While we celebrate the incarnation of Christ Jesus, I want to ask you to consider the example of a man who was indispensable to the Christmas story — Joseph the carpenter.

Meet Joseph

When we first meet Joseph in the Bible, he is defined in terms of his relationships — as the son of his father, Jacob, and the husband of Mary, the mother of Christ (Matthew 1:16).  From there we learn that Joseph was engaged to Mary, and that Mary was pregnant by God the Holy Spirit.

Joseph’s choices

Although Joseph could have avenged his honor and had Mary stoned to death for her supposed adultery, instead he made up his mind to break their engagement quietly.  But instead, a messenger of God — an angel — appeared to Joseph and told him not to be afraid to proceed with the marriage, because Mary was carrying God’s son.  So Joseph obeyed God.  The only other narrative mentions of Joseph in the Gospel according to Matthew show him moving his family to safety in Egypt, and later to Nazareth to avoid murderous and corrupt rulers.

Family ties

In the Gospel according to Luke, we see Joseph taking his bride to his ancestral home, Bethlehem, because of a census decree.  Jesus was born there just as it had been prophesied.  Bethlehem was significant because Joseph was descended from King David — the greatest king of Israel — and the prophecies regarding the messiah told that he would be the son of David.

Joseph’s greatness

Despite the slight number of scripture verses in which Joseph appears, his impact is tremendous.  Christmas could not have happened without him.  Here are the lessons I take from the life of Joseph:

• No whining — According to the genealogy of Jesus, Joseph could well have been the rightful heir to the throne of King David.  Instead he was a tradesman –a carpenter.  We do not have any account that suggests Joseph complained about his station in life, or about the circumstances he and his fiancée found themselves in.
• No drama — When it appeared Mary had been unfaithful to him, his love for her caused him not to want to subject her to disgrace.  His plan was to quietly send her away.
• Faithful — Joseph is described as a man of noble character.  Although this is not unheard of in the offspring of kings, it is by no means guaranteed.  Note that Joseph willingly accepted the role of Jesus’ earthly father, even though scripture tells us he did not have marital relations with Mary until after the birth of Jesus.  That is, he took the responsibility without any immediate gratification.
• Devout — We see Joseph hearing from God via angels and dreams, so we must conclude that he was seeking God’s wisdom.  Elsewhere we see him presenting the newborn Jesus to be dedicated at the temple, according to the law.  Certainly Joseph revered God to have ingrained such habits of belief and practice.
• Obedient — When God communicated His will to Joseph, it appears Joseph went straight to it.  Human nature was no different in Joseph’s day than it is in ours, so clearly Joseph must have known he’d have to deal with the whispers and gossip of his neighbors.  Based on the information given us in the Bible, he didn’t let anything deter him.
• Cool as the other side of the pillow — When evil Herod wanted to kill the newborn King of the Jews, Joseph got instructions to take Mary and Jesus into Egypt to escape Herod’s murderous intent.  And he just did it.  When news reached Joseph that Herod had died, God let him know it was safe to move back to Israel.  Again, he simply moved, although he did avoid Herod’s son by settling in Nazareth. (This decision fulfilled another prophecy regarding Jesus – this is why Jesus was considered a Nazarene.)

About the painting:  This is “Saint Joseph and the Infant Christ” painted by Baciccio — also known as Giovanni Battista Gaulli.  I love this portrayal of Joseph — his expression conveys such love, wonder and reverence.  What genuine nobility!  What a man!  

So how about you?  What of Joseph’s example can you put to work in your life?  Add your comments below.

“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.” – C. S. Lewis

In two recent posts under this same title, I summarized the message of Roy H. Williams’ and Michael Drew’s book Pendulum: How Past Generations Shape Our Present and Predict Our Future. As I explained in Part I, the thrust of the book is that history unfolds in cycles — like a pendulum — through forty-year arcs from what the authors refer to as a “Peak Me” phase to a “Peak We” phase. The period from a peak We to the next peak We  — one round trip — is roughly eighty years, and the authors claim we are heading for the next peak We in or around 2023 — less than six years from now.

The apex of a We cycle brings an over-the-top emphasis on conformity for the common good, stifling individuality, and suppressing individual liberty. Unfortunately, according to the authors, it always goes to extremes, bringing witch hunts and bloodbaths.

In Part I, I laid out the reasons why I think the current conditions in the US support the authors’ hypothesis. In Part II, I discussed how I think the unpleasantness might show up. Today, I want to offer some thoughts and encouragement on how we ought to live through difficult and dangerous times.

Is there light at the end of the tunnel? We’re going to find out!

Tough times aren’t anything new

First, it’s important to remember that this generation will not be the first to live through a peak We, or even the first to endure hard times. A family member with whom I was discussing this series pointed out that although World War II was a time of excessive violence and conformity, there was also a great deal of wholesome unity as Americans banded together to endure hardship and support the war effort. This observation is correct, and it neither rebuts nor excuses the internment of Japanese Americans in camps.

The potential for overreach notwithstanding, I believe it is possible for faithful men to live honorable, courageous, and fulfilling lives even in the midst of trouble. Consider the persecution of the first-century church at the hands of the Roman Empire. Christians rejected the empire’s demands that they confess Caesar as lord, and they suffered condemnation and martyrdom as a result. Even so, the apostles Peter and Paul each wrote that Christians were to submit to the authorities,  and more – they were to pray for the emperor. If you are unclear how hostile the relationship was between the empire and the church, take a look at the emperor Nero and the persecution he visited on followers of Jesus.

