Details

Written by Rex M. Rogers

Published: 22 January 2024

Have you noticed that climate change activists are beginning to sound desperate, hyping their rhetoric with attacks on fuel, food, democracy, and life itself?

Hi, I’m Rex Rogers and this is episode #129 of Discerning What Is Best, a podcast applying unchanging biblical principles in a rapidly changing world, and a Christian worldview to current issues and everyday life.

Back in 1995, Pope John Paul II attracted worldwide attention for calling growing support for abortion and euthanasia a “culture of death.”

“Modern debates on abortion and euthanasia are a symptom and leading edge of something more profound and insidious – an entire view of the world that will lead us to forsake our ideals of human dignity and equality and ‘revert to a state of barbarism.’” 

“Many balked at St. Pope John Paul’s metaphor. Too harsh, they said. Too negative. Too closed-minded. Even worse, too religious. The world, they assure us, will be fine left to the immanent-value frameworks of secular humanism. We don’t need a theological perspective to know how to take care of ourselves: We have science. We have experts. We can predict the problems coming and beat them when they arrive. Technology saves. We have the data. Trust us.”

The conservative Pope John Paul II was sounding the alarm that a distinctly Satanic worldview was advancing, promoting not life but death.

Now we’re told by the President of the United States that climate change “is the challenge of our collective lifetimes. The existential threat to human existence as we know it.”

“The problem here is unmitigated scaremongering. A new survey shows that 60% of all people in rich countries now believe it's likely or very likely that unmitigated climate change will lead to the end of mankind."

Some people now say they will not have children because they're convinced that climate change will destroy the world. But Bjorn Lomborg, Director of the Copenhagen Consensus Center, points out how counterproductive that would be: "We need your kids to make sure the future is better."

“For saying this, Lomborg has been called ‘the devil.’ The Danish government even targeted him for his views on climate change.” 

America’s “climate czar” John Kerry recently tipped his hand, saying, “The real enemy, then, is humanity itself." Kerry is giving us a peak at the anti-family, anti-human culture of death now motivating climate elites.

“Key Club of Rome member, Dennis Meadows, hopes the ‘necessary’ depopulation of the planet, down to one billion—an 87.5% reduction from today’s population—can (get this) ‘occur in a civil way’.” How, one wonders, do we eliminate 7 billion people “in a civil way”? 

Meadows channels the old Malthusian idea – “the theory that population growth is potentially exponential…while the growth of the food supply or other resources is linear, which eventually reduces living standards to the point of triggering a population decline.” Never mind that Malthusianism has long been discredited, climate change activists are now calling for the depopulation of the earth.

Meadows said, "If you want more liberty, and more consumption, you have to have fewer people. And conversely, you can have more people. I mean, we could even have eight or nine billion, probably if we have a very strong dictatorship." Another peak at what climate change proponents really want – power through big government control.

Where once we talked about climate change hyperbole as “climate fear porn,” an ever-ratcheting-up hysteria, now we’re hearing it’s not just the weather we need fear, it is human beings who must be reeducated, reduced, probably eradicated. Sounds like a culture of death to me.

Climate change activists include not only pompous John Kerry and screeching Greta Thunberg, but the likes of Bill Gates, Joe Biden, Canada’s Justin Trudeau, King Charles III, the UN General Secretary, Al Gore, and many other mostly Western, globalist wealthy class.

These people are not just elite; they are elitist, philosopher-kings in their own minds. Meeting annually at the Word Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, they articulate an hysterical anti-humanity message.

“Key member of the (World Economic Forum’s) Board of Trustees' and deputy PM of Canada, Chrystia Freeland, openly declares war on the concept of democracy, in the name of tackling ‘climate change’.

"Our shrinking glaciers and our warming oceans,” she said, “are asking us wordlessly but emphatically, if democratic societies can rise to the existential challenge of climate change."

Climate con man extraordinaire, John Kerry, argues the farming industry must be destroyed in order to achieve Net Zero (eliminating all human produced carbon emissions). “Agriculture contributes about 33% of all the emissions of the world,” Kerry says, “And we can't get to Net Zero—we don't get this job done—unless agriculture is front and center as part of the solution.” Now it’s not just people and democracy that are the problem, but farms and farmers, the food supply itself.

Croatian MEP, Mislav Kolakušić, warned the EU parliament, “The EU is using the ‘man-made global warming’ hoax as a pretext to seize agricultural land from farmers, with the ultimate goal of creating deliberate food shortages. Remember, starving and desperate people are a lot more likely to comply with tyranny, in exchange for enough calories to avoid death, than people with easy access to an abundance of food, even if the source of those calories is insects—or fake, lab-grown ‘meat’.”

