“The people bowed and prayed / to the neon god they made.” - The Sound of Silence, Paul Simon

King Nebuchadnezzar sets up a statue of himself and says, in essence, “I have had this amazing image put up, and I want universal submission and worship, from everyone, or else.”

Unsurprisingly, everyone says, “Ok—we will bow.” Perhaps for most of them the sight of this magnificent image was sufficient to cause them to bow. Perhaps for some of them, the sight of everyone else bowing made it clear that it was the right thing to do. And for the rest of them, the thought of the furnace was more than enough to get their knees to bend: “As soon as all the peoples heard the sound of the horn, pipe, lyre, trigon, harp, bagpipe, and every kind of music, all the peoples, nations, and languages fell down and worshiped the golden image that King Nebuchadnezzar had set up” (Daniel 3:7).

All of Us Still Worship

What is going on here? It’s simple: idolatry—worshiping something that a human has made instead of the God who made humans. The people who gathered on that plain were bowing to an image as though it were God. Whether it was because they were impressed by what they saw, or because they wanted to fit in with everyone else, or because of the threat of what would happen if they did not, they chose to bow to the image, and so they made it an idol.

Idolatry is not only a problem of ancient civilizations. It is a problem of all human societies because it is a problem of human hearts. Romans 1 is speaking of everyone when it says that “although they knew God [deep down], they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him …. Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man .... [They] worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator” (Romans 1:21–23, 25). As a result of that idolatry, “God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves” (Romans 1:24).

Idols Change, Our Reasons for Bowing to Them Do Not

Idolatry—in your life and more broadly in society—precedes immorality. If we would understand why immorality is tolerated or even promoted, we need to look behind the behavior to the worship—to the idol.

Of course, the idols change; few people in the West bow down to golden images today. But the idols have no less a hold, and our reasons for bowing to them are no different—they look impressive, our peers are worshiping them, and our society threatens us with penalties if we do not join in. As Paul Simon put it in “The Sound of Silence,” “The people bowed and prayed / to the neon god they made.” Great swaths of humanity bow down at various shrines—temples, malls, offices, strip bars—with great sincerity of heart, and every one represents a false religion.

It is far easier to identify the idols in other cultures than in our own. There are idols we bow down to not because we’re made to but because we want to, and those are the very hardest to acknowledge.

Examples of Modern Idolatry

To take two examples: first, the average Western Christian parent finds it natural to worship the idol of children, at the expense of fidelity to God and service of his people. Of course kids are a good thing—idols usually are—but they so easily and unnoticeably become a god. It becomes so vitally important that Tommy goes swimming and Zadie has skating and Rochelle does her tutoring, and maybe they won’t have time to go to the church youth group, and maybe we won’t have time as a family to read the Bible together each day. The word of God and the people of God are important, but the greatest commitment is to the kids. When push comes to shove, we worship the image of the perfect family, and the holy God can fit in around that.

Second, the average American Christian finds it natural to worship the idol of politics. We think and pray and speak as though if our guy wins, the kingdom wins; and if he loses, then it’s hell. In other words, we treat our favorite for president, or our political party, as a god.

American Christians are used to having a political home, and we have forgotten that this is Babylon—it may be Republican Babylon or Democrat Babylon, right-wing Babylon or left-wing Babylon, but it is Babylon nonetheless—and we have forgotten that the kingdom of God is not of this world. My sense is that in the US most of us worship capitalism, and none of us have any idea of what socialism actually is. Neither builds the kingdom of God; as the economist John Kenneth Galbraith once memorably put it, “Under capitalism, man exploits man; while under socialism just the reverse is true.”

Set up a political party or economic system as an idol and you’ll make sacrifices to it. Witness the ethical backflips that Christians on both sides of the divide (sadly, it’s more of a chasm) have started to perform to defend the biblically indefensible. There is no nuance and no ability to see the strengths and weaknesses of either our own position or of others. It’s idolatry—confidence in something other than God to deliver what we need.