Options = strength. Strength = options

Making it happen

Your mindset matters

Love your neighbor (yes, that one) — If you’re on board with sowing good seed to help your community hold together, let’s go back to the Good Book. “Love your neighbor as you love yourself” goes back 3,000 years — and that’s still the best advice. To love your neighbor when things get dicey, you have to get to know him now, before things get difficult.

“Thus says the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel, to all the exiles whom I have sent into exile from Jerusalem to Babylon: ⁵ Build houses and live in them; plant gardens and eat their produce. ⁶ Take wives and have sons and daughters; take wives for your sons, and give your daughters in marriage, that they may bear sons and daughters; multiply there, and do not decrease. ⁷ But seek the welfare of the city where I have sent you into exile, and pray to the Lord on its behalf, for in its welfare you will find your welfare.” – Jeremiah 29:4-7 (ESV)

Bridge the divide — Find ways to establish common denominators with your opposite numbers. No, you can’t make people love you but you can model godliness. Previously, I referred to Charles Murray’s book, Coming Apart, and the trends he cited that signified a growing separation between college-educated and non-college-educated Americans.

Emphasize and live in the theology of the body — Recognize that we need each other and we need to be able to cooperate with people who are different from us.

¹² For just as the body is one and has many members, and all the members of the body, though many, are one body, so it is with Christ. ¹³ For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—Jews or Greeks, slaves or free—and all were made to drink of one Spirit.

¹⁴ For the body does not consist of one member but of many. ¹⁵ If the foot should say, “Because I am not a hand, I do not belong to the body,” that would not make it any less a part of the body. ¹⁶ And if the ear should say, “Because I am not an eye, I do not belong to the body,” that would not make it any less a part of the body. ¹⁷ If the whole body were an eye, where would be the sense of hearing? If the whole body were an ear, where would be the sense of smell? ¹⁸ But as it is, God arranged the members in the body, each one of them, as he chose. ¹⁹ If all were a single member, where would the body be? ²⁰ As it is, there are many parts, yet one body.

²¹ The eye cannot say to the hand, “I have no need of you,” nor again the head to the feet, “I have no need of you.” ²² On the contrary, the parts of the body that seem to be weaker are indispensable, ²³ and on those parts of the body that we think less honorable we bestow the greater honor, and our unpresentable parts are treated with greater modesty, ²⁴ which our more presentable parts do not require. But God has so composed the body, giving greater honor to the part that lacked it, ²⁵ that there may be no division in the body, but that the members may have the same care for one another. ²⁶ If one member suffers, all suffer together; if one member is honored, all rejoice together.

²⁷ Now you are the body of Christ and individually members of it. – 1 Corinthians 12:12-27

Give space — Don’t be the moral busybody Lewis mentions above. Even if — especially if — you disagree with someone, let him be free to have his opinion without fear of reprisals. The gravest provocation is the one that hounds a man for his private thoughts. Speech codes and political correctness, along with employment practices that result in firings for saying or believing the “wrong” thing, .

We don’t get to choose the time or place…

Theoden: I will not risk open war.
Aragorn: Open war is upon you whether you would risk it or not.”

“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.” – C. S. Lewis

In a recent post, I summarized the message of Roy H. Williams’ and Michael Drew’s book Pendulum: How Past Generations Shape Our Present and Predict Our Future. As I explained in Part I, the thrust of the book is that history unfolds in cycles — like a pendulum — through forty-year arcs from what the authors refer to as a “Peak Me” phase to a “Peak We” phase. The period from a peak We to the next peak We  — one round trip — is roughly eighty years, and the authors claim we are heading for the next peak We in or around 2023 — less than six years from now.

“This is God’s country — why do you want to turn it into Hell?” – a bumper sticker

The apex of a We cycle brings an over-the-top emphasis on conformity for the common good, stifling individuality, and suppressing individual liberty. Unfortunately, according to the authors, it always goes to extremes, bringing witch hunts and bloodbaths.

In Part I, I laid out the reasons why I think the current conditions in the US support the authors’ hypothesis. Today, I want to explain when and how I think this is likely to play out, and offer some thoughts on how you and I can help avoid the worst of this. I am not a prophet nor the son of a prophet — this is my best estimate based on what I see.

What do you think will happen?

• Attempts to incite violence – protestors and planted antagonists will be spoiling for a fight, like two bullies in a schoolyard each daring the other to strike first.
• Political de-legitimization as a pretext – Allegations of treachery coupled with disrespect for institutions will cause the aggrieved to disregard the results of elections, or to justify attempts at coups, assassinations, and the like.
  • Although the authors say 2023 is the 80-year point, I think the 2020 elections may be the catalyst for the worst of what’s coming.
  • Already, there is a lot of militant loose talk on the left and right edges of the internet, singling out President Trump and other elected officials. This is not a good sign — and this began with the 2016 election.*
• Depersonalization/dehumanization – An decrease in empathy and fellow-feeling for those holding contrasting views, resulting in justification for violence.
• Attempts at large-scale disruptions – groups seeking a confrontation and/or a reason to act out may try to attack infrastructure such as roads and bridges, municipal utilities, or the power grid. If the violence comes in anything greater than isolated outbreaks, I think we should look at the experience of Bosnia as a likely guide. Consider that our infrastructure can be disrupted by determined groups — particularly if law enforcement takes a hands-off approach. Consider the recent events Ferguson, Baltimore, and Charlotte as small examples.

