On Graham Hancock

Up until a couple of weeks ago, I had no idea who Graham Hancock was. There is currently a series on Netflix called "Ancient Apocalypse" and because it aligned with my interests, I watched it. If you aren't familiar, the 8-part series has been labeled a documentary, and the central character is Graham Hancock, who has spent the last 30+ years of his life traveling to ancient sites all over the world and developing a theory (which appears to be borrowed from others). The theory is that there is some kind of lost ancient civilization, pre-flood, and that certain members of that pre-flood civilization survived and passed on their advanced knowledge to the post-flood survivors throughout the rest of the World. The Ancient Apocalypse series is very well done - its a bit over-the-top in terms of production - engaging and interesting. Having said that; I was firm in my own mind, after finishing the documentary, that while I appreciate what Hancock has brought together, I can't agree with his conclusions because our worldviews very different. He is not a believer and as far as I can tell, he is firmly against the idea of a Creator God. Having said all that, the series was enough to interest me in what else Graham Hancock has put out there. He is an accomplished author as well, with several titles available for purchase, and after reviewing my options, I decided to read "Magicians of the Gods", his 2017 update to his original best-selling book, "Fingerprints of the Gods."

I had a couple of lengthy car rides over the Thanksgiving break and so I finished that book in a few days. I then listened to an episode of the Joe Rogan podcast that he did in early November (just a few weeks ago) and after taking all of that in, I decided to go and see what his opponents say. I read a lengthy critical review of his 'Magicians of the Gods' book that was particularly scathing. With that as the backdrop, I wanted to share my take on his work, from the point of view of someone with a Biblical worldview.

What is Love (Baby Don't Hurt Me)?

I've been thinking about this question a lot lately - especially in the wake of a divisive election season where there seemed to be no shortage of opinions from various Evangelicals on how Christians ought to cast their vote. You had people on the Right saying that Christians shouldn't vote for politicians that would promote the right to kill babies. You had people on the Left saying that Christians shouldn't vote for politicians who are not loving their neighbor well (i.e. voting against open-border policies, voting in favor of big business, etc).

I can't help but feel like both sides are getting it woefully wrong.

When I look at Jesus' interaction with his main 'opponent' in the Gospels, the Pharisees, I don't see the same dynamics that Evangelicals are talking about today. Jesus' disagreements with the Pharisees were all under the umbrella of obedience. Pharisaical-ism was, for better and for worse, obsessed with obedience to God. So obsessed, in fact, that they created all of these secondary traditions so as to not even come close to disobedience. So when Jesus is confronting the Pharisees, it is not because they are calling something sinful, good. Rather, the stick that they used against the people around them was that they were not pious enough. They lorded it over the people that they (the teachers and leaders) were the most pious. In other words, it became a outward-behavior competition. Who can stay the farthest away from outwardly breaking the Law? Jesus was constantly getting at the heart of a person - to that end he famously said, "you Pharisees clean the outside of the cup and dish, but the inside is full of greed and wickedness."

My overall point here is that Jesus was not talking to people who were sinning and calling it good. He was talking to people who believed in God and who wanted to obey. There seems to be this on-going conversation within the broader Church about how we "love others". And that's really what I want to address with this post.