The power to be “something you have never been”

President Trump has confirmed that the Super Bowl champion Philadelphia Eagles will be invited to the White House, stating, “They deserve to be down here.” The team has already said they will come if invited.

However, there is history between the Eagles and Mr. Trump, and not just because he picked the Chiefs to win the latest Super Bowl and he supports Patrick Mahomes and his wife Brittany. After the Eagles won Super Bowl LII in 2018, the team and Mr. Trump publicly clashed and no visit took place. But their past is apparently not restricting their future.

In other political news, Democratic political veteran James Carville writes in the New York Times that his party should “roll over and play dead” in the face of Republican domination of the political landscape. He advises his fellow Democrats to “allow the Republicans to crumble beneath their own weight and make the American people miss us.” Then they should “make like a pack of hyenas and go for the jugular.”

One more story contributes to the theme I’d like to discuss with you: Country singer Kelsea Ballerini recently stopped a concert to scold fans for cursing out her ex-husband, Morgan Evans. When she performed her song “Penthouse,” widely believed to be about her 2022 divorce from the Australian country singer, fans apparently shouted an obscenity about Morgan.

“Guys, we have to stop saying that,” she told them. “Seriously, we’re three years past it, everything’s fine now.” As the crowd cheered, she continued: “Alright, for everyone that’s moving forward with their life, will you sing this with me?”

The moral dilemma that frames our culture

Past behavior is often identified as the best predictor of future behavior, but this does not have to be true. A strategic consultant to our ministry once told our team, “When you get new information, you can make a new decision.”

The Philadelphia Eagles and President Trump are apparently making a new decision. Kelsea Ballerini is obviously charting a new path regarding her former marriage. James Carville, by contrast, continues to advocate the acerbic politics for which he is famous.

At its heart, we are dealing with a moral dilemma as old as Western culture.

1. Bradley Thompsonis an author and political science professor at Clemson University. In his latest “Redneck Intellectual” column, he explainsthat Plato and Aristotle posited very different approaches to selfishness, which he calls the “moral issue of our time.”

In the Republic, Plato advocated for acting selflessly for the sake of others as our highest moral obligation. In the Nicomachean Ethics, by contrast, Aristotle taught that our first and most important relationship is with ourselves as we seek to act in the noblest ways and to possess what is objectively good.

To summarize his discussion: Should we do what is best for others or for ourselves?

Christianity answers, “Yes.”

“Martyrs” or “terrorists”?

The problem with both Plato’s and Aristotle’s theories is that they have no objective referent outside the individual who seeks to follow them. How are we to know when, for example, forgiving others is in their best interest? This seems to be the kind of sacrificial service Plato would commend. But if our forgiveness only reinforces and facilitates destructive behavior, it is in neither the best interest of those we forgive nor ourselves.

I’m sure James Carville would say that for Democrats to “forgive” Republicans and try to work with them would harm the nation and, ultimately, the Republicans who live in it. By contrast, the Eagles and President Trump seem to feel that forging a new relationship is in everyone’s best interest. Kelsea Ballerini certainly thinks so with regard to her former husband.

On the other hand, Aristotle wants us to do what is most noble and to possess what is objectively good. But how are we to define each? What the Islamic State calls “martyrs,” the rest of us call “terrorists.” Wealth can be either a means of doing good in the world or an idol that possesses those who possess it.

And, even when we know when it is best to forgive and sacrifice for others, or when we can identify what is most noble and best, how do we find the character and strength to follow through on these choices?

We have had the moral theories of Plato and Aristotle for two millennia, but we’re no better as a race than we were. What are we missing?

“Harking back to what you once were”

The central “brand promise” of Christianity is that we can be “born again” (John 3:3) as a “new creation” (2 Corinthians 5:17) by the grace of Christ through faith (Ephesians 2:8–9). The living Lord Jesus can make us the children of God (John 1:12) and manifest in our lives a character that changes us and changes our world (Galatians 5:22–23). When we submit to God’s Spirit (Ephesians 5:18), he guides us into “all truth” (John 16:13) and empowers us to do what we then know to be best (Acts 1:8).

Of course, the skeptic might protest that, as with Plato and Aristotle, we have had these biblical teachings for two millennia as well, but the human race does not seem to have improved. How are we to respond?

