Saturday, September 26, 2009

The Triumph Of The Love Of Money

Physics is a fascinating subject, although the fascination can only be sustained by mastery of increasingly complicated mathematics as one delves deeper into it. Otherwise, one soon reaches a point where the subject matter goes entirely over one's head. As a kid, I was fascinated by physics, but was too lazy to dive deeply into the associated math. One very interesting topic was the comparison of forces at scales ranging from the smallest distances (the space within an atom, for instance) to the largest (the space between stars and galaxies).

When we think of forces acting at a distance, electrostatic or magnetic forces often come to mind, because they are very easy to see. Stick a cow magnet into iron-rich dirt and you'll see the dirt clump into a hairy fuzz on the magnet's surface. Put silk or nylon clothes into a dryer in the wintertime and run them through a drying cycle, and when you pull them out, you'll see clothes sticking together and attracting lint because of electrostatic forces. The same forces will give a cat a shock if you rub its fur the wrong way in wintertime, or will give you a shock if you shuffle across a carpet while wearing socks and no shoes, and touch a brass doorknob.

Gravity is another force that's easy to visualize, especially because each of us has to deal with it. Electrostatic and magnetic forces are fun to play with, because they either attract or repel depending on the polarity of the agent producing the electrostatic or magnetic field. Gravity isn't as much fun to play with – unless you're a downhill skier or a skateboarder or a kid building a “land luge” or (do they even have those things anymore?) a soap box derby racer. Otherwise, we relate to gravity primarily by spending most of our lives trying to keep things (such as ourselves) from falling down.

Gravity seems all-pervasive, yet it is actually the weakest force of the the four forces known to physicists as the “fundamental interactions.” As a force, gravity has an infinite range, although the strength of a gravitational field decreases as the square of the distance from the object causing the field. The next strongest force is a very short-range force that acts between subatomic particles, and is called the weak force. It causes certain forms of radioactive decay. It is called “weak,” yet it is 1.67 x 1032 times as powerful as gravity. (That's a lot!) After that comes the electromagnetic force, which is around 7300 times as strong as the weak force, and has an unlimited range with strength decreasing as the square of distance, just like gravity. Lastly, there is the strong force, which is 137 times as powerful as the electromagnetic force, and which has a very short range, just like the weak force. (If you want to know where I got these numbers, look here: http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/HBASE/forces/couple.html)

The other three fundamental forces are the foundation for the structure and behavior of matter at scales familiar to everyday life. At these scales, gravity plays a negligible role. For instance, a freeway overpass does not have to be built to withstand its own gravity (although it does have to be built to withstand everyday use within the gravitational field of the Earth). This is true even though the mass of the overpass creates its own gravity, which tends to pull all the parts of it toward its center. But its self-generated gravity is so tiny, and the electromagnetic and nuclear forces of the atoms of its components are so strong, that the gravity of the overpass plays no part in its design. The electromagnetic force, which holds the electrons of an atom in close proximity to its nucleus, is so strong compared to gravity, that if an atom were scaled up to the size of the sun, its electrons would be 400 times farther from it than the sun is from the earth.

Gravity is so weak that one must gather a lot of mass to generate enough gravity to be felt. There are huge rocks (asteroids) in space that are many miles across, but their gravity is so weak that if you stood on one of them, you could put yourself into orbit around it just by taking a running jump. Yet if one accumulates enough mass into one place, gravity can become so strong that it is stronger


than the weak force

than the electromagnetic force

than the strong force;

and that it becomes so strong that it crushes large masses of rock into spherical planets; crushes large clouds of gas into stars;

and given enough mass, crushes everything within its grip into a black hole

from which nothing can escape.

Impressively unexpected for such a weak force, isn't it?

Gravity is just one example of seemingly mundane things with unexpected dimensions. There are moral phenomena that seem quite mundane, yet have the same unexpected, darkly triumphant twist possessed by gravity. One of these moral phenomena is encapsulated in a statement from the Good Book: “For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil...” (1 Timothy 6:10, World English Bible.) I quote the World English Bible because it is a modern public domain translation. Yet its rendering of this verse is a bit wimpy. The King James version of this verse is more literal: “For the love of money is the root of all evil...” The most literal rendering of this verse reads, “For the love of money is root of all the evils...”

