Akos Balogh: 5 Subconscious Lies of Our Therapeutic Age that Can Deceive Christians

From The Daily Declaration:

5 Subconscious Lies of Our Therapeutic Age that Can Deceive Christians

feelings

 

As we shed our traditional Judaeo-Christian values, our worldview has radically changed, including our expectations of life, of others, and what we base our identity upon. Feelings trump reason and suffering is unacceptable.

Over 200 years ago, a revolution was launched across the West.

Or rather, revolutions. Western societies began to move away from Christianity. They moved slowly at first — like a crawling baby. But as that baby grew, it became less and less Christian, shaking off its religious beliefs.

Fast forward to 2022, and this child (to continue the metaphor) has a radically different view of reality and humanity than 200 years ago.

We’re now a society where our feelings are critical to our existence. Or, in the words of sociologist Philip Rieff, we live in the ‘therapeutic age’: we’re driven and defined by our feelings in ways utterly foreign to our ancestors. And this has spawned all sorts of beliefs that shape us and our view of the world.

What’s more, these beliefs are mostly subconscious:

We don’t consciously choose to accept them. Instead, we ‘catch’ them as we swim in the sea of Western culture. Whether through the media we consume (e.g. Disney, Hollywood), our workplaces, social media, or friends.

And because these beliefs are unbiblical, they can wreak havoc on people’s lives. 

Here are 5 of those beliefs:

 

1) Our Feelings Determine Who We Are

This belief is the bedrock of our therapeutic feeling-based age.

You see it everywhere, from Disney (‘just follow your heart’) to the transgender movement (your internal feelings about gender trump your physical biology). Genuine ‘authenticity’ now means living out your inner feelings, no matter what they are (and woe to anyone who tells you otherwise). [1]

But when anyone — including Christians — adopts this belief, it shapes us in strange and ungodly ways:

We can let our feelings trump our given identity in Christ. We can let our emotions drive our moral decision-making. And we can judge our Church not on its faithful teaching and living, but on how it serves our felt needs.

 

2) True Freedom Means Defining Your Own Existence

If our feelings determine our identity, then true freedom means society giving us space to express that identity.

This view of freedom is a bedrock belief that sustains the abortion rights movement across the West. As the US Supreme Court wrote in a ruling about abortion rights:

‘At the heart of liberty is the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, of the mystery of human life. Beliefs about these matters could not define the attributes of personhood were they formed under the compulsion of the State.’ [2]

With freedom thus redefined, oppression is also redefined: oppression now includes anything — any belief, any law — that prevents people from expressing their own view of existence (the Biblical sexual ethic, anyone?). And so, Christians have moved from being the ‘moral guys’ to being the ‘bad guys’.

While Christians feel this pressure externally, from society, it’s also a belief that shapes us internally:

We’re less willing to submit ourselves to others, like church leaders and religious institutions. We’re less likely to see submission as good. We don’t want others telling us what to do.

And if we’re in positions of leadership, we’re less likely to want to enforce rules like church discipline, as it feels a little unfair.

 

3) Always Trust Your Feelings

Because feelings are essential to who we are, they now hold authority like never before.

If something or someone makes you uncomfortable, then the problem is always the other person and never your feelings. Your interpretation of reality (which leads to those feelings) is always right because we are our feelings.

We see this in the rise of cancel culture, where any person or belief that causes people to feel offended is attacked and shut down. There’s little engagement or understanding with what the other person might mean or why they might hold to that view — let alone whether that view is true or not.

 

4) We’re Meant to Have Good Feelings, So Avoid Anything That Makes You Feel Bad

The aim of life in a therapeutic age has moved from having good character to having good feelings.

Feeling good becomes a moral duty: the big question we ask ourselves is no longer ‘what’s the right thing to do?’, but rather ‘how will it make me feel?’. And so, as a culture, we avoid anything that makes us feel bad:

We avoid the difficult person at Church because they don’t make us feel good.

We avoid having those hard but important conversations because they make us feel uncomfortable.

And we avoid conflict like it’s an out-of-fashion pair of jeans.

We use people and things to help us feel good: life becomes increasingly self-centred.

Of course, this has all sorts of problems because constantly feeling good is an unrealistic goal. We’ll regularly feel frustrated. Yes, we might feel good for a while — when we get that new phone, friend, or partner. But it never lasts.

More perniciously, life lived for self-centred feelings and avoidance of difficulty can leave a trail of damaged relationships.

(Ask almost any celebrity.)

 

5) Suffering Serves No Good Purpose

If life is all about feeling good, then suffering is all bad: it serves no purpose.

