During this Christmas week, I have taken the time to discuss the theology of some of the Christmas hymns and carols that we sing. Today I would like to talk about The First Noel. It is an English song dating back to the sixteenth century. Some people believe that the First Noel was French because of the French spelling of Noel, but it actually an English song. The French word Noël does mean “Christmas” and it relevant to the lyrics of the song. The First Noel was first published in 1833 when it appeared in the work, Christmas Carols Ancient and Modern.

The first line of the song suggests that a December date for the birth of Christ: “The first Noel, the angels did say; Was to certain poor shepherds in fields as they lay;
In fields where they lay keeping their sheep, On a cold winter’s night that was so deep.” Although many doubt that Jesus was born in December, there are some theologians (such as the author of the Chronological Aspects of the Life of Christ) who believes that a December date is possible.

Whatever the case may be about the date of the birth of Jesus, the song continues: “Born is the King of Israel!” It reminds us that a king was born that night. Yet few understood the significance of a birth in Bethlehem.

Even the wise men from the East did not completely understand the significance of His birth, but they were guided to Him by a star. “For all to see there was a star;
Shining in the east, beyond them far; And to the earth it gave great light, And so it continued both day and night.”

The song goes on to say that “three wise men came from country far.” The Bible does not tell us how many wise men there were. We know there were three kinds of gifts
(gold, frankincense, and myrrh).

What the Bible clearly teaches, however, is that Jesus was born and that He is “the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29).

This is Christmas week, and so I thought we might reflect on the hymn, “O Holy Night” by John Dwight.

“O holy night! The stars are brightly shining. It is the night of the dear Savior’s birth. Long lay the world in sin and error pining, Till He appeared and the soul felt its worth.”

Jesus came into the world to save us and so we feel valuable and our soul feels its worth. Perhaps the most quoted verse in the Bible is John 3:16. It tells us that Jesus came because “God so loved the world.” He came so that our souls would feel their worth to God.

This hymn also asks us to consider the fact that the King of kings was born as a human infant and placed in a manger. “The King of kings lay thus in lowly manger, In all our trials born to be our Friend. He knows our need, to our weakness is no stranger. Behold your King, before Him lowly bend.”

Isn’t amazing that there were some who were willing to worship him even while merely a babe in a manger? The hymn then talks about how we should respond to one another in humility.

“Truly He taught us to love one another; His law is love and His gospel is peace. Chains shall He break, for the slave is our brother, And in His name all oppression shall cease.”
We no longer have slavery in this country, but many people are still enslaved to various forms of sin and need Jesus as their Savior. And we as believers are to model the humility that Jesus demonstrated when He stepped out of eternity into time and gave up His rights as God.

This is a message we not only need at Christmas, but every day.

We have all heard the phrase, “seeing is believing.” Unfortunately, that is no longer true due to the technological advancements that make deepfakes so convincing. Two years ago, I wrote about how you could put someone’s face on a video the way you can use Photoshop or Lightroom to put a face on a picture of someone’s body.

In the past, it took cutting-edge video technology to accomplish this. Now, it is readily available and can even be purchased on the Internet. Michael Grothaus writes about this in his book, Trust No One: Inside the World of Deepfakes. His examples are a reminder that you shouldn’t even believe everything you see.

This technology can make it look like you commit a crime. This journalist asked a “deepfake for hire” to put together a clip of him committing a crime and was shocked to see how convincing the video was. He watched himself point of gun at a cyclist and told him to give up his backpack or die. It looked like his video-created-self would have killed the man if passers-by had not interrupted.

Deepfakes have been used to make an innocent person appear in porn. Actresses like Addison Rae and Scarlett Johansson have been targeted this way through deepfake technology. Although they have tried to fight back, it seems like a losing battle.

Some of the deepfakes are harmless. You can see Tom Cruise playing golf on TikTok. You can see Queen Elizabeth dancing and then flying through the air. Videos have been made of Donald Trump, Barack Obama, Boris Johnson, and Vladimir Putin.

Unfortunately, these videos can be manipulated to have you say or do things you would never say or do in real life. They could easily be used to damage your reputation and even lose your job. Sadly, I must agree with title of the book: Trust No One.

University professors in the humanities and social sciences have been publishing open letters for years, but the latest one come from some of the top scientists in the country warning about the assault on math in our schools. In previous commentaries, I have talked about woke math and woke science. It is sometime easy to dismiss such bizarre statements by leftist critics. But this letter focuses on recent attempts to “eliminate standardized testing and lower standards in math to give the appearance that achievement gaps don’t exist.”

Their focus is on the California Department of Education’s math framework that encourages math teachers to take a “justice-oriented perspective.” They are concerned that such programs will reduce the “availability of advanced mathematical courses to middle schoolers and beginning high schoolers” and thus discourage students from taking calculus.

The signers are from some of the top universities and are likely left of center politically. But they are deeply concerned about trendy and shallow courses instead of the necessary focus on foundational mathematical skills.

The lowering or even the elimination of mathematical standards would certainly damage America’s global competitiveness. They remind us that the mathematical courses and disciples are centuries old and “arguably even more critical for today’s challenges than in the Sputnik era.”

