We are experiencing an ongoing war of worldviews. Advocates of a this-world (secular) worldview have set their sights on the destruction of all competing worldviews that transcend the finite world of knowledge and power. Anti-Christian worldviews derive their authority and power exclusively from this temporal time and place controlled by ideological power brokers. R. C. Sproul states the following about secularism:

Secularism … elevates the secular to the point where it is believed that nothing exists beyond that which we can see. Accordingly, secularism says there is nothing beyond this life. It denies the church a voice in society, and even if God is not denied explicitly, the secularized culture operates as if He does not exist. There is nothing transcendent to which the secular is accountable.

We are seeing it everywhere. The secularists are determined to bury history, and what they can’t bury they will attempt to destroy, and what they cannot destroy they will propagandize. Cancel culture isn’t anything new. Every pagan worldview does it and continues to do it. The French revolutionaries did it, and so did the Communists and Nazis.

Canceling six books written by Theodor Seuss Geisel, Dr. Seuss, is designed to determine how much of the past can be eradicated with little or no pushback. The same tactic is employed when showing your work in solving a math problem is deemed to be “racist.” Many academics are opposed to absolutes in math even though every rational person knows that math is the same for everyone. The world runs on the premise that math works the same for everyone in every situation no matter what your skin color. If the ideological soldiers in the anti-Christian worldview can get people to believe otherwise, then almost nothing will be too difficult to get people to believe like 2 + 2 = 5. Walter Williams wrote:

Mathematics, more than any other subject, is culturally neutral. The square root of 16 is 4 whether you’re Asian, European, African or even a Plutonian or Martian. While math and science literacy among white 15-year-olds is nothing to write home about, that among black 15-year-olds is nothing less than a disaster.

But rational people are being conditioned to act contrary to what they know to be true to accept even more absurdities in the name of some new culture-saving ideology. Getting the right answer or showing your work in math is said to be “white supremacy.” If enough young black girls and boys believe this, their lives will be destroyed. Williams continues: “Few people appreciate the implications of poor math preparation. Mathematics, more than anything else, teaches one how to think logically. As such, it is an important intellectual tool.” When math is thought to be suspect, then the same will be true of logic.

Thinking Straight in a Crooked World

Thinking Straight in a Crooked World

Gary DeMar shows the power of biblical thinking and the desperate need for it in the church today. Thinking Straight in a Crooked World is designed to identify the bends in the road of ideas and repair them with biblical, straight thinking.

Buy Now

Liberal educators have followed this subversive approach to indoctrination for centuries. The following is from atheist philosopher Richard Rorty (1931–2007) who believed “in a foundationless world [where] creative, secular humanism must replace the quest for an external authority (God, Nature, Method, and so forth) to provide hope for a better future.” (Source) He believed educating young minds was the way to accomplish this:

It seems to me that the regulative idea that we heirs of the Enlightenment, we Socratists, most frequently use to criticize the conduct of various conversational partners is that of “needing education in order to outgrow their primitive fear, hatreds, and superstitions” … It is a concept which I, like most Americans who teach humanities or social science in colleges and universities, invoke when we try to arrange things so that students who enter as bigoted, homophobic, religious fundamentalists will leave college with views more like our own … The fundamentalist parents of our fundamentalist students think that the entire ‘American liberal establishment’ is engaged in a conspiracy. The parents have a point. Their point is that we liberal teachers no more feel in a symmetrical communication situation when we talk with bigots than do kindergarten teachers talking with their students … When we American college teachers encounter religious fundamentalists, we do not consider the possibility of reformulating our own practices of justification so as to give more weight to the authority of the Christian scriptures. Instead, we do our best to convince these students of the benefits of secularization. We assign first-person accounts of growing up homosexual to our homophobic students for the same reasons that German schoolteachers in the postwar period assigned The Diary of Anne Frank… You have to be educated in order to be … a participant in our conversation … So we are going to go right on trying to discredit you in the eyes of your children, trying to strip your fundamentalist religious community of dignity, trying to make your views seem silly rather than discussable. We are not so inclusivist as to tolerate intolerance such as yours … I don’t see anything herrschaftsfrei [domination free] about my handling of my fundamentalist students. Rather, I think those students are lucky to find themselves under the benevolent Herrschaft [domination] of people like me, and to have escaped the grip of their frightening, vicious, dangerous parents … I am just as provincial and contextualist as the Nazi teachers who made their students read Der Stürmer; the only difference is that I serve a better cause. (“Universality and Truth,” in Robert B. Brandom (ed.), Rorty and his Critics (Oxford: Blackwell, 2000), 21–22.)

