‘Imagine” No Blasphemy, It’s Easy if You Try
Psalm 2 and the Cosmic Tyranny at the 2024 Paris Olympics
The 2024 Olympics in Paris will hopefully be remembered for some outstanding athletic competition. However, it is certain that it should be recalled as the most defiant, licentious, and offensive gathering of the nations since perhaps the tower of Babel. Not only did the Olympics famously begin with a mocking of Jesus Christ and the Last Supper, but also, of course, the biblical values and worldview of Christianity—even if some say it was intended to replicate the feast of the gods. The performance by homosexuals, transvestites, and an off-colorful collection of decidedly unathletic types looked more like an off-Broadway play in Sodom and Gomorrah than an Olympic opening in a Western capital city. Of course, the defiant acts by the Olympic officials and their collaborating French hosts sent the message they undoubtedly desired: viz., “Vive la Révolution Française!” The wanton spirit of the age that once sent believers of the French Reformed churches—the Huguenots— to the gallows or hounded them through the woods reappeared in the Olympic flame in Paris. The organizers. defiantly mocked all things Christian.
The shameless atheism and defiance of God did not stop with the performance mentioned. Adding a soundtrack to continue the wicked mockery, the Olympic officials included what has become the veritable theme song for the Olympics: “Imagine”, composed and recorded by the late John Lennon in his most Marxist period as a songwriter (we understand that Mrs. Lennon, aka “Yoko Ono,” had a significant role in the lyrical composition). The song’s controversial lyrics include, "Imagine there's no religion, it’s easy if you try.” The Olympic Committee did try, and, indeed, they showed us just how easy it is. Even a premier, global athletic competition that included millions of Christians (and other religions) watching the televised event from around the world could be openly ridiculed with no consequences. On a positive note, I understand (i.e., I have not confirmed) that some, including an African athlete who had lived under such a vision, questioned the decision of using the song: “Why are we singing a Communist anthem?” If it turns out that the story is apocryphal, then let me hasten to insert that I, for one, did pose that very question. I served in the nation's Armed Forces intelligence community during the Cold War (Navy top-secret linguist-analyst), and, prior to my retirement, in service and support of the Global War on Terror (as Command Chaplain of US Military Intelligence Readiness Command, i.e., the global Military Intelligence Reserve Division). I recognize when Western culture, including art and music, is hijacked to advance socialism. O, how the old Soviets would have paid dearly to have just a quarter of the "favorable" messaging time that the Olympic officials enjoyed.
And then, there was the transgender thing.
The image of a female boxer being pummelled by a North African male pretending to be a woman (along with similar incidents) is not only unfair but sinful. The Word of God prohibits cross-dressing and condemns sexual sins (it is pornea, the Greek word used for sins of a sexual kind; and to use one’s maleness to hurt a female is an act of pornea; it is, as it were, a “crime against nature” which God abhors). But even more, the Bible teaches that men must honor women and to give thanks to God for the beautiful gift of so perfect a companion. The abuse of females by males is not only cowardly, dastardly, diabolical and disgusting but is a sign that signals a devastatingly downward turn towards the self-implosion of civilization. Western Civilization has rightly cultivated certain “customs and manners” that reflect Biblical teaching. This is especially so in the matter before us. Such customs born of Scripture seek to train our young men in the godly traits necessary for Christian civilization. Thus, “that which I received” I have passed along. I practiced and taught my son to open the door for girls and ladies, stand when a woman enters the room, and remove or “tip” your hat when you approach a woman, e.g., on a sidewalk or in other public places. And I still do so. Such customs are not merely quaint acts from a bygone era. These are essential manners that remind us of women's immeasurable worth and their irreplaceable role in the home and society (i.e., Mankind). For this reason, women are afforded a first place in escaping danger, e.g., “first off” of a sinking ship. Women should not be in war. Neither should our young women ever be conscripted to mandatory service in the Armed Forces. Why? Are these opinions and precedents just traditions without thought? A vestige of the hated patriarchy? In a word, “No.” Simple biology teaches us that the female is more valuable (not ontologically but effectively) than the male in the most fundamental way—reproduction. One healthy