I spent this past weekend stuck in a hotel room in suburban Milwaukee. Exciting, right? I know, you’re jealous. But trust me, it wasn’t as interesting as it sounds. For one, it was raining and snowing (yes, snowing!) the whole time I was there. Second, it was Milwaukee. Unless you just have an unnatural fondness for Miller Lite or Laverne and Shirley, there’s really no reason to ever go there. I did, however, discover cheese curds, which I’m told are amazing, but to me they just tasted like, well, cheese. Which we have in Texas. Except we call it queso and dip our tortilla chips in it.

Anyway, I had gone up there to move one of our offices, which had to be done over a weekend. I finished up by mid-afternoon on Saturday, but my flight home didn’t leave till Sunday afternoon. So what do you do for 24 hours in suburban Milwaukee while it’s raining and snowing? You sit around in your hotel room trying to figure out how in the world you took such a wrong turn in life. That, and watch movies.

One of the movies I watched was “City Slickers”. Now, I’ve seen that movie probably a few dozen times over the years, but for some reason, I learned a few new things this time. For example, if you’re ever on a cattle drive, don’t bring along a coffee grinder; it immediately causes a stampede. Also, rum raisin is the perfect ice cream to follow a meal of sea bass and potatoes au gratin. And those enormous glasses you thought were so cool in 1991 look ridiculous in 2011.

But I also learned the secret of life. Really. According to Jack Palance’s Curly,  it’s one thing. “You stick to that,” Curly says, “and the rest don’t mean shit.”  But what is the “one thing”, asks Mitch. “That’s what you have to find out.”

Um, right.

I’m pretty sure when the writers got to this scene, the conversation went something like this:

Writer 1: The secret of life is… uh… uh…
Writer 2: Happiness.
Writer 1: No.
Writer 2: Financial security.
Writer 1: No.
Writer 2: The brunch buffet at the Bellagio.
Writer 1: What?! No. It’s… uh… it’s one thing.
Writer 2: What? What is it?
Writer 1: … … That’s what you have to find out.
Writer 2: That’s… Brilliant!

And then they went out for rum raisin ice cream.

But here’s the deal. That philosophy, that idea that the secret of life is some random concept that everyone has to figure out for himself, isn’t just some corny movie line, it’s what a lot of people tend to believe. It’s this politically correct notion of coexistence and tolerance, a refusal to acknowledge any absolutes or truths. You can be Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, atheist, gay, straight, whatever. Whatever you wanna be. Whatever your “one thing” is. Just don’t try to push your one thing on me.

Even though that’s a load of crap.

The one thing, the only one thing, is Jesus. He said, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one can come to the Father except through me” (John 14:6).

That’s it. That’s all you need to know.

That truth has hit me especially hard this week. If you haven’t noticed (which you haven’t since you don’t actually read this blog), I haven’t been especially active on the blog lately. That’s due to a number of factors but mostly just because I’ve been busy with other stuff. And I’m not gonna apologize about that. Although I want people to read what I write (who doesn’t?), I don’t live and die by Google Analytics. If people read it, then that’s great. If they don’t, I don’t really care. Because honestly, I’m not writing this for them.

Christian band The Classic Crime puts it this way in “A Perfect Voice”:

I may not sing your favorite songs, but I don’t sing for you
‘Cause if I did, I would have been gone long ago

I’ve run across a lot of well-meaning Christians on Twitter that I’ve ultimately unfollowed because they only seem to care about promoting their blogs or their books. They tweet their latest blog post several times a day and retweet every compliment they get so everyone knows just how awesome they are. And these are Christians. Who should know better. Who should be putting Jesus ahead of their own shameless self-promotion.

Not that I don’t promote myself. I do, of course. I mean, I’ve got social media links beneath every post and my Twitter and Flickr streams in the right-hand column. It would be hypocritical of me to condemn by brothers and sisters for doing the same thing I do. Although I’ve never really been comfortable promoting my blog on Twitter and do so very rarely.

But I’m the first to admit that I often lose sight of that “one thing”, the only thing that truly matters. I’m the first to admit just how selfish and shallow and egotistical I can be and how wrong that is.

What better time to realize that than on Good Friday, the day in which the Son of God — in which God Himself — willingly gave up His life in place of mine. Who knew how stupid and lazy and self-centered I really am but who loved me anyway and literally put Himself through Hell so that I wouldn’t have to. Because of God’s sacrifice 2,000 years ago, I’m free today. Political correctness can’t save me. Judaism, Islam, and atheism can’t save me. Nothing else can save me. But God’s grace can.