But that can’t happen here

Cui bono?

Before you sign up for someone else’s cause, it is worthwhile to stop and ask yourself who benefits if your leader prevails. Is that outcome one you can live with? At what cost? Is the cause good and noble? By what measure? I’ve said before that the worst thing about the era predicted by the Pendulum is the great waste of it all. Neighbor will turn against neighbor and both will lose their freedom over it.

I hope I’m wrong

 “If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone.” – Romans 12:18 (NIV)

Time flies. What’s the big deal?

We need to strengthen social cohesion.

What do you see?

• Polarized politics – the left and the right do not talk to each other, so much as they talk at or past each other.
• Contentious social issues – Triumphalism and scorched earth seem to be the order of things, “Coexist” stickers to the contrary
  • Intolerance in the name of tolerance
  • Flash mobs, shouting down of unpopular points of view, suppression of dissent, and speech codes
• Nationalism vs. Globalism – diametrically opposite and irreconcilable views concerning the relationship between citizens and their government
  • This is actually a three-way clash between the worldviews of militant Islam, international Socialism and classical Liberalism
• The rise of populism – It may be pure cynicism, but notice how political candidates speak of The Little Guy or Everyday Americans
• Tribalism and parochialism – intensifying competition among identity groups
  • Charles Murray’s book Coming Apart examines the stratification among college-educated versus non-college-educated whites, showing how what he calls the “cognitive elite” increasingly keep to themselves.
    
• Fraying moral consensus – Americans no longer share a common view of what makes up a good life, or of the values that encourage and sustain it.
• Setting groups against one another – note political rhetoric aimed at appeals to group identity. These pit:
  • men against women
  • black against white
  • poor against rich
  • Law enforcement officers against civilians
• Suspicion and hostility toward institutions – some of it well-deserved. Consider the opinions of your friends about:
  • Church
  • Government
  • Media
  • Business
  • Academia
• Erosion of social trust – note the rise of gated communities, security systems, and neighbors who don’t know each other
  • This is, in part, a byproduct of the failure of institutions. If authorities lie with impunity, trust dies.
• Reality television and social media rewarding the lack of self-control and exhibitionism
  • This creates an amplifying effect – creates a self-fulfilling perception that “everyone is doing it.”
  • This also undermines notions of personal modesty and privacy
• Acceptance of near-universal surveillance – we aren’t the only ones recording video, but “it’s for our safety.”

What vulnerability?

Is it hopeless?

So how about you? What do you think about Williams and Drew’s prediction? What am I missing? Add your comments below

“When your only tool is a hammer, all the world looks like a nail.” – Ancient Proverb

A note from your host: I considered writing this as an open-letter to my fictional  twentysomething nephew. My reasoning was that my intentions might be more apparent if I was expressing these thoughts in a relational context — from an uncle to a beloved nephew. As you’ll see, I decided to keep the form I use for most other posts, since I couldn’t be sure that the open letter wouldn’t cause confusion within my extended family. As I have said before, I am not my own, so I have to consider how what I do here and elsewhere affects others.

We’ve been talking about Identity, Stimulation, and Security — the three emotional and psychological needs that each one of us seeks to fulfill once we’ve seen to our bodily needs. In a recent post, I observed that social activism seems to be a way many young and not-so-young people are seeking to satisfy these needs. The bigger-than-yourself cause, the identity derived from what one is for, as well as what one is against, the meetings, the rallies, the conflict, the drama, and the security of being part of the group — one of the good guys. All these benefits are real. And if one is aimed at a righteous objective, one can accomplish a great deal of good. But I also warned that cults and destructive causes can also provide the same good feelings, but in the service of destructive aims.

Tools of the trade – Your mileage may vary
(Photo by Krzysztof Puszczyński)

Won’t get fooled again?

These days, we see groups of masked and black-clad anti-fascists, antifa for short, protesting primarily against the Trump administration, though there are various other social critiques and statements on the signs I’ve seen. I take these activists and their intentions seriously, even while I differ with their views and their methods. They have already demonstrated a willingness to suit up and show up, so they deserve credit for believing strongly enough to do something about it.

What is harder to do is to pin down the core message and beliefs of the group. The latter-day antifa have adopted the mid-20th century communists’ name and symbols, so that’s a strong directional clue. I am less certain how many of the participants in various street demonstrations share these tenets with their philosophical ancestors, versus how many enjoy the identity, stimulation, and security they derive from the cause.

It is also disappointing to see their passion boiling over into violence against “fascists” who do not deserve the label, but who simply have a different point of view.

The rationale

As I understand it, antifa teaches that it is moral to use violence, since that violence will create disincentives among those who are on the receiving end to behave fascistically, and will further inhibit any inclination toward “fascism” among those fearful of getting the same treatment. As cartoonist Scott Adams explains (I’m paraphrasing), If you could go back in time and kill Hitler when he was a baby, it would be moral, so of course you’d do it. The problem is that the labels Nazi, Hitler, and fascist have been applied to every presidential candidate the Republican party has nominated since Bob Dole.

You can see the problem, right? These epithets have become cheapened through overuse — so much so that actual fascists are nearly impossible to identify. But more dangerous is the license to commit violence this appears to give to young activists whose identity, stimulation, and security depend on remaining in the in-group. These emotional needs are so strong that, unfortunately, innocent people fall victim to violence.

What is a fascist?