Suffering gets in the way of my feeling good. And I’ll do anything to avoid it. There’s no ‘higher purpose’ to my suffering.

But we can’t avoid suffering in a fallen world.

It’s part of our human condition (no matter how much we try to avoid it). Adopting a therapeutic view of suffering leads to anger and even despair when suffering hits us. We’ll feel discombobulated and fearful, worrying about the next bout of suffering that might come our way.

 

These 5 beliefs, these lies, are deeply embedded in Western Culture. But in an upcoming post, we’ll explore how we can respond to each of them in a way that frees us from their grip.

 

___

 

[1] It’s worth mentioning there are still culturally accepted limits to what desires people can live out: e.g. pedophilia is still unacceptable.

 

[2] Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833, 851 (1992). Quoted in Carl Trueman, The Rise and Triumph of the Modern Self – Cultural Amnesia, Expressive Individualism, and the Road to Sexual Revolution (Wheaton, Illinois: Crossway, 2020), 303.

 

James Macpherson: We Are Witnessing the Birth of a New Religion

new religion

We Are Witnessing the Birth of a New Religion

James Macpherson

Transgender ideology is becoming sacrosanct, taken as a fact and not permitted to be questioned or criticised. It is treated as a sacred religion by those who actually believe in it. This has implications for all of society.

I don’t think most people believe that “trans women are women”, even when they say it.

I think most people who say it are afraid not to say it.

And then there are a small group of people who say it to make those who don’t say it afraid; very afraid.

“Trans women are women. Trans women are women. Trans women are women.”

Woke Confession

If you’re on social media, you would have seen everyone from the United Nations to US President Joe Biden and London Mayor Sadiq Khan repeat the phrase.

“Trans women are women. Trans women are women. Trans women are women.”

It’s like a religious confession; a sacrament of woke, if you will. When you say it, you prove that you have abandoned truth in order to fully embrace the new religion. You are a believer.

Repeating the woke liturgy is a way of signalling to everyone else that you have converted and so you won’t be any bother.

No matter how ridiculous or absurd things become, you won’t question anything. You’re a loyal member of the congregation of woke. You’ll go along to get along. And don’t the Emperor’s new clothes look good!

Total Control

If you secretly yearn to control and boss others around, the “trans women are women” confession is especially appealing.

Imagine having the power to bully people on social media or to get them fired from their job for not agreeing with obvious falsities.

Up is down! And if you don’t disagree, you’re a bigot who should be run out of town.

Imagine having that kind of power!

Read the rest of the article at Daily Declaration

Stephen McAlpine: Planting Flowers in Wartime

People are planting flowers in Kyiv. Spring is coming.

In the midst of all the chaos, horror and death that the Russian invasion has inflicted on Kyiv, there is something beautiful about people planting flowers in wartorn Kyiv.

As The Times reports, in the light of the Russian withdrawal from the city, the city’s mayor, former world heavyweight boxing champion, Vitaly Klitschko declared:

The municipal services have started spring cleaning. Parks, green areas are being arranged and trees and flowers are being planted.

The war isn’t finished of course. Far from it. Half of the city’s population is still missing, some dead, many in other countries. The devastation and pain will continue for some time yet.

But the normal process of planting seedlings in the flowerbeds, much the same as in my suburb on a seasonal basis, has recommenced. Spring in the air. Easter Resurrection in the air.

Planting flowers in wartime? It could be construed as denial. It could be misdiagnosed as futility or nihilism. Or it could be seen for what it is: Hope sprouting from the ground again.

And it’s a lesson too. A lesson for so many things, but a lesson, I think, for the church. I’ve written much about the straitened times that the church of God finds itself in in the West, either due to its own folly, or because of the turn against the Gospel in the hard secular age. There is much to be sober about. And let’s not get too shy about calling the Christian life a battle, or the spiritual work of the Church a warfare, for the sake of not offending, or for fear of being labelled seditious. If we were to jettison that language we’d have to cut large swathes out of the New Testament documents.

But in the midst of that, let’s remember the better story, the truer narrative of human flourishing, the light to the world, salt of the earth, shining like stars in the dark, sorta stuff that the New Testament speaks of as well. Let’s not forget the new citizens of a heavenly kingdom, the people who have a hope beyond the hope of this age.

In other words, the church gets to plant flowers in wartime. We have a hope that what springs from the ground in our midst, and as we do good to the world and in the world, will not be wasted. Our Resurrection Day is coming. Not Easter Sunday, that was the proto-type, the first-fruits springing from the ground, of which our resurrection will be the full planter bed, blossoming into eternity.