male, as the progenitor of a tribal line of the human race (this also relates to our primary family relationships that reflect biological and hereditary reality—a woman becoming wife, rightly assuming the name and familial line of her husband rather than her father, and becoming a matriarch of her home with her husband or, if able to bear a child, an expanding family unit within a given tribe or group of families) can provide a near-unlimited supply of seed and, potentially, do so from puberty to death. Female participation in human reproduction is biologically limited to a comparatively few years out of her lifecycle and restricted to a relatively small number of completed pregnancies. Susanna Wesley (1669-1742), who was reared in a home with twenty-five children, famously bore nineteen children, including Charles and John Wesley, leading figures in the Evangelical Revival of the Eighteenth Century. However, the average birth rate in England was much lower. Today the birth rate is in decline in the U.S., Great Britain, the Anglo-sphere and the EU nations.1 To avoid an inevitable catastrophe the birth rate must be strengthened which will require necessary social changes to restore traditional roles in marriage. All of this seems remarkably elementary and, in another era, such talk would be an unnecessary excursus. Yet, we must repeat the plain facts of life in the presence of a self-delusional society seemingly hell-bent on defying God unto death. Read carefully: “Male and female he created them, and he blessed them and named them Man when they were created” (Genesis 5:2).
The self-induced insanity we witness is not giving heaven any trepidation at all:
1 Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing? 2 The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the Lord, and against his anointed, saying, 3 Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us. 4 He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision. 5 Then shall he speak unto them in his wrath, and vex them in his sore displeasure. 6 Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion. 7 I will declare the decree: the Lord hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee. 8 Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession. 9 Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel. 10 Be wise now therefore, O ye kings: be instructed, ye judges of the earth. 11 Serve the Lord with fear, and rejoice with trembling. 12 Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him.
Did you see the divine sarcasm used in verse 4? “He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh; the Lord shall have them in derision.” Here’s the thing: If one becomes the object of such divine sarcasm it is really no laughing matter.
So, I won’t go along with any in the Church keeping their voices to a whisper about the sin-blinded denial of God erupting in our society and the destructive lava flow of degeneracy that inevitably follows. As always, such primal sin, first, hurts women and children. And our women are to be honored, and with our little ones, protected from the madness of unbelief, and the unbridled perversions of the fallen world.
And it was a fallen world on full shameless display when that square-jawed, big-boned North African male stood to receive the gold medal in women’s boxing. That sentence is one I thought I would never write and contains a contradiction of the most fundamental kind: “. . . Male . . . Women’s boxing.” If the corrupt Olympic Committee and the gold medal-winning Algerian man would allow a fair fight, I would like to humbly nominate Connor McGregor. Or even an aging Mike Tyson. They are both past their prime, but I would like to see how that Algerian boxer fares against those fellows.
Since heaven is laughing at the tower of Babel-building exploits of little Man, why not grab a seat in the gallery?
After all, it appears all gloves are off.
As of 2024, the birth rates in the U.S., the U.K., and the European Union (EU) show a trend of decline, reflecting broader demographic shifts.
1. United States: The current birth rate is approximately 11.0 births per 1,000 people. This reflects a slight decline from previous years, as the U.S. continues to experience a trend toward lower fertility rates .
2. United Kingdom: The U.K.’s birth rate stands at around 10.0 births per 1,000 people. Similar to other developed nations, the U.K. has seen a gradual decrease in birth rates, driven by various socio-economic factors .
3. European Union: The EU as a whole has an average birth rate of 8.7 births per 1,000 people as of 2022. This represents a continued decline across most member states, with some countries like Italy and Spain having notably lower rates at 6.9 and 6.7 respectively .
These declining birth rates across these regions are influenced by aging populations, economic factors, and shifting cultural norms regarding family size and childbearing.
This is powerful and true!