The love of money as the root of all the evils? Is this simply hyperbole, an exaggeration on the part of the writer of these words? Or is it really true?

Back in the day, as the Cold War was entering its terminal phase, a lot of alarmist books were published by members of the American “Christian” media. These books warned against the dangers of various humanist ideologies that were perceived by prominent American evangelical leaders as a threat to the identity and survival of America as a “Christian” nation and as a powerful and rich nation. Many of these books warned against the threat posed by secular humanism, the threat of post-modernism, the threat of multiculturalism, the threat of the New Age movement, and so forth. One particular book comes to mind, namely, Peace, Prosperity and the Coming Holocaust, by Dave Hunt. There were many others like it. The preoccupation with “threat” ideologies carried over into “Christian” fiction as well, as exemplified in Frank Peretti's novels. The focus on “threat” ideologies really kicked into high gear after 9/11.

This focus on ideology as a potential threat really grew out of the major conflicts of the 20th century, which were largely motivated by ideology. World War II was the world's first modern ideological war, in which the Allied good guys fought against the evil ideologies of Nazism and Fascism. Later, during the Cold War, it became a battle against the Western good guys against “godless Marxist Communism and totalitarianism.” Our relatively lengthy experience of modern ideological conflict convinced many in the West that the deepest evils and the most dangerous moral threats were ideological. This was easy to believe when one saw the insanely fanatical lengths to which ideologues would go to promote their ideologies – from the Chinese “human wave” attacks of the Korean and Vietnam wars to the suicide bombings of the Islamic jihadists. One could also see it in the severe measures taken by ideologue states to enforce their ideology on their citizens, including things that we would call brainwashing.

Against the backdrop of these frighteningly colorful ideologies and the colorful conflicts engendered by them, greed – the love of money – seemed like a wimpy, chump-change sin. How could the love of money really be the root of all evil when we had such obvious, in-your-face evils as atheistic Communism or Islam or the Satanic New Age Movement? Surely the coming empire of the Antichrist would be at its core an ideological empire embodying an ideological evil. Greed would simply be one of its lesser sins.

Yet as I have studied world events over the last two years, I have come to believe that the love of money actually is the root of all evil. I have seen that the world at this time is predominantly owned by a handful of extremely rich interests, who have robbed the poor, have stolen from the needy, have begun to destroy the earth, and have enslaved the powerless – all for the sake of the love of money. And they have invented handy, high-sounding ideologies to justify what is basically an exercise in pure greed. Their ideologies are broadcast over mass media owned by the rich and swallowed unquestioningly by the many gullible sheep among the poor, like Kool-Aid eagerly swallowed on a hot day. Yet it is the greed of the rich that is now driving world events, such as the takeover of world governments by the banking sector and the finance “industry”, the tearing apart of social safety nets for the poor citizens of the world, the invasion of other countries in order to take their natural resources, the persecution of poor ethnic minorities, the defrauding of the Third World via “free trade” agreements, and so forth. The atrocities committed by ideologues in decades past – for the sake of ideology – are now being done by the rich – solely for the sake of greed.

Greed has become the supreme ideology, the real soul behind all the worldly ideologies now pushed on the world, and pushed especially on the American public by America's right wing. And the Good Book seems to indicate that greed – especially mercantile greed – will be one of the chief characteristics of the empire of Antichrist, an empire based on a capitalist economy, as shown in Revelation 18:9-19, which I quote below, for a little bit of light reading:

The kings of the earth, who committed fornication and lived wantonly with her, will weep and wail over her, when they look at the smoke of her burning, standing far away for the fear of her torment, saying, ‘Woe, woe, the great city, Babylon, the strong city! For your judgment has come in one hour.’ The merchants of the earth weep and mourn over her, for no one buys their merchandise any more; merchandise of gold, silver, precious stones, pearls, fine linen, purple, silk, scarlet, all expensive wood, every vessel of ivory, every vessel made of most precious wood, and of brass, and iron, and marble; and cinnamon, incense, perfume, frankincense, wine, olive oil, fine flour, wheat, sheep, horses, chariots, and people’s bodies and souls.