Meanwhile, climate change is a hoax. “The ‘climate crisis’ is based on computer models that predict hurricane, tornado, flood, drought, sea level rise and other disasters vastly greater than the world is actually experiencing. The models also ignore five great ice ages and interglacial periods, the Medieval Warm Period and Little Ice Age, the Anasazi and Mayan droughts, and other inconvenient climate truths.”

“Topping it off, China, Russia and India are burning cheap coal to industrialize, lift their people out of poverty, and leave climate-obsessed Western nations in the economic and military dust. Even if the West went totally Net Zero, it wouldn’t reduce atmospheric greenhouse gases even one part per million.”

“The climate catastrophe Cassandras have been wrong for decades. In the 1960s, professor Paul Ehrlich, author of “The Population Bomb,” predicted widespread starvation for most of humanity. Didn’t happen. In the 1970s, the “experts” were predicting a new “ice age.” Didn’t happen. ‘Global cooling’ became ‘global warming’ and Al Gore, one of its most famous prophets, relied on computer models to predict that arctic ice would be melted by 2013. Didn’t happen.

Rampant hypocrisy gives a glimpse into the dystopic future these megalomaniacs are planning. The seas are supposedly rising, but they own beachfront properties. 

You shouldn’t be driving a car, but they fly everywhere -- including into Davos -- on private jets. Your modest family home is a problem, but they own multiple mansions that sit empty most of the time. Politicized science coupled with propaganda is a recipe for disaster. In the hands of those who seek global power in the name of ‘climate change,’ it is a prescription for an actual catastrophe of unprecedented proportions.”

“Our school kids are being terrorized with misinformation. This, in turn, is leading to all sorts of maladies, including a rise in teen depression, suicide, lower productivity and drug addiction. Worst of all, we are seeing the opposite of a population bomb. We are experiencing one of the most severe birth deaths in American history. The birth rate is plummeting and no surprise. Who wants to bring kids into a world that will be uninhabitable in 50 years? Psychologists are attributing these dysfunctions to a new syndrome called ‘eco-anxiety.’ It's a fear that Mother Earth is going to punish us in a brutal way -- and very soon.         

The irony of all this is that today's children and teens are inheriting a living standard, a cleaner planet, and a level of goods and services and technologies and medical care that is far superior to anything anyone in history -- even the richest kings and queens -- had access to even 100 years ago.”

“’Human-induced climate change’ is a monumental scam, fabricated as a pretext for unelected globalist bodies (including the United Nations and World Economic Forum) to wield absolute control over every aspect of our lives, under the guise of ‘saving the planet’?” There is no ‘climate emergency’, and never has been.” (@wideawake_media on X, 1/15/24).

So, in sum, climate change activists believe they, not God, can control the weather and the future, they prefer big government and dictatorship over democracy, and they wish to reduce the human population while controlling fuel, farms, and food. 

This is all about politics, more government control of our lives, and the loss of individual freedom. It’s not about Global Warming. It’s about Global Government. It’s not about life but a culture of death.

Well, we’ll see you again soon. This podcast is about Discerning What Is Best. If you find this thought-provoking and helpful, follow us on your favorite podcast platform. Download an episode for your friends. For more Christian commentary, check my website, r-e-x-m as in Martin, that’s rexmrogers.com. 

And remember, it is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm.

© Rex M. Rogers – All Rights Reserved, 2024   

*This podcast blog may be reproduced in whole or in part with a full attribution statement. Contact me or read more commentary on current issues and events at www.rexmrogers.com/, or connect with me at www.linkedin.com/in/rexmrogers or https://twitter.com/RexMRogers.

Details

Written by Rex M. Rogers

Published: 15 January 2024

Has the self-induced “immigration crisis” on the US southern border caused you concern?  Is there no way out of this nightmare?

Hi, I’m Rex Rogers and this is episode #128 of Discerning What Is Best, a podcast applying unchanging biblical principles in a rapidly changing world, and a Christian worldview to current issues and everyday life.

With the invasion taking place on the US southern border, I feel I must circle back and discuss immigration. I referenced immigration in a podcast last year, June 2023, in which I noted that 16.8 million illegal aliens reside in the U.S. The number is now over 18 million.

This is the direct result of President Joe Biden’s actions, literally since his first day in office, Jan 21, 2021, when he signed several proclamations and Executive Orders either rescinding Trump Administration immigration policies, for example, stopping the building of a border wall, or instituting new, wide open policies of his own. “There have been more than (10 million illegal entries since President Biden took office, a number larger than the individual populations of 41 of the 50 states). Each night Americans see video clips of thousands of foreign nationals crossing the border en massewith complete impunity—as if the entire corpus of federal immigration law has been dynamited.”

“The Federation for American Immigration Reform published a comprehensive report last year showing that federal, state, and local expenditures for illegal immigration are approaching $200 billion annually.” Who but our own progeny is going to pay the bill for Mr. Biden’s irresponsibility, and what will happen if they cannot pay the bill?