And that’s the only thing that’s truly important. That one thing. That one single amazing truth. And that should be why I do everything I do.

Because the rest don’t mean shit.

Previously:
Look for the search lights
Jesus as the fulfillment of prophecy
The ransom has been paid
Who are you following?

Should we be at all surprised by these results? Not really. Many atheists tend to be more highly educated in general and trend toward the intellectual. Think college professors, scientists, and historians. Meanwhile, Mormons have a fanatical adherence to their religion, which uses (and distorts) the Bible extensively. So it’s not surprising that either of these groups would be well-versed in various religious teachings. The same can be said for Jews, who like Muslims tend to be more devout in their faith but also have a long history of religious oppression.

I don’t know if we should read too much into this study though. Yes, we Christians know a lot less about our own faith than we should. However, it’s not just religion that Americans are ignorant about. How many Americans (regardless of religious affiliation) could name the first ten U.S. presidents? The first five? How about the Bill of Rights or the state capital of South Dakota? What is the Pythagorean Theorem or Newton’s first law of motion?

There’s a reason why contestants on Are You Smarter Than a Fifth Grader? do so poorly. It’s because they seldom are.

The reality is that Americans are pretty ignorant in a lot of areas, not just in areas of our faith. That’s not to say the Pew study is flawed; I don’t think it is at all. But I think it’s just a symptom of a much larger problem.

Previously:
Survey: Other religions can lead to eternal life
On debating an atheist
How much emphasis should be placed on Christianity when teaching history?

Today, the Texas State Board of Education begins debating social studies curriculum standards that would affect history, government, and economics classes in public schools for the next 10 years. And naturally, the debate isn’t without controversy.

One of the biggest questions is how much emphasis should be placed on the role of Christianity in history books. Critics argue that the Board is showing a clear Christian bias, including appointing conservative Christian experts to review current standards.

Some of the board-appointed reviewers are picking and choosing certain people and events from history to make an argument that America is a Christian nation, said John Fea, a history professor at Messiah College, a Christian school in Grantham, Pa.

“Students are not learning history. They are learning the facts about the past that suit some larger agenda, a cultural and political agenda,” said Fea, who has been following the Texas curriculum process.

“My best advice would be to respect the historians, respect the voice of historians,” said Fea, “and try to keep politics out of the teaching of history.”

A few observations here:

First, it’s impossible to teach history or government without discussing politics and religion. Go on, try it. It can’t be done. It’s a proven fact that 99% of history involves politics and/or religion to some extent. The other 1% mainly involves men in funny hats, but even that often is related to politics and religion.

Second, all historians have an agenda. Don’t be fooled by their stunning good looks, these folks are serious. And as someone with a History degree, I know of what I speak. The reality is that history, while comprised of objective facts and statistics, is largely subjective. What history “is” depends on how the historian interprets those facts and statistics. So any time an “expert” tells you a history book is completely unbiased, they’re lying. The bias might not be great, but it’s there. The critics in Austin simply want to trade a bias that they don’t like for one that they do.

Third, the United States is a Christian nation, so to downplay the role of Christianity in our history is pretty reckless. Now, when I say the U.S. is a “Christian nation”, what I mean is that Christianity has played a critical role throughout our existence. Christopher Columbus, the Puritans, the Founding Fathers, the U.S. Constitution, slavery, the Civil War, Manifest Destiny, the Enlightenment, Prohibition, the Civil Rights Movement, abortion, gay rights. Every single one of these topics was influenced in one way or another by Christianity.

Does that mean we should ignore the role of Judaism, Islam, or other religions in U.S. and world history? Absolutely not. But just because you discuss a particular religion in an historical context doesn’t mean you’re promoting it.

Finally, I’m struck by the irony of this debate. This is the same Board of Education who only 6 months ago voted to eliminate the “strengths and weaknesses” requirement when teaching evolution in science classes, pretty much guaranteeing that evolution will go unquestioned in public schools. The critics who argue that the Board is being biased with social studies now didn’t seem to mind them being biased with science back then. I’m sorry, but you can’t have it both ways.

As I said back in January regarding the evolution question, I think students need to be able to do their own research and come to their own conclusions, and they should be free to question and debate as part of the process. That’s true with science, and it’s just as true with history.

Previously:
Should evolution be debated in public schools?
Bill would protect the grades of students who disagree with evolution
History to be (re)written by the victors?

The part of the interview that seems to be getting the most attention is when McFadden asks the President about his faith. While some of the answers are pretty good, there are a few that I disagree with.

Below are some of his responses and my comments on them. (And by the way, I’m sorry for the extremely long post here.)

