, that Moses sat to judge the people: and the people stood by Moses from the morning unto the evening.
14 And when Moses’ father in law saw all that he did to the people, he said, What is this thing that thou doest to the people? why sittest thou thyself alone, and all the people stand by thee from morning unto even?
15 And Moses said unto his father in law, Because the people come unto me to inquire of God:
16 When they have a matter, they come unto me; and I judge between one and another, and I do make them know the statutes of God, and his laws.
17 And Moses’ father in law said unto him, The thing that thou doest is not good.
Moses had played host to Jethro when he first arrived, but on the next day he had to get back to his work as Israel’s judge. This was quite fortuitous, as it allowed Jethro to observe Moses’s process, and in the following verses we will see the key improvement that he had to offer.
Moses stood between all the disputes and difficulties of the people, delivering God’s judgment for them all. This is a key function that any large populace needs to have filled. Isolated individuals become a unified people in part by having
- A shared vision.
- Reliable rules that they all adhere to.
- Their smaller issues resolved before they can escalate into egregious affronts.
Moses was meeting all of those needs by sitting in judgment. Put more abstractly, a society needs a locus of control, just as an individual does, and without one it will dissolve into anarchy. But since the society is not a single person, that locus of control must be external instead of internal.
Of course, among a people that may have numbered over two million, the number of disputes that Moses heard must have been immense. As we will see tomorrow, this is exactly the problem that Jethro saw in Moses’s approach. Judging two million people was already too great of a burden, and the population was only going to increase, and Moses’s approach would not be able to scale upwards indefinitely. It would become literally impossible for one man to judge these people in this way. Something had to change.
Spiritual Wanderings 