That’s the problem! Ask ten people for a modern example of fascism and you’ll likely get ten answers. This, despite a well-established body of political philosophy that defines fascism and its assumption quite clearly. More than anything, to cry fascist seems to be a lazy way to slander people whom one designates unworthy of debate. And as we’ve established above, if my opponent is not worthy of debate, he isn’t really human. This depersonalization of the other further justifies inflicting harm. Non-persons’ lives, families and communities are valued at zero, so one can attack them and say they have it coming.

What’s the payoff?

My impression is that most antifa footsoldiers aren’t very happy. Their willingness to accept a role as an imperial stormtrooper in the service to a totalitarian ideology that subsumes their identity, suggests that they are seeking an escape. Whether from boredom, envy, or a sense of powerlessness, I can’t say. I recognize however, that this is a mark of spiritually hungry people looking for what John Eldredge expresses as the needs of our hearts — beauty, adventure, and intimacy.

This seems to be a misplaced attempt to obtain the excitement and the satisfaction of genuine adventure, set in the context of a great struggle. Cosplay and live-action role playing satisfy some of the same longings, minus the lethal potential.  Violent protesting goes far beyond dressing as a hero at Comic Con, or mock duelling at the Renaissance Festival — but it’s easy to see where the desire comes from, and the progression to direct action.

But referring again to the plumbline, is today’s antifascism truly a noble and transcendent cause?  For the reasons I’ve given above, I understand its appeal, but I say it is neither worthy nor noble.

A still more excellent way

Follow Jesus.

He’s the only religious figure who taught his disciples to love their enemies and pray for their persecutors. While I recognize that there is a gap between what Jesus instructs and what His followers (including your host) actually do, we have seen Christ followers unfairly maligned as Christo-fascists — assigning a totalitarian motive to followers of the king whose kingdom was — and is — not of this world. The way of Jesus is truly revolutionary,

Love — you keep using that word…

C.S. Lewis distinguished love from sentimentality. Love can be fierce and hard-edged, but it always seeks the good of the beloved. Consider parents who discipline their little boy for running into the street. Sentimentality suggests the parents shouldn’t hurt the child’s feelings by scolding him, but the failure to convey to him the wrong he’s done isn’t loving. If the child doesn’t learn not to run into the street, he will likely be injured or killed by a car.

In the same way, we have an obligation to speak the truth in love to those with whom we disagree. We should seek to avoid violent confrontations while asserting what is true. After all, if we believe God will repay evil, we can afford to take the long view. You do have the right to defend yourself and others, however, so for Heaven’s sake be wise.

So how about you? Are you feeling the urge to do something? How can you channel that into something life-giving? Add your comments below.

“My son, if you have put up security for your neighbor, if you have shaken hands in pledge for a stranger, you have been trapped by what you said, ensnared by the words of your mouth. So do this, my son, to free yourself, since you have fallen into your neighbor’s hands: Go—to the point of exhaustion— and give your neighbor no rest! Allow no sleep to your eyes, no slumber to your eyelids. Free yourself, like a gazelle from the hand of the hunter, like a bird from the snare of the fowler.” – Proverbs 6: 1-5 (NIV)

In a recent post, I touched on the link between latter-day activism and the psychological/emotional needs of Identity, Stimulation, and Security. In that post, I explained that popular causes attract the bored and and the aggrieved — as well as the true believers — and I argued that activism meets the psychological needs by creating a tribal identity, stimulation through anticipation and action, and security in belonging. I also explained that this is neither good nor bad in itself — the worthiness comes from the rightness of the cause. This is somewhat tricky, since we human beings seem to be rationalizers, rather than the rational actors we imagine that we are.

You may have to put your foot down…

The plumbline

In construction, the straightness of a wall has significant influence on the structural integrity of the building. Leaning or crooked walls don’t bear as much weight and their failure can cause a calamity. This is why builders use a plumbline — an external reference that does not care about the builder’s feelings. The wall is either plumb (straight), or it isn’t. When we are lending our name, our money, and our time to any cause, we should take care to evaluate its aims and claims against an outside standard — as objective as possible.

Not everything that feels good is good

You know this, but not every stranger that stops to help you in a big city is seeking your well-being. Causes are like that too. People with agendas do not ever seem to tire of enlisting people of good reputation to add the latter’s halo effect to the former’s cause. The church also has to be on guard against being co-opted by political parties — left or right — since Jesus said His kingdom is not of this world. If even the church isn’t immune, you need to be on guard as well. I recommend being a reluctant joiner — at least until you can make an informed decision regarding how involved you want to be. Then you should beware of being used.

Over the years I’ve become much more skeptical and selective about what or whom I’ll endorse. That’s what getting burned a few (dozen) times will teach you.

The Who sang about it.

Here’s a trip to the poetry (OK, lyrics) corner.

“We’ll be fighting in the streets
With our children at our feet
And the morals that they worship will be gone
And the men who spurred us on
Sit in judgment of all wrong
They decide and the shotgun sings the song

If you’re active on behalf of a cause, may I suggest you measure it according to the plumbline of scripture. Does the Bible speak to the cause and the methods the group uses? Does it endorse or condemn those methods?

I also recommend asking yourself what the realization of the cause’s stated goals would look like. If you’re engaged in eliminating child poverty in your city, for example, how will you define success? How will you measure it? If you’re active in politics, how would the full implementation of your preferred policies affect your family? your neighborhood? your city? Are the effects positive? What are the harms? What would come next?