America cannot afford to dumb-down education in important fields like civics and history. But our technological future would be devastated by a generation of future scientists and engineers who know little about the mathematical tools necessary for technological progress and innovation. Let’s hope educators are listening

George Barna has been interviewing Americans throughout this year and published his results in the American Worldview Inventory. As I have mentioned in previous commentaries, he has concluded that most Americans have a syncretistic worldview, which is a cut-and-paste worldview.

A very small minority of Americans have Marxism as their dominant worldview. But here is the interesting fact. A much more significant percentage of them do embrace ideas that could be described as Marxist views.

For example, more than four in ten (41%) agree that “race is used by white people to advance their economic and political interest at the expense of people of color.” More than a quarter (27%) believe “allowing people to own property facilitates economic injustice.” Marxists have called for the abolition of private property.

Nearly a majority (48%) agree with the statement that “human beings have developed over a long time from less advanced forms of life in a process that occurred naturally.” It worth noting the Karl Marx sent an autographed copy of his book Das Kapital to Charles Darwin.

A majority (54%) say that “determining moral truth is up to each individual; there are no moral absolutes that apply to everyone all the time.” Marxism, along with humanism, and many other secular worldviews deny the existence of absolute moral truth.

George Barna has also been researching the values of the younger generation that has been more accepting of Marxist ideas and socialism. He believes conditions are ripe for the expansion of Marxism in this country.

Although a very small percentage of Americans embrace a Marxist worldview, they nevertheless hold to many values that parallel Marxist views. Everyone from pastors to politicians should take note.

Dennis Prager recently put together a “Brief Guide to Leftist Destruction” and provided 16 examples. He probably calls is a “brief guide” because he could come up with even more examples.

He has said on numerous occasions that everything the Left touches, it ruins. It became clear to him years ago while talking about the Left’s war on the Boy Scouts. Then he wondered if the Left would replace the Boy Scout with a left-wing Boy Scouts. He concluded that they would not because the Left only destroys.

As I have mentioned in previous commentaries, he does make a distinction between the Left and liberalism. The two are very different, as illustrated by so many liberal voices these days being criticized by the Left.

The Left has ruined the arts. He acknowledges that long ago, the Left “conquered the arts. Consequently, since the 20th century, most modern art has been ugly, meaningless, and nihilistic.” As a part-time conductor he also criticizes contemporary classical music.

Two obvious examples of leftist destruction would be journalism and education. Journalists used to provide facts about the news but now are obviously advancing an agenda through opinion presented as journalism. Universities used to be devoted to seeking truth. He laments that, “Virtually every left-wing idea was born at a university.”

He goes into detail talking about how the Left has destroyed the family, childhood, public schools, and race relations. What has been a surprise in the last few years is how leftist ideas have made their way into sports, late-night television, and even the military.

Perhaps of greatest concern is the destruction is free speech. Everywhere the Left has gained power, “it has suppressed free speech.” This is the sad list of leftist destruction in the western world.

Two articles in the last few weeks raise serious questions about the effectiveness and efficiency of mail-in ballots. The first comes from a House election in Florida that was won by a mere five votes. That was a reminder of how close elections can be especially in a primary in a special election.

But the more important issue was the nearly 1,400 mail-in ballots thrown out in a Democratic primary that was won by five votes. Most of the mail votes (1,253) had a problem with the Election Day deadline. Hundreds had missing or illegible postmarks. Nearly 300 were postmarked before Election Day but not delivered in time to be counted. In addition to these tardy ballots were 140 mail votes rejected because they were unsigned, or the signatures didn’t match or had some other problem.

In a second article, Dr. Merrill Matthews quoting from the US Election Assistance Commission reported that 560,826 mail-in ballots were rejected in the 2020 presidential election. He concluded that it would not have made any difference in any state that Joe Biden won over Donald Trump. But more than half million votes would most certainly have made a difference in a few close state and local elections.

In both cases, you have American citizens who did everything right and still did not have their votes count because of a problem with the mail service or because a signature didn’t match. In other cases, the voters did nearly everything correct, but their vote wasn’t counted.

Despite what proponents of mail-in voting say, these two examples illustrate why it is better to vote in person (either with early voting or voting on Election Day). If you want your vote to count, and don’t live in a state that only has mail-in voting, then go to the poll and vote in person.

Are there more weather-related disasters due to climate change? Activists and the media would have you think they are increasing in number and intensity. Some science fiction movies portray a dystopian future due to climate change.

If you are paying attention, you will notice that activists may talk about climate disasters, but they never total up the deaths from various natural disasters. Fortunately, Bjorn Lomborg has put together the facts and a chart that show we are much safer from climate-related disasters.

It is true that the costs of natural disasters are often increasing, but there is a very good reason for the increase in cost. The world is getting richer, and the population has grown. That means the number and quality of the structures in the path of floods, fires, and hurricanes have risen.

There is a more accurate way of estimating the impact of weather-related damages by comparing the costs as a percentage of gross domestic product. When you do this analysis for each decade from 1900 to 2020, the see a significant decline.

If you plot disaster-related deaths on a chart, you see a sharp decline. “A century ago, almost half a million people died on average each year from storms, floods, droughts, wildfires and extreme temperatures. Over the next 10 decades, global annual deaths from these causes declined 96%, to 18,000.” This drop is even more significant once you realize that the global population has quadrupled.

We are safer from climate disasters than we have ever been. That doesn’t make for terrifying headlines or gripping science fiction movies, but it is a fact rarely covered by the media.