This decision to submit our lives to God as a “living sacrifice” (Romans 12:1) runs against the “will to power” that dominates our fallen nature (Genesis 3:5). This is a daily “dying to self” that positions and empowers us to experience and emulate the “abundant life” only Christ can give.

1. K. Chesterton noted, “The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting; it has been found difficult and left untried.”

But when it has been “tried,” it has changed hearts and lives. It has turned cowardly followers into courageous apostles (Acts 4) and prejudiced skeptics into grace-centered evangelists (Acts 9–11). It “turned the world upside down” (John 17:6) and birthed the mightiest spiritual movement the world has ever seen.

In light of such grace, Oswald Chambers’ observation is both relevant and empowering:

“Beware of harking back to what you once were when God wants you to be something you have never been.”

Will you follow his advice today

Denison Forum

Gene Hackman, the two-time Oscar-winning actor, and his wife, classical pianist Betsy Arakawa, were found dead yesterday afternoon in their New Mexico home. Santa Fe County Sheriff Adan Mendoza reported just after midnight Thursday that the couple had died along with their dog. He said there was no immediate indication of foul play, though he did not provide a cause of death or say when the couple might have died.

Celebrities make the news daily. It can be tragic news, such as the death of actress Michelle Trachtenberg at the age of thirty-nine. It can be good news, such as late-night talk show host Jimmy Kimmel’s update on his son Billy’s third open-heart surgery, saying the seven-year-old is now “in perfect health.”

It can even be mundane news: Kansas City Chiefs star quarterback Patrick Mahomes got a new hairstyle after his team lost the Super Bowl. And famed Chiefs tight end (who’s even more famous for his girlfriend) Travis Kelce shaved his beard after the loss.

What makes celebrities so famous (despite the obvious fact that they are by definition)?

One factor is our desire to look up to authority figures. This is good when we’re being protected and mentored by our parents or other people in positions to benefit us. However, the explosion of social media, coupled with a decline in religious interest, has made celebrities the new authority figures for many.

In addition, celebrities serve as aspirational heroes for those who see them as successful and wish to emulate and imitate them as a result. And there’s a bit of escapism in celebrity culture today: following their lives can relieve the monotony and stress of ours.

Has the decline of Christianity in the US “leveled off”?

By now you’re perhaps wondering what any of this has to do with an article that is supposed to discuss cultural issues in the context of spiritual truth. For the answer, let’s turn to good news on spirituality that may not be as good as it seems.

Pew Research Center has just published a study that is generating headlines this morning. Titled “Decline of Christianity in the US Has Slowed, May Have Leveled Off,” it reports that the Christian share of the US population has stabilized after years of decline, increasing from 62 percent to 63 percent (though down from 79 percent in 2007).

In addition, large majorities of us say we have a spiritual or supernatural outlook on the world. Quoting from the report:

• 86 percent believe people have a soul or spirit in addition to their physical body.
• 83 percent believe in God or a universal spirit.
• 79 percent believe there is something spiritual beyond the natural world, even if we can’t see it.
• 70 percent believe in an afterlife (heaven, hell, or both).

Here’s what bothers me: Many “spiritual” Americans treat God like another celebrity. We view him as an authority figure and see Jesus as an aspirational hero we want to emulate.

But all of this spirituality is on our terms.

No one forces us to go to movies or otherwise pay attention to the celebrities of our day. We do so only when we think doing so will be to our benefit. It is much the same for much of American Christianity. We separate the spiritual from the secular and religion from the “real world.” We are spiritual to the degree that spirituality benefits us and not when it does not.

In a day when only 22 percent of Americans are satisfied with our nation’s “moral and ethical climate,” how’s this working for us?

“An aspirational desire for tolerance of everything”

In their new book The Technological Republic: Hard Power, Soft Belief, and the Future of the West, technology billionaire Alexander C. Karp and his deputy Nicholas W. Zamiska lament:

A significant subset of our leaders, elected and otherwise, both teach and are taught that belief itself is the enemy and that a lack of belief in anything, except oneself perhaps, is the most certain path to reward. The result is a culture in which those responsible for making our most consequential decisions—in any number of public domains, including government, industry, and academia—are often unsure of what their own beliefs are, or more fundamentally if they have any firm or authentic beliefs at all.