Please understand that I am for passion and for getting involved. The world needs the energy and creativity of passionate people — the world needs you to play the man. Part of the reason I write this blog is because I see conditions causing people to suffer, and I want to change those conditions. Again, all I’m advocating is making sure that any issue to which you lend your time, your money, and or your good name is a noble and worthy one.

So how about you? – How are you planning to live without being co-opted by an ism? Add your comments below.

“Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere  
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst  
Are full of passionate intensity.”

 – W. B. Yeats from The Second Coming

I recently read and re-read Roy H. Williams and Michael Drew’s book titled Pendulum: How Past Generations Shape our Present and Predict Our Future. The book deals with a similar principle to that examined in William Strauss and Neil Howe’s books Generations and The Fourth Turning, respectively. That is, that history unfolds in twenty-to-forty-year spans that culminate in periods of crisis.  Williams and Drew posit that the cycles are more like the arc of a swinging pendulum — hence the title — swinging every forty years from what they refer to as a “Peak Me” phase to a “Peak We” phase. According to their theory, which they seek to prove through an analysis of 3,000 years of western history, the next Peak We will occur around the year 2023 — less than six years from now.

“A house divided against itself cannot stand.” – Abraham Lincoln quoting Jesus

Definitions, please

Before I go further, I want to provide definitions for the terms Williams and Drew use and to summarize their principal argument. The most important distinctions are those between the Me phase and the We phase. The authors explain the attributes of each as follows (and I am quoting them verbatim here):

“We” Mindset vs. “Me” Mindset

Drivers of a “We” Cycle

1. Conforms for the common good.
2. Assumes personal responsibility.
3. Believes a million men are wiser than one man.
4. Wants to create a better world: ” I came, I saw, I concurred.”
5. Small actions.
6. Desires to be part of a productive team.
7. Values humility and thoughtful persons.
8. Believes leadership is “This is the problem as I see it. Let’s solve it together.”
9. Focuses on solving problems to strengthen society’s sense of purpose.

The motto of a We phase is “United we stand, divided we fall.

By contrast, here are the drivers of a “Me” cycle:

1. Freedom of expression.
2. Personal liberty
3. One man is wiser than a million men.
4. Wants to achieve a better life — “I came, I saw, I conquered.”
5. Big dreams.
6. Wants to be number one.
7. Individual confidence and decisive  persons.
8. Leadership is “Look at me. Admire me. Emulate me if you can.”
9. Elevates attractive heroes to strengthen society’s sense of identity.

The authors provide multiple reminders of the arc of the pendulum and the phases of its swing throughout the book. And they explain the implications in considerable detail.

Why I am writing this series of posts

I’m sure you’re wondering why I am so fascinated with a book that came out five years ago, and why I’m writing about it now. (Thank you, Straw Man!) It’s because as we in the west approach the peak at each end of the pendulum’s arc, we always overdo it. An excess of “Me” results in a more isolated citizenry and a diminished sense of community. At the other end, however, the peak of a “We” results in  forced conformity for the common good — and the authors say that brings about witch hunts and bloodbaths. If they’re right, I want my friends and readers to be aware of what could be coming so we can all prepare.

What it’s not about

Williams and Drew are at pains to emphasize that the ideas in their book are not political or partisan. The pendulum and its arc appear to be quite separate from whichever party is in power. More on that in a moment. Clearly, the products and services we see on offer — and more vividly, the way we see them marketed and sold — does change with the era. Even so, this is not a discussion about economics.

It’s also important to note that these periods are not based on the year of one’s birth, or the average age of the population. Rather, they are based on the population’s experiences — individually and culturally. Notably, because “We” phase peaks are eighty years apart, for most of us, this will be a once-in-a-lifetime event, certainly once in one’s adult life.

Not about the political left or right

My friends on the left will no doubt say, “Of course things are polarized. Look at how horrible people on the right are.” And my friends on the right will certainly say, “Of course we’re heading for a clash. Look at how horrible those people on the left are.” Polarization is certainly a factor, but the likelihood of a serious conflict does not seem to be a function of which political party is in power.

The three most recent peak “We” cycles occurred in or around 1943, 1863, and 1783. Note that all three occurred during times of war — World War II, The American Civil War, and the American Revolution. Two of the three predate today’s Democratic and Republican parties. And there’s more: the greater bloodbaths of the most recent peak “We” occurred at the hands of Hitler and Stalin — to my knowledge neither was a proponent of our two-party system.

Polarization already on display

I wish I could say that the authors explain the cause of these cycles, but they are reporting and not diagnosing. The bulk of the book seeks to confirm the hypothesis that these cycles exist and that another peak “We” is coming — with all that entails. I certainly find their argument compelling and I’ll offer my reasons.

Populism

Let’s start with the rise of populism — on both the left and the right. Throughout the 2016 presidential campaign, both candidate Donald Trump and candidate Bernie Sanders appealed to everyday Americans, citing the many ways these citizens were receiving short shrift from the Elites. Even consummate Washington insider, Hillary Clinton affected the manner of a populist.

Overheated rhetoric

Along with populism, note the overheated rhetoric in the news and on social media. People are agitated and are feeling free to speak without self-restraint. In a prior post, I took the left to task for belaboring and cheapening through overuse Hitler and Fascist as euphemisms for people with whom they disagree. The right has its own set of offensive names for people on the left, too. None of them suggest we are on the cusp of a Kum-ba-yah outbreak.

