‘O LORD, are not thine eyes upon the truth? thou hast stricken them, but they have not grieved; thou hast consumed them, but they have refused to receive correction: they have made their faces harder than a rock; they have refused to return. Therefore I said, Surely these are poor; they are foolish: for they know not the way of the LORD, nor the judgment of their God. I will get me unto the great men, and will speak unto them; for they have known the way of the LORD, and the judgment of their God: but these have altogether broken the yoke, and burst the bonds.’ Jeremiah 5:3-5 KJV
‘What exists now is what will be, and what has been done is what will be; there is nothing truly new on earth’ (Ecclesiastes 1: 9.) NET
‘Each man did what he considered to be right’ (Judges 17:6; 21:25.) NET
Proverbs 23:23 ‘Buy truth, and do not sell it; buy wisdom, instruction, and understanding.’
Isaiah 1: 17 ‘…learn to do good; seek justice, correct oppression; bring justice to the fatherless, plead the widow’s cause.’
According to the ‘Big Five’ personality test, as described by the acronym OCEAN—Openness, Conscientiousness, Extravertedness, Agreeability, and Neuroticism, I score high in attributes O & N. My perceptions of the Christian experience have led me to believe our specific culture generally elevates the qualities described by E & A as those the American Christian should strive to exhibit in themselves. Was (Is) this a good thing? (That is, if my perceptions are not a bit more than a little skewed.)
Focusing on the A attribute, Agreeableness does not necessarily mean one must equally (and consciously) regard all propositions as true, but rather the attribute denotes a general desire to minimize conflict and is more concerned with how others may perceive our actions and beliefs. Nice, right? Is it possible for us to agree that American culture in general has been very polarized? If so, then forgive my suggestion that our collective increasing distaste for disagreement and debate has herded us by force of everyday habit into isolated tribal circles. Since the possibility of argument itself is often seen as being not only ‘rude’ but even morally repugnant, the avoidance of possible conflict all but guarantees the formation of echo chambers—social media technology facilitates the ‘closing of the bubble’ very well. We are rapidly losing the ability to disagree with each other.
The costs are high; there is and will be even more (and uglier) conflict in the future because of our mistaken trust in the (alleged) moral value of ‘not saying anything which may hurt someone’s feelings.’ Judging (ugly word I know) from what I’ve seen of human nature, there are plenty of people out there who see great benefit in cultivating our cowardice (avoiding conflict and hurt feelings) to form a populace which does not settle matters of import through rational debate but rather inspires loyalty by perceived benefit. Philosophers have been warning us of the collapse of all that has been previously regarded as true for well over a century. I believe that collapse is well under way and with this realization our handlers now position themselves to take advantage of the noise and confusion; easily manipulatable feelings remain as demagogues and con men work the respective terrains. As the pursuit of truth is devalued as unattainable, personal allegiance to champions is substituted to fulfill a basic human need.
‘Sides’ must be chosen in this environment if anyone is to remain with a sense of conviction. The unifying force of conviction lies no longer within the very social act of debate to find truth among respected adversaries (each given the benefit of the doubt by the other that they both are searching for what is good and true) but with a conviction found within the righteousness of your chosen side as experientially guided by some force of conscience and/or God Himself. (Of course, I’m not immune from this.) The quality of loyalty (which is obviously not bad in itself) is elevated as a virtue as the substitute for abandoning the search the world taught us is hopeless.
The fear of rational debate according to cold standards and rules has led to our heated separations as we seem to forget there still is a need for a common authority for a personal sense of unity and communal cohesion. We are social creatures; without a commitment to a, admittedly elusive, single source of authority, we will multiply the number of sources to meet our need to belong to something. The central question for the seeker of love, meaning, purpose, and community (in other words, a human) revolves around which source of authority to best fulfill those human needs. If debate is distasteful, then one should gravitate towards like-minded humans to not be rude and keep the peace. Echo chambers multiply as a result, increasing division. ‘Sugar’ (what I sometimes call either the mysterious power of charisma or outright bribery) tends to become the currency within groups which are reluctant (and ill-equipped) to rationally challenge other groups. (Seriously; what else would provide credibility within that social arrangement—barring titles of nobility and the like?)
This might not be so bad if you naively committed yourself to a charming soul who has your best interests in mind; this may be what you need to tell yourself to keep your own existential angst to a minimum in such an arrangement. How willing are you to place that much power into the hands of another human being and trust that he or she is truly altruistic? Apparently, millions upon millions are willing to surrender their credibility and trust into human hands to save themselves work and discomfort. People can now regard loyalty itself as the premier virtue. Below, I’ll talk more about my own biases and the causes and costs of what I see as our laziness, cowardice, and our misinformed commitment to being ‘nice;’ and how I see wicked folk taking advantage of the fracturing of authority to exploit others and to enrich and empower themselves.
One serious beef I have with the ‘Big Five’ is that it seems to ignore where a person may lie in the authoritarian/libertarian spectrum which is a big factor in how a person views the world, and, perhaps more importantly, other people. Being raised within an authoritarian household I view the motives of others, even proclaimed Christian leaders, with skepticism and high suspicion. I see today’s direction of ‘Christian’ leadership as generally pointing towards the acceptance of human authority as the hope for a ‘better life’ for the sheep. The evidence for this is seen in our celebrity pastors and megachurch networks, our trust in our leader’s call to support a sociopathic, unrepentant liar as our ‘Chosen One,’ and in our subsequent sharp, measured decline in basic Biblical literacy. A central idea within the Reformation ethic, that the responsibility of knowing the scriptures personally lies with us as individuals, is dead. We look to celebrities now; our virtue lies in our loyalty to them.