So we bow down to the idol of party, and we attend our chosen network temples of Fox News or CNN and MSNBC. We don’t think—we just rearrange our prejudices. One way to discover if you are bowing down is to ask yourself this: Do you watch, and seriously consider, the views of the networks that embrace the other view to yours? If not, then when push comes to shove we are worshiping the image of president and party, and the holy God can fit in around that.

Dismantling Our Idols

The list could go on: status, acquisition, our bodies… These are the things that our culture worships, and so these are the gods to which we bow without thinking.

Our hearts naturally worship idols that exalt our agenda, our goals, our significance, or our reputation. Christian faith does not mean that we are immune to idolatry; but it does mean that we have no excuse not to dismantle our idols. A Christian is not someone who does not struggle with idol-worship, but he or she is someone who prays:

“The dearest idol I have known,
Whate’er that idol be,
Help me to tear it from its throne
And worship only thee.”
—William Cowper, 1731–1800

---

This material is an excerpt from Alistair Begg’s book Brave by Faith (The Good Book Company, 2021). All content from the book is used by permission, and this article was originally posted by The Good Book Company.

Confessing Sin Rather Than Celebrating It

 As America begins its month-long celebration of pride, leaders would do well to stop their smug virtue signaling

By Everett Piper - - Sunday, June 6, 2021

ANALYSIS/OPINION:

On June 1, 2021, Joe Biden used his bully pulpit to encourage Americans to stand proud in our nation’s march for what he called equality. “Pride stands for courage. [Pride] stands for justice, and most of all [pride] stands for love … Happy Pride Month!” the president tweeted.  

In the fall of 1942, C.S. Lewis took to the airways of his nation to encourage his fellow citizens to, likewise, stand resolute. But the differences between Lewis’ speech and President Biden’s tweet are stark.  

In the face of an actual existential threat, the Oxford don didn’t speak of contrived notions of social justice or the faulty logic of defining ourselves by our desires. He didn’t talk of a person’s right to do whatever he wanted but instead spoke of every man’s obligation to do what he must. Lewis didn’t flatter with messages of moral license, but rather he reminded all his listeners of God’s moral law.  

When C.S. Lewis took to his day’s version of social media via the BBC, he didn’t speak in platitudes of “affirmation” and “tolerance.” He didn’t talk sanctimoniously of “inclusion” and “love.” Instead, he spoke forthrightly about what he called his nation’s “Great Sin.”

And what was this sin that Lewis described as “worse than any other?” 

“There is one vice,” he said.,” [a sin] of which no man in the world is free … [That] essential vice, that utmost evil, is pride.

He went on. 

“Unchastity, anger, greed, drunkenness, and all that, are mere fleabites in comparison. It was through Pride that the Devil became the Devil: Pride leads to every other vice. It is the complete anti-God state of mind.”

Lewis argued that pride makes you feel you are “better” than everyone else. “It is the comparison that makes you proud: the pleasure of being above the rest.” A proud person is never satisfied. Pride makes us always want more. More influence. More control. More power. “If I am a proud man,” he said, “then as long as there is one man in the whole world more powerful, or richer or cleverer than I, he is my rival and my enemy.”

Lewis characterized pride as the chief cause of human misery since the dawn of time. He said pride not only makes us enemies with each other, but it also makes us enemies with God. 

“In God, you come up against something which is in every respect immeasurably superior to yourself. Unless you know God as that — and, therefore, know yourself as nothing in comparison — you do not know God at all. As long as you are proud, you cannot know God. A proud man is always looking down on things and people: and, of course, as long as you are looking down, you cannot see something that is above you.”

“How is it,” asked Lewis, “that people who are quite obviously eaten up with pride can say they believe in God and appear to themselves very religious? I am afraid it means they are worshiping an imaginary God … ; imagining how He approves of them and thinks them far better than ordinary people. That is, they pay a pennyworth of imaginary humility to Him and get out of it a pound’s worth of pride towards their fellow men.”