And that should encourage us as we approach what I believe could well be darker and harsher times ahead, both geo-politically and for the church.

The always brilliant Anglican rector and UK journalist Giles Fraser, pointed out recently in UnHerd, that in response to the Ukraine war, the Christian hope leaves the humanist hope quite literally for dead. Humanists have no way of explaining evil away, other than it being a good opportunity for humanity to glint through the darkest body count.

And while I think that humanists could look at the flower-planting in Kyiv and say “See? There’s humanity in all its glory!”, they are unable to counter that glory with any sense of the true horror of humanity that makes such a photograph as the one I posted above, truly memorable.

Read the rest of the article here

The Question That May Not Be Answered

It seems that nobody knows what a woman is any more.Despite calls for “equality” and respect for women, nobody can tell us what a woman is- not a US Supreme Court judge, not political leaders, not even the Australian Department of Health.

Remember when we were promised that the redefinition of marriage was not a slippery slope, the thin end of a woke wedge? Well here we are in 2022 in a crazy world where people dare not answer the queston, “What is a woman?”

From the Canberra Declaration

Senator Alex Antic Asked ‘What is a Woman?’ and the Department of Health Couldn’t Answer

With one simple question, Senator Alex Antic this week revealed just how real the ‘slippery slope’ is. Five years ago we undefined marriage. Now Australia’s top medical minds can’t define a woman.

Can Australia’s Department of Health define what a woman is? This was the burning question that Liberal Senator for South Australia Alex Antic took to Senate estimates in Canberra this week.

The response given by the department’s head revealed just how far Australia has drifted from reality since the undefinition of marriage took place in 2017.

“I can’t seem to get a bureaucrat in this building to define what is a woman,” Senator Antic explained to his followers on social media soon after the exchange. “Today, I took it right to the top, straight to the Department of Health, and [received] one of the most extraordinary responses I’ve seen to date.”

Defining a Woman: ’Pretty Basic Stuff’

In a short one-minute video that has had over 150,000 views on Twitter since Wednesday, Senator Antic asks a panel of five of Australia’s top medical experts:

I’m going to finish up … with a very simple question for the department, and that is one which has troubled me for a great deal of time with the bureaucracy here. Can someone please provide me with a definition of what a woman is?

After a period of silence and blank stares, Antic probes further. “Department of Health,” he says incredulously. “Definition of a man. Definition of a woman. Anyone?”

“It’s pretty basic,” someone off camera can be heard saying. “Basic stuff,” Antic adds.

Professor Brendan Murphy, the Secretary of the Department of Health, begins moving uncomfortably in his chair, realising that he is the most senior figure in the room.

“There, look, I think there are a variety of definitions, and I think… Perhaps to give a more fulsome answer we should take that on notice,” he tells the Senator.

Antic is taken aback, asking, “You’re going to take on notice the question of what a woman is?”

“No, well there are a variety of… it’s a very, it’s a very, ah… it’s a very contested space at the moment Senator,” Professor Murphy continues. “There are definitions in terms of how people identify themselves so we’re happy to provide our working definition on that.”

Antic’s response couldn’t have been more appropriate. “I’ve only been here two years,” he remarks. “That’s the best thing I’ve seen thus far. Thank you so much.”

The Slippery Slope is Real

For thousands of years and until very recently, it was universally understood that a woman is an adult human female. The definition of “female” was also set in stone: the sex that can give birth to young or produce eggs.

These definitions were present across cultures, but in the West they were grounded in Scripture. The Bible sheds immense light on the dignity, value and calling of men and women. The foundational text is Genesis 1:27, which declares, “God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.”

Bible-believing Christians and other conservatives warned that by introducing same-sex “marriage”, Western nations would de-gender marriage and lay the groundwork for the abolition of gender altogether.

Within just years, this “slippery slope argument”, once mocked by progressives, turns out to have been entirely accurate. Gender is now widely seen as a mere social construct, not grounded in objectivity.

Unmoored from a biblical understanding of reality, the West is losing its moral and intellectual compass.

Read the rest of the article here

Russia And The End Times

Russia And The End Times

The recent invasion of Ukraine by Russia has generated a lot of excitement among end times enthusiasts. Could this be the start of the stirring of God and Magog? Could Israel be next on Russia’s agenda?