Add to the overheated rhetoric the breathless articles, columns, and blog posts asserting that we are in a Cold Civil War that could go hot at any moment. In my view, some of this seems to be aimed at goading less stable people to take violent action. And as we’ve discussed, people in need of Identity, Stimulation, and Security connected to a higher purpose may find the notion of fighting such a war appealing. Friends, even a cursory reading about civil wars in the US, Spain, or Bosnia will convince you that this is nothing to wish for.

Worldviews matter (yes, I said it again). I have written extensively about the need for cultivating a biblical worldview, and I want to encourage you again to consider how the Bible speaks most accurately about the nature of man and his condition in a fallen world.

Look, I acknowledge that there are conflicting worldviews. But for the most part, we’ve been able to tolerate one another while noting our differences. At the same time, I wonder if we aren’t caught in the world’s largest game of “Let’s You and Him Fight” — where people in power pit constituencies against each other to deflect attention from their own self-dealing. (Wait. Did I just sound like a populist?)

Forced conformity

Consider the emergence of campus speech codes, trigger warnings, and safe spaces. I’m not a fan. As I’ve written before, your ideological immune system ends up enfeebled if you never encounter an unfavorable idea. Plus, Safe spaces are a joke when one isn’t permitted freedom of thought — and forced conformity criminalizes wrong ideas.

Is it inevitable?

Williams and Drew suggest that the Pendulum is swinging and will reach its zenith in the next three-to-six years at the apex of “We.” The only possible out is to recognize what may be coming and to choose a different response. In an upcoming post, I want to discuss what I think may happen, the role of the church and her people, and some thoughts on how we should live in times like these.

So how about you? What do you make of Williams and Drew’s hypothesis? What’s your plan if they’re right? Add your comments below.

“As a father shows compassion to his children, so the Lord shows compassion to those who fear him. For he knows our frame; he remembers that we are dust.” – Psalm 103:13-14 (ESV)

In part I, I told how I recommended to a friend that he read the Old Testament story of Joseph, and how he didn’t expect to encounter the story of Judah and Tamar — a single chapter in the book of Genesis that appears in the middle of the story of Joseph. In this story Judah, one of Jacob’s twelve sons and Joseph’s older brother, deceives and deprives his daughter-in-law Tamar of her rights. Let me recap briefly.

By custom, if a man died childless, his brother had an obligation to conceive children with his widowed sister-in-law so his brother’s family line could continue. Tamar was the wife of Er, Judah’s son, but Er died. Judah told his middle son, Onan, to sleep with Tamar to fulfill the family obligation. Onan slept with Tamar, but never completed the act of conception, instead he spilled his seed on the ground. This provoked God’s judgment, so Onan paid with his life. Although Judah promised his third son to Tamar when he came of age, he didn’t keep his promise to her.

Not everything that is pretty is good for you. Look and think deeply.

To even the score, Tamar disguised herself as a prostitute and seduced her widowed father-in-law, taking his identification as collateral for the transaction. Three months later, Judah got news that Tamar was pregnant, bringing shame on the family, so he ordered her execution. But before she accepted her sentence, she explained that the man who got her pregnant is the man who owned Judah’s staff, cord, and seal — oops!

The story ends with Judah’s saying that Tamar was more righteous than he. And she gives birth two twin boys, Perez and Zerah.

Why is that in there?

For those of you unfamiliar with the Bible, you may be wondering if this is some kind of a joke. It isn’t. The story is in the Bible, and I invite you to read it for yourself (you can link to it here). There are lots of good reasons why this story appears in scripture, and my purpose in this post is to explain those reasons and, by explaining them, to encourage you.

About Onan

Let’s talk for a minute about Onan. This part of the story is the source of a lot of mistaken teaching about masturbation. I’m not advocating it — I discourage it, in fact — but there is no specific scriptural prohibition against it, and it is not a capital offense. Jesus taught that adultery was sinful, and then raised the stakes by saying that to lust after a woman was to commit adultery in one’s heart. The purpose of this teaching was to illustrate that sin is more a matter of the heart than of the flesh. That is, the inclinations of the heart reveal more about our spiritual condition than our outward behaviors. It also demonstrates that God wants to preserve the sacredness of sex, by warning us to avoid even the thought of sexual sin.

God gave the gift of sex. It was His idea. And in this case, Judah told his son to provide an heir for his late brother. Onan didn’t go off by himself to think lustful thoughts about Tamar while pleasuring himself. Instead, he took advantage of her, enjoying her body — consuming her — but withdrawing at the last moment and denying her the life-giving seed that would have fulfilled his obligation to his sister-in-law and his deceased brother. The sin of Onan was the sin of selfishness. The scripture says he knew the child wouldn’t be his, so every time he slept with Tamar, he spilled his semen on the ground. God demanded Onan’s life for his selfishness and rebellion, not for masturbation.

But what’s the big deal about not conceiving?

Context

The larger picture of this filial obligation was that God had chosen a people for himself when He established the covenant with Abraham. God promised Abraham that his descendants would be as numerous as the stars in the sky, so it was important for every household to have children. If a man died without having conceived a child, his brother had to take on the responsibility to do his part to fulfill the covenant.

This is also the reason for a lot of the ceremonial law that appears later in the Old Testament. God’s people were to be distinct in their life and conduct, so they were to keep themselves separate from neighboring tribes that worshiped other gods.

In the case of Judah and Tamar, we were only into the third generation of Abraham’s descendants, and you could say they were still a long way from stars-in-the-sky numerous. Judah’s fear that his third son might also die, caused him to be stingy toward Tamar. But this also was contrary to God’s will, as Judah withheld his seed from God — just in a way that was different from his son, Onan.