They warn that this “abandonment of belief” has “left us unable to confront issues with moral clarity.”

Karp and Zamiska trace our secularism to Sigmund Freud’s depreciation of religion and especially to those in elite universities who have conflated belief in objective truth with “colonial” oppression (they particularly cite Edward Said’s very influential book 1978 book Orientalism). Then they show that communal commitment to the common good has been replaced by what Michael Sandel of Harvard describes as “market triumphalism”—we work not to improve the nation but our corporate and personal bottom line.

As a result, “An aspirational desire for tolerance of everything has descended into support of nothing.”

Their theme seems like something a Christian philosopher like me would write, doesn’t it? But even secular publishers like Penguin Random House can recognize our need for “moral clarity” and the consequences when it is abandoned.

“When they saw the boldness of Peter and John”

“Spirituality” on our terms is not enough. Treating God like a celebrity we can follow as we wish is not enough.

What every human soul needs is the relationship for which we were created with the God who created us. Nothing less than intimacy with the living Lord Jesus can transform us into the Christlike people our fallen society needs us to be.

In words that serve as a thoughtful critique of our celebrity culture, the British writer Nick Hornby noted:

“It’s not what you like but what you are like that’s important.”

I would amend his assertion to read, “It’s who you are like that’s important.”

For example: “When they saw the boldness of Peter and John . . . they were astonished. And they recognized that they had been with Jesus” (Acts 4:13).

Will someone be “astonished” by you today?

Quote for the day:

“By opening our lives to God in Christ, we become new creatures. This experience, which Jesus spoke of as the new birth, is essential if we are to be transformed nonconformists. . . . Only through an inner spiritual transformation do we gain the strength to fight vigorously the evils of the world in a humble and loving spirit.” —Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

Our latest website articles:

• Two more aviation near-misses occurred this week: Are airline accidents more frequent?

• Super Bowl Champion Philadelphia Eagles to visit White House: The power to be “something you have never been”
• What does the Bible say about temptation?
• Roundtable discussion on faith, AI, and global unity with special guests Josh Miller and Dr. Ryan Denison
• My friend Scott Turner is now HUD Secretary: “Never let your circumstance define your ability or your opportunity to succeed.”

Denison Forum

What the war with Russia says about the future of war

Kyiv and Washington agreed yesterday on the terms of a draft minerals deal that Ukrainian officials hope will improve relations with the Trump administration and pave the way for long-term security commitments by the US. Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky now plans to travel to Washington on Friday to see President Trump and formalize the deal.

There was a day when such incentives were ideological rather than economic as the West opposed the Soviet Union’s drive to impose Communism on the world. But Russia is not the USSR. It is a nation-state doing what Vladimir Putin thinks is in Russia’s (and his) best interest.

Understanding this shift from ideology to pragmatism is vital to understanding the world today—and finding peace with God, others, and ourselves.

“A reordering moment in international relations”

The Nobel Prize-winning economist Gary Becker theorized that all human behavior consists of maximizing pleasure and minimizing pain. As a result, the decision to commit or refrain from a crime depends entirely on our weighing the benefit against the expected punishment.

According to Becker, “Some persons become ‘criminals,’ therefore, not because their basic motivation differs from that of other persons, but because their benefits and costs differ.” Accordingly, there are no crimes in a moral sense, just violations of arbitrary laws.

This amoral approach to morality absent of objective authority applies not just to individuals but to nations as well.

In his famous book The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order, Harvard political scientist Samuel Huntington predicted that group identities based on cultural distinctions would come to dominate geopolitics as the universalizing worldviews of the Cold War waned. In other words, the world would be dominated less by the conflict between Western values and Communist ideology than by nation-states pursuing their individual goals.

Recent years have proven him right. From Russia’s invasions of Ukraine to Iran’s aggression in the Middle East, China’s threats against Taiwan, India’s rising nationalism, and Europe’s growing populist movement, we are seeing what Foreign Policy calls “a reordering moment in international relations.” None of this is driven by what is objectively right; what seems to matter now is what is right for a particular nation (or ruler) in competition with the rest of the world.