Lewis also said that pride leads to the damnation of self-righteousness. “Many a man has overcome [lesser sins] by learning to think that they are beneath his dignity … The Devil laughs. He is perfectly content to see you become [virtuous] provided, all the time, he is setting up in you the dictatorship of pride — just as he would be quite content to see your [common cold] cured if he was allowed, in return, to give you cancer. For pride is spiritual cancer: it eats up the very possibility of [true] love, or contentment, or even common sense.”

Pride leads to the disdain of others, said Lewis. “The real black, diabolical pride comes when you look down on others so much that you do not care what they think … But the proud man says … ‘All I have done has been done to satisfy my own ideals, or, in a word, because I’m That Kind of Chap. If the mob like it, let them. They’re nothing to me.’”

This all sounds a bit familiar, doesn’t it? Self-righteousness. The loss of common sense. False definitions of courage, justice, and love. Looking downward at others rather than upwards toward God.  

Maybe as America begins its month-long celebration of pride, our leaders would do well to stop their smug virtue signaling and instead consider what C.S. Lewis told us some 79 years ago. Maybe in the face of this “most mortal of all sins” — this “complete anti-God state of mind” — our president would do well to call upon our nation to confess its sin rather than celebrate it. 

• Everett Piper (dreverettpiper.com, @dreverettpiper), a columnist for The Washington Times, is a former university president and radio host. He is the author of “Not a Daycare: The Devastating Consequences of Abandoning Truth” (Regnery) and, most recently, “Grow Up: Life Isn’t Safe, But It’s Good” (Regnery, 2021).

Fault Lines: The Social Justice Movement and Evangelicalism’s Looming Catastrophe by Voddie Baucham

 Excerpt From the Preface to the Book:

Putting It All Together

 In order to understand Critical Theory, it is important to understand how the words “critical” and “theory” are used. In the social sciences, “critical” is “geared toward identifying and exposing problems in order to facilitate revolutionary political change.”7 In other words, it implies revolution. It is not interested in reform. Hence, we do not “reform” the police; we “defund” the police or abolish them. “It is more interested in problematizing—that is, finding ways in which the system is imperfect and making noise about them, reasonably or not—than it is in any other identifiable activity, especially building something constructive.”8 This is complicated by the fact that Critical Theory denies objective truth. “An approach based on critical theory calls into question the idea that objectivity is desirable or even possible,” write Özlem Sensoy and Robin DiAngelo in Is Everyone Really Equal?

“The term used to describe this way of thinking about knowledge is that knowledge is… reflective of the values and interests of those who produce it.”9 But this is only half the puzzle. The word “theory” can be used in two ways in the social sciences: as an abstract noun (as in “I have a theory about that”) or as a proper noun, as in Critical Theory. According to the New Discourses Encyclopedia:

Theory—treated as a proper noun and thus capitalized—is an appropriate catch-all term for the thinking behind Critical Social Justice, especially at the academic level. It is the set of ideas, modes of thought, ethics, and methods that define Critical Social Justice in both thought and activism (that is, theory and praxis). In a meaningful way, Theory is the central object—the canon and source of further revelation of canon—of Critical Social Justice. That is, Theory is the heart of the worldview that defines Critical Social Justice.10

In other words, Critical Theory is not just an analytical tool, as some have suggested; it is a philosophy, a worldview.

Critical Race Theory

Perhaps the most important concept to grasp for the purposes of this book is Critical Race Theory (CRT). “Critical Race Theory is an outgrowth of Critical Legal Studies (CLS), which was a leftist movement that challenged traditional legal scholarship.”11 There has been much debate over CRT within evangelical circles recently. Some have accused those of us who are leery of CRT of creating a straw man and labeling everything we disagree with or that makes us uncomfortable as CRT. Therefore, it is important that I allow CRT to define itself in order to demonstrate that when I refer to this ideology, I am not making things up, taking them out of context, or building a straw man. I am merely taking its founders and practitioners at their word.

