“Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure.” — Marianne Williamson
Many say Marianne Williamson won the Democrat debate last night. She is the Democrat version of the un-politician: an articulate, thoughtful individual. Employing classic marketing, she is relevant, and differentiates from the pack, at least by appearances.
It is said this spiritual leader and bestselling author was groomed by Oprah.
It is apparent she is the latest version of another Oprah candidate, Barack Obama. Her professional life has been devoted to a call to love, decrying what she calls the politics of fear and anger, blaming the opposition of course. Perhaps choreographed, very recently, Obama wrote a piece decrying the politics of fear and anger, blaming the opposition.
Others might say the politics of fear and anger originated with Karl Marx in 1848, the godfather of the modern Democrat Party, and indeed, the rhetoric of Williamson continues the tradition.
She invokes Lincoln and the Founders, then goes on to speak of our “amoral economic system” and the “false god” of corporate profit-taking. She declares our Founders created opportunities to “thrive,” but this amoral economic system denies people health and safety. She thereby exalts opportunities to thrive but condemns the system which allows us to thrive.
Williamson invites us to “a global conversation by which we are collectively creating a field of alternative possibility for ourselves and all the world.” Combine this statement with the quote above, and Christians will immediately see the problem. Her spirituality asserts humans have unlimited power. We should not be afraid to use that unlimited power because with it we can solve all our problems and create global change. These statements sound reminiscent of many who aspired to the throne throughout history, pointing all the way back to the rebellion in heaven.
Consequently, like many at the U.N. who promote the theory of man-made global warming as a path to global socialism, Williamson proposes a U.N. of the spirit that reserves to the human mind and soul the totality of spiritually, excluding the God of Love, in the name of love. In order to propose such a system, and expect it to work, one must believe certain things, that:
>humans are perfectible
>humans possess all the information and processing power necessary to rightly diagnose problems and propose solutions
>human beings have the capabilities required to implement solutions leading to success
>humans are essentially good and capable of creating utopia
Here is the rub. None of these things are true.
Six thousand plus years of recorded history tell us humans are not perfectible. Indeed, the proliferation of wealth and technology is demonstrating our selfishness on a global scale, highlighting our imperfections in glaring ways!
Does anyone reasonably believe we possess all the information and processing power required? If we do not possess the information and processing power, how can we expect meaningful implementation of solutions?
The biblical worldview, delivered to us by the God of Love, the author of true spirituality, tells us clearly that human beings, once created to be good, rebelled against God, inviting evil. Our invitation to evil caused all creation to fall into sin, a disease cured only by the Cross. We are not essentially good, we are by nature, prone to be evil, selfish, greedy and lawless. Such beings are capable of creating utopia?
God promises utopia. It is called the New Heaven and the New Earth. He has solved the sin problem by taking our just punishment upon himself. This is real love.
These are the beliefs that directed the Founders to write a Constitution with the Fall in mind. They knew Fallen man in all his pride tends toward violence and dictatorship, and so, “to promote the general welfare and secure the blessings of liberty” (allowing us to thrive), the Founders realized power must be limited, separated, shared and exercised with a servant’s heart imbued with virtue, the kind only God provides, the kind required for a Republic to function.
Unfortunately, Williamson’s message is not only a repackaged set of slogans reaching back beyond Karl Marx to the Temptation, is it persuasive because it flatters our pride, our sense of power, our self-indulgence. Her political philosophy is akin to Obama’s: we need to be super nice and embrace ‘fundamental change’ (dismantling the Constitution) or all hell will break loose.
She promotes socialism, a colossal failure, ignoring the enormous contributions of capitalism.
She invokes the Founders but denies their belief that liberty depends on private property.
She offers a false hope, that human power alone can deliver when in truth, only the blood of Christ can deliver us.
Ironically, Williamson decries fear, then uses it to promote her message, telling us to stop fearing what we ought to fear, the dangerous reliance on human pride and power which always leads to tyranny and deprivation.
And she encourages us to fear her opposition, patriots who subscribe to traditional Americanism, the most successful system ever devised, combining the best of human intentions with the power of God.