Description vs. Prescription

What about Tamar? Should a wronged woman dress up like a harlot and use sex to get what she wants? The short answer is no. I have to explain here that the Bible describes a lot of things that it doesn’t command or endorse. Tamar’s behavior is one such example. Slavery and child sacrifice are two more. One cannot judge the rightness of a thing simply because “it’s in the Bible.”

We can understand some of Tamar’s motivation, since in her time, to be barren and a widow was to be an outcast as well as desperately poor. In this light, Onan didn’t just deny her a child, he denied her redemption and life. Given that she was in Judah’s household, she was entitled to her rights. But when Judah failed to keep his word to her, she acted according to her flesh, rather than seeking God’s wisdom. And speaking of God’s wisdom, we need to consider something important. We’ll get into that in Part III.

So how about you? How does the story of Judah and Tamar challenge your ideas about the Bible? Add your comments below.

“An eye for an eye only ends up making the whole world blind.” – M. K. Gandhi

If you’ve been reading here for a while, you know I’ve been discussing the book Roy H. Williams’ and Michael Drew’s book Pendulum, and its theme of history’s unfolding in alternating cycles of emphasis — from Me to We and back again, every eighty years. In Part II, I listed several things to look for that indicated the probability that the authors’ predictions were correct. The first two items on my list were attempts to incite violence and political delegitimization as a pretext.

Darkness can seem so overwhelming, but we must persevere in faith.

I said, “I hope I’m wrong”

Unfortunately, over the weekend at a demonstration in Charlottesville, Virginia, an assortment of “alt-right” groups — including neo-Nazis, the Ku Klux Klan, and assorted white supremacists — clashed violently with their “alt-left” Antifa and Black Lives Matter opponents. Tragically and inexcusably, one of the Nazi-sympathizing protesters drove his car into a crowd of counter-protesters, killing Heather Heyer, and injuring 19 others.

Let me stop here and state categorically that I denounce neo-Nazis, the KKK, and white supremacists and their hateful ideology. I also denounce Antifa, and BLM, and any ideology that asserts racial superiority or seeks to subjugate or divide according to race. Further, I condemn the use of violence to advance any cause, and I especially condemn the cowardly and terroristic use of a car as a weapon of mass destruction. I lived in Charlottesville for two years, and I am heartbroken at the evil that these factions brought to such a beautiful city.

It’s complicated

I had planned to write this week on a different topic entirely, but I had to postpone my plans in light of the events and all the turmoil that has followed. I know my friends on the right are going to protest that the alt-right organizers of the protest had a lawful permit and that they were only defending themselves. Likewise, I know my friends on the left are going to say that Nazis are a particularly egregious type of evil — one that deserves violent opposition — and besides, the neo-Nazi murderer makes the actions of the counter-protesters moot. It’s more complicated than that.

As a Christian, I cannot in good conscience wink at evil, or look the other way. So while I condemn absolutely the white supremacist/neo-Nazi cause and the taking of innocent life, I cannot endorse the use of evil to oppose evil, or give a pass to groups simply on the basis of what they are against. I need to know what you’re for. Being against one sort of evil doesn’t confer virtue, especially if your preferred method is violence and subjugation. This isn’t an attempt at moral equivalency — some ideas and philosophies are clearly better than others. Some are only less repugnant than others.

I’m all for free expression and for vigorous public debate, and we have to find more constructive ways to address and resolve our differences, or the Fourth Turning/Peak We ahead of us is going to be unbelievably destructive to our country.

A higher point of view

As I have thought, prayed, read, grieved, and sought to learn the facts of what happened in Charlottesville, I have wanted some insight, some guidance on how to act redemptively. On Sunday, I opened my daily devotional from Scripture Union (if you’re interested you can subscribe here), and the appointed reading was Psalm 73. The New International Version translation reads as follows:

² But as for me, my feet had almost slipped;
    I had nearly lost my foothold.
³ For I envied the arrogant
    when I saw the prosperity of the wicked.

⁴ They have no struggles;
    their bodies are healthy and strong.
⁵ They are free from common human burdens;
    they are not plagued by human ills.
⁶ Therefore pride is their necklace;
    they clothe themselves with violence.
⁷ From their callous hearts comes iniquity;
    their evil imaginations have no limits.
⁸ They scoff, and speak with malice;
    with arrogance they threaten oppression.
⁹ Their mouths lay claim to heaven,
    and their tongues take possession of the earth.
¹⁰ Therefore their people turn to them
    and drink up waters in abundance.
¹¹ They say, “How would God know?
    Does the Most High know anything?”

¹² This is what the wicked are like—
    always free of care, they go on amassing wealth.

¹³ Surely in vain I have kept my heart pure
    and have washed my hands in innocence.
¹⁴ All day long I have been afflicted,
    and every morning brings new punishments.

¹⁵ If I had spoken out like that,
    I would have betrayed your children.
¹⁶ When I tried to understand all this,
    it troubled me deeply
¹⁷ till I entered the sanctuary of God;
    then I understood their final destiny.

¹⁸ Surely you place them on slippery ground;
    you cast them down to ruin.
¹⁹ How suddenly are they destroyed,
    completely swept away by terrors!
²⁰ They are like a dream when one awakes;
    when you arise, Lord,
    you will despise them as fantasies.

²¹ When my heart was grieved
    and my spirit embittered,
²² I was senseless and ignorant;
    I was a brute beast before you.