According to the UCLA Luskin School of Public Affairs:

CRT recognizes that racism is engrained in the fabric and system of the American society. The individual racist need not exist to note that institutional racism is pervasive in the dominant culture. This is the analytical lens that CRT uses in examining existing power structures. CRT identifies that these power structures are based on white privilege and white supremacy, which perpetuates the marginalization of people of color. CRT also rejects the traditions of liberalism and meritocracy. Legal discourse says that the law is neutral and colorblind, however, CRT challenges this legal “truth” by examining liberalism and meritocracy as a vehicle for self-interest, power, and privilege.12

Many discussions of CRT have referenced this definition, and with good reason. First, it is as clear and succinct a definition as you will find. Second, it captures the essence and major tenets of CRT. Third, it comes from a source that has led the charge for CRT in recent years, which means, fourth, that it is a case of proponents of CRT defining themselves. Note also that this definition, without using the word “worldview,” describes precisely that. One way to define a worldview is “an analytical lens one uses to examine the world.” According to Richard Delgado, the worldview of CRT is based on four key presuppositions:

Racism is Normal:… the usual way society does business, the common, everyday experience of most people of color in this country.13

Convergence Theory: “Racism advances the interests of both white elites (materially) and working-class whites (psychically), large segments of society have little incentive to eradicate it.”14 This means whites are incapable of righteous actions on race and only undo racism when it benefits them; when their interests “converge” with the interests of people of color.

Anti-Liberalism: [CRT] questions the very foundations of the liberal order, including equality theory, legal reasoning, Enlightenment rationalism, and neutral principles of constitutional law.15

Knowledge is Socially Constructed: Storytelling/Narrative Reading is the way black people forward knowledge vs. the Science/reason method of white people. Minority status, in other words, brings with it a presumed competence to speak about race and racism. The “legal storytelling” movement urges black and brown writers to recount their experiences with racism and the legal system and to apply their own unique perspectives to assess law’s master narratives.16

While this is a well-established summary, Tara Yosso, one of the most-cited academics on Critical Race Theory, expands Delgado’s fourth tenet with a very important dimension:

The centrality of experiential knowledge. CRT recognizes that the experiential knowledge of People of Color is legitimate, appropriate, and critical to understanding, analyzing and teaching about racial subordination.…17

Intersectionality

If Derrick Bell is the father of CRT, then he is the grandfather of Intersectionality. The idea was popularized by Bell’s Harvard Law School protege, Kimberlé Crenshaw, and is best summed up in her two seminal papers: “Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory and Antiracist Politics,” published in 1989, and “Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence Against Women of Color,” published in 1991. I offer the full titles as they give a glimpse into Crenshaw’s worldview. Put simply, Intersectionality is about the multiple layers of oppression minorities suffer. For instance, if a black person has one layer of oppression, a black woman has two, a black lesbian woman has three, etc. The Encyclopedia of Diversity and Social Justice offers a helpful summary:

Our experiences of the social world are shaped by our ethnicity, race, social class, gender identity, sexual orientation, and numerous other facets of social stratification. Some social locations afford privilege (e.g., being white) while others are oppressive (e.g., being poor). These various aspects of social inequality do not operate independently of each other; they interact to create interrelated systems of oppression and domination. The concept of intersectionality refers to how these various aspects of social location “intersect” to mutually constitute individuals’ lived experiences.18

There are volumes written on these concepts, and I commend them to you. I have benefitted greatly from the work of people like Neil Shenvi, Helen Pluckrose, James Lindsay, and a host of others. Their work is thorough, insightful, and much-needed in these times. I also recommend diving into the sources I have cited here and throughout this book for an inside look at what CRT and Intersectionality say about themselves.