“Whatever the cause of this nihilism, (scholar Victor Davis Hanson lists) several ways an open border is insidiously destroying the United States”:

Immigration – “Does legal immigration even exist? Are we still requiring those who would enter the U.S. legally to provide required documents, undergo audits, and complete background checks? Is not the current policy de facto punishing those who follow the law by tying them up in bureaucratic red tape for years as we reward unlawful behavior by greenlighting amnesties for lawbreakers?”

Lawless US – “Does the utter lawlessness at the border contribute to the general coarseness and current mockery of the rule of law in general—an epidemic that plagues our cities with homelessness, smash-and-grabs, car-jackings, and random assaults?”

Dependency – “If the first thing a foreign national does is to violate the law by crossing the border without permission, and the second is to reside illegally in the US, and the third is to apply for some sort of food, housing, medical, legal, or educational subsidy, then is that really the type of new resident we desire?”

Hanson also lists a broken relationship with Mexico, danger from drug cartels, the destruction of the idea of citizenship, enormous budget cost implications, ending the idea of deterrence of wrongdoing, an increase in racism.

We really have no clue what this massive number of illegals will mean for our country and culture’s future. We do know what impact it is making right now.

“We do not have sufficient affordable housing for our own citizens. Veterans and the elderly have been forced out of housing to make way for illegal immigrants. Our own homeless population is exploding, many of whom need treatment for addiction and/or mental illness. In Chicago, migrants have been living in the O'Hare airport. Massachusetts Gov. Maura Healey has asked citizens to take migrants into their homes. Just this week, a New York City high school was closed, and its students were sent home for "remote" learning so that nearly 2,000 migrants could be housed at the school during a winter storm.”

“Illegal immigrants also distort congressional representation…their presence increases congressional representation for states with more of them. That reduces the voting power of citizens in states with lower populations.”

“Open borders facilitate human trafficking, including child sex trafficking.”

“Illegal immigration also burdens our criminal justice system. According to the 2023 Annual Report of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement Office, more than 170,000 illegal immigrants were arrested in this country last year. Nearly half already had criminal records; on average, four prior charges and convictions.”

Interestingly, many European articles now replace the word “immigrant” with the term “cultural enricher,” usually ironically or sarcastically. It refers to invasion or general violence caused by people of different cultures. The phrase has roots in Germany in WWI and was used by Hitler derogatorily to refer to Jews. 

The so-called “cultural enrichers” have been admitted en masse to European countries under the false philosophy of multiculturalism, along with the equally ill-advised ideas captured in the DEI acronym, Diversity, Equity, Inclusion. These cultural enrichers in Europe are now acting out violently, making economic and religious demands, daily disturbing public events, and harassing local citizenry. 

Please understand. In making these observations or raising questions about immigration, I am notpreaching bigotry or prejudice. Nor am I against legal immigration. Actually, I have always been a proponent and can point to stellar examples of legal immigration that have brought wonderful, decent, hard-working, creative people to the American society.

But what we have today is neither legal nor immigrants per se. What we have is illegal invasion, fake refugees, cultural enrichers bent not on assimilating or becoming Americans but bent on demands, dissension, demonstrations, and destruction of America and its defining ideals.

Too many illegals are coming across our open borders, as they have in Europe, with entitlement mentalities or political disruption on their minds. Week after week, videos of cultural enrichers – not always just young men but also young women – attacking vulnerable people without provocation in the streets, harassing retail store clerks then stealing whatever they want, defying police, blocking traffic, praying in the middle of public thoroughfares even though there are many mosques available in their city, going door to door asking not for a job but for money, desecrating monuments or other public sculpture. The list is endless.

We could fix our problems in the U.S., of course. It is not rocket-science as they say. It’s politicians on the Left cynically opening America’s borders in order to intentionally change the political culture in a way they believe will reinforce their power. And it is politicians on the Right who do not seem to have the pollical will, to do anything about this.

What should be done? Well, that’s easy:

1 – Close the borders to all would-be immigrants until immigration policy and procedures can be reinvigorated for security, order, and fairness.

2 – Enforce legal immigration policy presently in place.

3 – Reform U.S. immigration policy, something this country has done periodically, under Teddy Roosevelt and Ronald Reagan, for example, so that it reinforces legal due process.

4 – Vet would-be immigrants to identify who they are, who really does require and deserve asylum, who will bring new talents and skills, who wants to assimilate by learning English and contributing to the American culture and economy.

It was T.R. in 1907, who said, “In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person’s becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American…There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn’t an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag…We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language…And we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.”