According to Rorty’s pragmatist ideology, the Nazis were wrong in what they advocated but not how they went about forcing compliance.

In the famous scene in George Orwell’s 1984, Inner Party member O’Brien tests Winston Smith’s adherence to “truth” as the Party defines it. O’Brien demands to know if Winston sees five fingers instead of the four fingers he is holding up. Refusal to accept Party “truth” will mean torture:

O’Brien held up his left hand, its back towards Winston, with the thumb hidden and the four fingers extended.
“How many fingers am I holding up, Winston?’
“And if the Party says that it is not four but five—then how many?”
The word ended in a gasp of pain. The needle of the dial had shot up to fifty-five. The sweat had sprung out all over Winston’s body. The air tore into his lungs and issued again in deep groans which even by clenching his teeth he could not stop. O’Brien watched him, the four fingers still extended. He drew back the lever.

We are being forced to accept the falsehood that there are more than two sexes and that men can become women and women can become men. This is 1984 writ large. “Repeat after the dictates of the Ministry of Truth: ‘‘trans women are women.’”

The goal is to push the absurdities to their breaking point to see how much nonsense rational people will accept. The goal is to reshape the future in terms of a new paradigm of total ideological control.

The transformation of society would come by eliminating all competing worldviews. “Hitler was obsessed with an eternal struggle between two hostile forces, the ‘Aryan’ and the ‘Jew’, the stakes of which were the survival of mankind and the planet.”[i] The struggle goes much deeper, however.

Nazism has been described as a “political religion” that demands “of its adherents total submission of their consciences and surrender of their souls…. It was unconditional in its claims, inspired fanaticism and practiced extreme intolerance of those who thought otherwise. A ‘Church-state’ had emerged, with cults, dogmas and rites, whose beliefs consisted of a form of millenarianism….”[ii]

According to the late William L. Shirer, under the leadership of Alfred Rosenberg, Martin Bormann, and Heinrich Himmler, “who were backed by Hitler, the Nazi regime intended eventually to destroy Christianity in Germany … and substitute the old paganism of the early tribal Germanic gods and the new paganism of the Nazi extremists.”[iii] Bormann, “one of the men closest to Hitler, said publicly in 1941, ‘National Socialism and Christianity are irreconcilable.’”[iv] For Bormann, the Nazi worldview was the final truth. “For this reason,” Bormann wrote, “we can do without Christianity.”

The Christian Churches build upon the ignorance of men and strive to keep large portions of the people in ignorance because only in this way can the Christian Churches maintain their power. On the other hand, National Socialism [Nazism] is based on scientific foundations. Christianity’s immutable principles, which were laid down almost two thousand years ago, have increasingly stiffened into life-alien dogmas. National Socialism [Nazism], however, if it wants to fulfill its task further, must always guide itself according to the newest data of scientific searches.[v]

William Shirer would later write: “We know now what Hitler envisioned for the German Christians: the utter suppression of their religion.”[vi] With Christianity out of the way, all was possible.

You would be correct if some of this sounds very familiar with what’s taking place today. The solution? Remove your children from government schools before you can’t.

Worldview 101: A Biblical View of the World

Worldview 101: A Biblical View of the World

Worldview 101 is an in-depth course designed to help Christians think biblically. Utilizing audio, video, and printed material, Worldview 101 will equip the student with the tools necessary to ‘think God's thoughts’ about the world and the created order. It will reveal and re-direct the humanistic thought patterns that exist in each of us. The Enlightenment promised freedom, but brought slavery to man's ideas instead. Worldview 101 points the way forward to true freedom of thought in Christ.

Buy Now

[i]Michael Burleigh, The Third Reich: A New History (New York: Hill and Wang, 2000), 92.

[ii]Burleigh, The Third Reich, 252.

[iii]William L. Shirer, The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1960), 240.

[iv]Shirer, The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, 240.

[v]Martin Bormann, “National Socialist and Christian Concepts Incompatible” in George L. Moss, Nazi Culture (New York Grosset & Dunlap, 1968), 244.

[vi]William L. Shirer, The Nightmare Years: 1930–1940 (Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1984), 156.