The fruits which your soul lusted after have been lost to you, and all things that were dainty and sumptuous have perished from you, and you will find them no more at all. The merchants of these things, who were made rich by her, will stand far away for the fear of her torment, weeping and mourning; saying, ‘Woe, woe, the great city, she who was dressed in fine linen, purple, and scarlet, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls! For in an hour such great riches are made desolate.’ Every shipmaster, and everyone who sails anywhere, and mariners, and as many as gain their living by sea, stood far away, and cried out as they looked at the smoke of her burning, saying, ‘What is like the great city?’ They cast dust on their heads, and cried, weeping and mourning, saying, ‘Woe, woe, the great city, in which all who had their ships in the sea were made rich by reason of her great wealth!’ For in one hour is she made desolate.

As far as sins go, greed may well triumph over all other sins. This is something that American evangelical culture seems to have overlooked.

Sunday, September 6, 2009

What The Left Gets Right (And What It Gets Wrong)

I consider myself to be a Biblical Christian. I believe that the Bible actually is the Word of God, and I believe what the Bible teaches about the holiness of God, the fallenness of man and the remedy for our fallenness in the Lord Jesus Christ. I believe in the Trinity of God (for anyone who thinks the Bible teaches otherwise, let me refer you to Matthew 28:19; John 1:1 and John 10:30, among many other verses). I can recite the Apostles' Creed and mean it, without having my fingers crossed behind my back.

Yet there are many elements of modern American evangelicalism that I can no longer accept. My movement away from its toxic ecclesiastical elements began in 2003. My movement away from its toxic political and economic elements began a bit later, around 2005, as gas prices first soared above $3 a gallon and I started to see just how hard it was for people in America to break free from our predatory economic system. As my movement progressed, I found myself reading and listening to many writers and thinkers on the political Left, people whom I had previously rejected during my flag-waving, Frank Peretti novel-reading, Christian talk-show radio listening, vote-Republican, let's-hang-out-at-the-Christian-bookstore days.

What I found in listening to voices from the Left is that while we usually disagreed on cosmogony (that is, how the universe and the people on earth came to be) as well as matters of personal (especially sexual) morality, there were many matters in which we were in strong agreement. I agreed with the Left's fear that godless, predatory capitalism was destroying the poor of the earth, and that it was destroying the earth itself. I agreed with the Left that the Iraq war was all about oil, and was illegitimate. I agreed with the Left that the world could no longer sustain a society such as ours, that depended on ever-increasing consumption and materialism, and that we would have to change our ways very quickly.

I also began to see the truth of the Left's accusations against the leaders of the Right, namely, that the Right seemed to be nothing more than a bunch of shills for the rich who are the owners of the major pieces of our economic and political systems. Thus I began to listen with new ears when I heard things that I had previously accepted unthinkingly, such as when prominent members of the Religious Right spoke against government-sponsored safety nets for the poor, or opposed the providing of public resources like libraries and mass transit, or railed against attempts to protect the environment. Usually these leaders would denounce such things by calling them “examples of Marxist socialism!!!!” or “governmental intrusion into the (God-given!) free market system.” Now that I was listening with new ears, I noticed that the statements of these leaders sounded like the tantrums of children.

I also noticed how the Left sought to use the discrediting of the Religious Right in order to discredit the Christian faith itself. I talked about this a bit in my post, A Dude In Bedlam. While I agree with many of the criticisms made by the Left, this is going too far. For one thing, it is intellectually dishonest. But the Left has made a further mistake, which, while not a direct attack on Christianity, is yet a result of rejecting one of the central teachings of Christianity. I'll explain it thus:

Many of the writers and thinkers on the Left have correctly diagnosed the present threats and dangers to our modern society and our world, and that these threats and dangers are the result of our greed and exponentially increasing consumption. They have accurately seen the role played by the leaders of our present system in perpetuating that system even though it is destined to break down. They have seen the stubbornness and determination of our leaders and powerful people at all levels of government and economic power in hanging on to their breaking system. They have also seen how many ordinary people are willingly enslaved to that system and its false promise of ever-increasing prosperity.