A lot of the speculation has its roots in the end times hysteria of the 1970’s when the then Soviet Union was incorrectly labelled by the likes of Hal Lindsey (“Late Great Planet Earth”) as the “rush” and the Gog and Magog of Ezekiel 38-39. These chapters describe an attempt to destroy the Jewish people, an attempt that the Lord thwarts and turns back on Gog and Magog.

Some people have argued that there is no historical record of such an event given in Scripture or even in subsequent history. They argue that it must therefore refer to the end times.

So let us take a closer look at where we might find help with understanding these matters.

“Rush” is Not Russia

In Ezekiel 38:2, the Lord says to Ezekiel “Son of man, set your face against Gog of the land of Magog, the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal.”

The Hebrew word rushtranslated in the NIV as “chief” literally means chief or head. Everywhere it appears in the Old Testament it is translated with that meaning.

However, some prophetic writers have taught that it means, in this passage only, “Russia” on the basis of the sounds of the word. They say the passage should be translated as something like “… the prince of Russia, of Meshech and Tubal.”

It is odd that in dozens of uses in Scripture this word means “chief” but at this place, we are meant to see it as a reference to Russia.

In modern Hebrew, the nation of Russia is written not as “rush” but as “russiya”.

To equate “rush” with Russia is the same sort of ignorance which might lead a person to expect the land of Turkey to be the home of the bird of the same name.

Proponents of the Russia theory claim that they are vindicated by Ezekiel 39:2 where Gog is dragged from “the far north”. Look at a map, they say. Where else could it be but Russia?

But if we read the text, it describes Gog as “chief prince of Meshech and Tubal” in both 38:2 and 39:2, not of Russia. These regions were actually to the north of Israel! We might not think of them as “the far north” with our global perspective, but to the Israelites they would have been considered that way.

Who Is Gog?

Ezekiel prophesied from about 593 BC to about 571 BC. Just before this period, in 597 BC, Nebuchadnezzar had captured Jerusalem and taken many of the leaders and skilled workers into captivity in Babylon. In 539, Cyrus of Persia conquered Babylon.

About 50 years later the Book of Esther tells of a plot by Haman to kill all of the Jews throughout the Persian Empire. At that time King Xerxes ruled over 127 provinces stretching from India to Ethiopia (Esther 1:1).

In Esther 3:1, we read, “After these events, King Xerxes honoured Haman son of Hammedatha, the Agagite, elevating him and giving him honour higher than that of all the other nobles.”

As the story of Esther unfolds, Haman tricks Xerxes into issuing a decree that cannot be cancelled. This decree says that on a particular date, every Jew was to be killed and their goods plundered. Esther and her uncle Mordecai persuade Xerxes to issue another edict granting the Jews the right to defend themselves and to kill anyone who attacked them. Haman is hanged on the gallows he had prepared for Mordecai, and Mordecai is promoted to the position previously held by Haman.

Haman is described as an Agagite, that is a descendant of Amalek, one of the most persistent and troublesome of Israel’s enemies. Interestingly, there are ancient manuscripts of the book of Esther where the word “Agagite” is written as “Gogite” because the words are nearly identical when written in Hebrew.

In Ezekiel 39:11 and 15, the place where the army of Gog will be buried is the valley of Hamon-Gog and the nearby city will be called Hamonah. Both these place names come from the same root word as Haman.

When we see that Haman is a “chief prince” who gathers an armed force from across the Persian Empire (virtually the whole of the known world) in order to destroy the people of Israel, the identity of Haman in Esther with Gog in Ezekiel becomes apparent.

Conclusion

People who try to identify prophetic events with current geopolitical upheavals always make the mistake of allowing the newspapers to determine their understanding of the Bible. It should be the other way around: we interpret world events, politics and our own lifestyles through the instructions of the Bible.

At various times the identity of Gog and Magog have been seen as the Goths, the Huns, the Islamic Empire, the Turks, Native Americans and most lately the former USSR and present day Russia. There is a tendency to identify the geopolitical “bad boys”of the current age as Gog.

When Ezekiel was prophesying, he was not talking about the last days of planet Earth. No, he was referring to events that would threaten God’s people in the next generation.

We should be no more impressed by this prophetic fulfilment that occurred within decades of Ezekiel’s death than we would be by some fulfilment two thousand years later. The fact is that God is the Lord of history, and that should give us great hope as we face the uncertain days in front of us.

In order to understand difficult passages such as Ezekiel 38-39, we need to have a solid biblical understanding, allowing the Bible to interpret the Bible.

If you want to read a far more detailed account of this interpretation of Ezekiel 38-39, I recommend Gary Demar’s book “Why The End Of the World Is Not In Your Future” available from americanvision.org