This is very useful to celebrities both religious and political; we elected someone who is the epitome of a celebrity for prophetic reasons, for entertainment reasons, and because his opponent was so unlikeable. Our unified Conditioners (C.S. Lewis Abolition of Man) have merged the religious and political interests in a cynical bargain as both sides are interested in keeping things as muddled as possible. On the political side of things, Trump’s strategist Steve Bannon played to his boss’s greatest natural ability to ‘flood the zone with shit,’ (applying copious amounts of cacophonous and contradictory noise, which can be designed to affirm existent biases and beat us into submission) ‘truth’ (whatever that is now) has become something we’ve been trained to believe is unattainable though our own investigations. Some can just shrug their shoulders to find meaning and purpose elsewhere, perhaps desiring to be wooed. Some may choose radical individualism, whether principled or unprincipled. But a majority will attach ourselves to a champion who will fight for our interests because of the perceived loss of both personal certainty and power. Personal fealty is what our champion openly demands as the requirement ‘to make America great again.’ Our ‘Christian’ leadership, as the religious side merges with the political, using the authority they’ve attained through decades of manipulation and self-promotion, confirms, in our charismatically driven faith, that we must pledge unquestioning loyalty to an evil man (who has launched an all-out assault upon the very idea of truth) else be cast aside as disagreeable—or worse, an unjust judge.
Is it hard to imagine that through decades of bombardment that charismatic and ‘powerful’ men and women would eventually pound it into our hearts and minds the idea of a new apostolic authority in which we look personally to these men and women for knowing the will of God? Is it any wonder that decades of looking to the government to solve every possible human need has led not only to our submission to the ‘lesser of evils’ but also to choose the most ‘entertaining’ option—because, in the end, our choices really don’t matter in the grand scheme of things? Cynicism will rule in the absence of commitment to truth and debate; bluster and obfuscation will win the day. This is where we are and the ubiquitous call to agreeability is a good part of why; our shocking decline in Biblical knowledge as we sit at the feet of one Christian celebrity teacher after another lends evidence to this transition. Truth has bowed to charisma as our moral (and cognitive) decline continues into the fear inspired by social media manipulated groupthink. Fake News? All claims are ‘real’ if we believe it; even to the point of believing our champion’s claims that he speaks the truth.
Blind agreeability is a dangerous thing to cultivate but it seems our Christian leaders have succeeded in placing themselves in authority by instilling this means of fear to conformity—so they may feed. Those who are not so agreeable to this feeding are often seen as dividers who refuse to acknowledge the heart of those who speak so lovingly and fervently about Jesus. (This is all we have left to judge—how we feel about this or that.) Those who object against the dominate mode of thought are said to be unjust judges who ignore our master’s command to not judge. How easy… Is this really what the Scriptures teach? I don’t think so (Romans 12:3; 16: 17-20, 1 Peter 1:13; 5:8.) But majority opinion (feeling) rules, right? (Judges 21:25.)
We’ve been here before. It is my hope and prayer that His People will once again see through the illusion cast by our magicians who have advantaged themselves of our abandonment of the pursuit of truth, to ‘trade up’ to the universal pursuit of agreement, by any means, as the highest value. Is this how God wishes we live? Do a search of the word ‘truth’ in your Bible application and then ask yourself how we all came to endorse Donald Trump as our Hope and Chosen One. It seems we’ve forgotten that it is truth that sets us free (John 8:32.) We live in a land increasingly governed by a craven liar who will employ every technology to spread targeted lies (so-called ‘micro-targeting’ algorithms in Facebook and other social media) to further increase his power without any moral reservation (Isaiah 30:12, Jeremiah 9:6.) We’ve forgotten that lies can only enslave us as we pledge allegiance to our institutions, our prophets, our apostles (2 Peter 2) who instruct us to pledge fealty to our savior—all so easily blessed by simply invoking the name of Jesus.
The divider reminds you that:
Grace cannot exist apart from truth and justice (Isaiah 59:14-15, Jeremiah 4:2; 5:1, John 1:17.)
Truth exists independent of human authority (Job 38.) God is Creator who establishes; we can only discover.
Truth concerning God’s Will (apart from scientifically and historically discernable truths in regards to the natural world) is only discoverable by revelation from the Creator Himself in His Word (Isaiah 45:19) the understanding of which is debated by committees of people through centuries of struggle to keep each other accountable (Proverbs 11:14; 12:15; 19:20; 27:9, 17, Zechariah 8:16, Philippians 4:8, Ephesians 4:25.) The Church, which is a body comprised of many parts of cooperative function, is described as ‘the support and bulwark of the truth’ (1 Timothy 3:15.) As I reason therefore, the many parts regulate each other as analogous to our physical body’s regulatory systems. Our appointed apostles have elevated themselves above the body as heads (1 Corinthians 1:12) which can only lead to cacophony. There is only one Head (Ephesians 4: 14-16.) The rise of our reliance upon these deceitful workmen who claim to speak for God, with whom we must agree else risk being against the latest ‘movement of God’s,’ has led to our deep division and corruption. Our willful ignorance allows us to be played.
Father,
May we once again seek forgiveness for our abrogation of our responsibilities towards being the ‘bulwark of the truth.’ May we stop relying upon the pragmatic application of force to do ‘God’s Will’ to instead love the truth and live as examples to it.
Open our eyes to see the ruins we’ve created by coveting that which does not belong to us…
Into your hands ought we commit history.
Amen