There need be no animus in any of this. All these improvements in US legal immigration policy can be enacted with compassion for those who truly need asylum, and with preservation of the opportunity to immigrate for those who wish to assimilate and contribute to the American society.

Without this kind of concerted effort, I truly fear for the future of America.

Well, we’ll see you again soon. This podcast is about Discerning What Is Best. If you find this thought-provoking and helpful, follow us on your favorite podcast platform. Download an episode for your friends. For more Christian commentary, check my website, r-e-x-m as in Martin, that’s rexmrogers.com.  

And remember, it is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm.

© Rex M. Rogers – All Rights Reserved, 2024   

*This podcast blog may be reproduced in whole or in part with a full attribution statement. Contact me or read more commentary on current issues and events at www.rexmrogers.com/, or connect with me at www.linkedin.com/in/rexmrogers or https://twitter.com/RexMRogers.

Details

Written by Rex M. Rogers

Published: 08 January 2024

If you’ve been listening, you’ve probably sensed things aren’t right on campus, or for that matter in the American street, so what is this game of truth or consequences we seem to be playing?

Hi, I’m Rex Rogers and this is episode #127 of Discerning What Is Best, a podcast applying unchanging biblical principles in a rapidly changing world, and a Christian worldview to current issues and everyday life.

When I was a kid there was a long-running television game show called “Truth or Consequences.” This was in the days of black and white TV. Borrowed from an earlier run on radio, this program was the “first game show to air on broadcast television, airing as a one-time experiment on the first day of New York station WNBT’s commercial program schedule on July 1, 1941…(but) the series did not appear on TV again until 1950,” when the new boob tube caught on commercially. 

The program gimmick was that contestants would be ask goofy trivia questions and if they did not answer correctly, which they almost never did, then they had to pay some kind of consequence, usually being the object of a prank. The public loved this show, and it ran for years in the 1950s, then much longer in syndication.

I reference this illustration because it harks to a time, even in jest, when “truth” was considered a real and immutable thing, a time when truth, not “alternative facts,” not “truthiness,” not “true for you but not true for me” existed.

Today, we regularly witness the brazen rejection of scientifically demonstrable, biologically determinate, seen-with-your-own-eyes truth in favor of, well, untruth. 

And we think there are no consequences. Consider these examples:

1. Abortion– For thousands of years into the primordial past, families, clans, tribes, countries, empires, and civilizations acknowledged that the baby in its mother’s womb was indeed a human being, and thus to be protected. Then came our time, when officially since 1973 we’ve said, “Nope, it’s just a fetus.” Somehow, we know more about truth than all who’ve come before us. The moral, social, political confusion since are the consequences.

2. Immigration – Well, actually we could now call it “invasion” on the southern border, tens of thousands coming into the U.S. without being vetted, with no concern for vaccination status, yet more than 8,000 U.S. military personnel were dismissed for refusing a COVID vaccine, with no idea who these mostly military age males are, and with the glaring example of the non-assimilation problems now being experienced in Europe,yet each week current Administration personnel look into cameras and argue the southern border is secure. And media, if they report on this travesty at all, tell us there’s no consequences.

3. LGBTQ – The big news in Canada is that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced that the Parliament building restrooms would now provide free women’s hygiene products in the men’s restrooms. “Menstrual products must be in ‘all toilet rooms, regardless of their marked genders,’ according to Canada’s Employment and Social Development website.” So, just like that, Canadian taxpayers are being required to pay for transgender ideology.

But let’s think about this for a moment. If a woman wants to be a lesbian or a man wants to be gay, they can take this immoral step without fundamentally wrecking the social order. But a so-called transgender person, a man who thinks he is and must act like a woman, a woman who “identifies” as a man, in most cases demand to be treated according to their sexual proclivities. Consequently, these spiritually troubled individuals drive a deep rift into what has been since the Garden of Eden a biologically binary world, “male and female created he them.” The consequence of transgenderism, and Satan the Father of lies knows it, is division, among families, friends, churches, and governments.

4. Plagiarism– Since three ivy league university presidents testified before Congress Dec 5, 2023, regarding their university’s woeful campus inaction with respect to open antisemitism, fallout from their atrocious, arrogant, aloof responses has continued. 

The three privileged academy presidents cited free speech and so-called “context” as defenses of their university’s lack of response, apparently attempting to make the public believe, based upon principle, that they were powerless to intervene as student groups sometimes harassed and threatened local Jewish students or personnel, and then shouted for the genocide of Jewish people in Israel.

But Hey, we have a problem, Houston. “Such excuses were blatantly amoral and untrue. In truth, ivy-league campuses routinely sanction, punish, or remove staff, faculty, or students deemed culpable for speech or behavior deemed hurtful to protected minorities.”

