Too many people on all sides of the cultural divide are carelessly throwing around the word “enemy” and they need to stop. If we don’t know who the enemy truly is, from what direction he arrives, and in what strength he comes, then we are all too easily defeated, or at least subject to his blast effects. Just how strong is he?
Satan comes in the strength we give him. And, we give him great strength.
I’d estimate that about 65 percent of our culture leaves it to others to determine facts and outline ideas about truth. They listen to what others say and refer authority to those with the best sounding and most reasonable notions of truth and freedom (and keep in mind that Satan’s lies always sound good and reasonable). They choose the truth that best answers the question, “what’s in it for them.”
They are the opposite of the Bereans who would search the scriptures on their own for what was being presented as truth. These “65 percenters” assign their beliefs about truth to others. They let others tell them what to believe about the truth, and for them, defending truth is not a contentious issue. They do not have to defend the truth because whatever happens to truth, it seems to be of little concern.
Their perspective dilutes, disperses, and scatters most cultural norms simply because their perspective is unpredictable. Sometimes their views are conformist, sometimes not. This unpredictability foreshadows other more perilous implications. These are the people that elected a professional wrestler governor and a comedian who once joked about rape to the United States Senate.
They derive their position from notions—whether true or imagined, passing or lasting, tested or unproven. Some notions that aren’t televised or advertised, or don’t make the newspaper or the gossip columns, or aren’t adorned with “what’s-in-it-for-me” considerations, probably don’t make their radar screen.
Their methodology is impulse. Even liberals won’t allow daily circumstances to sway them from their utopian course. The “65 percenters” live for today and can alter their perspective because they feel like it. Changes in cultural perspective don’t have to make sense—that’s for others to decide.
Most ominously, they bring to our culture a negative cultural stability. Should the “65 percenters”—in great numbers—ever find their perspectives similar enough to notionally unite around any one aspect of the culture, the culture will easily destabilize in that area. Can’t happen, you say? My sense is that this is how a president can be reelected because he’s cool, or at least looks cool, a butterfly ballot in one county of one state holds a national election hostage, moral decay in our government and culture is tolerated, and we get the choice between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump.
They usually focus on themselves and their immediate sphere of influence—family and friends. Although liberals need them in great numbers, and thought they “had” them in the last election, liberals can’t understand how the “65 percenters” could have left the fold in 2016. A blind man can see it. Someone came along and gave them a better reason to vote for him. “What’s in it for you” sure sounded better from the other side. Satan’s agents—digital communication and direct appeals to the electorate through social networks, and something called “reality” television—facilitated this outcome. It’s ironic that the previous administration championed the use of social networking.
Should they focus elsewhere, we can hope and pray that they focus on “what is truth” and the things of God. Yet, it is better for the culture that they should become liberals than be empowered to unite with other “65 percenters” on most anything else. Should they unite to dominate the culture, we haven’t long to survive. See 2 Timothy 3: 2 – 9.
Our enemy Satan lights an unstable fire in our culture which spreads to the point that even he does not control it. Satan is not omnipotent that he can control all that he has loosed. Not all that he does ultimately serves his purposes. So, I assert that not even Satan can control the internecine conflict that would emerge from an organized “65 percenter” revolt in our country.
Our God may give the them over to their own unstable pursuits, but the collateral damage of such a revolt would be devastating to our nation and its future—even for liberals. Ultimately, all they hold dear would be imperiled as well. Think of it as a national “flash mob” on steroids.
That’s in what strength our great enemy arrives. And this is only one example of his power.