Bush said he is often asked if he thinks he was chosen by God to be president.

“I just, I can’t go there,” he said. “I’m not that confident in knowing, you know, the Almighty, to be able to say, ‘Yeah, God wanted me of all the other people.’ My relationship [with God] is on a personal basis trying to become as closer to the Almighty as I possibly can get. And I’ve got a lot of problems. I mean, I got, you know, the ego … all the things that prevent me from being closer to the Almighty. So, I don’t analyze my relationship with the good Lord in terms of, well, you know, God has plucked you out or God wants you to do this. I know this: I know that the call is to better understand and live out your life according to the will of God.”

Me: I like his answer here, especially the last sentence. But it bothers me that he constantly refers to God as “the Almighty”. Just seems very politically correct to me.

“People say, ‘But how do you know that it’s because of prayer?’ And I guess the answer is because of faith is how I know — I can’t prove it for you. People, you know, say it’s just a crutch. For me, it’s not a crutch, for me it’s the realization of a power of a universal God and recognition that the God came manifested in human and then died for sins. Now, all of this was hard for me to understand for a period of time and I am still trying to understand as best as my human mind can possibly do so. But in the understanding and in the search and in the quest, I find comfort and strength.”

Me: Well said.

When asked if he thinks that he prays to the same God as those with different beliefs, Bush said, “I do.”

“I do believe there is an Almighty that is broad and big enough and loving enough that can encompass a lot of people…”

Me: Incorrect. The Muslim God (Allah) is not considered by Muslims to be the same as the Judeo-Christian God (Yahweh). Therefore, Muslims do not pray to the same God that Jews and Christians do. And Buddhists and Hindus likewise do not pray to God. Further, because Jews do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as the Son of God, then it’s fair to say they don’t pray to the same God (the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) that Christians do.

Jesus was very clear that He is the “way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.”  (John 14:6).

Interviewer Cynthia McFadden asked Bush if the Bible was literally true.

“You know. Probably not. … No, I’m not a literalist, but I think you can learn a lot from it, but I do think that the New Testament for example is … has got … You know, the important lesson is ‘God sent a son,’” Bush said.

(Quote taken from here.)

Me: OK, I’m going to give Bush the benefit of the doubt here. As he alluded to here, there is a difference between a biblical literalist (i.e. one who accepts every single word of the Bible as true, including that the universe and mankind were created in six 24-hour days) and a biblical fundamentalist (i.e. one who maintains that the Bible is God’s Holy Word but who can also accept that it contains some allegory or symbolism).

President Bush is presumably saying here that he’s more of a fundamentalist, although most viewers would not understand that distinction.

Asked about creation and evolution, Bush said, “I think you can have both. I think evolution can — you’re getting me way out of my lane here. I’m just a simple president. But it’s, I think that God created the earth, created the world; I think the creation of the world is so mysterious it requires something as large as an almighty and I don’t think it’s incompatible with the scientific proof that there is evolution.”

He added: “I happen to believe that evolution doesn’t fully explain the mystery of life.”

Me: I agree and I disagree.

Christianity can be summed up in four basic truths: (1) God created the universe and everything in it, and humans were created distinctly in God’s image (Genesis 1:26-27). (2) Mankind disobeyed God, causing us to be separated from Him.  Romans 6:23 says that the punishment for that disobedience is death, meaning Hell. (3) God sent His Son, Jesus Christ, to earth to pay that penalty for us by dying on the cross. Three days after His death, Jesus was resurrected and now sits at God’s right hand in Heaven. (4) By repenting of our sin and acknowledging that Jesus is Lord of our lives, we can be forgiven of our sins and reborn spiritually in order that we can live eternally in Heaven.

If you remove any of those truths from the equation, then it’s no longer consistent with the Bible. Therefore, you can’t as a Christian believe that humans evolved from another organism or species.

However, that is not to say that evolution cannot co-exist with Creation. Evolution, if you define it as plants and animals adapting over time to their environment, is not inconsistent with the Bible (at least as I see it). So I can allow for the existence of evolution up to a point. But again, if you take out that first biblical truth, then all other aspects of Christianity don’t make any sense.

So what is President Bush saying here exactly? It’s not 100% clear. But I suspect, based on the way he framed the answer, that he’s acknowledging the limited version of evolution I just described.

Again, with a lot of these answers, it’s difficult to know exactly where he stands on a lot of these things. Certainly, many Christians will disagree with him, and I’m sure others will misunderstand him. As I’ve said before, though, our faith should never be in any politician, but in God Himself.