Anyone who follows higher education knows that public universities, especially the Ivies, have all developed strict codes limiting free speech, requiring use of trans pronouns, pushing racist ideas in the name of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion, and otherwise forcing out people, including faculty, who hold non-progressive or conservative views, which are considered unacceptable ideology.

Two of these presidents have now resigned, the first largely due to her clueless comments and her university’s inaction to protect Jewish students, and the pushback pressure this triggered among wealthy alumni, and the second, Claudine Gay of Harvard University, resigning only in small part due to pressure generated regarding her similarly callous testimony.

It took a month of obfuscating, distraction, and defense by the university Board and a group of 700+ faculty members who rallied around President Gay, before she finally resigned. This was after Harvard claimed to have investigated not Gay’s congressional testimony, not the university’s non-existent policies regarding antisemitism, but charges that had emerged alleging Gay plagiarized material used in her published scholarly work.

Plagiarism, it should be noted, is or has been one of the mortal sins of academia. Yet at Harvard, rather than dismissing Gay outright, powers that be looked for ways to dodge this bullet.

Harvard attempted to protect President Gay by inventing a wheezily phrase, “duplicative language,” which in everyday colloquialism means cheating, copying someone else’s content. There have now been more than 50 examples of plagiarism lodged against Gay—meaning not once but repetitively, including in her dissertation, she lifted entire paragraphs, copying and pasting another’s work, and then wrote and passed them off as her own, yet Harvard “cleared her of actionable plagiarism.”

“Harvard and its supporters further embarrassed themselves by alleging that if the victims of Gay's plagiarism didn't object, then why did her expropriation matter that much?”

Meanwhile, Dr. Carol M. Swain, and award-winning Black scholar has sent a letter to the Harvard Corporation asking them what remedies they intend to apply in recognition of the fact Gay plagiarized passages of Swain’s work for use in Gay’s 1997 dissertation.

“In the respective press releases from both Gay and the Harvard Corporation, racial animus was cited as a reason for her removal. Gay did not even refer to her failure to stop antisemitism on her campus or her own record of blatant plagiarism.”

In the past month, we’ve heard from other left-leaning pundits that plagiarism is not really a problem, just another example of white supremacy, that Gay’s plagiarism was just “technical attribution issues” or “sloppiness,” so now in an effort to protect their politics, scholars, journalists, university administrators and board members are willing to redefine plagiarism, which is to say, falsehood has no consequences.

This is little more than Orwellian doublethink, or what later was called doublespeak, the “use of euphemistic or ambiguous language in order to disguise what one is actually saying.” It’s like being pro-abortion is just prochoice, or choosing to be sexually immoral is choosing to be gay.

Cal Thomas noted that “(Claudine Gay) and many other university presidents are only a symptom of what's wrong with our system of education, from bottom to top.”

“American public schools have followed the path of these universities, incorporating subjects that have little to do with a proper education, and in too many instances indoctrinating young people with a secular progressive worldview.”

Ultimately, deeper, restorative changes must be made in education, as well as government and commercial America.

This involves rediscovering and reaffirming the reality of objective truth, the sacred value of morality and ethics, and the desire to do right and do well because we know God who is truth. The future of Western civilization is at stake.

Well, we’ll see you again soon. This podcast is about Discerning What Is Best. If you find this thought-provoking and helpful, follow us on your favorite podcast platform. Download an episode for your friends. For more Christian commentary, check my website, r-e-x-m as in Martin, that’s rexmrogers.com. 

And remember, it is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm.

© Rex M. Rogers – All Rights Reserved, 2024   

*This podcast blog may be reproduced in whole or in part with a full attribution statement. Contact me or read more commentary on current issues and events at www.rexmrogers.com/, or connect with me at www.linkedin.com/in/rexmrogers or https://twitter.com/RexMRogers.

Details

Written by Rex M. Rogers

Published: 01 January 2024

Have you ever noticed the dramatic change that takes place the week following Christmas from “peace on earth” to “let’s let it all hang out”?

Hi, I’m Rex Rogers and this is episode #126 of Discerning What Is Best, a podcast applying unchanging biblical principles in a rapidly changing world, and a Christian worldview to current issues and everyday life.

In my recollection, when I was a kid, most people enjoyed the Christmas season right on into the New Year’s. These days, I’m not so sure if most people still enjoy the season, though I assume it’s reasonable to say many people do.

But Christmas to New Year’s involves a big shift, at least I always thought it did and I still do. What I mean is there is a palpable transformation in tone from the few weeks leading up to and including Christmas on into the week following Christmas up to New Year’s Day.

Before Christmas, people catch the Christmas spirit. Gas station clerks wish you “Merry Christmas.” People at the airport, though harried by travel, for the most part are excited, happy, and pleasant. Retail stores brim with red and green, bright colorful lights, and various representations of Christmas, whether religious or secular.

