Getting Rid of God

Fig. 1.1

What is the cause of all the trouble in the world? Some purport that "religion" causes all trouble and that without religion everyone would get along perfectly.  Is this true? Does all "trouble" come from religion? Would the world be peaceful without God? 

The other day, I came across this image in a discussion concerning religion.  There are, of course, multiple ways to take it: 1.) While there is a Bible in the image, it could mean all religion and that Christianity merely epitomizes those religions, or 2.) Christianity is the only religion that needs to be done away with.  Are these new ideas? Is there any validity to such arguments? While the Bible actually presents us with numerous examples in which similar sentiments were express (through words or actions), let us first examine whether this makes sense given what we know about the world.

In a world full of dispute, it is obvious that claiming that getting rid of religion will bring peace is an absurdly illogical argument.  Are arguments concerning Global Warming based on religion? Gun control? Issues of race? Oil? Drugs? If all religion were done away with tomorrow, would these issues (some of which have caused the deaths of many people) magically disappear? What about violent international disputes over economic systems? How peaceful have nations without religion been in the past? 

Relatively recently, the lead singer of a band posted a photo of his full-size truck on his own Facebook page.  If, as some claim, religion causes all the strife in the world, then this one post should have had no negative impact, but that simply wasn't true.  "Fans" of this singer began commenting on the photo in the most vile manners possible (on both sides of the issue); there was name calling, cussing, swearing, and many other unspeakable things presented in the "discussion".  Remember, this was over a man's truck. He wasn't discussing religion, nor was he making a political statement...he was only showing a picture of his truck.  How would getting rid of religion cure such rantings and ravings? 

Unfortunately, many generations in America have fallen prey to the misconception that they are smarter and more "enlightened" than any generation that has preceded them.  The Bible is "outdated" and "antiquated", which is generally established by false claims that the Apostle Paul was a chauvinist (or similar argumentation).  Religion, many claim, is the manifestation of a weak, undeveloped mind.  Enlightened minds do not need a "dusty old book" to tell them what is right and what is wrong, and the enlightened mind is able to accept differing viewpoints (except, of course, viewpoints predicated upon religious principles).  No one, in the entire history of the world, has been so enlightened as our current society; remember, of course, that many who make such claims believe the world to be millions, billions, or trillions of years old, so this is a rather large claim to make. 

Mankind is able to determine morality separate and apart from God; we do not need God to inform us as to what is right and wrong...or at least some make such a claim.  Can we logically conclude what is and what is not right by ourselves? Can our system of laws determine such for us? Let us take a moment to examine such a claim using America as a case-study:

It is illegal for someone of "consenting age" to have sexual relations with someone not of "consenting age".  Depending upon state, "consenting age" is 18, while other states are 16. A female who is 12, 13, 14, or 15 (and, of course, younger than 12) is not deemed cognitive enough to make the decision to have sexual intercourse.  However, that same child can, in many states, have an abortion without involving her parents or the father  in any way.  Now, a child as young as 2 or 3 can choose their "gender preference".  Let us follow the logic: a 2 year old can choose their gender, a 15 year old girl can choose to murder  her child, but neither can make the cognitive decision to have sex.

Yes, it is clear that mankind can establish morality apart from God and that religion is the cause of all the problems in the world.  Sadly, many will defend the "agenda" no matter what the cost; in other words, they would argue that the only thing out of sorts in the paragraph above is that children aren't deemed cognitive enough to have consensual sex.  

The problems in the world are not caused by religion, nor are they caused by the existence of morality (as given by God).  Rather, they are caused by mankind and the wickedness participated in by mankind.  While each generation purports to be the most "enlightened" ever, they spew the same wickedness of the generations that came before them.  Remember that King Ahab claimed that it was Elijah that had caused all the trouble in Israel: "Is that you, O troubler of Israel?" Was it Elijah who troubled Israel? Or had he simply made the Israelites feel guilty in their disobedience? Elijah responded to Ahab by saying that he had "not troubled Israel, but you and your father's house, in that you have forsaken the commandments of the Lord and have followed the Baals" (1 Kings 18:17-18).  

Shouts of bigotry and intolerance are directed at those who stand up for God and for His word and they are meant to intimidate.  They are agenda driven and they are argued from emotion rather than from an objective viewpoint.  Man is not "enlightened" apart from God.  Man cannot find the correct path without God.  Too many Christians are falling prey to the empty rhetoric of this world and are accepting sin as being fine with God.  Forget what the world purports as being "right"; the world cannot discern right from wrong without God! 