Yet many of those on the Left continue to believe that humanity is evolving into something better, and that our present difficulty is primarily an evolutionary struggle. They believe that mankind is capable of controlling its destiny in the sense of choosing a better evolutionary path, if only we can be educated to choose it. Thus, when they see the propensity of our society and its leaders to choose a self-destructive path, they propose solutions that don't take the full scope of the human condition into account.

Therefore, there are people who think that if we only teach humanity the proper values, we will all magically start acting differently, and the world will be a better place. There are others who look to evolutionary theory for some key, that if found, would help humanity make the jump to a higher state of being and a more sensible existence. Indeed, there has recently sprung up an entire discipline of “evolutionary psychology,” along with the even more impressive-sounding “evolutionary cognitive psychology,” which attempts to explain destructive and maladaptive human behavior entirely in biological terms. When some of these people give way to cravings they shouldn't indulge, they blame it on their “corpus callosum,” or the remnants of their “reptile brain.” When they see their fellow humans and the people in power making destructive choices, they believe the solution to be education and discussion. So they say things like, “Our leaders and people in power don't seem to understand the threats posed by Peak Oil, climate change, and environmental destruction. Their decisions would be different if they did understand. Therefore we must educate our society. Once they are educated, they will respond differently.”

As a Christian, I see things quite differently. When I see our leaders and the prominent figures of our society choosing the things they choose, I don't blame it on a failure of evolution or a lack of education. I blame it on indwelling evil. The Bible calls certain behaviors evil – and holds these behaviors as evidence that those who practice them are evil. Take the case of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney – both the supposed products of thousands of years of “evolution” if you accept the cosmogony of the Left. I don't think that it was a defect of the corpus callosum or an asserting of the remnants of the “reptile brain” that made Bush and Cheney start an unjustified war against a country that had done nothing to us. It's not like they woke up one day and said to each other, “Man, I got a jones on! I've got to have me some Iraqi oil!” No, rather, they manufactured the most elaborate justifications for what they did. This is the nature of evil. Mere biological craving is one thing, but true spiritual evil acts on that craving even when it knows that in doing so, other lives will be violated. And true evil fabricates all sorts of justifications for its actions. The villains of the Right know good and well that what they are doing is wrong, yet they still do it.

Thus we see the failure of the Left – a failure to acknowledge the reality of evil in the world. It's not hard to see why the Left refuses this acknowledgement. For if the Left acknowledged evil as evil, it would also have to acknowledge the existence of an objective, righteous standard that measures good and evil and that exists independently of humans, by which each of us is measured, and which is the product of a righteous Standard-Maker. Acknowledging that the rich and powerful are in violation of the righteous standard of the Standard-Maker would force the members of the Left to look at their own lives and their own violations of that standard. That acknowledgement would force a further acknowledgement of the evil within each of us, our indwelling sin that is untamable by mortal man. Realizing this would lead to the realization of humanity's need for a Redeemer.

Such a realization is too frightening for the Left, whose members cling to standards of their own making suited to their particular quirks, who reject objective morality and an objective God, who blame humanity's present problems on a lack of evolutionary development, and who actually believe that it is possible for humans to create, by their own power, a utopia on earth.

As for me, I don't think we will ever be able to create a utopia by our own power. My views tend to line up with Reinhold Niebuhr, who once said, “It is because we had so completely miscalculated the character of human history that we are so frequently threatened by despair in this day of frustration and disappointed hopes. Our modern culture moved from a too simple optimism to a too deep despair... An adequate faith for a day of crisis will contain what modern men have completely dismissed, namely, a tragic sense of life and a recognition of the Cross as the final center of life's meaning...” (Source: “An Adequate Faith for the World Crisis,” Reinhold Niebuhr, 1947). Left entirely to ourselves, I fully expect that instead of creating utopia, we would create the sort of mess depicted in Walter M. Miller's A Canticle for Leibowitz. That book is a unique depiction of original sin, devastatingly funny in places, and in other places, simply devastating.