Then Christmas is suddenly over and in one fell swoop, people’s moods change.

Gas station clerks return to their often seen-it-all surly selves. People at the airport are manic and driven. Retail stores still brim with color, but Christmas disappears fast, moved to the discount section, and customers take on a frenzied push to find the right foods for the planned blowout New Year’s Eve.

Media, especially television, really evidences this mood swing. Sure, there’s a few Christmas themes, commercials, and classic films still on air, along with football bowl games, but the big push is New Year’s Eve – ads about celebrities, singers and bands, and a lot parties. In fact, it’s a take a walk on the wild side atmosphere from here on out.

The focus is the upcoming last midnight of the old year and ringing in the new year.

Nothing wrong with this per se, but I’ve always felt the values being expressed were radically different from the week before Christmas. Earlier, it was silent night, love, home, family and friends, tranquility, peace on earth. With New Year’s, it is raucous rowdiness, sensuality, hit the clubs, noise, revelry-around-the-world, bacchanalia, the ball dropping in Times Square, and maybe most of all, drinking, a lot of drinking.

It’s probably the latter that makes me react. An endless evening of shallow celebrities expressing how ostensibly happy they are in their carousing status.

Maybe part of my pullback is that I have never been a drinker. I don’t think it is a sin, per se, to drink alcoholic beverages. Excess or drunkenness is the real problem.

That said, I do think drinking alcohol is like playing with fire. Clearly, many people cannot handle it and succumb to alcoholism. Even for those who don’t become substance abusers – like so many Hollywood and entertainment stars, a community that year-after-year lose a few to the all-too-predictable endgame of their addiction, for example, “Friends” star Matthew Perry, who at 54 years of age recently drowned in his hot tub. He was not drunk and in fact had apparently been sober for some time, but he struggled with years of alcohol abuse, surgeries, treatments, and prescribed drugs to assist his return to normalcy. However, his autopsy showed he died of acute effects of ketamine, a drug designed to treat anxiety and depression. He’d apparently taken too much, which resulted in unconsciousness, and he slipped below the water. In other words, one of the variables in his early death is traceable to his long abuse of alcohol.

In 2012, once-in-a-generation singing voice Whitney Houston died similarly at 48 years of age, drowning in the bathtub of a Beverly Hills hotel. Alcohol was a factor, while her “toxicology report found that ‘cocaine and metabolites’ contributed to her passing.” There is incredible sadness in this kind of early, avoidable demise. In 1991, to open Super Bowl XXV, Whitney Houston sang the “Star Spangled Banner.” Her presentation was so special, so goose-pimple-producing, it is yet regarded as one of the best renditions of the National Anthem ever sung and may be watched on YouTube. So, losing Whiney to alcohol and substance abuse is dreadfully sad.

But even among those who don’t abuse alcohol, there are the special occasions like New Year’s when there seems to be an expectation and an acceptable excuse. So people get drunk because, well, Hey, everybody’s partying, and some later die in vehicle accidents, some get pregnant, and some embarrass themselves physically or in what they say or do while drunk. Remember actor Mel Gibson’s horrid antisemitic comments he made while knockdown drunk, comments that yet stain his legacy in the film industry.

In my view, all this is celebrated in the party-hardy motif of New Year’s Eve. Lost in this are the “Silent Night, Holy Night” values of Christmas.

Now you could say, Rogers, you’re just a prude, or maybe, Rogers, you’re just getting old. Maybe. But my unease with the riotous living of New Year’s Eve doesn’t change the fact it all takes place worldwide.

This year, ringing in 2024 takes place under the shadow of threat assessments warning of potential terrorism. God forbid that any attacks happen, but the threat is viable. “Heightened security measures in the hours ahead of and after ringing in 2024” are in place for New York City’s Times Square. “The move comes after the Federal Bureau of Investigation and other federal agencies warned police departments across the country about potential threats to large crowds celebrating the holiday, including from lone actors motivated by the Israel-Hamas war.”

France is on very high alert. “German police are planning one of their largest security operations in Berlin. In light of the Middle East conflict, German Interior Minister Nancy Faeser said she was ‘concerned that New Year's Eve could once again be a day on which we experience blind rage and senseless violence.’”

Similar concerns focus on New Year’s Day parades and football bowl games featuring large, concentrated crowds. Unprecedented security efforts will take place during the Rose Parade and at the Rose Bowl.

Year 2024 is an unknown to all of us looking into the future. None of us are Nostradamus, who was not all that accurate a prognosticator himself. We hope to avoid pandemics and protests, wars, rumors of wars, and culture wars. But whatever 2024 entails, as believers we can rely upon the providence, the presence, the promises, and the peace of God.