"O Lord, I know the way of man is not in himself; It is not in man who walks to direct his own steps" (Jeremiah 10:23).

"There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death" (Proverbs 14:12). 

Heart Rather Than Politics

So far, I've tried to refrain from entering into political discussions too much on Facebook (at least regarding the presidential campaign). As a whole, my individual perspective isn't going to alter who is going to be president (as proven by the last two presidential elections...).  That being said, the following does pertain at least in part to politics.

However, here is something we, as Christians, ought to think about: how did Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton, and Bernie Sanders become the top runners for the most powerful position in the world?

Generally speaking, the "leader" reflects the people; while there are cases throughout history where the opposite was true ( Josiah - 2 Kings 21-23; 2 Chronicles 33-35), it more often than not is true.

First up, we have Donald Trump. Why is he even being considered? He's loud, he's obnoxious, he's rude, he's a bully, and he goes whichever way the wind blows. Now, look at our society: we're great at screaming down those who disagree with us rather than having rational discussions, we call people "stupid" if they don't agree with us, we rarely listen to actual arguments and instead attack the person, we bully people by telling them that if they don't agree with us then they are "hating" us or others, and we rarely, if ever, spend time thinking through an argument when it is so much easier to go with whatever sounds good at the moment (Proverbs 18:17). But hey, he's rich, so he'll be great for our economy...but let's not look too closely at his shady business deals.

Second, we have Hillary Clinton. She is a known liar, likely a murderer, known advocate of abortion, and yet she is still the front-runner in the Democratic party. She clearly lacks integrity, but we are a society in which integrity doesn't matter because we "do what we want". This is 'Merica. Just capture the West Virginia vote...we've elected incarcerated criminals to office.

Third, we have Bernie Sanders. Sanders is probably the most "likable" of the three, but does that qualify him for the position? His socialist "principles" fit with everything fought against in World War II and the political "Cold War", and yet we have a generation coming out in droves to support him. Why? Because we have generations of spoiled people in this nation who have no clue how they got the freedom to be spoiled. They're told by society that reality doesn't matter when their individual feelings are "hurt" and that reality is whatever they "identify" as. Society teaches them them that they are entitled rather than teaching hard work. Promise them free stuff, and they will vote for you. This generation has been given a trophy every time that they've sneezed in life and told how much of a genius they are. Sanders clearly does not understand economics, and neither do his supporters.

Where does this leave us? Do politics matter to Christians? While our eternal home and our goal is to be heaven, we do still have to live in this world (1 Cor. 5). If we are given the freedom to voice our concerns openly about the detrimental impacts such front-runners can have on the spiritual well-being of our society, then ought we to use it? Unfortunately, I've followed numerous discussions among Christians this go-around and many, in their efforts to support their chosen candidate, have shown the same short-comings their candidate does: bully tactics, mocking, entitlement, and lack of integrity.

The problem(s) in America isn't politically related, it is heart related. How can we expect to alter a person's politics without first altering their hearts? There are many things, like the economy, that do not matter in the grand scheme of things; Christians can easily disagree with one another one what the best economic system is and it doesn't impact either of their abilities to reach heaven. However, if we teach that we are entitled to have things for which we have not worked, is that appropriate? Is that compassionate (2 Thess. 3:10)? If we advocate monetary gain by shady methods, is that appropriate (Matthew 6:24; 1 Timothy 6:10)? Greed and covetousness can apply in a capitalist society, and it certainly applies to socialist societies (no matter what the rhetoric states). They are wrong under both systems.

The example of Josiah (already mentioned), and in the example of his grandfather in the preceding chapters of each respective book, shows that a society can be "legislated" into obedience without their hearts having been changed (as evidenced by the book of Jeremiah). No matter who the president is, our job as Christians remains the same: change the hearts of the people.

This is not a post that is meant to discourage Christians from voting for legislation that will, even temporarily, halt immoral things from happening in our country. However, for us to be able to combat such immoral issues in our society, we have to avoid being drawn in by the empty rhetoric spewed by an ungodly society, and we have to strive to change their hearts. Changing hearts will NEVER be accomplished by "accepting" people in sin AS THEY ARE (a very unscriptural "principle"...again, 1 Corinthians 5).

We cannot complain about our presidential candidates when they simply reflect our society perfectly.

"The prophets prophesy falsely, And the priests rule by their own power; And My people love to have it so. But what will you do in the end?" (Jeremiah 5:31)