²³ Yet I am always with you;
    you hold me by my right hand.
²⁴ You guide me with your counsel,
    and afterward you will take me into glory.
²⁵ Whom have I in heaven but you?
    And earth has nothing I desire besides you.
²⁶ My flesh and my heart may fail,
    but God is the strength of my heart
    and my portion forever.

“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.” – C. S. Lewis

In two recent posts under this same title, I summarized the message of Roy H. Williams’ and Michael Drew’s book Pendulum: How Past Generations Shape Our Present and Predict Our Future. As I explained in Part I, the thrust of the book is that history unfolds in cycles — like a pendulum — through forty-year arcs from what the authors refer to as a “Peak Me” phase to a “Peak We” phase. The period from a peak We to the next peak We  — one round trip — is roughly eighty years, and the authors claim we are heading for the next peak We in or around 2023 — less than six years from now.

The apex of a We cycle brings an over-the-top emphasis on conformity for the common good, stifling individuality, and suppressing individual liberty. Unfortunately, according to the authors, it always goes to extremes, bringing witch hunts and bloodbaths.

In Part I, I laid out the reasons why I think the current conditions in the US support the authors’ hypothesis. In Part II, I discussed how I think the unpleasantness might show up. Today, I want to offer some thoughts and encouragement on how we ought to live through difficult and dangerous times.

Is there light at the end of the tunnel? We’re going to find out!

Tough times aren’t anything new

First, it’s important to remember that this generation will not be the first to live through a peak We, or even the first to endure hard times. A family member with whom I was discussing this series pointed out that although World War II was a time of excessive violence and conformity, there was also a great deal of wholesome unity as Americans banded together to endure hardship and support the war effort. This observation is correct, and it neither rebuts nor excuses the internment of Japanese Americans in camps.

The potential for overreach notwithstanding, I believe it is possible for faithful men to live honorable, courageous, and fulfilling lives even in the midst of trouble. Consider the persecution of the first-century church at the hands of the Roman Empire. Christians rejected the empire’s demands that they confess Caesar as lord, and they suffered condemnation and martyrdom as a result. Even so, the apostles Peter and Paul each wrote that Christians were to submit to the authorities,  and more – they were to pray for the emperor. If you are unclear how hostile the relationship was between the empire and the church, take a look at the emperor Nero and the persecution he visited on followers of Jesus.

Options = strength. Strength = options

Making it happen

Your mindset matters

Love your neighbor (yes, that one) — If you’re on board with sowing good seed to help your community hold together, let’s go back to the Good Book. “Love your neighbor as you love yourself” goes back 3,000 years — and that’s still the best advice. To love your neighbor when things get dicey, you have to get to know him now, before things get difficult.

“Thus says the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel, to all the exiles whom I have sent into exile from Jerusalem to Babylon: ⁵ Build houses and live in them; plant gardens and eat their produce. ⁶ Take wives and have sons and daughters; take wives for your sons, and give your daughters in marriage, that they may bear sons and daughters; multiply there, and do not decrease. ⁷ But seek the welfare of the city where I have sent you into exile, and pray to the Lord on its behalf, for in its welfare you will find your welfare.” – Jeremiah 29:4-7 (ESV)

Bridge the divide — Find ways to establish common denominators with your opposite numbers. No, you can’t make people love you but you can model godliness. Previously, I referred to Charles Murray’s book, Coming Apart, and the trends he cited that signified a growing separation between college-educated and non-college-educated Americans.

Emphasize and live in the theology of the body — Recognize that we need each other and we need to be able to cooperate with people who are different from us.

¹² For just as the body is one and has many members, and all the members of the body, though many, are one body, so it is with Christ. ¹³ For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—Jews or Greeks, slaves or free—and all were made to drink of one Spirit.

¹⁴ For the body does not consist of one member but of many. ¹⁵ If the foot should say, “Because I am not a hand, I do not belong to the body,” that would not make it any less a part of the body. ¹⁶ And if the ear should say, “Because I am not an eye, I do not belong to the body,” that would not make it any less a part of the body. ¹⁷ If the whole body were an eye, where would be the sense of hearing? If the whole body were an ear, where would be the sense of smell? ¹⁸ But as it is, God arranged the members in the body, each one of them, as he chose. ¹⁹ If all were a single member, where would the body be? ²⁰ As it is, there are many parts, yet one body.

²¹ The eye cannot say to the hand, “I have no need of you,” nor again the head to the feet, “I have no need of you.” ²² On the contrary, the parts of the body that seem to be weaker are indispensable, ²³ and on those parts of the body that we think less honorable we bestow the greater honor, and our unpresentable parts are treated with greater modesty, ²⁴ which our more presentable parts do not require. But God has so composed the body, giving greater honor to the part that lacked it, ²⁵ that there may be no division in the body, but that the members may have the same care for one another. ²⁶ If one member suffers, all suffer together; if one member is honored, all rejoice together.

²⁷ Now you are the body of Christ and individually members of it. – 1 Corinthians 12:12-27

Give space — Don’t be the moral busybody Lewis mentions above. Even if — especially if — you disagree with someone, let him be free to have his opinion without fear of reprisals. The gravest provocation is the one that hounds a man for his private thoughts. Speech codes and political correctness, along with employment practices that result in firings for saying or believing the “wrong” thing, .

We don’t get to choose the time or place…

Theoden: I will not risk open war.
Aragorn: Open war is upon you whether you would risk it or not.”