“Temptation yielded to is lust deified”

I would very much like to claim that none of this applies to me personally. Since I know the Bible to be objectively true and biblical morality therefore to be incumbent upon me at all times in all circumstances, I strive always to do what is right because it is right and to refuse what is wrong because it is wrong.

But you already know that this is not really true for me any more than it is for you.

Paul’s transparent psychological reflections are helpful here. In Romans 7 he admitted: “I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate” (v. 15). We can all agree that we sometimes (perhaps more often than that) do the same.

But then he added: “Now if I do what I do not want, I agree with the law, that it is good” (v. 16). This is interesting. The fact that I do not “want” to do what is wrong shows that I know it to be wrong and that I agree with the “law” in this regard. If I do not want to lie, cheat, and steal, this shows that I know lying, cheating, and stealing to be objectively wrong.

But such knowledge is not enough, as Paul admitted: “I have the desire to do what is right, but not the ability to carry it out” (v. 18).

Oswald Chambers’ convicting observation is right: “Temptation yielded to is lust deified and is a proof that it was timidity that prevented the sin before.” The devil’s enticement is both simple and insidious: To make our supposed morality our fear of the consequences of immorality. Then we will do what we want to do, whether it is objectively right or wrong, based on what seems right or wrong for us at the time. And biblical truth and morality are jettisoned along the way.

So Becker is correct: Our behavior is often motivated by a fear of consequences rather than a commitment to biblical morality. What self-driven nation-states are doing in our fallen world, we are tempted to do as well.

Does any of this feel familiar to you?

“To set the mind on the Spirit is life and peace”

The answer to our dilemma is not in being more religious or trying harder to do better. If that didn’t work for the Apostle Paul, it is unlikely to work for you and me.

Rather, it is embracing what Paul discovered: “The law of the Spirit of life has set you free in Christ Jesus from the law of sin and death” (Romans 8:2). Jesus’ death paid the penalty for all our sins (v. 3). Now we can “walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit” (v. 4). When we do, “to set the mind on the Spirit is life and peace” (v. 6, my emphasis).

Here’s how I understand this process to work. If we submit each day to the Spirit of God, asking him to take control of our mind, emotions, and will (Ephesians 5:18), he will manifest his “fruit” in our lives (Galatians 5:22–23) as he molds us into the character of Christ (Romans 8:29). He empowers us to choose what is right because it is right, not simply to avoid the consequences of doing what is wrong. He enables us to live in victory over the temptations of the enemy (1 Corinthians 10:13) as “more than conquerors through him who loved us” (Romans 8:37).

But we must stay submitted and connected to him. This is why we are urged to “pray without ceasing” (1 Thessalonians 5:17) and to “give thanks in all circumstances” (v. 18). It is why we are warned, “Do not quench the Spirit” (v. 19) through sinful thoughts, words, and actions (cf. 1 Corinthians 10:5).

“Cut off from Christ for the sake of my brothers”

The Spirit enables us to experience God’s love for us and to love him in response (cf. Romans 5:5). And, as we noted yesterday, when we love someone, we want only their best—whatever the cost to ourselves.

It was because Paul loved the people he served that he assured them, “I will most gladly spend and be spent for your souls” (2 Corinthians 12:15) and could even “wish that I myself were accursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brothers, my kinsmen according to the flesh” (Romans 9:3).

This is what it means to “love your neighbor as yourself” (Matthew 22:39). It is what happens when the Spirit produces the “fruit” of love in our lives (Galatians 5:22).

This is the only cure for the self-centered amorality of our nations and our souls. As a result, it is the only path to true peace in our war-torn world. Accordingly, it explains the old aphorism,

“Know God, know peace. No God, no peace.”

Will you “know peace” today?

Quote for the day:

“We look forward to the time when the Power of Love will replace the Love of Power. Then will our world know the blessings of peace.” —William E. Gladstone

Our latest website articles:

• My friend Scott Turner is now HUD Secretary: “Never let your circumstances define your ability or your opportunity to succeed.”
• Taylor Swift’s lost followers and a shark survivor’s story: How my youth group changed my life
• Google AI makes breakthrough in biology: The benefit of AI scientists
• The New York Yankees change their historic hair policy: “Societies crumble not by the mile, but the millimeter”
• James Bond’s future and MrBeast’s mental health: “I am who I think you think I am”

Denison Forum