We know God is Sovereign. He is the Creator, and he is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent. We know there is no such thing as luck, fate, destiny, or “May the Force be with you.” Rather, in the vernacular, we know God the Heavenly Father is providentially in charge.

We know God is with us. His son, Jesus, and our Savior is called Immanuel, “God with us.” We know Jesus said, “And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age” (Matt 28:20). We know Jesus also said, “Never will I leave you; never will I forsake you” (Heb 13:5). The Holy Spirit “himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God” (Rom 8:16). We know we are never, no matter what we experience, outside of the presence of God.

We know God keeps his word and fulfills every promise. Scripture says, “You know in your hearts and souls, all of you, that not one word has failed of all the good things that the Lord your God promised concerning you. All have come to pass for you; not one of them has failed” (Josh 23:14). We know that “What is impossible with man is possible with God” (Lk 18:27). God is God, our God, today and tomorrow, and his promise stands even to be with us in the valley of the shadow of death. (Ps 23).

We know, too, that only in the Lord there is peace. Jesus said, “I have told you these things, so that in me you may have peace. In this world you will have trouble. But take heart! I have overcome the world.”(Jn 16:33).

Whatever the new year brings, trust in God’s providence, experience his presence, lean on his promises, and enjoy his peace. And celebrate the spirit of Christmas throughout 2024.

Well, we’ll see you again soon. This podcast is about Discerning What Is Best. If you find this thought-provoking and helpful, follow us on your favorite podcast platform. Download an episode for your friends. For more Christian commentary, check my website, r-e-x-m as in Martin, that’s rexmrogers.com. 

And remember, it is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm.

© Rex M. Rogers – All Rights Reserved, 2024   

*This podcast blog may be reproduced in whole or in part with a full attribution statement. Contact me or read more commentary on current issues and events at www.rexmrogers.com/, or connect with me at www.linkedin.com/in/rexmrogers.  

Details

Written by Rex M. Rogers

Published: 25 December 2023

Do you think it’s possible to experience peace of any kind in a world so bent upon envy, disruption, violence, and sin?

Hi, I’m Rex Rogers and this is episode #125 of Discerning What Is Best, a podcast applying unchanging biblical principles in a rapidly changing world, and a Christian worldview to current issues and everyday life.

Christmas is a time we typically think good thoughts about family, friends, and oh yes, peace. But the world is anything but peaceful Christmas 2023.

The Ukraine struggles against Russian aggression, Sudan finds itself once again in a senseless, brutal civil war, and the Holy Land is immersed in war as Israel attempts, as they say, “to eradicate Hamas,” in response to Hamas’s barbaric unprovoked, surprise attack killing, maiming, raping, and kidnapping hundreds of Israelis, Oct 7, 2023.

Christmas, though, is about peace. Isaiah 9:6 announced, “For to us a child is born, to us a son is given,and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.”

Jesus’s peace, as we sometimes assume, is not necessarily physical safety and political harmony.

The babe in the manger who became the Savior because of Calvary and the Resurrection, said, “Peace I leave with you; my peace I give you. I do not give to you as the world gives. Do not let your hearts be troubled and do not be afraid,” Jn 14:27.

The Hebrew word for peace is shalom, commonly used as Jewish greeting. Shalom in this verse means more than just the absence of war. It references all kinds of peace: wholeness, welfare, physical health, quietness, mental and emotional stability. It means “an appearance of calm and tranquility of individuals, groups, and nations”…and “the deeper, more foundational meaning of peace is “the spiritual harmony brought about by an individual’s restoration with God.” 

This reminds me of the beloved Christmas carol, “Silent Night.” My SAT-7 colleague Dennis Wiens recently observed, “Josef Mohr, a Salzburg clergyman, wrote the lyrics in 1816, just after the Napoleonic Wars. (His) congregation in Mariapfarr (Austria) was reeling from the war, which had decimated the country's political and social infrastructure. The song's message of peace was sent into a time marked by war, hunger, disease, and natural disasters.”

Two years later, “Josef walked to a hill overlooking his town one evening. This quiet time, alone, allowed him to process and reflect as he and the town prepared for Christmas Eve 1818.

“Reveling in the majestic silence of a wintry night, Mohr looked over the Christmas card-like scene of his town. He reflected on a Christmas play he had just watched that triggered his memory of a poem he had written a couple of years before. That poem was about the night angels announced the birth of the long-awaited Messiah to shepherds on a hillside. Mohr decided those words might make a good carol for his congregation the following evening at their Christmas Eve service. The one problem was that he didn't have any music to which that poem could be sung.”

“So, the next day, Mohr went to see the church organist, Franz Xaver Gruber, “a local schoolteacher who the next year became the organist of Old Saint Nicholas Church. By that evening, Gruber had managed to compose a musical setting for the poem. That the church organ was inoperable no longer mattered to Mohr and Gruber. They now had a Christmas carol that could be sung without an organ.”