 WACMM Highly Recommends Voddie's book
(As always WACMM receives no remuneration or compensation for its recommendations)

Fault Lines: The Social Justice Movement and Evangelicalism's Looming Catastrophe

 

Looking at 1 John 5:21, ("keep yourselves from idols") David Powlison provides us with an insightful means of self-examination:

“Idolatry is by far the most frequently discussed problem in the Scriptures…The relevance of massive chunks of Scripture hangs on our understanding of idolatry…John’s last line properly leaves us with that most basic question which God continually poses to each human heart":

Has something or someone besides Jesus the Christ taken title to your heart’s trust, preoccupation, loyalty, service, fear and delight? It is a question bearing on the immediate motivation for one’s behavior, thoughts, and feelings. In the Bible’s conceptualization, the motivation question is the lordship question.  Who or what “rules” my behavior, the Lord or a substitute?”

In addition, in Tim Keller’s excellent book Counterfeit Gods, he shares the following twenty questions that will help you diagnose the idols of your heart.

“Life only has meaning/I only have worth if…

1. I have power and influence over others.” (Power Idolatry)
2. I am loved and respected by _____.” (Approval Idolatry)
3. I have this kind of pleasure experience, a particular quality of life.” (Comfort idolatry)
4. I am able to get mastery over my life in the area of _____.” (Control idolatry)
5. people are dependent on me and need me.” (Helping Idolatry)
6. someone is there to protect me and keep me safe.” (Dependence idolatry)
7. I am completely free from obligations or responsibilities to take care of someone.” (Independence idolatry)
8. I am highly productive and getting a lot done.” (Work idolatry)
9. I am being recognized for my accomplishments, and I am excelling in my work.” (Achievement idolatry)
10. I have a certain level of wealth, financial freedom, and very nice possessions.” (Materialism idolatry)
11. I am adhering to my religion’s moral codes and accomplished in its activities.” (Religion idolatry)
12. This one person is in my life and happy to be there, and/or happy with me.” (Individual person idolatry)
13. I feel I am totally independent of organized religion and am living by a self-made morality.” (Irreligion idolatry)
14. My race and culture is ascendant and recognized as superior.” (Racial/cultural idolatry)
15. A particular social grouping or professional grouping or other group lets me in.” (Inner ring idolatry)
16. My children and/or my parents are happy and happy with me.” (Family idolatry)
17. Mr. or Ms. “Right” is in love with me.” (Relationship Idolatry)
18. I am hurting, in a problem; only then do I feel worthy of love or able to deal with guilt.” (Suffering idolatry)
19. my political or social cause is making progress and ascending in influence or power.” (Ideology idolatry)
20. I have a particular kind of look or body image.” (Image idolatry)

Doctrine and Theology Resources for Men

WACMM recommends the following books on doctrine and theology to specifically help brothers in the faith to grow in the love and knowledge of Christ.

PLEASE NOTE: WACMM does not receive any compensation or remuneration for any of its recommendations and endorsements.

Systematic Theology (Second Edition) by Wayne Grudem, This most widely used resource of the last 25 years has been completely revised and expanded. Highly recommended. Discounted Here 

Concise Theology: A Guide to Historic Christian Beliefs by J.I. Packer Here

Knowing God by J.I. Packer Here

Essential Truths of the Christian Faith by R.C. Sproul Here

Everyone's a Theologian: An Introduction to Systematic Theology by R.C. Sproul Here

Biblical Doctrine: A Systematic Summary of Bible Truth by John MacArthur Here

Pilgrim Theology: Core Doctrines for Christian Disciples by Michael Horton Here

Core Christianity: Finding Yourself in God's Story by Michael Horton Here

God's Big Picture: Biblical Overview by Vaughan Roberts Here

Foundations of the Christian Faith: A Comprehensive and Readable Theology by James Montgomery Boice Here

Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Christian Belief by John Frame Here

Basic Christianity by John Stott Here

The Cross of Christ by John Stott Here

Here Other Good Books About Biblical Manhood and the Intersection of Faith and Culture:

Gentle and Lowly: The Heart of Christ for Sinners and Sufferers by Dane Ortlund
WACMM's 2020 Men's Book of the Year. Here 

The Rise and Triumph of the Modern Self: Cultural Amnesia, Expressive Individualism, and the Road to Sexual Revolution by Carl Trueman. Here

Dignity Revolution by Daniel Darling. Here

Eikon: A Journal for Biblical Manhood by Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood  Download Here

 

Gospel Men Are Champions of Human Dignity

As men who preach, teach and disciple or otherwise lead ministries to men in churches or in regional or national parachurch ministries, we should be known foremost as Gospel Men and the fiercest champions of human dignity. What our friend Dan Darling says should be true of our churches should be likewise true and characteristic of ministries to men.

“…we [must] resist the world’s definitions of worth and power. It means we see the child with Down’s syndrome as a fully valuable member of our body. It means we resist the urge to only put on our platforms those who fit the cultural definition of beauty or masculinity. It means we are the one, and perhaps the only, place in society where you are accepted and loved not because of what you can contribute, but because of who you are in Christ.

“Those who are disabled, those who are poor, those who might not neatly fit into our modern notions of success, should have a prominent place in our assemblies not simply because they have full human dignity as image-bearers of God, but because each one is a future king or queen of the universe, who will one day reign with Christ.

“Our churches should be a collection of people that you would not normally see together. Just imagine congregations filled with people who have no business being together, other than the fact that they are redeemed people of God. Imagine rich and poor, conservatives and liberals, blue collars and white collars and no collars. Imagine a parking lot with hybrids and pickups, gun racks and whole foods stickers. Imagine a church lobby filled with walkers and strollers, canes and car seats, tattoos and bow ties. Imagine a church comprised of people whose primary, and sometimes only, commonality is their allegiance to the gospel of Jesus Christ.

“We should long for this in our churches, but more than that, we should each ask ourselves what we are doing to make it more of a reality. This begins with each of us accepting—no, celebrating—the upside-down nature of the kingdom. It begins with each of us applying the kingdom ethic of leadership in our own hearts—seeing others as made in God’s image, and so serving others because we wish to cultivate their humanity and promote their dignity rather than because we wish to cultivate our ambition and promote our reputation. It begins with treating others with the dignity that the Lord Jesus did, and does, and will.”

From The Dignity Revolution by Daniel Darling

Older Men Can Teach Young Guys A Thing or Two

Willie Mays was my hero back in the mid-late 50’s. In this 2010 interview in GQ Magazine, Willie tells this wonderful story about when, as a 17-year-old, he faced the ageless, legendary Satchel Paige for the first time:

"It was 1948. Satchel had a very, very good fastball. But he threw me a little breaking ball, just to see what I could do, and I hit it off the top of the fence. And I got a double. When I got to second, Satchel told the third baseman, 'Let me know when that little boy comes back up.'

"Three innings later, I go to kneel down in the on-deck circle, and I hear the third baseman say, 'There he is.' Satch looked at the third baseman, and then he looked at me.

"I walk halfway to home plate and he says, 'Little boy.' I say, 'Yes, sir?' because Satch was much older than I am, so I was trying to show respect.

"He walked halfway to home plate and said, 'Little boy, I'm not going to trick you. I'm going to throw you three fastballs and you're going to go sit down.' And I'm saying in my mind, 'I don't think so.' If he threw me three of the same pitch, I'm going to hit it somewhere.

"He threw me two fastballs and I just swung...I swung right through it. And the third ball he threw, and I tell people this all the time, he threw the ball and then he started walking. And he says, 'Go sit down.' This is while the ball was in the air.

"He was just a magnificent pitcher."