“The now-famous carol was first performed as "Stille Nacht Heilige Nacht," Josef Mohr, the young priest who wrote the lyrics, played the guitar and sang along with Franz Xaver Gruber, the choir director who had written the melody.” It was later first performed in the United States in New York City in 1839.

“The contrast between the carol's message of tranquility and hope and the violence during a time marked by war, hunger, disease, social upheaval, and natural disasters is obvious and compelling.”

“It was sung in churches, in town squares, and even on the battlefield during World War I, when soldiers sang carols from home during a temporary truce on Christmas Eve. It's considered the Christmas carol that paused a war!”

“Silent night, holy night
All is calm, all is bright
Round yon Virgin, Mother and Child
Holy Infant so tender and mild
Sleep in heavenly peace

Sleep in heavenly peace!”

The prophet Isaiah also reminded us, “For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways,” declares the Lord” (Is 55:8-9). So, he does not always immediately bring peace in the face of war, as he could, in part because he knows that people are drawn to him at such times and perhaps in part because he grants human beings the opportunity to choose to seek him and to do right versus wrong.

Human beings want peace; we want the world on our terms. The Beatle’s John Lennon wrote at least two songs about peace, one in 1969 called “Give Peace a Chance,” an anti-war statement that reads like he must have been high when he wrote it. The gibberish lyrics make no sense, but still, the phrase “Give Peace a Chance” caught on for a time. The problem is, Lennon offered no basis for accomplishing his dream, no acknowledgement of sin and evil, no way of redemption, no spiritual means of achieving peace, and certainly not achieving it on our own.

The other Lennon song about peace became his anthem and legacy. “Imagine” was released in 1971, becoming the best-selling song of his career and has now been covered by more than 200 artists.  

Why is “Imagine” so popular? Aside from its catchy tune, it’s an idealistic secularist view of the world. Anyone can embrace the song’s longings. It imagines a world without disturbance, in other words, peace. Lennon says,

“Imagine there's no heaven

It's easy if you try

No hell below us

Above us only sky

Imagine all the people living for today

Imagine there's no countries

It isn't hard to do

Nothing to kill or die for

And no religion too

Imagine all the people living life in peace”

Certainly, we can relate to John Lennon’s desire to live a life of peace, but sadly, the utopian dreams he recommends for achieving peace aren’t real. Lennon’s aspirations are spiritual dead ends. 

“John Lennon’s song Imagine is frequently used as a call for peace and unity. It’s an especially common selection in response to acts of violence.”

“Critics often note that what Lennon depicts is end-stage communism: the pursuit of which has been the cause of millions of deaths throughout history.”

Actually, “history disproves Lennon’s optimism. A denial of heaven and hell does not result in world peace—quite the opposite, in fact. The worst human atrocities—counter to the rest of Lennon’s vision, ironically—have been driven by an atheistic rejection of the afterlife and the removal of religion from society. When leaders assume there is nothing “above” man, the result is usually genocide: witness Joseph Stalin, Mao Zedong, Pol Pot, and others who saw themselves as the highest authority.”

Hamas says they serve the Islamic conception of God, Allah. But their way of serving is anger, fear, destruction, brutality, and killing. And there is no peace.

Back to Lennon: there is a heaven, and there is a hell, and there is religion, and if properly understood in biblical terms, God has given us the prescription we need to seek peace and through his Son the Lord Jesus Christ, to experience it. 

The Prince of Peace, Immanuel “God with us,” born as the incarnated God-Man in a manger about two thousand years ago is God’s answer to mankind’s “relational dilemma,” that is, our broken relationship with God, others, and creation. Scripture says, “therefore, since we have been justified through faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ,” (Rom 5:1).

Jesus Christ is the only reason we can truly live peacefully with God and in peace with others and creation.

The Prince of Peace is the reason for the season.

Jesus did not stay a baby in a manger but became the Savior whose sacrificial death, burial, and resurrection made our redemption possible, and makes peace possible.

“Jesus Christ is called the Prince of Peace because He restores every broken relationship, provides for a well-ordered and balanced life, and offers the assurance of eternal life” to all who call upon him.

Peace be with you this Christmas.

Well, we’ll see you again soon. This podcast is about Discerning What Is Best. If you find this thought-provoking and helpful, follow us on your favorite podcast platform. Download an episode for your friends. For more Christian commentary, check my website, r-e-x-m as in Martin, that’s rexmrogers.com. 

And remember, it is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm.

© Rex M. Rogers – All Rights Reserved, 2023   

*This podcast blog may be reproduced in whole or in part with a full attribution statement. Contact me or read more commentary on current issues and events at www.rexmrogers.com/, or connect with me at www.linkedin.com/in/rexmrogers.